The Two Types of Training

[DUThomas]

How many consecutive posts will he have before someone cracks?

He does 5 or 6 routinely, even with responses. So I think he can hit 15 easily if nobody responds. Do I hear 16?

[JohnBove]

if you click on the link above you will notice that the particular thread in question is a carbon copy of the more recent ones: no one agrees with him... genius goes unappreciated it seems, throughout eternity

And this from the same thread -- 2007 by HarryB on 30 Jan 2007 (fully over three--- THREE! -- years ago):

Enough. Surely?

As one who has taken part in the great Ranger debate for longer than is good for my own sanity I really think we all need to give our heads a shake.

We've had months and months of posturing, babbling, lies and bull from the greatest pound for pound erger on the planet and then he 'treats' us to a 7:11 in a big race. OK, he didn't deliver on the day. We can forgive him for that. We all have bad days (I had one at BIRC 2005) but when you are as good as Rich claims he is and you have as many bad days as he does then either the truth machine is telling a pack of liies or he is.

But there's worse. Ranger constantly belittles the achievements of others and is disparaging to those who he feels aren't fit to lick his boots. He's abusive towards people who really know what they are talking about (Mike Caviston and Paul S spring readily to mind) and dimissive of anyone who dares suggest that he's not as wonderful as he makes out.

We've been listening to his bragging, his tripe and his over-emphasis of the importance of technique for too long. Why in God's name are we giving him this much air time?

On the evidence of his latest outing. Indeed on the evidence of a couple of his recent races there are many over-50 lightweights and countless over-50 heavyweights who could beat him.

Then we have the latest excuse for his poor performance. His erg at home is no good. Sheared bolts, damaged chassis, dial instead of a monitor, no chance of df 32. It's pathetic and yet we give his blather some credence by actually arguing and responding to the nonsense.

There is no doubt that Prof Cureton has a serious mental problem. What say we leave it to him? No more posts about Ranger or in response to Ranger until he rows a 2k that we can actually say marks him out as an exceptional erger.

Enough is enough and I'm out. Why not join me?

[nycbone]

Jerry, just remember, it's not a lie if you believe it. -George Costanza

[ranger]

We've been listening to...his over-emphasis of the importance of technique for too long

In rowing, I think that it is impossible to overempasize technique: effectiveness (stroking power) and efficiency (rate).

These combine, to the max, in top-end UT1 rowing.

And that's all she wrote if you want to determine how good you are in a 2K.

You are only as fast in a 2K as you are effective and efficient in a 60min trial @ 10 MPS.

60min is done at 2K + 10.

AT, TR, and AN training is challenging, but as long as you do it, taken alone, it doesn't ever make you better than anyone else.

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

What determines how good you are as a rower is your effectiveness and efficiency in your UT1 rowing.

Harry, for one, has a ridiculously weak, ineffective stroke, although he can use it at a high rate.

He needs to learn how to row effectively.

Then, once he has developed that effectiveness, he needs to become efficient with it.

He has done nothing of the sort, so he can't row a lick, even though he seems to have quite a bit of athletic ability (e.g., a high anaerobic threshold, good edurance, etc.).

Rowing well for a lightweight like Harry is 13 SPI.

All Harry needs to do is train himself to row a lot at 13 SPI (and above).

Then he would encounter what is really entailed in rowing.

What he would find out is this:

Rowing is _primarily_ about technique--skeletal-muscular strength, dexterity, quickness, flrexibility, rhythmicity, precision, consistency, length, balance, timing, sequencing, relaxation, etc.

It isn't primarily about aerobic capacity at all, as Mike VB demonstrates whenever he rows.

Mike has a wretchedly low maxHR, and therefore very low aerobic capacity, but he still does amazingly well in rowing.

In fact, he is the present hammer in Harry's age and weight division on the erg, and the present US National Champion OTW for both 55s heavyweights and 55s lightweights.

What is the difference between Mike and Harry?

Mike knows how to row well.

He has good technique, at least, when he wants to.

