The Two Types of Training

[ranger]

In fact, I have erged next to Mike, who was putting out more watts than I even though my HR was higher, and I am "trained". Why? HE HAS A LARGER STROKE VOLUME AND A HIGHER PERCENTAGE OF HIS MUSCLE FIBER IS SLOW TWITCH TISSUE.

The only one here making specious comparisons to elite 20something lightweights is you. What part of "Mike...was putting out more watts" during their joint erg session because Mike "has a larger stroke volume and a higher percentage of his muscle fiber is slow-twitch tissue" is so hard to understand for you?

Wait, wait, don't tell me. All of it.

As for other gems from this morning:

It is the explosive pointing of the toes with the calves, together with the swing of the back, that accelerates the handle through the sweet spot in the middle of the stroke into and out of the finish.

Explosive pointing of the toes?? In the middle of the stroke, yet??? The last best version of your foot plant had you abjuring any rockup onto your toes at the catch and keeping your feet flat against the footplate during the drive. Please let us know how you can point your toes "explosively" (whatever that's supposed to mean) while keeping your feet flat. You can't point them if you can't move them.

And what pray tell does "pointing ... the calves" mean? Might this have to do with herding young bovines? It certainly can't have anything to do with your lower legs between your ankles and your knees, which can't independently be extended since their lengths are fixed by your femurs.

As for "accelerating the handle" during the drive, by definition all normal drives on a C2 erg involve handle acceleration. If you stop accelerating the handle you stop accelerating the flywheel. And the monitor interprets the onset of deceleration as the end of your drive.

As for "accelerating the handle ... out of the finish," please explain how any possible arrangement of the lower limbs can have anything to do with getting your hands away quickly.

Finally, this one might win "Howler of the Day":

am _very_ comfortable with this sort of rowing. It's my favorite type of session. This is what I did for a quarter of a century when I was a marathon runner.

And here I thought that marathon runners generally trained by running.

(1) I would guess that my stroke volume and slow twitch fibres are exactly the same as Mike's, but that his low maxHR makes it so that his aerobic capacity is _waaaaay_ less.

(2) It matters a whole lot whether you drive down with the front of your foot in the center of the drive when you swing your back or just continue to drive with your heels. The issue involves both the angle of force application and the force applied. When you drive down with the front of your foot, you use your calves.

(3) It is the back swing and drive down with the front of the foot that helps further accelerate the handle into the finish. The rhythm of the stroke cycle is such that your speed into the finish tends to be matched with your speed out of the finish, so a quick finish on your stroke also shortens the recovery of your back and arms and therefore significantly lifts the rate. Why don't you rate 30 spm in your distnace rowing? Food for thought.

(4) Especially if your anaerobic threshold is high, as mine is (172 bpm), it is a trick to cover long distances with your HR steady at those high levels. I don't know, but it might take a decade or so of daily distance training to be entirely relaxed for 90min with your HR at 172 bpm. This is what I did in my running for a quarter of a century. So doing this with my rowing is very natural.

ranger

[ranger]

Given my stroking power and efficiency now, and my high anaerobic threshold, if I can rate 30 spm in all of my training from now on, the game is won.

For a 60s lwt, I will be a monster on the erg.

I will row like an elite 30s lightweight.

I will outrow my competition, both contemporary and historical, by seven seconds per 500m--across the board.

ranger

[NavigationHazard]

1. Were you erging at that session next to leadville and Mike? No. Does a direct comparison between leadville's and Mike's results at that session apply to you? Or to anyone else? No.

2. I reiterate. You cannot point your toes if they are flat against a fixed, unyielding surface (floor, foot stretcher). You can lever your body off of them. But it is your body that moves rather than your toes.

3. In any normal stroke, your arms are responsible for bringing the handle into your body. Not your back. Not anything you think you might be doing with your lower limbs. If you don't believe me, try taking a stroke without bending your arms. You can try anything you want to. But you you won't get the handle into your chest without bending your arms. Your arms also are responsible for getting the handle away quickly. No 'recoil' or 'rebound' is involved. Your brain has to tell them to move. Their movement away from your body (and the speed of that movement) has no causal physiological connection with their movement towards your body.

4. What you actually wrote, as opposed to what you think you wrote, is that "this sort of rowing ... is what I did ... as a marathon runner." See http://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/595/01/ for help with pronouns and antecedents.

[Edit] 5. I agree: you don't know.

ps. I agree that your rowing and erging demonstrate monstrosity.

