Ranger's training thread

[nharrigan]

A Calibration setting does not vary for the payload of the boat. It's forward movement that's involved here.

From what I've learned through the years, the differences can be linked (on the same hull) to where the impeller is placed. IOW: the distance from the bow ball to the impeller. Moving the impeller to a different place on the hull would require a different calibration factor. Why? => turbulence created by the boat design varies at different points along the hull.
It is impractical to move an impeller very far as their is limited space in the foot well where this arrangement can be mounted. A builder, like Fluid, factory mounts their impellers in the same location each time they complete a new boat.

O.K.

So I should use your calibration factor, and that should do it.

What is your calibration factor?

ranger

I'm sure Mike will post something by the end of the month, after he's done some sharpening.

[whp4]

A Calibration setting does not vary for the payload of the boat. It's forward movement that's involved here.

From what I've learned through the years, the differences can be linked (on the same hull) to where the impeller is placed. IOW: the distance from the bow ball to the impeller. Moving the impeller to a different place on the hull would require a different calibration factor. Why? => turbulence created by the boat design varies at different points along the hull.
It is impractical to move an impeller very far as their is limited space in the foot well where this arrangement can be mounted. A builder, like Fluid, factory mounts their impellers in the same location each time they complete a new boat.

O.K.

So I should use your calibration factor, and that should do it.

What is your calibration factor?

ranger

I'm sure Mike will post something by the end of the month, after he's done some sharpening.

No, no, he already posted the screenshot showing the calibration factor, it was in the same thread where ranger posted the screenshot of his 5k piece. Too bad ranger missed it, but it was posted, he should just look for it

The best part, though, is that Mike was able to post the screenshot without even preparing for it, and it took 20 seconds less than anyone his age and weight did all year, though he was handily beaten by a 6-year-old from down the street

[NavigationHazard]

No, no, he already posted the screenshot showing the calibration factor, it was in the same thread where ranger posted the screenshot of his 5k piece. Too bad ranger missed it, but it was posted, he should just look for it

The best part, though, is that Mike was able to post the screenshot without even preparing for it, and it took 20 seconds less than anyone his age and weight did all year, though he was handily beaten by a 6-year-old from down the street. After having won the Charles, Henley Diamond Sculls, and all 199 events at US Masters' Nationals -- sweep and scull, mens and womens and mixed and adaptive -- without the formalities of entering or showing up at the venue.* In his spare time he is curing the common cold, weaving his own clothing line out of tent-caterpillar silk, and jamming with Elvis, Jim Morrison, and Kurt Cobain.

Fixed.

* True, the mixed parent/child 2x was a close thing....

[ranger]

Over at least the last 5 years now, you've repeatedly promised 8x500 sessions at a pace that is clearly way beyond your capabilities.

"Promising"?

Who is "promising"?

I have given you my goals.

We'll have to see what I can do.

"Beyond my capabilities"?

How do you know?

My pb on the session is 1:32.5.

My goal is 1:31, with perhaps 1:32 being fine before BIRC.

Yea, I'll have to be a bit better to do that, but not much.

I don't see anything wildly beyond my capabilities about this goal at all.

ranger

[ranger]

Over at least the last 5 years now, you've repeatedly promised 8x500 sessions at a pace that is clearly way beyond your capabilities.

"Promising"?

Who is "promising"?

I have given you my goals.

We'll have to see what I can do.

"Beyond my capabilities"?

How do you know?

My pb on the session is 1:32.5.

My goal is 1:31, with perhaps 1:32 being fine before BIRC.

Yea, to do that, I'll have to be a bit better on the session that I have been in the past, but not much.

I don't see anything wildly beyond my capabilities about this goal at all.

It is only a half a second per 500m better than my pb.

ranger

[whp4]

Over at least the last 5 years now, you've repeatedly promised 8x500 sessions at a pace that is clearly way beyond your capabilities.

"Promising"?

Who is "promising"?

You are, when you write "I will do"

My pb on the session is 1:32.5.

My goal is 1:31, with perhaps 1:32 being fine before BIRC.

Yea, tp do that, I'll have to be a bit better on the session that I have been in the past, but not much.

I don't see anything wildly beyond my capabilities about this goal at all.

It is only a half a second per 500m better than my pb.

Only half a second per 500m better than a PB that you haven't been near in years. You shouldn't waste your time with such pedestrian goals, why not aim a little higher?

[aharmer]

As I mentioned before (and you conveniently ignored), for you to pull a near WR (6:38-6:39) right now would be the equivalent of a 7:00 erger pulling a 7:26. Within 15 minutes of reading this post you could walk downstairs, pull your sub 6:40 at 27spm, shoot a picture and post it here.

More importantly, you could silence all the critics. This should not even be a challenge for you. This would not sabotage your training. This would not compromise your training in any way. Hell, you claim to be doing almost this pace for hours at a time. The only reason not to do it would be the actual truth...you are nothing but a troll looking for attention and have no intention of doing anything remotely close to the lies you spew.

Oh yeah, why don't you throw the HRM on for the little WR pull just so we can see how easy it was for you.

[becz]

It will be interesting to see what difference this makes in my 2K time.

Understatement of the year.

[ranger]

Only half a second per 500m better than a PB that you haven't been near in years.

