The Two Types of Training

[mikvan52]

I was a little puzzled by ranger's need to warm up for a four hour drive. In most respects I can't begin to match his performances, but it's not unusual for me to drive for up to 6 hours with only a minimal stretching routine beforehand, and I'm sure I can maintain the same sort of pace that ranger does.

It would be interesting to hear how long (in time and meters) this ersatz "warm up" was.

It was not a warm up. WIthin 10 minutes of cessation he's be warmed down.

Coaches remind their novice athletes to "keep on moving" to prevent the loss of benefits from a decent warm up.
When "Cardiac Man" Cureton got out of his Caddy in Cinci' he was definetly not "warmed up" !
He was IMHO cooked w/no chance of a good performance.
Oxygen rushed everywhere it could to keep him from overheating and his athletic performance suffered accordingly.

Rich is a 100 percentile 2k rower as a fully hydrated athlete at 170 lbs.
At 160 lbs he is not... Case closed.

[aharmer]

Ranger..."Heck, I have even done six months or so of distance rowing, slowly building the rate up to 10 MPS and 29 spm, 30 spm, or even 31 spm--1:43 @ 28 spm (11 SPI); 1:40 @ 30 spm (11.7 SPI), 1:37 @ 31 spm (12.4 SPI)-- so that the cadences are smooth and relaxed."

Here we are again. Correct me if I'm wrong Rich, but this implies that you've been doing distance rowing at 1:37/31. When you say distance rowing at 1:37/31, I'm assuming you mean rowing for more than 500m at a time at that pace/rate.

So you've been doing distance training at 1:37/31, but you had to handle down after 500m at 1:39?

Could you please address this instead of conveniently ignoring it as you typically do?

[NavigationHazard]

I'll do it for you. He's decided that his target for a 10k time trial is something like 1:43 r28. In Rangerworld, it follows that any stroke taken at 1:43 pace r28 must be a distance stroke. Thus intermittent intervals at 1:43 r28 must be "distance rowing." Note the crucial difference [sic] with "rowing with breaks." That involves intermittent intervals at 20-24 spm.

What's of course missing is the normal association between "distance rowing" and "continuous rowing over longer-than-competition distances." Most people think of it in those terms.

Having said this, I am completely sympathetic to the idea that you can improve everything you can in long continuous rows via interval training (both prescribed and free-form/fartlek). See for example Zatopek in running, or Gunder Haag for fartlek, or for a domestic US example Jim Ryun. The hard part is understanding what you're doing in that sort of interval training. You need to work at the right intensity: too hard and you debilitate yourself; too soft and you don't work the right systems. In rowing this demands not only careful physiological monitoring but also proper understanding of pace/rate/intensity relationships....*

* Hint: trying to hold spi constant gets this entirely wrong.

[ranger]

If you are a 60s lightweight, as I am now, and you get so that you can pull 1:40 @ 30 spm (10 MPS, 11.7 SPI) as a distance stroke, that is, in a smooth, relaxed way, with a stable, or only slowly rising, heart rate under your anaerobic threshold, as I have now, training for rowing becomes _very_ simple:

JUST DO IT!!!

And keep doin' it.

Doesn't matter how.

However you want.

If you get so that you can do it for 2K, you break the 60s lwt 2K WR.

If you get so that you can do it for 5K, it predicts that you can break the 50s lwt 2K WR.

If you get so that you can do it for 6K, it predicts that you can break the 40s lwt 2K WR.

If you get so that you can do it for 10K, it predicts that you can break the 30s lwt 2K WR.

And if you get so that you can do it for an hour, it predicts that you can break the OPEN lwt 2K WR.

UT1

Gotta love it.

There's that Head of the Charles stroke again!



ranger

[ranger]

I was a little puzzled by ranger's need to warm up for a four hour drive. In most respects I can't begin to match his performances, but it's not unusual for me to drive for up to 6 hours with only a minimal stretching routine beforehand, and I'm sure I can maintain the same sort of pace that ranger does.

It would be interesting to hear how long (in time and meters) this ersatz "warm up" was.

It was not a warm up. WIthin 10 minutes of cessation he's be warmed down.

Coaches remind their novice athletes to "keep on moving" to prevent the loss of benefits from a decent warm up.
When "Cardiac Man" Cureton got out of his Caddy in Cinci' he was definetly not "warmed up" !
He was IMHO cooked w/no chance of a good performance.
Oxygen rushed everywhere it could to keep him from overheating and his athletic performance suffered accordingly.

Rich is a 100 percentile 2k rower as a fully hydrated athlete at 170 lbs.
At 160 lbs he is not... Case closed.

No, the warm up was not the issue.

When I sat down on my erg to race, I was soaking wet from warming up.

The issue is getting my heart rate to rise smoothly and quickly to TR, AN, and then max after about 700m into the race.

All the UT work I have been doing makes my heart want to lock into steady state at _very_ low levels, first, UT2, and then UT1.

This problem is easily solvable, though.

I just need to be more intense with my training, keeping my heart rate at threshold, or above threshold, levels during the distance rowing in my sesisons, with the sprinting part of my sessions devoted to repeatedly driving my HR to the max.

A lot of rowing, 1:40 @ 30 spm (10 MPS, 11.7 SPI) for my distance work, with many bouts of 8 x 500m at 1:31 for my sprint training, will do just that.

ranger

[Yankeerunner]

If you are a 60s lightweight, as I am now,

ranger

Do you time-travel or something? I mean, did you time-travel to 2011, come back to 2010, and accidentally write the above while thinking that you were still in 2011? A common mistake, I'm sure, but can't you try a little harder to keep track of which dimension or time period you are currently writing in? It confuses the rest of us who live only in the present.

[BrianStaff]

Are you still doing two races this weekend in Boston?

