Ranger's training thread

[Steve G]

Rich
You mentioned a page back you have lost your impeller on your speedcoach?
I don't understand this OTW terminology, but you do possess a Garmin, no need to calibrate, press button and go, readout of pace, distance etc, or does the truth hurt?

Steve

[pmacaula]

Here is a bit of data from the M1x A Final at the recent World Cup in Munich.

Code: Select all

Competitor Time (mm:ss) Avg Rate (spm)
Synek/CZE	   07:00.6	34.7
Tufte/NOR	   07:02.3	33.4
Hacker/GER	  07:05.9	35.8
Karonen/SWE	 07:06.8	36.1
Campbell/GBR	07:13.9	34.5
Howard/CAN	  07:23.3	41.5

Pretty low to negative correlation between rate and position.
The outlier on rate is Howard.
Given he was 5 seat in the Oly gold medal 8+ in Bejing (and 6'6", 234lbs & with very little extra body fat), very unlikely Howard would give up much to any of these guys on the erg - either on 2K time or SPI. Clearly he is not translating that power into pace, though making the A final is still respectable in your first year focusing on the 1x, though he did win the HOCR Champ 1x in 2007. You can bet his coach will be working a lot more on on his technique than additional conditioning.

Cheers. Patrick.

[ranger]

Here is a bit of data from the M1x A Final at the recent World Cup in Munich.

Code: Select all

Competitor Time (mm:ss) Avg Rate (spm)
Synek/CZE	   07:00.6	34.7
Tufte/NOR	   07:02.3	33.4
Hacker/GER	  07:05.9	35.8
Karonen/SWE	 07:06.8	36.1
Campbell/GBR	07:13.9	34.5
Howard/CAN	  07:23.3	41.5

Pretty low to negative correlation between rate and position.
The outlier on rate is Howard.
Given he was 5 seat in the Oly gold medal 8+ in Bejing (and 6'6", 234lbs & with very little extra body fat), very unlikely Howard would give up much to any of these guys on the erg - either on 2K time or SPI. Clearly he is not translating that power into pace, though making the A final is still respectable in your first year focusing on the 1x, though he did win the HOCR Champ 1x in 2007. You can bet his coach will be working a lot more on on his technique than additional conditioning.

Cheers. Patrick.

By and large, elite young rowers have somewhat the same skeletal-muscular power and physiological capacity. So, sure, given this, technique, how this skeletal-muscular power is translated into boat speed, is crucial to who wins races.

60s rowers, though, can differ wildly in skeletal-muscular power and physiological capacity. Given the ever-threatening potential of a steep decline with age in both skeletal-muscular power and physiological capaacity, especially after 40, what determines your skeletal-muscular power and physiological capacity at 60 years old is not primarily your age but your lifelong physical habits. If you don't use it, you lose it.

The standard expectation at the moment, given four decades of physical neglect from 20 years old to 60 years old, is to lose 50% of your youthful full-body ppower and 30% of your youthful physiological capacity.

That's a lot, and given that physiological capacity is the most important element of boat speed, these things are crucial to who wins and loses a veteran rowing race.

This loss also has a large effect on training and technique. When you lose physical capacity you can't row as fast, as well, or as much from day to day. That is, your ability to train hard and long also declines dramatically. In fact, it declines so dramatically that compared to most younger rowers, what most 60-year=olds do for training is just resting, "paaddling about"--and even so, not for very long, and for most people, not every day, given the need to rest.

Large declines in skeletal-muscular capacities (flexibility, strength, muscular endurance, etc.) can also seriously affect technique. Catches get shorter, timing gets sloppy, technical consistency declines, balance among the levers gets upset, etc.

Sure, if everyone has the same physiological capability, technique is all that matters. But for 60s rowers, the assumption that everyone 'in the race has the same physiological capacity, that everyone has had the same lifelong physical habits and therefore has experienced the same decline with age, is wildly misguided.

I haven't lost _any_ of my youthful full-body power, and my physiological capacity has only declined 15%, not 30%. Given our culture, this is the skeletal-muscular and physiological profile of a good 30s rower, not a good 60s rower.

From 30 to 60, the standard handicap OTW, given the decline with age, is right aroound seven seconds per 500m.

This decline with age is even more dramatic on the erg.

On the erg, this decline for lightweights is from 460 watts to 295 watts, 9 seconds per 500m, or just around 30%.

ranger

[ranger]

Sure, if Mike VB held his technique together and rated 36 spm for 2K OTW or on the erg, there would be no problem at all.

But if he doesn't trade rate for pace, his preference is to rate something closer to 28 spm.

If he held his technique together (say, at 12 SPI) and rated 36 spm, he would pull 1:33/6:12 for 2K on the erg, not 1:42/6:48.

The difference is nine seconds per 500m.

ranger

[ranger]

It doesn't matter how old you are.

If you have the skeletal-muscular and aerobic capacity of an elite 30s lightweight rather than a 60s lightweight, you can both row well and do your daily 80% HRR, distance rowing at 27 spm rather than 17 spm.

At 12 SPI, that's 310 watts rather than 205.

The difference is 15 seconds per 500m, 1:44 rather than 1:59.

ranger

[ranger]

You have stated as recently as yesterday that you haven't done these sorts of things yet

This chart is just a table of targets for stroking powers.

