The Two Types of Training
Re: The Two Types of Training
Ordered my new Fluidesign 1x today--in blue, with "Windhover" on the bow.
I'll drive up to London, Ontario, which isn't far at all, to pick it up.
They will have it done in four weeks.
So, May 17th?
Nice.
Thanks, mom!
ranger
I'll drive up to London, Ontario, which isn't far at all, to pick it up.
They will have it done in four weeks.
So, May 17th?
Nice.
Thanks, mom!
ranger
Rich Cureton M 72 5'11" 165 lbs. 2K pbs: 6:27.5 (hwt), 6:28 (lwt)
Re: The Two Types of Training
While I agree that his claims are to be viewed with extreme skepticism, your arithmetic is rather suspect as wellsnowleopard wrote:No, you haven't. That would be 40,000K a week for 50 years. So, once again, you are lying.ranger wrote:I have been on 10,000 10K runs.
10,000 runs * 10k / run is "only" 100,000k of running.
40,000k / week * 50 years * 52 weeks/year is 104,000,000k. The problem is your use of 40,000k as his weekly total, which is a mere 5 miles short of the circumference of the Earth (measured over the poles). I don't think even TSO claims that he ran that much per week.
What I find puzzling about his claims of endless training all his life is how he ever managed to pork up to 200 lbs. He must have spent his entire salary on potato chips and beer.
Re: The Two Types of Training
whp4 wrote:snowleopard wrote:ranger wrote:I have been on 10,000 10K runs.
OK but 100000 Km = 62 137 mile
Divide by 30 years and you get ~2000 miles a year
Or 40 miles a week
Certainly doable but this is purely word of mouth and hearsay as is everything this person writes
JD
Age: 51; H: 6"5'; W: 172 lbs;
Age: 51; H: 6"5'; W: 172 lbs;
Re: The Two Types of Training
How about put-on or leg-pull?jliddil wrote:
Certainly doable but this is purely word of mouth and hearsay as is everything this person writes
Re: The Two Types of Training
Ah yes, because endurance has nothing to do with aerobic capacity?ranger wrote:Skeletal-muscular strength, flexibility, quickness, agility, rhythmicity, fluidity, endurance, balance, timing, etc.auswr wrote:'Primarily aerobic' [vs.] what?
ranger
You should really practice not sounding stupid, as Letterman might do a similar list about you.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pCnjuJ1pbmc
24, 166lbs, 5'9
Re: The Two Types of Training
Wait, Primary importance: Fingers that curl. Try rowing without that.
Re: The Two Types of Training
About the only time I trust what ranger says is when he says he rows like shit, or doesn't know how to row, or isn't preparedjliddil wrote:whp4 wrote:ranger wrote:I have been on 10,000 10K runs.
OK but 100000 Km = 62 137 mile
Divide by 30 years and you get ~2000 miles a year
Or 40 miles a week
Certainly doable but this is purely word of mouth and hearsay as is everything this person writes
Certainly 10,000 10K runs over the 30 or so years he claims to have been a runner would be pushing it, given that he lived in Michigan and Illinois, not somewhere more hospitable to year-round running, like California. That's a lot of running in snow for a guy who succumbs so easily to frozen feet
-
- 6k Poster
- Posts: 936
- Joined: September 23rd, 2009, 4:16 am
Re: The Two Types of Training
Yes, sorry, my bad I was on a fly-by and not paying enough attention.whp4 wrote:While I agree that his claims are to be viewed with extreme skepticism, your arithmetic is rather suspect as wellsnowleopard wrote:No, you haven't. That would be 40,000K a week for 50 years. So, once again, you are lying.ranger wrote:I have been on 10,000 10K runs.
10,000 runs * 10k / run is "only" 100,000k of running.
40,000k / week * 50 years * 52 weeks/year is 104,000,000k. The problem is your use of 40,000k as his weekly total, which is a mere 5 miles short of the circumference of the Earth (measured over the poles). I don't think even TSO claims that he ran that much per week.
What I find puzzling about his claims of endless training all his life is how he ever managed to pork up to 200 lbs. He must have spent his entire salary on potato chips and beer.
Re: The Two Types of Training
There'd be some serious fisticuffs in the writers' room, trying to cut the list down to only 10 items!bloomp wrote:Ah yes, because endurance has nothing to do with aerobic capacity?ranger wrote:Skeletal-muscular strength, flexibility, quickness, agility, rhythmicity, fluidity, endurance, balance, timing, etc.auswr wrote:'Primarily aerobic' [vs.] what?
ranger
You should really practice not sounding stupid, as Letterman might do a similar list about you.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pCnjuJ1pbmc
Striking resemblance between the "confused stare" shot in that video and a picture of Rupp!
Re: The Two Types of Training
Well here's your claim: You rowed 6:29 or whatever in 2003 (or whatever, I'm not going to look it up). By your own description you didn't know how to row then, and you're much better now. It's axiomatic that you weren't fully trained then, since it's seven years later and you, somehow, still aren't fully trained. So, you're clearly better trained now than you were then. And you were thirteen seconds slower in your best 2K. Over 7 in another and, of course, didn't show up actually to compete against people whom you might (were you sane) consider your peers, probably because whenever you do you get whipped.ranger wrote:I haven't lost _any_ of my youthful full-body power--at all. rangerauswr wrote:Do you want to clarify that one?
