6:28 2K

Nosmo · Post by **Nosmo** » December 13th, 2009, 6:13 pm

bloomp wrote:...... But you're proving my point that setting a WR on the erg is much different from setting a WR on the water, and breaking said record is much less debatable on the erg.
Paul

Guys this thread is all about Ranger! DON'T pollute it with off topic arguments!

I've got to agree much more with Paul then ausrwr here. Times mean everything on the erg, but on the water, it is a total side show, and people don't pay very much attention to them.

Nosmo · Post by **Nosmo** » December 13th, 2009, 6:18 pm

ranger wrote:
blake_mulder wrote:
blake_mulder wrote:Ranger

Will you be posting the results of your upcoming trials here on this forum, regardless of whether you hit your targets?

Good luck with them!

Blake
With all the noise on here Ranger, you may have missed my question, will you be reporting your trials here on this forum?
Sure, I have been reporting everything that I time.

I just don't usually time training rows.

A trial is timed--by definition.

So, sure, I'll report them as I do them.

I'll also report sharpening workouts (e.g., 8 x 500m, 4 x 1K, 4 x2K, etc.).

ranger

This is what you said last winter, yet we didn't see any (except for a 5K or two). The real question is will you be doing those sharpening workouts? (don't bother to answer--we know your answer, we are just waiting for some.

ranger · Post by **ranger** » December 14th, 2009, 2:50 am

Nosmo wrote:The real question is will you be doing those sharpening workouts?

Not much else to do now, given that I am doing no foundational rowing.

So.

Sooner than later this year.

I want to be fully ready to race by my first regatta at the end of January.

I have started some fast rowing already, although nothing very organized yet.

BTW, once you row well (e.g., 13 SPI for lightweights, 1:40 @ 27 spm), you can soften up the catch quite a bit and still be pulling some _very_ respectable wattage.

This saves a ton of energy.

I only need 100 Newtons of peak force to pull 1:44 @ 27 spm (11.5 SPI) in my distance rowing.

And, hey, I don't need anything faster than that.

If I can do that for an hour under my anaerobic threshold, my dreams come true.

That would be a pb by 600m.

1:44 is UT1 for a 6:16 2K.

1:44 for 60min would break the 50s _heavyweight_ record for 60min by 300m.

This sort of rowing is now _very_ comfortable stuff.

I now row well!

ranger

ranger · Post by **ranger** » December 14th, 2009, 3:03 am

Nosmo wrote:The real question is will you be doing those sharpening workouts?

No, that's not the real question at all.

The _real_ question is when will others my age and weight wake up and do proper foundational rowing.

I am already the best by three seconds just on the basis of low rate trudging.

When I add distance rowing (26-32 spm) as I am doing now, and sharpening (36-42 spm) as I will in January and February, over 2K, I might be as muchas 30 seconds beyond my immediate competition.

I get about a dozen seconds each over 2K from hard distance rowing and sharpening.

There's that seven seconds per 500m again!

So, the _real_ question is: When is everyone else going to learn how to train?

Huh?

It is perverse to be willfully ineffective and inefficient when you race, just because you are too dense to figure out how to get better.

If you row badly but others row well, you lose.

By and large, the man with the best stroke wins.

I'll now pull 12.5 SPI when I race.

My competition will pull 9.5 SPI.

We will all rate pretty much the same--35 spm +/- 1 spm.

No contest.

ranger

snowleopard · Post by **snowleopard** » December 14th, 2009, 3:43 am

ranger wrote:The _real_ question is when will others my age and weight wake up and do proper foundational rowing.

I am already the best by three seconds just on the basis of low rate trudging.

No, you're not the best at all. Because the real question is: when are you going to break Roy Brook's WR?

bloomp · Post by **bloomp** » December 14th, 2009, 3:54 am

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Units_of_pressure

Geeet yerself a guuud edjucatun Ricky?

ranger · Post by **ranger** » December 14th, 2009, 3:58 am

snowleopard wrote:
ranger wrote:The _real_ question is when will others my age and weight wake up and do proper foundational rowing.

I am already the best by three seconds just on the basis of low rate trudging.
No, you're not the best at all. Because the real question is: when are you going to break Roy Brook's WR?

Fully trained, I'll break it, 4 years older, by 20 seconds, while Roy will have slowed down eight seconds since he set it.

28 seconds in all?

There's that seven seconds per 500m again!

Investment pays off.

If you just spend, you go broke.

When Roy and I race, we'll stroke along together.

I'll be going 1:34/1:35; Roy will be going 1:41/1:42.

ranger

ranger · Post by **ranger** » December 14th, 2009, 4:32 am

snowleopard wrote:the real question is: when are you going to break Roy Brook's WR?

No, that's not the real question at all.

Training determines performance, not the other way around.

If you think otherwise, whatever you do won't amount to much of anything.

In a few years, when the 55s lwt WR is sub-6:30, or even sub-6:20, Roy's 6:38 will fade into anonymity and be forgotten.

Who remembers Jean-Paul Tardieu's standard of 6:31.6 for the 50s lwts?

Gone.

ranger

snowleopard · Post by **snowleopard** » December 14th, 2009, 4:42 am

ranger wrote:
snowleopard wrote:the real question is: when are you going to break Roy Brook's WR?
No, that's not the real question at all.

