ranger wrote:mikvan52 wrote:but here's the kicker... the last 3:00 segment was recorded as follows w/o "tricks"
2:07.8 / 14 spm..... watts/spm = 11.98
as I was barely moving on the recovery, this was easy...
a far cry from trying to hit such a queer number at 40 spm! (12 spi would require 1:30 pace so.... 3' of that would mean I would cover 1k 16 seconds faster than my personal best!)
More proof as to the uselessness of such a quotient ! Magnitudes are meant to mean something after all!
You just said very precisely what it means.
If you trained yourself to row 12 SPI with your natural rowing motion--automatically, habitually, unconsciously, inevitably--and if you could also train yourself to hold 40 spm for 1K, your potential over the distance would rise dramatically, four seconds per 500m.
I used to think you were just having us all on with this watts divided by stroke rate stuff. But you really seems to believe it!
Call Kirk, spend a dime. You don't believe me.
But let me make this observation: Even you sentence structure and lack of logic shows your ignorance of the subject. Notice what you say. There are two ifs in what you said:
IF #1:" If you trained yourself to row 12 SPI"
IF #2:" if you could also train yourself to hold 40 spm for 1K"
What's the connection between the two IFs?
There is none.
IF # 2 leaves out any consideration of one of the variables in #1:.....
watts
Sure any decent athlete can achieve #1 watts/spm. Any decent athlete can hold 40 spm.... but where are the watts?
AS Citroen points out: you need to be able to do the work.
When I turned in my 11.98 bullshit quotient last night I was at 2:07.8 pace. This is 167.xx watts.
I was in a comfortable breathing pattern for the 3 minutes
No matter what, there is no training in the world that can increase my wattage to 480 for the same length of time.
When I row at 480 watts I don't last much longer than 250m. It doesn't depend on training. IT depends on strength and my ability to "fire up" the small furnace I have to run my "system" (my body, not a theoretical one) flat out.
It's a sustained strength issue. 58 year old muscles on a 160 lb frame don't do 480 watts for 3 minutes and never will.
No one's body does this in the "natural" world...
If you want to refute this statement: Outline your program in detail & report it here. Show your work!
Clearly, a heavyweight taking 17 strokes at 1:34 (421.xx watts) doesn't prove a thing beyond the distance you covered having exerted yourself for those 40-some seconds.
SPI training is for idiots who refuse to appreciate the meanings of the variables in the physical world.
Don't "go there" (into the real world) w/o being able to illustrate what you are talking with confirmed workouts including watts and stroke rates. No, single stroke screen shots don't help.
You couldn't even do 500m at 34 spm and maintain 1:34 pace ... <end of theory right there>
Furthermore:
Neither you nor I have 1:24 500m speed... That, plus or minus a few watts, is what is required for a 6:16 2k.
Again....End of subject. You don't have to be "fully trained" to exhibit wattage in a TT close to that figure.
The stroke rate doesn't figure into the equation. The body settles into whatever rate is appropriate to produce such wattage... It's that simple.
Your failure to post anything remotely supportive of your crack-pot theories remains amusing. I expect your endless promises to do the same will continue indefinitely.
(Your answer remains...
"Well, you just wait! I'll show you!!
We've waited for 8 years now, another 8 isn't going to change a thing.
2003 was a long time ago... let go of it. You're 60 and much slower.
If you choose to be competitive again, try to beat your cohorts first before moving on to la-la land.
