6:28 2K

ranger · Post by **ranger** » January 14th, 2010, 2:46 pm

mikvan52 wrote:Tom's instructions were to limit my HR to 70% (me= 128 bpm)

But you don't think that heart rate has anything to do with perceived effort, performance, etc., so how can Tom's instructions here have any relevance to (what you think about) training?

So, what?

Do you _really_ believe that %HRR has nothing to do with perceived effort, performance, etc.?

Do you not believe in training bands?

As far as I can tell, the top ends of your training bands are these:

UT2 1:57
UT1 1:52
AT 1:47
TR 1:42
AN 1:38
max 1:31

Mine are these:

UT2 1:49
UT1 1:44
AT 1:39
TR 1:34
AN 1:30
max 1:23

(with max = 500m trial pace)

The difference is eight seconds per 500m.

My point about the massive reduction in your maxHR over time is not that maxHR correlates with performance across different rowers, but that it correlates with performance across the lifetime of the same rower who, when both young and old, was highly trained.

For most college kids on a crew, the issue that is most relevant to performance is how trained they are, even though their maxHRs might be similar.

For elite older rowers, who were athletes when young, the opposite is the case.

The issue that is most relevant to performance is how much of their maxHR they have lost over time, even though they are still highly trained.

All else equal, for the same rower, a massive decline in a maxHR over time implies a large deccline in aerobic capacity, too.

ranger

eliotsmith · Post by **eliotsmith** » January 14th, 2010, 3:04 pm

ranger wrote:During sharpening, I usually get a couple of seconds a week over 2K.

You mean during the sharpening you did back in 2003?

Usually implies repetitiveness.

You would make a great hunter, ranger. The true key to a good hunter is the subtle knowledge of how to tell a good tale. After all, it can get mighty boring and cold around the campfire after a long day in the woods. Come to Montana next fall and I'll take you out for a few days. You would be great at telling all your friends how close, in meters, you got to the biggest elk you've ever seen.

The great thing about hunting, as opposed to indoor rowing, is that no one cares if you are lying for they are all doing it too. It is part of the fun.

ranger · Post by **ranger** » January 14th, 2010, 3:08 pm

eliotsmith wrote:
ranger wrote:During sharpening, I usually get a couple of seconds a week over 2K.
You mean during the sharpening you did back in 2003?

Usually implies repetitiveness.

You would make a great hunter, ranger. The true key to a good hunter is the subtle knowledge of how to tell a good tale. After all, it can get mighty boring and cold around the campfire after a long day in the woods. Come to Montana next fall and I'll take you out for a few days. You would be great at telling all your friends how close, in meters, you got to the biggest elk you've ever seen.

Sure, I have some stories to tell.

I have already gotten the biggest elk (the WR)--several times.

So the stories I have to tell are not tall tales, but personal narratives.

Now I am on the trail of even bigger game.

Another story in the making.

For more than a decade, since the explosion of popularity in indoor rowing, besides myself, no male WR-holder, 40-70, has ever gotten better--at all.

Back in 2003, I got a couple of seconds better over the course of a year.

Now, I am _substantially_ better.

I have gotten a couple of seconds better each year for six years.

I am now a dozen seconds better over 2K than I was six years ago.

ranger

mikvan52 · Post by **mikvan52** » January 14th, 2010, 3:56 pm

'I am _substantially_ butter' wrote:
Do you not believe in training bands?

As far as I can tell, the top ends of your training bands are these:

UT2 1:57
UT1 1:52
AT 1:47
TR 1:42
AN 1:38
max 1:31

Mine are these:

UT2 1:49
UT1 1:44
AT 1:39
TR 1:34
AN 1:30
max 1:23

(with max = 500m trial pace)

The difference is eight seconds per 500m.

My point about the massive reduction in your maxHR over time is not that maxHR correlates with performance across different rowers, but that it correlates with performance across the lifetime of the same rower who, when both young and old, was highly trained.

Let's stop with this chunk of trash-talk right here.

Please stop falsifying data.

For instance:
Your "max" as compared to my "max".

What distance does your "max" represent or what length of time?
500 meters?

Ours are so similar.

I challenge you to an IND_V contest at "max" today.
According to the table above you claim to have 8 sec/500m on me...

You're a posturing trash-talking fake Rich.
You cannot beat me by that margin ... any day of the year ... at any weight

From a stopped fan ... cold hard start there is no way.

Let's go: IND_V.... "Hi yo Silver" (as you say)

I can be ready in 1/2 hour between now and 4pm.

NavigationHazard · Post by **NavigationHazard** » January 14th, 2010, 3:57 pm

Oooh, smackdown!!!!

rjw · Post by **rjw** » January 14th, 2010, 4:15 pm

mikvan52 wrote:(snip).......I challenge you to an IND_V contest at "max" today.
According to the table above you claim to have 8 sec/500m on me...

You're a posturing trash-talking fake Rich.
You cannot beat me by that margin ... any day of the year ... at any weight

From a stopped fan ... cold hard start there is no way.

Let's go: IND_V.... "Hi yo Silver" (as you say)

I can be ready in 1/2 hour between now and 4pm.

History will repeat itself - a no show.........no?

mikvan52 · Post by **mikvan52** » January 14th, 2010, 4:16 pm

NavigationHazard wrote:Oooh, smackdown!!!!

Nav: I'm lurking on-line waiting... doing desk work.

Cureton will either be (with reason: because of work) unable to respond to this challenge or will have some smart-ass thing to say: totally inconsistent with the ease of sitting down on the erg and cranking out 60-70 strokes at max.

