New Wolverine Plan Thread

[ThatMoos3Guy]

I am wondering if I have some deep seated fear of going slower than the target pace? I definitely hear this voice in my head saying "pull dammit" whenever I see the split monitor creep above the target pace. I do not hear a voice saying "relax a little" when I'm 2 seconds faster. I guess I have something to work on.

I have the same problem, I always have to be faster than the reference pace. Part of the problem I find is that if I start off moderately hard then the first "interval" is faster than it should be, and then on the next one I have to negative split so I go even faster. I'm going to try and focus on dialing it down a bit, and really treat it as a steady state/recovery session instead of an excuse to rip on it at low SPM.

Another option is to increase the average SPM so that you're covering more meters by taking more strokes instead of by pulling harder.

[wjschmidt2]

Pacing is the name of the game.

Bill

[wjschmidt2]

Wed 22 Sept
L4 14998m right on target; spm 18.2 df 118
184,182,184,180,182,180

Bill

[gregsmith01748]

23 Sept - L2 4 x 2K
target pace: 1:50

1:49.4 r28
1:49.4 r28
1:49.3 r28
1:49.2 r28

I used the 20' warmup from Eddie Fletcher again. I really like it. 1K active rest at 2:10 r18 after each 2K.
I managed to negative split this workout, but I was surely hurting in the last interval.

[gregsmith01748]

24 Sept - L4 2 x 40 min

Target Actual Delta
Strokes, Meters, Strokes, Meters, Strokes, Meters
168, 2373, 180, 2395, 12, (+21)
172, 2389, 170, 2405, -2, (+15)
176, 2407, 180, 2418, 4, (+10)
178, 2414, 180, 2429, 2, (+14)
180, 2425, 180, 2431, 0, (+5)
182, 2431, 180, 2435, -2, (+3)
184, 2441, 190, 2451, 6, (+9)
186, 2449, 190, 2456, 4, (+6)
1426, 19332, 1450, 19420, 24, (+87)

Note: Actual strokes are somewhat inaccurate, calculated by avg SPM for 10min interval x 10, and SPM is shown as an integer on the PM, so the resolution is 10. Even so, you can see that interval #1 was stroked too fast.

Overall, this workout, I managed to get a bit better at hitting the paces and rates in the second set. All of them were with 10 meters of the target distance, and all but the second to last interval were at the right stroke rate (within the error band of the count anyway).

I was determined to do better at hitting the rates and splits today, and it paid off, at least to a degree. Another couple of workouts with the same level of concentration and I should be on track.

Physically, I didn't feel so good. I banked a lot of meters this week (96K after today's workout), and the L2 yesterday took a pretty big effort. I was struggling in the second half of the last set. My rate and splits were bouncing around a fair amount instead of being solid.

[gregsmith01748]

25 Sept - went for a run ~10 miles.
26 Sept - L4 - 40 min
ref pace: 6:48 / 1:42

Target Actual Delta
Strokes, Meters, Strokes, Meters, Strokes, Meters
168, 2385, 172, 2421, 4, (+35)
172, 2401, 172, 2423, 0, (+21)
176, 2419, 176, 2445, 0, (+25)
178, 2426, 174, 2462, -4, (+35)
-------------------------------------------------------------
694, 9632, 694, 9751, 0, (+119)

OK, so I had this theory that I was cheating by edging my stroke rate up slightly and that is why I was getting so far ahead on distance. So today, I set up to grab 2 minute split data on the PM and watched my stroke rate like a hawk. I overstroked the first and understroked that last segment, but it balanced out. However, my distances were again on the high side.

I decided to compare the target MPS and SPI with what I actually got, and it looks like I am pulling pretty hard. The target SPI was 10.4 for all segments, and I pulled 10.9, 10.7, 10.8, 10.9. I was also consistently pulling about 0.1 or 0.2 MPS more than target.

I think I'll do another L4 tomorrow to try to get closer.

[wjschmidt2]

Sun 26 Sept L1 8x500 1:39.7ave df 120 3:30 rest sr ave 34

Felt stronger than last week.

Today______ Last week
1:40.8r34___ 1:41.0r35
1:40.6r33___ 1:40.8r33
1:40.3r35___ 1:40.6r33
1:39.8r34___ 1:40.4r34
1:39.5r34___ 1:40.0r34
1:39.3r35___ 1:39.8r33
1:39.0r36___ 1:39.3r33
1:38.4r36___ 1:39.1r35

Still looking to break the 2k 6:40 barrier one more time.

Bill

[gregsmith01748]

27 Sept - L4 2x40min

Target Actual Delta
Strokes, Meters, Strokes, Meters, Strokes, Meters
168, 2385, 168, 2412, 0, (26)
176, 2419, 176, 2435, 0, (15)
168, 2385, 172, 2413, 4, (27)
192, 2486, 194, 2506, 2, (19)
168, 2385, 166, 2373, -2, (-13) <--ipod issue
176, 2419, 176, 2438, 0, (18)
168, 2385, 170, 1985, 2, (-401) <-- ~2 minute interruption
192, 2486, 194, 2514, 2, (27)
1408, 19352, 1416, 19076, 8, (-277)

Boy, this is hard. I think the ref pace is about right now. I am really working hard to maintain the pace at the stroke rates specified. I am starting to get used to allowing the splits to drift both above and below the target pace, but I am still ending up with about 20 extra meters per segment. I also tend to err on the high side of stroke rate.

