The Two Types of Training

[Nosmo]

....
You will never hit your targets if you race your training, as MIke VB illustrated this year.
....

What Mike VB has illustrated:

1) a 6:47 2k --just below his target pace for this row.
2) his 6:47 was severely negatively split, indicating he could have gone faster--certainly below 6:45 and probably 6:43 if it was more evenly space--and even faster with another month of training.
3) Despite ageing, not emphasizing the erg, doing the trial in his off season on minimal training, his 6:47 illustrated that he could have beat his previous best of 6:45.
4) what happens if your race target is above your ability. Going for a WR when one cannot do it results in a sub-par time.
5) how to gut it out and finish get a world championship even when he blows up.
6) The ability to learn from others, receive coaching, and continue to improve.
7) to completely dominate his class in the 1x


Ranger has illustrated:
1) superior natural talent for 2K lwt erging.
2) inability to do what he says he can and will do.
3) inability to properly pace himself in races.
4) what happens if your race target is above your ability.
5) lack of guts in finishing races when he goes off too fast.
6) the ability to get a lot of people to waste a lot of time and pay a lot of attention to him
7) the inability to learn from others or recognize his mistakes
8) the ability to redefine common words to contradict himself and otherwise be incoherent.

[NavigationHazard]

I did my 60min pb with my HR flat at 172 bpm.

As has been pointed out many many times, and as you yourself have admitted maybe half as many times, you did no such thing. You started out with something akin to a walking-around heart rate. It climbed over the next 7 or 8 or 9 minutes to something approaching a plateau. And by your own words, you 'kicked it in' over the last 1k (3:30 or so) during which your HR rose rapidly. Thus even if we ignore the medical improbability that your HR and your pace/rate stayed constant over the middle portion of your row, by your own description a minumum of somewhere between 1/6 and 1/5 of it (17-20%) WASN'T at a constant HR.

No, I didn't start out at 172 bpm. Who would choose to do that?

Yes, my HR reached 172 bpm, pretty quickly, only 1/10 of the way to the finish.

Yes, my HR was _above_ 172 bpm for 1K or so at the end.

How is this relevant?

My HR was at 172 bpm for 13K.

I suspect I could have extended that to 20K, but just didn't choose to.

ranger

It is relevant because you claimed falsely (for the umpteenth time) "I did my 60min pb with my HR flat at 172 bpm." It was NOT "flat" for 60 minutes at 172 bpm. 13000m [sic] ≠ 16692m. It's actually 78% of 16692m. At a minimum, then, 22% of your row WASN'T at 172 bpm. Of course, if "flat" in Rangerland means "nearly flat except for the bits that aren't" I suppose you can call both San Francisco and Salma Hayek "flat."

[ranger]

And yet in all of that you didn't manage to row for around 17 minutes continuously, i.e. to actually row that 5k?

I wasn't racing; I was training.

You can't claim a time over some distance unless you race.

That will come in due course.

You can't do anything in a race that you don't prepare yourself to do in training.

Training determines racing, not the other way around.

Why keep trying to turn one into the other.

To avoid any mention of training (that is not racing)?

That's pretty odd, given that this is a training forum and given that racing your training gets you nowhere.

ranger

[Citroen]

Last year he revealed that his heart never displays any cardiac drift... It remains constant at what ever level he chooses throughout any long workout pulled at a constant pace....

Remember in Rangerland constants aren't and variables don't (depending on the phase of the moon).

[Nosmo]

anaerobic threshold does not predict performance

For those the same gender, size, resting HRs, technique, experience, and fitness--like us?

Yep, it does.

Well, AFAIK you are both of the same gender.

[snowleopard]

anaerobic threshold does not predict performance

For those the same gender, size, resting HRs, technique, experience, and fitness--like us?

Yep, it does.

Well, AFAIK you are both of the same gender.

Yeah, but his infatuation with Mike hints that his cloth might be woven on another loom

[whp4]

And yet in all of that you didn't manage to row for around 17 minutes continuously, i.e. to actually row that 5k?

I wasn't racing; I was training.

You can't claim a time over some distance unless you race.

