The Two Types of Training

[pmacaula]

The discussion about OTW vs erging is interesting.

There was a good bit of work done by Mike Caviston (can't find the link) on relative fade during 2K races. It showed pace for each 500m segment as a % of average. Conclusion was that crews going out too hard pay a big price at the end of the race & tend to place poorly.
This conclusion is of limited relevance to the discussion in this thread. What is relevant is Caviston's methodology & data selection. He only looked at Olympic (and I think) world championship 'A' finals.
Why ?
Because one could safely assume that everyone was racing their absolute hardest & had done everything they could to peak for that race. Comparisons done for other races could be coloured by the fact that one crew was not peaking or shut it down when it was clear they were not going to place first (and thus would need to go to repechage).

How is this relevant ?
I would hypothesize that for a very high percentage of rowers and virtually all elite rowers, the only time you might see a truly maximal effort (including tapering if practical) on an erg is when performance determines whether they make their preferred boat (e.g. Olympic 8+ in one of the countries with the 8+ as priority boat).

A supplementary hypothesis is that truly maximal efforts for those who only or primarily focus on the erg would be most reliable in 2Ks at events like BIRC & CRASH-B. Comparing time or distance A to time or distance B is inherently unreliable for all but a very small number of people who really focus on max efforts at all the ranking distances. Even then, actually peaking for all of them in a single season is pretty unlikely.

Back to the primary topic. While Ranger is capable of very strong erg results on occasion, he does not choose to peak for major competitions where one truly races others under the same conditions, etc. Fair enough, but effectively doing solo time trials at race venues is not racing, but it is a way to get official WRs certified by C2.

There is no equivalent OTW. While I would tend to agree with Mike VB that one is not a novice if one has been sculling for 7 or so years, the complete absence of racing (or, it appears, external coaching), certainly suggests a 'novice' approach to rowing in a racing shell.

So, I would agree with Ranger that he is a novice, albeit a very well conditioned one. If he were to engage a good OTW coach & spend a season working on boat-moving with that person, he might do well in some races, especially those with thin fields. For races with solid fields, the top end racers, especially in age groupings in head races, have a lot more tricks up their sleeves than just good conditioning and reasonably good technique.

Cheers. Patrick.

[NavigationHazard]

Expressed in watts, his otw result was 64% of his erg result. But AFAIK Alan Campbell, who holds the alltime #2 best time otw, was about 70%. Xeno in his prime was around 67%. For FISA medallists a typical result seems to be 68-70%.

Are these estimates or are they actually measured? Any idea what the uncertainty is in these measurements? I would think they would be at least several percent but that is just a guess.
I would also assume all the great OTW rowers peak for OTW races and don't do 2K erg trials anywhere near the big race date so the erg scores are lower then they could be.

Calculated off a combination of known results, spy reports and scores some of the people in question have told me. IMO the main uncertainty comes from the huge effects of ambient conditions and also racing strategy on OTW results.

As for the erg-test results, yes lots of sandbagging goes on and yes you have to consider any leaked results in the context of longer training cycles. I gather that all sorts of stonking off-season performances get done behind closed doors, as it were, the closer you get to an Olympic year. Sometimes too national squads will basically train through publc or quasi-public events, as I think may have been the case for the British HW men at BIRC this year.

[johnlvs2run]

I asked Rocky and Rambo, and they both asked, 'Who the f@#$ is John Rupp and what has he done?'.

I've never heard of them either.

Well 2k + 12.6 seconds for an hour is not impressive to me, as I could do that easily in my sleep.

If that's the best rower in the planet then the best rower on the planet sucks.

John, perhaps you can examine why there is such a drop-off amongst athletes like Benton, which makes the best athletes in the world "suck" in your own words. For them, the priority is not long distance. It's 2k racing, and going fast there. That's why they suck so badly at 1 hour pieces. Because they don't particularly care about them. Because they are not a priority. Their training is not directed at, oh, bugger it!

My point is in reference to rowing well over distance. They do not row well over distance.

They could not row well over distance if they wanted to do so.

Your training is directed at longer stuff because you don't go fast at the short stuff - your priority, and fair enough, but I can't see how you presume to tell great athletes that they suck. You're not a great athlete.

They are not great athletes. And they do not maintain their speed over distance. That's the point, see.

I direct my training at longer stuff because I have found this to be more valuable and enriching to me, for example to be faster over a half marathon than fast over 100 meters, which means nothing. Likewise I value a long healthy quality life.

having trained with people of that ilk, I've got a certain amount of respect for what they do. It's abundantly clear that you have no respect for their performances, and no idea of what goes into them!

It is true that I have some but not a lot of respect for their performances. I have more respect for athletes who work MUCH much harder and who are able to maintain their speed over distance.

When you're around these people, you can tell Benton, or Drysdale, or Campbell, that they suck because you have less of a drop-off than they do. And prepare to be laughed at, if they would even listen to your casuistic reasoning.

I have no interest in them.

[NavigationHazard]

That is your loss, and their gain.

[johnlvs2run]

That is your loss, and their gain.

