New Wolverine Plan Thread

[pmacaula]

Reporting back after a week off with the flu and almost a week back on the WP. Restarted while still a bit plugged up, but was really not keen to take off more than a week.

L4s at the pre-flu volumes and target progression on pace have been fine. Did very nicely on a 2x(4x10') @ 19.2spm & 6' recovery, which is the longest L4 I have in the rotation.
The higher paced interval stuff has been a mess. Just don't seem to have the 'oomph' for the high intensity efforts at pre-flu levels. Somewhat discouraging having to back off in mid work-out, but better than handling down or bagging the workouts.

Given MC's comments about taking 3 weeks to get back to previous form, a smarter approach may have been to back off the pace for each workout to the one from two weeks before flu. Will try using paces from a week before flu this coming week & see if that works better.

Neil - on big drops in rating, have a similar issue. Find I can only really control one variable at a time. Takes a stroke or two to get to the new rate & then a stroke or two to get pace dialled in.

Bill - Am interested in the kind of weight exercises you do, the format & how you line them up against your WP sessions (i.e. only during L4 days or right after an L1 or ...).

Cheers. Patrick.

[NavigationHazard]

Cheers, if you're having trouble with 'big' rate changes you might want to consider practicising them for a session. Alternate r22 (or whatever) with r18 (or whatever) every minute or two just to get used to the transitions. Half the battle, I think, is anticipating the 'feel' of the next segment's stroke rate while you're finishing the one you're on.

[raymond.botha]

Hi All and Bill,

Last time we spoke was online training with rowpro, since then we've had a little boy while you've upped your count by three !

Also making a comeback like you.

Would anyone give me a quick crash course to WP.

ie.

L1 =
L2 =
L3 =
L4 =

I've read the thread in the past but am trying to avoid doing that again ...

My point of reference is just to go a step further than the 500 CAL erg sessions I've been doing for the past 3 months (strapless @ 22 SPM - have not noted rate just time / CAL so far so am ready to put some thinking behind what I'm doing as I'm feeling ready for a b it more discipline ... and would like to ultimately realize my sub 7 2k !

Thanks chaps, in case you all out enjoying your New Years celebrations - Happy New Year.

Ray

[Snail Space]

Would anyone give me a quick crash course to WP.

ie.

L1 =
L2 =
L3 =
L4 =

I've read the thread in the past but am trying to avoid doing that again

That might be a bit unrealistic; I think that if you really want to do WP training you have to have a fairly comprehensive understanding of the plan - both the composition of the sessions, and a feeling for its philosophy. Without that intimacy you may as well do one of the related but lesser training plans. The so-called Pete Plan is one of the more popular on the UK forum. The plan and notes are separately available. It is derived from WP but misses out important components, but if you don't want to commit to understanding the WP it may be your man.

... and would like to ultimately realize my sub 7 2k !

Have you been sub7 before, or is that [like mine], an aspiration?

Cheers
Dave

[raymond.botha]

Hi Dave,

Yes I know you're right, I've done the Pete Plan before (made good gains) and was around on the forum when the Wolverine Plan thread started. What I was trying to avoid was re-reading the thread but have since been sniffing around and came across this //www.concept2.com/forums/wolverine_plan.htm
which seems that someone helpful has cut and pasted this info into a more readable doc format ?
Anyway I've started re-reading it and found it quite motivating. I just didn't want to have to go through miles and miles of explanations but can see now its not as laborious as I remembered

I've not done a proper 2k yet Dave. My best 60min row was @ 1:58,7 pace. I then went all out another day doing a 2k but blew up and finished with a 7.25 odd time. My rating those days was always around 32 > SPM and with a lot of strapless training I've managed to feel quite at home with 22 SPM paces.

I used to have the mind set of always bettering my previous training piece's pace. That just led to burnout. Now that I'm fast approaching 44 I realize the body can't recover as easily as it used to ... Thats why I'm looking to do this with a more scientific approach

Like Bill I've found more time due to domestic / work time management restructuring and am keen to build up slowly with the end goal in mind.