You've clearly lost lots of power (or else it's mental toughness or aerobic capacity). On the other hand, you're obviously a major head case which, as I've said before, should compel me to feel sorry for you. But I don't.
Re: The Two Types of Training
He's a headcase, a total loon. And loves being an @@shole
JD
Age: 51; H: 6"5'; W: 172 lbs;
Age: 51; H: 6"5'; W: 172 lbs;
- Carl Watts
- Marathon Poster
- Posts: 4692
- Joined: January 8th, 2010, 4:35 pm
- Location: NEW ZEALAND
Re: The Two Types of Training
I just love this thread, it's so amusing I just cannot wait to read it after my row in the mornings.
Hows the distance rowing coming on Ranger ?, still waiting for your sig. to be updated, only about 10 days to go you know.
Busy updating mine with the best that I can before the 2010 season ends. Will try for a better 2K time as it's out of alighnment with the rest of my results before May 1st. Shame you don't row online, I could give you a run for your money !
Carl Watts.
Age:56 Weight: 108kg Height:183cm
Concept 2 Monitor Service Technician & indoor rower.
http://log.concept2.com/profile/863525/log
Age:56 Weight: 108kg Height:183cm
Concept 2 Monitor Service Technician & indoor rower.
http://log.concept2.com/profile/863525/log
- johnlvs2run
- Half Marathon Poster
- Posts: 4012
- Joined: March 16th, 2006, 1:13 pm
- Location: California Central Coast
- Contact:
Re: The Two Types of Training
MikeB did.ranger wrote:Ah.
Here is another thing.
Rowing is massively skeletal-muscular.
It is not primarily aerobic, as everyone likes to think.
The best thing you can do for your rowing, I think, is to learn to make maximal use your core.
You need to learn to explode with your hips in the middle of your stroke, as you swing your back, point your toes, and drive with your calves.
I did 1000 sit ups a day for five years or so in order to strengthen my core.
Pull ups are also a good measure of upper body power relative to rate. I can still do 30 pull ups.
Jumping rope is also great for the skeletal-muscular system, as is running.
I jumped rope for an hour a day for 10 years or so, just before and during when I took up rowing.
As a substitute for this hour of jumping rope, I did 10-mile runs.
For five years or so, I did the hour of jumping rope (or 10-mile run) and the hour of sit ups _before_ I did my 20K on the erg.
Hey.
No one said that being great at rowing was easy.
ranger
bikeerg 75 5'8" 155# - 18.5 - 51.9 - 568 - 1:52.7 - 8:03.8 - 20:13.1 - 14620 - 40:58.7 - 28855 - 1:23:48.0
rowerg 56-58 5'8.5" 143# - 1:39.6 - 3:35.6 - 7:24.0 - 18:57.4 - 22:49.9 - 7793 - 38:44.7 - 1:22:48.9 - 2:58:46.2
rowerg 56-58 5'8.5" 143# - 1:39.6 - 3:35.6 - 7:24.0 - 18:57.4 - 22:49.9 - 7793 - 38:44.7 - 1:22:48.9 - 2:58:46.2
- johnlvs2run
- Half Marathon Poster
- Posts: 4012
- Joined: March 16th, 2006, 1:13 pm
- Location: California Central Coast
- Contact:
Re: The Two Types of Training
I see nothing wrong with this.ranger wrote:180 bpm is AT for me.
My anaerobic threshold is 172 bpm.
In fact, I asked the following question several weeks ago, and no one was able to answer.
John Rupp wrote:Okay then here's a question for you. At what HR is your AT not fake?mikvan52 wrote:I'd rather gain a better understanding of how to train in and around AT than have a fake discussion about humility.
bikeerg 75 5'8" 155# - 18.5 - 51.9 - 568 - 1:52.7 - 8:03.8 - 20:13.1 - 14620 - 40:58.7 - 28855 - 1:23:48.0
rowerg 56-58 5'8.5" 143# - 1:39.6 - 3:35.6 - 7:24.0 - 18:57.4 - 22:49.9 - 7793 - 38:44.7 - 1:22:48.9 - 2:58:46.2
rowerg 56-58 5'8.5" 143# - 1:39.6 - 3:35.6 - 7:24.0 - 18:57.4 - 22:49.9 - 7793 - 38:44.7 - 1:22:48.9 - 2:58:46.2
Re: The Two Types of Training
Poetic License, pure and simple.Bob S. wrote:How about put-on or leg-pull?jliddil wrote:
Certainly doable but this is purely word of mouth and hearsay as is everything this person writes
I'm surprised that folks who have been reading here for more than a couple of weeks insist on precisely parsing Ranger's hyperbolic boasts and taking things literally. But don't stop now -- it does make for interesting reading and keeps us coming back.
Walter