CRASH B's 55-59LWT Race Report

[Edward4492]

You're right Jim.....I'm not sure myself at this point. Two things I am sure of, I started doing speed work way too early (in November) and had my best time of the season (7:06) the day after New Years. Also concerned about the weight I shed prior to "B"s. I have the reverse problem of most people, once it starts coming off it just falls off. Weighing in 5lbs under the limit may be giving away too much. Also, as a point of reference, I pulled 6:59 in the gym, not during a competition. And......this is key. It came after an eight week block of doing four 15k rows per week followed by three weeks of speed work.

I sometimes wonder if that 6:59 was a complete outlier, perfect storm type of thing. But prior to that I had pulled a 7:03 and a 7:01, all gym PR's. Again as a point of reference my best ever time at a public event at a race was 7:05.8. This season 7:07.9,709.4, 7:08.9, and 7:13.0; then yesterday 7:11.5. I'm pretty sure I would have gone under 7:10 if I had played it safe, but I made a conscious decision to race aggressively. What good would another 7:08 do me? .

With all of that said, this is a perfect time to test the high volume approach. I'm going to give it a shot in March and April, a solid eight weeks. The new ranking season begins in May. Why not? I have nothing to lose. I certainly won't get less fit, maybe a little slower (going backwards right now as it is). Then I'll see what kind of results when I start ranking the shorter speed pieces.

I'll be racing 60-64LWT next year, that class got fast in the top three. Tom Phillips is un beatable (by me) if he stays healthy. The Danes came over this year and raised some hell (65-69LWT WR 6:51.7). In my new class Per Amby pulled a 6:58. for Silver. But it's not linear, 55-59LWT had nowhere near the competition that was there last year. It ebbs and flows.

Quick side note, I spoke with Tom and asked about his training. He was doing lots of volume. Food for thought.

[Bob S.]

But prior to that I had pulled a 7:03 and a 7:01, all gym PR's. Again as a point of reference my best ever time at a public event at a race was 7:05.8. This season 7:07.9,709.4, 7:08.9, and 7:13.0; then yesterday 7:11.5.

The venue-racing start itself costs a big part of a second. I think that hjs once quoted a more exact estimate of the time lost between Ready - Row and the actual start of the wheel. It is even costlier, relatively, for races shorter than 2k. Same amount of time lost, but a bigger percent of the total. If and when the 100m and 1' become a regular part of the public indoor rowing events, it is my guess that any new WRs will be generated outside of those events for the most part.

Bob S.

[hjs]

Edward, you had no clue what you where worth on the 2k at forhand, cause you don,t do real predictive speed work, you do plenty but seldom the real deal. I think you should know at forhand what you can.
The races before did predict this outcome though, I get the sub 7 try and the racing for third, but the outcome was very logic.

Other point, in the bigger picture, the first half year, you should not worry at all about your 2k, work on whatever you want, but ignore looking at the 2k.

Third, you have a tendency to row at round numbers. 2.00/20 for example. This is clearly wrong, you need to find out what paces you need. Those will be seldom round numbers.

For the rest, you seem to enjoy training very much, focus on that and general health ofcourse. Those are the most important.

[Citroen]

Well done Ed. Nice write-up you'll be pushing our usual journalist (Rick Bayko) off his compositing stool soon.

Should I start some very serious training (and weight loss back to LWT) and join you in the 55-59LWTs in 2018?

[Yankeerunner]

Well done Ed. Nice write-up you'll be pushing our usual journalist (Rick Bayko) off his compositing stool soon.

Should I start some very serious training (and weight loss back to LWT) and join you in the 55-59LWTs in 2018?

Ed's reports are great, and it's good that we are in different divisions so that more races are covered between us. Truth be told though, we both pale in comparison to the entertaining tales that DP (Parky, Dave Parkinson) used to post when he was still active. He set a standard that is hard to top. I miss his contributions.

[Cyclingman1]

Edward, you had no clue what you where worth on the 2k at forhand, cause you don,t do real predictive speed work, you do plenty but seldom the real deal. I think you should know at forhand what you can.
The races before did predict this outcome though

It seems to me that Ed did quite a bit of predictive rowing in the weeks leading up to Crash-B. Of course, they are subject to interpretation. Also, a decent row one day, does not mean something good is going to happen a couple of days later, although that is one aim of training.

[hjs]

Edward, you had no clue what you where worth on the 2k at forhand, cause you don,t do real predictive speed work, you do plenty but seldom the real deal. I think you should know at forhand what you can.
The races before did predict this outcome though

It seems to me that Ed did quite a bit of predictive rowing in the weeks leading up to Crash-B. Of course, they are subject to interpretation. Also, a decent row one day, does not mean something good is going to happen a couple of days later, although that is one aim of training.

There we differ. I know in advance if I do well or not. Sickness excluded. Always been that way. I never/seldom really surpriced myself. Even in events which are very sudden. Like jumping or trowing. Training at forhand was very telling.

They way I have seen edwards training and certainly the interpretation is different. If I had to bet, I would not given him a sub 7. Not even near. To me 4/6 seconds on a 2k is a very big difference.

[ArmandoChavezUNC]

The venue-racing start itself costs a big part of a second. I think that hjs once quoted a more exact estimate of the time lost between Ready - Row and the actual start of the wheel. It is even costlier, relatively, for races shorter than 2k. Same amount of time lost, but a bigger percent of the total. If and when the 100m and 1' become a regular part of the public indoor rowing events, it is my guess that any new WRs will be generated outside of those events for the most part.

Bob S.

