Realistic improvement in older athletes?

[RBFC]

I may not have a large amount of experience, but it seems that anyone capable of rowing a sub-7 minute 2K must have at least "decent" technique! While I'm sure there are some adjustments that may further improve performance, I stand firm with my thoughts that more upper body/lower back power will allow him to push his time down.

If you are at the limits of your strength to row 1:40/500m, and can't do a single 500m piece mcuh faster than that, it's unrealistic to expect that you can link 4 at that pace all together.... If you're much stronger, and capable of a 1:30, then 1:40 will not have you hitting the peak of lactic acidosis at that exertion, and you stand a better chance of stringing 4 500's together. You just can't run the throttle wide open for 6+ minutes.

Lee

[bobkwan2007]

If the OP hasn't rowed much before and is able to do sub-7, he's obviously quite fit, 200-lb or not. However, if he's not done much rowing before it's unlikely that his technique is very good. He may already be very close to his aerobic limit. And gains from improving his aerobic capacity will be very limited. However, he may still be able to make bigger gains from improving his technique.

[carlb]

The one thing that I do know is that if I want to row 1:40/500m for 2K, I have to be able to stand the pace. Which means a lot training at pacing below 1:40.
But for the casual, 60+ old rower it is not exactly easy (understatement) to dial up 1:35/500m intervals. My plan is to embark on a course of short and longer intervals.

But the question I'm asking is any of this realistic? I really wish I could speak with a really knowledgeable/experienced rowing coach or read some detailed articles on this very subject.

Look at The Pete Plan and consider signing up for Pete's coaching
http://www.thepeteplan.com

Pete's plan has 3 types of intervals, and plenty of long slow work which is important for the body adapting and recovering.

[Cyclingman1]

Thanks for all of the comments.

I have done some rowing with the profile showing on the bottom half of the display. When I get rolling, it seems to be pretty smooth and level. Being an ex athlete in several areas, the act of rowing seems quite natural to me.

I agree that I probably need to gain some strength. I plan on doing that through the rowing and not from lifting weights.
I've already realized that 500m intervals alone are not going to be adequate for me gaining power and speed. That is why I indicated doing 30s intervals with good rest periods. I would eventually like to do those at 1:30 pace.

I agree completely that my inability to fairly easily complete 4 500m intervals in 1:40 says that I am not in shape to do 6:40. Like I said, I first thought this was going to be a little easier than it has turned out to be. Not sure if I need to be able to do 4 1:30's. I'm thinking 4 1:34's might do it if I have staying power. I had pretty good 10K times when running even though I am relatively slow. I trained to have a high anerobic threshold.

It is all going to take time. There are few shortcuts in sports requiring fitness and strength. I tend to not put in junk miles when I train. Never did when I competed in running or cycling. I'd rather rest to be ready for quicker, harder workouts.

[hugh]

What's the point of setting a goal you know you can meet?

You do have the advantage of not having a history. I don't have a real rowing history but about 15 years ago I spent a year on the erg. Stress and anger relief mostly (better than the alternative, liquor in my case). Life got better and I stopped erging. My kids started rowing last year so I decided to start erging too. It's really depressing to know how much slower age has made me....

I did my first erg race with the kids a few weeks back. I did an 8 week plan from the UK web site. It seemed to work. I was at about a 7:05 2k when I started the plan and ended up at 6:53 on race day. An easy 6:53 at that. My goal was 7:00, and I did the first 1500 at 1:45 and dropped 7sec on the last 500, finishing at 1:31. (right now I don't think I can pull lower that 1:27)

My new goal is 6:30. Not a world record but certainly not a given for me. I think its about a 15% power increase. So pretty comparable to what you're looking at. I just started a 16 week UK training plan. I'll let you know in 16 weeks on how close I get . I'll be happy with anything below 6:40. 6:40 is about what I need to make up the wght handicap to beat my LW friend.

As far as technique - the monitor offers immediate feedback and I think you can get efficient "erg technique" on your own. OTW technique probably requires coaching.

I think if you do a specific training plan and put in the mileage on the erg you'll get darn close.

I'm 47, 202lbs (with luv handles), 5-11 and if I can break 7:00 in my 60's I'll be a happy man.

