Why So Slow With The Rates?

[old] JimR · Post by **[old] JimR** » October 22nd, 2004, 5:05 pm

John - I think there are many people on this forum who would like to hear a somewhat detailed description of the "John Rupp Plan". While I my be out on a limb here I'm not sure I remember you describing such a thing. Tell us what you BELIEVE IN ... not what you don't! JimR

[old] Fesse-a-l'os · Post by **[old] Fesse-a-l'os** » October 22nd, 2004, 5:29 pm

I should have mentioned when I started this thread, that I "row" on an erg only. I'm a competitive dragonboater using the erg as one means of keeping in shape in the off-season. I truly appreciate all of your answers since the start of the thread. It's helping me learn a bit more about ergs, training, etc. Lots of opinions out there! Wow! One question though: what is SPI? (yeah, that's how much of a newbie i am!) Thanks!

[old] ranger · Post by **[old] ranger** » October 22nd, 2004, 5:41 pm

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td class='genmed'>QUOTE </td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>One question though: what is SPI?  </td></tr></table> SPI = (S)troke (P)ower (I)ndex (Paul Smith) SPI = average watts divided by stroke rate or average watts per stroke ranger

[old] ranger · Post by **[old] ranger** » October 22nd, 2004, 5:48 pm

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td class='genmed'>QUOTE </td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>Nice workout. What pace did you do in between, or what was your overall pace for them?  </td></tr></table> John-- Not paying any attention to recovery pace and overall pace at the moment, although I might start doing this once I approach getting the whole thing done. I just keep rowing inbetween intervals. No batching of intervals, though. I rowed continuously through the 30 intervals (15K). The workout is nothing impressive yet, I think, but it's coming. If I get to 80 x 250m at 1:32, the result will be significant (for me). My best on this workout (over the last couple of years, with my old stroke) was 1:36. ranger

[old] ranger · Post by **[old] ranger** » October 22nd, 2004, 5:52 pm

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td class='genmed'>QUOTE </td></tr><tr><td class='quote'> the goal of training being an IMPROVEMENT in racing performance.  </td></tr></table> Yes. Training isn't racing. Given these goals, the _best_ training, I think, is work on your weaknesses. ranger

[old] Pete Marston · Post by **[old] Pete Marston** » October 23rd, 2004, 7:03 am

I don't think people should look at what a person has achieved, and because they have got to a high level (WR or whatever) assume that that training is the way it should be done. You never know if that person is fast because of their training methods, or despite their training methods. I have some insight into the training of a lot of the people mentioned on this thread, and have seen most if not all of them train or race. I've watched Ranger race, and have trained with him once. I've watched Mike Caviston race, and did a bit of training on the erg next to him and Dennis Hastings at crash b's last year in the warm up room.

[old] Pete Marston · Post by **[old] Pete Marston** » October 23rd, 2004, 7:03 am

I have watched Eskild race. I've trained and raced with some of the top brit ergs like Graham Benton and Nik Fleming, and watched people like Pinsent, Cracknell, Shroeder and Shermei race. Every one of these people I have opinions on their training, racing style / strategy and technique that, in my opinion, they do wrongly, or I would advise them to do differently (well, most of them). None of these opinions are fact though (obviously), and most of them are probably wrong. But that's what makes this sport interesting that everyone has different methods and training, and opinions. I could write what I think in more detail, but won't risk offending the people named. I'm sure for every opinion I wrote I'd have a 50/50 split of people who agree with what I'd say, or are strongly opposed to it. So I'd best not.