I was wondering about this during/after my race this weekend. I had a pretty quick start (you can see the replay with splits online) and was pulling in the low 1:20s within 2 strokes and then slowly brought it up to my race pace at about 10 strokes in. I noticed, however, that on the erg my average was a 1:36.0 (!!!) even after I had spent almost 10 seconds at splits way below that. It was disconcerting, to be sure, but you don't get too much time to think about it.

Later after the race I was wondering if it was due to my reaction time from the start command to when I actually started pulling. At least it affects everyone equally.

[Cyclingman1]

If I had to bet, I would not given him a sub 7. Not even near. To me 4/6 seconds on a 2k is a very big difference.

Well, I think that is/was fairly evident.

[hjs]

If I had to bet, I would not given him a sub 7. Not even near. To me 4/6 seconds on a 2k is a very big difference.

Well, I think that is/was fairly evident.

Yes, but not to Edward, erging is simple, no surprices.

[Yankeerunner]

The venue-racing start itself costs a big part of a second. I think that hjs once quoted a more exact estimate of the time lost between Ready - Row and the actual start of the wheel. It is even costlier, relatively, for races shorter than 2k. Same amount of time lost, but a bigger percent of the total. If and when the 100m and 1' become a regular part of the public indoor rowing events, it is my guess that any new WRs will be generated outside of those events for the most part.

Bob S.

I was wondering about this during/after my race this weekend. I had a pretty quick start (you can see the replay with splits online) and was pulling in the low 1:20s within 2 strokes and then slowly brought it up to my race pace at about 10 strokes in. I noticed, however, that on the erg my average was a 1:36.0 (!!!) even after I had spent almost 10 seconds at splits way below that. It was disconcerting, to be sure, but you don't get too much time to think about it.

Later after the race I was wondering if it was due to my reaction time from the start command to when I actually started pulling. At least it affects everyone equally.

At a race the timing starts on the word ROW, whereas without the racing start the monitor doesn't recognize the first drive but begins recording by measuring the deceleration of the flywheel on the first recovery (I'm pretty sure that's how it works). Therefore no matter how quick someone is at timing the word ROW they will never have that advantage of the time it takes to do a free first drive.

Since the PM4 came out and had the race software (go to Games, Racing, and set it up) I've used it for all of my home time trials at 500m, 1000m, and 2K so that it doesn't shock me at CRASH-Bs I still hate having it take so long to get down to the average pace I want, but it doesn't shock me any more.

[Bob S.]

@Rick: Thanks for clarifying the bit about the race start feature on the PM4. I was vaguely aware that it was reported to have that and may have even looked at it early on when I first got the PM4 that came with my dynamic (3-4 years ago). But its didn't stick in my mind and I could only think of the availability of that feature on RowPro.

Bob S.

[Edward4492]

I feel a need to respond. Not sure were sub 7 came from.........I never mentioned any recent efforts in that range nor am I anywhere near that right now. Been there once before and I will train to get back there. Henry, I knew exactly what I was capable of, recent training predicted a possible best of 7:07 to 7:08. So far this year I pulled 7:06 (in practice), 7:07.9, 7:09.4, 7:08.9, and 7:13.0 all in competition. I had no reason to just row for a seasons best and a 4th,5th, or 6th place when there was a potential medal to be had. The two guys who finished ahead of me were guys I was very close to and I felt I had a chance. I made a conscious decision to stay with these guys and in retrospect it was EXACTLY the correct thing to do in the context of a race. The splits speak for themselves. I went too hard to sustain the pace at my current level of fitness...pretty simple. If I had paced properly; nice safe and conservative, and saw the bronze medal won at 7:06.5 I'd be wondering forever "what if I'd just tried a little harder". I certainly wasn't reckless, but I was obviously right on the edge the whole way and in the end (as Jim would say) reality won out. Zero regrets, I'd do it again tomorrow. None of this is conjecture, if you're bored outta your mind you can watch the race replay; it was touch and go for the first 1500m.

With that said Henry I appreciate yours (and Jims) comments; several were particularly astute. You got me to thinking. I do have a very strong tendency to hang on round numbers (2:00, 200w etc). Like you said, why would a nice even number just happen to be the right one? Some food for thought. Also, dwelling on 2k a little too much. Right again. One thing you're right about.....I love to train. It's not something I have to force myself to do. Totally different approach this year and it's gonna start next week with big meters at a nice 70% HR cap that works out to around a 2:12 pace for me (see, I'm learning already, not an even number like 2:10 or 2:15). The more I read, the more it seems like this is the correct approach. I certainly came up short on the aerobic end on Sunday.

And for the record, I take none of this as personal insults. The observations are sometimes acerbic, but if I want platitudes I'll go elsewhere, I prefer the truth. If you want the glory when you perform at the highest level, ya gotta take the heat when ya don't.

[hjs]

Ed, I have no critic, I get it you went for the medal. If I where you I wouldn,t have done so, but thats me. To me it always better when I can pull back. And I think due to my technique (more lack off lol) I always have a fast last 100. Thats certainly not for everybody. My last 500 needs to be the fastest by a good margin, once I am in the red...


The sub 7 was just that,s what yo where training for. You knew that was not on this race.

Trainingwise I said during the year what my thoughts are. If thats something you can use. Thats to you to decide. It was J who reacted to me, it was not pointed so much to you.

[Edward4492]

Thanks Henry. I have my own ideas, but I'm open to suggestion. You made a lot of good points and have influenced (more than you think) my decisions moving forward with my training. It's tough, you have to commit to a method and it takes a long time and a lot of sweat and blood to find out what works. Which is in the end why we do it. Keep pushing the envelope.