13 Weeks and Counting

[Laura]

Post removed

[dmthree]

You are in such a great spot to be in training wise - you have 13 weeks, you are young and you're TALL. I'm only 5'8" and what I would have given anything to be your height when I was in college.
So the big questions...do you have a heart rate monitor? How long are you willing to remain on an erg? Are you doing this in a health club or at home? And what are you willing to do off erg?
13 minutes at 2:20 is a great place to start but a 13 minute piece for a collegiate rower at sea level and your height, I would expect to cover 3500 meters or a little over 2 miles.
I would say that your first big goal over the next 3 weeks is to up your minutes on the erg. Try to alternate steady state 30-40 minute rows at a 70-75% heart rate ((206-2/3 age) x 70% or 75%) with interval workouts that will take you through 30 minutes (5 min warmup 20 minute interval training 5 min cooldown). Concept 2 has some great training workouts in their library for beginners. I have some good ones too, if you want.
Off erg, if you have the time, Yoga, Pilates, sculpting weight classes and good old fashioned situps and pushups can make a nice difference for you. The goal for your height isn't weight loss, it's weight reshaping. Muscle weighs 3 times more than fat so you will find that a stonger, fitter 150 is actually darn skinny at 6' tall.
Make sure you keep eating well as I have found for me that the amount of sugar and fat I eat seems to affect my body fat percentage fairly negatively.
Good luck!
DM

[Bob S.]

Muscle weighs 3 times more than fat so you will find that a stonger, fitter 150 is actually darn skinny at 6' tall. ;-)
DM

!!! 3 times!?! Where on earth did you come up with that ridiculous figure. My own guess would be a density of a little over 1 g/ml for muscle and a little under for fats. A quick Google check on this confirmed my guess with the actual figures being 1.06 g/ml for muscle and 0.9 g/ml for fats. So muscle is just under 1.2 times as heavy as fat — a long way from 3.

Bob S.

[dmthree]

sorry, old myth that gets passed around the gym some times. guess i should've checked first
- but i do know that 150 at six feet tall and in shape looks a lot thinner than out of shape - don't you agree? Most of my college teammates who were six feet tall and 160 were very attractive. I had one teammate who was six feet and 132 and you could count her ribs (not attractive). So, begs the question - from a training perspective - would you encourage some one to diet to lose the weight at that frame (6'...150lbs) or to eat healthy and focus on good solid training?
Even Haas - the dietitian who wrote Eat to Win (and happens to be Lance Armstrong's dietitian) says losing more than 2 lbs a week will interfere with performance. You still have to have the fuel to train.
So not trying to pass around bad info - just trying to encourage some one to train in a healthy manner.
DM

[Bob S.]

sorry, old myth that gets passed around the gym some times. guess i should've checked first
So not trying to pass around bad info - just trying to encourage some one to train in a healthy manner.
DM

DM,

I apologize for coming on too blunt there. My only excuse is that I was going through the accumulated mail after a long and tiring trip. After 30 years or so of grading chemistry papers, old habits sneak in and trigger off reactions. I could have and should have been a little more diplomatic about it.

Your point was well taken, that muscle tissue is heavier than fat — skinny swimmers have to work hard just to stay on the surface. That factor of three, which I have seen a number of times before, is probably just a little gym hyperbole trying to emphasize the point.

Bob S., the old grump

[Laura]

post removed

[Laura]

So the big questions...do you have a heart rate monitor? How long are you willing to remain on an erg? Are you doing this in a health club or at home? And what are you willing to do off erg?

DM

Well, as stated above, I got the lower back ache, rested a few days, became lazy, and haven't been on the erg for about 2 - 3 weeks now. However, I still have been going to the gym 4 - 6 days a week and doing 40 min cario sessions with weight lifting afterwards.

I am eager to get back on the erg.
I really like the post in the Training Forum about 30 minute ergs. One of the members thinks he's a "Whimp" because he has such a hard time with the 20 - 30 minutes. That's how I feel.

To answer your question:
I don't have a heartrate monitor for the erg. I am good about checking my heartrate when I'm on the elliptical though, and I can pretty accurately judge when I'm in a good heartrate zone. I also am a poor college student and can't afford a monitor. (My boyfriend has one and swears by it though).

