The Two Types of Training

[lancs]

The 60s heavyweight WR for 6K is 21:04 (1:46).

The 60s lightweight WR for 6K is 21:49 (1:50).

My pb is 1:44

Presuming you mean your 6k pb is 1:44 and assuming it was valid (and clearly this is a huge assumption given your habit of lying through your back teeth) then let's not forget this was a 50's hwt row..

[ranger]

The 60s heavyweight WR for 6K is 21:04 (1:46).

The 60s lightweight WR for 6K is 21:49 (1:50).

My pb is 1:44

Presuming you mean your 6k pb is 1:44 and assuming it was valid (and clearly this is a huge assumption given your habit of lying through your back teeth) then let's not forget this was a 50's hwt row..

Yes, 1:44 is my 6K pb.

1:43 is my 5K pb.

1:48 my 60min pb.

All in good order, given that 1:37 is my 2K pb, both lightweight and heavyweight.

So weight is irrelevant.

In indoor rowing, distance rows such as 6K are just stages in training for 2K.

ranger

[ranger]

assuming it was valid (and clearly this is a huge assumption given your habit of lying through your back teeth

Lying about my WR rows, etc.?

You don't believe in physics, clocks, machines?

Such skepticism is absurd.

Who do you believe in--yourself--disbelieving everything else that is inconvenient for you?

The resulting world, although "true" to you, is pretty small, Lancs.

Just yourself.

ranger

[snowleopard]

assuming it was valid (and clearly this is a huge assumption given your habit of lying through your back teeth

Lying about my WR rows, etc.?

You don't believe in physics, clocks, machines?

Such skepticism is absurd.

Not at all. Apart from your 2Ks there is no evidence to support the times, continuity or even completion of rows by you at any other distance

[mikvan52]

Boy did your research skills fail you on this gem (quoted in it's entirety)

Mike--

Could you explain to us all why you choose to race 6K at 23 spm?

That's a pretty bizarre choice, no?

Do you do it in order to "let the wheel spin."

Or do you do it so that you can eat lunch between strokes?



ranger

Once you look at the big picture, Rich, you may see that your questions are not appropriate.
I assume you're referring to this 6k from February:


http://concept2.co.uk/forum/blog.php?u=7679&b=71757

Date Submitted
2/20/2010 9:14:42 PM
Type
On Slides

{edit} 6k for submission purposes (Ed McNeely)~FOR STRENGTH PROGRAM

22:33.9 - 6k - 1:52.8 - 23 - 155 (AT REACHED AT 143 BPM)-(UVM TESTING)
IN 2K SPLITS
7:21.1 - 2000 - 1:50.2 - 261 watts - 24 spm - 149 bpm
7:35.2 - 2000 - 1:53.8 - 237 watts - 23 spm - 155 bpm
7:37.8 - 2000 - 1:54.4 - 233 watts - 23 spm - 159 bpm (HR is for last stroke of split)


.

5
Michael van Beuren
57
Hartland
VT
USA
22:34.9
IND

The answer lies here (what I was up to two days before):

http://concept2.co.uk/forum/blog.php?u=7679&b=71729

For those who don’t choose to read this link: I was admitted to a hospital for a day because of extreme pain 2 days before the 6k piece.


Upshot: I come out a hospital bed and row a 6k 2 days later and ranger still can't post any workout data when his training is going "oh so well" w/o an injuries whatsoever.

Wild!...Turkey

I wouldn't have done this piece but my strength training coach wanted a TT to check my status for purposes of putting together a program for my OTW campaign this year to win the 50-59 open weight category at the Head of the Charles.
IOW: I probably shouldn't have done this 6k piece. But, I was leaving the erg netherland for OTW nirvana in a few days and didn't want to renege on my commitment to have a February 6k time.

Hey Rich! Here's an idea: Erg a 6k training piece and break it down as I did (in three 2ks)... Or, are you afraid what it would show? Don't forget the HR data

[macroth]

1:40 @ 31 spm (6K)
1:39 @ 32 spm (5K)
1:38 @ 33 spm (4K)
1:37 @ 34 spm (3.5K)
1:36 @ 35 spm (3K)
1:35 @ 36 spm (2.5K)
1:34 @ 37 spm (2K)

I am now locked into these rates and paces.

