The Two Types of Training

[ranger]

What was it meant to show

How to generate a lot of power with your core and upper body, even if you are a little guy?

This is work on effectiveness, but in retrospect, it was just an important stage in the development of what I do now.

ranger

[ranger]

Translation: "You're nowhere close to 1:3 at 30 spm."

Now, now.

Patience, cowboy.

Let's don't jump to conclusions without the evidence.

I'll get a video for you.

At max drag (e.g., 200 df.), with a long stroke, rolling up onto my toes at the catch, and keeping a pretty even speed on the handle, I am in a 2-to-1 ratio at 30 spm.

With my heels planted at the catch, at 145 df., accelerating the handle in and out of the finish, I think I am in a 3-to-1 ratio, or pretty darn close.

I'll post a video of my distance stroke at 30 spm tomorrow morning when I am doing my normal rowing.

I can't do it now.

I am over at work, between classes.

At 30 spm, I now go 1:40 (11.7 SPI) with this distance stroke.

For me, WR 2K pace.

ranger

[snowleopard]

I'll get a video for you.

Make it a good sample, couple hundred strokes.

[ranger]

I found this one: a youtube of our hero doing.... (?) let's count out the ratio



I count:
Drive-two-Drive-two
at 36 spm
Naturally he can triple the recovery time if he drops the pace to a 30!

Yea.

There's the opposite exteme.

The maximally effective stroke, rather than the maximally efficient stroke.

Max drag, big layback, big roll up at the catch, etc.

17 SPI?



Undoubtedly, when I get around to it, I'll do a 500m at max drag with a pretty strong stroke, stronger than my racing stroke, _much_ stronger than my distance stroke.

My distance stroke is only 11.7 SPI.

The drive on my distance stoke is over 30% lighter (shorter, etc.) than this 17 SPI sprinting stroke in the video.

The drive on this heavy stroke in the video is over .8 seconds.

Lighten the chain, speed up the handle, and lighten the stroke 30% and you get right around .5 seconds for the drive.

30% of .8 is .56, without lightening the chain.

At 30 spm, a .5 second drive is a 3-to-1 ratio.

ranger

[chgoss]

Translation: "You're nowhere close to 1:3 at 30 spm."

At 30 spm, I now go 1:40 (11.7 SPI) with this distance stroke. For me, WR 2K pace.

Rich: it's odd that you are able to do a 10k at a pace that you have been unable to complete a 2k with. It might be related to some sort of mental block when you approach the 65% complete mark of a particular piece.

suggestion: at your next race, set the monitor for 10k, then stop when you hit the 2k mark. It may not "officially" count as a WR, but it would sure quiet the nay-sayers..

HTH

[ranger]

it's odd that you are able to do a 10k at a pace that you have been unable to complete a 2k with

The distance stroke I am using now is a completely different stroke (radically different drag, radically different at the footplate, radically different in and out of the recovery, radically different in length, etc.) than I used in my 2Ks this winter.

My distance stroke is in a 3-to-1 ratio.

Completely different affair.

Quick little drive.

Then _huuuuuggggggge_ recovery.

Let the boat run!



I would guess that the ratio is close to twice as big as the stroke I used at max drag this winter.

ranger

[Citroen]

Rich: it's odd that you are able to do a 10k at a pace that you have been unable to complete a 2k with. It might be related to some sort of mental block when you approach the 65% complete mark of a particular piece.

You're missing the point. In Rangerland there's the Rangerian-Newtonian-Einsteinian time dilation coefficient to account for when reporting any rate/pace/distance. Combine that with the Rangerillogic psuedo random number generator and his posted results start to make sense. His use of "if", "when" and "completely different" give you the clue to forget all your knowledge of your universe and switch to Rangermath and Rangerillogic in Rangerland with Rangerphysics (where variables don't and constants aren't).

[macroth]

I keep my heels firmly planted

Haven't you been lambasting Byron D. about this forever?