What's your goals Dave ?

[Snail Space]

I've not done a proper 2k yet Dave. My best 60min row was @ 1:58,7 pace.

Oh, I think that you are ahead of me - my 60' PB pace was 1:59.7, and I only managed that once about 18 months ago.

What's your goals Dave ?

As a 51 yr old reformed fat, hypertensive boozer with a young family my goals are not performance related, but health motivated: keeping my weight and blood pressure under control are my main aims, but I would love to record just one sub-7 in the process. My best so far was 7:13, but that was 18 months ago (and on slides), so we'll see what we shall see.

If I can maintain the discipline to do a proper WP then I may incidentally hit the magic 7, but I'll have to pick up fitness after a slothful December first, so I'm commiting January to the Virtual Team Challenge with the Sub7 club [UK forum]. I hope to exceed 300,000 metres for the month, which should give my aerobic fitness a kick-start.

Cheers
Dave

[miep]

Hi all,

I've (34 M, 185lbs, 6'2) just started my third week into the Wolverine Plan. My last 2K was a year ago at 7:33; since then I've done a lot of actual OTW sculling. I didn't want to start erging right away with a 2K, so I eased into it with the 100K Holiday Erg Challenge, and started on the WP two weeks ago.

It's hard to guestimate a good reference pace; the one based on my 2K of last year seemed much too slow, I finished most workouts with ease, and significant better splits than I should. So I moved my ref pace up a bit, from 1:51 to 1:48; the adjectives describing the workouts now apply (L2 nasty, L3 doable, L4 challenging but recovering).

I have a few simple questions, and I'd like some feedback on my goals / training program, if you want to share those with me.

Question 1: I don't count the strokes I make. I feel quite embarassed to admit, but I just lose count after a while. I've used a spreadsheet (home.btconnect.com/matthew-burrows/Wolverine_Plan_Instructions.doc) to generate workouts, and the L4-workouts are all structured by Watts. For example, when I do a 196, I try to keep the rate at 18, 20, etc. and use the watts that the spreadsheet gives me for my pace; for 18 it is 159 in my case, for 20 it is 175, etc. This gives an approximation that seems to work well (I'm sometimes only a few meters off from the stated distance), but am I overlooking something essential by ignoring my actual stroke count?

Question 2: it's not entirely clear to me how I should relate a 40' piece to a 4x10' piece or a 2x20' piece. My last 2x20 was 200^,200 (twice, with 6mins R in between). For some reason, the spreadsheet I'm using to plan pieces has a strong preference for 4x10 and 2x20 over 1x40'. Let me give you an example of the first three weeks:

• Wk 1: twice L4 40' and a L4 4x10' (R3'20")
  Wk 2: twice L4 4x10 and a L4 2x20'
  Wk 3: twice L4 2x20 and a L4 1x40'

and then I saw a post on the old forum that says:

In some of the literature there is some info about 4x 10. Mike recommends it as a level 4 workout in the following parameters: There are at least 2 other level 4 workouts during the week using continuous formats and of at least 100 minutes duration.

Clearly, the spreadsheet is not in line with what MC recommends; week 2 has no continuous pieces and week 3 has only one. I would think the spreadsheet is wrong, but, does it make a lot of difference?

Here are my 'goals' and my plan:

In one head race that's important to me, I have rowed a 22:35 min 5K last September in a single, with no winter training at all. My primary goal is to do better in that race this year; under similar water conditions, I'd like to get it down by at least a minute, and perhaps two.

When sculling, I am comparatively faster on lower stroke rates (22-24) than on higher ones (28+). I can beat competitors when we row with similar stroke rates; but once they pick it up to race pace, I fall behind. It's not really a lack of technique that kills me (although that certainly can use improvement), I just hit my physical limits too soon. It is this part that I want to improve by erging, apart, obviously, from getting in overall better shape.

