Wolverine Plan Discussion

[old] tennstrike · Post by **[old] tennstrike** » November 23rd, 2005, 3:37 pm

Mark: Appreciated your running comments. Plan on using this weekend to restructure my current workout to bring it more in line with the WP. I think I've been doing 2 of my 5 weekly workouts at Level I and that's probably why my thighs always hurt. I'm going to be interested in your next 4 weeks. You seem pretty aggressive. I'll post anything positive.

[old] Mike Caviston · Post by **[old] Mike Caviston** » November 23rd, 2005, 4:12 pm

I guess I need to repeat my Standard Disclaimer about the original Wolverine Plan document. It was never intended to stand alone or to cover every aspect of training in detail. It was originally written as a supplement for athletes with whom I worked hands-on. Someday, if I should be lucky enough to live so long, I hope to revise the original WP document and make it a comprehensive training guide for the beginner as well as the experienced rower. Until that day, I have tried off and on over the past couple years to address many points related to training with the WP here on the C2 forum.<br /><br /><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>He likes the motto "If you don't have the discipline to READ it, you don't have the discipline to USE it." </td></tr></table> <br />This is true. I don’t have the time or energy to repeat past explanations on demand, so I encourage everyone to keep reading and re-reading the available discussions. That being said, I hope to continue to clarify and expand on my previous statements, and I’m sure there are many pertinent questions waiting to be asked. Best wishes,<br /><br />Mike Caviston<br />

[old] Mike Caviston · Post by **[old] Mike Caviston** » November 23rd, 2005, 4:16 pm

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(freestyle @ Nov 21 2005, 03:22 AM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>Suppose that Crash B was set up as a tournament <br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />This is an interesting hypothetical situation. When I was with the UM women’s team, we coaches always talked about having a series of 2K tests that mimicked the NCAA championship format (heats, reps, semis, finals = 4 races). But that would actually require three days to perform and the logistics (not to mention the psychological stress on the athletes) just weren’t practical. But your four races in one day format would be a tough but fair contest. Given the emphasis on endurance in the WP, I’d like my chances with that format. I’d certainly be watching my opponents a lot more than usual, since I wouldn’t want to expend any more effort in the early rounds than necessary! If I had say an hour between the first three rounds, and knowing that I might have to give a max effort in the next round, I would probably spend the 15-20’ immediately after each race just cooling down properly (and this is actually the next topic related to the WP that I hope to address in the near future). Then I’d take 20-25’ to sit/lie/stretch and stay pretty inactive physically (but very active mentally – rehearse plans for the next race, get psyched up, etc.) Then about 20’ to warm up before the second and third races (having done a full warm-up before the first, which generally takes me about 40’). Off the top of my head I don’t know exactly how I’d truncate these shorter warm-ups, but probably a lot of low-spm, moderate-intensity strokes with a couple 250m bursts at 2k pace. If I had as much as two hours between the semis and the finals, I’d probably want to do my complete warm-up routine before the final race. Or maybe I’d have crawled off into a corner somewhere to die after the third race. If you want to know what kind of pace I think I might hold for four 2Ks with this format vs. one time all-out – I really don’t know! Maybe within two seconds per 500m, certainly within three, but don’t expect me to ever prove it! <br /><br />As for your wrestlers, without enough personal experience I can’t comment too much about the parallels between a match and a 2K race. But a general rule of thumb is, the more intense the contest, the longer and more intense both the warm-up and cool-down need to be. But that might be accomplished in 10’ on either side of the match, still leaving plenty of time for the kids to goof around and enjoy themselves too. Good luck!<br /><br />Mike Caviston<br />

