An examination of WR lightweight marks age 30 on up

[Byron Drachman]

oops. wrong thread

[macroth]

Mind you, he's not playing around. He even quoted a bunch of people. I repeat, he is NOT. PLAYING. AROUND.

[Byron Drachman]

oops. wrong thread.

[chgoss]

Jan 25, 2010: I am just beginning to sharpen.

Jan 27: 2010: I now have seven weeks of sharpening.

Rangeresque mathematics

This isnt the 628 thread that I swore off until after WIRC, so I guess I can offer:

Ranger is DEFINITIVELY, NOT SHARPENING.

he may do "some sharpening workouts" over the next couple month's. But, he is not officially sharpening.

Why: because he cant start "Sharpening" until "distance rowing" is complete, and "distance rowing" cant complete until he is within 12 seconds of his stated goal of 6:18.

It's a tough line he's walking, one has to admire his command of the english language. On the one hand, he must continue to posit his superb preparation, and the impending collapse of 55-59 lwt WR's.
On the other hand, he must also provide himself plausable deniability when this seasons best turns out to be a 6:45. ("I never sharpened last year, show me one reported sharpening workout!").
by always claiming to be "starting sharpening" next week, he gets both accomplished..

Never mind, I found it.. you are in stage #2 below..

Ranger's stages of training
(1) Row effectively/foundational rowing (at low rates, middle distances, and high stroking power). Don't race your training!
(2) Row efficiently/hard distance rowing/pre-sharpening (at low stroking powers, long distances, and up to 30 spm). Don't race your training!
(3) Sharpening (at high rates, middling stroking powers, and short distances, 2 month's at most). Now it's time to race your training!. Get out the clock and bust it to the max!
(4) Race (at middling rates, middling stroking powers, and middling distances).

Notes:
- "Dont race your training" means: dont record the time it took to complete a distance, regardless of the rate or pace of that session, as the very act of recording the time/distace transforms a stage 1 or 2 session, into a stage 3 "sharpening" session.
- A person can only start #3 when they are within 12 seconds of their target race goal.

Yes.

ranger

[ranger]

Well, I just ate you up, Mike.

Races are won in training, not on race day.

Are you gonna respond now?

Or are you just gonna fold like all the other pussies on this line?

How does the wake feel, Mike?

Gettin' a little rough back there?

Here we go, son.

Time you learned a lesson or two about training.

Try 1;30 @ 40 spm (12 SPI), Mike.

See how it feels, bubba.

I think that's where I'm headed for 500s.

Ya got a big mouth but not much else, son.

Are you still doing 1:39 @ 36 spm (10 MPS).

Yikes.

Ya need ta learn ta row, boy.

In the world of canoeing, we cal that "lily-dippin;."

Ya need to get yr paddle in the wada if ya gonna haul da boat.

ranger

[mikvan52]

Have you ever noticed how people get irrational when they get angry?

All anyone has to do is carefully read the first post of this thread.
What I contend applies to everyone...

that being said:
I've never minded a fire fight:
implied by this outburst:

I'm not playing around.

ranger

hmmm:
"Everybody run: Dangie's got a gun!"(AEROSMITH rip-off)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o_KytLO2WME

or... (how about?) The Lone Ranger to Tonto as an overwhelming number of Indians swoop down on them: " Tonto! Looks like we're in for a heap of trouble!"

Tonto to the ranger: "What do you mean "We", white man"


I jes love it when de perfesser git lil greased and 'gry


Mais, mon cher ami, Richard, Coeur de Lion: My argument is mathematical. If you cannot fathom it, perhaps you should take night courses?

You might learn something new and interesting

eg:

Any variable you wish to include in the formula of how one figures what a WR 2k is ... is a rational number.
Mathematics has proven that the resultant curve is smooth as long as the equation includes only rational numbers.
To be human is to be on this curve.
The curve has been demonstrated to be descending one (2k pace vs. increasing age) BY ALL LWT AGE WR DATA AVAILABLE FROM C2

Again:
My data set comes from WR performers
The curve applies to everyone of that caliber.

Any 2k performances over a period of 10 years after the age of 30 indicate a decline and confirm the mathematics of the curve I'm referring to.

Before going apoplectic again.... reflect on the truth of the matter. It's general... It's not an attack on RWB or DLS or SPI training... it's more fundamental than that.