According to my reference pace, I should be able to do a 7:12 2K. I know that this type of 'ref pace X, SHOULD do Y' is dangerous, but because my last 2K was a year ago and I have done some conditioning and strengthening in-between, I consider it my best estimate. My first short-term goal is to row a 7:12 2K about a week from now. If succesful, my next goal would be to go sub-7 at the end of March / beginning of April. That's about a 1s improvement per week; is that a rate of progress comparable to what others have experienced?

My plan of the last two weeks is 6 workouts, one day rest; 3 x L4, 2 x L3, 1 x L2/L1 (alternating each week). I have the time to improve, no rush for a particular race. I had intended to keep up with this schedule until March, and then replace one of the L3's for a L2, resulting in a a L2 and a L1 each week. Am I getting too little L1/L2-work done in my current schedule?

I am currently at about 65K a week; in a few weeks, I want to build that up to 90K a week. My L4 meters are 51% of the total, L3 35%, L2 12%. Am I right that my L4's are on the low side, compared to the others? Perhaps I'll add meters to the L4-pieces first to get the percentages more in line with the original WP, 65-70 % vs 25% vs 5-10%?

Thank you for any feedback you may have!

[nharrigan]

Hi all,

I've (34 M, 185lbs, 6'2) just started my third week into the Wolverine Plan. My last 2K was a year ago at 7:33; since then I've done a lot of actual OTW sculling. I didn't want to start erging right away with a 2K, so I eased into it with the 100K Holiday Erg Challenge, and started on the WP two weeks ago.

It's hard to guestimate a good reference pace; the one based on my 2K of last year seemed much too slow, I finished most workouts with ease, and significant better splits than I should. So I moved my ref pace up a bit, from 1:51 to 1:48; the adjectives describing the workouts now apply (L2 nasty, L3 doable, L4 challenging but recovering).

I have a few simple questions, and I'd like some feedback on my goals / training program, if you want to share those with me.

Question 1: I don't count the strokes I make. I feel quite embarassed to admit, but I just lose count after a while. I've used a spreadsheet (home.btconnect.com/matthew-burrows/Wolverine_Plan_Instructions.doc) to generate workouts, and the L4-workouts are all structured by Watts. For example, when I do a 196, I try to keep the rate at 18, 20, etc. and use the watts that the spreadsheet gives me for my pace; for 18 it is 159 in my case, for 20 it is 175, etc. This gives an approximation that seems to work well (I'm sometimes only a few meters off from the stated distance), but am I overlooking something essential by ignoring my actual stroke count?

Question 2: it's not entirely clear to me how I should relate a 40' piece to a 4x10' piece or a 2x20' piece. My last 2x20 was 200^,200 (twice, with 6mins R in between). For some reason, the spreadsheet I'm using to plan pieces has a strong preference for 4x10 and 2x20 over 1x40'. Let me give you an example of the first three weeks:

• Wk 1: twice L4 40' and a L4 4x10' (R3'20")
  Wk 2: twice L4 4x10 and a L4 2x20'
  Wk 3: twice L4 2x20 and a L4 1x40'

and then I saw a post on the old forum that says:

In some of the literature there is some info about 4x 10. Mike recommends it as a level 4 workout in the following parameters: There are at least 2 other level 4 workouts during the week using continuous formats and of at least 100 minutes duration.

Clearly, the spreadsheet is not in line with what MC recommends; week 2 has no continuous pieces and week 3 has only one. I would think the spreadsheet is wrong, but, does it make a lot of difference?

Here are my 'goals' and my plan:

In one head race that's important to me, I have rowed a 22:35 min 5K last September in a single, with no winter training at all. My primary goal is to do better in that race this year; under similar water conditions, I'd like to get it down by at least a minute, and perhaps two.