[old] arakawa · Post by **[old] arakawa** » November 23rd, 2005, 4:37 pm

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(Mike Caviston @ Nov 23 2005, 03:12 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>I guess I need to repeat my Standard Disclaimer about the original Wolverine Plan document. It was never intended to stand alone or to cover every aspect of training in detail. It was originally written as a supplement for athletes with whom I worked hands-on. Someday, if I should be lucky enough to live so long, I hope to revise the original WP document and make it a comprehensive training guide for the beginner as well as the experienced rower. Until that day, I have tried off and on over the past couple years to address many points related to training with the WP here on the C2 forum.<br /><br /><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>He likes the motto "If you don't have the discipline to READ it, you don't have the discipline to USE it." </td></tr></table><br />This is true. I don’t have the time or energy to repeat past explanations on demand, so I encourage everyone to keep reading and re-reading the available discussions. That being said, I hope to continue to clarify and expand on my previous statements, and I’m sure there are many pertinent questions waiting to be asked. Best wishes,<br /><br />Mike Caviston[right] </td></tr></table><br />By the way, are there topics on the C2 UK forum in which <i><b>you</b></i> discuss the WP? Or will I find basically all of your writings on this forum (and the old archived one, which keeps timing out when I try to search it!)?

[old] Mike Caviston · Post by **[old] Mike Caviston** » November 23rd, 2005, 4:53 pm

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(arakawa @ Nov 23 2005, 04:37 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>By the way, are there topics on the C2 UK forum in which <i><b>you</b></i> discuss the WP? Or will I find basically all of your writings on this forum (and the old archived one, which keeps timing out when I try to search it!)?<br /> </td></tr></table><br />There are a couple, but not many. I find that on the UK forum I tend to get ignored, ridiculed, or ripped off, so I don’t stay too active over there. There are some UK regulars interested in the WP, but they know to come here for the direct information. My total posts on the UK site is small enough that you could do an author search and find them all pretty quickly, but I don’t think there’s anything that hasn’t been covered here.<br /><br />Mike Caviston<br /><br />

[old] mpukita · Post by **[old] mpukita** » November 23rd, 2005, 5:14 pm

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(tennstrike @ Nov 23 2005, 03:37 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>Mark: Appreciated your running comments. Plan on using this weekend to restructure my current workout to bring it more in line with the WP. I think I've been doing 2 of my 5 weekly workouts at Level I and that's probably why my thighs always hurt. I'm going to be interested in your next 4 weeks. You seem pretty aggressive. I'll post anything positive. <br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />Re: Running. If I could find a watch (or something "wearable") that had some GPS capability to register true speed -- actually pace -- I can only imagine how I could structure my training that much better. I've got to believe there's a device out there now that does this. I was never a great track interval runner because I had no sense of pace, so unless we were getting splits shouted by one of the timers/assistants, I just went with the pack until I tied up. Now, running on my own, I just use heart rate, which isn't as manageable (for me) as pace.<br /><br />Re: The WP. I wouldn't call myself aggressive ... more like committed. And, by posting here I help that. I need all the motivation (and fear of criticism) as I can get to keep it up. There is always an excuse not to row (or run, or whatever). I've found the plan, as well as all the support here, superb for staying at it at a much higher level of intensity than anything else I've done recently. My running comes in spurts ... due to all sorts of excuses ... weather, treadmill malfunctions and failure, races, etc. etc. There's none of this with the erg. It's there and waiting no matter what! Plus, the specificity of the plan is right up my alley as a driving analytic (electrical engineer by degree, salesperson and now business owner by profession).<br /><br /> <br /><br />I'd say that with your times now, and with your size, if you try the plan, and get in more of the longer continuous rows (L3 & L4), you'll be blowing my doors off in no time flat. And I'll be the first to congratulate you!

[old] mpukita · Post by **[old] mpukita** » November 23rd, 2005, 6:45 pm

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(tennstrike @ Nov 23 2005, 03:37 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>Mark: Appreciated your running comments. Plan on using this weekend to restructure my current workout to bring it more in line with the WP. I think I've been doing 2 of my 5 weekly workouts at Level I and that's probably why my thighs always hurt. I'm going to be interested in your next 4 weeks. You seem pretty aggressive. I'll post anything positive. <br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br /><br />If you can, I also suggest racing and training online using RowPro. It's just one more tool (and reason) to just row. I feel obligated, once I sign up for a race, to be there ... and I am usually very glad I showed up after the fact ... even if I don't set a PB (forget winning!).

