Ranger's training thread

General discussion on Training. How to get better on your erg, how to use your erg to get better at another sport, or anything else about improving your abilities.
ranger
Marathon Poster
Posts: 11629
Joined: March 27th, 2006, 3:27 pm

Re: Ranger's training thread

Post by ranger » October 20th, 2010, 11:07 am

snowleopard wrote:
ranger wrote:Sure, but "speed" in rowing is really natural stroking power--at all distances.
No, as in all things, speed in rowing is distance/time :idea:
For those whose fitness is maximal, in terms of training (which I would define as an opportunity to get better), the notion, distance/time, is empty.

If your fitness is maximal, and you just row fast in training, sharpening to race, your times plateau, and nothing can be done about it.

This happened to me in 2003 after three consecutive WR lightweight rows: 6:30, 6:29, 6:28.

ranger
Rich Cureton M 72 5'11" 165 lbs. 2K pbs: 6:27.5 (hwt), 6:28 (lwt)

ranger
Marathon Poster
Posts: 11629
Joined: March 27th, 2006, 3:27 pm

Re: Ranger's training thread

Post by ranger » October 20th, 2010, 11:10 am

whp4 wrote:
ranger wrote:
mikvan52 wrote:The raw speed has to be there, listeners... Rich has not cracked 1:30 in years
Consequently, when I was doing RWBs, I was interested in getting to some max on 500m @ 10 MPS, e.g., 1:26 @ 35 spm.
Yet another "accomplishment" for which there is no evidence!
Sure, because I didn't accomplish it.

The best I could do at 16 SPI for 500m at that time was 1:30 @ 30 spm, and even so, at max drag with a sprack back, which is a pretty odd way to row, even OTErg.

So I had to settle for that.

Clearly, I was still struggling with technique.

ranger
Rich Cureton M 72 5'11" 165 lbs. 2K pbs: 6:27.5 (hwt), 6:28 (lwt)

macroth
5k Poster
Posts: 514
Joined: February 4th, 2008, 5:14 pm
Location: Geneva, CH

Re: Ranger's training thread

Post by macroth » October 20th, 2010, 11:14 am

Still stuck in the past, I see. :lol:

Getting back to the present or -- :shock: :shock: :shock: -- the future, how can you know 1:40 is your "base"/6k speed if you haven't done any workouts where you keep track of your distance, time or HR, let alone predictive workouts, let alone a 6k? Cart way before the horses, buddy.

Remember, for the last several years, 1:40+ has only been your best 2K speed.
43/m/183cm/HW
All time PBs: 100m 14.0 | 500m 1:18.1 | 1k 2:55.7 | 2k 6:15.4 | 5k 16:59.3 | 6k 20:46.5 | 10k 35:46.0
40+ PBs: 100m 14.7 | 500m 1:20.5 | 1k 2:59.6 | 2k 6:21.9 | 5k 17:29.6 | HM 1:19:33.1| FM 2:51:58.5 | 100k 7:35:09 | 24h 250,706m

snowleopard
6k Poster
Posts: 936
Joined: September 23rd, 2009, 4:16 am

Re: Ranger's training thread

Post by snowleopard » October 20th, 2010, 11:18 am

ranger wrote:
snowleopard wrote:
ranger wrote:Sure, but "speed" in rowing is really natural stroking power--at all distances.
No, as in all things, speed in rowing is distance/time :idea:
For those whose fitness is maximal, in terms of training (which I would define as an opportunity to get better), the notion, distance/time, is empty.
distance/time isn't a notion it's an equation. I can understand why speed is notional for you though since one has to complete a distance to calculate a speed.

Oh, and your fitness isn't maximal BTW.

ranger
Marathon Poster
Posts: 11629
Joined: March 27th, 2006, 3:27 pm

Re: Ranger's training thread

Post by ranger » October 20th, 2010, 11:20 am

macroth wrote:Still stuck in the past, I see. :lol:

Getting back to the present or -- :shock: :shock: :shock: -- the future, how can you know 1:40 is your "base"/6k speed if you haven't done any workouts where you keep track of your distance, time or HR, let alone predictive workouts, let alone a 6k? Cart way before the horses, buddy.

