Mike--
Think about it.
If you row well, as I now do, all of you have to do is learn to row efficiently and you can zoom along, effortlessly, 1:43 @ 29 spm (11 MPS), with your heart rate below your anaerobic threshold.
When you are pulling 11 SPI like this, you are barely pulling and therefore barely doing any work, relative to what you do when you take a full, stiff stroke (13 SPI).
Your are "frothing"!
Why are you going so fast?
You are at a proper ratio to maximize efficiency.
You have the rate up!
You aren't trudging.
But you are taking full advantage of your effectiveness, all of the work you did learning to row well.
Speed comes from the inherent efficiency in a well done rowing stroke, when done at the proper ratio.
No unusual effort needed.
Mike--
Think about it.
If you are rowing, steady state, below your anaerobic threshold, you can do it for an hour or more.
You are just doing high end UT1.
A UT1 pace of 1:43 predicts a 6:12 2K.
Nice, huh?
So!
Why, why, why, why, why, would you want to waste your time trudging, trudging, trudging, trudging, if you can just sit down on the erg each day, take off at 29 spm, and have a nice hour or hour and a half row?
1:43 for an hour is 17.5K.
Great stuff.
Almost no one can row 17.5K for 60min--at all--much less every day.
A disappearingly few lightweights can--of any age.
The 60s lwt WR is still shy of 16K.
You row right around that 16K in an hour.
But that 16K misses 17.5K--literally--by a country mile (1500m).
Event Record Age Name Wt. Gender Country Season Verification*
60m 13108 12 Briggs Polikoff L M USA 2009 PM3/PM4 verification code
60m 13371 81 Robert Spenger L M USA 2006 Historical record*
60m 15034 70 Roger Bangay L M GBR 2007 Witnessed at public club
60m 15928 60 Greg Hodge L M USA 2007 PM3/PM4 verification code
60m 17132 53 Rod Freed L M USA 2003 Historical record*
60m 17282 32 Dan Staite L M GBR 2006 Historical record*
60m 17285 46 Kent Timm L M USA 2005 Historical record*
60m 17319 29 Thomas Ebert L M DNK 2003 Historical record*
60m 17754 17 Matt McArthur L M USA 2005 Historical record*
There is a good reason why 60min has always been Eskild's favorite session on the erg.
If you already know how to row well, it maximizes work on efficiency.
And if you are already effective, efficiency is all that is left to learn.
Put them together and you are fast as hell, no matter what distance you are rowing.
ranger
6:28 2K
So, _I_ speculate and am therefore culpable of fantasy, lying, deception, etc., but you don't speculate and therefore are being factual, truthful, honest, etc.Nosmo wrote:He is a very strong erg athlete. But he is a year older than last year.mikvan52 wrote:Thanks, Nosmo! But I do have faith in Rich's abilities. He is a strong erg athlete.
I don't believe...
he is getting faster.
I don't believe...
he did not sharpen last year.
So my bet is...
that he will be slower then last year and once again it will take him a number of races to get into the low 6:40s.
I'd give the odds...
of him going under 6:43 a bit less then 50%.
I think...
the odds of you doing so are more then 50%.
So I don't think...
my bet is a sure thing.
but I really think...
the odds are with me.
Look again.
You don't have any evidence at all for your speculations.
You are just running off at the mouth.
I have my rowing as evidence.
I live with it every day.
You have only your own ill will to back up your claim that I am lying about my evidence.
Pretty nasty stuff.
You should be ashamed.
ranger
Last edited by ranger on February 3rd, 2010, 6:12 am, edited 1 time in total.
Rich Cureton M 72 5'11" 165 lbs. 2K pbs: 6:27.5 (hwt), 6:28 (lwt)
BTW, as I have said, last year, I not only didn't do any sharpening, I didn't do any distance rowing.
I just did foudnational rowing at low rates.
I get about a dozen seconds over 2K each from distance rowing and hard sharpening.
So it will indeed be interesting to see what I can pull this year for 2K, when I am fully trained.