[old] kjgress · Post by **[old] kjgress** » November 24th, 2005, 3:37 am

Mike, if you have the time and inclination to answer a couple of questions on 2 aspects at opposite ends of the WP spectrum, i would really appreciate it. If anyone else has any ideas or opinions, feel free to express them.<br /><br />The first is recovery rate. You have mentioned that the Lev 4 recovery rate is a minimum. What is the number referencing? I can never get even close to it. Even pulling at 14 spm I will be under it by anywhere from 8-12 spm. If I try and use it between intervals I lose my warm-up. I am most comfortable about 20 sec below it at about 18-19 spm. I <br /><br />The second question involves starts on level 1 (and to a much lesser extent level 2) workouts. I do not have a particularly fast leg drive and am a slow starter. Using level 1's and 2's to practice starts has helped immensely and I can get to GP in 3 strokes usually. However (and bear with me this is a little convoluted), when pulling a 1K piece I have a set goal for the first 200m. Because of the start I can usually hit my GP for the first 200 if I pull the GP for the second 200 from after the start until about the end of the first 100-125m. However, doesn't this defeat the point of having the GP be different for the first and second 200? I know this will happen at the start of a race (and after all is the whole point about getting to race pace as quickly as possible) and you have addressed it somewhat in the discussions but the crux of the matter is how not to pull faster than the target GP for the first 200 and yet hit the GP by the end of it (which is, of course, impossible). You have mentioned that in a race you try to get to the target pace by the first few strokes and then no faster. However there has to be a number of strokes at a somewhat faster pace in order to reach the desired average by the end of the interval (in the case of a 2K perhaps that interval would be the end of the first 600m). Perhaps the balance is to practice how many strokes at what pace below the desired GP will get you there by the end of the desired sub-interval most efficiently.<br /><br />If this makes any sense at all and you have any ideas, suggestions would be greatly appreciated. Thanks,

[old] H_2O · Post by **[old] H_2O** » November 24th, 2005, 10:52 am

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(kjgress @ Nov 24 2005, 02:37 AM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><br />The second question involves starts on level 1 (and to a much lesser extent level 2) workouts. I do not have a particularly fast leg drive and am a slow starter. Using level 1's and 2's to practice starts has helped immensly and I can get to GP in 3 strokes usually. However (and bear with me this is a little convoluted), when pulling a 1K piece I have a set goal for the first 200m. Because of the start I can usually hit my GP for the first 200 if I pull the GP for the second 200 from after the start until about the end of the first 100-125m. However, doesn't this defeat the point of having the GP be different for the first and second 200? I know this will happen at the start of a race (and after all is the whole point about getting to race pace as quickly as possible) and you have addressed it somewhat in the discussions but the crux of the matter is how not to pull faster than the target GP for the first 200 and yet hit the GP by the end of it (which is, of course, impossible). You have mentioned that in a race you try to get to the target pace by the first few strokes and then no faster. However there has to be a number of strokes at a somewhat faster pace in order to reach the desired average by the end of the interval (in the case of a 2K perhaps that interval would be the end of the first 600m). Perhaps the balance is to practice how many strokes at what pace below the desired GP will get you there by the end of the desired sub-interval most efficiently.<br /><br />If this makes any sense at all and you have any ideas, suggestions would be greatly appreciated. Thanks, <br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />After the first 200 you might be behind goal pace noticeably but at the end of the race, after 200+ strokes the discrepancy will be negligible.<br />

[old] mpukita · Post by **[old] mpukita** » November 24th, 2005, 1:17 pm

Thanksgiving Day Wolverine Plan Pre-Meal Workout:<br /><br />1,000 w/u<br /><br />LEVEL 4: 60' - target 12,996 - actual 13,016 - (20 meters/approx. 2 stroke miss).<br />* 180/176/180/172/176/172 *<br /><br />1,000 c/d<br /><br />w/u & c/d not to Mike's recommendation, but I'm getting better since I was doing NONE on LEVEL 4's before!<br /><br />Might have to row another hour after the meal to work off the calories!!!