[ranger]

1. Were you erging at that session next to leadville and Mike? No. Does a direct comparison between leadville's and Mike's results at that session apply to you? Or to anyone else? No.

2. I reiterate. You cannot point your toes if they are flat against a fixed, unyielding surface (floor, foot stretcher). You can lever your body off of them. But it is your body that moves rather than your toes.

3. In any normal stroke, your arms are responsible for bringing the handle into your body. Not your back. Not anything you think you might be doing with your lower limbs. If you don't believe me, try taking a stroke without bending your arms. You can try anything you want to. But you you won't get the handle into your chest without bending your arms. Your arms also are responsible for getting the handle away quickly. No 'recoil' or 'rebound' is involved. Your brain has to tell them to move. Their movement away from your body (and the speed of that movement) has no causal physiological connection with their movement towards your body.

4. What you actually wrote, as opposed to what you think you wrote, is that "this sort of rowing ... is what I did ... as a marathon runner." See http://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/595/01/ for help with pronouns and antecedents.

[Edit] 5. I agree: you don't know.

ps. I agree that your rowing and erging demonstrate monstrosity.

The point that leadville is making about aerobic capacity, I think, is certainly sound, but probably doesn't apply. This will be obvious is I pull 5K in 16:40 and Mike pulls 5K in 17:50. You can use the front of your foot as a lever when you swing your back--or not. If not, there is a large loss in power. What you can do with your arms at the finish depends on what you do with your back in the middle of the stroke. Your arms are your last and weakest levers. The arms largely inherit the acceleration from the legs and then back. If the middle of your stroke is weak, you can't make this up with your arms. The finish and recovery are rhythmically linked. No, you don't have to "tell your arms to get the handle away quickly" if you finish quickly. The rhythm of the stroke does it--automatically. What you would often like to do volitionally with in rhythmic process, you can't. You are constrained by the rhythmic process. The point I made about doing work at my anaerobic threshold all of my life is entirely clear. Your nit-picking is just ill will, although in being that, it is revealing, albeit of you, not me.

ranger

[ranger]

4. What you actually wrote, as opposed to what you think you wrote, is that "this sort of rowing ... is what I did ... as a marathon runner." See http://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/595/01/ for help with pronouns and antecedents.

Why the ellipses in quoting what I wrote?

I wrote this:

"I am _very_ comfortable with this sort of rowing. It's my favorite type of session. This is what I did for a quarter of a century when I was a marathon runner."

_This_ refers to "type of session," not "this sort of rowing."

The "type of session" (i.e., prolonged effort at your anaerobic threshold) is not sport-specific.

If you need help with reading, you might try redoing grade school.



ranger

[aharmer]

No, not double unders.

Just singles.

Still challenging, though, if you keep the jumping up for an hour.

Can you do it?

In your initial jump rope post you claimed to do "double time" for 7 minutes, which simulated a 2k. If you can skip rope for over an hour nonstop, doing singles for 7 minutes even at an increased pace would not simulate a 2k in any way. You were implying that you were doing double unders, but of course when called on it you can back out and claim "double time" means singles. Nice work, you don't get enough credit here for manipulating the language and leaving backdoors to ooze through when necessary.

Oh, and can I do it? Don't know, never tried. But again, nice job deflecting the attention away from your own lie.

[mrfit]

Ranger Ranking Distance Countdown
28 Days

[ranger]

No, not double unders.

Just singles.

Still challenging, though, if you keep the jumping up for an hour.

Can you do it?

In your initial jump rope post you claimed to do "double time" for 7 minutes, which simulated a 2k. If you can skip rope for over an hour nonstop, doing singles for 7 minutes even at an increased pace would not simulate a 2k in any way. You were implying that you were doing double unders, but of course when called on it you can back out and claim "double time" means singles. Nice work, you don't get enough credit here for manipulating the language and leaving backdoors to ooze through when necessary.

Oh, and can I do it? Don't know, never tried. But again, nice job deflecting the attention away from your own lie.

For me, the normal way of jumping rope is with a little hop in between. What are these called "halves"?

If you eliminate the hop, you go twice as fast.

So for me, that is double-time.

I never said anything about "double unders."

ranger

[ranger]

doing singles for 7 minutes even at an increased pace would not simulate a 2k in any way

Really?

Then try it.

Singles come along at about two a second, or 120 a minute. So, seven minutes is 840 of them.

When you are done with the seven minutes of singles, keep skipping at a skip a second ("half time") or seven minutes.

Then skip again at 120 a minute again for seven minues.

