Ranger's training thread

[mikvan52]

On the BIRC farce we should understand that ranger goals are not goals as is known by the rest of the world...

(today)
Booked my flights and hotel today.

As usual, I will stay at the Crown Plaza.
(snip)

I am written into the history of BIRC.
(snip)

This year, my goal is to pull a lwt 6:20.
(snip)

To appreciate the above:
You said it best, Rich, a long time ago in your blog:

(in February 2006):
I would like to move toward a marathon at 1:48, a half marathon at 1:45, 10K at 1:42, and a 5K @ 1:39.

In sprinting, I would like to work on move toward a 3:00 1K and 1:24 for 500m.

In sprint workouts, I would like to move toward 8 x 500m @ 1:30.

In all of these cases, these are absolute limits, not defined goals.I just want to get as far as I can toward these limits.

ranger

so, going back the first quote: rangerquest is about moving toward 6:20 or 6:18 or shuffling off to Buffalo or... (you fill in the blank) ... IOW: it's not about getting there.
IOW: Rich will never confirm (as a goal) that he will row an erg piece in a certain time (or better) on a certain day in the future.

We all know he will definitely NOT row a 2k piece faster that 6:40 as a lwt ever again in his life.

Has anyone ever seen the cryptic logo imblazoned on Rich's "rowing kit"? It features an asymptote:



Furthermore (on goals):
I have been to CrashB the last 4 years .. ranger has not.. even though each year he moves toward Boston... he is happy with that. Boston is his limit ... but he never gets there....

Maybe ranger does best at the little venues where they don't administer their weigh-ins according to C2 accepted standards... (Baltimore) (Elkhart) and such... I speak from 1st hand experience as a lwt at such "satellite" events...

BTW: Rich have a drink for me too this afternoon... (You know you shouldn't drink and write)... it's an English Major's pitfall...

Here: As you're an auto-didact rower...pick your own photo

http://www.funatiq.com/simply-funny/hil ... nk-people/

Your posts get predictably ugly on Sunday afternoons. Is alcohol involved?

[mikvan52]

"pride goeth before the fall"

The Christian malarky about pride is just b.s.

If he were on an even keel he'd realize the sense of my substitution of the definite for an indefinite article:

Here's a little help for our perpetual novice:

"a" fall (Proverbs 16:18) ... albeit, somewhat bastardized vs "the fall" (King ranger's Bible)

as others point out: misattribution is ranger's main strength in Rich's form of dialectic rhetoric.

[Byron Drachman]

What is the problem hjs? How does one person's posting, even if it is multiple, affect the posts of others?

Hi Bob,

When I post a BLOG I am hoping someone else will read it and find it interesting and perhaps useful. For example in my UK BLOG today I described a social activity for a rowing club. At least one person found it useful.

Once a BLOG is moved off the first page it is less likely to be noticed, and that happens sooner when the first page becomes clogged with multiple Ranger BLOGs.

Byron

[Bob S.]

What is the problem hjs? How does one person's posting, even if it is multiple, affect the posts of others?

Hi Bob,

When I post a BLOG I am hoping someone else will read it and find it interesting and perhaps useful. For example in my UK BLOG today I described a social activity for a rowing club. At least one person found it useful.

Once a BLOG is moved off the first page it is less likely to be noticed, and that happens sooner when the first page becomes clogged with multiple Ranger BLOGs.

Byron

Hi Byron,

Thanks for information. That would explain hjs' concern. I wasn't aware that there was a general first page. I had the idea that people just went directly to individual blogs. My only experience with the system was from clicking on links to a blogs in forum messages. In that case, you go directly to the specific blog.

It is too bad that this forum does not have the blog option. That would have been a more appropriate place to have posted my completely off-topic trip reports.

