6:28 2K

[chgoss]

This is a _very_ good way to train.

rich, it was meant to be a joke...

But it's not a joke.

Keeping one pace and rate and doing a little more of it each day is a wonderful way to train, especially for distance rowing, such as 10K, HM, FM, etc.

- that isnt at all what the WP says.. it has different workouts, at different paces, long distance , intervals, , hard, easy.
- It's just so odd the way you embrace these obviously naive, (dare I say "delusionary") training "principles" so completely out of step with proven regimines established by world class athletes and coaches who have millions of dollars riding on performances..

[chgoss]

we're both talking about intervals

No, you are, but I'm not.

Interval(noun): a series of fast-paced exercises interspersed with slower ones or brief rests for training (as of an athlete)

rich: how can you possibly argue that this

To get there, I will have to do the whole thing, steady state, right at my anaerobic threshold, though, 172 bpm.
I am not quite ready to do that yet.

I like to do this work by holding onto the pace and rate for as long as it is comfortable.

isnt intervals according to the dictionary definition above?

[NavigationHazard]

This is a _very_ good way to train.

rich, it was meant to be a joke...

But it's not a joke.

So, you're wrong, according to some of the best rowers around, including Mike Caviston.

Keeping one pace and rate and doing a little more of it each day is a wonderful way to train, especially for distance rowing, such as 10K, HM, FM, etc.

I also do this with 5K.

ranger

For long, continuous Level 3 rows I modify the format slightly. These workouts should be 60’-plus in duration; that will be at least 12-16K for most people (I am currently doing 24K, which most recently took 87:02.7). My approach is to break the long row into multiple smaller segments with 4-5 whole number G[oal] P[ace]s to achieve my overall GP for the workout. The number of smaller segments varies depending on the length of the workout and the best division to keep the math simple. So I divide 24K into a dozen 2K segments. I am going to bump the workout up to 25K soon and will divide it into 10 segments each 2.5K in length. For 15K I would probably keep it simple and use 3K segments. Once I establish my overall GP for the entire workout, I use the general format described above for the interval workouts, but play with it a little bit to adapt it to the longer workout. The spread of segment paces from start to finish (gradually getting faster, of course) will be 3-4 seconds (e.g., 1:51-1:47). Yesterday my 24K goal was 1:49.0, and my GPs for each 2K were 1:51, 1:51, 1:50, 1:50, 1:49, 1:49, 1:49, 1:49, 1:48, 1:48, 1:47, 1:47. Again, this isn’t the absolute fastest way to do a long workout like this, but I know I’ll be warmed up before things get too hard, and I can break the overall workout down mentally into shorter segments. These workouts just don’t seem that long any more. The last 4-6K can be pretty challenging, but by that point I’ve invested too much in the workout to give up easily, and proportionally the remaining distance is small enough that I can usually tough it out.

Perception-wise, each segment might feel something like this:
1st segment: almost too easy; have to hold back to keep from going faster.
2nd segment: fairly easy; could keep the pace for a long time and the thought of going faster doesn’t concern me much.
3rd segment: just about right; couldn’t cruise like this forever, though; could go faster if I HAD too.
4th segment: this feels like work, but I can handle it; don’t know how I can go faster, though.
5th segment: hang on somehow; I guess I can do it after all....

The whole post is at http://c2forum.com/viewtopic.php?p=59973#59973

Where is the 'keeping one pace and rate and doing a little more of it each day'?

[mikvan52]

http://www.oarsport.co.uk/training#training2

Found a bit more on this subject nothing new but maybe a nice read.

"UT2 also offers the opportunity to develop technique.