If everything goes well and these trends hold, the prediction should be something like 6:41 minus 24 seconds.
What's that?
6:17
No, I won't pull that in my first 2K this year.
I have just begun my sharpening, and I am still working up to distance trials in my distance rowing.
But I should be much better than my first race last year.
And five weeks from now, if everything goes well, I think I should be pretty darn near to being fully trained.
So my 2Ks by that time should be very good indeed.
ranger
I just did foudnational rowing at low rates.
I get about a dozen seconds over 2K each from distance rowing and hard sharpening.
So it will indeed be interesting to see what I can pull this year for 2K, when I am fully trained.
If everything goes well and these trends hold, the prediction should be something like 6:41 minus 24 seconds.
What's that?
6:17
No, I won't pull that in my first 2K this year.
I have just begun my sharpening, and I am still working up to distance trials in my distance rowing.
But I should be much better than my first race last year.
And five weeks from now, if everything goes well, I think I should be pretty darn near to being fully trained.
So my 2Ks by that time should be very good indeed.
ranger
Rich Cureton M 72 5'11" 165 lbs. 2K pbs: 6:27.5 (hwt), 6:28 (lwt)
Mike--
If you pull 1:43 @ 29 spm (11 SPI, 10 MPS), when does your HR go over your anaerobic threshold, 143 bpm?
500m?
By the end of this winter racing season, I think I'll do 60min, 1:43 @ 29 spm (11 SPI, 10 MPS).
You can't row 60min if your heart rate _ever_ goes over your anaerobic threshold.
At best, 60min is a "threshold" row.
You do it with your heart rate just a smidge below your anaerobic threshold.
If I can get this done, it will be an improvement of five seconds per 500m over what I could do for 60min back in 2002-2003.
The difference will have nothing to do with fitness.
In fact, because I am now seven years older, I assume that I _can't_ be as fit as I was in 2002-2003.
Everyone declines with age.
But beyond that, I am just as trained, physically, as I was back in 2002-2003.
So any improvement that I show will just be a result of my improvements in technique, my improved effectiveness and efficiency, technically, given the same (or even less) physical ability.
What happens here will be an interesting test of the role of technique in erging.
If I improve five seconds per 500m in something like a 60min row, and the improvement is just due to technique, those who say that technique has little to do with erging will be refulted--convincingly.
ranger
If you pull 1:43 @ 29 spm (11 SPI, 10 MPS), when does your HR go over your anaerobic threshold, 143 bpm?
500m?
By the end of this winter racing season, I think I'll do 60min, 1:43 @ 29 spm (11 SPI, 10 MPS).
You can't row 60min if your heart rate _ever_ goes over your anaerobic threshold.
At best, 60min is a "threshold" row.
You do it with your heart rate just a smidge below your anaerobic threshold.
If I can get this done, it will be an improvement of five seconds per 500m over what I could do for 60min back in 2002-2003.
The difference will have nothing to do with fitness.
In fact, because I am now seven years older, I assume that I _can't_ be as fit as I was in 2002-2003.
Everyone declines with age.
But beyond that, I am just as trained, physically, as I was back in 2002-2003.
So any improvement that I show will just be a result of my improvements in technique, my improved effectiveness and efficiency, technically, given the same (or even less) physical ability.
What happens here will be an interesting test of the role of technique in erging.
If I improve five seconds per 500m in something like a 60min row, and the improvement is just due to technique, those who say that technique has little to do with erging will be refulted--convincingly.
ranger
Last edited by ranger on February 3rd, 2010, 5:05 am, edited 2 times in total.
Rich Cureton M 72 5'11" 165 lbs. 2K pbs: 6:27.5 (hwt), 6:28 (lwt)
Yes, I am racing in Cincinnati this weekend.
I need to qualify if I want a plane ticket to WIRC.
I am doing _two_ races at WIRC this year, the 55s lwt race in the moring and then the lightweight Open race in the afternoon.
In terms of age, it appears that everyone in the Open lightweight race is in their 20s.