When sculling, I am comparatively faster on lower stroke rates (22-24) than on higher ones (28+). I can beat competitors when we row with similar stroke rates; but once they pick it up to race pace, I fall behind. It's not really a lack of technique that kills me (although that certainly can use improvement), I just hit my physical limits too soon. It is this part that I want to improve by erging, apart, obviously, from getting in overall better shape.

According to my reference pace, I should be able to do a 7:12 2K. I know that this type of 'ref pace X, SHOULD do Y' is dangerous, but because my last 2K was a year ago and I have done some conditioning and strengthening in-between, I consider it my best estimate. My first short-term goal is to row a 7:12 2K about a week from now. If succesful, my next goal would be to go sub-7 at the end of March / beginning of April. That's about a 1s improvement per week; is that a rate of progress comparable to what others have experienced?

My plan of the last two weeks is 6 workouts, one day rest; 3 x L4, 2 x L3, 1 x L2/L1 (alternating each week). I have the time to improve, no rush for a particular race. I had intended to keep up with this schedule until March, and then replace one of the L3's for a L2, resulting in a a L2 and a L1 each week. Am I getting too little L1/L2-work done in my current schedule?

I am currently at about 65K a week; in a few weeks, I want to build that up to 90K a week. My L4 meters are 51% of the total, L3 35%, L2 12%. Am I right that my L4's are on the low side, compared to the others? Perhaps I'll add meters to the L4-pieces first to get the percentages more in line with the original WP, 65-70 % vs 25% vs 5-10%?

Thank you for any feedback you may have!

Miep,

Q1- counting strokes- Personally, I just keep an eye on the spm on the PM4. You can buy software (ergmonitor) that will keep track of more data.

Q2- I would not use that spread sheet you refer to. Someone posted a better spreadsheet on this very thread that you can use to create the L4 workouts, up to 10 segments. Look back a few pages. Somewhere in Mike's comments he talks about how to set up the WP with 6 sessions/week (or 4, 5 8, etc) The L4 intervals are meant to be an advanced workout when you are doing 8+ sessions per week. If you are only doing 6 sessions, I would stick to the straight 40min and 60min. L4s

The focus of the WP is the L1 workouts. The L4 sessions are meant to be relatively easy (for recovery), so I believe increasing the ref. pace is strongly discouraged. If your 2k last year was an all out effort while being fully trained, then you should stick to that ref. pace. If you just did it with no training then you will need to try and find an approximate ref. pace. Better to err on the side of it being too easy, rather than too hard.

As for rate of progress on the 2k, this all depends on how trained you are. If you are just starting out, you will make much bigger improvements than someone who has been training for a longer period of time.

I would recommend you reread the Wolverine Plan and Mike Caviston's comments. There are links at the beginning of this thread.

Best of luck,

Neil

[pmacaula]

Miep,
Nice to hear from you.

Question 1: I don't count the strokes I make. I feel quite embarassed to admit, but I just lose count after a while...am I overlooking something essential by ignoring my actual stroke count?

Assuming that the PMx shows you are on target rate, not counting strokes is fine. The key is that you are actually on target rate as much of the time as possible with as little variation from target as you can. Can be tough to settle quickly in large transitions (ie. 24 spm to 18spm).
Don't hink many count actual strokes all the way through (though I happen to be one); many who do a lot of L4 calculate # of strokes/interval after the fact using data from the PMx.

Question 2: it's not entirely clear to me how I should relate a 40' piece to a 4x10' piece or a 2x20' piece. My last 2x20 was 200^,200 (twice, with 6mins R in between). For some reason, the spreadsheet I'm using to plan pieces has a strong preference for 4x10 and 2x20 over 1x40'. Let me give you an example of the first three weeks:

• Wk 1: twice L4 40' and a L4 4x10' (R3'20")
  Wk 2: twice L4 4x10 and a L4 2x20'
  Wk 3: twice L4 2x20 and a L4 1x40'

Probably worth reading some of the L4 links in the first posting in this thread. Not sure the spreadsheet you are using interprets them properly.

