Ranger's training thread

[macroth]

Taking a few strokes and stopping does nothing for habituation.

Silliest thing I've ever heard.

Fartlek and interval training are great for habituation.

You keep reaching new depths of stupidity. At what pace is 8x500/3:30 done? Is it at 4K pace? If you do 20x100m/1' at 1:30/500m pace, is there a chance in hell that you will pull 6:00 for 2K?

What if you row 100x200m/1' at 1:45 pace, do you think this will bring you any closer to managing 1:45/500m over a continuous 20K?

Your brother would set you straight in a minute, but you wouldn't dare bring up the subject of training with him.

[hjs]

Once your fitness is maximal, what is important is to get maximally effective and efficient at rowing so that you can make the best use of your fitness.

Rowing slowly and badly over long distances is absolutely the worst thing for your technical effectiveness and efficiency.

You're not going to pull 6:16 for 2K if you do a lot of 2:02 @ 20 spm for most of your sessions.

ranger

Maximal yes, but every that max is less...... Father time is boss.

[ginster]

Once your fitness is maximal, what is important is to get maximally effective and efficient at rowing so that you can make the best use of your fitness.

And in Rangerland, of course, once fitness is "maximal", it just magically stays like that - you don't have to keep working on it...

[ranger]

What if you row 100x200m/1' at 1:45 pace, do you think this will bring you any closer to managing 1:45/500m over a continuous 20K?

I am not doing anything of the sort, but sure, if your fitness is maximal, working on your fitness will get you nothing at all.

What will make you faster is becoming better at rowing, making more effective and efficient use of your fitness.

There are _lots_ of ways to do that, but rowing a continuous 20K, 2:02 @ 20 spm, is not one of them.

That just works on your fitness.

Sure, rowing 100 x 200 would be a fine way to get more fully used to a new technique.

Why wouldn't it be?

My fitness is fine for being able to row a continuous 1:45 for 20K.

Nothing to be done there at all.

I can run my HR at 170 bpm for 20K.

What I need to have to row 20K at 1:45 is a fully relaxed and consistent use of an effective and efficient technique, so that I can make the best use of my fitness.

I now have that technique.

All I need to do is get fully relaxed and consistent with it.

That's what I am doing now with this rowing at 32 spm in a 3-to-1 ratio.

ranger

[mikvan52]

You're not going to pull 6:16 for 2K if you do a lot of 2:02 @ 20 spm for most of your sessions.

Father time is boss.

Henry is right!
Let's just cut to the chase and not be idiotic.
no 60 yr old lightweight has the potential to get close to 6:16 for 2k on the erg

All this dithering about drag factor and force curves and ratio is just old man speak. IOW: Avoidance of admission that old people slow down.

We're all long past over-due on needing to move on to other subjects. It is so hard to believe that this thread goes over its handful of topics over and over again.

In erging as in al sports there are no outliers that statistically deviate in strength by the margins TSO claims.
I suggest we give the 6:16 thing a rest

Rich: Here's a constructive idea. Instead of blathering about impossibility, why not speak to the subject of breaking Brian Bailey's WR? I think you can do it. Furthermore, the obscurity of 60+ year old efforts at ultra-erging is mind-numbingly dull and insignificant. So few seeking a "back-water" crown. WOuldn't you prfer to do something as outstanding as possible by focusing on 2k?

Have at it, good buddy!

Come on. Lip-synch with me...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uuRpzmXj4l8

[ranger]

Once your fitness is maximal, what is important is to get maximally effective and efficient at rowing so that you can make the best use of your fitness.

And in Rangerland, of course, once fitness is "maximal", it just magically stays like that - you don't have to keep working on it...

I have been doing daily sessions, of 1-3 hours a session, for a decade.

I don't take rest days.

I would say that is working on it.

ranger

[mikvan52]

What will make you faster is becoming better at rowing, becoming more effective and efficient.

...


My fitness is fine for being able to row a continuous 1:45 for 20K.

Nothing to be done there at all.

I can run my (mouth)

What I need to have to row 20K at 1:45 is a relaxed, effective, efficient technique, so that that level of exertion is up to the task.

I now have an effective, efficient technique.

All I need to do is get fully used to it.

That's what I am doing now with this rowing at 32 spm in a 3-to-1 ratio.

See what I mean?

What you say here is such total garbage. It should embarrass you to propose such foolishness.
1:45 pace for long distance is not accessible for 60 year old because they are 60!... end of story.
"Getting used to it"?

LMAO!
If you laughed yours off... you might make weight!

[ranger]

no 60 yr old lightweight has the potential to get close to 6:16 for 2k on the erg

Everyone is welcome to their own opinion, I guess.

But I don't agree with you--at all.