Sure you can. The monitor clocks every stroke you take, whether or not you choose to look at the result. Set the monitor for 5k splits and row as you like. When you are done, just look at the result. (Hint: you will have to row at least 5k!) In theory, you should be able to do at least that well when you "race" although you don't seem to be able to do as well for 2k in public as you claim you can do for hours at home...

[whp4]

With my HR at 172 bpm, I am not even breathing hard.

Sounds like it is time to see the cardiologist.

[whp4]

So when you post that you are doing something, or that something is a lock or a guarantee you are really expressing "goals" and "targets".

Before the end of the month, I will do all of the races, from 500m to FM--all as a lwt.

I will do them IND_V and enter them in the 50s lwt rankings.

ranger

You're going to be busy today!

[ranger]

It was NOT "flat" for 60 minutes at 172 bpm.

Yes, my heart rate had to rise to 172 bpm, but that only took a few minutes (out of an hour).

After that it was indeed flat and only rose because I pulled the pace down from 1:48 to 1:40.

If I had remained at 1:48, it would have remained flat.

I don't see how a heart rate could be "flatter," do you?

You have HR "drift" when your heart rate continues to rise throughout a piece, even after it matches the level of exertion, e.g., after a few minutes.

There was no drift.

There was just a natural rise until my heart rate matched the level of exertion and then it was flat until I decided to raise the pace.

As I said, I could have extended the row to 20K at 1:48 if I wanted to.

If I had, my heart rate would have stayed flat.

ranger

[ranger]

The monitor clocks every stroke you take, whether or not you choose to look at the result.

So?

We are not machines.

Training is not mechanical.

It is biological: skeletal-motor, hormonal, cardiovascular, neurological.

Different matter entirely.

Each biological system has its own temporality, and none of them has anything to do with clock time.

If you concentrate on clock time when you train, you misplace your emphasis, avoiding everything that matters.

ranger

[ranger]

Going for a WR when one cannot do it results in a sub-par time

Indeed.

Your training determines your racing.

The issue is: How do you train yourself so that you _can_ beat the WR?

This is a training forum, not a racing forum.

ranger

[ranger]

doing the trial on minimal training

Yes, MIke often claims that he can do more with less.

Evidently, not.

ranger

[ranger]

With my HR at 172 bpm, I am not even breathing hard.

Sounds like it is time to see the cardiologist.

More vice versa, I would say.

Cardiologists are health care workers.

To have an anaerobic threshold of 172 at 60 is a _very_ healthy affair.

ranger

[mikvan52]

If you had an anaerobic threshold of 172 bpm, as I do, rather than 143 bpm, as you do, you would ...(do a 5k in such and such0

Rich: You are a laugh-riot:.... "(Mike) would" ..... There's no "would", Rich... I do.

&! Every year I log something in the 5k whether it be OTW or OTErg...

You log ?.... Answer: Nothing.

So you want to beat me with an ignorantly phrased "anaerobic threshold is (such an such a heart rate)? Have at it.

Rich: Listen.\ AGAIN! Anerobic Threshold is not defined by HR: it is defined by blood chemistry involving O2 and CO2. VO2 max figures more prominently in peak performance.

What is your VO2 max? Lab tested figure only.
What is your AT? Lab tested figure only.
Are you afraid to have these tests done?

It fun to play pretend isn't it?

Rich: I admire your ambitious goals as an erger. My goals are clearly stated too: to win an age group award at the HOCR.
I report my progress along the way. You don't (except for your admirable 2k).

I continue to make progress... look at my HOCR results... look at my 1k results. That's my primary arena. I sidetrack in the winter to stay in shape with the erg.

In a week or so I'll post some more evidence of OTW progress with a vid' of our 8's victory at the San Diego Crew Classic.
Do you know anything about this particular regatta? It might call for some research on your part before you characterize it's relative importance to a 55-59 lwt time trial performance at distances over 2k on the erg

As a prelude: Remember when you said repeatedly that my meager conditioning prevented me from taking the pace up on the water?
Well: Our PBRC "D" 8 rated 40-42 off the line and rowed the body of the piece at 34-35 and then sprinted to open up a 5 second margin over second place.

Last week I logged 2 x 1k (short rest) OTW in a single with two 3:56's... (low rate)

Give that a whirl with an erg stroke.

In the light of developments like this, do you think I should be worried about low HR?