The Road to Boston 2007

[seat5]

Supposed to do 3 x 14 UT1 today, but my schedule got rather messed up; I ended up eating some donuts and coffee about an hour before I was able to row (thought I had a longer meeting to go to than I did this evening) and then had was short of time, so I did 42 min UT1 instead. I ended up taking a 45 second break with about 12 min to go but still ended up with an average of 2:06.6/22 spm, so I was OK with it (target was supposed to be 2:10). The donuts were in a constant state of rebellion, but I was glad I did it.

[whaskell]

Wednesday morning: 12min WU 2722m

AT 12min / max pace 1:50 / 26-28spm

Target:- 12min / avg pace 1:51.0 / 27spm

Actual:- 12min / avg pace 1:51.0 / 27spm / 3242m

12min CD 2801m

Felt good again, even though I only had 4.75 hrs of sleep last night. Had a late night planning board meeting for work and was last item on the agenda. This makes for a long day at work! Oh well, I got up 1/2 hour later than usual and did the AT workout. I was glad it was not multiple repititions.

[Bob S.]

I was going to revise my IP schedule, adjusting it to take into account my recent 2k and also to aim for the satellite regatta at Long Beach which will likely be three weeks earlier than the CRASH-B. There is no point in training for the C-B if I can't get there. My scheme was to start from scratch with a 16 week/3day a week IP.

However, my old program just happened to call for a 30'UT2 for the second session of the week. It also just happened that I was in need of a good 30'@20spm piece in order to show that a certain prediction formula is a bunch of crap. The punchline is that I did the 30' piece with a 6641m (2:15.5) result. Using the formula which came up on the U.K. forum:

http://www.machars.net/spi.php#twokfromwatts

I plugged in the 6641m and got back a prediction of 8:01.3 (2:00.3) for a 2k — 15.8 seconds faster than the 8:17.1 that I did on Monday. The 2k that I actually did was a (post-op) personal best done here at 4000ft. In January, I did beat that predicted time, but that was at sea level and, since the 30' predictor was done here at altitude, it should predict a 2k for here, not at sea level. I was definitely done in at the end of the 2k, but the 30' piece was not at all a problem.

(Note the "post-op" qualifier means that it was a PB done after July of 2003. This rules out the 2ks that I did 10 years or so ago, which were obviously much faster than what I can do now.)

Bob S.

[Anne]

Hey Bob, I may look into that predictor too...I actually studied the past two 2Ks I did (my test is coming up) and learned more about what not to do...namely, I seem to always make the mistake of going out too fast---and then paying for it in the second 500.

Anyway, today I did squeezed in the the 2x8' AT piece before a Pilates class. I didn't have my heart monitor with me. Ended up with a 2:14,5 (26spm) average...steady through both pieces. It wasn't as fast as I usually do the AT pieces, but was in the right range. No complaints on my end.

[Anne]

I'll save my complaints until after the 2K test

[seat5]

The predictor, based on a 30r20 piece of 7526, says I should be able to do a 7:04 , which is absolute and utter hogwash, and will never happen in 100 years of hard training, steroids, and an overdose of caffeine.

Today was 57min (?why??)UT2, target 2:14/20, actual 2:06.8/20. Since I'm not using a HR monitor it is highly likely this was actually more of a UT1 workout--I had the PM3 on watts to see what that was like and had really no idea what pace I was doing, and it was fun to make a bigger number instead of a smaller one for a change. Tomorrow is 4 x 12 UT1.

[Bob S.]

Hey Bob, I may look into that predictor too...I actually studied the past two 2Ks I did (my test is coming up) and learned more about what not to do...namely, I seem to always make the mistake of going out too fast---and then paying for it in the second 500.

Anne,

Good luck on the 2k test. I made that same mistake on mine, i.e. my first 500 was too fast:

2:02.6/500. 31spm. 153bps.
2:06.6/500. 31spm. 153bps.
2:05.8/500. 30spm. 156bps.
2:02.3/500. 31spm. 156bps.

Fortunately I still had a lot left in the tank for a solid sprint to pull that last 500 down to a faster pace. I much prefer to have negative pacing all the way, but I just did not have good control of my pace in that first split. I had intended to try to hold to 2:05 in the first split and then try to work down from there. I had also intended to stick close to a 28spm rate, which has worked well in the past, but somehow I lost concentration and could not stay focused. At the end, I felt that I was really lucky to have improved on my previous best time here.

Bob S.

P.S. In regard to that predictor, I have seen praises of it and apparently it works reasonably well for a lot of people in the 30-60yo brackets. For the young rowers, it seems to predict 2k times that are too slow, and, for this old guy at least, it was just the opposite. As I commented on the U.K. forum, this is consistent with the concept that, with aging, we lose strength more rapidly than we lose endurance and that strength is relatively more important than endurance for short races and vice versa for the longer ones. As I remember, you are somewhere in the middle range, so it might work quite well for you. Note that, in using that page, you have to scroll down to the "2k time from watts calculator," then click on the item that says "select" and scroll that down to "m/30 mins." I was rather confused by this at first. Also note that it is for a 30 minute piece done at 20spm. I didn't catch that the first time I applied it and used a couple of 30'24spm pieces. Those predicted really fast 2k times. B.

