Concept2 Forum

I'm hoping to get low 7:30s or even break 7:30 in a 2k test on Wednesday, but I've never been good on planning out how to pace for something like this. I'm a small guy, so i don't know if that has to do with pacing at all.

I'm trying to figure out whether my first 500 should be something fairly fast, like 1:49s or if I should just hold a steady 1:50/51 for the first 1500 then pick it up in the end?

It really depends on who you are. For example: I used to hold a steady pace throughout the whole test and then i tried to go out fast and slowly let the split creep up and I found out I go faster that way. Other rowers I know do just the opposite. You're going to have to use trial and error for this one. Good luck

A couple people I know like the fly & die technique (their 1st 500 is about 2-3sec lower than their average). Me personally, I take about 2 strokes and get right into my 2k pace and keep it til the last 500. Its a personal taste thing I guess.

hmm i prefer to go 130%(as hard as possible power 5 I guess) for the first 5 strokes or so, then I like to just settle into my desired split range and hold it like a bat out of hell.

Adrenaline wrote:I'm hoping to get low 7:30s or even break 7:30 in a 2k test on Wednesday, but I've never been good on planning out how to pace for something like this. I'm a small guy, so i don't know if that has to do with pacing at all.

I'm trying to figure out whether my first 500 should be something fairly fast, like 1:49s or if I should just hold a steady 1:50/51 for the first 1500 then pick it up in the end?

Remember that you only have to average 1:52.5 to hit 7:30. I would settle into my planned pace after 100 m or so, keep to it and then hit my sprint at about 200 to go.

Treat it as a set piece, not a race and stick to your plan. Learn from whatever happens.

Good luck

Adrenaline wrote:I'm trying to figure out whether my first 500 should be something fairly fast, like 1:49s or if I should just hold a steady 1:50/51 for the first 1500 then pick it up in the end?

One thing for sure, it certainly feels a lot better to finish strong at the end of a piece than to die at the end. It really will depend on you and how you "work" mentally. If it were me, I would negative split it as:

500 1:54
500 1:53
500 1:52
500 1:51

If you really have a shot at 1:52.5, the first 500 will be easy after your first three or four strokes. The hardest will probably the the third piece and the last 100 you might even pull the occasional 1:48 or 1:49.

For what it's worth. Good luck tomorrow.

this may sound ridiculous, but go mad in the first 500, slow down steadily in the second one, up it slightly in the third one and then go ballistic in the last one. If youy do this you will get a sick time.

leviathan wrote:this may sound ridiculous, but go mad in the first 500, slow down steadily in the second one, up it slightly in the third one and then go ballistic in the last one. If youy do this you will get a sick time.

That's the classic fly and die approach to 2K. The mad first 500 will fill your legs with lactic acid and you'll struggle to finish the piece.

A more sensible approach (given to me by Mike Caviston on the old forum) is 800m @ RP+1, 600m @ RP, 400m @ RP -1, 200m @ RP -2 [where RP is the race pace you're trying to achieve]

So for a 2K in 7mins you'd row 800@1:46, 600@1:45, 400@1:44 and blast 200m for the finish @ 1:43.

The other sensible approach is simply to hold steady for 1800m @ RP then blast for the finish in the last 200m.

Thanks you guys for all your help.

I think that tomorrow I'm going to start out fairly fast, maybe 1 split lower than I want. Then, I'll stay at pace until I sprint.

I'll post tomorrow after the test with my score!

Adrenaline:

Consider what Mike Caviston, world record holder and exercise physiologist, has written about how to pace a race (slightly edited):

"Fly-and-die is just not a smart way to approach a race. It is usually employed by athletes who are inexperienced, who don’t have a realistic sense of their current abilities, or who allow themselves to be overwhelmed by the excitement of competition. The physiological consequence is to accelerate the accumulation of fatiguing metabolic byproducts of intense muscular contraction (LACT, NH3, K+, etc.), resulting in severe discomfort and the inability to hold the desired pace

