The Road to Boston 2007

seat5 · Post by **seat5** » November 15th, 2006, 7:28 pm

It was supposed to be 3 x 15 UT1 today, but everyone else is doing 3 x 17 & I felt left out so I did that too. I did give myself an extra 30 seconds rest (3:30 instead of 3:00) between since the longest 3 x UT1 I've had so far was 3 x 13. Max pace is supposed to be 2:05.

It seemed easy to me but I think it's because I use the metrenome. You just stay with the count and look at your pace every 3rd stroke or so and make sure you're on target, and think about other things or listen to the radio.

4088 2:04.7/22
4094 2:04.5/22
4104 2:04.2/22

2K w/u and 2K c/d.
...and tomorrow my very first TR workout!!

TomR · Post by **TomR** » November 15th, 2006, 10:02 pm

after three days away, did 30r20 tonight.

overall avg: 2.03.0 (2.02.8 last week)
10 min splits were:

2.03/144 hr
2.03.5/154 hr
2.02.4.163 hr

HR climbed to mid-150s in the middle of the row, and I backed off (caved in?) for about 2 minutes, pulling 2.05-2.06. Then got back on track.

I counted strokes--exactly 600. Psychologically the row seemed easier than last week. I was focused on counting and my split and payed much less attention to the time remaining and the negative chattering of the trolls in my head.

Tom

seat5 · Post by **seat5** » November 16th, 2006, 1:11 am

Am I nuts or is there no way to register for the Crash Bs yet? I 've gone over the website 5,000,000 times and there's no link for actually registering. Has anyone else found it?

Nice 30 r 20, Tom. If I wasn't using a metrenome I'd be counting. On most race pieces I end up counting backwards from 10 for every 100m starting at about 500m to go (but usually have to repeat a few numbers so I should start at 12 as 10MPS doesn't happen when strapped in rowing for time...however I start at 10 and end up going, 10, 9, 8, 7, 7, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1, 1, ...) it makes the 100m's seem to get finished much faster that way.

Bob S. · Post by **Bob S.** » November 16th, 2006, 1:30 am

seat5 wrote:Am I nuts or is there no way to register for the Crash Bs yet? I 've gone over the website 5,000,000 times and there's no link for actually registering. Has anyone else found it?

All I could get out of it is that the details will be released in "late 2006 or early 2007."

Bob S.

Carole · Post by **Carole** » November 16th, 2006, 5:50 am

well done Carla on your 2k.... xxxx

whaskell · Post by **whaskell** » November 16th, 2006, 6:43 am

Thursday Morning
10min WU - 2204m
UT1 5x10min / max pace 1:54.5 / 22-24spm
Target:- 5x10min / avg pace 1:57.0 / 23spm / 2:00min rest
Actual:- 10min / avg pace 1:57.0 / 24spm / 2564m
Actual:- 10min / avg pace 1:57.6 / 24spm / 2552m
Handle down
Total session: 5898m

These are supposed to be the easy ones, but I did not have it in me this morning. I could not focus, legs felt tired...

Well, I'm not going to let it get me down. I've got a 2k test at the beginning of next week. Then, I may take a Thanksgiving week break from IP and do what I feel like. Looks like the week following Thanksgiving, I have my first AN workout.

Anne · Post by **Anne** » November 16th, 2006, 8:33 pm

whew Will--you gave me a scare. I assumed we were at the same place in the plan, and I feared a 2k and an AN piece next week. Instead I have (I think) more TRs and UT1s...same old, same old....I may need to get out my calendar and make sure I didn't jump a line or so.

I'll try the AT workout tomorrow, but am worried about results as I did some rough strength training today. Advil may be my snack in the am.

TomR · Post by **TomR** » November 16th, 2006, 11:22 pm

UT1/3x19 tonight--13,313 meters.

Given the length of the intervals, I did have to go slower than in previous UT1 sessions to keep w/in the HR boundary.

