6:28 2K

[ranger]

I would say that it would be a pretty safe bet that when you finally time a piece that you will yet again extend horizon by yet another year.

What "horizon"?

On the basis of just foundational training, no hard distance rowing or sharpening, my 2K time last year was the best in my age and weight division by three seconds.

You can't be better than the best.

The lwt 6:41 I pulled last year was a second under the 60s lwt WR.

I will be 60 next year (2011).

This year, I am adding hard distance rowing and full sharpening, and I continue with these next year.

My foundational work is complete.

I am no longer doing foundational rowing at all.

Beyond what I get frrom foundational rowing alone, I get about a dozen seconds each over 2K from hard distance rowing and full sharpening.

So, how is my training going badly?

I don't understand.

Seems ideal to me.

Is there anyone whose training is in a stronger position with respect to standards in the sport?

ranger

[snowleopard]

OTW, the best head racers rate 30 spm.

How would you know? You've never been near a head race.

[ranger]

Because of my investment in foundational rowing over the last five years, my immediate competition has no way to catch up to my present level of performance with any short-term training.

They are already training maximally, and they already fall short.

This year, when I am fully trained, the size of the gap between us will be fully articulated for the first time.

If I am right, it is now approaching 30 seconds in a 2K.

The only way my immediate competition can catch up is to me is by replicating my five-year commitment to foundational rowing.

But as far as I can tell, none of them seem interested in making such an investment, now or ever.

So, until that happens, I can't see any other outcome than this:

I will dominate my age and weight divison by huge margins over 2K for the rest of my competitive life in the sport, what I hope will be another 30 years.

ranger

[ranger]

OTW, the best head racers rate 30 spm.

How would you know? You've never been near a head race.

These days you don't need to be near anything to see it.

I watch the webcast of the Head of the Charles every year.

ranger

[ranger]

Sorry to be gone so long.

Between my 5:15 and 6:57 posts, I did a little 84min bike ride (24.7 MPH) just to stay loose.

I wouldn't want my fingers to cramp up from all this typing.





ranger

[eliotsmith]

The only way my immediate competition can catch up is to me is by replicating my five-year commitment to foundational rowing.

But as far as I can tell, none of them seem interested in making such an investment, now or ever.

So, until that happens, I can't see any other outcome than this:

I will dominate my age and weight divison by huge margins over 2K for the rest of my competitive life in the sport, what I hope will be another 30 years.

This is classic ranger speak. You can never seem to see any other outcome than your own domination of the sport of indoor rowing. In fact, I think you should change your long term goals to 0 min, 0 sec for each. After all, that would make you faster than any possible challenger and allow you to not row the piece at all to achieve your "ideal" results!



You are obviously oblivious to the possibility that your preparation was longer than necessary to achieve the desired result. You ignore the fact that your training plan may be the worst ever, thus making you take 5 years to reach your potential, and then only in your mind!

[ranger]

You are obviously oblivious to the possibility that your preparation was longer than necessary to achieve the desired result. You ignore the fact that your training plan may be the worst ever, thus making you take 5 years to reach your potential

No, I'm not "oblivious" to this possibility at all.

Sure, someone might have a better way of training.

That is always a possibility.

There are no necessities here, just probabilities.

I suppose this would have to be demonstrated, though, for it to become a possibility.

So let me say:

If I pull a lwt 6:16 at 60 and someone comes along and pulls a lwt 6:15 at 60, with very little training, or some different sort of training, then, hey, sure, I will be _delighted_ to hear about it and point to it as amazing, the thing that everyone should do, immediately.

You probably know that it took Mike Caviston right about five years with the Wolverine Plan to grind his 2K time down from 6:26 to 6:18 when he was 40 and set the 40s lwt WR.

The training he put himself through wasn't quick at all.

A couple thousand days of double sessions, rarely missing a day, rarely missing a target.

A 6:18 at 40 is equal to about a 6:38 at 60.

Last year, at 47, Mike pulled 6:36.

On the other hand, since there seems to be no one around besides me who is ready to do much better than a lwt 6:45 at 60, it might be quite a wait to have your claim tested.

I am willing to wait, though.

Time is no issue.

I will be rowing for another 30 years.

Time is also no issue for me because my training (at a foundational level, with technique and stroke power) is already done.

If someone wants to do better, they have quite a cliff to climb.

