The Two Types of Training

[ranger]

Okay, so you're now doing the predictive workouts you've been talking about for so long. Start posting screenshots so we can cross reference workout results and race results and maybe finally learn something from all this nonsense.

I just did, a 2K, faster than the hammer row at WIRC in the 55s lwts, just on a UT1 effort, even though I am 59: 6:48.6.

The fastest any 60-year-old lightweight has ever rowed at WIRC, flat out, TR, is 6:50.8.

And I will continue to post results of this sort.

I'll get heart rates next time, so my claims about training bands can be corroborated, too.

I'll try both 8 x 500m (3:30 rest) and another hard 2K this week, and I'll post the screen shots, with heart rates.

I'll also post some screen shots of my UT2 rowing in warm ups, just to show you pace and heart rates.

1:49 @ 22 spm is UT2 for a 6:16 2K.

My top-end UT2 heart rate is 145 bpm.

I'll also post some shots of FM pace, rate, and heart rate: 1:48 @ 25 spm.

I can row a FM at a heart rate of 155 bpm, steady state.

At that heart rate, I now pull 1:48, perhaps faster.

1:48 for a FM predicts a 6:16 2K.

I think I am also ready to meet my target for HM (1:45) and 60min (1:44).

ranger

[bloomp]

Two things:

Earlier you stated that the anaerobic system accounts for 8s/500m in a 2k, or 20% of that 2k. You mean that a 2k is done at 40s/500m? Do the math.

And how is it that your "UT1" has gone from giving you a 7:11 with several handle-downs to giving you a 6:4x in just two weeks? Either you were pulling UT1 at your race, or you were going all out the other day. Your UT1 pace doesn't change miraculously over 2 weeks.

[ranger]

You don't think my final result was good last year?

Not really.

With your athletic history and claimed training regime why wouldn't you get that result?

I am more surprised at your inability to pace yourself than anything else.

My 6:41.0 last year was .2 seconds from the 55s lwt American record, even though I was 58 and was only doing foundational rowing to train for it.

Yea, I guess that's lousy.

Don't know for sure, but the 6:41 at 58 last year might well be the fastest anyone my age and weight has ever rowed, even though I wasn't even training to race but just doing foundational rowing, given that the 60s lwt WR is 6:42.

That's pretty remarkable.

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

This year I have been, and/or will be, doing both.

My gains over 2K from distance rowing will start showing up in my racing and sharpening workouts this week.

My gains over 2K from sharpening will show up in my racing and sharpening workouts the two weeks following that.

Gains from both, I think, will continue to show up out into next year, too.

After my last regatta this year, I won't stop training to race.

I'll just continue sharpening and racing at home until my 2K levels out and stops improving.

Lots of 1:40 @ 30 spm and 1:34 @ 36 spm.

Then a 2K trial.

Lots of 1:40 @ 30 spm and 1:34 @ 36 spm.

Then a 2K trial.

Etc.

ranger

[snowleopard]

Don't know for sure, but the 6:41 at 58 last year might well be the fastest anyone my age and weight has ever rowed, even though I wasn't even training to race but just doing foundational rowing, given that the 60s lwt WR is 6:42.

That's pretty remarkable.

No, it isn't remarkable at all. With 60 million meters behind you, you must have been the most highly trained 58 yo in a minority division of a minority sport, ever.

By the age of 58, people with a complete brain have learned that leaking bucket loads of sweat on a daily basis in a dingy basement isn't really where it's at.

[ranger]

Two things:

Earlier you stated that the anaerobic system accounts for 8s/500m in a 2k, or 20% of that 2k. You mean that a 2k is done at 40s/500m? Do the math.

And how is it that your "UT1" has gone from giving you a 7:11 with several handle-downs to giving you a 6:4x in just two weeks? Either you were pulling UT1 at your race, or you were going all out the other day. Your UT1 pace doesn't change miraculously over 2 weeks.

My UT1 pace has been coming down a bit lately, but not too much.

I have reported these things in my posts here.

At Cincinnati, I was tired from traveling, had the drag too high, and went out too fast.

Pretty disastrous affair.

I shouldn't have raced at all.

I wasn't ready.

At Cincinnati, I didn't row rested, at my normal 185 drag, and at a steady UT1 pace and rate, as I did yesterday.

If I had, I would have pulled something like the 6:48 I pulled yesterday, a good UT1 effort.

I think I am now ready to push a 2K into AT.

Eventually, that should get me to 1:38 pace, at top-end AT.

Then I will be ready for hard sharpening at TR and AN, pushing my heart rate to max.

ranger

[ranger]

Don't know for sure, but the 6:41 at 58 last year might well be the fastest anyone my age and weight has ever rowed, even though I wasn't even training to race but just doing foundational rowing, given that the 60s lwt WR is 6:42.

That's pretty remarkable.

