Ranger's training thread

[ranger]

How many SPI's are your better vector forces giving you these days, give or take a few inverse Farads per square pound?

1:56 @ 29 spm

ranger

[ranger]

Pretty sloppy language.

If you think his language is sloppy, you should see his rowing!

Yes, still _very_ sloppy.

But I get better each day.

I can't ask for anything more than that.

ranger

[ranger]

How's that 80 x 250 r38 @ 1:32/paddle a 250 coming?

I'm afraid that's still off in the future.

I think I will start working some faster rowing into my sessions by doing an easy hour or so at 20-22 spm, to get thoroughly warmed up, and then adding another half hour or so of sprints.

To compensate, I would like to stretch my OTW sessions up toward 20K from my current 10K.

Then I would like to work toward just a 5K warm up on the erg, with a greater and greater proportion of the time being spent on faster rowing, with a standard 20K OTW.

ranger

[ranger]

That's UT2 for a 6:40 2K.

I'd say I'm a few seconds short of 6:40 for a 2k right now. I'll soon sort that though..

Lately, in my low rate rowing, I have been working a lot with 1:48 @ 21 pm (13 SPI)--a little tougher rate and pace, done at a somewhat higher, low UT1, heart rate.

But you've not yet managed a continuous 12k without breaks though have you?

No, not yet.

But I think it will come around soon.

I haven't really tried to push it yet.

I need to start doing that now, though.

Notice that even a 6' or 10' sequence, 1:48 @ 21 spm is a useful exercise for a 60s lwt, though, if the concentration is on technique, and these sequences are repeated for an hour or so.

1:48 is a 7:12 2K.

The 60s lwt hammer at WIRC 2010 pulled 7:04/1:46.

If I am going to hit my targets, or even get better at all, I can now longer row badly.

I need to row well--every stroke.

At low rates, at least, 1:55 @ 22 spm (11.4 SPI) is just rowing badly.

ranger

[ranger]

repeated failure means you've failed.

In training?

Absurd.

Repeated success in training just means that you are avoiding your weaknesses--flattering yourself rather than doing what you need to do.

You only get better by confronting (and then eliminating) your "failings."

ranger

[ranger]

The point is that in a single 1:56 at 29 spm is not 7.7 SPI, unless you weigh about 115 lbs have pretty good technique. For anyone your size it is much higher. Furthermore you don't know what it is.

Sure.

My response is that, for my purposes, it doesn't matter.

As a rule of thumb to chart my progress, these calculations are fine.

ranger

[ranger]

Only if your force doesn't decrease by more 15%, your stroke length doesn't decrease, and you have the aerobic capacity and technique to increase the power by 25%. Caveats you choose to ignore. Pretty sloppy language.

The point is not to decrease your force or stroke length at all.

Keep your technique constant.

And sure, it is hard to miss that rowing faster takes more power, and therefore more effort.

ranger

[PaulH]

You only get better by confronting (and then eliminating) your "failings."

Then why do you keep failing to attempt a single piece you say you will do? Does that mean you're not getting any better?

(edit: took out 'do', put in 'attempt', as that's the point)

[ranger]

I think that the best way to meet my 6:28 2K target for early September will be to work it out at low rates and a high stroking power, like a Level 4 Wolverine Plan sequence, albeit at 27 spm rather than something less.

1:38 @ 26 (14.3 SPI) is top of the line Level 4 rowing for a 1:34/6:16 2K.

1:37 @ 27 spm is pretty much the same stroking power (SPI).

It just clicks up the rate a notch, with the corresponding increase in pace.

I now have no trouble pulling 14.3 SPI at low drag (118 df.).

So there is no problem with this exercise mechanically.

In training, I can just keep pushing up the distance and my HR doing intervals, 1:37 @ 27 spm, until I get the task done.

I did 1K, 1:38 @ 24 spm (15.5 SPI), back in 2006, but that was rowing badly at max drag.

I can now get just as much power rowing well at low drag (118 df.), that is, rowing more effectively and efficiently.

This should help my endurance.

14.3 SPI is also quite a bit easier than 15.5 SPI, especially for a little lightweight like me.

ranger

[macroth]

Notice that even a 6' or 10' sequence, 1:48 @ 21 spm is a useful exercise for a 60s lwt, though, if the concentration is on technique, and these sequences are repeated for an hour or so.


ranger

So are you actually doing several of these 6'-10' rows totalling an hour at a steady 1:48@21spm these days? That would indeed be a great start. What's your HR like at the end?

Or is this just another thing you might want to think you will work up to sometime soon?

[ranger]

So are you actually doing several of these 6'-10' rows totalling an hour at a steady 1:48@21spm these days? That would indeed be a great start. What's your HR like at the end?

Or is this just another thing you might want to think you will work up to sometime soon?

No, whatever I report here, you can still just think it's pie in the sky dreaming and call me a liar.

You seem more comfortable with that.

So be it.

It doesn't bother me, and it certainly doesn't affect my training.

ranger

[ranger]

Mike--

If you want to learn how to row well OTErg, why don't you post a video of some of your erging here, rowing well, and we can give you some pointers about how to become more effective and efficient?

How about 500m, 1:41 @ 26 spm (13 SPI)?

Let's see how you generate your easy power.

I suspect that you need to learn to use your core and back more effectively.

ranger

[macroth]

ranger--

If you want to learn how to row well OTErg, why don't you post some of your erging here, rowing well, and we can give you some pointers about how to become more effective and efficient?

How about 500m, 1:41 @ 26 spm (13 SPI)?

Let's see how you generate your easy power.

[ranger]

So are you actually doing several of these 6'-10' rows totalling an hour at a steady 1:48@21spm these days? That would indeed be a great start. What's your HR like at the end?

Or is this just another thing you might want to think you will work up to sometime soon?

I have been doing this sort of thing for seven years.

I call it rowing with breaks (RWBs).

The goal now is a FM, 1:48 @ 21 spm (13 SPI).

To do this, I will have to keep my HR, steady state, below 160 bpm, for the 2.5 hours.

118 df.

13 SPI

ranger

[macroth]

So are you actually doing several of these 6'-10' rows totalling an hour at a steady 1:48@21spm these days? That would indeed be a great start. What's your HR like at the end?

Or is this just another thing you might want to think you will work up to sometime soon?

I have been doing this sort of thing for seven years.

I call it rowing with breaks (RWBs).

The goal now is a FM, 1:48 @ 21 spm (13 SPI).

To do this, I will have to keep my HR, steady state, below 160 bpm, for the 2.5 hours.

118 df.

13 SPI

ranger

I see. Over these seven years, have you noticed any progress towards performing this FM? I recall that you have had a similar goal of a FM at 1:4x@2x spm (11-12-13 SPI) for several years already.

Generally speaking (no need for hard numbers, god forbid), have your sequences been increasing in length, closer on average to 10' than 6'? Is your HR now steady below 160bpm most of the time? Have you been able to shorten your breaks between the rows?

Surely there are signs that over the next few months, seven years of this sort of training will finally come to fruition?

And no, setting an ever higher target SPI isn't a sign of improvement, if you don't actually reach it.