Concept2 Forum

So since my last 2K test I've gotten into rowing at lower rates than before. LSD rows at r17, some endurance length intervals at r20-22, etc. It is a compelling way to roll, since each stroke becomes more important and the effort feels there even with slower paces as evidenced by my HR. And it also seems to be easier to manage HR in terms of caps. But it also lands in my back, neck, shoulders in such a way as to make me wonder if there is a limit - like should every other day be softer strokes. What advice would you veterans provide to a short, fat 54 year old who is trying to get fitter? I am really liking trying to get my power per stroke higher and proportional across the rates.

G-dub, you trying to open a big can of worms? The debate about SPM, meters rowed total and per session, power per stroke gets renewed repeatedly. I would like to remind, that rowing >= 1K is not primarily a power event. High end aerobics is what it is all about. Its never been clear to me that power per stroke at 17 SPM translates well to power at say 30 SPM. Also, I would be concerned about being able to stay aerobic in my longer rows. AT training pushes the aerobic envelope - gives one more capacity. In other words, you don't need to red line to maintain a pace.

What splits are you trying to pull at 17 spm and what's your most recent 2k PB? You should aim to be somewhere around 55% of 2k watts for your SS.

As for harder endurance intervals, you should really aim to be higher on the rate, closer to 26-28 spm

Armondo, with 17 I can be at the right pace and HR for LSD work. The reason I'm exploring 20-22 on endurance length intervals (1500, 2K, waterfall etc) is that they were blowing me out at 26! So I figured that over time ( a month or two) I can bring them back up. So next week I was going to nudge it up etc. I did 4 X 2k today at r20 and it still worked me pretty good even though it was 6 strokes per minute less and 6-7 seconds slower pace.

Jim, I know you don't support lower rate work, so maybe this post doesnt line up well for your style. I'm not trying to open a worm can, just asking the folks that have done lower rate work for some feedback. And I'm not sure where the 1K comments fit. I'm trying to be able to spend more time getting more aerobically fit.

I'm just saying that unless one is really concentrating on 500m and below, that huge power per stroke is going to be less and less important. Fitness is key. Rowing is not a slow activity. It requires decent power at pretty high rates. Its hard to see a bunch of 17 SPM work doing much. Why don't cyclists find steep hills and push high gears very slowly up hills to train? Is it because it is an irrelevancy? You need a big aerobic engine for rowing. And you get high end capacity with AT training. And that has virtually nothing to do with 17 SPM. I want to see quite a bit of rowing in the 1:50-1:54 range for a 1:45 2Ker.

Depends on what suits you or what your trying to achieve.

My mate who rowed at top national level OTW here is all about low rating. When he starts bashing out 30 minute rows at 17-18spm at 1:53 pace you cannot help but be impressed, I don't care what his heartrate is !

Personally I like the low rating stuff now and have settled on 17-18spm if I want to do a 1:58 pace 30 minute training row.

The lower rating also comes in very useful in the much longer rows like the FM if you just intend to finish it but not set any records ! Mine was at 18spm, I never would have finished trying to do 28spm plus at that pace, way too much wasted energy going up and down the slide.

OK, I am not a veteran by any stretch but I tend to agree with the slower rate people. I can not maintain a, to me, high stroke rate ie; 26-28 spm. I stay around 18-20 spm and I am doing fine. I am not trying to set any records except on my own times. As long as I am improving I am happy and getting healthier in the process. I really love the indoor rower and will hit my first million meters on 4-27-16 when I complete the Mud Season Madness challenge. I am happy with my progress so far and will stick with my slower rate rowing and let others argue about all the other stuff.

We use the rating that serves the purpose, and we need them all. There's no contradiction between high and low ratings. They're different and serve different purposes, like knives and forks.

I always eat peas with honey;
I've done it all my life,
It makes them taste rather funny,
But it keeps them on the knife.

Ogden Nash (?)