I am 59.
Seeing my age, C2 actually wrote me to ask whether I had made a mistake.
They thought I had entered the wrong race.
Nope.
ranger
I need to qualify if I want a plane ticket to WIRC.
I am doing _two_ races at WIRC this year, the 55s lwt race in the moring and then the lightweight Open race in the afternoon.
In terms of age, it appears that everyone in the Open lightweight race is in their 20s.
I am 59.
Seeing my age, C2 actually wrote me to ask whether I had made a mistake.
They thought I had entered the wrong race.
Nope.
ranger
Rich Cureton M 72 5'11" 165 lbs. 2K pbs: 6:27.5 (hwt), 6:28 (lwt)
BTW, among other things, before Sunday, when I race in Cincinnati, I am going to try to do 60min, 1:47 @ 26-28 spm, just for a long row, working on efficiency.
I expect my HR to be middling UT1, steady state, that is, not much over 160 bpm.
My anaerobic threshold is 172 bpm.
UT2 is 145 bpm.
1:47 for 60min is 16,850m.
That will be a pb for me by one second per 500m, 150m.
1:47 is UT1 for a 1:37/6:28 2K, my 2K target for Cincinnati.
On a mild effort, 80% HRR, 7% HRR below maximal exertion, 1:47 would be 16.85K at the speed that Mike VB can row, flat out, for 5K.
On a mild effort, it would be five seconds per 500m or so faster than anyone my age and weight has ever rowed for 60min.
I'll do the row IND_V and post it in the lightweight rankings.
The row would be about a mile further than anyone my age and weight has rowed this year for 60min.
RANKING RESULTS 2010
Indoor Rower | Individual and Race Results | 60 minutes | Men's | Lightweight | Custom Age Range (59–70) | Current 2010 Season
gregory brock 61 santa cruz ca USA 15553 IND
1 Bob Lakin 61 Wichita KS USA 15389 IND_V
2 Hugh Conway 60 St. Pats TOW Club IRL 15331 IND_V
3 Gerald Lawson 61 Winona MN USA 15282 IND_V
4 Ed Pabst 60 Terre Haute IN USA 15244 IND
5 PJoe Keating 60 London IRL 15205 C2Log
6 john black 61 wanganui NZL 15104 IND
7 Rolf Meek 59 Oslo NOR 15088 IND
8 Rick Bayko 62 Newburyport MA USA 15052 IND_V
9 Henry Baker 62 Santa Barbara CA USA 15045 RowPro
10 George Meredith 61 Gravesend GBR 14925 IND_V
Then, at some point over the next five weeks, as I sharpen, I'll push this 60min effort to max, 1:43 @ 29 spm (10 MPS, 11 SPI).
ranger
I expect my HR to be middling UT1, steady state, that is, not much over 160 bpm.
My anaerobic threshold is 172 bpm.
UT2 is 145 bpm.
1:47 for 60min is 16,850m.
That will be a pb for me by one second per 500m, 150m.
1:47 is UT1 for a 1:37/6:28 2K, my 2K target for Cincinnati.
On a mild effort, 80% HRR, 7% HRR below maximal exertion, 1:47 would be 16.85K at the speed that Mike VB can row, flat out, for 5K.
On a mild effort, it would be five seconds per 500m or so faster than anyone my age and weight has ever rowed for 60min.
I'll do the row IND_V and post it in the lightweight rankings.
The row would be about a mile further than anyone my age and weight has rowed this year for 60min.