Training determines performance, not the other way around.

Well that's stating the obvious. And performance measures the effectiveness of your training.

Right now yours isn't looking too good. You haven't bested Roy's mark in training, despite saying for the past three years that 4 x 2K @ 1:38 was achievable, never mind just a single 2K.

Added to which you have not recorded a ranking distance PB in six years. That's a span of 1.5 olympiads.

eliotsmith · Post by **eliotsmith** » December 14th, 2009, 5:29 am

Nosmo wrote:Agreed rangers method is correct, 85% to 90% pace of 1:34.5/500 is
1:45 to 151.

Sorry about that; I guess I have been doing my calcs wrong, though it seems to be a minor difference in my case. Thanks for the correction.

I was mostly taken aback by ranger's comment that level 4 is "learn to row" stuff, meaning too easy for someone of his caliber. But I guess that is par for the course.

ranger · Post by **ranger** » December 14th, 2009, 6:17 am

snowleopard wrote:You haven't bested Roy's mark in training

Well, that depends on what "training" you are talking about.

Roy does 1Kr24 in 1:44.5.

I did it in 1:38.7.

Hmm.

I did 500r30 in 1:30.7.

I suspect that Roy can't do 500r30 under 1:36.

And so forth.

Distance trials coming up.

Then sharpening routines.

Then 2K racing.

When Roy pulled 6:38, fully trained, I pulled 6:29.7, without even preparing for it.

I am quite a bit better than that now.

Roy is quite a bit worse.

Yes, the numbers will appear, but only at appropriate tiimes, as my training develops.

Stay tuned.

Ready?

Start your engines!

ranger

ranger · Post by **ranger** » December 14th, 2009, 6:22 am

This morning: 90min erg, 90min bike.

A second session, similar to this, before dinner.

Vacation.

Gotta love it.

I don't have to go over to school and teach again until Jan. 5th.

Dec. 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, Jan. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5.

ranger

ranger · Post by **ranger** » December 14th, 2009, 10:59 am

eliotsmith wrote:I was mostly taken aback by ranger's comment that level 4 is "learn to row" stuff, meaning too easy for someone of his caliber.

Irony of ironies.

I think learning to row is easy, so easy that "someone of my calibre" doesn't have to do it?

Yikes.

Hardly.

Even though I was a WR-holder on the erg (back in 2003), I have spent the last seven years (!!) trying to learn to row (and have been criticized endlessly for it by those who think that this effort has been unnecessary).

Level 4 rowing is great stuff, if that's what you want to use to learn to row.

I stiffened up the challenge of learning to row even further, assuming that standards for technical accomplishment and skeletal-muscular capability, and therefore stroking power, are absolute (13 SPI for lightweights; 16 SPI for heavyweights), rather than relative to your 2K.

But, lordy, I suspect that no one in my position has ever taken _more_ seriously the importance of learning to row to high achievement in this sport.

Even though I was a WR-holder, I worked on it for about 60 million meters.

On the other hand, I do indeed think that, once you row well, you no longer have to do a lot of trudging at low rates.

Just row at 10 MPS.

That keeps the rate and HR high and the movement elegant.

There appears to be no such thing as competent, elegant, 10 MPS (high end UT1) rowing in the Wolverine Plan.

That's a mistake, I think.

IMO. once you know how to row, that's just about all you have to do in your day-to-day rowing.

Perhaps Mike C. just wasn't any good at this sort of thing.

Who knows?

In his training plan, the Wolverine Plan, he skips over it entirely.

Even though I will soon be a 60s lwt, I will pull 12.5 SPI when I race.

Why do I need to do a lot of low rate trudging to try to develop more stroking power than that?

My immediate competition pull 9.5 SPI when they race, almost a third less wattage per stroke.

That's a lot.

At the same rate (say, 33 spm), that's right around 100 watts or about 9 seconds per 500m.

1:43.6 becomes 1:34.6

6:54 becomes 6:18

ranger

hjs · Post by **hjs** » December 14th, 2009, 11:00 am

New 70s 2k WR by Eddie Fletcher on 14 Dec 2009, 15:45
Hi all

Just thought I would post the first 70 year old to go under 7 minutes.

Paul Guest in Australia did a C2 supervised 2k TT and recorded 6.56.2 a huge 6.7 seconds off the current WR and the first 70 year old to go sub 7 minutes.

An awesome result for a man of 70 (even though he is an ex Olympian).

Previously week he rowed 1k in 3.19.9.

He will be in Boston - I reckon more in the tank!Eddie Fletcher
Sport & Exercise Physiologist & Coach
http://www.fletchersportscience.co.uk
email: eddie@fletchersportscience.co.uk

very Impressive and not unlikely faster than the nutty prof. in most of his races this year

ranger · Post by **ranger** » December 14th, 2009, 11:45 am

hjs wrote:not unlikely faster than the nutty prof. in most of his races this year

Yes, a HM at 1:45 will be a challenge, but I think I will meet it.

Given my stroke now, I just need to hold 27 spm for the hour and a quarter.

A HM is done at 2K + 11.

To reach my target, I will need to rate 28 spm in a 60min trial, 26 spm in a FM.

I am working on these things now.

Distance/threshold/UT1 rowing.

ranger

Concept2 Forum

6:28 2K

Re: reporting trials