Tried zone2 for a month, something unxepected happenend

[HornetMaX]

Thanks Sakly for taking the time.

For shorter distances PBs you used a higher DF and focused on more powerful strokes. So ... yeah
Your watts/stroke are pretty different between .5/1/2K PBs (~11 watts/stroke) and long&steady rows (~9 watts/stroke). This is essentially why I reacted to jamesg advice.

BTW, you did your 2K PB at 11 watts/stroke, 30SPM: do you think you could do the same time at 9 watts/stroke (aka at 36-37 SPM, not touching the drag factor) ?

I think what jamesg was saying is (@jamesg please correct if I'm wrong here):

• if you train for a 2K then "train in 2K conditions". You can describe this with two measures: (pace or avg watts) plus (SPM or watts/stroke). Whichever combo you like most.
• No matter what you train for, "pull good strokes": which essentially means don't go crazy with SPM when you can hold the same pace with a lower SPM (for the requested duration, of course).

I understand the above but I'm not sure that "always row the same watts/stroke" stretches down to very low intensities sessions.
But again, I honestly know little to nothing of all this, so yeah, just my 2c worth comment here.

[Sakly]

Thanks Sakly for taking the time.

For shorter distances PBs you used a higher DF and focused on more powerful strokes. So ... yeah
Your watts/stroke are pretty different between .5/1/2K PBs (~11 watts/stroke) and long&steady rows (~9 watts/stroke). This is essentially why I reacted to jamesg advice.

BTW, you did your 2K PB at 11 watts/stroke, 30SPM: do you think you could do the same time at 9 watts/stroke (aka at 36-37 SPM, not touching the drag factor) ?

The main question would be - referencing 2k level as comparison - would I be able to hold 11watts/stroke also for longer pieces, not could I do shorter pieces with less powerful strokes at higher rate.
And the 30r20 shows that I am capable of doing this (even with harder strokes).
In the end you have to choose a strategy for your race distance and you can choose for higher rates with lower power or vice versa and all steps between.
Being able to pull a hard stroke enables you to make this decision.

[smokersteve]

I workout about 3-4 hours per week. Mostly zone 3 and some zone 4 intervals. Works great for me to maintain my fitness.
Zone 2 training would not work for what I’m wanting to do.

[p_b82]

The part I took a bit of time getting my head round was working out the watts per stroke and how that then was applied to lower ratings.

It should have been more obvious I know, but as I don't have a huge variation in my stroke rate it confused me

but then I did a 2k and it made more sense. Taking my 2k, peak power was 202w@31 giving me ~6.5w per stroke

But atm my max sustainable rate is about 4.6w per stroke - I've done that for an hour 2.21.3@26 (124w), my HR got a little high yesterday on 2:25@25 (115w) during a 45min row to pace/rate; it was 17:12 >170bpm so in zone 5.

That all said, I don't think any of my sessions have been only in zone2 per max HR values - zone 3's the lowest I've seen, but most mine are zone4; ~150bpm max is zone3 by mHR which is UT2 by calcs. (Resting HR 70 max 189, tho even if I put in resting as 60, it only shifts the HR by 3 bpm down, and 150 is the upper end of UT2 still).

[HornetMaX]

The main question would be - referencing 2k level as comparison - would I be able to hold 11watts/stroke also for longer pieces, not could I do shorter pieces with less powerful strokes at higher rate.
And the 30r20 shows that I am capable of doing this (even with harder strokes).

Capable yes, but your 30min no rate limit (SR30) is miles better than your 30min@SR20: 273W vs 248w, with 9.15 watts/stroke vs 12.40 watts/stroke.
So I guess that if you were to train for a 30min race, you likely would train (mostly) at 9.15 w/stroke instead of 12 w/stroke, no ?

[Sakly]

The main question would be - referencing 2k level as comparison - would I be able to hold 11watts/stroke also for longer pieces, not could I do shorter pieces with less powerful strokes at higher rate.
And the 30r20 shows that I am capable of doing this (even with harder strokes).

Capable yes, but your 30min no rate limit (SR30) is miles better than your 30min@SR20: 273W vs 248w, with 9.15 watts/stroke vs 12.40 watts/stroke.
So I guess that if you were to train for a 30min race, you likely would train (mostly) at 9.15 w/stroke instead of 12 w/stroke, no ?

Typically rate decreases with longer distance/time. R30 is much for 30min - the same rate which I used in the 2k for <7min. I can rate high for longer distances, because my cv system allows me to do it, so I can weaken my stroke to row "relaxed". The 30min was not an all out effort, because I did not know how to pace as it was my first time.
In my next attempt I think I would rate a little lower and pull harder. To answer the question: I would try to use the harder stroke and adapt rating according to distance. This is my plan for my next 5k and 10k attempt.

[Dangerscouse]

So I guess that if you were to train for a 30min race, you likely would train (mostly) at 9.15 w/stroke instead of 12 w/stroke, no ?

It's very common to have a circa 200m difference between a 30r20 and a 30 free rate. IIRC, mine is about 270, and very few people will PB at r20-22. When I say PB, I mean in terms of true potential, which they may or may not achieve.

Personally I'm not bothered by watts per stroke, as I just see a stroke rate as a means to make you the most efficient you can be. It might be important for OTW, but OTE I don't see the benefit. As an example no-one cares if you achieve a sub 7 at r22 or r32, it's only the result that counts.

