Ranger's training thread

[ranger]

Give it a whirl and see what you come up with.

Nah.

No reason for me to do your OTW workouts.

We are at completely different places in our OTW training.

I suspect that it will be a couple of years before I do the kind of thing you are doing OTW.

I am still just learning to row.

ranger

[ranger]

No. Just boring.

Yea.

To an audience, good training is the ultimate bore.

Training isn't a performance.

It's an opportunity to get better.

Drills, and the like.

If you race your training, you never get any better.

In fact, you don't even stay the same.

You just get worse.

ranger

[Flipper21]

Rich,

Get help, as it now looks like you are in a permanent state of psychosis.

Gods speed with your recovery.

[Nosmo]

And what units are we using?

Degrees?
Minutes of arc?
radian?
mil?
point?
binary degree?
grad?
hour angle?
Are we using Euclidean geometry?
Dot product?
Riemannian geometry?

nanoseconds of arc would be in the right ballpark.

B.S.

But you need to know the pin head diameter which is about 20 femtofarads. Or you could use SPI times SPM per BTU but femtofarads is much easier.

[hjs]

No. Just boring.

Yea.

To an audience, good training is the ultimate bore.

ranger

Not at all, good training is very nice to watch or read about. But you hide what you do, you have not show the details of 1 trainingpiece after 2003. That is the "ultimate bore". Only your racing shows your true erging. And year after year yo get slower and futher away from your "goals" Although those not goals but more or less random numbers. Just choosen because Mike C Pb 's are slower

[jliddil]

And what units are we using?

Degrees?
Minutes of arc?
radian?
mil?
point?
binary degree?
grad?
hour angle?
Are we using Euclidean geometry?
Dot product?
Riemannian geometry?

nanoseconds of arc would be in the right ballpark.

B.S.

But you need to know the pin head diameter which is about 20 femtofarads. Or you could use SPI times SPM per BTU but femtofarads is much easier.

I prefer atomic units using hartrees multiplied by Avogadro Units. Then we can determine how many moles there are per SPM X SPI. we could also use the Rydberg Constant I suppose. Or the speed of a ranger boat in a vacuum.
http://goldbook.iupac.org/

[ranger]

Rich,

Get help, as it now looks like you are in a permanent state of psychosis.

Gods speed with your recovery.

Recovery?

No chance.

I have become a rower.



Rowers are nutty.

ranger

[ranger]

But you hide what you do

Hardly.

I have explained what I have been doing--at length.

I have been trying to take good strokes.

Most don't bother.

On the average, 60s lightweights pull 9 SPI.

That is wretchedly ineffective.

When I was 52, I pulled 10 SPI.

Now, at 60, I pull 12 SPI.

That's what I have been doing.

Doing a lot of "training pieces" does you no good at all if you row ineffectively.

For lightweights, the Amercian record for 2K on the erg is 6:56.

Only one erger of any weight has pulled sub-6:30: Paul Hendershott.

I am going to change all of that.

Paul is what, 6'4", 220 lbs.?

Size 16 shoes?

I am 5'11" and will race at 160 lbs.

Shoe size: 9.

But I will pull a 6:16 2K at 60.

6:16 is 12 SPI @ 35 spm.

ranger

[Nosmo]

I prefer atomic units using hartrees multiplied by Avogadro Units. Then we can determine how many moles there are per SPM X SPI. we could also use the Rydberg Constant I suppose. Or the speed of a ranger boat in a vacuum.
http://goldbook.iupac.org/

Wouldn't be inverse Rydberg Constants for the diameter? Or Bohr radii would work too.
Or it could be hartrees per BTU or I guess if you want to keep it all atomic, hartrees x square Rydberg Constants x seconds per atomic mass units.

I goofed above: SPI x SPM per BTU. (has units of power/(1/time) x time / energy = power /energy = 1/time).
BTW, 20 femtofarads really is about the diameter of a pin head (just over 2mm).

Of course one could always multipy by 2 pi bar. (nerd humor)

Why don't we just invent a new unit for the area of a pin head. The Zippy, defined as the cranial surface area of rangers brain devoted to sculling information minus that devoted to sculling miss information (but I fear it may be a negative).

[hjs]

But you hide what you do

Hardly.

I have explained what I have been doing--at length.

ranger

No. Just boring.

Yea.

To an audience, good training is the ultimate bore.

ranger

Not at all, good training is very nice to watch or read about. But you hide what you do, you have not show the details of 1 trainingpiece after 2003. That is the "ultimate bore". Only your racing shows your true erging. And year after year yo get slower and futher away from your "goals" Although those not goals but more or less random numbers. Just choosen because Mike C Pb 's are slower

why do you so often misquote people


The proof of the pudding is the eating. You have given pudding not once for 7/8 years.

[Citroen]

Or the speed of a ranger boat in a vacuum.

Can we ensure that the pilot has no oxygen supply when you do that experiment? Without a space suit the vacuum is going to do some damage that will likely result in death (and therefore instant relief from the tedium that results from his posting on this thread).

[Citroen]

But you need to know the pin head diameter which is about 20 femtofarads. Or you could use SPI times SPM per BTU but femtofarads is much easier.

Is that an inverse square femtofarad? Or a natural femtofarad?

[Nosmo]

But you need to know the pin head diameter which is about 20 femtofarads. Or you could use SPI times SPM per BTU but femtofarads is much easier.

Is that an inverse square femtofarad? Or a natural femtofarad?

a natural femtofarad. or inverse root miles per gallon.

I actually try to make these units correct. although obviously sometimes I do it too quickly.
There are about 8.99 nanofarads per Km. and 42 inverse square cm in a mile per gallon.

[Bob S.]

A SpeedCoach spinner is basically a flow meter, so it could be calibrated in my favorite dimension, firkins/fortnight. I had heard tell that there was a grad student in chemistry who used this for a flow meter built into his apparatus. At the time I heard the story, I didn't know a firkin from a forkin', so I checked it out in my old reliable 47th Ed. Chemistry Rubber Company "Handbook of Chemistry and Physics" (this was pre-internet by about 3 decades) and, sure enough, a firkin (U.S.) was reported to be 34 liters. A British firkin was listed as about 41 liter or 1.2 U.S firkins. On that same search, another volume measure popped up - the butt - British only - there was no U.S. butt listed. It is listed as 0.477 cubic meters, so 477 liters, which would give 14 U.S. firkins/British butt or 11.6 for both in the British system. However Wikipedia ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firkin ) has a table that gives 18 firkins/butt - presumably both are in the British system. It looks like further research is needed here before a SpeedCoach can be properly calibrated.

Bob S.

[Citroen]

I think you'll do better by measuring your imperial firkins, hogheads and butts in imperial (20 fl oz) pints rather than any other unit of measure. Nine gallons or 72pts in a firkin. 54 gallons or 432pts in a hogshead. To convert those to metric measures use 568 ml for a 20 fl oz pint.

I've comsumed many a pint of warm, brown, hoppy, bitter beer in the Firkin pubs http://www.firkinpubs.com/