Pondering the topic of stroke rates in the IP and wondering how people are viewing these in their training. To date of course we have just been doing UT1 (20-22) and UT2 (22-24) but then with AT it takes a significant jump 26-28 I think but then again the 'power' required as pace increases is not linear so the demands get higher per stroke.
Reading the thread on the UK forum about using low stroke rates to develop power and knowing that Tom was looking to do the UT2 sessions at about 18 (is that right Tom) I wonder what peoples thoughts are or if it has been a consideration.
My perspective would be that UT2 (which has the lowest SPM) sessions are really designed to develop aerobic capacity and are not meant to develop strength, I think to do that you 'really' have to drop the rate. I think it is more likely you will develop strength during the TR and AN stages. For someone like me who at this stage has more power than endurance I struggle when the rate gets up and as I get tired I drop the rate and 'heave' more, so I should tend towards the top end of ranges to overcome this weakness and this will be the challenge for me as we enter the AT phase to get my rate up at AT pace.
Thoughts ??
George
The Road to Boston 2007
George,
I think I disagree.
The purpose of UT2 is to develop endurance AND power. Lower stroke rates help you develop more power per stroke, and being a longish session, it promotes endurance. Presumably you hold the same power per stroke as you increase the rate, which obviously taxes your body more. UT1 has a similar purpose to UT2, I believe, but being more demanding, UT1 requires more recovery between sessions. Again, holding the rate down while hitting your targets helps develop a consistently powerful stroke. When you increase the rate for AT etc, that power is reasonably ingrained (in theory).
Lower your rate on your next UT2 and see how it goes.
Tom
I think I disagree.
The purpose of UT2 is to develop endurance AND power. Lower stroke rates help you develop more power per stroke, and being a longish session, it promotes endurance. Presumably you hold the same power per stroke as you increase the rate, which obviously taxes your body more. UT1 has a similar purpose to UT2, I believe, but being more demanding, UT1 requires more recovery between sessions. Again, holding the rate down while hitting your targets helps develop a consistently powerful stroke. When you increase the rate for AT etc, that power is reasonably ingrained (in theory).
Lower your rate on your next UT2 and see how it goes.
Tom
I am interested in the thoughts on stroke rate, simply because I want to know what to expect (how to prepare 
)when we get to the TR pieces and an over 30 SR. I have tremendous trouble at faster stroke rates and am happily paddling along on the UT1 pieces at 24. Even doing the 2K, I prefer to pull harder but at a slower stroke rate.
Today's piece was the 3x14' UT1 - target 2:17 24SR 4 minute rest
Actual was 3067 (2:16.9) 24 sr 140HR
3069 (2:16.8) 24sr 158 HR- really sweaty
3074 (2:16.6) 24sr 164 HR - new technique used*
HR recovery to sub 100 was less than 2 minutes.
*I worked on technique--- particularly at the finish .....rolling back on my feet/ digging in my heels...this has always caused my pace to drop 3-5 seconds/500, but I can't keep up this exhertion for long. This time I was deliberate about decreasing the effort with my arms, and I was shocked that my pace dropped a few seconds while and my HR dropped. Made me wonder if I have been using incorrect form for the past two years! In the past I think I have pulled harder while maximizing the power of the legs and have worn myself out. Is this understandable?
Well, they say old dogs can't learn new tricks...however today is my 52nd birthday....and I may be an old dog, but I feel like I learned a new trick
I appreciate any and all perspective. I need to keep learning how to improve to offset the effects of aging!
Anne
)when we get to the TR pieces and an over 30 SR. I have tremendous trouble at faster stroke rates and am happily paddling along on the UT1 pieces at 24. Even doing the 2K, I prefer to pull harder but at a slower stroke rate.Today's piece was the 3x14' UT1 - target 2:17 24SR 4 minute rest
Actual was 3067 (2:16.9) 24 sr 140HR
3069 (2:16.8) 24sr 158 HR- really sweaty
3074 (2:16.6) 24sr 164 HR - new technique used*
HR recovery to sub 100 was less than 2 minutes.
*I worked on technique--- particularly at the finish .....rolling back on my feet/ digging in my heels...this has always caused my pace to drop 3-5 seconds/500, but I can't keep up this exhertion for long. This time I was deliberate about decreasing the effort with my arms, and I was shocked that my pace dropped a few seconds while and my HR dropped. Made me wonder if I have been using incorrect form for the past two years! In the past I think I have pulled harder while maximizing the power of the legs and have worn myself out. Is this understandable?
