Ranger - News To Shock

[old] John Rupp · Post by **[old] John Rupp** » December 15th, 2005, 4:11 pm

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(FrancoisA @ Dec 15 2005, 12:04 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>All I have said is that in any endurance sport, if one excel at a six minutes event, one usually also do very well at the longer distances.[right] </td></tr></table><br /><br />Agreed, one would do well, but would not be the fastest.<br />

[old] John Rupp · Post by **[old] John Rupp** » December 15th, 2005, 4:12 pm

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(NavigationHazard @ Dec 15 2005, 11:49 AM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>And since when is actually setting a WR or winning an Olympic medal the criterion of excellence across events?[right] </td></tr></table><br /><br />Since they've been established as such.<br />

[old] hjs · Post by **[old] hjs** » December 15th, 2005, 5:40 pm

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(John Rupp @ Dec 15 2005, 09:07 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(NavigationHazard @ Dec 15 2005, 11:36 AM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>9-time Olympic gold medalist Paavo Nurmi. Unless you don't consider the 1920s/30s the modern era. In 1923 held the record for the mile, the 5k and the 10k simultaneously.[right] </td></tr></table><br /><br />1923 is not the modern era.<br /><br />Nurmi's fastest mile was not any better than 4:10, a good high school time these days.<br /><br />Try again. <br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br /><br />John is right. Those days don't count. The level of performance was much lower than nowedays

[old] FrancoisA · Post by **[old] FrancoisA** » December 15th, 2005, 5:50 pm

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(hjs @ Dec 15 2005, 09:40 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>John is right. Those days don't count. The level of performance was much lower than nowedays <br /> </td></tr></table><br />Be careful before agreeing with John; most of his posts are pure nonsense! <br /><br />Cheers!

[old] hjs · Post by **[old] hjs** » December 15th, 2005, 5:55 pm

<br />ranger <br />[/quote]<br /><br />Rowing is not that different!<br /><br />The reason why people that excell at the 2k tend to also excell at longer distances is because the 2k is already an endurance event.<br /><br />Even in running, a weight bearing activity par excellence, you will find people excelling at all events from 1500m to 10000m.<br />Paula Radcliff, for instance, is a British champion at the 3000m and 5000m, and she holds the WR for the marathon (2:15:25).<br /><br />Paula is a fine example off being a formidable marathon atleet but a not so good on shorter distances. her 10 k is still worldclass but her finish isn't good enough. She has't fast twitch muscle enough. On a 7 minutes race (2 k time for rowing) she is not worldclass. <br /><br />In swimming, Janet Evans holds the long course WRs in the 400m, 800m and 1500m, while Laure Manaudou holds the short course WRs at those distances.<br /><br />Al those race are more or less the same. 4/15 minutes. No compareson to 2 hours plus and 7 minutes.<br /><br />Now, if there were such thing as a 100m erg race, it would be a totally different story. The very best at such short event would not be the best at the 2k, let alone at the marathon.<br /><br /><br /><br />Cheers,<br /><br />Francois <br />[/quote]<br />

[old] FrancoisA · Post by **[old] FrancoisA** » December 15th, 2005, 5:57 pm

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(hjs @ Dec 15 2005, 09:40 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(John Rupp @ Dec 15 2005, 09:07 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(NavigationHazard @ Dec 15 2005, 11:36 AM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>9-time Olympic gold medalist Paavo Nurmi. Unless you don't consider the 1920s/30s the modern era. In 1923 held the record for the mile, the 5k and the 10k simultaneously.[right] </td></tr></table><br /><br />1923 is not the modern era.<br /><br />Nurmi's fastest mile was not any better than 4:10, a good high school time these days.<br /><br />Try again. <br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br /><br />John is right. Those days don't count. The level of performance was much lower than nowedays <br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />In 1923 competitve running was in its infancy, much as competitve erging is today.