I am willing to remain on the erg for awhile. I am EXTREMELY competitive, but tend to bash myself up if I dont row my personal best every time. Hence the reason I have a hard time getting past about 16 minutes (where I stopped last time). It is both my mind and body that gives in and gives up.
I have never been a very good athlete, and althought rowing personal bests, I am still "bad" compared to most others. For instance, my best mile time ever (Running), was 9 minutes flat...... ya! It's disheartening to not be able to even get close to "rowing with the best"

I am rowing at my universities gym. I am willing to get off the erg, and for the past few weeks have been doing a combination of running, tiny bits of rowing, cycling and running on an eliptical - all for about 40 minutes total. I have also begun to lift weights (mostly upper body to balance out the cardio) and do crunches hanging from a bar and lifting my knees to my chest (not making much of an impact now my diet has become a bit worse as well as not being on the erg )

!!! That was alot to soak in

Responses greatly appreciated.

XX

[dmthree]

Hey Laura -
I know what you mean about food, but eating well will help you heal faster and also help with that "sexy" energy you will need in 9 weeks
Sounds like your off erg workouts are really good. Again alternate hard/ easy and you will actually accomplish more sooner.
Some things that might help you get to that 30 minute mark sooner:
-When i have a long slow piece i row to some really relaxing music.
-Long slow distance allows me to review my technique and build my aerobic base. (If you can make it 40 minutes on the eliptical you can definitely do 30 minutes on the erg)
-Try what i like to call heartrate intervals first. 6 minutes of work 2 minutes of rest. the ideal is 75% effort. (There was this book awhile back by Phillip Maffetone and he had a great suggestion of instead of doing all of the fancy math try 180-age for a good ballpark aerobic heartrate (i use 6 seconds of counting my pulse and just multiply the # by 10)).
-Set the monitor so that you get avg /500. That way you will be able to figure out what pace you need to row on your 6 minute piece.
-Row your first 6 minute piece then check your heartrate right away. if you are in your 20's then 150's are your target heartrate. If you are in the 160's (or higher) then slow down your pace, if you are in the 130's then pick it up. worry about your heart rate not if you are pulling a 2:20 or not.
-see if you can do 3 intervals first
FOR YOUR BACK
-Check your resistance. Some Nationally ranked athletes train at at 2 or 3 because they are focused on aerobic base. my guess is a 3-5 should be your max. if your back is tweaked try a 3 or 2.
-Check your feet. Are you using your whole foot or the ball of your foot? A friend of mine taught me to use my whole foot at the catch and really focus on feeling the stroke in my quads and glutes (jeans muscles)

-Think of a waltz. beat 1 is the catch and drive all together, beat 2 is the finish and hands away, beat 3 is the rest of the slide.
-Lastly, do your weights and your off erg until your back is all healed and just go easy when you are on the erg so you don't aggravate anything.
REMEMBER< YOU ARE DOING AWESOME>
Change is never easy and you are in a great habit of exercising. Don't worry about being a wimp...you are making great progress by being in the gym regularly!!!
o:-)

[Bob S.]

There was this book awhile back by Phillip Maffetone and he had a great suggestion of instead of doing all of the fancy math try 180-age for a good ballpark aerobic heartrate.

Whoa! That one would certainly knock me out of any real erging. It puts me at an HR of 97, which wouldn't even bring out a sweat.

I had been doing sets in which I regularly get up into the 150s. My current "cardiologist" consists of any one of a group of 18 based in an office in Reno. Once a week one of them flies down with a crew of assistants to treat patients in our small, isolated community. This chore is rotated amongst the physicians on the staff, so I never know which one it is going to be. One of them was rather hesitant about giving an O.K. to take my HR to 140 and above. However, in an appointment today that was complete with an echocardiogram, I was told that getting up into the 150s was O.K. as long as I wasn't feeling any stress — like chest pains. With that encouragement, I did a 60' piece today and it got my HR well into the 150s for most of the piece. For the curious, I have posted details under the thread "the long road back."

There is one formula for HR max that seems to fit me fairly well. It is 205—age/2. This would come to 163 1/2, so getting up into the 150s is sub-max — well, not by much, but it seems to have been a reasonable limit.

