Ranger's training thread

[mikvan52]

One of the interesting tactics that TSO uses is to try to drive people off "his" thread with insults... Particularly is such a person has the upper hand in an argument...

Ah.

Thought so.

You don't have the courage to confront your weaknesses.

You think it is an insult to have them noticed and mentioned.

Truth hurts?

Guess it does--for snobs.

ranger

So now I'm not brave and I'm hurting? I'll add this to resting on my laurels... Like showing up at Masters Nationals 2010 a month ago.
Your claims are empty: like your predictions.... " I will row all the major (erg) regattas." ; "I will row the Head of the Charles in 2011"; " I will get a free ticket to Crash-B 2010 and set a WR"

Remember, Rich, this thread should be about YOU...

Your claims are empty: like your predictions.... " I will row all the major (erg) regattas." ; "I will row the Head of the Charles in 2011"; " I will get a free ticket to Crash-B 2010 and set a WR"; "I will brake Roy Brooks WR" ; "I will row a 6:28 erg by the end of September 2009"

[mikvan52]

How many meters can you go a constant speed of 2:10 per 500m (without a break) with your SpeedCoach calibrated at 0.968?

I don't know.

I have just learned to row!

I suspect I will eventually be able to do 20K, 2:10 @ 24-26 spm.

When I race 5K OTW, I'll rate 30 spm.

Fair enough.
You don't know.
Why not get out and do a full length of your river annd record the pace and rate you go and report back here?

Some data would restore some credibility.

My suggestion is put off the 30 spm goal until you're an under 60 year old again...
IOW: never

[hjs]

Last year, I pulled WR pace, nonetheless, without even preparing for it.

"Close enough" to the truth, aka a lie.

Can,t almost everbody do this. Pace is not the main point, it's how long you keep this pace

[NavigationHazard]

Projecting future acievements is fair enough but you can't have a record of future achievements.

I didn't claim that my record is in the future. It is in the past and present.

ranger

You claimed that future achievements are part of your record:

Given my record of achievements (both past and present, and soon, future)....

Run it through the Stanford parser. You get

Tagging
Given/VBNmy/PRP$record/NNof/INachievements/NNS-LRB-/-LRB-both/DTpast/NNand/CCpresent/JJ,/,and/CCsoon/RB,/,future/NN-RRB-/-RRB-Parse
(ROOT
(PP (VBN Given)
(NP
(NP (PRP$ my) (NN record))
(PP (IN of)
(NP
(NP
(NP (NNS achievements))
(PRN (-LRB- -LRB-)
(UCP
(NP (DT both) (NN past))
(CC and)
(ADJP (JJ present)))))
(PRN (, ,) (CC and)
(ADVP (RB soon))
(, ,)
(NP (NN future))
(-RRB- -RRB-)))))))Typed dependencies
poss(record-3, my-2)
dep(Given-1, record-3)
prep(record-3, of-4)
pobj(of-4, achievements-5)
det(past-8, both-7)
dep(achievements-5, past-8)
cc(past-8, and-9)
conj(past-8, present-10)
dep(future-15, and-12)
dep(future-15, soon-13)
dep(achievements-5, future-15)Typed dependencies, collapsed
poss(record-3, my-2)
dep(Given-1, record-3)
prep_of(record-3, achievements-5)
det(past-8, both-7)
dep(achievements-5, past-8)
dep(achievements-5, present-10)
conj_and(past-8, present-10)
dep(future-15, and-12)
dep(future-15, soon-13)
dep(achievements-5, future-15)

Note the dependency chain linking record, achievements, and future.

[ranger]

Fair enough.
You don't know.
Why not get out and do a full length of your river and record the pace and rate you go and report back here?

That's the intention.

Do you mean 2.5K?

That's all I can do before I have to turn around.

ranger

[ranger]

Pace is not the main point, it's how long you keep this pace

2K

6:41 for 2K, which I pulled last year at max drag, without even preparing for it, is WR pace for a 59-year-old lightweight.

The 60s lwt WR is 6:42.

ranger

[ranger]

My suggestion is put off the 30 spm goal until you're an under 60 year old again...

I am not at AT when I am pulling 24-26 spm.

That's just UT1

ranger

[NavigationHazard]

No; for the ten thousandth time: you're at "AT" when you're rowing at an intensity at which your HR as a proxy for effort is at or near a rate per minute associated with your lactate threshold. Rowing 27, 42, 160, 16, whatever rate doesn't make it "AT" or "not AT." If you're rowing at 26 spm and your HR is at or near threshold level then you're at threshold level intensity. Muppet -- what do you think "AT" stands for?

[ausrwr]

To what?

If I can outrow you, why should I listen to you?

If I can outrow you, you have more problems than I do.

Shouldn't you solve your own problems before you misrepresent them as virtues and foist them off as "wisdom" onto someone else.

Time to get to work, coach.

Sure, I am willing to listen to how you respond to your own limitations.

Do you have the courage to confront them?

We're all here to give you support, if you want it.

It is clear that you need it.

