Pete Plan Autumn 2015

[mdpfirrman]

Nice work G-Dub!

Thanks all on the feedback on the long steady day. After reading and re-reading his post (he has a very specific doc he created to clarify ambiguities), what you're all saying makes sense. Thanks Jack for figuring that out too! You are way better at data than me.

I'll keep it over 2:15 from here on out. Marston says himself that as long as you're in that 22 to 25 SPM range you can't go too slow essentially (just too fast).

[jackarabit]

Someone didn't finish his spinach.

[G-dub]

Someone didn't finish his spinach.

Just easing back into it, whether I want to or not

[gregsmith01748]

Nice Chris!

Mike, the steady rows, too me, are confusing in the plan. He seems to encourage a pace that is more difficult than needs to be. Or it is easy to assume that. Or we get all amped up that each workout needs to be a test. Chris, Greg and Henry got me on 2K plus 25ish after we finished the PP last time (each said something slightly different). I vary between 2:08 (+23) and 2:12 - sometimes even 2:15 (+30) and I don't think there would be much to gain by going faster. If it gets too boring, I throw in some pick ups. These rows are not supposed to be too taxing it seems to me. They enable harder work on the hard days and work the aerobic system. You should be able to carry on a conversation and feel good afterwards. Sorry if I'm saying something you already know and are doing, but it took a long time for the light bulb to go off for me that slow and comfortable is still good. Hopefully, Chris Greg or Henry can support this.

I agree intellectually with the idea that you can't go too slow, but I still struggle with it in practice. The issue is that I also believe in the overload principle. That essentially, you need to continue to increase the training load (either in time or intensity) to see continued improvement. So, I am trying to gently nudge the power up for steady state sessions without turning them into something entirely different. I think you can do this either by tracking heart rate or by measuring lactates. If you limit the pace to less than about 75% to 80% of HRR, you're probably OK. And if you keep lactate levels below 2.0 you're golden. The advantage of this is that you have a goal to shoot for in steady state training beyond just putting in the meters, and you have a way to measure progressive improvement in aerobic capability.

The problem that I have with using a set number like 2K - 25 is that it is quite different from person to person and even can change depending on how aerobic or anaerobic you are currently. And I've found that the difference in power between something that doesn't provide much (if any) training benefit and something that is too hard is only about 10 watts (or about 2 seconds on pace). So, I agree that is better to err on the side of slowness, but I think that you might not see a lot of training effect if you are consistently way below a target power.

[gregsmith01748]

Mike, I have a slightly different gloss on Marston's recs for initial pace targets. He does say best 5k pace for speed intervals. I believe he implies that the pace target for both speed and endurance intervals should be referenced to a best pace for a continuous row LONGER than the total interval meterage. 5k fills that bill for the short interval sessions which are usually 3500-4000' meters total. The intermediate or endurance interval sessions total 7500-8000m which suggests referencing best pace for a continuous piece 8k or longer, which makes the first LSD/SS/recovery day target 8k pace + 10.

The latter interpretation should in general encourage a slower recovery day pace cf. to referencing the 5k. I also find Marston's pacing suggestions a bit casual. In the long term, you should investigate using a pace window or range of "45 to 60% of 2k pace" (in watts) for SS rows.

45 to 60% of your current PB 2k watts (246) = 111 to 148W. Converted to pace that's a UT2 pace window of 2:27-2:14 for your recovery rows. Easy as it should be!

I think the main thing that he tries to communicate is that pacing guidelines aren't worth much because everyone is a special snowflake. The guidelines that he does provide are designed to be very conservative starting points, so that you can you use negative splitting to home in on the right pace for subsequent sessions. The same thing for the SS rows. I don't think Pete is being casual. I think he is trying communicate that your mileage may vary.

[G-dub]

Fair comments Greg. I use HR too. I may be guilty of not "nudging" enough at the moment. My heart rate numbers say I could be going a little faster on these rows.

[jackarabit]

I work the fast end + of my UT2 pace window (2:42-2:28 as determined by ISS IP calculator) on UT2 HR cap. Currently bracketing 2:27 for long SS rows @ <70%HRR. My window is obsolete.

[hjs]

Nice Chris!

