6:28 2K

[Bob S.]

I don't know the science behind this but I assume it's because blood plasma (or serum) levels begin to decrease and because SV remains the same there has to be some change to keep water/nutrients/oxygen getting to muscles.

Dehydration likely increases the viscosity of the blood. This means the pump would have to work harder to keep the flow rate the same.

Bob S.

[bloomp]

I don't know the science behind this but I assume it's because blood plasma (or serum) levels begin to decrease and because SV remains the same there has to be some change to keep water/nutrients/oxygen getting to muscles.

Dehydration likely increases the viscosity of the blood. This means the pump would have to work harder to keep the flow rate the same.

Bob S.

Thank you.

I assume that also pushes muscle cells towards glycolysis, and thicker blood would mean that lactate is carried out slower than usual. So the HR jump associated with heat/fluid loss has a lot of negative impacts on performance.

[ranger]

Today: 60min erg, 60min step at 290 watts

My top-end UT2 work is now steady state.

If I want, I can extend this work to three hours--on the erg, on the bike, or on the stepper.

HRs today on the stepper:

30min 138 bpm
60min 142 bpm

Now, I need get to steady state at top-end UT1 on the erg.

ranger

[ranger]

The proper conclusion is NOT to avoid racing for another seven years

??

This year, I am already registered for four races and will try to pick up a fifth.


For the next six weeks, I will be sharpening.

So: ranger's definition of racing is: registering for a race showing up and saying something like: "I decided to cruise along at AT give it a little bump at the end and wait until the next "race" to actually race"

Rich: You've broadly categorized all of last year's events as not racing.
Will you do that again once this indoor season is over?

No? Then tell us which 2010 event will be raced to the full extent of your capabilities, fully trained, fully sharpened...

My guess is that you don't want to be hampered by any such prediction.
Deadlines are a bitch aren't they.

I don't understand all of these questions.

I have said, over and over, how my preparation for this racing season differs from last year (and several years before).

Since 2003, this is the first year I have been doing distance rowing (26-31 spm).

I have been doing distance rowing for about six months.

Since 2003, this is the first year that I will sharpen to prepare for racing.

I will be sharpening (32-42 spm) for the next six weeks.

Historically, I get about a dozen seconds over 2K each from distance rowing and sharpening, so it will indeed be exciting to see what I can pull this year for 2K.

I am no longer doing foundational rowing ("learn to row").

I now row well.

I never have to do foundational rowing again.

ranger

[Den-J]

you can get the opposite effect as well I have noticed occasionally when cycling If I dont eat enough and "hit the wall" I can be pedaling as hard as I can and my hr drops, probably a function of the muscles not having enough fuel to require as much oxygen so the hr falls ..horrible feeling though. So at that point you could be working as hard as you can and your hr could drop into really low bands
so it could be said you can use your hr to estimate the training effort ..if you are fully hydrated ..and your glycogen levels are ok ...and you have not had to much caffien ..and you are not coming down with an illness ..the list is endless
argh.. I just talked myself out of training, its far to complicated

[Nosmo]

[.....

If we consider what your "after a while" means...
....
I begins to get on my nerves though when someone insists : Your AT is (so many seconds per 500m).

that is to misunderstand how AT is determined.
.......

Well, after a while means only that I learned what the HR monitor would read.
Agree entirely about AT, but I question how useful the concept is.
Really I am just arguing for Mike Caviston's approach of avoiding the training band jargon, and concentrating on improving a given level/workout each week.
I'd phrase the pacing guide lines as follows: constant or negative split everything. L1 and L2 go just about as fast as hard as you possibly can. L3 go hard, but at a pace that doesn't waste you for the rest of the day and one that you can recover from. L4 as much as you can handle without interfering with the next work out. At least that is how I approach it (I'm sure MC or others would put it differently).

Even when I bike raced with a heart rate monitor I didn't use it to determine how fast to go. I used how I felt. Granted if you don't have enough experience then the HR monitor is more useful.

[Byron Drachman]

Sept 22, 2009: This year, I will be at weight and sharpening all fall and winter.

Jan 15, 2010: I have been doing distance rowing for about six months.
Since 2003, this is the first year that I will sharpen to prepare for racing.
I will be sharpening for the next six weeks.

This thread turned sensible and interesting. But I thought it was time to insert some nonsense lest we forget whose thread this is.

[drjay9051]

New to the C2. Every so often I visit the "ranger thread" to see what is new. I have no clue if what he proposes is at all possible. I did note in an earlier post of his that he would enter a race inlate January. However I see on Jan 15 he states he will sharpen for the next six weeks? Does this mean no race at end of January or is "sharpening" a method which would include a late Jan. race? Where is the race? Hopw can I get the results? Posted on C2 website?



J

[ranger]

New to the C2. Every so often I visit the "ranger thread" to see what is new. I have no clue if what he proposes is at all possible. I did note in an earlier post of his that he would enter a race inlate January. However I see on Jan 15 he states he will sharpen for the next six weeks? Does this mean no race at end of January or is "sharpening" a method which would include a late Jan. race? Where is the race? Hopw can I get the results? Posted on C2 website?



J

You can google the results of all the races.

The times will also be entered in the US rankings with the label "race."