He rows effectively, and he can be efficient with that effectiveness.

Harry doesn't.

He rows like shit.

It might very well be the case that if Harry learned to row well, he might beat Mike, both on the erg and OTW.

He has more aerobic capacity.

Mike can't get the rate up as high as he should.

Harry probably can.

ranger

[ranger]

I continue to think this:

The whole trick in training for rowing is (1) to learn to row effectively at low rates (i.e., 13 SPI for lightweights; 16 SPI for heavyweights) and then (2) to learn to be efficient with it (e.g., rating 30 spm under your anaerobic threshold with a somewhat lighter version of it, as in a 10K or 60min trial).

ranger

[ranger]

For a little lightweight like me, at least, I think good measures of efficiency, without going over the top, might be to rate 26 for a FM (HR 155 bpm), 28 spm for a HM (HR 165 bpm), 30 spm for 10K (HR 170 bpm), 32 spm for 5K (HR 175 bpm), 36 spm for 2K (HR 180 bpm), 38 spm for 1K (HR 185 bpm), and 46 spm for 500m (HR 190 bpm).

If you can rate up this high, then what pace you can do for the various distances is just a matter of how effective you are.

I am now pulling around 11.7 SPI, at 10 MPS, 1:40 @ 30 spm, across the board, perhaps a little higher (12-12.5 SPI) at the shorter distances, at 500m, perhaps as high as rowing well, 13 SPI.

At max, 11.7 SPI is only 1.3 SPI lighter than rowing well (13 SPI).

So it's still rowing _pretty_ well.

Solid stuff.

Happy with that.

Now, I just need to keep doing it--in good order, on the money, holding my technique steady.

Piece after piece.

Session after session.

Day after day.

Week after week.

Month after month.

Year after year.

Decade after decade.

I now row well.

ranger

[ranger]

I have lowered my drag down from max (185 df.) to 145 df.--permanently.

185 bpm might be good for some sorts of training, and for sprints.

But it absurd for distance racing, including 2K racing, if you have good technique.

High drag takes all the snappiness out of your stroke.

You can't keep the most efficient ratios, especially at the catch and finish, if the chain is too heavy.

High drag is great is you don't use your arms and legs much, but just anchor-haul with your back and core, as I used to do, but that's about it.

In a month or so, when I am trained up for it again, it will be interesting to see what I do for 2K at 145 df.

Much better, I think.

6:28?



I now use my arms and legs _very_ effectively, and without diminishing the contribution of my back and core.

My stroke is now very long and snappy at both ends.

That speed and length is less costly that a lot of slow, short heave-ho-ing at high drag.

ranger

[ranger]

It looks as though the central goal of my distance rowing, then, is a 10K @ 1:40, which comes out to be 33:20.

These are the lightweight WRs for 10K:

10000 32:15.7 31 Augusto Farfan L M PER 2005 Historical record*
10000 32:49.2 26 Suranga Lakamarachchi L M LKA 2005 Historical record*
10000 33:43.1 14 Vince Argall L M USA 2003 Historical record*
10000 34:16.2 52 Rod Freed L M USA 2002 Historical record*
10000 34:28.4 41 Jari Lampi L M FIN 2003 Historical record*
10000 35:54.7 61 Brian Bailey L M GBR 2007 PM3/PM4 verification code
10000 39:29.7 70 Roger Bangay L M GBR 2008 Witnessed at public club
10000 43:33.9 11 Briggs Polikoff L M USA 2009 PM3/PM4 verification code
10000 43:52.3 81 Robert Spenger L M USA 2006 PM3/PM4 verification code

33:20 is right around seven seconds per 500m better than Brian Bailey's 60s lwt WR for 10K of 35:54.

There's that seven seconds per 500m again!

ranger

[KevJGK]

I continue to think this:

The whole trick in training for rowing is to learn to row effectively at low rates....16 SPI for heavyweights)......

I thought I would check how my earlier 36' L4 session stacked up?