I have already scaled the rock face.

I'm now up on the summit, surveying the land below.

ranger

[rjw]

I have rowed several pieces covering feedback from the PM3 and it is very difficult to say what the split is based on "feel" and I do not consider myself brain dead.

Perhaps you need to reconsider your diagnosis.



Do you know when you are at your UT2 pace?

Do you know when you are at your anaerobic threshold?

Do you know when you are in between these two?

Do you know when you are below the former?

Do you know when you are above the latter?

Do you know when you are at your 2K race pace?

Do you know when you are at your 1K race pace?

Do you know when you are at your 500m race pace?

If you know these, well, sure, you don't know _exactly_ how fast your are going, but for all practical purposes, you know enough.

When I was doing marathon running, I could guess the pace I was running within about 5 seconds per mile, that is, within an error range of perhaps +/- 1%.

On the erg, that's within 1 second per 500m.

I don't even look at the monitor much when I row a 2K.

I never know my splits after a race.

During the race, I just check the meters rowed as I approach the end so that I know when I need to go into an all out sprint.

I sprint at 300m to go.

If I counted strokes, as many do, I wouldn't even have to do that.

If you are completely trained, 2Ks aer automatic.

You know what your 2K pace feels like and you just do it--flat splits, end to end, for 2000 meters (altered only with a few fast strokes at the start and an all out burst at the end).

ranger

That is just my point. Unless you do these things, with some sort of objective feedback from time to time, the times that you throw out are completely fictitious. Like - "Oh this feels like 2k pace" even though you have done just a few strokes. Your 2k pace from last year is very good - 1:40.2 but you feel that you are positioned to do a 1:34 pace. Based on what? How you feel?

You know Ranger, I was born at night just not last night. Take your time, get the distance rowing in, do your sharpening and let er rip.

In a few months we will understand where your "feel" gets you.

[snowleopard]

I will dominate my age and weight divison by huge margins over 2K for the rest of my competitive life in the sport, what I hope will be another 30 years.

Wow! Imagine dominating a minority division of a minority sport for 30 years. What a blast!

[Byron Drachman]

I will be 60 next year (2011).

This year is 2009. Next year is 2010, and the year after next is 2011. It is lamentable to see a fellow human being suffer such a constant state of confusion.

[ranger]

I will dominate my age and weight divison by huge margins over 2K for the rest of my competitive life in the sport, what I hope will be another 30 years.

Wow! Imagine dominating a minority division of a minority sport for 30 years. What a blast!

Yep.

And quite a bit better than getting your ass whipped for 30 years in a minority division in a minority sport.

No?

6:16 is under the qualifying lightweight erg standard for US National Team.

So, not a shabby goal, I think, for a 60-year-old.

ranger

[ranger]

I will be 60 next year (2011).

This year is 2009. Next year is 2010, and the year after next is 2011. It is lamentable to see a fellow human being suffer such a constant state of confusion.

For all the races this winter indoor rowing season (2009-2010), I will be 59.

For all the races next winter indoor rowing season (2010-2011), I will be 60.

ranger

[rjw]

6:16 is under the qualifying lightweight erg standard for US National Team.

So, not a shabby goal, I think, for a 60-year-old.

ranger

Exactly!

There is a reason it is a national team goal.

You will find out why.

[ranger]

Unless you do these things, with some sort of objective feedback from time to time, the times that you throw out are completely fictitious.

Like this:

In 2006, I pulled a sub-6:30 2K without even preparing for it, just on the basis of foundational rowing.

After three more years of foundational rowing, I am quite a bit better than that now.

This year, I am doing no foundational rowing to prepare to race.

I am just doing pre-sharpening (hard distance rowing) and sharpening.

Above and beyond my foundational rowing, I get about a dozen seconds over 2K from each.

ranger

[ranger]

6:16 is under the qualifying lightweight erg standard for US National Team.

So, not a shabby goal, I think, for a 60-year-old.

ranger

Exactly!

There is a reason it is a national team goal.

You will find out why.

Duh.

I found out long ago.

That what my training has been all about.

To row 6:16, you have to pull at least 12 SPI when you race, or at least, I do.

So I had to improve my technical effectiveness and efficiency.

60s lwts usually pull about 9 SPI.

12 SPI is a full third more per stroke.

ranger