Starting on Jan. 31st, I will race every weekend for five weeks.

Four of these venues are set: Indianapolis, Cincinnati, Boston, and Chicago (in that order).

I will pick up a fifth venue (for the week after Boston) when possible times and places become available.

ranger

[ranger]

Once you can do rock-solid, steady state, top-end UT2 work for a FM with a light, efficient stroke at an elevated rate such as 26 spm, then it is time to get to steady state at top-end UT1.

Each training band is about 5 seconds per 500m, so the goal will be to raise the pace five seconds per 500m at this stage in training.

Top-end UT1 rowing can be done for a HM.

At UT1 paces and rates, if you keep your technique together, holding steady the power in your stroke, five seconds per 500m is right about five strokes per minute.

So at the max, in your UT1 rowing, you now will want to push the rate up to 31 spm, cut the distance in half, and search for steady state there.

For instance, if you do 1:47 @ 26 spm at UT2, steady state, for a FM, you now want to search for a comfortable steady state, 1:42 @ 31 spm, for a HM.

Challenging stuff.

"Threshold" rowing.

ranger

[ranger]

Interestingly, the 60-64 lightweight qualifying time for WIRC 2010 is 1:47 pace (7:08).

For me now, that is UT2 at 26 spm, three training bands away from TR.

So, this next spring-summer-fall training season, leading up to the winter indoor racings season, when I will turn 60, any time that I am doing UT2 rowing, I will be going along at WIRC 2K qualifying pace.

Bizarre.

ranger

[ranger]

Wow.

If you are a 60s lwt, as I will be next year, and you can do 1:47 @ 26 spm at UT2, steady state, for a FM, why in the world would you ever want to do foundational rowing ever again?

1:47 is WIRC 2K qualifying pace!

26 spm is a substantial rate for long distance rowing. Great stuff.

A UT2 HR is hardly working!

If you can ever get yourself in this position, training for rowing sure becomes easy and enjoyable.

You can do huge sessions of world class training every day, light years beyond what anyone has ever done, without even trying.

Just a long walk in the park!

Hey.

Know what?

Even _crazy_ dreams come true.

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

ranger

[ranger]

Hey.

Save a horse.

Ride a cowboy.

http://www.truveo.com/Big-Rich-Save-A-H ... 1048914848

[ranger]

Then again, if you row a FM 1:56 @ 26 spm (8 SPI), you might want to do a _lot_ of foundational rowing, perhaps years and years of it, in order to learn how to row.

You are missing something large, both technically and otherwise.

Your boat is stuck in the mud.

You're mired in the muck.

ranger

[hjs]

Therefore I consider (roughly)

100 meter sprint/20 seconds An pace
400/500m TR pace
20min 5k ish AT pace
between HM and fm time UT1 pace
pace you should be able to do for hours UT2 pace

The trouble with this is that you have to be able to row that long to use these I myself can,t even row a Fm without rest.


No doubt NaHa will come around and correct (slap me on the wrist) me

Can I slap first?

IMHO:You've left out how hard the heart is working and fall back on using pace as an imprecise measure.

When describing bands of effort I maintain that we have to measure the body's response to work:

Look at these two examples using your methods to determine what you call TR

#1 Long interval workout 2k-1500m-1k at max (pace for me) 1:37 - 1:43

#2 5 x 500m heart rate at max (pace for me) 1:36 - 1:40

Now ask yourself: When erging at 1:42 pace am I in a max training band or not? Relying on pace alone: the answer is yes in one case and no in another. That's not a valuable answer in my book.

Also:
Watching the HR monitor, By definition: your have not reached 95-100% until a considerable length of time has passed in each of these intervals.

Also, say you are rowing a 5000m piece, the effort can go to max there too (at a longer workout distance) for a valuable length of time.... (say, in the final part) where you will be rowing at slower pace than many TR paces.

Also you can reach AT without having to row 20 minutes.

Looking at your quote again:
........you did say "roughly".
Exercise physiology tries to avoid "roughly".

"Roughly" tends to hide physiological facts.

100 meter sprint/20 seconds An pace
400/500m TR pace
20min 5k ish AT pace
between HM and fm time UT1 pace
pace you should be able to do for hours UT2 pace

Fo the first 2 bands the energy is mostly anaerobic, the first a lactic, the latter lactic.
At is mostly aerobic but also anaerobic.
UT 1 and 2 are only aerobic (sligly a lactic an aerobic to get the system started).
hartrate is not a good messure for the first 2 bands, our hart is not the main factor in energy deliverence.
For the other 3 it is , but it's not a fixed number I think, the fitter one is the highert a hart rate (relative) one can use in a band. A top fit maratoner will have a much higher ut2 hf than an average one, the latter can get that higher if he is better trained.

If take thake this your 1.42 , thats 2k pace? for you, this falls between the second and third band. It is ceratinly not your 20 seconds max pace and also not your 500 meter pace.

The 20 min at I mentioned is a periode of time that you can keep constant more or less, but only just.
If you reach At sooner you are going to fast and can,t mentain that pace, you don,t have a certain balance long enough.

And after an at piece you can always use the first two bands, but that not's at anymore, you certainly have to stop after a short while, so the balance was disturbed. That's no at.

shoot