The idea that there are “free” strokes anywhere in a 2K is a common misconception among the rowing community. Anyone with even a rudimentary understanding of physics and thermodynamics should recognize this is impossible. Starting a race with several intense, sub-race-pace strokes will probably utilize the muscles’ ready supply of phosphagens (ATP & phosphocreatine). Some people figure, what does it matter when I use my phosphagen stores? It’s anaerobic anyway, so I may as well use them at the start of the race to get a good position in the first 500m, rather than use them to sprint at the end. This thinking is incorrect. After a few seconds (when phosphagen stores are depleted) the muscles support intense contractions by rapidly breaking down glycogen into pyruvate. This rapid or “anaerobic” glycolysis results in the release of hydrogen ions (H+) that must be buffered, resulting in the formation of lactate, and the resulting decrease in muscle pH is a contributing factor to fatigue. So far I’m sure everyone is nodding their head saying, “Uh-huh, I know that, so what?” The “so what” is that the rapidity of glycolysis is accelerated by the feed-forward signals resulting from the overly-intense, sub-race-pace strokes that start the race. In other words, if you plan to race at a 1:40 pace and take off at a 1:27 pace, your muscles don’t know that you intend to slow up in a few strokes. They immediately jump into action and rapidly break down glycogen to liberate as much immediate energy as possible, and the signal doesn’t immediately stop when you settle into your planned race pace. The result is a much greater initial rise in lactate. Furthermore, phosphagen compounds help buffer decreasing muscle pH, so it is ill-advised to deplete them early. I don’t know about you, but racing for me is tough enough already without dragging the albatross of increased lactate accumulation into the second 500m, so I prefer to start more conservatively.

Now, some coaches will encourage a young/inexperienced athlete to start hard with the hope that they will discover some hidden gear and perform at a level they didn’t think was possible. Unfortunately, a likely result is the athlete will have such an unpleasant experience that they develop a mental block against racing hard, and it may be a long, long time before they reach their true potential.

The even-split approach to racing makes the most sense from a purely mechanical standpoint. Consider the hypothetical example of covering 2000m with an average pace of 1:36 either by holding a steady 1:36 pace for the entire distance, or covering half with a 1:35 pace and half with a 1:37 pace. Either method would result in a 6:24 2K, but because of the cubic relationship between velocity and power, and the proportionately greater energy cost of the 1:35 pace, more total energy is expended with the uneven pace. If an athlete is truly performing at maximum capacity, the less efficient pacing results in a slower time. If you actually calculate the energy difference with this hypothetical example, you might be tempted to say the difference is pretty trivial, but I say even a fraction of a second is significant. And the greater the variation in pace during the race, the greater the amount of energy lost. So logically it must be concluded that the most effective race strategy would be to hold an even pace from start to finish.

But I don’t race that way. I prefer to start at a pace slower than my overall goal pace. But it’s also important to recognize that any strokes slower than your true potential represent lost time that can never be made up, no matter how fast you row later in the race. So you can’t take it too easy either, and that presents a real quandary. On the one hand, you risk going too hard and burning out too soon, and on the other you risk getting too far behind your optimal pace. It’s a fine line to tread, but with enough training and racing experience as well as a little common sense, I think anyone can create an effective race strategy.
I think the optimal pacing strategy for a 2K race is pretty close to:
800m (40%) @ GP +1; 600m (30%) @ GP; 400m (20%) @ GP – 1; and 200m (10%) @ GP – 2. [GP = Goal Pace, so to row 2K in 6:24, row the first 800m @ 1:37, the next 600m @ 1:36, the next 400m @ 1:35, and the final 200m @ 1:34.]"

I totaly agree with your science.

After doing 9, 2k ergos a week i started to notice holding a steady pace the whole way works and to pull your ass off in the last 500 to try and break times.

j

GREAT JOB!!!!

Adrenaline wrote:7:33.1

I'm verryy happy. For a guy my size, 120 lbs, with a few months experence, i think it's pretty good.

Basically, I held 1:52s for the first 1500 and then 1:53/1:54 in the last 500. I had nothing left to sprint with.

Very, very good.

Well done. Having just come across this thread my twopence worth is that even if I pull a steady pace throughout, my sprint at the end will only maintain the current pace, not lower it all.

Steady pace is the way to go for me I think. I have found some benefit in doing 1500s at race pace, say 1:52.5 and resisting the temptation to speed up at the end. Just row it steady state and mentally you know that you can get another 500 in, even if you have to throw the *** DELETE - SPAM *** sink at it

John