[old] Mike Caviston · Post by **[old] Mike Caviston** » November 24th, 2005, 10:43 pm

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(kjgress @ Nov 24 2005, 03:37 AM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>Mike, if you have the time and inclination to answer a couple of questions...<br />The first is recovery rate...<br />The second question involves starts on level 1 </td></tr></table><br /><br />Regarding your first question, I’m not sure I understand it completely, so you might want to rephrase it for me. My guidelines for recovery refer specifically to <b>pace</b> , and the values listed in the WP Level 4 tables represent the <i>slowest</i> pace I want to see during recovery; it’s not unusual for me to go as much as 10”/500m faster for short stretches during a recovery interval without even thinking about it, and I sometimes bring the pace down to L3/L2 territory for a few strokes if I feel I need it. Regarding stroke <b>rate</b> during recovery, I much prefer a low (14-16spm) rate for most of the recovery. Many people I’ve worked with, however, prefer to recover in the 18-22spm range. I never fought them on it too much, but I think it is less effective, for reasons I hope to elaborate on soon. The main point is that people actually become as recovered as much as possible during the recovery interval, and if they’ve given my way an honest evaluation and still prefer another way, then I have to assume they know best what works for them.<br /><br />Regarding your second question, I think I understand what you’re asking but let me paraphrase it and you can correct me if I’m wrong. You’re saying that you are so slow in the first 100m or so, that you have to go faster than planned for the next 100m so that you’ll be at your planned GP by 200m, correct? I think that’s about all you can do under the circumstances, and as long as you are exercising enough control to be where you want to be by the start of the second 200m – and you are still in position to continue negative splitting for the rest of the interval – you are in good shape. The mistake most people make is to fail to stop accelerating early enough to avoid getting too far ahead of GP too soon. Like you, I am a pretty slow starter, but for a 1K piece I can usually get to my GP for the first 200m by the half-way point (100m). My first couple strokes are pretty slow, then I get to where my instantaneous splits on the monitor are at GP but my average is still above GP, so I’ll take a few hard strokes a couple seconds below GP, and ease up back to GP just as the average is settling to the pace I want. It takes a little practice but it’s not too difficult. Every once in a while I botch it, muff a stroke somewhere and have to readjust by taking a harder stroke here or an easier stroke there. It’s good practice, because such things happen in races from time to time (at least, they do to me). Now, someone might be reading this and thinking, That’s way too much thought to be putting into the first 200m. Just hammer it for a while and then settle down to the body of the race, f’rgodsake! But, if possible, I want to control the race and not let the race control me. One advantage to starting a race at something like GP + 1 is that it takes less effort and fewer strokes to accelerate to that pace. It’s getting harder and harder for me to do 8 x 500m workouts, because I try to do each piece with roughly an even split, which at this point is roughly 2K – 3. Because my first few strokes are pretty slow, I have to compensate with several sub-GP strokes just to get down to pace, which sometimes takes me half the piece. Once I actually get to GP, my goal is to finish the piece with as little variation between strokes as possible.<br /><br />Hope that’s what you were looking for. If I don’t get a chance to do so again, I want to wish you and the rest of the USIRT a wonderful time in Denmark. Like everyone else, I’ll eagerly be waiting for results and personal accounts. Good luck!<br /><br />Mike Caviston<br /><br />