[Bob S.]

The predictor, based on a 30r20 piece of 7526, says I should be able to do a 7:04 , which is absolute and utter hogwash, and will never happen in 100 years of hard training, steroids, and an overdose of caffeine.

Carla,

Your message came in while I was busy composing mine, so I didn't see it until after I sent mine. Obviously, my generalization about it working well for those 30-60yo doesn't have much validity. I have tried out a number of other predictors that I have run across and they all seem to be way off. I just have to face the fact that there are some of us that just do best on the long hauls and have to struggle with the "sprints."

Bob S.

[GeorgeD]

Best predictor for a 2k is 2 x 1k OR 4 x 500 with no rests between intervals

George

[Bob S.]

Best predictor for a 2k is 2 x 1k OR 4 x 500 with no rests between intervals :!:

George

I sure can't argue with that one, George. I just wish I had a better way of translating what I can do here at 4000ft to what I could do at sea level. The article on the physics of rowing had a formula based on available oxygen. It didn't seem to be too far off, but it is still just a guessing game. A lot of it just comes down to how you feel on the day of a test — like did you get a good sleep the night before — or did you worry all night about how the test would go?

Bob S.

[hjs]

The predictor, based on a 30r20 piece of 7526, says I should be able to do a 7:04 , which is absolute and utter hogwash, and will never happen in 100 years of hard training, steroids, and an overdose of caffeine.

Carla,

Your message came in while I was busy composing mine, so I didn't see it until after I sent mine. Obviously, my generalization about it working well for those 30-60yo doesn't have much validity. I have tried out a number of other predictors that I have run across and they all seem to be way off. I just have to face the fact that there are some of us that just do best on the long hauls and have to struggle with the "sprints."

Bob S.

If this 30/20 predictor gives you a much better 2 k time than the real 2 k, it shows a weakness. You simply don,t train your speed enough.
We also often see that the older we get the tougher it becomes to train or speed. Endurance will be ok but to make that into a good 2k is easier when you are young.

[seat5]

If this 30/20 predictor gives you a much better 2 k time than the real 2 k, it shows a weakness. You simply don,t train your speed enough.

Very true, which is why I decided to pick a plan and just do it as it would force me to work on everything and not just the stuff that comes naturally. Right now the IP seems fine but I'm sure to hate it when the AT and TR stuff comes along. I'm only in the 3rd week and start AT next week. But I am committed to doing it this season, like it or not, and hope to improve the 2K so that it's somewhat in line with the longer distances. My best 2K was 7:42.9 (slides) and that is an eternity from the predicted 7:04!

[hjs]

If this 30/20 predictor gives you a much better 2 k time than the real 2 k, it shows a weakness. You simply don,t train your speed enough.

Very true, which is why I decided to pick a plan and just do it as it would force me to work on everything and not just the stuff that comes naturally. Right now the IP seems fine but I'm sure to hate it when the AT and TR stuff comes along. I'm only in the 3rd week and start AT next week. But I am committed to doing it this season, like it or not, and hope to improve the 2K so that it's somewhat in line with the longer distances. My best 2K was 7:42.9 (slides) and that is an eternity from the predicted 7:04!

Carla,

7.04 may be a bit to much but that 7.42 can be bettered, no doubt ! Your power endurance is there and that's a strong base

[whaskell]

Thursday Morning
10min WU 2271m
UT1 3 x 12min / max pace 1:54.5 / 22-24spm

Target:- 3 x 12min / avg pace 1:57.0 / 23spm / 2:30rest

Actual:- 12min / avg pace 1:56.8 / 24spm / 3081m / 2:30min rest
Actual:- 12min / avg pace 1:56.8 / 23spm / 3081m / 2:30 min rest
Actual:- 12min / avg pace 1:56.8 / 23 spm / 3083m / 2:30min rest

Total session 10855m

Felt a little tired this morning, mentally and physically. Finished the workout and maintained pace and stroke rate but did not feel great about the workout. Day off tomorrow.

[Anne]

After a lengthy day of work, I decided that doing the 2K test tomorrow ( Friday the 13th ) could be unlucky. So, today was the day and I kept reminding myself that this was a test...not a race. Most important to me was pacing it right. Holding back during the first 500 is still tough for me (perhaps it is the music on my i-pod or the great feeling of being let loose)

I improved during the IP plan from a 8:15.4 to 8:11.6 tonight...although I am 15 seconds off my pb this year. Had never measured HR in a 2K but Tom told me to do so...I did cover the HR part of the monitor during the race ...feared seeing it get high.
8:11.6 29sr 186 HR
2:01.3 30sr 183 HR
2:04.3 29sr 184 HR
2:03.9 29sr 187 HR
2:02.0 31sr 190HR

Any suggestions for improvement are welcome!