Do an hour.

4 x 7 minutes (7 minute active rest).

ranger

[PaulH]

Well, Mike and I both pull a 5K @ 1:48 with a HR of around 150 bpm, perhaps pushing up to 155 bpm.

No you don't. In fact when I said you did you denied it, so why are you claiming it now?

Yes, I do.

Let me explain with an example.

*Citroen juggles with 5 knives at a time.

*I juggle with 3 knives at a time.

*I intend to increase that number to 5 knives.

*Therefore Citroen and I both juggle with 5 knives.

Can you see the logical fallacy in there? Well it's the same one you're committing. The difference between your 5k and Mike's 5k is that his exists, whereas yours is an intention. So you *intend* to pull a 5k at the same pace and HR as Mike, but you don't *actually* pull a 5k at the same pace and HR as Mike.

[Nosmo]

The arms largely inherit the acceleration from the legs and then back.

Time for another quiz: Clarify/rewrite the above sentence so it makes sense.
Hint: Start by explaining the difference between acceleration and velocity.

Even Ranger might get this one. But then again he didn't know the relationship between speed and pace.

[chgoss]

Well, Mike and I both pull a 5K @ 1:48 with a HR of around 150 bpm, perhaps pushing up to 155 bpm.

No you don't. In fact when I said you did you denied it, so why are you claiming it now?

Yes, I do.

Translation: Rich is NOT saying that he can do an 18 minute 5k (1:48 average pace)with his HR never exceeding 155 BPM.

Rich is saying that he can row 5k, with his pace alternating between 1:48 and resting periods, with his HR never exceeding 155.

Rich is exceedingly careful to NEVER put time AND distance in the same statement.

[mikvan52]

Well, Mike and I both pull a 5K @ 1:48 with a HR of around 150 bpm, perhaps pushing up to 155 bpm.

The difference between your 5k and Mike's 5k is that his exists, whereas yours is an intention. So you *intend* to pull a 5k at the same pace and HR as Mike, but you don't *actually* pull a 5k at the same pace and HR as Mike.

Indeed! There is no record of ranger EVER posting a 5k as a lightweight.

If and when Rich eventually does one (lwt or hwt), will there be HR data?

Answer: Most probably, not.

RIch: Might I make a friendly suggestion. In order to demonstrate you HR during any 5k piece: Just do an easy one!

Why not?

Might I suggest something similar to 1:51 pace for 5k at a constant rate with splits set for each 500m... IOW : 10 splits.
This will help the nay-sayers see "what you are made of" and will merely be easy training pace for someone of your stated caliber.
In this stage of your distance training; Can you row non-stop for 5k? We'd think you could as your hour piece is coming up this month.... IOW: Someone who is about to row an hour can make it through 5k (less than 1/3 of the disatnce!).

I doubt you'll do this as an IND_V ... but that would be helpful to those who tend to think you set your monitor on "Just Row".

At this stage of this thread's game of words I do not expect any data from you.. even if it's from an easy workout.
This remains a most puzzling state of affairs....
Is it because you bristle at being prompted to do anything?

[mikvan52]

And Rich:
I like sharing what I'm up to...
Like you, I am not sharpened these days:

Trying to match length with the big guys can beat you up!
https://www.sportgraphics.com/events/39 ... rch+Photos

The guy sitting in front of me in the 5th photo of this series of our Palm Beach "D" eight is 6'6" and 41 years old (Chris Ives) Yes, this is the same Ives who has all those great erg scores...

http://www.crewclassic.org/results/2010.html
(Event 86 (12:50 pm Sunday) (second page))

I rowed 4-seat in the Palm Beach 8 in San Diego, California (a week ago Sunday).


Jim Green & Mike vB, 2 of 9 who were part of a "D" eight

Here’s an easy workout I did on the erg this week. The last 15' is at my recent (last two years) 60' pace. Can you hold the same for 5k or 20 minutes?

3 x 15:00/3:00r
MAR 31 2010

45:00.0 - 11,692 - 1:55.4 - 21

15:00.0 - 3804 - 1:58.2 - 20
15:00.0 - 3865 - 1:56.4 - 20
15:00.0 - 4021 - 1:51.9 - 23
r.883

[Bob S.]

I rowed 4-seat in the Palm Beach 8 in San Diego, California (a week ago Sunday).

Mike,

What's the deal with your club putting lightweights in the boiler room? Even at over 170#, I was always bow or 2 seat. Nothing wrong with it I suppose, but it is just not the usual practice.

Bob S.