RANKING RESULTS 2010
Indoor Rower | Individual and Race Results | 60 minutes | Men's | Lightweight | Custom Age Range (59–70) | Current 2010 Season
gregory brock 61 santa cruz ca USA 15553 IND
1 Bob Lakin 61 Wichita KS USA 15389 IND_V
2 Hugh Conway 60 St. Pats TOW Club IRL 15331 IND_V
3 Gerald Lawson 61 Winona MN USA 15282 IND_V
4 Ed Pabst 60 Terre Haute IN USA 15244 IND
5 PJoe Keating 60 London IRL 15205 C2Log
6 john black 61 wanganui NZL 15104 IND
7 Rolf Meek 59 Oslo NOR 15088 IND
8 Rick Bayko 62 Newburyport MA USA 15052 IND_V
9 Henry Baker 62 Santa Barbara CA USA 15045 RowPro
10 George Meredith 61 Gravesend GBR 14925 IND_V
Then, at some point over the next five weeks, as I sharpen, I'll push this 60min effort to max, 1:43 @ 29 spm (10 MPS, 11 SPI).
ranger
Rich Cureton M 72 5'11" 165 lbs. 2K pbs: 6:27.5 (hwt), 6:28 (lwt)
I don't think efficiency is as basic as effectiveness.John Rupp wrote:Probably a lot of the hysteria around Rich is that he does his own thing, which everyone gets if they don't "conform" to hard workouts at r20.
However that is exactly the problem. Rich was smashing the WRs the 2nd season that he rowed,
then started all the low rate and SPI stuff that sabotagued his times, the same as they do with everyone else.
Of course tall long armed rowers have much less problem with those, as the handle travel per stroke is much greater.
Fortunately Rich is getting away from that now, and rowing like he did at the start, though much stronger now, as he says.
I'm interested to see the results, now that the ratings are creeping back upward.
But you are right, effectiveness without efficiency isn't much use, either.
Better, you should first become effective.
Then, become efficient.
It has taken a while, but that's what I have done.
Back in 2002-2003, I was efficient.
And that was indeed adequate to break WRs.
But it wasn't enough, if I wanted to row my best.
To row my best, I needed to be effective, too.
I needed to row well.
It took seven years to learn how to do it, but that project is complete.
I now row well (i.e., effectively).
So, yes, I am now getting back to what I do best--rowing efficiently, for all your disagreementa, as _you_ say, at a high rate, and as PaulS says, at 10 MPS.
If you row well and can row your normal 2K stroking power at 10MPS over long distances (e.g., 60min/HM), you have it made in the shade.
You are both effective and efficient.
That is, you are fast as hell.
ranger
Rich Cureton M 72 5'11" 165 lbs. 2K pbs: 6:27.5 (hwt), 6:28 (lwt)
As is clear to the attentive:..... R. Cureton, the aging weight cutter of the great north woods, wants people to report workouts, is too lazy to look in the online records of others, report them accurately, and write entries here worthy of response.
Then he has the temerity to point out:
HE has it.
WE don't, as he does not record it here or anywhere else for anyone to see.
I have told Rich, in the past, that I admired his willingness to attempt new methods of training.... ie: To get all "mave-ricky"
But, as the years roll by, our "Ricky" doesn't have anything to show for his innovative techniques.
The record is quite clear:
Ricky Cureton lightweight record
2003... "not rowing well" WR rows (congratulations!) 6:28
2004 ?
2005 ?
2006 ?
2007 (6:3x.x ?)
2008 ?
2009 6:41.0
2010
Oh he has the Baltimore Hwt stuff...& (WOW)! a 1:30.x 500m Hwt effort. Failed 5k efforts.... Failed efforts to get on the C2 IRT..... When he was going to post times "in the fall". NO IND_V times at any distance as a lwt in the interim....
It is lame to say that he cannot have fully trained himself in the years between 2003 and 2007. Falls came and went... He rowed decent erg times all along and the net result is a 6:28 becomes a 6:41 many years later.
His experiment is sadly a failure. As others have testified too.
6:41 at 58 IS A FINE RESULT... but it's not the topic of this thread. ^6:28 is
All through his missing years he's been claiming "perfect stroke, just found it, eureka" status for his new techniques w/o posting a single workout or result indicating any improvement since his "not rowing well days... That's his choice ...
The "I'll be just like/whomever", 6:16 stuff" is raving lunacy: It flies in the face of all measures of human capacity when aging is taken into consideration.
Details about aging/erging are in a separate thread on this forum (a non-dreamers thread)... No need to bother with the sobering supporting facts, is there Ricky?