Unfortunately, the concept of blogs, along with items like twitter and FaceBook, are among a number of 21st century innovations to which this old mossback has an aversion. I just don't relate to these things. After getting inundated with unsolicited FaceBook solicitations and reading about FaceBook scams, I find a lot of this to be on the threatening side. Not that this has a hell of a lot to do with the U.K. forum blog system, but to my antediluvian mind these things are birds of a feather.

Regards,

Bob S.

[whp4]

But the arts, and all sports are arts, are primarily about innovation, talent, hard work, personal expression, mastery, and high achievement.

...and that is why you are such a poor sportsman.

[hjs]

At his UK BLOG Ranger deletes messages he doesn't like, and he has the habit, particularly dishonest and obnoxious, of editing other people's posts along with the usual attributing quotes to the wrong authors. If you follow him there, you will be playing in his playground.

Oh B.S.

You're the biggest asshole I've ever encountered, Byron.

Ever.

What's youir problem, dude?

Get a life.

We are all sorry that you are no good at rowing, but sheesh, being lousy at something is no reason to make things worse by bitching and moaning about it.

ranger

?????? the real Ranger.........................

[hjs]

Over here it is just one thread, in the blog section he will put in numerous blogs a day and ruin the blogs of others that way. I hope he will be put to rest soon there. 1 blog per day ok, but not numerous.

What is the problem hjs? How does one person's posting, even if it is multiple, affect the posts of others? I am not a blog reader myself; I see no point to it. To read any blog on that forum requires logging on and I rarely bother with that, I just lurk once in a while to see what kind of deviltry the Brits are up to nowadays.

So I am not familiar with the mechanics of using the blog feature. Is there some problem with multiple posts? It was my impression that a viewer has the option of logging on only to those blogs that are of interest to the viewer. Any others can simply be ignored without the viewer even being aware of them.

Bob S.

Byron told it already. The blogfunction is very, most peoples ones are nice to read, but they al come in inline, and get pushed away buy the new entries.

[hjs]

What is the problem hjs? How does one person's posting, even if it is multiple, affect the posts of others?

Hi Bob,

When I post a BLOG I am hoping someone else will read it and find it interesting and perhaps useful. For example in my UK BLOG today I described a social activity for a rowing club. At least one person found it useful.

Once a BLOG is moved off the first page it is less likely to be noticed, and that happens sooner when the first page becomes clogged with multiple Ranger BLOGs.

Byron

Hi Byron,

Thanks for information. That would explain hjs' concern. I wasn't aware that there was a general first page. I had the idea that people just went directly to individual blogs. My only experience with the system was from clicking on links to a blogs in forum messages. In that case, you go directly to the specific blog.

It is too bad that this forum does not have the blog option. That would have been a more appropriate place to have posted my completely off-topic trip reports.

Unfortunately, the concept of blogs, along with items like twitter and FaceBook, are among a number of 21st century innovations to which this old mossback has an aversion. I just don't relate to these things. After getting inundated with unsolicited FaceBook solicitations and reading about FaceBook scams, I find a lot of this to be on the threatening side. Not that this has a hell of a lot to do with the U.K. forum blog system, but to my antediluvian mind these things are birds of a feather.

Regards,

Bob S.

Bob you can use the Uk blog can,t you, that way you can keep your stories together for yourself, besides puting them here somewhere.

[ranger]

But the arts, and all sports are arts, are primarily about innovation, talent, hard work, personal expression, mastery, and high achievement.

...and that is why you are such a poor sportsman.

More b.s.

Sport is the most distant activity imaginable from tender sympathy for the other (charity) and other sorts of Christian virtues--obedience, faith, etc.

The major virtues in sport are Ancient, Victorian, and Modern--will, wit, and brawn; discipline, self-reliance, intelligence, and skill; flexibility, tolerance, humor, creativity.

When an athlete has a big "heart," it doesn't mean that they are selflessly charitable to their opponent.

It means that they can channel their emotional energies into their will, wit, and brawn in ways that stoke their engines with desire/fire.