No, it isn't remarkable at all. With 60 million meters behind you, you must have been the most highly trained 58 yo in a minority division of a minority sport, ever.

By the age of 58, people with a complete brain have learned that leaking bucket loads of sweat on a daily basis in a dingy basement isn't really where it's at.

To each his own.

I have gotten the full benefit from the effort.

After quite a long delay, this benefit will now show up in my racing.

You have to do hard distance rowing and sharpening to row your best 2K.

Since 2003, I haven't done either until this year.

Together, hard distance rowing and sharpening contribute as much as 25 seconds to a 2K.

So my 6:41, done without hard distance rowing or sharpening last year, was not shabby at all.

In fact, it showed the full development of my base, which is ready to support a 6:16 2K.

I just still needed to do the distance rowing and sharpening to prove it.

ranger

[DUThomas]

Maybe you should devote a little time to learning verb tenses? Just a thought....

[ranger]

Earlier you stated that the anaerobic system accounts for 8s/500m in a 2k, or 20% of that 2k. You mean that a 2k is done at 40s/500m? Do the math.

The math is done with watts.

For instance, if I can do 420 watts in a 2K, fully trained, I can only do 336 watts without any of my anaerobic capacities, 20%/84 watts less.

That's 7.5 seconds per 500m.

420 watts is 1:34.

336 watts is 1:41.5

ranger

[johnlvs2run]

But only because they rate 40+ spm for 2K, John.

Yes, Rich, because they are efficient.

When they are my age, they won't race at 8 MPS because they won't rate 40+ for 2K.

Sure they will. I rowed my first marathon (2:58) at 8 meters per stroke.

They are much stronger and more efficient than I am.

And they don't row at 8 MPS when they train at lower rates.

They train at 8 mps when they are training efficiently.

When they race at 8 MPS, they pull 11-12 SPI.

When they are rowing at lower rates, they pull 11-12 SPI.

When they race at 8 mps, they race at 8 mps.

When they are training efficiently, they are rowing at 8 mps.

I also row at 8 MPS when I rate 44 spm--just naturally, but when I do it, I pull 11-12 SPI.

Well then good. You should be able to do it at 38 or 40 or any other spm too.

So what is the common denominator?

8 MPS, or 11-12 SPI?

ranger

Spi for training effectively - which is not efficient.

8 mps for training/rowing/racing efficiently.

How effective can you be when rowing efficiently i.e. at 8 mps?

[ranger]

Okay, so you're now doing the predictive workouts you've been talking about for so long. Start posting screenshots so we can cross reference workout results and race results and maybe finally learn something from all this nonsense.

Learn something?

Well, as I sharpen and finish my hard distance rowing, my scores on sharpening sessions and trials of all sorts will get better and better, better and better, up to some limit, where the results will plateau.

And that will be that.

I will have brought out the potential in my base.

The question is, where will that be?

If it is at a 6:16 2K, the major lesson will be this:

Even on the erg, it pays high dividends to invest in learning to row well.

As much as 10 seconds per 500m.

ranger

[ranger]

Yes, Rich, because they are efficient.

No, John, because they are young, have a high aerobic capacity, and therefore can do a 2K at 44 spm.

I can't.

If they had an aerobic capacity like mine, they wouldn't row at 8 MPS, either.

Why?

They would have to lower the rate.

When they lower they rate, they don't row at 8 MPS, even now.

Why?

8 MPS is inefficient when it done at rates below about 40 spm.

And to pull 8 MPS for 2K at rates like 44 spm, you have to have an enormous aerobic capacity.

That rules out out guys like me.

Efficiency has nothing to do with it.

ranger

[ranger]

When they are training efficiently, they are rowing at 8 mps.

There is no evidence for this.

For instance, there would be no reason to do a 60min trial rowing inefficiently.

But I suspect that most of us, including the Danish lightweights, row 60min at something like 10 MPS, not 8 MPS.

If they rowed at 8 MPS, they wouldn't be as fast over the distance.

Why?

It's inefficient.

ranger

[johnlvs2run]

When they are training efficiently, they are rowing at 8 mps.

There is no evidence for this.

For instance, there would be no reason to do a 60min trial rowing inefficiently.

Right, there is no reason to do a 60 minute trial INefficiently.

All my distance PB's have been at 8 meters per stroke, 5k, 6k, 10k, 60m, half marathon, and marathon.

My hm pb was at 2k + 6 ... at 8 mps ... done efficiently.

[twok]

My hm pb was at 2k + 6 ... at 8 mps ... done efficiently.

That seems like a total non-sequitur. What is your 2K PB? Is it (or was it) optimal for your age group at the time you did you HM PB?

[johnlvs2run]

What is your 2K PB?

HM - 6.

Is it (or was it) optimal for your age group at the time you did you HM PB?

Yes.