Well, they say old dogs can't learn new tricks...however today is my 52nd birthday....and I may be an old dog, but I feel like I learned a new trick
I appreciate any and all perspective. I need to keep learning how to improve to offset the effects of aging!
Anne
Tom just to throw this in then, if I am looking to produce the max allowable pace (watts) for UT2, UT1, and AT using the middle of the spm band for each session then in fact UT2 is the lightest stroke, and the longest 'recovery' (rest) time.TomR wrote:George,
I think I disagree.
The purpose of UT2 is to develop endurance AND power. Lower stroke rates help you develop more power per stroke, and being a longish session, it promotes endurance. Presumably you hold the same power per stroke as you increase the rate, which obviously taxes your body more. UT1 has a similar purpose to UT2, I believe, but being more demanding, UT1 requires more recovery between sessions. Again, holding the rate down while hitting your targets helps develop a consistently powerful stroke. When you increase the rate for AT etc, that power is reasonably ingrained (in theory).
Lower your rate on your next UT2 and see how it goes.
Tom
Now if you drop the rate below what the IP calls for then yes you can manipulate the UT2 session into a power session but that is not what the IP plan is setting out to do - which is my point.
George
Anne can you explain this a bit more as I am not sure what you mean and then can maybe comment. So far I have done all the sessions strapless and one of my goals has been to 'not' dig in the heels to drag myself forward as that is what people use the straps for and indeed wastes energy.Anne wrote:
*I worked on technique--- particularly at the finish .....rolling back on my feet/ digging in my heels...
Anne
George
George,GeorgeD wrote:
Now if you drop the rate below what the IP calls for then yes you can manipulate the UT2 session into a power session but that is not what the IP plan is setting out to do - which is my point.
UT2 pace for a 6.40 2k is 1.55/500 or 230 watts
At 20 spm, that's 11.5 w/str. At 22 spm, that's 10.5 w/str.
AT pace is 1.45 or 302 watts.
At 26 spm, that 11.6 w/st. at 28 spm, that's 10.8 w/str.
Similar.
The IP program is inconsistent in its recommended stroke rates, using 20-22 for UT2 in one place and 18-20 in another. It also says UT1 can be 20-24, and AT 24-28.
It seems to me that building consistent power per stroke is part of the program design. But you know I'm just making this up as I go along.
Tom
My workout: 54' U2, done as 2x27, 90 sec rest.
2.13.9/128HR/18 spm
2.14.7/134HR/18 spm
maxed out HR and slowed, pulling 2.16s. Based on resting HR the last couple of days, I'm not convinced I'm recovering fully when I do other physical activity and the workouts.
Anne--Like George I am not sure I fully understand the issue w/ the stroke. My experience w/ digging in the heels goes back to having had a teenage son.
Tom
2.13.9/128HR/18 spm
2.14.7/134HR/18 spm
maxed out HR and slowed, pulling 2.16s. Based on resting HR the last couple of days, I'm not convinced I'm recovering fully when I do other physical activity and the workouts.
Anne--Like George I am not sure I fully understand the issue w/ the stroke. My experience w/ digging in the heels goes back to having had a teenage son.
Tom
Saturday morning:- IP 3 x 15min / max pace 1:50 / 22-24spm
Target:- 3 x 15min / avg pace <1:52 / 23spm / 3:00rest
Actual:- 15min / avg pace 1:51.7 / 23spm / 4026m / 141HR
Actual:- 15min / avg pace 1:53.3 / 23spm / 3971m / 144HR (stopped half way)
Actual:- 15min / avg pace 1:53.1 / 23spm / 3976m / 144HR (took off easier)
Total session 15073m
Impressions:- not a good session, maybe the cough and the sore throat did not help and maybe I should not have trained but I did. I should be pragmatic about these things but I am not and this morning has bummed me out.
George
Target:- 3 x 15min / avg pace <1:52 / 23spm / 3:00rest
Actual:- 15min / avg pace 1:51.7 / 23spm / 4026m / 141HR
Actual:- 15min / avg pace 1:53.3 / 23spm / 3971m / 144HR (stopped half way)
Actual:- 15min / avg pace 1:53.1 / 23spm / 3976m / 144HR (took off easier)
Total session 15073m
Impressions:- not a good session, maybe the cough and the sore throat did not help and maybe I should not have trained but I did. I should be pragmatic about these things but I am not and this morning has bummed me out.
