The Two Types of Training

becz · Post by **becz** » February 28th, 2010, 1:18 pm

I think it's time to once again consider whether the forum would be a better place without Ranger. And by better I'm not referring to anything regarding entertainment. I can live with the ridiculous bravado, especially given his spectacular failure with respect to meeting his own expectations. But when he time and again belittles others and posts profanity when challenged I thinks it's time to clean house. It wasn't due to simple annoyance that he was banned from the UK forum, it was for the same reasons that we see occurring here. While Ranger's rowing hasn't improved over the course of the past 5 years, neither has his behavior, and I think it makes the forum a lesser place to contribute to. This isn't about censorship, it's about what the community wants this place to be. Let him go start a blog somewhere if he so chooses, something that only he has control over (which it would seem would suit him just fine), but let's end the ridculousness here. Anyone who's truly interested in continuing the madness can follow him wherever he lands.

ranger · Post by **ranger** » February 28th, 2010, 2:30 pm

Byron Drachman wrote:I know there are seminars for people who lack self-esteem and need to become more self-confident and assertive. I wonder if there are any seminars for people who need to tone it down.

Tone it down?

Why?

If you pay the price, you get good, Byron.

Try six-hour sessions for a few years.

Row at 13 SPI.

If you can hang in there, you will have a right to crow.

The only issue is this: Will you hang in there?

ranger

ranger · Post by **ranger** » February 28th, 2010, 2:32 pm

becz wrote:his spectacular failure with respect to meeting his own expectations

Say what?

I am meeting _all_ of my expectations.

I am rowing right at my targets.

I am at weight.

I feel great.

No sickness, no injuries, no staleness, no discouragement.

I am pulling 11.7 SPI right up to 40 spm.

As a 60s lwt?

Ridiculously good!

Most 60s lightweights pull about 9 SPI.

ranger

ranger · Post by **ranger** » February 28th, 2010, 2:36 pm

becz wrote:Ranger's rowing hasn't improved

A little premature on this one, dude.

If I pull 1:38 @ 32 spm for 2K on Saturday, I equal what I did in my last race in 2003 and therefore overcome all of the decline with age of seven years, without even preparing for it.

The normal decline with age in the veteran ranks is 1.7 seconds per year, over 7 years, right around 12 seconds.

I am also a _long_ way from being fully trained.

This 2K, 1:38 @ 32 spm, will be an AT 2K.

1:38 is AT for a 6:16 2K.

ranger

johnlvs2run · Post by **johnlvs2run** » February 28th, 2010, 2:38 pm

ranger wrote:I'll do this stuff all week and then try 32 spm again at Detroit on Saturday.

Sabotage
6:50 at 32 spm is 9.2mps
6:40 at 32 spm is 9.4mps
6:30 at 32 spm is 9.6mps

- - - - - - -

E f f i c i e n c y
6:50 at 8 mps is 36.6 spm
6:40 at 8 mps is 37.5 spm
6:30 at 8 mps is 38.5 spm

ranger · Post by **ranger** » February 28th, 2010, 2:41 pm

leadville wrote:And I'm the fxxxin idiot...

Finally!

It has dawned on you.

Yep.

_You're_ the f...kin' idiot, not me.

My training is going great.

I am the best in the world for my age and weight.

You are nobody.

Isn't that a fact that you need to consider?

ranger

ranger · Post by **ranger** » February 28th, 2010, 2:43 pm

John Rupp wrote:
ranger wrote:I'll do this stuff all week and then try 32 spm again at Detroit on Saturday.
Sabotage
6:50 at 32 spm is 9.2mps
6:40 at 32 spm is 9.4mps
6:30 at 32 spm is 9.6mps

- - - - - - -

E f f i c i e n c y
6:50 at 8 mps is 36.6 spm
6:40 at 8 mps is 37.5 spm
6:30 at 8 mps is 38.5 spm

When all is said and done, for 2K, I'll do 1:34 @ 36 spm.

