Concept2 Forum

Me? Negative always...out of trepidation! I like to feel comfortable(ish) for the majority of the session and then really ramp it up towards the end. Can't think of anything worse than getting time "in the bank" and then holding on. I've noticed "Remi" on here tends to do that....

All my 2k+ pb's have been set with a negative split, normally with a big sprint at the end (500m or less to go). I tend to go out too conservative (or turgid) so for my last pb a 10k I was 15 seconds over 40:00 pace 4000m in. My last 1000m was done at 1:55.3 pace with the last pulls being 1:46, to finish in 39:58.9.

For my shorter intervals (<1k) I tend to go off too hard, and then have to slow down to hit my target time, although I am getting better at that by working out my target finish time before hand so I can aim for that rather than a 500 split.

If you always can negative split you are never fully going 100%, we never now at forhand what we will pull, so if we start slow enough to always negative split, we are holding back.

Re question, depending on my mindset, but most often my splits are from slow to fast. Third 25% slowest, last 25 the fastest, first quarter second fastest and second quarter third

3,2,1,4 with often a fast sprint.

On 500 and below, hanging on, last bit always the slowest, although I try to prevent that.

Talking about hard rows, steady stuff mostly very flat.

2K and over I like to see goal pace average early in a row. If it feels good I can sit at that pace and it if's going well bring it down at the end. If the going is a bit lumpy then the pace can drift up in the middle part of the row. I'll look to start bringing the split down at half distance+1K and if it's still going well hammer the last 1K.

Exception being an all out 2K where again I like to see goal pace average early on but what happens at the end is anyone's guess

For shorter distances(up to 10k) I have a plan on splits. They should be the same from start to finish. I promise myself not to start to quick...but while doing the first split I notice to often that I like to gain some spare seconds. If that's the case quitting on my 3e quarter crosses my mind a lot and the pace is decreasing. When I servive that, I'm often able to win back the lost seconds of the third. But I dislike it, dislike it! The best performances until now...I'm a newbie, are not these.

It's a scientific fact that the most efficient way to do it is hold the same pace for the entire duration. That works fine for machines. in longer pieces, it takes me a while (500-1000m) to get my body working and the breathing settled in, so I tend to start a second or so slower than my goal pace. (After a 5 stroke hard start to bank a few seconds, that is). Then see how I feel when I'm into it, holding near my goal pace. Always sprint at the end (250-500m). So I guess I'm a negative splitter, but with a goal pace I try to stay close to, knowing the physics.

Best tactic in racing is to go off quickish to force the others to do the same, but cool it soon, even before 400m in. With any luck they will then continue to go fast to get ahead, and will blow up in the third 500. Then all we have to do is cruise past them, may not even need to wind it up in the last 500, tho we usually do anyway. Weightlifters are good at falling into this trap.

Cyclist2 wrote:It's a scientific fact that the most efficient way to do it is hold the same pace for the entire duration. That works fine for machines. in longer pieces, it takes me a while (500-1000m) to get my body working and the breathing settled in, so I tend to start a second or so slower than my goal pace. (After a 5 stroke hard start to bank a few seconds, that is). Then see how I feel when I'm into it, holding near my goal pace. Always sprint at the end (250-500m). So I guess I'm a negative splitter, but with a goal pace I try to stay close to, knowing the physics.

Warm up is not good when you need a "warm up" in the piece itself.

remisture wrote:I think my PRs are so close to my max that a slow start makes it impossible to catch up the lost meters in the end.

Dangerous place to be when you don't feel like there's much more headroom over an above what you've already achieved. In reality though I think v few of us get that close.

The OP probably is not aware that this question has generated fierce discussion through the years on this forum.

Then there is the question about what is best for what level of athlete? Do/should elites use the same tactics as us lesser folks.

Also, I've seen where the exact same data, let's say by Olympic competitors for which such data is available, draws exactly different conclusions. Now that is strange.

I think it also depends on one's training and conditioning. It is difficult to start fast and hang on. I would say that only the extremely fit can do that. And it hurts more. But as stated, time lost at the start is hard to make up.

Even pace with a push at the end.

Cyclingman1 wrote:Also, I've seen where the exact same data, let's say by Olympic competitors for which such data is available, draws exactly different conclusions. Now that is strange.

At Olympic level I imagine the mind games involved in "psych out the opposition in this race" vs "psych out (in?) me in this ergo session" will lead you to different pacing strategies for a medal or a PB. Don't think that changes for mere mortals either.

George

georgeed wrote:

Cyclingman1 wrote:Also, I've seen where the exact same data, let's say by Olympic competitors for which such data is available, draws exactly different conclusions. Now that is strange.

At Olympic level I imagine the mind games involved in "psych out the opposition in this race" vs "psych out (in?) me in this ergo session" will lead you to different pacing strategies for a medal or a PB. Don't think that changes for mere mortals either.

George

Water involves other factors, waves, wind, current, so a certain start can hinder the competition, a TT on the erg has non of that. Otw boats are often within a few seconds, so a little edge can make the difference between winning and not even on the podium.

Gammmmo wrote:

remisture wrote:I think my PRs are so close to my max that a slow start makes it impossible to catch up the lost meters in the end.

Dangerous place to be when you don't feel like there's much more headroom over an above what you've already achieved. In reality though I think v few of us get that close.

Stick around 2 years and read this again

hjs wrote:

georgeed wrote:

Cyclingman1 wrote:Also, I've seen where the exact same data, let's say by Olympic competitors for which such data is available, draws exactly different conclusions. Now that is strange.

At Olympic level I imagine the mind games involved in "psych out the opposition in this race" vs "psych out (in?) me in this ergo session" will lead you to different pacing strategies for a medal or a PB. Don't think that changes for mere mortals either.

George

Water involves other factors, waves, wind, current, so a certain start can hinder the competition, a TT on the erg has non of that. Otw boats are often within a few seconds, so a little edge can make the difference between winning and not even on the podium.

Massed start racing very different to time trialling. Beating the opposition doesn't mean you have to beat the clock.

But it helps to be faster than the rest.