The spreadsheet author' seems to be ramping you up to handle more & longer continuous workouts over time, but in an odd way (at least to me), notably the emphasis on what appear to be interval L4s.

Most L4 workouts should be continuous, with interval L4s in the minority. If you are doing three L4s per week, at least two of them should be continuous, with possibly one interval L4.

BTW - There may be some ambiguity in terminology, as I have seen instances where a 40' continuous L4 has been called a 4x10', I think because MC's tables are structured in 10' (and 6') sequences, which get pieced together into continuous workouts.

The key difference is that L4 interval pieces should be done at +2spm from your normal reference rate. So, if you are at 18.2spm for your continuous L4s, you should be doing 20.2spm on the interval workouts.

Here are some 'standard' L4 workouts referenced by MC in his postings and documentation:

Continuous
40 min (4x10' sequences)
Continuous 60' [6x10' sequences]
2 x 40 min (or 2x[4x10']) with one 6' recovery period (* though this has two intervals, it is effectively a continuous workout).

Interval = all done at +2spm over continuous rate.
4 x 10' seq (3:20 recovery)
7 x 6' seq (2:00 recovery)
6 x 10' seq (3:20 recovery)

Am I getting too little L1/L2-work done in my current schedule?

Looks good to me, especially given you are not targeting a race in the near term.

Am I right that my L4's are on the low side, compared to the others? Perhaps I'll add meters to the L4-pieces first to get the percentages more in line with the original WP, 65-70 % vs 25% vs 5-10%?

You can and should do longer L4 workouts to get the ratios in line w/ MC's guidance. Not sure how the spreadsheet builds your volume up (outside the three weeks you show), but the bread-and-butter L4 seems to be a 60' Continuous (6x10' seq), so one approach would be to do two 40' Continuous and one interval each week and and build the two continuous L4s to 60' in a few steps.
For example I am doing 3 L4s /week (every 2nd day) as part of a 6 day/week WP & built up my L4 load over about a month to the following:

Day 1: L4 - 60' Continuous
Day 3: L4 - Interval > either 7x6' or 4x10' or 2x[40' continuous]
Day 5: L4 - 60' Continuous

Initially, the Day 1 & Day 5 workouts were 40' continuous. I added time to them (such as a 42' continuous made of 7x6' sequences, then a 50' continuous of 5x10', then a 54' continuous of 9x6') until I hit 60' for both.
Once comfortable with this load at Target Pace & 18spm (20spm for the 7x6' & 4x10' pieces), I started adding about 0.1spm/week to my rate (about 2 strokes/week to each workout, for a total increase of 6 strokes/week).

In my mind, this is the real magic of L4. A 60' L4 at 19.4spm average (or a 7x6' at 21.4 for that matter) at my Target Pace would have killed me a few months ago, but by creeping up to it week by week, it is a solid workout that allows me to recover to do a tough L1 or L2 the next day (say, a 4x1K).

Cheers. Patrick.

[miep]

Miep,
Probably worth reading some of the L4 links in the first posting in this thread. Not sure the spreadsheet you are using interprets them properly.

The spreadsheet author' seems to be ramping you up to handle more & longer continuous workouts over time, but in an odd way (at least to me), notably the emphasis on what appear to be interval L4s.

I did read the WP and the MC-posts on the old forum a few times. I used the spreadsheet to make an easy jumpstart - figured it would get at least 80% right

The difference between the WP and the actual intervals planned by the spreadsheet is what prompted my post. Thank you for your response, it makes things clear. Thankfully, it is easy to just swap out the intervals for the continuous pieces, and that's what I'll do!

The ref pace seems not easy to estimate. If I literally take the 2K from last year (ref pace 1:53, I had not trained for that one), I feel the L4's and L3's are too easy, certainly not in the percentage range that MC describes. I estimate my ref pace on the basis of how the different workouts feel and how they should feel acoording to the WP; 1:48 seems to be about right for the L4's, although my 8x500k's yesterday were in the 1:47-1:50 range. So I'll just stick with 1:49 and see where that gets me.

