Ranger's training thread

[ranger]

The wind finally died down yesterday, at least a bit.

After erging in the morning, I got in a nice 6K at Europe Lake in the afternoon, albeit in a six-inch chop.

A good challenge, technically.

Beautifully calm and clear this morning.

Got in 13K OTErg before dawn.

Back down to Europe Lake now for some more work OTW in what look to be much better conditions.

Really got my finishes down, now.

Yea, I was finishing too much with my back, with unermines both the speed and effectiveness of the finish with the arms, especially the contact at the footplate as you drive with your calves and point your toes.

Now that I get it right, I pull 13 SPI (e.g., 1:44 @ 24 spm) rather than 12 SPI.

That's rowing perfectly for a lightweight of any age.

I suppose this might be the case.

For lightweights, there isn't much of a questiion of technique until you get over 10 SPI.

For heavyweights, there isn't much of a question of technique until you get over 13 SPI.

Any lightweight can pull 10 SPI rowing like crap, as I did back in 2002-2003.

And any big heavyweight can pull 13 SPI rowing like crap, as most do.

But rowing well for a lightweight is 13 SPI.

That's a different matter.

As a lightweight, you have to row well to pull 13 SPI.

In fact, as a lightweight, you have to row pretty darn well to pull 12 SPI, and even pretty well to pull 11 SPI.

Rowing well for a bit heavyweight is 16 SPI.

As a big heavyweight, you have to row well to pull 16 SPI.

In fact, as a heavyweight, you have to row pretty darn well to pull 15 SPI, and even pretty well to pull 14 SPI.

ranger

[ThatMoos3Guy]

As a big heavyweight, you have to row well to pull 16 SPI.

In fact, as a heavyweight, you have to row pretty darn well to pull 15 SPI, and even pretty well to pull 14 SPI.

ranger

So, does that mean when you row races as a heavyweight you'll now be pulling 16spi?

Also, what does that mean about Nav's session here? http://concept2.co.uk/forum/blog.php?u=4487&b=83217 super-duper rowing well?

[ben990]

ranger,

I found this picture of you when you were younger:

[ranger]

So, does that mean when you row races as a heavyweight you'll now be pulling 16spi?

No.

These targets only apply to the upper reaches of the weight categories.

When I row as a heavyweight, I am the lightest heavyweight imaginable, 170 lbs. or so, one so light that I have three WR lightweights rows and a couple of dozen other quality 2Ks races as a lightweight.

Also, what does that mean about Nav's session here? http://concept2.co.uk/forum/blog.php?u=4487&b=83217 super-duper rowing well?

Sessions are the issue for much of the time, but the proof is in the pudding, that is, when you race.

If Nav could race at 16 SPI, 30 spm would be a 6:00 2K.

But Nav rates over 30 spm in a 2K and, at the moment, is pulling closer to 6:30 than 6:00.

ranger

[ben990]

ranger, I'd like you to meet Nav. Nav is better than you. Way better.

[Fred]

Sessions are the issue for much of the time, but the proof is in the pudding, that is, when you race.

Agreed, your pudding has been 6.41, 6.41, 7.02. Excellent age group times, but light years from a sub 6:30.

It's so interesting, how the rules you require everyone one else to follow, you never think to follow yourself. Ever think of becoming a member of congress?

[ranger]

Sessions are the issue for much of the time, but the proof is in the pudding, that is, when you race.

Agreed

Yes.

I've done 12 SPI @ 32 spm for 2K, 6:29.7, without even preparing for it, when I was right around Nav's age (55).

That was still rowing at high drag, too, and with several things about technique still to work out.

I now row well (13 SPI) at low drag (120 df.), and have ironed out my remaining technical weaknesses.

I am now just preparing to race.

Rowing well (13 SPI at low drag (120 df.), fully prepared, I'll now pull a lwt 13 SPI @ 32 spm, 6:16.

ranger

[ranger]

[removed]

[Fred]

Sessions are the issue for much of the time, but the proof is in the pudding, that is, when you race.