Yeah they've gained twice my weight.

I am thankful for the loss of it.

[snowleopard]

That is your loss, and their gain.

Yeah they've gained twice my weight.

I am thankful for the loss of it.

John,

Did a big man scare you when you were a child? Was the surgeon who threatened to remove your appendix 5' 8"? Or are you just a hater deep down?

[ausrwr]

I asked Rocky and Rambo, and they both asked, 'Who the f@#$ is John Rupp and what has he done?'.

I've never heard of them either.

I'm sure that that will cause them to lose sleep at night. They're cats.

Well 2k + 12.6 seconds for an hour is not impressive to me, as I could do that easily in my sleep.

If that's the best rower in the planet then the best rower on the planet sucks.

John, perhaps you can examine why there is such a drop-off amongst athletes like Benton, which makes the best athletes in the world "suck" in your own words. For them, the priority is not long distance. It's 2k racing, and going fast there. That's why they suck so badly at 1 hour pieces. Because they don't particularly care about them. Because they are not a priority. Their training is not directed at, oh, bugger it!

My point is in reference to rowing well over distance. They do not row well over distance.

They could not row well over distance if they wanted to do so.

John, they row better over long distances than anyone else. WTF else do you want?

Your training is directed at longer stuff because you don't go fast at the short stuff - your priority, and fair enough, but I can't see how you presume to tell great athletes that they suck. You're not a great athlete.

They are not great athletes. And they do not maintain their speed over distance. That's the point, see.

No it's not, you're clearly a fool. You don't increase your speed as distance gets shorter. By your logic, this would make you a rubbish athlete. What would make a great athlete in your mind? Oh, OK. One that shared YOUR characteristics.

I direct my training at longer stuff because I have found this to be more valuable and enriching to me, for example to be faster over a half marathon than fast over 100 meters, which means nothing. Likewise I value a long healthy quality life.

Valuing a long, healthy life, fine. But in terms of 'meaning' something, it means absolutely nothing as to whether you're faster over 100 metres or a half marathon. Do you think anyone outside of erging gives a shit?

having trained with people of that ilk, I've got a certain amount of respect for what they do. It's abundantly clear that you have no respect for their performances, and no idea of what goes into them!

It is true that I have some but not a lot of respect for their performances. I have more respect for athletes who work MUCH much harder and who are able to maintain their speed over distance.

How hard do you think these guys work? Honestly? Do you think that no-one can work as hard as you? Please provide some sort of an example. Having seen Olympic champions work themselves to a vomiting standstill, I know how hard they work.

So, people who are able to maintain their speed over distance. That'd be YOU...

When you're around these people, you can tell Benton, or Drysdale, or Campbell, that they suck because you have less of a drop-off than they do. And prepare to be laughed at, if they would even listen to your casuistic reasoning.

I have no interest in them.

No shit. You're more interested in your own performances, a perathlon which panders to your strengths - long distance, than learning from people who are better. Perhaps take an interest, John, you might learn something. Look at swimming, running, all that sort of thing. You'll see that there HAS to be a drop-off in speed and power over time if the athlete is working at their maximum. Try reading Noakes's Lore of Running - there's some excellent physiology examples in there, as to why it's physically impossible to keep up such paces if every effort is at a maximum.

[snowleopard]

By your logic, this would make you a rubbish athlete.

No 5hit

[Nosmo]

...
So, I would agree with Ranger that he is a novice, albeit a very well conditioned one. If he were to engage a good OTW coach & spend a season working on boat-moving with that person, he might do well in some races, especially those with thin fields. For races with solid fields, the top end racers, especially in age groupings in head races, have a lot more tricks up their sleeves than just good conditioning and reasonably good technique.

I'm pretty sure that the according to US Rowing, one remains a novice for 1 year from your first race. I've never seen it checked or enforced. I've seen races where the novices could barely head in the right direction and others where they are obviously very skilled rowers. The novice class is supposed to be a low key way for new rowers to try racing without the stress of the open class. Many people have raced novice when they shouldn't have. The results are not taken seriously by anyone.

[ranger]

So, I would agree with Ranger that he is a novice, albeit a very well conditioned one. If he were to engage a good OTW coach & spend a season working on boat-moving with that person, he might do well in some races, especially those with thin fields. For races with solid fields, the top end racers, especially in age groupings in head races, have a lot more tricks up their sleeves than just good conditioning and reasonably good technique.

Large fields of intensely competitive, well-conditioned, experienced 60-year-old scullers?

O.K., if you say so.

But I will have to see it to believe it.

Where are these guys hiding out?

They certainly don't have any interest in erging, and never have.

I am not presuming anything about how fast I can be OTW, but isn't it a little more straightforward than you are making out?

Don't you just gaze at your speed coach from day to day and note how fast you are going?

In the end, isn't that what wins races?

"Tricks up their sleeves"?

Not sure what you mean.

OTW, when I rate 30 spm, I go 2:00 pace.

If I can rate 30 spm in head races, what then?

You are saying that a bunch of wily old 60-year-olds with "tricks up their sleeves," because they are experienced OTW rowers, will go faster, even though they might not be as well conditioned?