18-20 paddle light, warm-up, -down;
23 paddle hard: relaxation, sequence, endurance, rhythm, crew cohesion, balance, bladework, timing;
32-34 cruise race; in training, same but faster, racing with margin for wind, chop, sprints etc;
40 starts and sprints.

If we can't make the boat go fast at 23, it's unlikely to go fast at 34. As Xeno said, those with no technique fall back at the first 500 mark. At 23 we develop both the technique of making boats go fast and the endurance it takes. Then we apply both for training at 30 - 40 if we intend to race.

The Work cannot be any greater than stroke length x sustainable average force; but there's no reason for it to be any less. After all we only have to pull about 200 strokes in a 2k.

G-dub wrote:So since my last 2K test I've gotten into rowing at lower rates than before. LSD rows at r17, some endurance length intervals at r20-22, etc. It is a compelling way to roll, since each stroke becomes more important and the effort feels there even with slower paces as evidenced by my HR. And it also seems to be easier to manage HR in terms of caps. But it also lands in my back, neck, shoulders in such a way as to make me wonder if there is a limit - like should every other day be softer strokes. What advice would you veterans provide to a short, fat 54 year old who is trying to get fitter? I am really liking trying to get my power per stroke higher and proportional across the rates.

17 is proberly a bit low, maybe stay in the 18/21 zone. This work is much tougher than free rate work. It did hurt my shoulders this year.
Do don,t overdo it and keep the paces doable. If needed do parts of your training at a softer stroke.

If you don,t do any other work don,t expect this to translate directly to 2k work, it won,t. If you do a long block of endurance work you need time to transfer that to anaerobic speeds.

I myself am no fan of completely ignoring faster work. I would advice to do one longer free rate piece a week. Caped at 85/90%. And also do some, very relax sprintwork. Sprintwork means alactic, so very short and low volume in reps. But it keep fast fibers alive. Us older guys should be very carefull with neglecting speed.

Re 500 meter, low rate work like this ofcourse does nothing for your speed. Its aerobic training.

Several individuals who post here from time to time are doing low rate, slow pace, high volume training as an experiment to see the impact on 2K performance. It will be interesting to see how it turns out, if they do, in fact, stick with that regimen. And I agree, we can all have different purposes. Perhaps such a regimen is a proven winner for one's orientation. We don't all have to get caught up in the "faster is better" syndrome.

Henry, that's just what my intuition says. I can believe, from an impact standpoint, it could cause damage if done too much and at more power. My back and neck tell me so. It is addictive - powering the pedals feels very productive and I know it is helping my stroke get better - but not worth getting hurt over. I'm also doing one sprint session a week to stay in touch with speed and higher rate too. And obviously the speed work would increase if a test was on the horizon, which right now it's not.

Isn't this whole line of thinking one of the primary principles of the Wolverine Plan? High volume @ 16-24 spm, leavened with regular speed & speed endurance workouts. The scales tilt toward low-rate volume at the start of the season and gradually tip to include more speed as the racing season wears on.

Plenty of value in low-rate work, it seems. Nothing wrong with any long SS work, at any rate, so no need to condemn one style or another. Right?

-- Mike

How about trying Wolverine L4 for power/endurance? There are built-in governors on stroke force therein; not the same as endurance at peak power. Almost afraid to say anything about L4; don't want MC descending on the whirlwind to wreak correction on my folly!

@ Mike Adkerg. You were first on the buzzer and to you falls the honor of holding the line when Cavendish appears and splits the very air asunder with the Jovian thunderbolts of authorial intention.

jackarabit wrote:@ Mike Adkerg. You were first on the buzzer and to you falls the honor of holding the line when Cavendish appears and splits the very air asunder with the Jovian thunderbolts of authorial intention.

Indeed--I wrote my post fully aware of the doom that may descend upon my insignificant EQ (erg quotient). But, that's how I have interpreted the plan, and used it.

Incidentally, tried my first 30' r20 test today after doing a bunch of low-rate stuff since CRASH-B's. Tough, but I see the value, I think, in doing this kind of stuff a long way away from my next round of races.

-- Mike