[Yankeerunner]

Hi miep,

Two things. First, regarding reference pace, if you have found the 1:53 too easy why not try a time trial at 2km to determine current reference pace? Onse established, resist changing it later on because an increased effort is built into the higher stroked segments.

Second, I'd urge you to try again to actually count the strokes. My own experience was that by counting (I liked counting down, 16-15-14....etc) it became something like what I would guess that Transcendental Meditation is like, with the counting serving as the 'mantra.' I think that for me the counting of the strokes helped to clear the mind of distractions and is probably what led to the phemomenon of time seeming to pass quickly.

[Nosmo]

My own preference for increasing time would not be what Patrick did. Starting at 40 minutes for the two workouts I would have increase only one at a faster rate and kept the other at 40 minutes. Then I would have increased the second. I would rather do one 40 minute and one 80 minute or one 50 and one 70 then do two 60 minute L4s. (Also my preference is for one long L4 rather then two long workouts in one day. I'd rather do one 30K L3 or one 2 hour L4 then do two workouts in one day.)

I never count total strokes but I do get the number of strokes exact by starting on the minute exactly and adjusting every 10 -30 seconds to hit the stroke on the correct seconds. At 16 spm, I know every fourth stroke is at a multiple of 15 seconds, at 18 every third stroke is at a multiple of 10 seconds, etc. One doesn't have to count if one adjusts. This makes big rate changes pretty easy--Changing from 22 or 24 down to say 16, I know my second stroke is after 7.5 seconds so I try to hit that point--the pace is usually off for the first 4 strokes but I don't worry about that.

Rather then doing a 2K trial, use an L1 4x 1K workout instead. It will be close enough. However, you need to consider what kind of shape you are in now compared to peak shape last season. If you just took a two month break then you want to start with a reference pace significantly faster then what you can do now.

But the most important thing is how you are recovering. Since you are just starting you want to keep the spm around 18, so choose a pace that allows you to recover enough to do the L1s and L2s the next day. It is not the worst thing to adjust the reference pace--just adjust the spm to compensate when you change reference pace.

As nharrigan mentions, erg monitor will let you keep track of a lot of data and give you rating on a stroke by stroke basis and count strokes for you. If you use it, just be careful of how you set up your computer--you don't want to be looking to one side all the time. Best to have the monitor directly in front of you, but if not alternate its use on each sides.

[miep]

Thank you again for all your kind replies.

I don't have my own erg, so unless I schlepp a laptop with me every single time I do a piece, using a PC next to the erg is not really an option.

I did a continuous 40' piece today and followed Patrick's advice on bringing the average spm down by 2 secs. I did a 176,172,176,172 without rest in between, at reference pace 1:48.

During the piece, it didn't feel that different. The fact that it is continuous makes it more challenging, yet the fewer strokes makes it easier. It felt similar to the interval pieces while doing it, good work, but certainly not unsustainably hard. After the piece, the satisfied feeling after a workout seemed to linger longer, and it feels as if I've used more strength. Horribly subjective of course...

if you have found the 1:53 too easy why not try a time trial at 2km to determine current reference pace? Onse established, resist changing it later on because an increased effort is built into the higher stroked segments.

I wanted a few weeks of erging again, prior to actual testing. I'll either do a 2k or, as Nosmo suggested, a 4x1K on Tuesday two weeks from now, in my `level 1/2'-slot.

Thanks again, the feedback is really appreciated.

[Nosmo]

Good Mike Caviston Interview at row2k.com:

http://www.row2k.com/features/features. ... ead&id=391

[MateosDad]

Does anyone have any experience following the WP while erging on slides? I use slides to reduce the strain on my lower back. I notice that low stroke rates are harder to maintain when I'm on slides. (By the way I'm just learning about the WP system, prompted by reading the interview on Row2k.)