I have used this chart as a guide ever since I started rowing OTW back in 2003.

Of course, stroking power ("effectiveness") is not the whole ballgame in rowing by any means.

There is also efficiency, which is just as important, if not more important.

It is not only important to row well ("effectively"), if is important to learn how to row well with high efficiency, that is, without much effort.

From 2003-2008, I worked mainly on effectiveness.

For the last couple of years, I have been working mainly on efficiency.

To work on effectiveness, you pull hard at low rates.

To work on efficiency, you pull more easily at moderate rates.

When you sharpen and race, you pull moderately at high rates.

ranger

[ranger]

I can never understand statements like this. You have stated as recently as yesterday that you haven't done these sorts of things yet you can say that these are about 19 seconds per 500m off of your erg paces at these rates.

For what it's worth, in the second set of videos of my OTW rowing, which I took a couple of years ago, I am doing right about these rates and paces (2:00 @ 29 spm), but with enormous inefficiency.

A couple of years before that, I pulled a 6:29 2K at 12 SPI on the erg.

12 SPI @ 29 spm is 1:40 pace.

At the same rate, the difference between my stroking OTW and my stroking in this 2K on the erg, then, is 20 seconds per 500m.

On the erg, I do 12 SPI.

The OTW SPI I have been shooting for is 7.

ranger

[ranger]

Rich
You mentioned a page back you have lost your impeller on your speedcoach?
I don't understand this OTW terminology, but you do possess a Garmin, no need to calibrate, press button and go, readout of pace, distance etc, or does the truth hurt?

Steve

Yes, I rowed OTW with my Garmin yesterday, given that I need to get an impeller before I can get readings for pace and distance on my speed coach.

At the moment, my speed coach just gives me rate.

The truth hurts?

For you, maybe.

Not for me.

My rowing is getting better and better, both on the erg and OTW.

The truth about my rowing is a beauty and joy forever.



ranger

[ranger]

When I get an impeller and can again read my pace and rate off of my speed coach, I'll get some new video doing 2:00 @ 29 spm in my Fluid.

I am still working on all sorts of technical flaws, but I am certainly getting better, as you will see.

ranger

[hjs]

you "row well at low drag"

Indeed I do.

I now pull 12 SPI at 123 df.

ranger

And therefore you ste set the drag at max during racing

[hjs]

n 2003 you where "fully trained" after 1 year, now you are 7 years further

Different projects entirely.

From 2000 to 2003, I just trained myself physically, using the erg, paying no attention to technique.

The result was a lightweight 6:28, at max drag, rowing like shit, pulling 10 SPI.

Since 2003, I have trained myself technically, while maintaining my physical condition.

So now I am ready to see what I can do for 2K on the erg fully trained and rowing well at low drag, pulling 12 SPI.

ranger

ah that's why you rowed at max drag this season hahahaha because you "row well at low drag"



Ps I give you an other change to win back the 1000 dollar you own. This is again not an bet, cause for a bet you need two sides. In this you can,t loose anything so it's just a possible gift from my side.

Next to the 2000 dollar you get from me (after you pay all your lost debts )if you row any of your lifelong goals pointing to a 6.16 2k. I offer you the following:

If you row a PB on a nonathlon distance, with a weigh in at forehand and proven, so in a race or filmed in the batcave, you can substract 100 dollar from the 1000 you own me. For any distance you can win 100 dollar max.
You have to report the row plus evidence here.

his pbs

http://www.nonathlon.com/scores.php?id= ... eason=2002

[ausrwr]

When I get an impeller and can again read my pace and rate off of my speed coach, I'll get some new video doing 2:00 @ 29 spm in my Fluid.

I am still working on all sorts of technical flaws, but I am certainly getting better, as you will see.

ranger

So, you've got a Garmin which gives you pace, and a SpeedCoach which gives you rate... What's stopping you rowing at 15km/h on the Garmin and at R29 and getting some video of that. I'm guessing that the Garmin does not give you the numbers you want because your Speedcoach was calibrated totally incorrectly.

What would that prove anyway? With a better boat and improved technique you're NOT ANY FASTER...

And when you say you're "working on all sorts of technical flaws", does that mean you're creating them or trying to solve them?

You may not be able to comprehend this, but SPI on water means very little indeed. Wind, water temp, water density etc. It's not an erg, something you still seem to be struggling to comprehend.

Just asking...

[ranger]

I'm guessing that the Garmin does not give you the numbers you want because your Speedcoach was calibrated totally incorrectly.

No, they give the same readings.

I just prefer the speed coach.

ranger

[ranger]

With a better boat and improved technique you're NOT ANY FASTER...

The issue now is efficiency, not speed.

Next year, when I am 60, if I do the three miles at the Head of the Charles, 2:00 @ 29 spm, I win going away.

For veterans, that's the course record.

ranger

[ausrwr]

I'm guessing that the Garmin does not give you the numbers you want because your Speedcoach was calibrated totally incorrectly.

No, they give the same readings.

I just prefer the speed coach.

ranger

Really? OK, so your preference for the SpeedCoach is stopping you getting video of you doing 2:00 r29?

There's a pea under your mattress, Princess.