If anyone is hopeful for a ranger-ricky 6:16 or 6:18 or 6:28 performance from Ricky it is because they are dreamers. BTW: I admire dreamers but purely for spiritual and romantic reasons. That counts a lot in my world too.
Back to the Put it up there Big boy world:
OPEN BET: ranger will not ever row a 6:28.0 or better again in his life as a lightweight obeying the 2hr rule for weighins!
I will take bets of $100,000.00 or more only. I'll give odds if you wish.
Money has to put up in advance an held by a neutral party. My check is ready. I'll have it bank certified as will be required of anyone betting against me. Bets will be renewed and made year by year. Accounts to be settled on May 1 of each C2 year... (I have an aversion to perpetuities!)
ricky has proven himself to be a "perp."
John Rupp?
R. Cureton? (the "millionaire" who says he has loads of cash on hand)
All of this thread is very cute... entertaining... but there never will be any substance supporting the R. Cureton time gains claim at 2k forthcoming from Ann Arbor or any other planet having earth's gravity constant.
Put that in yer MPS pipe and smoke it!
Finally:
Ricky sez: time trials are "for the coaches". Yet: We remember, because he tells us over-and-over ad naseum: " I am self-taught ."
Does this make sense then? .... Only to him and any other self-deluding dreamer who sets foot on the premises.
The office is now open for bet-taking. Send me PMs with your bets.
BTW: the walrus was Paul! ..... Paul S
Then he has the temerity to point out:
This is true.ranger wrote: I have my rowing as evidence.
I live with it every day.
HE has it.
WE don't, as he does not record it here or anywhere else for anyone to see.
I have told Rich, in the past, that I admired his willingness to attempt new methods of training.... ie: To get all "mave-ricky"
But, as the years roll by, our "Ricky" doesn't have anything to show for his innovative techniques.
The record is quite clear:
Ricky Cureton lightweight record
2003... "not rowing well" WR rows (congratulations!) 6:28
2004 ?
2005 ?
2006 ?
2007 (6:3x.x ?)
2008 ?
2009 6:41.0
2010
Oh he has the Baltimore Hwt stuff...& (WOW)! a 1:30.x 500m Hwt effort. Failed 5k efforts.... Failed efforts to get on the C2 IRT..... When he was going to post times "in the fall". NO IND_V times at any distance as a lwt in the interim....
It is lame to say that he cannot have fully trained himself in the years between 2003 and 2007. Falls came and went... He rowed decent erg times all along and the net result is a 6:28 becomes a 6:41 many years later.
His experiment is sadly a failure. As others have testified too.
6:41 at 58 IS A FINE RESULT... but it's not the topic of this thread. ^6:28 is
All through his missing years he's been claiming "perfect stroke, just found it, eureka" status for his new techniques w/o posting a single workout or result indicating any improvement since his "not rowing well days... That's his choice ...
The "I'll be just like/whomever", 6:16 stuff" is raving lunacy: It flies in the face of all measures of human capacity when aging is taken into consideration.
Details about aging/erging are in a separate thread on this forum (a non-dreamers thread)... No need to bother with the sobering supporting facts, is there Ricky?
If anyone is hopeful for a ranger-ricky 6:16 or 6:18 or 6:28 performance from Ricky it is because they are dreamers. BTW: I admire dreamers but purely for spiritual and romantic reasons. That counts a lot in my world too.
Back to the Put it up there Big boy world:
OPEN BET: ranger will not ever row a 6:28.0 or better again in his life as a lightweight obeying the 2hr rule for weighins!
I will take bets of $100,000.00 or more only. I'll give odds if you wish.
Money has to put up in advance an held by a neutral party. My check is ready. I'll have it bank certified as will be required of anyone betting against me. Bets will be renewed and made year by year. Accounts to be settled on May 1 of each C2 year... (I have an aversion to perpetuities!)
ricky has proven himself to be a "perp."
John Rupp?