Each UT2 session should conclude with a flat out piece of up to 2mins from a standing start. "

I like this quote

I like this quote from oarsport:

"Lightweights

Faced with regular weigh-ins, lightweights have to develop a strategy for weight management whilst maintaining their power. Often these strategies are in direct contradiction to prescribed wisdom. Over a period of time athletes get to know their own bodies and just what they can and cannot get away with. The safest way is a gradual loss of weight over a period of time using a combination of reduced calorie intake and increase training volume. It is important that the reduction in daily calories should not drop below that required to run the basal metabolism. It is not a good idea to loose excessive water by sweating prior to racing and then try to restore body fluids to normal during the time between weigh-in and racing. Under normal circumstances it is recommended that weight loss due to sweating during training should be replace by an equal amount of water. So for example if you loose 1kg during a training session then by drinking 1 litre of water your body weight will be restored. However it can take up to 5 hours for fluid ingested to reach all the cells where it is needed for proper metabolism. The maximum time between weigh-in and race is 2 hours and so if the weight lost was predominantly water then you will be handicapped during the race."

Also of note:

Notice the phenomenon of "lightweights" leaving erg competition for extensive periods of time using substitute reasoning such as "I'm learning a new stroke" "I'm revolutionizing the precepts of training with my new "blah-blah" discoveries".

Wonder if RWB/SPI/SWEATING BUCKETS/DLS for a guy whose usually over 175 lbs. is contradictory to a healthy weight loss strategy and knowing your own body?

We'll never know because only 2003 will prove what a 59 year old will do in 2010.

new ranger spectators are about to be treated to an encore ranger performance: Since he will not be "fully trained" until the indoor erg season is effectively over (all major competitions completed), none of he erg scores wil be touted by him as even being races for him... since he won't be fully trained.
As to why he has not been fully trained for CRASH-B's since 2003... I have a good idea: It starts with the color yellow.

[snowleopard]

In 2003, I never completed a 500m trial.

I was always too disorganized, given how poorly I rowed.

It takes one and a half minutes, how effin organised do you have to be? I assume you can dress yourself.

[mikvan52]

Note to spectators of this display of geriatric male posturing: (taunting ranger has no effect other than an off-topic reply that includes the number "2003")

In 2003, I never completed a 500m trial.

...

I did 1:20 once for 400m.

It's amazing how ranger just rises and takes the bait!

I say 'All he'll come up with for an answer is talk about 2003' and that's exactly what he does. Stunning!

RIch: Are you listening?

I no longer have any interest in what you did in 2003.
So you did 1:20 in 2003.. for 400 meters, as a "lardo" before you "rowed well"... Fine...

pAy attn now: Focus... gooood!
What have you done in 2.0.1.0.?

Repeat for us: 2.0.1.0... 2010

any weight class....

How about 200m? Can you row that far w/o a break?
IND_V

[ranger]

In 2003, I never completed a 500m trial.

I was always too disorganized, given how poorly I rowed.

It takes one and a half minutes, how effin organised do you have to be? I assume you can dress yourself.

I suspect that to do your best 500m trial, you have to be more organized (technically, strategically, etc.) than you are in any other trails.

Sprinting puts maximal pressure on technique.

I will be able to do a 500m trial this year, but there is no reason to do one now.

I will do one when I am in the throes of sprinting every day, probably in February some time.

ranger

[ranger]

What have you done in 2.0.1.0.?

No need to do any races yet, especially sprints, although I am indeed starting to think about doing FM, HM, and 60min trials.

In 2009, I pulled 6:41 for 2K, without even preparing for it, just on the basis of foundational rowing.

I was happy with that.

You pulled 6:50, fully trained.

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

I have been doing distance rowing for six months or so.

This training has been doing _very_ well.

I will be sharpening for the next six weeks.

Give or take a bit, I am at weight.

I should have a solid race in Indianapolis in two weeks.

I think I'll do something like the 6:29 I pulled in Baltimore in 2006.

That would be a solid first race, given that the 55s lwt WR is 6:38.1.

The 60s lwt WR is 6:42.

I will be 59 this week.

ranger

[snowleopard]

You pulled 6:50, fully trained.

That's not true is it. Mike doesn't follow your training regime and, ipso facto, neglects key aspects of his training.