[Cyclingman1]

What's the point of setting a goal you know you can meet?

I would like to meet the goal of 6:40, but I have placed no bets. I suspect that younger rowers [50 and below] cannot really have a feel as to what 65 feels like compared to 45. Just 2 months before turning 45, I ran a 1:21:40 (6:14 pace) marathon at 194 lb. To say I was fit does not even start to say where I was 20 yrs ago fitness wise. Now I do not run because of a semi-bad hip, but that would not matter. No way in hell, would I be doing 1:21 now. Age catches up in so many ways - aerobic capacity, strength, recovery time, etc.

I strongly suspect your first comment about an easy goal is related to not fully grasping what 65 really means. The difference between say 47 and early thirties is way less than 65 to 47. You'll be there some day - look up this post. The C2 WR for 2000m for 65+ at 6:41 seems slow as Xmas to those below 50. But like I say, you'll have your chance to row that time on your 65th birthday. I first entertained ideas that maybe it was not so fast; I'm starting to appreciate the time more and more.

Re: training plans, esp Pete's plan. The first thing I noticed about Pete's plan is that there are at a minimum 40,000 meters per week in the plan. I'm totally positive that is not required to row a fast 2K, not to mention it would exhaust me. I go back to my point of being 65. Pete might think his plan works for all ages, but I suspect he is targeting the 40 crowd. Also, his plan, for me, has virtually no short intervals. Most everything is 500 m and up.

I agree that a plan of sorts is needed - simply rowing every day is not going to get it. I will be doing short and longer intervals, tempo rows, and longer/slower rows. Intervals and tempo bleed into each other, especially because the target race is not very long. When training for half marathons, there is quite a bit of difference between intervals and tempo. Some people need a coach for any number of reasons: knowledge, motivation, feedback, etc. I happen to be one of those people who feels very comfortable doing the research and self-training. Plus I have had success in the past as a multi-sport athlete (run, bike). The motivation for this series of posts is seeing if others in the rowing community have been down or have knowledge of the road on which I am trying to travel. I'll do the walking.

[bobkwan2007]

Just 2 months before turning 45, I ran a 1:21:40 (6:14 pace) marathon at 194 lb.

I think you mean half marathon. Still nonetheless impressive for an almost clydesdale, but running a 1:21 marathon, you would have beaten the current world record by a good 40+ minutes.

[Cyclingman1]

OBVIOUSLY - pace gives it away.

[Oldcolonial]

Cyclingman1;

Your points on aging are well taken. In short, it's harder to stay on the curve as you get older.

In terms of the curve itself, for rowing, it looks like the performance curve vs. age is fairly linear. From age 23 to age 77 men's lightweight world records for 2K meters the average loss in power for each year of age is 4.4 watts with a 23 year old pumping out 491 watts (5:57) and a 77 year old pumping out 254 (7:25). I looked at lightweights because it is safe to assume they are all pretty close to the same weight so power and watts / kg are roughly equivalent which I think is the right measure of performance. The hard part is staying on the curve.

[Cyclingman1]

for rowing, it looks like the performance curve vs. age is fairly linear

I'm trying to get my head around that statement. I don't have any supportable data, but I am pretty sure that my athletic performance has slid at a slightly non-linear rate - unfortunately, worse. It finally dawned on me, that looking at the best times for each age, the actual person at each age is different for the most part. Elite athletes are far more susceptible to body break down due to the intensity of their training and racing. I've noticed time and again around Atlanta that someone who has been relatively sendetary for most of their life shoots to the top of age-group performance. The stars of before are long gone. NFL and NBA players may be a bad example, but when their same-age, formerly nonathletic friends are running 40 min 10k's, they can barely get out of bed.

I think the theoretical linear curve applies to a theoretical person who has no limitation on power production other than the parameter of age. I do think that rowing is more forgiving than most activities, but it cannot undo the various types of breakdowns that someone may have suffered, which I won't go into. I guess I'm saying that if I plotted what I did from 30 through 50 and extended the curve out to 65, I'd be rowing 6:20 and I wouldn't be wondering if I can get to 6:40.

[hugh]

“People like to get faster. But then there is fantasy and there is reality.”

I think you missed my point. I do think your 6:40 goal is unreasonable. But so what?