[old] NavigationHazard · Post by **[old] NavigationHazard** » December 15th, 2005, 6:07 pm

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(John Rupp @ Dec 15 2005, 02:26 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(FrancoisA @ Dec 15 2005, 11:19 AM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>Even in running, a weight bearing activity par excellence, you will find people excelling at all events from 1500m to 10000m. </td></tr></table><br /><br />Name one runner in the modern era who has held World Records for both in their lifetime. <br /> <br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />Since you dismiss Nurmi so easily, how about Said Aouita? Bronze medallist in 1988 in the Seoul Olympics in the 800m, world recordholder at one time or another in the 1500m, 2000m, 3000m, and 5000m, and a PB at 10k in 1986 that was then the 7th fastest ever (as well as only 3.5 secs off Henry Rono's WR at the time).<br /><br />Oh wait, he didn't hold the WR or win an Olympic medal in the 10k, so we can't say he truly excelled across the competitive distances. I've heard Aouita's so ashamed of this total complete abject failure he has to walk around Morocco with a paper bag on his head. <br /><br />Never mind.

[old] FrancoisA · Post by **[old] FrancoisA** » December 15th, 2005, 6:11 pm

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(hjs @ Dec 15 2005, 09:55 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>Paula is a fine example off being a formidable marathon atleet but a not so good on shorter distances. her 10 k is still worldclass but her finish isn't good enough. She has't fast twitch muscle enough. On a 7 minutes race (2 k time for rowing) she is not worldclass. <br /> </td></tr></table><br />Why would that reasoning not apply to rowing?

[old] ranger · Post by **[old] ranger** » December 15th, 2005, 6:24 pm

<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'>Even in running, a weight bearing activity par excellence, you will find people excelling at all events from 1500m to 10000m. </td></tr></table><br /><br />Sure. But that wasn't the basis of the discussion. Both the mile and the 10K are middle distance events.<br /><br />The discussion was about the mile and the marathon.<br /><br />Rowing is indeed odd in that, if they want to, the best milers will be the best marathoners.<br /><br />_Very_ odd, and food for thought.<br /><br /><br /><br />BTW, IMHO, there is no parallel, really, between the running stride and the power and complexity of a rowing stroke. The physics and dynamics of the two are entirely different. Therefore, the basic modes of training for rowing vs. running are _entirely_ different. <br /><br />ranger

[old] FrancoisA · Post by **[old] FrancoisA** » December 15th, 2005, 7:40 pm

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(ranger @ Dec 15 2005, 10:24 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><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'>Even in running, a weight bearing activity par excellence, you will find people excelling at all events from 1500m to 10000m. </td></tr></table><br /><br />Sure. But that wasn't the basis of the discussion. Both the mile and the 10K are middle distance events.<br /><br />The discussion was about the mile and the marathon.<br /><br />Rowing is indeed odd in that, if they want to, the best milers will be the best marathoners.<br /><br />_Very_ odd, and food for thought.<br /><br /><br /><br />BTW, IMHO, there is no parallel, really, between the running stride and the power and complexity of a rowing stroke. The physics and dynamics of the two are entirely different. Therefore, the basic modes of training for rowing vs. running are _entirely_ different. <br /><br />ranger <br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />As mentioned previously, there is Paula Radcliff who holds the marathon WR and was also a British champion at mid distances.<br /><br />Running is far more competitive than erging on a Concept2 machine, so one is less likely to be a WR holder at 3000m and the marathon.<br /><br />Also, in erging, the 2k is king and the other events are second class citizens, and hence even less competitive.<br /><br />The WP is an excellent plan optimized for 2k performance, but I am sure that it would require some changes to be optimal for someone focusing exclusively on the marathon. So as erging matures and increases in competitiveness, and if the other distances get more emphasis, it will become increasingly unlikely that the same person will hold all the WRs from 2K on, because people will be following different plans optimized for those other distances.<br /><br />IMHO, the complexity and power of erging has little to do with it. First it is utterly simple compared to many other sports, and its power requirements are not unique either. I doubt that the physiological and training principles that apply to other endurance sports become suddenly invalid for ergers <br /><br />Cheers