Agreed
[substance of the original post deleted]

<response to a portion of post taken out of context as to allow Rich to make his usual statement about "being much better" than previously "unprepared for" performances>

Rich, What you are doing above is known as a strawman, "A straw man is a component of an argument and is an informal fallacy based on misrepresentation of an opponent's position. To "attack a straw man" is to create the illusion of having refuted a proposition by substituting it with a superficially similar yet unequivalent proposition (the "straw man"), and refuting it, without ever having actually refuted the original position."

It is intellectually dishonest and by engaging in that behavior, you reveal your fear of actually addressing the content of the original post.

[ranger]

It's so interesting, how the rules you require everyone one else to follow, you never think to follow yourself.

Not at all.

Starting from three WR 2Ks, rowing badly, I have spent eight years working myself up to the standards I have set.

The sub-6:30 2K @ 12 SPI I pulled in 2006 was a half-way point in this regimen.

By that time, I had learned how to set my heels and lead with my legs, so my stroking power was much better (up from 10 SPI three years earlier), but I still needed to drop the drag, use the whole slide, loosen my shoulders and core at the catch, and other matters ( e.g., use less back and quicker arms and feet at the finish.

My training is now complete.

I now pull 13 SPI at low drag (120 df.) and am just preparing to race.

Rowing well (13 SPI) at low drag (120 df.), as I do now, when I am fully prepared, I will pull 1:34 @ 32 spm (13 SPI, 10 MPS) for 2K.

This is exactly the standard I set for myself eight years ago.

ranger

[ranger]

ranger, I'd like you to meet Nav. Nav is better than you. Way better.

Easy way for Nav to demonstrate that.

I broke the 50s lwt 2K WR three times straight, pulling it down 3.5 seconds, when I was just shy of 53.

To do something comparable in the 55s hwts, Nav would have to pull 6:14.5 when he is just shy of 58.

Sure, he is entirely capable of it.

He just needs to learn to row.

On the other hand, if I pull a lwt 6:16 at 60, breaking the 60s lwt WR by 26 seconds, Nav's task becomes somewhat harder.

In the 55s hwts, that's the equivalent of 5:52.

Sure, Nav is entirely capable of that, too.

He just needs to learn to row well.

ranger

[ausrwr]

Ranger, Nav could just as easily set a 5:52 as his goal as your idiotic 6:16.

But he's still part of the human race and is subject to fits of objectivity and reality, which are two things that left your mind some years ago.

He's different than you in so many ways it's not funny. And all of those are better.

You will never, ever, hold a WR at any distance, or any weight, ever again.

You will probably never even row any distance ever again.

[aharmer]

It's so interesting, how the rules you require everyone one else to follow, you never think to follow yourself.

Not at all.

My training is now complete.

I now pull 13 SPI at low drag (120 df.) and am just preparing to race.

ranger

Your training is now complete (as it has been a couple hundred times the last 5 years). You should be able to give us a general guideline of when the FM will happen. I wont ask for a screenshot of anything because we all know that will never happen. However, you say you're simply setting the groove, pulling for longer periods at 1:48 until you hit FM distance. Can you tell me the longest segment you've pulled at 1:48 without stopping so far?

[Citroen]

... but light years from a sub 6:30.

Fred, you've been infected by Rangerphysics.

A light year is a measure of distance (travelled in 365 days at 299,792,458 metres per second which is approx 9.4605284 × 10^15 metres). It is NOT a measure of time. It may be significantly different in Rangerland where normal universal laws don't apply.

[Nosmo]

... but light years from a sub 6:30.

Fred, you've been infected by Rangerphysics.

A light year is a measure of distance (travelled in 365 days at 299,792,458 metres per second which is approx 9.4605284 × 10^15 metres). It is NOT a measure of time. It may be significantly different in Rangerland where normal universal laws don't apply.

how about dozens of ohm-farads away.