George
Tom I think your observations are quite correct and the lesson to take from it is that we use the IP programme but we are not slaves to it. A prescribed session could be approached from either end of the 'stroke rate' range and result in variation of outcome. I dont think that is bad thing I think it is a smart thing, especially if it promotes a positive psychological outcome from the session.TomR wrote:George,GeorgeD wrote:
Now if you drop the rate below what the IP calls for then yes you can manipulate the UT2 session into a power session but that is not what the IP plan is setting out to do - which is my point.
UT2 pace for a 6.40 2k is 1.55/500 or 230 watts
At 20 spm, that's 11.5 w/str. At 22 spm, that's 10.5 w/str.
AT pace is 1.45 or 302 watts.
At 26 spm, that 11.6 w/st. at 28 spm, that's 10.8 w/str.
Similar.
The IP program is inconsistent in its recommended stroke rates, using 20-22 for UT2 in one place and 18-20 in another. It also says UT1 can be 20-24, and AT 24-28.
It seems to me that building consistent power per stroke is part of the program design. But you know I'm just making this up as I go along.
Tom
George
- I hate that 
Several comments....I like the gears better...that domesticated beast doesn't make me work as hard on these pieces.
Sunday will certainly be a day of rest for me- today was a bit extreme with a morning training session (lifting weights), then a 2 mile run, then painting a room. When my husband suggested that our Saturday 'date" be a trip the gym and watching the Ohio State football game on TV, I wasn't too thrilled. I must be a slave to the IP workout, becuase I figured if I hauled myself to the gym, I might as well do the 57' UT2.
Plan calls for 2:21 (20-22)
I did 11,856 meters and that was 2:24, 22apm, HR 150.
The results weren't great...but I did it (and liked the slow pace). I could have done another hour, so I guess I didn't work hard enough. The fun of the piece was doing it strapless (aka George) and seeing if that made a difference. With so many other variables, I couldn't quite tell, but I sue felt free!
As for my technique questions, I will get some help from some water rowers. But, the question
is ...at the finish, where is the weight in your feet? heels, evenly distributed???
Sunday will certainly be a day of rest for me- today was a bit extreme with a morning training session (lifting weights), then a 2 mile run, then painting a room. When my husband suggested that our Saturday 'date" be a trip the gym and watching the Ohio State football game on TV, I wasn't too thrilled. I must be a slave to the IP workout, becuase I figured if I hauled myself to the gym, I might as well do the 57' UT2.
Plan calls for 2:21 (20-22)
I did 11,856 meters and that was 2:24, 22apm, HR 150.
The results weren't great...but I did it (and liked the slow pace). I could have done another hour, so I guess I didn't work hard enough. The fun of the piece was doing it strapless (aka George) and seeing if that made a difference. With so many other variables, I couldn't quite tell, but I sue felt free!
As for my technique questions, I will get some help from some water rowers. But, the question
is ...at the finish, where is the weight in your feet? heels, evenly distributed??? Report on Friday's workout, delayed because the forum was down for several hours.
2nd week, 3rd session, 20' UT1.
Usual 10' warmup with four 10 stroke bursts. 2129m (2:20.9). Ave HR 123.
6' rest.
20' piece at 24 spm. 4609m (2:10.1). Ave. HR 140. 1' rest.
Usual 10' cool down. 2133m (2:20.6). Ave HR 131.
Couldn't match Monday's and Wednesday's sub 2:10 efforts, but the last two 2' segments were at 2:08.7 and 2:06.5, so I guess I could have put on a little more pressure in the middle. Next week is more UT1 stuff, but at increasingly longer intervals: 2x13', 2x14', and 2x15'.
Bob S.
2nd week, 3rd session, 20' UT1.
Usual 10' warmup with four 10 stroke bursts. 2129m (2:20.9). Ave HR 123.
6' rest.
20' piece at 24 spm. 4609m (2:10.1). Ave. HR 140. 1' rest.
Usual 10' cool down. 2133m (2:20.6). Ave HR 131.
Couldn't match Monday's and Wednesday's sub 2:10 efforts, but the last two 2' segments were at 2:08.7 and 2:06.5, so I guess I could have put on a little more pressure in the middle. Next week is more UT1 stuff, but at increasingly longer intervals: 2x13', 2x14', and 2x15'.
Bob S.