“People like to get faster. But then there is fantasy and there is reality.”

Reality for you is probably 6:45-50, fantasy is 6:20-30. What’s in between?

“Fooling one's self about possibilities is as common as rain.”

I think there is a big difference between the guy who says, “I could be top 10 if [place your favourite excuse/qualifier here]” and the guy who sets the goal of being in the top 10 and actually puts in the effort to get there. Who cares if he doesn’t make it? Only he knows if he really put in the effort.

As for 6:40, I do not think it is “slow as Xmas”. I think it is very fast for any age. It puts you in the top 4% of my age group and well into the top 10% of the 30-39 group.

You’re right about not knowing what 65 is like. But based on my own perception of decline from 40 to 47, 65 doesn’t look good. (At 40 I felt like could do about the same things I could do at 20).

Now for something useful – these are the training ranges from UK site for a 6:40 time
UT2 - Aerobic Endurance 2:10 - 1:59
UT1 - Intense Aerobic 1:59 - 1:53
AT - Threshold 1:53 - 1:48
TR - Transport 1:48 - 1:38
AN - Max 1:38 - 1:35

The longest interval in the AN range is 1.5 minutes – see the link for a plan.
http://concept2.co.uk/training/interactive

[Bob S.]

The advantage of size seems to fade away with aging, starting somewhere in the 70s and definitely in the 80s. There are not very many of us and a couple of us have switched back and forth over the 75 kg line, so we are pretty much borderlines. The top over 80s rower, Wagner, did his best as a lightweight. As far as I know he has not switched over.

Bob S.

[hjs]

Cyclingman1;

Your points on aging are well taken. In short, it's harder to stay on the curve as you get older.

In terms of the curve itself, for rowing, it looks like the performance curve vs. age is fairly linear. From age 23 to age 77 men's lightweight world records for 2K meters the average loss in power for each year of age is 4.4 watts with a 23 year old pumping out 491 watts (5:57) and a 77 year old pumping out 254 (7:25). I looked at lightweights because it is safe to assume they are all pretty close to the same weight so power and watts / kg are roughly equivalent which I think is the right measure of performance. The hard part is staying on the curve.

People are not slowing down from 23, roughly up untill mid 30, ies we stay at 100% fitness, and the decline is not liniar, after roughly 50 the decline begins to steepen, and more and more people completely have to stop.

[Cyclingman1]

What's the point of setting a goal you know you can meet?

I do think your 6:40 goal is unreasonable. But so what? Reality for you is probably 6:45-50

I suppose those two comments confuse me. On the one hand you seem to be saying that 6:40 is easy to get to and then you suggest that it is unrealistic.

6:40 is my goal and I'm going to figure out how to get there and put in the tough efforts to do so. That's the theory. When I took up duathlons (run, bike) at almost age forty, I told my wife I wanted to win one. She was like OK. Others were thinking I was saying win age group. As far as I know I am the only person who has been the overall winner in the duathlon series as a masters athlete (40+) that was being held in the state of Alabama in the mid-80s. It attracted athletes from across the southeast. I was shocked, but I trained like crazy to get there. I'm anxious to see if I can recapture that kind of effort.

[rjw]

Cyclingman -

For what it's worth I think that you could improve. As people have said, your CV engine likely wont improve much but there are two areas which you could work on; Lactate Threshold and Efficiency. These are sport specific, so even though you are good on the bike, it will likely take time to develop in these area due to the changes that need to take place (skeletal muscle, mitochondrial density, etc.). The most effective way to work on these are to get long rows in (45 - 90 minutes) at 65-75% of VO2 max and rows of 15-30 minutes at 80-90% VO2 max. The good news is that the development of LT and Efficiency are not dependent on age however. LT can take 3-4 years to plateau for a given discipline and there seems to be no plateau on improvements due to efficiency. If you want to hone in the VO2 max this general maximizes in 3-4 months and is transportable from sport to sport. To keep this up to snuff, intervals from 4-8 minutes seem to work best with an intensity above ~90% VO2 max.

I think that a longer term approach is the best but the suggested intensities and duration I mentioned above will likely optimize the changes that you are looking for. Then save the shorter faster stuff for 4-8 week out from a competition.