The Two Types of Training

[DUThomas]

Poetic License allows the poet to stretch, exaggerate, and use imagery in ways that we are not. To a poet, thousands of meters can become millions if he wishes to emphasize the effort required to make his erg "slip the surly bounds of earth". To a poet, precision is at the far end of the scale of his creative writing and is to be used sparingly. So don't insist on it here. Poets, because of the regulations of their craft, must invoke Poetic License in their compositions. Failure to do so could result in expulsion from his profession and the Guild of Poets.

Walter, please help me out. I was looking on Amazon for compilations of Ranger's poetry, but, here's the catch, I couldn't find any. Could you please send me some links to his poetry? I know from his postings that I would really like to read them.

[snowleopard]

Poetic License allows the poet to stretch, exaggerate, and use imagery in ways that we are not. To a poet, thousands of meters can become millions if he wishes to emphasize the effort required to make his erg "slip the surly bounds of earth". To a poet, precision is at the far end of the scale of his creative writing and is to be used sparingly. So don't insist on it here. Poets, because of the regulations of their craft, must invoke Poetic License in their compositions. Failure to do so could result in expulsion from his profession and the Guild of Poets.

Walter, please help me out. I was looking on Amazon for compilations of Ranger's poetry, but, here's the catch, I couldn't find any. Could you please send me some links to his poetry? I know from his postings that I would really like to read them.

ranger isn't a poet but rather an Assoc. Professor of Poetics. He has a work in progress: "A Temporal Theory of Poetic Rhythm":-

This book presents and illustrates a new theory of poetic rhythm, one that clarifies, extends, and contextualizes the suggestions of my 1992 book Rhythmic Phrasing in English Verse. and its supporting essays (Cureton 1985, 1986, 1986a, 1986b, 1986c, 1993a, 1993b, 1994a, 1994b, forthcoming). In RPEV, I argue that our flat, one-dimensional, categorical treatment of poetic rhythm is inadequate (77-117) and should be revised to align with our hierarchical, multi- dimensional, and preferential treatment of musical rhythm, in particular, with Jackendoff and Lerdahl's 1983 treatment of rhythm in Western Tonal Music and its sources (153-168), the work on melodic rhythm by Heinrich Schenker (1935/1979) and harmonic rhythm by Grosvenor Cooper and Leonard Meyer (e.g., Cooper and Meter 1960, Meyer 1973). Jackendoff and Lerdahl claim that there are three distinct (but closely interacting) rhythmic "components" in Western Tonal music, what they call meter (a cyclical beating), grouping (a more vertical phrasing) and prolongation (a linear goal-orientation). In RPEV, I argue that the tradition of rhythmic analysis in verse study (1) neglects prolongation and (2) conflates meter with grouping, missing their essentially oppositional construction and complementary interaction.

Quite a paragraph! It is interesting to note that 16 of the 21 citations are ranger's own works

[Nosmo]

This book presents and illustrates a new theory of poetic rhythm, one that clarifies, extends, and contextualizes the suggestions of my 1992 book Rhythmic Phrasing in English Verse. and its supporting essays (Cureton 1985, 1986, 1986a, 1986b, 1986c, 1993a, 1993b, 1994a, 1994b, forthcoming). In RPEV, I argue that our flat, one-dimensional, categorical treatment of poetic rhythm is inadequate (77-117) and should be revised to align with our hierarchical, multi- dimensional, and preferential treatment of musical rhythm, in particular, with Jackendoff and Lerdahl's 1983 treatment of rhythm in Western Tonal Music and its sources (153-168), the work on melodic rhythm by Heinrich Schenker (1935/1979) and harmonic rhythm by Grosvenor Cooper and Leonard Meyer (e.g., Cooper and Meter 1960, Meyer 1973). Jackendoff and Lerdahl claim that there are three distinct (but closely interacting) rhythmic "components" in Western Tonal music, what they call meter (a cyclical beating), grouping (a more vertical phrasing) and prolongation (a linear goal-orientation). In RPEV, I argue that the tradition of rhythmic analysis in verse study (1) neglects prolongation and (2) conflates meter with grouping, missing their essentially oppositional construction and complementary interaction.

But ranger, you left out fractals!

[DUThomas]

ranger isn't a poet but rather an Assoc. Professor of Poetics. He has a work in progress: "A Temporal Theory of Poetic Rhythm":-

He's not a poet? I won't get to read his poetry? Damn you, Walter, for raising my hopes!

But at least there's a new book. Is that coming out before or after his 6:16 2K?

what they call meter (a cyclical beating)

So, 100 million meters since 2000? Impressive!

[ausrwr]

Mike Caviston never learned how to row efficiently.

