Ranger's training thread

[JimR]

The sig file is separate from the stored posts. When you update it, it retroactively applies the new sig to all prior posts.

Well that sounds like a design flaw ...

I went back to the UK forum but the search won't find 1:48 FM posts ... too bad.

JimR

[PaulH]

I suppose I have just been careful not to be too premature in considering my work on technique complete, and clearly, I have been (repeatedly) right in this.

Ooh, ooh, Byron! Lookit Byron, LOOKIT!

[mikvan52]

The FM is unnecessary for great 2k performance. This makes is a marginal predictor, not a great one.

I didn't say that it was necessary.

And that it is unnecessary doesn't have any bearing on whether it is a great 2K predictor.

If you do it, it is a great predictor, as is your UT2 pace.

If you don't, hey, it's just your loss.

Sure, as in other things, you can prepare for a 2K by cuttin' corners.

But there is no reason to cut corners, if you don't need to.

ranger

So: IOW: In your opinion: to do 2k prep w/o doing a FM is cutting corners?
Surely, you jest...

The FM is for people who want to avoid straight forward race preparation for the 2k...
THe FM is not necessary and it is to be avoided as a waste of time.
4 x 20m / 2' r is an example of a substitute workout that takes 1/2 the time ...

If you were here w/me on the CT river you'd be witnessing the US Senior LWt camp... You'd also be witnessing that none of them are rowing FMs on the erg or on the water... WHy is that, Rich?
Would you paddle up to the coach's launch in the Windbagger an explain to them that they are cutting corners? .. that they are unable to establish UT pacing...

You're a trip!!... No, you're a bad trip...


BTW did you do your 10k on that little lake as 5 x 2k ? With what kind of rests...?
Good luck with your rowing.. Hope to see you at the Head of the Charles...

[Byron Drachman]

I suppose I have just been careful not to be too premature in considering my work on technique complete, and clearly, I have been (repeatedly) right in this.

Ooh, ooh, Byron! Lookit Byron, LOOKIT!

May 1, 2004: Technique is now set.

Nov 8, 2005: Yep. Technique is now fixed. Muscular adjustments are also complete, I think. Stroke is completely set ....

Fri Oct 20, 2006: Last year I was still struggling with technique. Now my technique is fixed.

Nov 28, 2006: My technique problems are now solved. I am now doing full sharpening and distance rowing.

Jan 16, 2007: I have now sorted out my technique, and I am doing both free rate distance rowing and full sharpening.

Feb 8, 2007: My work on technique is now done, though. Stroke is great.

Feb 11, 2007: My work on technique is over. Stroke is set.

February 3, 2008: My technique is certainly fixed. it's now a joy to use. Now, I just need to train it up.

April 21, 2008: I now row _very_ well.

November 7, 2008: My technique is now entirely fixed.

Dec 19, 2007: My stroke is entirely fixed. No more worries about technique.

May 27, 2008: I now row well (but it has taken me five years to get there!).

June 5, 2008: I now row well.

May 5, 2009: I am doing trials at the other distances this spring and summer. If I can't reach my goals in those trials, then I'll pay up for the bet I lost. My attempt to get better has involved improving my technique. That work is done. I now row well (13 SPI).

June 4, 2010: My work on technique is now done.

July 18, 2010: My work on technique is now complete

August 5, 2010: My problems have been with technique. At least on the erg, those problems are now solved.

August 18, 2010: Given these developments, there is certainly nothing else that needs to be done on technique and stroking power.

Dec 4, 2010: I no longer have any interest in changing my stroke. My technique is ideal. I am now just preparing to race.

Dec 28, 2010: I have now completed my work on technique, and I am now preparing to race. I now row well (13 SPI)

March 5, 2011: Clearly, my technical problems are now resolved. I now have a stroke to use. 13 SPI, 120 df. And I am now preparing to race.

July 10, 2011: I've _really_ got my technique together now, all of it, although the grooves are not very deep yet.

[PaulH]

Thanks Byron! As you can see, ranger, one of the defining characteristics of your training history is precisely that you *don't* know when your technique is established, despite your confident assertions. That's why so few people believe your predictions; it's not because we're cruel cynics, it's because we've pretty much never seen you get a prediction right.

[JimR]

Thanks Byron! As you can see, ranger, one of the defining characteristics of your training history is precisely that you *don't* know when your technique is established, despite your confident assertions. That's why so few people believe your predictions; it's not because we're cruel cynics, it's because we've pretty much never seen you get a prediction right.

What about the 6:16 2K at BIRC 2010 being a lock ... investments paying off ... everyone will bow before the mighty ranger?!

Oh wait ... that was the 7:02 wasn't it???

JimR

[ranger]

In your opinion: to do 2k prep w/o doing a FM is cutting corners?
Surely, you jest...

No jest.

A FM is just an erg test based on your UT2 pace, give or take.

It tests your effectiveness and efficiency while rowing, when you are just working easily, steady state, for a long period.

The distance imposes a HR limitation, just as UT2 rowing does.

Sure, as a substitute "test," you do UT2 for, say, 20K.

But 20K at UT2 is not a recognized "event."

The closest thing is a FM, which is done very close to UT2.

A FM is done at 2K + 14.

UT2 is done at 2K + 15.