[old] John Rupp · Post by **[old] John Rupp** » December 15th, 2005, 7:55 pm

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(ranger @ Dec 15 2005, 02:24 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>Rowing is indeed odd in that, if they want to, the best milers will be the best marathoners.<br /><br />_Very_ odd, and food for thought.[right] </td></tr></table><br /><br />Yes, very odd indeed. <br /><br />When the Freed's of the world take to the rowing distance events in the other divisions, the 2k'ers of the world will not have a chance.<br /><br />For case in point, even though you held the 50+ WR for the 2k and quite a bit faster than Freed, you are nowhere close to even his time for the 5k.<br />

[old] John Rupp · Post by **[old] John Rupp** » December 15th, 2005, 7:59 pm

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(FrancoisA @ Dec 15 2005, 03:40 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>The WP is an excellent plan optimized for 2k performance, but I am sure that it would require some changes to be optimal for someone focusing exclusively on the marathon. [right] </td></tr></table><br /><br />I agree with the rest of your message -- disagree with this if you wish however there is no way the WP would work for an optimal focus on the marathon.<br /><br />With "some changes", i.e. where it was no longer recognizable and became something else, then it might work that way. <br />

[old] ranger · Post by **[old] ranger** » December 16th, 2005, 3:46 am

<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'>IMHO, the complexity and power of erging has little to do with it. First it is utterly simple compared to many other sports, and its power requirements are not unique either. I doubt that the physiological and training principles that apply to other endurance sports become suddenly invalid for ergers </td></tr></table><br /><br />I wish!<br /><br />But not the case, I think. <br /><br />The complexity and power of the rowing stroke has _everything_ to do with it.<br /><br />Here's the scenario.<br /><br />When I run on the stepper, when I am working at about 300 watts, I am going along at about 88 spm, where "strokes" are drives with my legs. What is distinctive about this work is that (1) each stroke is a simple, mild, low energy effort (2) with only the legs (3) done continuously. As soon as one leg is done driving the other takes over. There is little or no "recovery" period when no levers are applying power.<br /><br />At about the same wattage when I am rowing, I go along at about one fourth of the stroke rate, 22 spm. What is distinctive about this work is that (1) each stroke is a complex, intense, high energy effort (2) done with the full body (3) discontinuously. At 22 spm, I am in a 4-beat measure, where the drive is one beat and the recovery is three beats. That is, I am working for only one quarter of the time and then resting three quarters of the time. To do this, then, the drive of the stroke has four times the power that a thrust with the legs has while running, and to create that power efficiently, the whole body has to be coordinated into a series of complex and precisely timed movements, as I conceive of these things now, a 5-stage effort that goes something like legs-back-legs and back-legs-arms, a smooth curve of energy with a "fat middle" where, at the central peak of energy, the back opens up and both the back and the legs, the two major levers, are at maximum velocity. <br /><br />These things are still pretty much the same in many ways even at maximum power/pace. Unlike the legs in running, the oars have to "recover" and get from the stern back up to the bow, even when going very fast. At 44 spm, this ratio of recovery to drive is no longer 3-to-1 but pretty much 1-1; but even so, one beat of the stroke is spent in recovery while the boat runs (or the wheel spins).<br /><br />This means that at moderate paces, running is something like rowing at 88 spm and 3 SPI rather than 22 spm and 12 SPI. At high paces, I am not sure what happens, but even if the running stride lengthens a bit, which I doubt is very significant (a 10K runner will take a pretty long stride), at top speed, running is probably something like rowing at 178 spm and 3 SPI instead of 44 spm and 12 SPI. <br /><br />In all of this, the great difference is the 3 SPI vs. 12 SPI. In both cases, the rate rises as the pace rising, but in rowing, each stroke takes four times the power of a thrusts with the legs and involves a complex sequencing and timing of several levers (legs, back, arms) and then a rest. <br /><br />This power requirement in rowing collapses the difference between marathoning and sprinting. In running, a marathoner can be a slight litttle fellow. During each effort, only 3 SPI is needsed. What is crucial is aerobic and mechanical efficiency. Power is not a problem. But in rowing, such a slight little guy get blown away, even in a marathon. You just can't row at 88 spm and 3 SPI for a marathon. At best, perhaps, you can go 30 spm or so, even if you are small. To row with the best stronger guys for the marathon, then, the litttle slight guy with the high aerobic capacity would have to row close to 10 SPI, or what amounts to a 2K SPI (or above) at 30 spm for 2.5 hours. I supppose this might be possible, but it is pretty difficult to pull off. In the 50s lwts, Freed, it appears, pulls off something like this for a HM, but it is interesting that he never seems to have ranked a marathon.<br /><br />There might be good reason why.<br /><br />ranger