He never learned how to paddle.

His whole training regimen is skewed toward effectiveness.

He rowed his long level 3 rows at 24 spm rather than 32 spm.

He muscled them.

To prepare himself for this, he spent 75% of his time muscling his training, working on effectiveness at low rates, while only devoting a session, here and there, to efficiency.

The rows that Mike was always concerned with were things like 60'r20 and the like.

But if he followed a balanced training program that included substantial work on efficiency, he would have been more interested in 60'r32, that is, a 60min trial, done with maximal efficiency, not a bunch of inefficient, muscle-beach trudging, fobbed off as rowing.

ranger

There is a reason real rowers do the bulk of their training at low rates. Leadville has illustrated: mitochondrial development, strength gains, neural pathways, all that sort of stuff.
What you call 'muscle beach trudging' is nothing of the sort.
Have a look at Xeno's sessions when he used to be the best in the world. They're in Marty Aitken's chapter in Rowing Faster.
You can probably find out what Mahe and the rest of the New Zealanders do.
The GB rowing team does a lot of 'muscle beach trudging'. I'm sure I can find a program somewhere.
As do the Australians. I'll find an old program from someone. And the ...

Oh f@#$ it. It's obvious that an Associate Professor of Poetics in Ann Arbor, MI, knows more about training, conditioning and rowing than the best rowing coaches in the world.

[ranger]

There is a reason real rowers do the bulk of their training at low rates.

Sure, I did a lot of trudging, too.

Seven years of it.

Until I learned how to row.

But I won't do any of it again.

I now row well.

Who needs to row 13 SPI @ 16 spm if you can do it at 30 spm?

Stiffs and flubs.

Those who still need to learn how to row, or how to be efficient, when they are rowing well.

Row well!

Keep the rate up!

Just jump on the erg, put the rate on 32 spm, get a good stroke going, and take off like the wind!

A couple of hours later, take a breather, and get on your bike for a couple of hours to relax and recover.

Then do it again the next day.



ranger

[ranger]

I am now sharpening hard.

I will pull sub-6:30 on Saturday, still without even sharpening for it.

With all the bullshit you come out with I accept it must be difficult to keep up with your own lies, but do try harder..

I haven't done anything very organized yet with my sharpening.

I am still keeping my HR in and around my anaerobic threshold until I get a good sub-6:30, AT 2K.

Then I will ramp up the sharpening, do 500s at 1:31, do distance trials, do 4 x 1K, do 4 x 2K, etc., ..., and push my HR to the max, 190 bpm.

I haven't done any of this yet.

When I do, I get about a dozen seconds over 2K, as does everyone.

Everyone sharpens in pretty much the same way for pretty much the same benefit.

It is what you do with your technique, stroking power, and UT rowing that determines what you can do for 2K.

Your 2K is only as good as your 60min row @ 10 MPS.

Top-end UT1.

60min is done at 2K + 10.

Other than the fact that you need to do it, what you do in sharpening doesn't determine anything at all.

It is a total wash.

It has no bearing whatsoever on your achievement as a rower.

ranger

[ranger]

After my 6:41.4 at Cleveland, so far, it appears that Mike VB's 6:49.7 at WIRC 2010 is the best "RACE" result in the 55s lwts this year.

If I can pull 6:29.7 on Saturday in Detroit, that would establish a nice 20 second gap between my best "RACE" result this year and the best "RACE" result of my immediate competition.

If I get a result of this sort of Saturday, I think I might also try to get to New York for one last race of the season next week.

If I can get close to a pb this Saturday, it would be fun to take a slap at the 50s lwt (and 60s hwt) WRs--6:24.

After New York, I'll keep sharpening for six weeks or so, until the end of the indoor rowing season in April.

I usually get about two seconds a week over six weeks of sharpening.

So, for this year, that will add another dozen seconds to this gap between my best 2K and the best 2K of my immediate competition.

Over these six weeks, I also want to establish a full array of 55s lwt pbs in all of the events, both sprints and distances.

It is easy to do this now that I am a walking around lightweight.

It looks as though I am heading for a _very_ nice finish to a _very_ nice year of training.

Then after April 30th, it is back out OTW, both sweep rowing for the Ann Arbor Rowing Club and rowing in my 1x.

Should be fun.

My goal this year is to do 20K a day OTW in my 1x, in addition to whatever I do with sweep rowing.

I certainly have the fitness for it, given my work this fall and winter on the erg.

My fitness is sky high.

Body fat is dipping below 10%.

I don't teach the summer, so I can just become a rowing bum, like Mike VB and Rocket Roy, who don't have anything else to do with their time and energy.



ranger

[leadville]

Everyone sharpens in pretty much the same way for pretty much the same benefit.