It sure felt like a good workout this morning, especially finishing off with the 192's. Being able to dig in with a few 20 SPM intervals after all those slow motion 16s was awesome.

Now, I'm off to California. I wonder if I can find a gym with a concept2 near Agoura Hills? The erg finder says there's one nearby. Wish me luck!.

Bill, Nice work on the 8x500, negative splits all the way, and that last interval was insanely fast. Do you always do you L1s at df 120? I usually push the df up closer to 130 for the short stuff.

[gregsmith01748]

28 Sept - L1 4 x 1K
target split: 1:43

Distance Time Split SPM MPS SPI
1000 03:24.0 01:42.0 31 9.5 10.6 int #1
1000 03:25.6 01:42.8 31 9.4 10.4 int #2
1000 03:24.9 01:42.4 32 9.2 10.2 int #3
1000 03:25.2 01:42.6 32 9.1 10.1 int #4

I went out too fast in int#1 (my target was 1:44), and dialed it back from there. I wanted a negative split from the third to fourth interval, but I lost it around 500m. I faded to about a 1:45 or 1:46 for the last 500m and felt lucky that I didn't pass out on the machine.

I'll say one thing, L1s sure are dramatic.

[wjschmidt2]

Bill, Nice work on the 8x500, negative splits all the way, and that last interval was insanely fast. Do you always do you L1s at df 120? I usually push the df up closer to 130 for the short stuff.

Greg,

In the past, I have used 125 to 130 df for the L1s and have been very successful. I hope my technique has improved enough to allow the lower drag factor.

Bill

[wjschmidt2]

Hmmm, I'll have to add my name to the list of those with deranged personalities: I love L4 sessions too. I find that the mental concentration that it requires to maintain the pace and stroke rates accurately results in the session flying by without me even being aware that I've spent 40'/60' rowing.

From the time that Mike Cavistion introduced the WP and L4 that has been a recurring sentiment. I don't think that any other type of workout has ever made me feel a similar sense of time passing so quickly. It must be the added focus needed to keep pace and rate and rate changes in order, or maybe the 2' time span (usually) between rate changes.

Guess I'm on the sad list too.

The sad list (apologies to those that I have missed):
Neil [nharrigan]
Patrick [pmacaula]
Dave [Snail Space]
Rick [yankeerunner]

For anyone who hasn't tried the L4s yet, I highly recommend it. Those using the other plan that is the WP minus the L4s don't know what they're missing.

L4 last night using a df of 120. Results: 15000m spm 18.2
184, 182, 184, 180, 180,182

Add me to the sad list!

Bill [wjschmidt2]

[wjschmidt2]

L3 60' 15823m 1:53.7 df120 sr 26

Felt good to get a good long hard row.

Bill

[gregsmith01748]

29 Sept - L4 60 minutes

ref pace: 1:42, avg SPM 18.1

Target Actual Delta
Strokes, Meters, Strokes, Meters, Strokes, Meters
168, 2385, 180, 2404, 12, (18)
176, 2419, 180, 2435, 4, (15)
200, 2524, 200, 2535, 0, (10)
168, 2385, 170, 2405, 2, (19)
176, 2419, 180, 2442, 4, (22)
200, 2524, 200, 2546, 0, (21)
1088, 14657, 1110, 14767, 22, (109)

After pounding the stroke rate yesterday for the L1, it took a couple minutes to tone it down for the 16SPM bits in the first segment. Otherwise the stroke rates were right on, and I was pulling a bit too hard as usual.

Boy it felt fantastic to open it up in the last 3 minutes of the "200", with 2 minutes at 22 SPM and then 1 minute at 24.

Bill: Nice work on the L3. Faster than 1:54 for a full hour, sounds like a killer.

[gregsmith01748]

30 Sept - L3
21097m - 1:21:51.3 - New PB (by about 9 seconds over 81 minutes, but hey, it's progress)
Avg 25 SPM
Rough splits
First 10K - 1:53.9
Next 5K - between 1:58 and 2:00
Next 4K - around 1:58
Next 2K - negative splits for each 500m, finishing with a 500m sprint at around 1:45.

What. A. Blast.

I've been North of LA on business and I scammed a week long guest pass (for free!) to the 24 hour fitness in Thousand Oaks. They have 2 model Ds in reasonable shape, that are rarely occupied. As the name indicates, they are open all the time, which has been great. I'll have to figure out how to add them to the erg finder.

[Nosmo]

30 Sept - L3
21097m - 1:21:51.3 - New PB (by about 9 seconds over 81 minutes, but hey, it's progress)
Avg 25 SPM
Rough splits
First 10K - 1:53.9
Next 5K - between 1:58 and 2:00
Next 4K - around 1:58
Next 2K - negative splits for each 500m, finishing with a 500m sprint at around 1:45.

Good job! But why start out so fast? Given that it was a PB, there wasn't any chance of you holding that for 21K.

I would find this thread much more interesting if you posted a whole week of workouts, with comments on how it compared to previous weeks. There is a lot of detail here, and it is hard to see the context. I read this and think, what did you do for recent L3's? How did you pace them in the past? Are you warming up and cooling down properly, etc. I can't how many workouts per week you are doing or even if you really following the WP in terms of the number of different types of workouts.
Not trying to discourage you posting. Others and I can be more helpful is we have a better idea of what you are doing.