6:28 2K

[ranger]

by simply keeping track of that, you can see if you are on track or not.. simple.. no self deception.. no surprises..

This type of calculating doesn't have much to do with success in anything.

It is just a bunch of artificially imposed clap-trap.

You succeed by doing things that build up your energies and make you feel strong, relaxed, and confident, regardless of what they are or do.

You don't make money by counting it.

You make money by doing smart investment.

ranger

[ranger]

Nice third hour on my bike, again at 21 MPH.

So that's 63 miles today so far, moving toward 100.

ranger

[ranger]

yeah at 58 you so have much experience that you need 7 years for producing nothing

This winter will be my first attempt at a 2K, fully trained and rowing well.

I think the results will be great, but we'll just have to wait and see, I guess.

Historically, veterans have slowed down at a rate of 1.7 seconds a year.

So, starting from my lwt 6:30 at WIRC 2003, the prediction, seven years later, is that I will pull a lwt 6:43.6 at WIRC 2010.

So let's see what happens.

If I pull 11.7 SPI, as I think I will, this predicts that I can now only rate 29 spm in a 2K.

Sure, it would be disappointing if that turns out to be true.

Just like my earlier self and the other quality veteran lightweights, when I am fully sharpened up for it, I think I'll be able to rate 36 spm.

ranger

[KevJGK]

So, starting from my lwt 6:30 at WIRC 2003, the prediction, seven years later, is that I will pull a lwt 6:43.6 at WIRC 2010.

So let's see what happens.

That would be nice but do you really think you will be there?

[ranger]

you will be burning carbohydrates almost exclusively as fat catabolism is too slow

No.

The low-grade UT2 work I am doing on my bike is almost entirely fat-burning.

ranger

[ranger]

So, starting from my lwt 6:30 at WIRC 2003, the prediction, seven years later, is that I will pull a lwt 6:43.6 at WIRC 2010.

So let's see what happens.

That would be nice but do you really think you will be there?

What you or I think is going to happen doesn't have much to do with anything at this point.

Who knows what is going to happen?

The body is a mysterious thing.

I have just tried to put my body in a position to succeed.

Whether it does or not is up to those mystic mites, the biological fates.

ranger

[ranger]

So, starting from my lwt 6:30 at WIRC 2003, the prediction, seven years later, is that I will pull a lwt 6:43.6 at WIRC 2010.

So let's see what happens.

That would be nice but do you really think you will be there?

Rating 36 spm?

Yes.

As I said, I think I'll do 4 x 2K rating 30 spm, perhaps even 32 spm.

4 x 2K is done at 2K + 4.

ranger

[KevJGK]

What you or I think is going to happen doesn't have much to do with anything at this point.

What you think is going to happen has everything to do with what will happen. If you truly believe your predictions you will be there. Hence my question.

[ranger]

A nice warm up for the next 2 months, I think would be to work from 26 to 29 spm at 10 MPS, with 5K at each rate.

That averages 1:49.

I'll try that tomorrow.

5K, 1:55 @ 26 spm
5K, 1:51 @ 27 spm
5K, 1:47 @ 28 spm
5K, 1:43 @ 29 spm

ranger

[ranger]

What you or I think is going to happen doesn't have much to do with anything at this point.

What you think is going to happen has everything to do with what will happen. If you truly believe your predictions you will be there. Hence my question.

Sure, what you believe can inspire you to do certain preliminary things, like training.

But after a point, that is, after you've done those things, it doesn't have anything to do with anything.

You just try your best and hope it works out.

ranger

[ranger]

Kevin--

You can engineer all sorts of things with your training, if you do minimal training and row way below your potential.

But if you work as hard as you can and row at the edges of your potential, as all of those who have WR rows do, you never know what to expect.

You just hope for the best.

Engineering is irrelevant.

ranger

[ranger]

No one my age and weight has come anywhere near pulling 12 SPI in a 2K, as I might well do.

So this is all entirely new.

Even the best 60s lightweights pull about 9 SPI.

Even at 31 spm, what I rated in Baltimore in 2006, pulliing 12 SPI, what I pulled there, gets you to sub-6:30, as I demonstrated then.

For me now, that's a dozen seconds under WR pace.

But this is the astonishing thing.

To prepare for the Baltimore row, I just did foundational rowing at low rates, no distance rowing or sharpening.