Remember, for the last several years, 1:40+ has only been your best 2K speed.
If your UT2 pace is 1:49 @ 22 spm, your AT pace is at least 1:40.

You just have to sharpen.

I did the 1:40 2Ks over the last two years without even sharpening, not to mention at max drag, still struggling with technique.

You get about a dozen seconds over 2K from a couple of months of hard sharpening.

Who knows how much you get from rowing well at low drag (120 df.), as I do now. I assume you get quite a bit.

ranger
Rich Cureton M 72 5'11" 165 lbs. 2K pbs: 6:27.5 (hwt), 6:28 (lwt)

ranger
Marathon Poster
Posts: 11629
Joined: March 27th, 2006, 3:27 pm

Re: Ranger's training thread

Post by ranger » October 20th, 2010, 11:26 am

snowleopard wrote: I can understand why speed is notional for you though since one has to complete a distance to calculate a speed.
I would rather have speed be notional in my training than improvement, non-existent, as with everyone else in the history of the sport.

In recent times, at least, other than me, no male WR-holder, 40-70 years old, has ever gotten better--at all.

They have just gotten worse--and worse, and worse, and worse--at a rate of 1-2 seconds a year, sometimes more than that.

My goal is to be fourteen seconds better (6:16) this year (WIRC 2011), eight years after setting the 50s lwt WR (6:30) at WIRC 2003.

If I can pull 12.5 SPI and rate 34 spm for 2K, the goal is mine.

ranger
Last edited by ranger on October 20th, 2010, 11:30 am, edited 2 times in total.
Rich Cureton M 72 5'11" 165 lbs. 2K pbs: 6:27.5 (hwt), 6:28 (lwt)

macroth
5k Poster
Posts: 514
Joined: February 4th, 2008, 5:14 pm
Location: Geneva, CH

Re: Ranger's training thread

Post by macroth » October 20th, 2010, 11:29 am

ranger wrote:
My goal is to get fourteen seconds better (6:16) this year (WIRC 2011), eight years after setting the 50s lwt WR (6:30) at WIRC 2003.

ranger
Not to mention 26 seconds faster than a year ago. :lol:
You poor, delusional man. Wasting away your last remote chance at the 55s WR. Oh well.
43/m/183cm/HW
All time PBs: 100m 14.0 | 500m 1:18.1 | 1k 2:55.7 | 2k 6:15.4 | 5k 16:59.3 | 6k 20:46.5 | 10k 35:46.0
40+ PBs: 100m 14.7 | 500m 1:20.5 | 1k 2:59.6 | 2k 6:21.9 | 5k 17:29.6 | HM 1:19:33.1| FM 2:51:58.5 | 100k 7:35:09 | 24h 250,706m

ranger
Marathon Poster
Posts: 11629
Joined: March 27th, 2006, 3:27 pm

Re: Ranger's training thread

Post by ranger » October 20th, 2010, 11:32 am

macroth wrote:
ranger wrote:
My goal is to get fourteen seconds better (6:16) this year (WIRC 2011), eight years after setting the 50s lwt WR (6:30) at WIRC 2003.

ranger
Not to mention 26 seconds faster than a year ago. :lol:
You poor, delusional man. Wasting away your last remote chance at the 55s WR. Oh well.
When he was just 55, Rocket Roy pulled the 55s lwt WR at 6:38.

Now, four years later, training the same way, he would have a hard time pulling 6:50.

For older rowers, time takes its toll (unless you do something about it).

Clearly, concentrating on speed (defined as distance/time) is _not_ the thing to do.

ranger
Rich Cureton M 72 5'11" 165 lbs. 2K pbs: 6:27.5 (hwt), 6:28 (lwt)

whp4
6k Poster
Posts: 665
Joined: March 15th, 2006, 10:09 pm

Re: Ranger's training thread

Post by whp4 » October 20th, 2010, 11:43 am

ranger wrote:
macroth wrote:
ranger wrote:
My goal is to get fourteen seconds better (6:16) this year (WIRC 2011), eight years after setting the 50s lwt WR (6:30) at WIRC 2003.

ranger
Not to mention 26 seconds faster than a year ago. :lol:
You poor, delusional man. Wasting away your last remote chance at the 55s WR. Oh well.
When he was just 55, Rocket Roy pulled the 55s lwt WR at 6:38.
Don't forget the 6:34 done outside of competition. Even if you could match the 6:38, that 6:34 would still be eating away at you...
Now, four years later, training the same way, he would have a hard time pulling 6:50.