...

Other than the fact that you need to do it, what you do in sharpening doesn't determine anything at all.

It is a total wash.

It has no bearing whatsoever on your achievement as a rower.

ranger

Another entry in the rapidly-growing "when it comes to training and the types and impact thereof ranger is ignorant as a box of rocks" file.

Most national teams do not 'sharpen' (whatever the heck that is) like you do. The Europeans in particular do a LOT less interval work and MUCH more LSD; their results demonstrate the wisdom of their approach. As your real, proven results demonstrate the ignorance of yours, rangerboy.

In addition, 'what' you do as far as interval training does, in fact, have a significant impact on performance. Specifically, keeping interval effort relatively high, and pushing it higher as racing season approaches and is underway, appears to have a positive affect on performance when compared to doing less-intense intervals at that point in the season.

Note to anyone interested in why ranger's program is less than optimal, see http://www.sportsci.org/index.html, Intervals, Thresholds, and Long Slow Distance: the Role of Intensity and Duration in Endurance Training. Stephen Seiler and Espen Tønnessen. Reconciling research and practice. Nov 9.

[snowleopard]

I usually get about two seconds a week over six weeks of sharpening.

That's _very_ interesting. I am surprised you haven't mentioned that before.

[ranger]

The Europeans in particular do a LOT less interval work and MUCH more LSD

No, they don't.

You're not paying attention, lead head.

I have taken the European model and followed it to the extreme.

I did seven _years_ of LSD (from 2003-2010)--without sharpening at all.

Interestingly, while I was doing it, these C2 forums gave me infinite grief about how I was being foolish.

Hmm.

I suppose we don't know yet, but the result of my foundational training over the last seven years, I think, will be this:

Seven years ago, I was about 10 seconds better than my competition.

I lowered the 50s lwt WR by four seconds, even though I was almost 53.

Since then, over the seven years that I have worked on technique and stroking power, overcoming my weaknesses, doing LSD, I have become about 10 seconds better.

Over the seven years that my competition has paraded their strengths and avoided their weaknesses, racing their training, training just to race, they have become about 10 seconds worse.

Result: A 30-second gap between what I will be rowing when I am 60 and what they will be rowing when they are 60.

Fully trained, I'll row 6:16.

They'll row 6:46.

Etc.

ranger

[ranger]

It's obvious that an Associate Professor of Poetics in Ann Arbor, MI, knows more about training, conditioning and rowing than the best rowing coaches in the world.

No, it's not at all "obvious."

It's empirical.

A matter to be determined by fact.

The erg is a truth machine.

We just have to wait and see what happens.

Sure, if I pull 6:16 for 2K at the end of April, I might indeed want to say that I know more about training, conditioning, and rowing--taken together--than the best rowing coaches in the world.

A lwt 6:16 at 60 years old would be more than a little bizarre, no?

It would break the 60s lwt WR by 26 seconds.

It would break the 60s lwt WR by 8 seconds

It would break the 55s lwt WR by 22 seconds.

It would breka the 55s hwt WR by 2 seconds.

It would break the 50s lwt WR by 9 seconds.

It would break the 40s lwt WR by two seconds.

It would break the 30s American record.

It would meet the qualifying standard for the US National Team.

Hmm.

ranger

[snowleopard]

I have taken the European model and followed it to the extreme.

I did seven _years_ of LSD (from 2003-2010)--without sharpening at all.

Interestingly, while I was doing it, these C2 forums gave me infinite grief about how I was being foolish.

Hmm.

Extreme, yes. You didn't do LSD you did RWB. Big difference. With the time you have at your disposal, if you had followed the European model without being extremely stupid you might be a lot closer to 6:28

[ranger]

You didn't do LSD you did RWB. Big difference. With the time you have at your disposal, if you had followed the European model without being extremely stupid you might be a lot closer to 6:28

There is no evidence for this at all.

Let's just wait and see what happens.

I think all of the evidence, fact not hypothesis, is going to fall on the side of my decisions about training.

You are just working with hypotheticals.

Over the next six weeks, I will be producing a stream of facts.

If you want to produce facts that support what you claim, be my guest.

For instance, take some 50s rowers who can row 6:28 when they are 50 and train them with European methods so that they row 6:16 (or whatever) when they are 60.

ranger

BTW, I pulled 6:29.7 in 2006, without even sharpening for it. I'll pull something comparable on Saturday. Then I will go on and sharpen for six weeks.

[snowleopard]

Over the next six weeks, I will be producing a stream of facts.

If you want to produce facts that support what you claim, be my guest.

I don't need to produce any facts to support my claim. You will be doing it for me