[old] PaulS · Post by **[old] PaulS** » October 23rd, 2004, 9:52 am

</div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td class='genmed'>QUOTE (Pete Marston @ Oct 23 2004, 11:03 AM)</td></tr><tr><td class='quote'> I have watched Eskild race. I've trained and raced with some of the top brit ergs like Graham Benton and Nik Fleming, and watched people like Pinsent, Cracknell, Shroeder and Shermei race. Every one of these people I have opinions on their training, racing style / strategy and technique that, in my opinion, they do wrongly, or I would advise them to do differently (well, most of them).  </td></tr></table> Pete, Oh Come on, let her rip! Maybe a matrix of these guys and their areas for improvement. Especially Shurmei, as I have no idea how he trains, other than very hard, and can't see how he could improve race strategy by much, "Steady, then build over the final 300M to crush the closest competition." (He started the build a bit late, a few years previously, and was beaten by 0.1sec) A note about "Eskilds Plan" that is trotted out frequently, it now appears that it is "Eskilds advice to Anders" that is being assumed to be what Eskild does himself, while it's possible that is true, it is certainly not necessarily so. There are usually some qualitative items that a trainer will insist on for thier athletes, however the actual specifics of a plan will vary with the athlete. The foundational parts of the plan would be interesting to see. For Example: The "Stop the Madness" plan has the foundations of, S10PS Pace Based pieces Active Recovery Technique focus Progress at a measurable rate Minimize injury risk There was prescription on how it could be administered that would work for a large population of individuals to improve performance based on less than 1 hour of exercise time per day, but those foundations stay in effect while the details can be changed for the needs of a particular individual. - Paul Smith

[old] Pete Marston · Post by **[old] Pete Marston** » October 23rd, 2004, 10:03 am

</div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td class='genmed'>QUOTE (PaulS @ Oct 23 2004, 01:52 PM)</td></tr><tr><td class='quote'> Oh Come on, let her rip! Maybe a matrix of these guys and their areas for improvement. Especially Shurmei  </td></tr></table> As I said, I have comments on most of them, but Shurmei is one I don't. His racing style and tactics looked great in Boston, and I have no idea what training he does. Some people proved a surprise to me watching them row, technique wise mainly. I have some technique flaws, and I know about them so try to control and correct them when I can. I guess these other people might know the same about theirs. Some aren't so much faults, as 'not what I'd have expected to see'.

[old] NavigationHazard · Post by **[old] NavigationHazard** » October 24th, 2004, 9:32 am

Old musician's joke: How many trumpeters does it take to play the Haydn Trumpet Concerto? Twelve: one to play it, and eleven to tell you how they could have played it better.... I suspect that most of us would be happy to have Shurmei's supposed faults as an erger, or Pinsent's alleged deficiencies in maximizing boat speed. As with trumpeting, perfectly othodox technique and world-class performance results are not necessarily the same thing. Great artists and great athletes fairly frequently have their own idiosyncratic ways of proceeding. Endless hours devoted to Arban's trumpet exercises, for example, may make you technically proficient. But they may not give you the ability to play glorious, inspired music rather than notes. To misquote Mao Zhedong, Let one hundred erg styles bloom!

[old] ranger · Post by **[old] ranger** » October 24th, 2004, 11:11 am

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td class='genmed'>QUOTE </td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>I don't think people should look at what a person has achieved, and because they have got to a high level (WR or whatever) assume that that training is the way it should be done. You never know if that person is fast because of their training methods, or despite their training methods. </td></tr></table> Pete-- Interesting comment. So if individual accomplishment is not the criterion of effectiveness in training and technique, what is? I'm not sure how I see how to get to some higher ground. Do you? Personally, the major thing that distorted my technique during my run to a world record was that I rowed at 200 drag. To do this effectively, you have to use a very odd stroke. Both your arms and your legs are overburdened (only your back is engaged in a standard way) and the wheel spins very slowly. This overburdening demands massive adjustments in the length of the stroke, the speed of the drive, the speed of the recovery, the extent of the finish, and (most important of all) the sequencing of levers. ranger

[old] PaulS · Post by **[old] PaulS** » October 24th, 2004, 11:23 am

</div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td class='genmed'>QUOTE (NavigationHazard @ Oct 24 2004, 01:32 PM)</td></tr><tr><td class='quote'> I suspect that most of us would be happy to have Shurmei's supposed faults as an erger, or Pinsent's alleged deficiencies in maximizing boat speed.  </td></tr></table> Hey now, Shurmei was in the Belarus M4x that finished 6th in the 2004 Olympics (they've been improving over the years). I suspect he is a bit over the top for power and has a difficult time controlling that in a boat. Pinsent just got moved to a boat where some others could help out, i.e. P&C didn't want to go up against the AUS M2- apparently. (Remember win they were winning in the M2- it was because they were "the best oarsmen" so rowed in the boat that required them.) "No doubt about it there is a true doctrine, and whenever oarsmen are gathered together in this country they unite, with a singular unanimity, in doing reverence to it." (Bourne, 1925) Rowing isn't as subjective as is music, and while some stylistic movements can become outwardly visible, the foundational elements must be there to truly achieve. It's like downhill ski racing, it all looks the same, and in fact they will be within hundreths of a second over a 60 second+ time trial run individually. We get close results in rowing because of multi lane racing, and various strategies come into play, the downhiller goes into free fall and tries not to do anything that will slow them down for the entire race. I guess that's not technically "racing" is it, think how much safer Nascar would be if they ran one at a time and determined a winner by time trial. - Paul Smith