I am not quite sure what the author meant by an aerobic heart rate, but I assume he means one that can be sustained at a steady state for a reasonable length of time, like 15' or more. If that is the case, the mid 150s works for me. In a recent 30' time trial, I got to 152 after 2 minutes of the piece and it stayed between 153 and 158 for the last 27 minutes.

Bob S.

[dmthree]

I've also heard of the current formulas, but for some one in their 20's Maffetone's formula is a great way to get them to a similar number without trying to sit there working out the fancy formulas. And I am talking a sustainable of 30-60 minutes, which a lot of doctors really prefer a 140-150 range depending on your level of fitness, even when some one is in their 20's to 30's. Also, Maffetone also had about a 15 beat diferential to factor in wellness versus fitness but since we are dealing with a healthy, twenty something, Maffetone's formula would be a simple means for some one to calculate a basic sustainable, aerobic not anaerobic threshhold (not max). The number you are talking about is one's absolute max that beyond which a doctor would prefer some one not working out at due to excessive strain on the heart. If you are working out close to your max heartrate, that is a say 85% to 90% workout that would be great for endurance and lactose tolerance training. I am talking about Long, Slow Distance which is just as important in that it allows one to have recovery days while still fatburning. By staying in a 50-75% range, you can start to see improvements in aerobic base where to body is burning fat instead of sugar. A combination of aerobic vs. anaerobic workouts is important to any collegiate or olympic training program, so I would think that there would be great applications for the larger population. Alternating hard and easy allows our friend here to keep up her hard workout days with cardio and weights, and slowly build back here confidence on the erg without tearing her back apart.
DM
P.S. You know, I am enjoying feeling challenged here. It's like being in school again only with more significant repercussions.
P.P.S. add 5-15 beats to your 180-your age and (5 for being fit, 5 for being healthy, and 5 if you are doing something you've done for a long time and you should get an aerobic number that you would be able to sustain for 30-60 minutes, same ideal as a 50 - 75% heartrate workout.
P.P.P.S. Bob- Are you really 83? That is awesome!!!!!

[Laura]

post removed

[Bob S.]

P.P.P.S. Bob- Are you really 83?

Yeah, I showed up on this planet in 1924 and started rowing in 1932.

I was aware that Maffetone's formula referred to an aerobic pace, not a maximum like the other formulas. The problem is that calling it aerobic is a bit ambiguous. I have heard it claimed that it is necessary to work at at least 80% of HR max for at least 30 minutes to have a training effect. That was a physician's recommendation based on some research that was reported a few years ago (4 or 5?). I have heard that this has been further revised to at least 60 minutes — continuous. Maffetone's recommendation falls far short of that for just about anyone. 50% to 75% of max seems awfully low.

The age and condition based HR max formulas and estimates are all flawed as far as I am concerned. It seems to me that the only sure way for any individual to find his or her max is to do it the hard way by working out at an increasing load until it can no longer be increased. I haven't felt the motivation to go through such a grueling experience, so I am just guessing that my max must be just a few beats higher the HR that I see in my long steady state workouts. Since I have done some of these in the mid 150s, I assume that my max is over 160 and perhaps over 170.

Bob S.

[dmthree]

Hey Bob and Laura -
Sorry to be gone so long - crazy October. Heart rate training is such an interesting debate. My understanding is similar to yours, Bob, to actually find your true heartrates they would have to hook you up and measure Oxygen usage compared to heart rate. One thing I have found useful with heartrate training is it guarentees my teens recovery days. By mixing it up I find fewer injuries seem to occur. Strength building relies hearvily on the recovery and refueling that you give your muscles between workouts. I also find that low heart rate workouts mixed in with higher heart rate work outs build confidence. Sometimes that intangible is what can allow some one to work harder at a longer distance because they know they can get there. One thing I am finding in rowing though, is it does remind me a lot of training for middle distance in track. Middle distance runners do best on a training program that has 2 hard days to every easy day. Heart rate training does force you to truly respect where your body is at and to truly take an easy day while still burning calories.
At least, that is my opinion based on my research and some emperical evidence. Granted my personal experience is not as extensive as yours, Bob
Take care,
DM