R. Cureton? (the "millionaire" who says he has loads of cash on hand)
All of this thread is very cute... entertaining... but there never will be any substance supporting the R. Cureton time gains claim at 2k forthcoming from Ann Arbor or any other planet having earth's gravity constant.
Put that in yer MPS pipe and smoke it!
Finally:
Ricky sez: time trials are "for the coaches". Yet: We remember, because he tells us over-and-over ad naseum: " I am self-taught ."
Does this make sense then? .... Only to him and any other self-deluding dreamer who sets foot on the premises.
The office is now open for bet-taking. Send me PMs with your bets.
BTW: the walrus was Paul! ..... Paul S
-
hjs
- Marathon Poster
- Posts: 10076
- Joined: March 16th, 2006, 3:18 pm
- Location: Amstelveen the netherlands
hmmmm nice list with simple facts.mikvan52 wrote:As is clear to the attentive:..... R. Cureton, the aging weight cutter of the great north woods, wants people to report workouts, is too lazy to look in the online records of others, report them accurately, and write entries here worthy of response.
Then he has the temerity to point out:
This is true.ranger wrote: I have my rowing as evidence.
I live with it every day.
HE has it.
WE don't, as he does not record it here or anywhere else for anyone to see.
I have told Rich, in the past, that I admired his willingness to attempt new methods of training.... ie: To get all "mave-ricky"
But, as the years roll by, our "Ricky" doesn't have anything to show for his innovative techniques.
The record is quite clear:
Ricky Cureton lightweight record
2003... "not rowing well" WR rows (congratulations!) 6:28
2004 ?
2005 ?
2006 ?
2007 (6:3x.x ?)
2008 ?
2009 6:41.0
2010
Oh he has the Baltimore Hwt stuff...& (WOW)! a 1:30.x 500m Hwt effort. Failed 5k efforts.... Failed efforts to get on the C2 IRT..... When he was going to post times "in the fall". NO IND_V times at any distance as a lwt in the interim....
It is lame to say that he cannot have fully trained himself in the years between 2003 and 2007. Falls came and went... He rowed decent erg times all along and the net result is a 6:28 becomes a 6:41 many years later.
His experiment is sadly a failure. As others have testified too.
6:41 at 58 IS A FINE RESULT... but it's not the topic of this thread. ^6:28 is
All through his missing years he's been claiming "perfect stroke, just found it, eureka" status for his new techniques w/o posting a single workout or result indicating any improvement since his "not rowing well days... That's his choice ...
The "I'll be just like/whomever", 6:16 stuff" is raving lunacy: It flies in the face of all measures of human capacity when aging is taken into consideration.
Details about aging/erging are in a separate thread on this forum (a non-dreamers thread)... No need to bother with the sobering supporting facts, is there Ricky?
If anyone is hopeful for a ranger-ricky 6:16 or 6:18 or 6:28 performance from Ricky it is because they are dreamers. BTW: I admire dreamers but purely for spiritual and romantic reasons. That counts a lot in my world too.
Back to the Put it up there Big boy world:
OPEN BET: ranger will not ever row a 6:28.0 or better again in his life as a lightweight obeying the 2hr rule for weighins!
I will take bets of $100,000.00 or more only. I'll give odds if you wish.
Money has to put up in advance an held by a neutral party. My check is ready. I'll have it bank certified as will be required of anyone betting against me. Bets will be renewed and made year by year. Accounts to be settled on May 1 of each C2 year... (I have an aversion to perpetuities!)
ricky has proven himself to be a "perp."
John Rupp?
R. Cureton? (the "millionaire" who says he has loads of cash on hand)
All of this thread is very cute... entertaining... but there never will be any substance supporting the R. Cureton time gains claim at 2k forthcoming from Ann Arbor or any other planet having earth's gravity constant.
Put that in yer MPS pipe and smoke it!
Finally:
Ricky sez: time trials are "for the coaches". Yet: We remember, because he tells us over-and-over ad naseum: " I am self-taught ."