I haven't sharpened in years.

I have been training--getting better.

Sharpening doesn't make you better.

You get better by improving your UT rowing.

As folks such as Dennis Hastings and Paul Hendershott have demonstrated, if you remain maximally active, decline with age from 55 to 60 is only slight, perhaps not even perceptible at all.

I rowed 6:29.7 when I was 55, still pulling at max drag, and without even sharpening for it.

I get about a dozen seconds over 2K from hard sharpening.

This year, I think I will also get quite a bit from rowing well at low drag (118 df.).

ranger

[ranger]

As I mentioned before (and you conveniently ignored), for you to pull a near WR (6:38-6:39) right now would be the equivalent of a 7:00 erger pulling a 7:26. Within 15 minutes of reading this post you could walk downstairs, pull your sub 6:40 at 27spm, shoot a picture and post it here.

More importantly, you could silence all the critics. This should not even be a challenge for you. This would not sabotage your training. This would not compromise your training in any way. Hell, you claim to be doing almost this pace for hours at a time. The only reason not to do it would be the actual truth...you are nothing but a troll looking for attention and have no intention of doing anything remotely close to the lies you spew.

Oh yeah, why don't you throw the HRM on for the little WR pull just so we can see how easy it was for you.

No reason to do it right now, but this is exactly what I am headed for with my AT training.

To reach my 2K goal, I will need to do 4 x 2K @ 1:38.

For lightweights, AT training is 28-30 spm.

5K/6K trials are AT, perhaps even 30min/10K.

28-30 spm is also what I would like to rate OTW in a Head race.

For me, an AT HR pushes up to 180 bpm.

This is level 2 rowing in the Wolverine Plan.

At 12-13 SPI, 1:38 is in and around 30 spm.

ranger

[ranger]

As I mentioned before (and you conveniently ignored), for you to pull a near WR (6:38-6:39) right now would be the equivalent of a 7:00 erger pulling a 7:26. Within 15 minutes of reading this post you could walk downstairs, pull your sub 6:40 at 27spm, shoot a picture and post it here.

More importantly, you could silence all the critics. This should not even be a challenge for you. This would not sabotage your training. This would not compromise your training in any way. Hell, you claim to be doing almost this pace for hours at a time. The only reason not to do it would be the actual truth...you are nothing but a troll looking for attention and have no intention of doing anything remotely close to the lies you spew.

Oh yeah, why don't you throw the HRM on for the little WR pull just so we can see how easy it was for you.

No reason to be so simplistic.

No 2Ks at WR level are easy.

And no 2Ks are easy if you are not prepared for them.

Sure, when I am fully prepared to pull 6:16 for 2K, 6:40 will be easy.

But probably only then.

Each level in training for a 2K presents its challenges.

At first, it is hard because you have been doing other things.

Then as you do it for a while, it gets easier.

AT training is no different.

You need to get used to it for it to feel easy.

No, I don't walk around with a HR of 180 bpm.

It takes some practice to get used to working that hard.

ranger

[ranger]

[removed]

[mikvan52]

(Rich:)Which NK product do you have?

Rich: Which NK product do you have for recording your OTW workouts?

Let me know and I give you the calibration factor I use.
.

BTW: You don't need me to do this... You could do the whole calibraton process on your own.
It would be interesting to see what you came up with! We could compare notes!!

[ranger]

(Rich:)Which NK product do you have?

Rich: Which NK product do you have for recording your OTW workouts?

Let me know and I give you the calibration factor I use.
.

BTW: You don't need me to do this... You could do the whole calibraton process on your own.
It would be interesting to see what you came up with! We could compare notes!!

Sure, I could just calibrate it myself with my Garmin.

Or you could just give me your calibration.

1.0 is fine for my Peinert.

I checked it with my Garmin.

This is my speed coach:

http://www.nkhome.com/rowing-paddling/speed-coach/

1.0 must be pretty close to fine with the Fluid, too, as my 15.5K row the other day indicates.

Three loops down to Barton Dam from my put in are just that: 15.5K.

Again, I don't think this is all very relevant for me at the moment.

Knowing exactly how slow you are doesn't improve your rowing and make you faster.

The point with training is to improve your rowing and get faster.

On the erg, you report your workouts very exactly, measuring each move you make, but does it help?

No.

You are just getting slower and slower.

Timing everything exactly is just a distraction from what is important.

Except in rare instances (e.g., during sharpening), timing is irrelevant to good training.

Last year, on the erg, I really did no "pieces" at all, and therefore, in your terms, didn't time anything.

But in the end, no one my age and weight came within 20 seconds of my 2K, even though I was pulling at max drag and didn't even prepare to race.

(Therefore, when I do a 2K this year, fully trained and rowing well at low drag (118 df.), I might well be in the range of 20-25 seconds better.)

You didn't come within six seconds.

At WIRC 2010, you missed it by nine seconds.

And you are a year and a half younger than I am.

So, tell me again.

Why does it help to time all of your training?

ranger

[ranger]

Here is _my_ advice:

Just get on the erg and row well.

Row well as much and as often as you can.

When you are not rowing well, stop, and try to figure out why not.

Then correct what you are doing wrong, and try again.

That's the best training.

Timing doesn't have anything to do with it.

It's all about efficient leveraging, not timing.

ranger