That's 8.7 MPS, as I remember.

ranger

PaulH · Post by **PaulH** » February 28th, 2010, 2:56 pm

I'm puzzled again - you seem to be defining what your race targets will be based on your training, but at the same time you'll know you're fully trained when you reach your race targets. The latter on its own is questionable, but together with the former it's a complete nonsense.

ranger · Post by **ranger** » February 28th, 2010, 3:14 pm

leadville wrote:And I'm the fxxxin idiot...

I don't understand your ethics.

Why don't you include a signature line, telling us what you are doing in your rowing?

What don't you say who you are?

ranger

ranger · Post by **ranger** » February 28th, 2010, 3:17 pm

PaulH wrote:I'm puzzled again - you seem to be defining what your race targets will be based on your training, but at the same time you'll know you're fully trained when you reach your race targets. The latter on its own is questionable, but together with the former it's a complete nonsense.

No, I am fully trained when I do my best for 4 x 2K, 4 x 1K, and 8 x 500m, not to mention distance trials.

My race targets at the moment are just guesses, given that I have only finished my UT training.

I am looking for a solid AT 2K.

My guess is that, when I get this, it will be 1:38.

32 spm is a very reasonable AT rate.

Many of the best rowers do 5K at 32 spm.

Your 5K pb, by and large, is your AT pace.

That's what I got in 2006 at Baltimore.

I assume I can get get it again--and then go beyond it, by sharpening with TR and AN sessions.

ranger

DUThomas · Post by **DUThomas** » February 28th, 2010, 3:19 pm

ranger wrote:The normal decline with age in the veteran ranks is 1.7 seconds per year, over 7 years, right around 12 seconds.

7 years ago -- 6:28
This year -- 6:41

You know what, buttercup? You're right on pace, maybe even a little ahead!

ranger · Post by **ranger** » February 28th, 2010, 3:23 pm

becz wrote:I think it's time to once again consider whether the forum would be a better place without Ranger.

Depends on your definition of "better," I guess.

If you mean _socially_ better.

Then, sure.

The forum is all about avoiding what you need to do to improve and get better at rowing.

It is all aobut socializing.

So. sure, if I didn't remind you, constantly, of what needs to be done to get better at rowing, the forum would be great.

Everyone could feel relaxed in the conviction that you don't have to do much at all to get better, and that those who are better are just gifted athletes than don't really earn it by training hard and well.

ranger

jliddil · Post by **jliddil** » February 28th, 2010, 3:26 pm

ranger wrote:
becz wrote:I think it's time to once again consider whether the forum would be a better place without Ranger.
The forum is all about avoiding what you need to do to improve and get better at rowing.

It is all aobut socializing.

ranger

In your opinion this is what the forum is about. I would disagree.

ranger · Post by **ranger** » February 28th, 2010, 3:27 pm

DUThomas wrote:
ranger wrote:The normal decline with age in the veteran ranks is 1.7 seconds per year, over 7 years, right around 12 seconds.
7 years ago -- 6:28
This year -- 6:41

You know what, buttercup? You're right on pace, maybe even a little ahead!

I think I will pull 6:32 in Detroit this Saturday, and without even training for it.

The 6:28 seven years ago was on a full docket of training--including distance trials and hard sharpening.

Given my technique and stroking, power, in 2003, the 6:28 was the outer limits of my ability.

My last 2K in 2003 was 6:32, fully trained.

If I do an AT 6:32 on Saturday, I have not only overcome all of the decline with age over the last seven years, I am massively better.

AT pace is 2K + 4.

ranger

ranger · Post by **ranger** » February 28th, 2010, 3:32 pm

jliddil wrote:In your opinion this is what the forum is about. I would disagree.

Of course you disagree.

So does everyone else on the forum.

There is a social consensus here, no?

What is the consensus?

If we all delude ourselves in what it take to be good at rowing, we will feel good about ourselves, even though we are not doing any of it.

ranger