Does this make sense then? .... Only to him and any other self-deluding dreamer who sets foot on the premises.
The office is now open for bet-taking. Send me PMs with your bets.
BTW: the walrus was Paul! ..... Paul S
About that bet, half the world would make that bet but on your side not against you.
Not true.mikvan52 wrote:HE has it. WE don't
I have explained my training over the last five years exactly.
You have just claimed that it is ineffective and therefore undesirable.
To each his own.
You also have the results of my training.
I have posted things like 500r30 @ 1:30 and 1Kr24 @ 1:38, with screen shots.
In 2006, I pulled 6:29.7 at a race venue, again without any serious preparation for it, just on the basis of foundational rowing.
Here is the result of my training from last year, when I wasn't preparing to race, just doing foundational training, no distance rowing or sharpening.
RANKING RESULTS 2009
Indoor Rower | Individual and Race Results | 2000m | Men's | Lightweight | Custom Age Range (55–59) | 2009 Season
You are number 1 of 95
1 Rich Cureton 58 Ann Arbor MI USA 6:41.0 RACE
2 Rocketroy Brook 57 GBR 6:43.8 RACE
3 John Busk 55 Slangerup GBR 6:47.5 RACE
4 Mike Van Beuren 56 Annapolis MD USA 6:50.0 RACE
5 Brian Leonard Phipps 59 Rongotea Manawatu NZL 6:56.9 R
5 Rolf Meek 58 Oslo NOR 6:56.9 IND
7 Tor Arne Simonsen 58 NOR 6:57.3 RACE
8 Thomas Knight 56 newcastle on tyne GBR 7:04.5 RACE
9 Chris Betenson 55 IRL 7:04.8 RACE
10 Daniel DEVEZ 55 FRA 7:05.1 RACE
Nothing ambiguous about that.
Over the next five weeks, you will have the results of my training this year, both in races and in training, when I have been preparing to race, doing both distance rowing and sharpening.
There will be nothing ambiguous about these results, either.
If my training involves the timing of a "piece," I will report it.
But in my training, I only time pieces that I am racing--distance trials and sharpening workouts.
I am getting to these things just now after long labor elsewhere and will indeed report the result of these at-home races.
But as I have explained, otherwise, my attention and concentration is directed elsewhere (rowing well, etc.).
ranger
P.S. I have also been reporting exactly what I do in my cross-training, both on the stepper and on the bike--with screen shots. It is not that you don't know about these things. It is that you think they are ineffective or unnecessary. To each his own.
Last edited by ranger on February 3rd, 2010, 9:20 am, edited 1 time in total.
Rich Cureton M 72 5'11" 165 lbs. 2K pbs: 6:27.5 (hwt), 6:28 (lwt)
Henry:hjs wrote:
About that bet...
I'll be able to retire for life!
Every year at least one gullible person will come forth with their $100k and bet.
Why wouldn't they? Ricky's 180 pages of drivel will have convinced them of that "the truth machine" will speak the wisdom of the RWB/DLS Foundational/SPI jabberwocky/RANGER training. N'est ce pas?
It's a dead-cold solid lock investment scheme on my part!
As any mave-ricky would say: "I'm pleased with this."
Yes you are correct: "you have explained"ranger wrote:Not true.mikvan52 wrote:HE has it. WE don't
I have explained ....
But you have not shown your work.
Oh..... and where's the bet?... You can retire!
$100k a year ... 2010, 2011, 2012.. you'll be reeling off 2ks at 6:28 now that it's all been "explained"....
Without any distance rowing or sharpening, it is the equivalent of a 6:17 2K.mikvan52 wrote:6:41 at 58 IS A FINE RESULT
Without any distance rowing or sharpening, just doing foundatioanal rowing at 16-22 spm as preparation, I suspect that you couldn't pull much better than 7:10 for 2K.
You also get about a dozen seconds each over 2K from hard distance rowing and sharpening.
ranger
Rich Cureton M 72 5'11" 165 lbs. 2K pbs: 6:27.5 (hwt), 6:28 (lwt)