For older rowers, time takes its toll (unless you do something about it).
And there's absolutely no evidence that you've done anything about it — your best times are slower with each passing year.

When 6:16 has elapsed in the 55 lwts race at BIRC next month, you'll still have 150m to row. When 6:16 has elapsed in your race at WIRC this spring, you'll have 2km to row, because you'll be cowering in the bat cave in one of your slime pools, posting some lame excuse about why you couldn't get there.

DUThomas
2k Poster
Posts: 297
Joined: August 8th, 2007, 12:28 pm
Location: Washington, DC

Re: Ranger's training thread

Post by DUThomas » October 20th, 2010, 11:45 am

ranger wrote:In recent times, at least, other than me, no male WR-holder, 40-70 years old, has ever gotten better--at all.
They have just gotten worse--and worse, and worse, and worse--at a rate of 1-2 seconds a year, sometimes more than that.
And so have you. You've lost about 13 seconds since 2003. Almost 2 seconds a year. Tough break.
David -- 45, 195, 6'1"

[img]http://www.c2ctc.com/sigs/img1264886662.png[/img]

snowleopard
6k Poster
Posts: 936
Joined: September 23rd, 2009, 4:16 am

Re: Ranger's training thread

Post by snowleopard » October 20th, 2010, 11:48 am

ranger wrote:
macroth wrote:
ranger wrote:
My goal is to get fourteen seconds better (6:16) this year (WIRC 2011), eight years after setting the 50s lwt WR (6:30) at WIRC 2003.

ranger
Not to mention 26 seconds faster than a year ago. :lol:
You poor, delusional man. Wasting away your last remote chance at the 55s WR. Oh well.
When he was just 55, Rocket Roy pulled the 55s lwt WR at 6:38.

Now, four years later, training the same way, he would have a hard time pulling 6:50.

For older rowers, time takes its toll (unless you do something about it).

Clearly, concentrating on speed (defined as distance/time) is _not_ the thing to do.

ranger
rammer,

When the clock stops at 6:40 and change after 2000m at BIRC the only measurement that matters will be distance/time. All your notions of SPI, leverage, base pace and training bands will be shown up for the pure whimsy that they are. I for one can't wait.

User avatar
Byron Drachman
10k Poster
Posts: 1124
Joined: March 23rd, 2006, 9:26 pm

Re: Ranger's training thread

Post by Byron Drachman » October 20th, 2010, 11:55 am

Ranger wrote: Steering is a no-brainer, folks. You just have to practice it a little--and that's that.
--snip--For someone like me, steering can be learned in a few days/weeks.
You're so lucky to be that talented. Then you won't even need these instructions when you win the HOCR next year:

http://www.hocr.org/competitors/steerin ... harles.asp
If you don't have a coxswain, don't put your oars over the buoys, even if you are allowed to. Chances are you'll miss one (your hull falls on the wrong side of a buoy), and that's a 10 second penalty. Sometimes buoys drift--be especially alert for that.

Before the start, be in the middle of the river. It gives you a straighter shot through the B.U. Bridge to pick up the tangent of the green buoys in front of Magazine beach.

Get a good start, but make sure you settle into a strong and sustainable rhythm as you go through the B.U. Bridge. Crews that extend the frenetic pace of the start past the B.U. Bridge often fizzle early. After Magazine Beach, at the blockhouse, you have gone about half a mile. Watch out for idiotic crews that might try to launch from Magazine Beach right into your race. Even if they get disqualified for doing so, it can ruin your day. Be alert for green buoys that have drifted or been dislodged by launching crews.

After the blockhouse between Magazine Beach and Riverside Boat Club to starboard, let yourself go wide to port a little, because that will lead you right onto the extended centerline of the River Street and Western Avenue bridges in the Powerhouse Stretch. Go right down the center of the middle arches. That straight stretch is between 1000m and 1500m long, depending on where you pick up the true course. Ideally you will be going straight about 1200m or so.