2.07.9/HR 142/21 spm
2.08.7/HR 146/21 spm
2.09.1/HR 146/21 spm

I'm currently planning to do my test next Monday, after a rest day Sunday. I'm not sure yet whether I'll do another mile test or do 1,800 meters. It wont be a 2k, I don't think. It's curious to me that the TEST follows a hard week, as opposed to being done after an easy week. Would that timing add about 1 sec/500 to the test pace compared what one could do coming off a less-demanding week?

Tom

seat5 · Post by **seat5** » November 16th, 2006, 11:39 pm

First TR session, only 3 x 3', 3 x 6' sounds pretty tough, Will!

max pace 1:53
actual 1:52.3, 1:53.0, 1:53.3
Did the first one too fast, I would have liked to have done these negative splitted the way I usually like to do any intervals. Next time I will know better! the last 30 seconds of each of these required counting. I was happy with the shape of the force curve though and it felt composed and strong at the catch and not tending towards injury which is good.

Are you supposed to do an equal time of work/rest? I've been using 3 min rests all along and it was about right for this workout,too. My next TR is late next week at 5 x 2, I guess I will do 2 min rest for those.

Tomorrow is easy, 2 x 10 AT.

Anne · Post by **Anne** » November 17th, 2006, 8:49 am

I was told to do an equal amount of rest on the TR pieces, and when I was rushed, I shortchanged the rest period and suffered. I have the 2x10' AT too today. Then I catch a plane for Washington.

seat5 · Post by **seat5** » November 17th, 2006, 9:32 am

Have a great trip! business or pleasure? I am going to have to do my 4 sessions all in a row next week to accomodate Thanksgiving travel plans.

Anyone going to go for the 200K challange along with their IP? I haven't even looked at what my weekly average is lately for total meters. I wonder how much more I"ll have to add on to make it.

TomR · Post by **TomR** » November 17th, 2006, 10:55 am

Re recovery between intervals. I use a work to rest ratio of 1:1.5 or 2 on TR.

The WP 8x500 uses (in one formulation) 3.30 rest. For the 4x1k, I think the rest is 6 mins.

Fritz Hagerman, physiologist, recommends 1:2 (work to rest) for TR, according to one chart I have seen.

Longer recovery allows you to train at faster paces, which heightens the training effect.

Tom

whaskell · Post by **whaskell** » November 17th, 2006, 1:14 pm

Looks like I need to lengthen my TR rest time. I have been doing a 1:1 ratio.

TomR · Post by **TomR** » November 17th, 2006, 6:49 pm

Saw this post from Mike Caviston on the UK forum. It talks about the importance of an adequate warm-up and active recovery (as opposed to simple rest) between intervals:

"I have found the scientific literature to on the whole be quite clear about two things to increase the effectiveness of training & enhance performance:

1) Warm up longer/harder.
2) Use active rather than passive recovery for interval training (at least for work intervals > 500m; 1’ on/1’ off is a different story).

I’ve validated these guidelines several times while coaching group workouts for athletes. I allow the athletes to warm up or recover however they want for several workouts and then have them switch to my specific guidelines.... Performance on L1 or L2 workouts invariably improved dramatically relative to previous workouts & rate of improvement. (I’m talking averages; individual results varied.) But what I’ve consistently found (much to my surprise and general frustration) is that when I allow the athletes to again choose their own method of warm-up or recovery, most athletes revert back to short warm-ups and passive recovery – despite the clear proof based on their own performance that these methods were less effective. There’s no question that training effectively takes a certain amount of mental discipline."

seat5 · Post by **seat5** » November 17th, 2006, 10:43 pm

2 x 10' AT, found it harder than I expected (must have been because of yesterday's 3 x 3 TR). But negative splitted and faster than I've done this session before. Max space suppsed to be 1:58

2K w/u, 2K c/d
2553 1:57.5/26
2563 1:57.0/26

Tomorrow off and Sunday starts the new week with 2 x 9 AT.

I wonder something about the passive recovery/active recovery on intervals. If you do active recovery, you aren't starting your intervals with a dead flywheel. So wouldn't that kind of automatically make the intervals a tad faster? I know it would for me, because for instance on these intervals, it took me at least 3 strokes to get the current pace down to 1:58 or so. Maybe it's not enough difference to account for the improvement.