Athletes don't turn the other cheek (and other Christian nonsense).

They take an eye for an eye to get their piece of the pie.

They enjoy the fruits of their labor.

The fellow-feeling that develops around sport comes _after_--from respect among peers (and for things like "team" effort, etc.).

Sport is mock (aesthetically ritualized) war.

ranger

[hjs]

Ahhh mister silence is showing his "silence"

[ranger]

Over here it is just one thread, in the blog section he will put in numerous blogs a day and ruin the blogs of others that way. I hope he will be put to rest soon there. 1 blog per day ok, but not numerous.

What is the problem hjs? How does one person's posting, even if it is multiple, affect the posts of others? I am not a blog reader myself; I see no point to it. To read any blog on that forum requires logging on and I rarely bother with that, I just lurk once in a while to see what kind of deviltry the Brits are up to nowadays.

So I am not familiar with the mechanics of using the blog feature. Is there some problem with multiple posts? It was my impression that a viewer has the option of logging on only to those blogs that are of interest to the viewer. Any others can simply be ignored without the viewer even being aware of them.

Bob S.

Exactly.

ranger

[hjs]

Muppet.

Here's Basalini when he's probably actually got his blades in the water:



The lower back is at an angle of 76 degrees, i.e. is still rocked over 14 degrees shy of vertical and towards the bow

And here he is at the absolute end of the finish, per the animation:



The lower back is at an angle of 40 degrees, i.e. rocked over 50 degrees shy of vertical and towards the bow.

It has traversed an arc of all of 36 degrees, or roughly 40% of the 90 degrees you somehow think you see. Better ask Nursie for some stronger meds; you're hallucinating again. As for his supposed ratio, if you count the drive as "blades in the water with the rower supplying meaningful propulsive force" and the recovery as "everything else," it's more like 1:1.3 or 1:1.4 depending on when you think his blades are in/out. News flash: from the point of view of propulsion, meaningful drive duration is NOT the same as "rower making movements that look to the ignorant eye like a drive."

Simple math is to much for the liar...

[mikvan52]

Simple math is to much for (ranger)...

Adage:
Never tell an English major to "do the math"

[Bob S.]

Bob you can use the Uk blog can,t you, that way you can keep your stories together for yourself, besides puting them here somewhere.

I could, hjs, but I have never felt comfortable on the U.K. forum. Most of the folks on it seem to know one another personally and I felt that I was an outsider butting in. A few years ago, I met a few of the British contributors at Copenhagen and Boston, but one is no longer with us and the others rarely contribute. It might have been different if I had made it to Birc a couple of years ago. I was all signed up and booked in Birmingham, but I was wasted by the 40 days of walking from Condom, France, to Sarria, Spain, so I cancelled out and flew home early. That was costly and I regret having to have given up on Birc, but I would have had to have help getting on and off the erg. My performance would have been a farce.

Bob S.

[hjs]

Bob you can use the Uk blog can,t you, that way you can keep your stories together for yourself, besides puting them here somewhere.

I could, hjs, but I have never felt comfortable on the U.K. forum. Most of the folks on it seem to know one another personally and I felt that I was an outsider butting in. A few years ago, I met a few of the British contributors at Copenhagen and Boston, but one is no longer with us and the others rarely contribute. It might have been different if I had made it to Birc a couple of years ago. I was all signed up and booked in Birmingham, but I was wasted by the 40 days of walking from Condom, France, to Sarria, Spain, so I cancelled out and flew home early. That was costly and I regret having to have given up on Birc, but I would have had to have help getting on and off the erg. My performance would have been a farce.

Bob S.

I think you are mistaken a bit Bob, the uk forum is very international and it is certainly not so so that they all now eachother. Most people I only now via internet. One thing is sure, you would certainly not but in.

Pitty about yout trip, you have to be fit indeed to race, if not I also would not race, And although it's not just about winning, I think you have to be able to come up with a result that does justice to yourself.