_Very_ comfortable stuff.

[...]

ranger

Obviously these numbers are fictional, but assuming you've seen them pop up on your monitor at some point in time, none of this makes sense.

- How can you be locked in a rate and pace for a given distance if you haven't actually performed the distance at said rate and pace, or anything remotely close?

- How can these rates and paces be very comfortable if they are to lead to PB's?

- How can you be so utterly stupid and delusional that you believe stringing together 30 strokes means you're "locked in" for distances 7 to 20 times longer?

- How can you live with yourself being such a dishonest man?/How can you function in society with such a feeble grasp of reality? (I have given up on deciding which applies best to your situation.)

[KevJGK]

How can you function in society with such a feeble grasp of reality?

[ranger]

Boy did your research skills fail you on this gem

Yes, sorry.

I was calculating that you did 21:34 rather than 22:34.

22:34 is indeed 1:53, not 1:49.

At 11.5 SPI, that's 21 spm, not 23 spm.

ranger

[ranger]

How can you be so utterly stupid and delusional that you believe stringing together 30 strokes means you're "locked in" for distances 7 to 20 times longer?

Yes, these are just my training paces and rates, and my target distances at those paces and rates.

The intervals that I doing are not 30 strokes.

Traditionally, intervals for distances 2K-6K are 50-200 strokes, depending on the pace and rate of the interval.

You can monitor your effort on intervals (1) intuitively or (2) by heart rate.

I am still staying pretty aerobic for these intervals.

ranger

[lancs]

Who do you believe in--yourself--disbelieving everything else that is inconvenient for you?

The resulting world, although "true" to you, is pretty small, Lancs.

Just yourself.

ranger

I believe anyone who produces reasonable evidence. Since your (now eclipsed) WR rows, you have produced nothing out of the ordinary and certainly not one tiny shred of evidence that you can row at anything like the levels you claim to be 'coming right up'. For about the last 5 or 6 years or so. That's why I don't believe anything *you* say..

[macroth]

Traditionally, intervals for distances 2K-6K are 50-200 strokes, depending on the pace and rate of the interval.

So, your new lie/delusion is that you are doing 2K repeats at 1:40/31spm and 500m repeats at 1:34/37spm, correct? How much rest between these fictional intervals?

You can monitor your effort on intervals (1) intuitively

Not a good idea. When it comes to your training, you have the intuition of a cinder block.

[ranger]

Traditionally, intervals for distances 2K-6K are 50-200 strokes, depending on the pace and rate of the interval.

So, your new lie/delusion is that you are doing 2K repeats at 1:40/31spm and 500m repeats at 1:34/37spm, correct? How much rest between these fictional intervals?

You can monitor your effort on intervals (1) intuitively

Not a good idea. When it comes to your training, you have the intuition of a cinder block.

Yep, I rely a lot on intuition/feel.

At 52, I was four seconds under the 50s lwt WR in my first race.

Those who don't rely on intuition/feel are just inexperienced, and so gape at clocks, for want of anything else to rely on.

For interval workouts, all you have to do is hit your rates and paces and work hard.

What else is there you can do?

Not much need for clocks.

Looking at clocks doesn't make you faster.

At best, it is a distraction; at worst, an imposition.

ranger

[ranger]

I don't believe anything *you* say

So, you can't prepare for something until you do it?

If you believe this, how do you train at all?

My guess is that you don't train.

You just prepare to race--and then race.

To each his own, I guess.

You only get better if you train.

No one gets better by racing.

ranger

[ranger]

Ironically, those who think they have something to prove whenever they train and therefore are always trying to prove it by racing their training usually discover when they race that because they haven't trained they have nothing to prove, while those who don't think that they have anything to prove with their training and therefore just train hard find ample proof when they race that they have trained well.

ranger

[jliddil]

Ironically, those who think they have something to prove whenever they train and therefore are always trying to prove it by racing their training usually discover when they race that because they haven't trained they have nothing to prove, while those who don't think that they have anything to prove with their training and therefore just train hard find ample proof when they race that they have trained well.

ranger

Nice run on sentence