[old] kjgress · Post by **[old] kjgress** » November 24th, 2005, 11:36 pm

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(Mike Caviston @ Nov 24 2005, 09:43 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'> the values listed in the WP Level 4 tables represent the <i>slowest</i> pace I want to see during recovery; it’s not unusual for me to go as much as 10”/500m faster for short stretches during a recovery interval without even thinking about it, and I sometimes bring the pace down to L3/L2 territory for a few strokes if I feel I need it. Regarding stroke <b>rate</b> during recovery, I much prefer a low (14-16spm) rate for most of the recovery. Many people I’ve worked with, however, prefer to recover in the 18-22spm range. I never fought them on it too much, but I think it is less effective, for reasons I hope to elaborate on soon. <br /><br /> My first couple strokes are pretty slow, then I get to where my instantaneous splits on the monitor are at GP but my average is still above GP, so I’ll take a few hard strokes a couple seconds below GP, and ease up back to GP just as the average is settling to the pace I want. <br /><br />It’s getting harder and harder for me to do 8 x 500m workouts, because I try to do each piece with roughly an even split, which at this point is roughly 2K – 3. Because my first few strokes are pretty slow, I have to compensate with several sub-GP strokes just to get down to pace, which sometimes takes me half the piece. Once I actually get to GP, my goal is to finish the piece with as little variation between strokes as possible.<br /> <br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br /><br />Mike: Thanks so much for replying; in spite of not being very clear in my questions you did provide the answers I needed. I have been doing what you are suggesting at the beginning of the interval: I can get to GP in about 3 strokes and then it takes about the first 100 to get the GP average as long as I pull a second or two under the average for the first 100.<br /><br />I have the same difficulty with the 500m pieces for the same reason. I had been doing them in a continuous format with rest in between and a rolling start. That compensated for slow strokes at the start and I could even split the whole piece. I quit doing them that way so I could practice starts. I also feel I have better control over the workout when I do them individually. For me the start adds about a half second to the the first half of the piece. I break the interval in half and work the reference pace off the second half split. The first half splits are consistent with each other and consistently a half second slower than the second sub-interval. For now I am going to live with it and just consider it a part of doing such a short interval.<br /><br />Thanks again for the response and encouragement. Hope you had a good holiday.<br /><br />KJG

[old] ragiarn · Post by **[old] ragiarn** » November 25th, 2005, 9:22 am

Wolverine Plan<br /><br />I have been reading with great interest the posts in this discussion topic and decided it is time that I jump in on the conversation.<br /><br />I am new to rowing. I was introduced to the sport last fall and like most of you became hooked on the this exercise because of the completeness of the work out. I was introduced to racing on the erg in December and got my feet wet at the Crash-B in February.<br /><br />My other exercise interest is bicycle riding and racing. I am a physician when I am not erging. I began riding bicycles 20 years ago to get myself back into shape and I began racing 19 years ago to encourage my then young teenage daughter to participate in a sport. I began coaching teenage boys and girls 18 years ago because I could not find a competent coach for my daughter.<br /><br />I have spent most of my adult life studying and treating illness and the biochemistry and altered physiology which goes along with the diseased state. Coaching young athletes introduced me to the biochemistry and physiology of training in the competitive athlete. I have been studying the biochemistry, nutrition and physiology of competitive training as it pertains to cycling in particular as well as sports overall. <br /><br />What has impressed me the most about the Wolverine Plan as outlined by Mike Caviston is the sound physiological basis on which the entire plan has been devised and in particular the level 4 plan. <br /><br />I am in my third week of trying to learn the intricacies of the plan. The posts of the various contributors in this group has been immensely helpful. The posting of your workouts and the results have also been very enlightening especially when Mike has corrected some of the mistakes made in interpreting his plan. <br /><br />I went to the Wolverine Plan web site and download the entire program with all the tables, studied the program and outlined it for myself. I have also download all of Mikes posts and studied them as well.<br /><br />Level 4, I must confess, was the most baffling at first and all the tables and various strokes and numbers seemed unnecessarily confusing. However once I put the time in to understand what Mike has been trying to tell us and tried the level workouts on the erg exactly step by step as outlined a light went on in my and the whole program came together and I marveled at the “genius” of level 4. <br /><br />Level 4 is undoubtedly the heart of this program. Everyone, myself included, wants to improved quickly and reach our peak performance in as short a time as possible but Mike’s advice to take baby steps and proceed patiently and slowly practice to practice and week to week is based on sound physiological basis. My erging, especially my technique and form, has improved tremendously in just the 3 weeks that I have trying to convert over to WP program. I tried the Pyramid 3 weeks ago when I first became aware of the WP program and again this week after cycling through the various levels and workouts as outlined in the WP program. I have reduced my av/500m pace by almost 5 sec/500 m for the entire Pyramid workout and at the same time dropped my average spm from about 35 to about 30. my distance per stroke has improved dramatically. <br /><br />I attribute this improvement to the 16 spm part of the Level 4 plan. This stroke rate gives me time to concentrate on my form and technique and in my opinion is the hardest but most important part of the program. <br /><br />Now here comes the most important question I have concerning the WP program. How to perform the 16 spm. I will describe what I am doing and will wait for corrections and advice. I start my stroke in the recovery position and move forward to the catch quickly pull through the power phase as quickly and evenly as possible. I pause in the recovery position and wait for the flywheel to slowdown and time my strokes in this manner. If the gym is quiet enough the flywheel has a certain pitch which tells me when to start the next stroke sequence. It takes a few strokes to get the timing down but once I get the rhythm it gets easier to get pretty much close to the 16 spm. I do not pay too much attention to the pace because I have found that if I am getting my technique correct the pace will take care of itself. <br /><br />The 18 spm is easier than the 16 spm because the flywheel does not slow down as much and it is easier to get a higher pace due to decreased inertia of the flywheel. The 20 spm becomes even easier for the same reason. Once I get the 16 spm right the rest becomes easier. <br /><br />I have several other questions but I will save them for another post. <br /><br />Looking forward to your comments<br /><br />Ralph Giarnella MD - Master 64 soon to be 65.<br />Southington, CT