But it isn't at all clear that you want it.

ranger

Pot. Kettle. Black.

Rich, there's nothing to show that you can row at all. No races. No put up or shut up. No reason for anyone to think, let alone believe that Mike wouldn't be off the water and having a nice cup of tea by the time you crossed the line.

That is, assuming that you have the cojones to show up on the start line. October 17th? Not a hope in hell you'll race Head of the Grand. Shit, even I'll be racing that weekend. It'll be on the Tideway in London, but hey...

[hjs]

Pace is not the main point, it's how long you keep this pace

2K

6:41 for 2K, which I pulled last year at max drag, without even preparing for it, is WR pace for a 59-year-old lightweight.

The 60s lwt WR is 6:42.

ranger

You prepare like hell, every winter, you have to shed a lot of fat first,
You are not capeble of rwing sub 7 in your first races.
You Sharpen as hard as possible and get's you to 6.xx, I wonder how many years you manage that, iy won,t be long you end up in the 6.5x.x

You are not 60 now, let alone last winter. The 59 year lightweight old Wr = 6.38.1

[ausrwr]

If it isn' t already obvious, by the end of this indoor rowing season (2011), it will be clear that I am one of the best ergers in the history of the sport, if not the best, bar none.

Really? How many WRs do you still hold?

Do you think you can really compare yourself to Waddell, Balmary (though that WR has been broken), Stephansen, Schlenker, Ripley, and many others who hold WRs, and will continue to hold them for a while in divisions in which there's a lot more competition? Oh, and Roy Brook, too.

Rich: you will hold the 60s LWT WR next year, of that I have no doubt. You are a pretty damn good athlete. You certainly train enough. But if you've spent years remodelling strokes, rowing thousands of miles a year, training your proverbial off, and you haven't been able to break Roy's WR, you won't be able to this year.

You'll do a mid to low 6:40, which will probably be the best 55-59 time of the year, and all credit to you. A similar time when you DO turn 60 will knock 15 to 17 seconds out of the 60+ WR, and good luck to you. But more than that? You must be kidding yourself.

[ranger]

No; for the ten thousandth time: you're at "AT" when you're rowing at an intensity at which your HR as a proxy for effort is at or near a rate per minute associated with your lactate threshold. Rowing 27, 42, 160, 16, whatever rate doesn't make it "AT" or "not AT." If you're rowing at 26 spm and your HR is at or near threshold level then you're at threshold level intensity. Muppet -- what do you think "AT" stands for?

Exactly.

My HR is not at AT when I am pulling 24-26 spm.

It is at UT1.

Sorry if that was unclear.

As I mentioned to Mike earlier, both OTW and OTErg, when I am fully trained up for it, I suspect I can pull 26 spm for 20K, not just 5K.

ranger

[ranger]

You must be kidding yourself.

No, I'm not.

Which my sharpening workouts will soon show.

Rowing well at low drag (118 df.), I am now doing 1:48 @ 22 spm with a UT2 HR (145 bpm).

That tells the story.

In 2003, I did 1:48 pace, steady state, at a HR of 172 bpm, top-end UT1.

The difference is five seconds per 500m, a full training band.

In 2003, I pulled 6:28 for 2K.

The 60s lwt WR is 6:42; the 55s lwt WR is 6:38; the 50s lwt WR is 6:24.

I am 59.

ranger

[ranger]

You prepare like hell, every winter, you have to shed a lot of fat first

Yes, I have been preparing my weight every year so that I can race as a lightweight.

But I haven't been sharpening.

Until now, I have just continued to work on technique.

This work on technique is now done.

ranger

[NavigationHazard]

No; for the ten thousandth time: you're at "AT" when you're rowing at an intensity at which your HR as a proxy for effort is at or near a rate per minute associated with your lactate threshold. Rowing 27, 42, 160, 16, whatever rate doesn't make it "AT" or "not AT." If you're rowing at 26 spm and your HR is at or near threshold level then you're at threshold level intensity. Muppet -- what do you think "AT" stands for?

Exactly.

My HR is not at AT when I am pulling 24-26 spm.

It is at UT1.

Sorry if that was unclear.

As I mentioned to Mike earlier, both OTW and OTErg, when I am fully trained up for it, I suspect I can pull 26 spm for 20K, not just 5K.

ranger

You really don't have a clue as to what HR-associated training terminology means, do you. Your HR is at some UT1 associated level if and only if you're rowing at the requisite intensity. The rating does not matter. Rating does not in and of itself drive HR. It does not in and of itself determine intensity. If it did, Rupp would be rowing harder than you. One more time: there is NO direct correlation between rating and HR. The original C2 Interactive plan did try to associate rating ranges with its suggested workouts. But those associations took into account pace (actually, watts) and duration. AND they presumed continuous rowing of prescribed pieces.

All of this, of course, is over and above the problem that you don't actually have a scintilla of an idea of what your factual threshold-associated HR might be right now. Here's a thought: ask your brother if he agrees it's 172 bpm as of today, 9/16/2010.