[HornetMaX]

Thx sakly, appreciate the discussion ! Good luck for the 10K, I'd bet you'll smash it

[Sakly]

Thx sakly, appreciate the discussion ! Good luck for the 10K, I'd bet you'll smash it

Thx, I know I will do

[eogbugo]

I’m not experienced enough in Zone 2 HR training to opine any recommendation. However, my understanding of the critical aspect of this training regime is that it should be limited to between 75 - 80% of your weekly workload. The balance of the weekly workload can be done in HIIT in Zones 4 and 5 as convenient.

[Tobias Stoehr]

Unexpected result:
The 1st time I switched to a "slower" half-marathon (11th Dec 2022, here) I did and avg pace of 2:17 and my HR never (never) exceeded 140. Splits were relatively uniform, HR over the splits too: so this seemed like a pretty steady-state rowing at the time. But since then the pace I can hold in order to keep my HR at 140 max has been constantly creeping up. Examples:

• On 27th Dec I only managed a 2:21 avg pace and my HR had some spikes above 140 (here).
• Today (15th Jan 2023, here) I only managed a 2:21 and my HR didn't stay below 140 at all (I'd say it stayed below 145).

So now I'm a bit confused: should I go back to harder long sessions (that didn't seem to pose me any problem in terms of fatigue) ?

Not unexpected at all. Sounds like your advice comes from the polarised school of thought. Going slower on the longer training requires you to go harder on your intervals. That is why it is called polarised. Very easy training combined with very hard training. If you take only the slow part of the training, and forego the fast training, the result will be loss of fitness.

[HornetMaX]

Not unexpected at all. Sounds like your advice comes from the polarised school of thought. Going slower on the longer training requires you to go harder on your intervals. That is why it is called polarised. Very easy training combined with very hard training. If you take only the slow part of the training, and forego the fast training, the result will be loss of fitness.

I didn't take away the hard part: each week I had 2 zone 2 sessions (half-marathons) and 2 "hard" sessions (3x(8min+2rest) at avg pace of 2KP+4-6s, which is kind of hard (at least for me).

[Tobias Stoehr]

Not unexpected at all. Sounds like your advice comes from the polarised school of thought. Going slower on the longer training requires you to go harder on your intervals. That is why it is called polarised. Very easy training combined with very hard training. If you take only the slow part of the training, and forego the fast training, the result will be loss of fitness.

I didn't take away the hard part: each week I had 2 zone 2 sessions (half-marathons) and 2 "hard" sessions (3x(8min+2rest) at avg pace of 2KP+4-6s, which is kind of hard (at least for me).

Sounds good.

[iain]

The part I took a bit of time getting my head round was working out the watts per stroke and how that then was applied to lower ratings.

It should have been more obvious I know, but as I don't have a huge variation in my stroke rate it confused me

but then I did a 2k and it made more sense. Taking my 2k, peak power was 202w@31 giving me ~6.5w per stroke

But atm my max sustainable rate is about 4.6w per stroke - I've done that for an hour 2.21.3@26 (124w), my HR got a little high yesterday on 2:25@25 (115w) during a 45min row to pace/rate; it was 17:12 >170bpm so in zone 5.

That all said, I don't think any of my sessions have been only in zone2 per max HR values - zone 3's the lowest I've seen, but most mine are zone4; ~150bpm max is zone3 by mHR which is UT2 by calcs. (Resting HR 70 max 189, tho even if I put in resting as 60, it only shifts the HR by 3 bpm down, and 150 is the upper end of UT2 still).

While I agree with many of the posters that maintaining W/Stroke isn't always appropriate for all sessions, comparison of this statistic will reveal changes in the quality of training. We are all different, but for someone of your size to pull 4.6WMin suggests that there may be substantial capacity to increase pace materially from improving the quality of your stroke. This assumes that there is no reason for the weaker stroke (eg substantially reduced range of movement or disability). At the other end it is good to notice increased WMin rates that could be due to inefficient extentions of the stroke ~(eg I lay have a tendency to layback too far at lower ratings which increases the effort of recovery disproportionally to the small increase in power achieved).

[p_b82]

While I agree with many of the posters that maintaining W/Stroke isn't always appropriate for all sessions, comparison of this statistic will reveal changes in the quality of training. We are all different, but for someone of your size to pull 4.6WMin suggests that there may be substantial capacity to increase pace materially from improving the quality of your stroke. This assumes that there is no reason for the weaker stroke (eg substantially reduced range of movement or disability). At the other end it is good to notice increased WMin rates that could be due to inefficient extentions of the stroke ~(eg I lay have a tendency to layback too far at lower ratings which increases the effort of recovery disproportionally to the small increase in power achieved).

My anaerobic max is currently 10.9WMin (360w@33); but my cardio can't keep up with more than ~4.5WMin for 45min+ sessions.

My cardio has always been my limiting factor when exercising; whether running/swimming/cycling/hill walking; there always hits a point when I just can't deliver the oxygen required, the lactic builds and the HR keeps rising - I'm not finding it difficult to sustain from an effort perspective.

I do have poor flexibility though - it's probably been 30 years since I last touched my toes without bending my knees. I also have poor dorsiflexion in the ankle, can't squat to the ground and keep my heels flat, I have to shift onto my toes + lift heels or I just tip backwards.

Neither are ideal, I'm sure, in my rowing stroke, but I don't think they're limiting things currently.