another piece ranked, goal met.

[Bob S.]

Finally recovered enough from a long, drawn-out cold to do a time trial. The 500m seemed like a good place to start. I had done a 2:04.7 as the last in a 6X550m interval session, so my goal was to get at least a second lower. Goal accomplished – barely – 2:03.6. Full data reported below. The warm up was based on the Eddie Fetcher 2k plan, at least the interval times and the 18-24 stroke rates were the same. Obviously the 500m is an entirely different animal from a 2k, but I haven’t seen any suggested warm ups specifically designed for a 500m. The cool down was shorter, mainly because an equal time (almost 20 minutes) would be too boring. It was boring enough to spend 12 minutes at it.

I fell short of the work per stroke level that I generally try for, 5 watt-minutes per stroke, during the warm up and far short on the 500m piece itself. With rates in the upper 40s I was probably cutting my stroke short. During the 4th split, I deliberately made an effort to lengthen the stroke and it showed in the drop in pace as well as in a drop in rate. It also made a definite improvement in the work per stroke. In retrospect, I may have done better to have done it at 44spm or so, and pulled a longer, harder stroke.

It doesn’t count in the records, of course, since it was done on my dynamic. There is no WR listed for it, but the archives show a 1:42.4 in the 2010 season:

alex fischer 95 gold coast AUS 1:42.4 IND

If it is real it is an amazing time.

Here is the 80-89 list:

500 80-89 Marinus Boon M Hwt 80 NZL 1:40.6 2009 2008 South Island Masters Games
500 80-89 Dean Smith M Lwt 81 USA 1:41.1 2008 2008 Mile High Sprints

And these guys were 14 and 15 years younger. Of course Dean Smith’s was done at an altitude of about 5,000’, so I believe that he could not only have beaten the heavyweight, but would have cracked 1:40.0. Even here at 4,000’ I find that it makes quite a difference.

In any case, that is the only one I can find in the archives that is faster than the one I did today, but, since the source is listed as Ind, his time doesn’t count any more than mine. Neither qualify.


Date End @ Time Meters SPM HR /500m Cal/hr Watts W'/S

Warm up
12/25/14 15:34 19:45.0 3882 25 121 02:32.6 638 98 3.92
Split or work interval results
12/25/14 15:34 04:00.0 761 18 107 02:37.6 607 89 4.94
12/25/14 15:34 04:00.0 784 20 117 02:33.0 635 98 4.90
12/25/14 15:34 03:00.0 599 22 123 02:30.2 655 103 4.68
12/25/14 15:34 01:00.0 204 24 124 02:27.0 678 110 4.58
12/25/14 15:34 00:30.0 105 32 127 02:22.8 713 120 3.75
12/25/14 15:34 02:00.0 379 18 120 02:38.3 603 88 4.89
12/25/14 15:34 00:45.0 164 35 126 02:17.1 766 136 3.89
12/25/14 15:34 02:00.0 381 18 119 02:37.4 608 90 5.00
12/25/14 15:34 00:30.0 125 44 131 02:00.0 997 203 4.61
12/25/14 15:34 02:00.0 387 19 123 02:35.0 623 94 4.95


500m TT
12/25/14 15:50 02:03.6 500 47 135 02:03.6 937 185 3.94
Split or work interval results
12/25/14 15:50 00:24.9 100 46 120 02:04.5 924 181 3.93
12/25/14 15:50 00:24.9 200 48 131 02:04.5 924 181 3.77
12/25/14 15:50 00:24.9 300 48 138 02:04.5 924 181 3.77
12/25/14 15:50 00:24.7 400 46 144 02:03.5 939 186 4.04
12/25/14 15:50 00:24.2 500 50 146 02:01.0 979 198 3.96

Cool down
12/25/14 16:04 12:00.0 2073 13 108 02:53.6 529 67 5.15
Split or work interval results
12/25/14 16:04 00:30.0 88 16 107 02:50.4 543 71 4.44
12/25/14 16:04 01:00.0 90 14 125 02:46.6 560 76 5.43
12/25/14 16:04 01:30.0 91 16 110 02:44.8 568 78 4.88
12/25/14 16:04 02:00.0 91 14 114 02:44.8 568 78 5.57
12/25/14 16:04 02:30.0 92 16 111 02:43.0 577 81 5.06
12/25/14 16:04 03:00.0 91 14 110 02:44.8 568 78 5.57
12/25/14 16:04 03:30.0 93 16 111 02:41.2 587 83 5.19
12/25/14 16:04 04:00.0 91 14 110 02:44.8 568 78 5.57
12/25/14 16:04 04:30.0 91 16 111 02:44.8 568 78 4.88
12/25/14 16:04 05:00.0 90 14 112 02:46.6 560 76 5.43
12/25/14 16:04 05:30.0 91 16 112 02:44.8 568 78 4.88
12/25/14 16:04 06:00.0 90 14 110 02:46.6 560 76 5.43
12/25/14 16:04 06:30.0 85 14 108 02:56.4 519 64 4.57
12/25/14 16:04 07:00.0 84 10 106 02:58.5 511 61 6.10
12/25/14 16:04 07:30.0 84 12 105 02:58.5 511 61 5.08
12/25/14 16:04 08:00.0 83 12 107 03:00.7 504 59 4.92
12/25/14 16:04 08:30.0 83 12 105 03:00.7 504 59 4.92
12/25/14 16:04 09:00.0 83 12 104 03:00.7 504 59 4.92
12/25/14 16:04 09:30.0 83 12 106 03:00.7 504 59 4.92
12/25/14 16:04 10:00.0 82 12 103 03:02.9 496 57 4.75
12/25/14 16:04 10:30.0 82 12 103 03:02.9 496 57 4.75
12/25/14 16:04 11:00.0 83 12 102 03:00.7 504 59 4.92
12/25/14 16:04 11:30.0 82 12 102 03:02.9 496 57 4.75
12/25/14 16:04 12:00.0 71 12 98 03:31.2 427 37 3.08

Bob S.

[dblinden]

I'm impressed at so many levels. Congratulations.
No telling how fast you might go if you just quit drinking and smoking.

Dennis L

[jackarabit]

. . . and the slow horses and fast women take their toll also. Jack

[Bob S.]

OK, OK, so it was a dud. Next time I'll try to keep the verbiage level down and to stick to the bare-assentials (sic) in the data department. I'll save all that excess crap for my UK forum blog.

Bob S.

[jackarabit]

Sorry friendly jibe missed the funny bone, Bob. The numbers you put up are always interesting to us yankers and flailers as they march down the page with the precise incrementing that signals realized intention. Jack

[DanielJ]

Well, I'm fascinated by the whole thing.

[Gettingold]

Nice work Bob.

[Bob S.]

Sorry friendly jibe missed the funny bone, Bob. The numbers you put up are always interesting to us yankers and flailers as they march down the page with the precise incrementing that signals realized intention. Jack

What it hit was a guilty conscience - on account of the verbosity. It is a combination of the common garrulousness of old age and the occupation hazard of having bad habits from 24 years of lecturing.

Bob S.