[johnlvs2run]

Quick little drive.

Then _huuuuuggggggge_ recovery.

That would be extremely inefficient.

[aharmer]

Wow, I ducked out for about 20 pages. I thought people were going to ignore this thread until a screenshot was posted. Instead of arguing for 3 hours a day about who has a good stroke on earth versus sea, why not just do these rows you're talking about and post a screenshot. If you're not completely ready in your mind, just post what you ARE ACTUALLY DOING. I assume you're actually rowing most days right? If you will be able to do 17K in an hour by the end of April, I have to assume you're doing 60 minute rows of at least 16.5k now right?

I'd like to see what you actually do each day so if you ever do these massive rows you predict I can look back and see what it was that got you there. Unfortunately at the end of April you'll claim that the stroke and conditioning isn't perfect yet, so nothing will be posted, and it's time to start rowing on the water so nothing will ever be posted.

[ranger]

I keep my heels firmly planted

Haven't you been lambasting Byron D. about this forever?

No.

Leverage is still off the front of the foot, not the heels, (1) at the catch and (2) during the swing of the back, when the toes are pointed.

I just don't roll up onto my toes going into the catch and roll back off my toes at the start of the drive.

This shortens the drive considerably, both in length and in time.

Drive time is transferred to recovery time.

The ratio balloons.

ranger

[ranger]

I'd like to see what you actually do each day so if you ever do these massive rows you predict I can look back and see what it was that got you there.

I am not training my fitness; I am training my technique, working on efficiency at the moment.

I am telling you all about it.

That's what is getting me there:

Rowing in a 3-to-1 ratio at 26-30 spm and 11.7 SPI over sustained distances.

The stroke is shortened and quickened (to conserve energy) while the recovery is lengthened (to provide continuous relief), even though the drive isn't weak at all, especially given the high rate.

It is still a _very_ substantial 11.7 SPI.

Back in 2003, I did my distance rowing at about 9.7 SPI, 2 SPI less.

ranger

[ranger]

Quick little drive.

Then _huuuuuggggggge_ recovery.

That would be extremely inefficient.

Yes, not much work and a lot of resting is hard to do.



ranger

[NavigationHazard]

(snip)

The drive on this heavy stroke in the video is over .8 seconds....

ranger

More like around 0.7 seconds. The reason it sort of looks like 0.8 is because you sit at the finish and do funny things with your hands that don't actually contribute materially to a drive.

Catch:



Finish, or at least end of purposeful handle traverse:



Several hundredths of a second pause while you think about how you're going to get up out of that silly layback:



Note that neither the handle nor you have moved in 0.03 seconds. The monitor will have interpreted the cessation of handle acceleration as the end of your drive.

Further movement of hands and handle -- up rather than the customary tap down and away. I assume it's because you can't tap down when you're nearly horizontal. In order to get the handle away you actually have to lift it up, and in order to do that you angle your elbows down for some reason. This perhaps creates the illusion that you're still moving the handle back purposefully. You're not:



Finally, start of meaningful handle movement back on the next stroke:



Within the limits of frame analysis, the whole stroke cycle is roughly 1.672 seconds, or 35.9 spm. Your drive (defined as that portion of the stroke in which you're accelerating the flywheel, as opposed to playing with your hands) is .705 seconds. The recovery (defined as the non-drive portion of the stroke) is .967 seconds. Your ratio is 1:1.37.

[jliddil]

Within the limits of frame analysis, the whole stroke cycle is roughly 1.672 seconds, or 35.9 spm. Your drive (defined as that portion of the stroke in which you're accelerating the flywheel, as opposed to playing with your hands) is .705 seconds. The recovery (defined as the non-drive portion of the stroke) is .967 seconds. Your ratio is 1:1.37.

All the hard core data in the world is not going to sink in. It's like trying to reason with someone who believes in intelligent design or is a member of the Texas school board