[old] ranger · Post by **[old] ranger** » October 24th, 2004, 5:20 pm

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td class='genmed'>QUOTE </td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>Rowing isn't as subjective as is music, and while some stylistic movements can become outwardly visible, the foundational elements must be there to truly achieve.  </td></tr></table> Paul-- So how does your comment here bear on Pete's claim about the relation between erging and achievement? What do you include in the "foundational elements" of erging? What do you mean by "truly achieve"? For instance, does Mike Caviston have these "foundational elements"? Did he "truly achieve" something in erging 6:18 as a 40s lightweight? It appears that there aren't too many guys rowing 6:18 in the 40s lwts these days. Why? Chance? Mike achieved what he achieved _in spite of_ how he rows and how he trains? Odd claim, especially given that (by following a certain training plan religiously and to the letter) Mike systematically and progressively lowered his 2K time from 6:26 to 6:18 over the course of five years. ranger

[old] PaulS · Post by **[old] PaulS** » October 24th, 2004, 6:52 pm

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td class='genmed'>QUOTE </td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>So how does your comment here bear on Pete's claim about the relation between erging and achievement? What do you include in the "foundational elements" of erging? What do you mean by "truly achieve"? For instance, does Mike Caviston have these "foundational elements"? Did he "truly achieve" something in erging 6:18 as a 40s lightweight? </td></tr></table> Not sure it bears on Pete's comment at all, unless he means that being fast alone does not make advice offered unquestionably credible. I don't think Tiger Woods swing coach could beat Tiger consistently, but Tiger doesn't seem to win as often without that coaches advice. Good advice, like bad advice, does not change in it's goodness (or badness) depending on the performance of the messenger. Good advice will withstand scrutiny considerably better. I should have said "truly achieve their potential". i.e. You did quite well while Erging badly, but I expect that you are going to improve with better technique. If your result alone was enough to declare "stick a fork in you , you're done!", instead of, "That's all well and good, but you aren't getting squat for the amount of work you are putting in.", where would you be now? Strong sequencing and coordinated force production would be foundational elements, Mike has them, and if I recall correctly he achieved a World Record. (which is "truly something") <table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td class='genmed'>QUOTE </td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>It appears that there aren't too many guys rowing 6:18 in the 40s lwts these days. Why? Chance? Mike achieved what he achieved _in spite of_ how he rows and how he trains? Odd claim, especially given that (by following a certain training plan religiously and to the letter) Mike systematically and progressively lowered his 2K time from 6:26 to 6:18 over the course of five years. </td></tr></table> No one else is quite like Mike, apparently. I suppose there is an element of chance, as several conditions do have to come into focus for maximum performance on a given day. But the more we practice the luckier we get... Systematic and progressive resistance has been a hallmark principle of mine for quite some time, it even transcends the particulars of any given training plan. (where of course there are differences, otherwise there would be little to argue about) - Paul Smith

[old] NavigationHazard · Post by **[old] NavigationHazard** » October 24th, 2004, 8:33 pm

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td class='genmed'>QUOTE </td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>Shurmei was in the Belarus M4x that finished 6th in the 2004 Olympics (they've been improving over the years). I suspect he is a bit over the top for power and has a difficult time controlling that in a boat. Pinsent just got moved to a boat where some others could help out... </td></tr></table> Let me see, between them they've got the most recent heavyweight Crash B win (Shurmei, 2004, 5:39.6 -- just 2 seconds off the world record), 1 heavyweight 5k all-time erg record (Pinsent, 2000, 15:11.0), an Olympic sixth and 4 Olympic golds. It's a wonder they can show their faces at the dock and the gym, considering how well they might do if they only improved their technique. Maybe if they can correct enough of their flaws over the winter and come down to my club, I'll deign to go out in a double with them after the ice melts....