Steady state pacing

[jamesg]

he gets called fat without provocation

225lb at 6' (102kg 1.83) is in his signature. BMI = 102/1.83² = 30.4. BMI over 30 provokes questions, that's what it's for.

We all know 60min is UT2 work, done at up to 60% test Watts. 7:03 is 294W, 60% is max 176W. UT2 is up to rate 20. He'll need a stroke worth at least 176/20 = 9W-min. So the advice is just do it.

He's 47y, 100kg, what's the problem? No training plan at all?

[JaapvanE]

he gets called fat without provocation

225lb at 6' (102kg 1.83) is in his signature. BMI = 102/1.83² = 30.4. BMI over 30 provokes questions, that's what it's for.

BMI is a worthless metric when applied to a single person without any additional info. He could be 100kg pure muscle with only 2% bodyfat. BMI is usefull for classifying large groups of people into groups and looking for initial correlations. Beyond that, the laws of math still apply. As any averaged metric, one should not apply average group properties to a single individual.

[jamesg]

He could be 100kg pure muscle with only 2% bodyfat.

Quite so. We await such info to integrate and explain what he already mentioned.

[Dangerscouse]

Where did he say he wasn't doing any speed work? Interesting how so many people answer a question that wasn't asked without addressing the question of pacing a 60' workout.

Fair point, I made an assumption that could well be wrong.

[mromero680]

Ummm, 60 minute pieces, comfortable, should I slow down?

No, I would not slow down. Doesn't seem that controversial to me.

[Mike Caviston]

We all know 60min is UT2 work, done at up to 60% test Watts. 7:03 is 294W, 60% is max 176W. UT2 is up to rate 20. He'll need a stroke worth at least 176/20 = 9W-min.

I don’t know any such thing. I know that “UT2” is an arbitrary made-up designation that isn’t a particularly effective means of organizing the training process to improve performance. I know that you regularly make shit up and pull numbers out of your ass to validate some ridiculous claim. And I know that when a person asks about what pace to use for a 60’ workout, performing an unrequested analysis of body composition without the necessary data is not an appropriate response.

[jamesg]

Your L4 Tables for a 2k test at 7:03 state

2:11 rate 16 (156W)
2:07 rate 18 (171W)
2:03 rate 20 (188W)
1:58 rate 22 (213W)

The average W/Rate ratio (= Work per stroke) here is just under 10.

If he wants to consider 60 minutes as training for a 2k I think he'd do better to use your L4 tables, if he can, since they train the stroke.

If his BMI 30 is due to muscle, presumably with better technique he'll have no diffculty using it. If not, he's doing very well already.

[jackarabit]

If he wants to consider 60 minutes as training for a 2k I think he'd do better to use your L4 tables, if he can, since they train the stroke.

If’t be a throwdown, ‘tis finely crafted. I anticipate a tsunami of deconstruction.

[nick rockliff]

If he wants to consider 60 minutes as training for a 2k I think he'd do better to use your L4 tables, if he can, since they train the stroke.

If’t be a throwdown, ‘tis finely crafted. I anticipate a tsunami of deconstruction.

That made me smile

[Gustel]

Good Morning - quick question about SS. I am training for a 2k in March - last test was 7:03. Hoping for sub 7 this time. Everything I read says SS certainly helps long term when incorporated in the training.

My max heart rate is about 170-175bpm. I'll be doing some 60 minute pieces - last one was 140bpm, 22s/m, and a 2:08 split. Comfortable, solid row. Are these numbers effective or should I slow things down a bit? Obviously want to make sure the work on the erg is maximizing end results.

Appreciate any advice!

I asked myself the same question recently. I used to do steady sessions next to the normal hard sessions at 2:14 which gave me a heart rate of 122, which is just above 70%. I made really good improvements with this setup when I followed the 5k Pete Plan. I asked myself then if I could make even better improvements if I increase my steady session to 2:08. this gives me a heart rate of 135 at the end of an hour. I made the change quite recently and don’t have any results yet concerning improvement. However, I seem to cope with this new steady pace quite well as part of the Pete lunch plan.

Maybe some self experiment would be the best approach? Do it for a while on 2:08 and check that you manage your hard sessions OK. Then increase it to 2:14 and see how you feel. Can you put more effort in the hard sessions?

Good luck.

[Mike Caviston]

Your L4 Tables for a 2k test at 7:03 state
2:11 rate 16 (156W)
2:07 rate 18 (171W)
2:03 rate 20 (188W)
1:58 rate 22 (213W)
If he wants to consider 60 minutes as training for a 2k I think he'd do better to use your L4 tables, if he can, since they train the stroke.

Actually, the tables say 2:13/2:08/2:04/1:59 for rates 16/18/20/22spm. But once again, the OPs question was about steady state, not rate-restricted rate-shifting unsteady training, so the appropriate WP workout would be Level 3. I already said my recommendation for 60' for someone hoping to break 7:00 for 2K would be to work down from 2:08 pace to as close to 2:00 as is reasonably possible. And that doesn't say he couldn't incorporate Level 4 if he wanted to.

[Cyclingman1]

Do I have this right? The OP wants to improve from 7:03 to 6:59 in a few weeks? And he is talking about doing 60 min rows?

Why? Talk about wasting time. Do 1Ks and 5Ks, among other shorter rows, briskly. 60 min rows will be virtually useless for fast 2Ks.

It's way too easy to get wrapped around a pole focusing on a detailed rowing plan and losing sight of the goal. Rowing fast means rowing fast, not slow.

[Mike Caviston]

Do I have this right? The OP wants to improve from 7:03 to 6:59 in a few weeks? And he is talking about doing 60 min rows?
Why? Talk about wasting time. Do 1Ks and 5Ks, among other shorter rows, briskly. 60 min rows will be virtually useless for fast 2Ks.
It's way too easy to get wrapped around a pole focusing on a detailed rowing plan and losing sight of the goal. Rowing fast means rowing fast, not slow.

At this point it's probably moot, since the OP doesn't seem to be interested enough to come back and follow up. But he posted on JAN 19 and testing in March could mean another nine weeks of training. He didn't say when he rowed 7:03 or say anything about the rest of his training, but everyone seems dead certain that since he asked about 60' that must be all he's doing and he has for some reason chosen to ignore race-pace intervals and threshold workouts. As for "60 min rows will be virtually useless for fast 2Ks", they sure weren't for me, and 90 minutes were better than 60. Focusing on a detailed rowing plan allowed me to achieve the goal without losing sight of it. Be careful with "Rowing fast means rowing fast, not slow". I agree that targets for endurance rows should be more aggressive than many people are willing to use, but a helluva lot of minutes need to be spent at a pace quite a bit slower than 2K pace.

[JaapvanE]

At this point it's probably moot, since the OP doesn't seem to be interested enough to come back and follow up.

I don't blame him, after being called obese for no appearant reason and directly getting caught up between an aggressive discussion that didn't seem to result in any decent answer.

[jamesg]

the appropriate WP workout would be Level 3.

Which is 85-90% of test pace and 60-73% of Watts and tallies with with the Interactives (60-70%W), ratings 20-24, for what is there called UT1. Such work is in the IAs, all the way through.

Come to think of it, we didn't do much else, 60 years ago, but not an hour continuous. Usually 30 minutes there and a bit less back, with the tide, plus time for coach to talk.

If the OP does it slower, he'll have his reasons; likely 60 minutes is just too much. But he's doing well anyway.