It alternated with 2' @ 9.49 spi then 2' @ 9.73 spi and was pretty tough.

To achieve 16 spi I would need almost my 2K PB pace at 18 spm

Am I doomed?

[ranger]

I continue to think this:

The whole trick in training for rowing is to learn to row effectively at low rates....16 SPI for heavyweights)......

I thought I would check how my earlier 36' L4 session stacked up?

It alternated with 2' @ 9.49 spi then 2' @ 9.73 spi and was pretty tough.

To achieve 16 spi I would need almost my 2K PB pace at 18 spm

Am I doomed?

Doomed?

Depends what you mean by that.

I pulled 1K at 16 SPI and 24 spm.

So it is not at all impossible to train yourself to do such things, given that I now only weigh 162 lbs. and am almost 60 years old.

These standards of effectiveness, I think, are just wake-up calls to what rowing is all about.

When you get down to fundamentals, rowing isn't about aerobic capacity.

It is about your skeletal-motor capabilities and technical expertise with the rowing stroke.

If you ignore these things, or dismiss them outright, then sure, everything seems doomed.

But it is only doomed from the point of view of your misguided perspective.

If you change your perspective and concentrate your training on technique and stroking power, rather than pace, you are not doomed at all.

Turn the clock off!

Just take good strokes.

Stop rowing "pieces" for time.

Back in 2003, I was only pulling 10 SPI at low rates.

By the time I got to 2009, I could pull 16 SPI for considerable distances.

Big change.

You could make the same change, too, if you got your mind right about it, and were willing to pay the price.

ranger

[Citroen]

How many consecutive posts will he have before someone cracks?

He does 5 or 6 routinely, even with responses. So I think he can hit 15 easily if nobody responds. Do I hear 16?

BUSTED by KevJGK who's not been paying attention to the "forum's" desire to let Ranger stew in his own juices and not reply to his noise.

[KevJGK]

How many consecutive posts will he have before someone cracks?

He does 5 or 6 routinely, even with responses. So I think he can hit 15 easily if nobody responds. Do I hear 16?

BUSTED by KevJGK who's not been paying attention to the "forum's" desire to let Ranger stew in his own juices and not reply to his noise.

I have NEVER been one to comply.

[ranger]

Kevin--

If, at 190 lbs., you are only getting 9.5 SPI at low rates, I would guess that you are not timing and leveraging your stroke correctly.

You need to fire off with your legs for almost three complete beats (out of five beats in the drive and 11 beats in the recovery) before you swing your back (in one beat) and pull with your arms (in one beat).

In these three beats with the legs, drive off the balls of your feet (on the first beat), roll to your heels (on the second beat), then push straight back with the whole foot, standing up on the footplate, hanging on the handle, flattening out your knees (on the third beat).

On the fourth beat, drive down with the front of your foot and point your toes while you swing your back.

On the fifth beat, finish with your arms.

Do you do this?

Or do you just pull with all your levers at once, slowly and smoothly?

Do you have a video of your rowing at low rates and 9.5 SPI?

If so, post it.

That will tell the story.

ranger

[KevJGK]

9.5 - 9.75 spi is what the WP calls for at 16 & 18 spm at my reference pace and it feels exactly right; exactly as MC describes it "tough but doable".

Sure we can all pull a few strokes at a much higher spi but whats the point if we can't maintain it? 16 spi would be suicide as part of an endurance session for me.

[hjs]

How many consecutive posts will he have before someone cracks?

He does 5 or 6 routinely, even with responses. So I think he can hit 15 easily if nobody responds. Do I hear 16?

BUSTED by KevJGK who's not been paying attention to the "forum's" desire to let Ranger stew in his own juices and not reply to his noise.

I have NEVER been one to comply.

The season is over Kev, we won,t see anything before next season, so this thread has died, after this last attempt even the nutty pro sees that he needed to make a change, so he took his strange numbers out of his sigh.

Without this numbers he also gave up on his bet with me, the bet that could win him double what he ows me. Maybe he he will go so far and pay off his debs