I guess you'll get two opportunities to test out your new found theories based on last weeks performance.

[chgoss]

If you are a 60s lightweight, as I am now

Rich: you are 59 years old

and you get so that you can pull 1:40 @ 30 spm (10 MPS, 11.7 SPI) as a distance stroke

Rich: as you recently discoverd, being able to pull 1:40 @ 30 SPM for short periods of time most definately does not mean you can do it a 16:40 5k (1:40 avg pace). why keep saying it does?

[chgoss]

Getting back to the thread's first subject:

There are two types of training
(1) training that advances your base so that you have the possibility of going faster than you did last year or five years ago
(2) training that gets you ready to race.

A somewhat different repackaging of your previous definition (see below), 2 questions:
- why the shift from 3 stages to 2?
- does your "12 second rule" apply to training type #2? (i.e. one can only consider training type #1 completed if they are within 12 seconds of their target race goal)

Code: Select all

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. 

[NavigationHazard]

(snip) The issue is getting my heart rate to rise smoothly and quickly to TR, AN, and then max after about 700m into the race.

All the UT work I have been doing makes my heart want to lock into steady state at _very_ low levels, first, UT2, and then UT1.

This problem is easily solvable, though.

I just need to be more intense with my training, keeping my heart rate at threshold, or above threshold, levels during the distance rowing in my sesisons, with the sprinting part of my sessions devoted to repeatedly driving my HR to the max.

A lot of rowing, 1:40 @ 30 spm (10 MPS, 11.7 SPI) for my distance work, with many bouts of 8 x 500m at 1:31 for my sprint training, will do just that.

ranger

When are you going to come to grips with the fact that your HR isn't associated with the intensities you think it is? And with the idea that Max HR -- what you can push it to during a specific exercise before failure from fatigue -- is what it is at the moment? It's >NOT< a theoretical constant. It's a moving target that's exercise- and ambient condition-specific. AND it tends to decline with age no matter that you say it doesn't.

If your HR truly wants to level off at 145, there's a strong probability it's because >that's the deflection point for erg exercise associated with your current threshold<. If your threshold-associated HR of 145 bpm is 80% of your current max HR on an erg, that implies your max HR is 181 bpm. More likely is something like 85%, which implies a max HR of 171 bpm. I'd actually be surprised if your erg-specific max HR right now is much more than 165 -- implying a threshold at a very good 88% of MHR and maybe 84% of HRR -- but then I'm a sceptic by nature.

Quit the munchausen-like claims of having a threshold-level HR of 170 bpm at age 59 going on 60. You don't. You can posture and pontificate all you want, but if you had proof to the contrary you'd post it here in refutation. You haven't done so because you can't. And if you try to train as if you actually do have that kind of cardiac response to rowing you will #megafail.*

* ps. Your current threshold pace/ vVO2max is NOT 1:40 @ r anything you want. If you want a robust estimator do a 20 minute test flat out and use that pace. 1:46-47 pace is probably more like it when you're fully hydrated.

[snowleopard]

#megafail

... again

It amuses me that ranger thinks his heart has some kind of independent will, where [it] is able to "lock on" rather than responding involuntarily to changes in blood chemistry.

[Montanaandy]

There was an earlier reference to Ranger Rick and the lyrics to The Talking Heads Once In A Lifetime - a few more come to mind with the continuation of this saga/thread...

You may ask yourself how do I work this
You may ask yourself am I right am I wrong
You may say to yourself my God what have I done

Same as it ever was, same as it ever was (repeat over & over)

In addition..

"Road To Nowhere"

Were on a road to nowhere come on inside
Taking a ride to nowhere
We'll take that ride
They can tell you what to do
But they'll make a fool of you

[johnlvs2run]

Rowing 6:29 at 31 is harder than 6:28 at 36.

On what basis do you make this claim?

Simple mathematics.

if both 2ks are all out, then by definition they're equally hard. You can't do more than 100% effort.

What I'm saying is that a 5'11 165# lightweight who rows 6:28, all out, at 36 spm can probably not row anything close to 6:29 at 31 spm.
A 5'11 165# lightweight who rows 6:29 at 31 should be able to break 6:20 at 36.

That is, being trained to row at open ratings and getting rid of the spi which is holding him back.

When you're 6'6 260 pounds then it is not so much of a difference, in fact you might not be "able" to race a 2k at 36
due to a combination of height, weight, fitness, cardio capacity etc etc etc etc. Apples and orangutans.
For you, there is not the same difference, maybe there is not so much difference.

For someone who is 5'11 and 165 pounds, then the difference is huge.

This is why E-L-S could row and did row 5:58-6:02 at 42-43 spm, with a range of 37-50+ spm.

[NavigationHazard]

Fine, except that's not what you said. What you said was, in its entirety,

Rowing 6:29 at 31 is harder than 6:28 at 36.

All the other stuff you added. As a general proposition it's simply not defensible. How "hard" it is/isn't is a subjective judgement that will depend on the rower. Moreover I reiterate: there is no one and only one solution to the pace/rate tradeoff. Your precious Danish and Italian LWs may choose to race 2ks on an erg at comparatively high average rates but that doesn't necessarily contradict other strategies.

As for whether or not Ranger could row a 6:29 at 31 spm given a 6:28 at 36, we'll never know. He no longer can do either.

[ranger]

f your HR truly wants to level off at 145, there's a strong probability it's because >that's the deflection point for erg exercise associated with your current threshold<.

No, I can work for long periods with my HR at 172 bpm.

That's top-end UT1/threshold.

It just takes some doing to get it up there unless I train my heart to do otherwise, which I will do now.

145 bpm is UT2, not UT1.

That's just a warm up heart rate, FM pace, or a HR for cross-training hours and hours, not threshold.

ranger