The same must also apply to Rocket Roy, and indeed to any > 50s lwt erger since yours is the only way to train and everyone else's training is deficient in some or other area (your analysis not mine).

Any erger that does no train as you do cannot be fully trained and you cannot claim that they are, otherwise you are admitting that their training is more comprehensive than yours and produces a fully trained athlete.

We can conclude, therefore, that Mike pulled 6:50 while not fully trained. And Roy Brook pulled the WR while not fully trained.

[Citroen]

How about 200m? Can you row that far w/o a break?
IND_V

You can't do IND_V for anything other than 4', 500m, 1K, 2K, 5K, 6K, 30', 10K, 60', HM or FM.

The PM3/PM4 will generate the 16digit auth code, but the C2 website won't accept it.

[chgoss]

You pulled 6:50, fully trained.

That's not true is it. Mike doesn't follow your training regime and, ipso facto, neglects key aspects of his training.

The same must also apply to Rocket Roy, and indeed to any > 50s lwt erger since yours is the only way to train and everyone else's training is deficient in some or other area (your analysis not mine).

Any erger that does no train as you do cannot be fully trained and you cannot claim that they are, otherwise you are admitting that their training is more comprehensive than yours and produces a fully trained athlete.

We can conclude, therefore, that Mike pulled 6:50 while not fully trained. And Roy Brook pulled the WR while not fully trained.

That's very solid logic rich..

[mikvan52]

I've figured it out ! "ranger" is a [Bot]

No use trying to get an answer out of him.

If I suggest "turn in a timed distance", he replies.

It's not time to race....

If I ask "so you be sharpening for the next 6 weeks: How about a promise to time trial on February 23rd?" He replies:

"I will be sharpening for he next 6 weeks."

I can understand what's going on here: He's either not a real person or he does not wish to race.
I'll have a potted plant to put on his empty erg-seat reserved for him at Boston.
"In Memory of 2003" our hero, the special one"

[SirWired]

Last year I made weight at all of the race venues I went to and ended up pulling three seconds faster for 2K than anyone else my age and weight, without even preparing for it, just on the basis of foundational rowing, without any distance rowing or sharpening.

This is a bit of a stretch, if technically true.

At CIRC (according to the results website), it is true that you were tops in your age/weight bracket. However, you were beaten by two lwts when you failed to make weight, and in hwt, both men in the 60-64 bracket beat you.

In Indianapolis you didn't finish at all.

SirWired

No, I made weight at all of the venues last year.

ranger

You might want to talk to the CIRC organizers, since apparently they have your results completely wrong: (The asterisk next to times means lwt.)

Veteran Men
Place Name Club Time
Age 50-54
1 Alec Dike Unaffiliated 07:16.1
2 Joseph Darnell Lincoln Park Boat Club 07:17.7 *
3 Robert Gottschalk Lincoln Park Juniors 07:33.2
Age 55-59
1 Keith Oldham Milwaukee Rowing Club 07:18.5 *
2 Viorel Stribu Lincoln Park Boat Club 07:25.9 *
3 Rich Cureton University of Michigan 07:30.9
4 Frank Morawiecki Unaffiliated 07:49.5
5 Ron Boi Lincoln Park Boat Club 08:20.9
Age 60-64
1 Terry Conway Lincoln Park Boat Club 06:55.2
2 Leonard Richards Lincoln Park Boat Club 07:28.4

http://www.chicagoindoorrowing.com/reco ... sults.html

Are you saying that not only were you lwt, despite what was recorded, but you actually came in first, even though the results list you as third? By a 12.4 second margin away from first?

Are the results referring to some other Rich Cureton from U. Mich.?

SirWired

[snowleopard]

Are the results referring to some other Rich Cureton from U. Mich.

That would be too much to bear

[Citroen]

I've figured it out ! "ranger" is a [Bot]

If you suspect him of being a bot perhaps a quick Turing Test could prove your theory one way or another.