Sure, a 60s lwt will have to have certain things to have a chance at 6:16--high aerobic capacity, excellent fitness, and most importantly, the ability to row well at low drag.

I now have all of these.

So I now think I have a chance.

Clearly, I didn't have a chance when I rowed badly and max drag.

I was too ineffective and inefficient.

So I couldn't make the best use of my aerobic capacity and fitness.

Rowing well at 95 df., I think that 11.7 SPI @ 36 spm for 2K, or something like, e.g., 12 SPI @ 34 spm, is now a good possibility for me.

2.5-to-1 ratio

ranger

[mikvan52]

It just might occur to many of us here that this thread is no much more than "old man" group therapy.
talk therapy

It's the talk that matters... clearly not the content!

There are no women here.
No under 30 speedsters on there way up...

Ever consider that?
This observation has been made from time to time and bears reconsideration in order "to be real".

[hjs]

Once your fitness is maximal, what is important is to get maximally effective and efficient at rowing so that you can make the best use of your fitness.

And in Rangerland, of course, once fitness is "maximal", it just magically stays like that - you don't have to keep working on it...

True, but I one keeps on training your fitness keep more or less contant, look at most top athletes, once they are fully grown there sports levels more or less stay the same, if they improve/or get worse % wise those changes are not big at all. Simply put, to get to 95/98% of once potential is not difficult and it is also not difficult to keep it that way. It the last bit that is the hardest and most difficult.

The nutty pro training twice a hour per day in his Pb erging time, so he was topfit in those days, his decline from there was just as inevitable as can be. 8 years older, 8 years decline in his current potential.

[ranger]

1:45 pace for long distance is not accessible for 60 year old because they are 60

Naw.

Age doesn't have much to do with it, I think, although aerobic capacity, natural stroking power, drag, ratio, work habits, and other things, certainly do.

As I have been underlining, the biggest barriers, I think, have been technical and skeletal-muscular things, which, of course, are interrelated--stroking power, drag, ratio, etc.

Lots of little old guys have good aerobic capacity and work habits, I think.

They just can't row worth a damn.

No veteran, much less 60s veteran, has ever rowed well.

Give it a try; see how far you get.

Pull a lot of 13-16 SPI, working on technique, until 13 SPI is just an easy, natural stroke that you can use at all rates and paces, including racing.

You're not going to row 6:16 for 2K if you only pull 9 SPI with your natural stroke.

You'd have to rate 47 spm!

ranger

[mikvan52]

no 60 yr old lightweight has the potential to get close to 6:16 for 2k on the erg

....a 60s lwt will have to have certain things to have a chance at 6:16--high aerobic capacity, excellent fitness, and most importantly, the ability to row well at low drag.

I now have all of these.

Consider this:

No 60 yr old lwt has neither the aerobic capacity nor the strength (read 'muscle mass')

(Please give up on the "drag" garbage)

If you think you have the aerobic capacity and/or the strength of a 6:16er, show it. That has been the tedious theme of this thread.
But... you don't do it and never will... just to keep a dream alive....
LESS power to you.
Rich: It's gone well beyond your even being a laughing stock. It's tedious...
Don't you see that?

[ranger]

If you think you have the aerobic capacity and/or the strength of a 6:16er, show it

Sure, I have both.

When I was 55, I pulled sub-6:30 at 12 SPI for 2K rowing badly at max drag without even preparing for it.

I also pulled 500r30 @ 1:30, 1Kr24 @ 1:38, 1Kr20 @ 1:42.5, etc.

From there (2006-2007), I just needed to get more efficient at rowing.

I have now done that.

Now, I just need to prepare.

ranger

[mikvan52]

1:45 pace for long distance is not accessible for 60 year old because they are 60

Naw.

?

I say "Yaw!" ...and so does each and every stat out there.
What is your VO2 max?
What is your 500m time?

.... (silence).....by you on these very simple measurements...

You cannot fire up a rocket ship with efficiency or ratio or watts divided by stroke rate.
It's not a rhetorical exercise (here).. after all... Or is it?

I'll simply lurk in the background waiting for your stats RIch... THere's nothing left to be said by anyone...not Byron, Henry, and all the faithful contributors.... Nav' has clear insights he humorously adds here... You don't respond to the sense of what anyone says...

it's over.... (6:16) is not for (60) ...call it "the Law of sixes"

[ranger]

What is your VO2 max?

Well, from my 6:28 weighing in at 161 lbs. at BIRC 2003, when I was just shy of 53, the VO2max estimator says that my VO2max was around 74 at the time.

I think that is probably a misrepresentation, though, given that I was a novice at rowing and rowed _very_ badly at max drag.

I suspect that I would have been a dozen seconds better, at least, rowing well at low drag.

That would put my VO2max then at about 78.

ranger