Mike, the steady rows, too me, are confusing in the plan. He seems to encourage a pace that is more difficult than needs to be. Or it is easy to assume that. Or we get all amped up that each workout needs to be a test. Chris, Greg and Henry got me on 2K plus 25ish after we finished the PP last time (each said something slightly different). I vary between 2:08 (+23) and 2:12 - sometimes even 2:15 (+30) and I don't think there would be much to gain by going faster. If it gets too boring, I throw in some pick ups. These rows are not supposed to be too taxing it seems to me. They enable harder work on the hard days and work the aerobic system. You should be able to carry on a conversation and feel good afterwards. Sorry if I'm saying something you already know and are doing, but it took a long time for the light bulb to go off for me that slow and comfortable is still good. Hopefully, Chris Greg or Henry can support this.

I agree intellectually with the idea that you can't go too slow, but I still struggle with it in practice. The issue is that I also believe in the overload principle. That essentially, you need to continue to increase the training load (either in time or intensity) to see continued improvement. So, I am trying to gently nudge the power up for steady state sessions without turning them into something entirely different. I think you can do this either by tracking heart rate or by measuring lactates. If you limit the pace to less than about 75% to 80% of HRR, you're probably OK. And if you keep lactate levels below 2.0 you're golden. The advantage of this is that you have a goal to shoot for in steady state training beyond just putting in the meters, and you have a way to measure progressive improvement in aerobic capability.

The problem that I have with using a set number like 2K - 25 is that it is quite different from person to person and even can change depending on how aerobic or anaerobic you are currently. And I've found that the difference in power between something that doesn't provide much (if any) training benefit and something that is too hard is only about 10 watts (or about 2 seconds on pace). So, I agree that is better to err on the side of slowness, but I think that you might not see a lot of training effect if you are consistently way below a target power.

Although true, there is a flaw in these thoughts. For beginners its true, for people beyond that stage a lot less so. Guys like you and me are happy with a little bit of improvement. 1 second on the split over a year already would be use. If you translate that in improvement over a year the steps are very small. If you would improve 0.1 second per week, it already would be 5 second in a year. Will never happen.
So the overload principle does not work, at the very least you should be very carefull. Just doing work for the sake of work won,t help.
Improvement is also getting better at doing the work you do. Without getting faster or going up in volume. Keep in mind you are only after a small improvement.

[Balkan boy]

Here's my exemple on how you can improve as beginner:

6 weeks ago: 3km/2.5km/2km
- 2:00/500m
- 2:00/500m
- 2:00/500m
Average HR: 150bpm

3 weeks ago: 3km/2.5km/2km
- 1:59/500m
- 1:58/500m
- 1:58/500m
Average HR: 152bpm

Today: 3km/2.5km/2km
- 1:57/500m
- 1:56/500m
- 1:55/500m
Average HR: 147bpm

All of these were done without holding back and very close to the maximum.
At the time of the first cycle I was off the rower for two months and underweight.

Big gains are fun while they last.
Mike Caviston also says in the WP that he's happy to improve by 0.1 - 0.2 seconds per week, and even that doesn't come easily.

[G-dub]

Well done BB!

[G-dub]

Greg and Henry,

As I lay unsleeping last night, pondering why I am starting out worse than I did last time on the PP on the intervals, I aIso wondered about overloading the steady distance rows while doing the PP. It seems to me that the overload happens on the hard days and that the steady distance rows are to maintain or hopefully enhance aerobic fitness and to allow for recovery. If one was doing mostly base building, like prior to the PP, it seems like that is where a long row that increases in distance, volume increases per week, or other "nudging" that will create overload since there isn't a lot of intense work going on.

[jackarabit]

Dub, you just made an argument for periodization. Your main man, Stephen Seiler, has research which shows that continuous training produces a relatively high proportion of non-responders cf. to periodized. It's not beyond reason that you could be in that category. Lost citation to Seilor lecture. I'll rummage around. Maybe in the MAPP blog? Greg Smith will know.

[ericallenboyd]

w1d5 with a 5k hard distance. Felt tired today but got through it. I think my the work flight the past two days did not help my energy level. Not my best but felt like I got a good workout.

[Tyche]

W1D3
5x1500
1:49.9 /500m on all from 29-27 spm

Went down from last time, though i do think i need to adjust my diet, just as D1 i kept feeling very lightheaded after a couple of intervals.

I've decided to try and loose about 20 Lb and are eating less than usual, maybe too little. Currently i am estimating around 1000-1500 calories / day

[jackarabit]

Here ya go, Glenn. From Polarized to Optimized: Moving Toward 2025 --Stephen Seiler