When I am fully sharpened up for it, I don't think I'll rate 31 spm when I race.

I think I'll rate 36 spm.

ranger

[aharmer]

I realize this thread is about ranger and his antagonists going back and forth, and in my opinion is entertaining as hell. I have an observation I'd like to get some more feedback on. It appears to me that SPI has a lot more relevance than others give ranger credit for.

When I started rowing my SPI was between 8-9. It was between 8-9 whether I was at 17spm or 29spm. At 17spm it was an easy row, the 29spm was at the end of a time trial. My stroke only had the power to row at 8-9 SPI, and my cardiovascular system only allowed me to row at 29spm at the highest.

Though I'm still very new, my stroke technique and power have improved such that I am now able to row just under 11 SPI. My rate is still at 28-29 for the fast pieces. I am now rowing much faster even though my rates are the same. To improve wattage (is that a word?) I can improve my fitness allowing for a higher rate, I can improve the power of my stroke, or preferably both simultaneously.

After creating a chart in Excel it is simple to see how relevant improved SPI really is. In the past my SPI allowed me to row about 7:30 2k at my fitness level. Right now it looks like I'm getting darn close to 7:00 without improving my rate at all. If I can take my SPI from today's value of a hair under 11 to 12, at the same rate I will be rowing in the 6:48-6:50 neighborhood.

The next question is what is the best way, besides technique improvement, to improve SPI?

I'm absolutely not trying to tell you far more experienced rowers what is right vs wrong, just looking for an explanation of what I'm missing if SPI isn't a relevant measurement. Thanks in advance for your thoughts.

[KevJGK]

ranger meets a hooker in a bar. She says, "This is your lucky night. I’ve got a special game for you. I’ll do absolutely anything you want for $300, as long as you can say it in three words." ranger replies, "Hey, why not?" He pull his wallet out of his pocket, and one at a time lays three hundred-dollar bills on the bar, and says, slowly: "Paint…my…house."

[ranger]

I realize this thread is about ranger and his antagonists going back and forth, and in my opinion is entertaining as hell. I have an observation I'd like to get some more feedback on. It appears to me that SPI has a lot more relevance than others give ranger credit for.

When I started rowing my SPI was between 8-9. It was between 8-9 whether I was at 17spm or 29spm. At 17spm it was an easy row, the 29spm was at the end of a time trial. My stroke only had the power to row at 8-9 SPI, and my cardiovascular system only allowed me to row at 29spm at the highest.

Though I'm still very new, my stroke technique and power have improved such that I am now able to row just under 11 SPI. My rate is still at 28-29 for the fast pieces. I am now rowing much faster even though my rates are the same. To improve wattage (is that a word?) I can improve my fitness allowing for a higher rate, I can improve the power of my stroke, or preferably both simultaneously.

After creating a chart in Excel it is simple to see how relevant improved SPI really is. In the past my SPI allowed me to row about 7:30 2k at my fitness level. Right now it looks like I'm getting darn close to 7:00 without improving my rate at all. If I can take my SPI from today's value of a hair under 11 to 12, at the same rate I will be rowing in the 6:48-6:50 neighborhood.

The next question is what is the best way, besides technique improvement, to improve SPI?

I'm absolutely not trying to tell you far more experienced rowers what is right vs wrong, just looking for an explanation of what I'm missing if SPI isn't a relevant measurement. Thanks in advance for your thoughts.

Well, "technique" is a slippery word in rowing.

In other sports, I suppose, it might mean something that doesn't involve any more effort, just improved skill, better judgment, better hand-to-eye coordination, and the like.

But in rowing, technique involves learning how to take a full stroke in ways that are maximally advantageous biomechanically and physiologically.

Initially, doing this is not easy at all.

In fact, it's excruciting.

It feels like you are pulling your guts out.

You just aren't used to the scope, speed, and violence of it all.

But once you get used to it, you find that it gets easier and easier.

And at some point, as you relate, somewhat magically so, you pull more wattage with the same effort that you used to exert pulling less wattage.

Learning to row well then has two sides.

One side is technical.

You need to learn what to do in order to take a good stroke.

The other side is skeletal-muscular and physiological.

You need to let your body get used to doing such a bizarrely violent thing, over and over, until you drop.



All in all, it took me seven years to learn to row well.

ranger