I don't see how that is possible, but perhaps you can explain.

ranger

[whp4]

But I will have to see it to believe it.

Too bad you aren't willing to oblige when others say the same about you...

You'll have to actually show up at a race to see the field; I doubt any of these guys will want to stop by your basement to listen to you talk about yourself.

I don't see how that is possible, but perhaps you can explain.

Certainly, with your depth of experience in OTW racing, if you can't see how something is possible, it must not possible!

Here's one possibility: they will be going in a straight line, not weaving all over the course!

Another: they'll have successfully calibrated their stroke coach so that when it indicates a 2:00 pace, they are actually going at a 2:00 pace, not 2:07.

[johnlvs2run]

I'm sure that that will cause them to lose sleep at night. They're cats.

Good. I don't like cats.

John, they row better over long distances than anyone else. WTF else do you want?

Their watts per weight output over distance is quite low.

Many people carry their speed much better over distance, and have much higher watts per weight outputs.

They are not great athletes. And they do not maintain their speed over distance. That's the point, see.

No it's not

Yes, this is the point.

Valuing a long, healthy life, fine. But in terms of 'meaning' something, it means absolutely nothing as to whether you're faster over 100 metres or a half marathon.

Sure it does. It means a lot. It means I can maintain my speed and they can't.

How hard do you think these guys work?

I think they work hard but not very long. Digging a ditch for 8 hours a day is hard work.

Do you think that no-one can work as hard as you? Please provide some sort of an example.

I think Rod Freed, if he indeed has done that training day after day continuously, has worked harder than me.
However I have rowed much farther than him.

Having seen Olympic champions work themselves to a vomiting standstill, I know how hard they work.

Hard work is not enough. It is also necessary to work smart and to have the ability.

They do not have the ability to maintain their speed over distance.

So, people who are able to maintain their speed over distance. That'd be YOU...

Yes, I maintain my speed over distance quite well.

You're more interested in your own performances, a perathlon which panders to your strengths - long distance

Actually no. The perathlon gives equal points to the top performances regardless of distance.
In fact people complained at the beginning because it was "too hard", so I purposely made it easier for them.

than learning from people who are better.

Yes, I have learned by adapting Rod Freed's program to myself.

You'll see that there HAS to be a drop-off in speed and power over time if the athlete is working at their maximum.

Of course. Endurance athletes are much better at maintaining their speed.

it's physically impossible to keep up such paces if every effort is at a maximum.

Every race is a maximum effort event, regardless of distance, or at least it should be.

By using some of the faulty logic here, since Gebrselassie ran 2:03:59 for the marathon, and others run only 6 hours, he should be able to run a 2 minute mile. Of course that is ridiculous.

[ranger]

As far as 60-year-olds go, when Mike VB talks about how competitive it is OTW vs. on the erg, he talks again and again about the same four or five guys, and even so, heck, Mike himself is the best of the lot.

Four or five?

That's hardly a hoard of chiseled athletes chomping at the bit to waste themselves (and everyone else) in head races.

My experience with OTW rowers is just the opposite, especially 60-year-old OTW rowers.

Most OTW rowers hate the erg because it is hard and objective.

They are just out to get some sun and have some fun.

They could care less who wins the races and they certainly aren't trying to win.

They don't consider themselves athletes at all.

ranger

[Nosmo]

Every race is a maximum effort event, regardless of distance, or at least it should be.

By using some of the faulty logic here, since Gebrselassie ran 2:03:59 for the marathon, and others run only 6 hours, he should be able to run a 2 minute mile. Of course that is ridiculous.

Gebrselassie Indoor times Earlier in his career.
1,500 meters 3:31.76 1 February 1998 Stuttgart 1:10.58 /500
2,000 meters 4:52.86 15 February 1998 Birmingham 1:13.22/500
3,000 meters 7:26.15 25 January 1998 Karlsruhe 1:14.36/500
5,000 meters 12:50.38 14 February 1999 Birmingham 1:15.04/500

So he slows down about 2.5 seconds/ 500 for each doubling of the distance

Outdoor PBS Later in his career:

Ten miles (i.e. 16093m) (road) 44:24 4 September 2005 Tilburg 1:22.77/500
One hour (track) 21,285 m 27 June 2007 Ostrava, Czech Republic 1:24.57/500
Half marathon 58:55 15 January 2006 Phoenix 1:23.77/500
25 km (road) 1:11:37 12 March 2006 Alphen aan den Rijn (not recognised by IAAF) 1:25.94/500
Marathon world record 2:03:59 28 September 2008 Berlin 1:28.15

From half marathon to full marathon that is 4.4 sec/500.

Don't know what this means but thought I'd take a look at an endurance athletes pace over distance.

[BrianStaff]

Don't you just gaze at your speed coach from day to day and note how fast you are going?

In the end, isn't that what wins races?

For an academic, you are a bimbo sometimes. I have only taken a learn to scull program but even I know that being able to row in a straight line is an important part of single sculling.

Going fast in a zig-zag will not win races.