[old] FrancoisA · Post by **[old] FrancoisA** » November 25th, 2005, 1:05 pm

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(ragiarn @ Nov 25 2005, 01:22 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>Now here comes the most important question I have concerning the WP program. How to perform the 16 spm. I will describe what I am doing and will wait for corrections and advice. I start my stroke in the recovery position and move forward to the catch quickly pull through the power phase as quickly and evenly as possible. I pause in the recovery position and wait for the flywheel to slowdown and time my strokes in this manner. [right] <br /> </td></tr></table><br />Ralph,<br /><br />In the section on using proper technique for L4, Mike mentioned:<br /><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>I have seen many people attempt to hold a 16 by pausing at the finish for several split seconds before racing up the slide towards the catch like they were shot out of a cannon. These aren't good strokes, just bad strokes done less often. Develop the proper control so that the handle is always in motion. I strongly recommend rowing with feet unstrapped (not only but most importantly for Level 4). </td></tr></table><br /><br />Hope this helps!<br /><br />Regards

[old] mpukita · Post by **[old] mpukita** » November 25th, 2005, 1:44 pm

Ralph:<br /><br />Regarding the LEVEL 4 sequences with 16 SPM sections ... I've had a rough time slowing down the stroke enough to get to 16 SPM, keep the proper pace, AND keep the handle moving constantly. I chalk this up to poor form that needs to get better, as well as more controlled power within that improved stroke. I can slow it down (the stroke that is), keep the handle moving, but not get the proper time (and every other possible permutation and combination of the 3 variables in the equation). I have a bit of a "hitch" between the recovery slide and the catch.<br /><br />18+ SPM is no problem to make smooth, on pace, and on rate (until I'm really weary that is).<br /><br />Someone out there might have some insight on specific practice exercises/workouts that might help with this.<br /><br />BTW, I agree with your assessment of the plan, and saw like improvements ... quickly. I now see that the rate of improvement is starting to slow down, as one would expect. I'm a few weeks ahead of you.<br /><br />Regards -- Mark

Concept2 Forum

Wolverine Plan Discussion

Training

Training

Training

Training

Training

Training

Training

Training

Training

Training

Training

Training

Training

Training

Training