[old] ranger · Post by **[old] ranger** » December 16th, 2005, 4:40 am

So...<br /><br />The great unspoken truth in rowing is that it is easy stroking power, your achieved UT2 pace, that separates the good rowers from the bad and a rower, no matter how talented, that has achieved their full potential as a rower vs. one that has not.<br /><br />Sprint here and there. Gasp for air. Fall off your erg after that 8th interval of your 8 x 500m workout, keep cutting that rest time between intervals until you turn blue in the face, try to go faster and faster for a 10K rowing at 32 spm and 10 SPI, revving your HR into the heavens, but in the end, if you don't work (most of the time) on your stroking power, you doom yourself to mediocrity as a rower. <br /><br />Rowing is not just an exercise in aerobics. <br /><br />ranger<br />

[old] ranger · Post by **[old] ranger** » December 16th, 2005, 5:18 am

BTW, JR is always arguing that the ability to have a good UT2 pace (i.e., rowing at 20-22 spm) depends crucially on your stroke length, in the sense of your height: leg length, etc.--and, of course, to some extent, this is true. But given rowers that are the same size and have the same stroke length, a different sort of "length" is much more important: the cumulative "length" (legs, back, arms) of the leverage applied to the chain during each drive. This length also depends to some extent on your height, but much more crucially, it depends on the proper sequencing of levers in the rowing stroke. If you collapse the levers in the rowing stroke and pull and push with your legs, back, and arms at the same time, you enormously shorten the cumulative length of leverage that you apply to the chain relative to sequencing these levers properly so that the legs fire off first, then the back is engaged, and then the arms. Of course, stroke length will also depend on how fully a rower utilizes the slide.<br /><br />This also seems to be crucial.<br /><br />A higher drag encourages the collapsing of the levers and the shortening of the slide. A lower drag encourages separating the levers and lengthening the slide. <br /><br />When I started rowing, I rowed at maximal drag (200+ df.), collapsed all levers, and shortened the slide. I now row properly at 105 df. with separated and sequenced levers and a full slide. <br /><br />By my measurements, in cumulative length of leverage appied, my stroke is now 50% longer, 72 inches vs. 48 inches. <br /><br />This change in technique has made a _huge_ difference in stroking power and therefore the ease of rowing with a quick UT2 pace. <br /><br />Of course, because rowing is not fixed weight lifting but a dynamic effort in which the weight lifted is proportional to the speed of the leverage applied, how strong your stroke is also depends on the quickness of the leverage, and at low drag, it is easier to be quick.<br /><br />In long rowing, such as UT2 training demands, I think I will soon be able to row with a UT2 heart rate at 14 SPI (e.g., 18 @ 1:52). <br /><br />This would have been unthinkable rowing at a higher drag using shorter and slower cumulative leverage. <br /><br />ranger

Concept2 Forum

Ranger - News To Shock

Competitions

Competitions

Competitions

Competitions

Competitions

Competitions

Competitions

Competitions

Competitions

Competitions

Competitions

Competitions

Competitions

Competitions

Competitions