20K can be done at top end UT1 if you don't impose a HR limitation.

That's a different matter entirely.

Another training band.

The 60s lwt FM WR is 2:00 pace.

The 60s lwt HM WR is 1:54 pace.

The 60s lwt 10K WR is 1:48 pace.

Pretty odd stuff.

"Double the d, add 6."

ranger

[KevJGK]

Christ Almighty! You are not splitting the atom you know?!!

Ok BB - granted it aint rocket science but - whats more technical? The perfect 2K erg or a 100m sprint?

and why?

[ranger]

BTW did you do your 10k on that little lake as 5 x 2k ? With what kind of rests...?

Hardly.

I just did what I could, where I could.

Even though it was 5 a.m., there was a 20 mph south wind, whipping up foot high waves at the north end of the lake.

Flags were standing straight out from flagpoles, flapping.

The rowing was good technical discipline, though.

I worked on various things that I still do badly--which includes a lot.

ranger

[ranger]

As you can see, ranger, one of the defining characteristics of your training history is precisely that you *don't* know when your technique is established, despite your confident assertions.

Not sure about that at all.

If you are a 60s veteran and are seeing some 2:05 @ 22 spm, 2:00 @ 25 spm, 1:57 @ 27 spm, etc., when you are rowing OTW, as I am now, I would say you can be pretty confident that you are getting it.

No?

That's right around 10 seconds per 500m better than I was doing a couple of years ago.

As I have been explaining, I am now getting better catches and finishes.

I now have the feel of the countermotion _against_ the back--with the legs (at the catch) and with the arms (at the finish).

I have always been great at using my back as a _lever_.

Now I also understand how to use my back as a _brace_.

I now can combine the two, bracing with my back at the catch and finish while my legs and arms do their business, without detracting from a full pry with my back (which I have always done so well) in between.

ranger

[ranger]

Christ Almighty! You are not splitting the atom you know?!!

Indeed not.

Those who split the atom couldn't row a lick.

I am sure that all of the geeks who split the atom would have given it up in a minute if they could have pulled a lwt 6:16 OTErg at 60, but since that was impossible, they had to turn to lesser things.

Some people just don't have what it takes to do the hard thing.



ranger

[mikvan52]

In your opinion: to do 2k prep w/o doing a FM is cutting corners?
Surely, you jest...

No jest.

A FM is just an erg test based on your UT2 pace, give or take.

It tests your effectiveness and efficiency while rowing, when you are just working easily, steady state, for a long period.

The distance imposes a HR limitation, just as UT2 rowing does.

Sure, as a substitute "test," you do UT2 for, say, 20K.

(big snip of useless blather)

UT does not need to be established by overdistance. A Conconi step test will do... even % HR max is fine...

Why test yourself at a steady 20k (12 miles) or more when it has no necessary bearing on 3.1 miles (5k) and under? It's pointless. Outlasting other over long distance is a laudable but separate skill... not to be denigrated... just remember, it's uncalled for when it comes to maxing a time trial or even maintaining UT pace... Breaks are good after 20-30+ minutes and do not detract from 5 k training ( my focus these days ).

Please remember that I regularly finish in the top 3 of such events OTW (E open weight) ... So I'm not making this stuff up...
Don't believe me? Take a look at the results of the Green Mountain Head Race from 2010. That was a quality field..

http://www.row2k.com/results/resultspag ... 9249&cat=2



Your fascination with the FM is just a way of hiding in the world of competitive erging... Virtually no one does the FM... that's why you say you'll attempt one.. to pretend you are somehow unique... when, in fact, you're just another regular talented aging athlete. (vis: most assuredly not the best thing since sliced bread (ie: not "unprecedented")

If you are so talented at long distance you would have posted an IND_V 5k or longer in the rankings in the last 5 years or so. You haven't. I can only conclude that, basically, you are washed up as a distance rower/erger...

You remain quite strong at 2k... better than me.

You will not post a 5k on the erg because it's too hard for you to make lwt... Did you forget that you once told me that?

[PaulH]

As you can see, ranger, one of the defining characteristics of your training history is precisely that you *don't* know when your technique is established, despite your confident assertions.

Not sure about that at all.

If you are a 60s veteran and are seeing some 2:05 @ 22 spm, 2:00 @ 25 spm, 1:57 @ 27 spm, etc., when you are rowing OTW, as I am now, I would say you can be pretty confident that you are getting it.

No?

No. Unless you were lying about being prepared all those other times, I assume you were pretty confident then. Confidence is not knowledge.

[ranger]

Christ Almighty! You are not splitting the atom you know?!!

No 60s veteran has ever come anywhere near rowing well.

They have missed it by seven seconds per 500m, 4 SPI, 4 kgF of peak force, a mile over 60min, etc.

This guy, the greatest rower of our time, both OTW and off, who has just won another world championship, and is prepared to rake in a fourth Olympic gold, pulls in and around 6:16 OTErg, even though he is only 38 years old:




ranger

[ranger]

To row 6:16 for 2K, you need a UT2 pace of 1:49.

But for most of the best 60s lwts, 1:49 is AT.

They miss it by two training bands.

For most of the best 60s lwts (Including Rocket Roy, I suspect), UT2 is 1:59, not 1:49.

ranger