BTW: Rich: THis challenge is open for next Tuesday and the following Tuesday and the following Tuesday. It has to be IND_V. You can leave your scales in the closet.
To win this challenge you have to win by 8 sec per 500m. The distance is 500m.

kini62 · Post by **kini62** » January 14th, 2010, 4:27 pm

mikvan52 wrote:
NavigationHazard wrote:Oooh, smackdown!!!!
Nav: I'm lurking on-line waiting... doing desk work.

Cureton will either be (with reason: because of work) unable to respond to this challenge or will have some smart-ass thing to say: totally inconsistent with the ease of sitting down on the erg and cranking out 60-70 strokes at max.

BTW: Rich: THis challenge is open for next Tuesday and the following Tuesday and the following Tuesday. It has to be IND_V. You can leave your scales in the closet.
To win this challenge you have to win by 8 sec per 500m. The distance is 500m.

Oh, no you've done it! You've scared the poor prof into hiding, most likely under his wife's skirt. What will become of this forum with the ''ranger'' in TW style seclusion? Why does he go by 'ranger'? That moniker should be used by those that are or were rangers in real life.

mikvan52 · Post by **mikvan52** » January 14th, 2010, 4:33 pm

A little over 30 minutes to go for today's challenge.

As my prior post indicates: "ranger" can choose any of he next three Tuesdays too.

While I've been waiting I reread something that might interest others:

http://www.c2forum.com/viewtopic.php?t=5044

There are only three posts on this archived thread. To appreciate Cureton you should consider reading it all.

I particularly like the end:

Coach Larry Gluckman wrote: I appreciate your point of view. Good luck, lg

What Larry seems to be saying here: "Rich, Meet the Fockers"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OXRBELZpKak

rjw · Post by **rjw** » January 14th, 2010, 4:34 pm

mikvan52 wrote:.....Cureton will either be (with reason: because of work) unable to respond to this challenge or will have some smart-ass thing to say: totally inconsistent with the ease of sitting down on the erg and cranking out 60-70 strokes at max.

Here are the other "possible" options:

Code: Select all

Possible answer options for Ranger when asked to report results: 

1 it has been reported (2003 WR, since then he as raced more than anyone else, since then he has only been getting better, he has reported his 4 years of training to get to a 13 SPI, no one has ever gotten better) 

2 it shouldnt be reported ("Work on general fitness, technique, stroking power, and endurance doesn't have much to do with the monitor (keeping track of distance covered over time) at all") 

3 it will be reported (he just finished distance rowing, he is now in the sharpening phase and will be posting screen shots of his sessions starting next Monday) 

4 ignored

We will likely need a ruling with the respone so I thought I would provide a refresher.

KevJGK · Post by **KevJGK** » January 14th, 2010, 4:56 pm

Not sure whether our BBC News site works over there but this story was posted recently. Greg Searle is talking about his planned comeback for the 2012 Olympics and comments about not being near the top of the pile in the trials on the rowing machine but coming to the front when "moving the boat".

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/other_s ... 425428.stm

chgoss · Post by **chgoss** » January 14th, 2010, 5:05 pm

mikvan52 wrote:
NavigationHazard wrote:Oooh, smackdown!!!!
To win this challenge you have to win by 8 sec per 500m. The distance is 500m.

8 sec!!!
to much, you're 500m is in the low 1:30's mike?

leadville · Post by **leadville** » January 14th, 2010, 5:08 pm

Mike - Ranger's working on his space/time altering device now...also known as photoshop - his internet is down, so he'll post a cell camera photo of his 1:23...

mikvan52 · Post by **mikvan52** » January 14th, 2010, 5:15 pm

chgoss wrote:
mikvan52 wrote:
NavigationHazard wrote:Oooh, smackdown!!!!
To win this challenge you have to win by 8 sec per 500m. The distance is 500m.
8 sec!!!
to much, you're 500m is in the low 1:30's mike?

My signature at the bottom of this post is not a fabrication
That's from 12/30/2007
More recently I pulled a 1:30.8.
Both were verified by C2

It's all in the rankings.

Rich has a monitor that does the much heralded IND_V function.

I predict he will qualify his claim by saying 'when we're both fully trained'

Good grief!

ranger · Post by **ranger** » January 14th, 2010, 5:28 pm

mikvan52 wrote:
'I am _substantially_ butter' wrote:
Do you not believe in training bands?

As far as I can tell, the top ends of your training bands are these:

UT2 1:57
UT1 1:52
AT 1:47
TR 1:42
AN 1:38
max 1:31

Mine are these:

UT2 1:49
UT1 1:44
AT 1:39
TR 1:34
AN 1:30
max 1:23

(with max = 500m trial pace)

The difference is eight seconds per 500m.

My point about the massive reduction in your maxHR over time is not that maxHR correlates with performance across different rowers, but that it correlates with performance across the lifetime of the same rower who, when both young and old, was highly trained.

Let's stop with this chunk of trash-talk right here.

Please stop falsifying data.

For instance:
Your "max" as compared to my "max".

What distance does your "max" represent or what length of time?
500 meters?

Ours are so similar.

I challenge you to an IND_V contest at "max" today.
According to the table above you claim to have 8 sec/500m on me...

You're a posturing trash-talking fake Rich.
You cannot beat me by that margin ... any day of the year ... at any weight

From a stopped fan ... cold hard start there is no way.

Let's go: IND_V.... "Hi yo Silver" (as you say)

I can be ready in 1/2 hour between now and 4pm.

I'll get in a 500m trial over the next six weeks, but not immediately.

You are ahead of my in that sort of training.

I am just doing some top-end UT1 and AT work at the moment.

The time for a 500m trial is when you have the rate way up and have been doing 500s for a month or so.

I'll soon be there, but not now.

ranger

Concept2 Forum

6:28 2K

RangerWorld