Have other data (in the vein of what I'm talking about) to show us...? Be our guest. Save speculation for the "6:28" dream-land thread. year-to-year is Not in the same vein. Decade to decade is....

personally I don't want to talk about variations from the opening topic here.
For purposes of this thread: talking about 20x500m as a hwt in a dank basement back in 2003 don't dem-dere-do it fer me.

Don't try to hijack this thread with troll-like diatribe. Please.

[mikvan52]

Rich your outburst of (Posted: Jan 27, 2010 5:06 pm) while I was writing a response to you....
doesn't dignify a response.

Please go back to your thread as you do not seem to want to discuss the issue I'm bringing up here.... it has to do with statistics not (being) ballistic.

[DUThomas]

Don't try to hijack this thread with troll-like diatribe. Please.

+1. The original post and some of the replies were quite interesting.

[mikvan52]

I have chosen lightweights because w/o doing too much review we can be certain that they are all approx. the same weight.

Here are the WR times for each distance 500 thru 2k: (source C2 official WRs)

To be excruciatingly thorough, here's a snapshot of the data from which my tables in the opening post were created:



I salute these lightweights!
It has been very inspirational to have met a good number of them.

I would love to meet Steven Geary someday.
Does anyone know if he's ever been to the United States? (He's from NZL)

Isn't it interesting that Dean Smith is the only one who's retains a WR in all 3 distances (500, 1000, 2000)?

[mikvan52]

... and furthermore the lists of the 1k and the 2k are nearly mutually exclusive.... I would have thought that more of the fastest guys at 1k would also be the fastest all-time at 2k....
Then, again, like in running on the track... Who, indeed, has ever held both the 800m and 1500m WR's...??

I bet Nav' has the answer!

[NavigationHazard]

Two men, actually. Otto Peltzer of Germany back in 1926-28 and then Seb Coe of GBR in 1979-80. The list expands to four if you count also the mile (add Glenn Cunningham and Peter Snell).

[mikvan52]

Two men, actually. Otto Peltzer of Germany back in 1926-28 and then Seb Coe of GBR in 1979-80. The list expands to four if you count also the mile (add Glenn Cunningham and Peter Snell).

I thought that I remember something about Coe. Snell doesn't surprise me as also being on the short list.

Thnx!

[hjs]

... and furthermore the lists of the 1k and the 2k are nearly mutually exclusive.... I would have thought that more of the fastest guys at 1k would also be the fastest all-time at 2k....
Then, again, like in running on the track... Who, indeed, has ever held both the 800m and 1500m WR's...??

I bet Nav' has the answer!

There is also the matter of ranked or not, many top otw rowers simply don,t rank there pieces. If you look at the nat erg competions you will see that most of those races are not ranked. Although it would be a small matter for c2 to do this themselve, but hey are a bussiness, there aim is money and not the ranking

Also, top otw rowers seldom do 1k pieces, if they did the 1k ranking would be very different.

To compare 1k and 2 k/3 minutes and 6 minutes with 800 and 1500 is not right I think, we should better take 1500m and 3k. 3.26 and 7.20 ish

Doing that you will find more double wr holders I think.

[mikvan52]

So here's a piece of advice for all those lwts who are both looking for a WR and over the age of 30.

Look at this table:

(source C2 official WRs)


Age>500 m> 1000m> 2000m
30 > 1:24.5 > 2:57.8 > 6:06.4
40 > 1:24.7 > 3:01.0 > 6:18.2
50 > 1:24.2 > 3:03.3 > 6:25.1
60 > 1:29.9 > 3:16.7 > 6:42.5
70 > 1:38.4 > 3:29.1 > 7:13.4
80 > 1:41.1 > 3:47.2 > 7:42.0

Be wise: chose a goal time that is between your age record and the one for the next younger group.

Example: You want to set a record at 1k and you are a 50 lwt.
The WR is 3:03.3.
My advise is to build your training around the 3:01.0 to 3:03.2 gap

For people who are not WR holders: Set a PB goal based on a modest fractional difference from the percentile of your best distance.

[mikvan52]

... and furthermore the lists of the 1k and the 2k are nearly mutually exclusive.... I would have thought that more of the fastest guys at 1k would also be the fastest all-time at 2k....
Then, again, like in running on the track... Who, indeed, has ever held both the 800m and 1500m WR's...??

I bet Nav' has the answer!

There is also the matter of ranked or not, many top otw rowers simply don,t rank there pieces.

Great point: This is why I did not include those lwts who are under the age of 30 in my examination.
By and large older folks are not Nat'l team members, Redgrave, Wadell and others not withstanding

And once you get into your 40's.....(the logic is clear)