Midway between the River Street and Western Avenue bridges, there is a blue and white stripe on the stone wall to starboard. That is the first mile mark.

After Western Avenue, do not be tempted to turn at all to port aiming straight for the center of Weeks Footbridge just yet, or you'll completely screw up the 90 degree Weeks turn to port, shoot wide coming out of the bridge, and lose three to five lengths almost instantly. This is the ruin of many good races.

You have to emerge from Weeks already pointed 40 degrees to port of the perpendicular, already pointed straight at the center arch of Anderson, which means that coming out of Western Avenue you have to hold a straight line toward the Dunster House crest until you are past the drooping tree on the Cambridge shore before you begin the wide arc that completes most of the Weeks turn before you even get to Weeks.

Just after Weeks you are halfway done with the race.

Going by Weld Boathouse to starboard, listen for the announcer to say something about you. It might give you a boost if they say something nice, so row your best.

Coming out of the center arch of Anderson, you need to be pointed 20 degrees to starboard of the perpendicular to pick up the tangent of the red buoys at a point just beyond the two mile mark. So, as with Weeks, you get most of the turn done before you get to the bridge, but the effect is a little less dramatic. As a cox, my point is a distant little red brick house just to the right of the big white apartment building.

After Anderson, the classic mistake is to get sucked in to port too close to Harvard's Newell Boathouse, not realizing that Newell is in a little bay of its own, and the red buoys follow a concave shore line, only to come out to the true course again after 500m or so. So stay away from those red port buoys after Anderson. You can visit Newell Boathouse at some other point not during your race.
Just as the Big Turn begins, you'll usually find a yellow triangular buoy well to starboard indicating the two mile mark. One mile to go!

For the Big Turn, now, don't go wide to starboard! If you do so early coming out of Anderson and then correct, you will lose a few lengths. If you stay wide and don't correct right away, you will add many, many more lengths to your course. The big turn lasts half a mile and goes a full 180 degrees around to port. People just don't believe that until they look at a map or an aerial photograph. So once you pick up the red buoys at the correct point, stay close to them. Keep a lookout for errant crews going the other way on the return side of the port buoys. The turn is tight enough that sometimes returning crews stray slightly onto the course. If they interfere with your race they will be disqualified, but of course that doesn't help you at all.

Going by Cambridge Boat Club to starboard, listen again for an announcer to mention you by name. With half a mile to go, you want all the moral support you can get. Going through Eliot Bridge, the angle is about 25 degrees to starboard of the perpendicular.

Pick up the tangent of the green buoys and then stay close to them. Be careful. Because of the zone of safety around the Winsor and Belmont Hill Boathouse dock, the buoys are a little further out from shore than you would expect. Also, you've just spent several minutes dealing with port buoys, and you may not be used to judging starboard buoys correctly.

Don't get caught on the outside of that last turn, or it will cost you 15 to 30 seconds, and probably half a dozen positions in the finishing order.

Once that last turn is done, stay a little to starboard and make sure you are aimed right between the finish line buoys. Be prepared for a blast of headwind at that point if the wind is from the west. In my single, once I have the finish line in sight it is almost exactly two minutes to the finish. The last twenty strokes begin right before the boardwalk on the port side. On shore, the finish line is the second telephone pole after the boardwalk, the pole with a transformer on it. (Note: In 1995, two four-foot white posts were planted, on both sides of the river, to mark the finish line. Since 1996, those white posts have an orange barber-shop stripe too.) Once through the line, keep paddling. This is a head race, and stopping at the finish makes officials angry. Keep your eyes about you, because others will stop ahead of you, not thinking.

Remember that the extreme right hand arches at the B.U. and Anderson Bridges are 60 second penalties, so stay out of them. Basically you want center arches all the way.

Copyright 1994-2001 by Geoffrey S. Knauth. Copy permission granted if this notice remains intact. "Head of the Charles®" is a registered trademark of Cambridge Boat Club.

User avatar
mikvan52
Half Marathon Poster
Posts: 2648
Joined: March 9th, 2007, 3:49 pm
Location: Vermont

Re: Ranger's training thread

Post by mikvan52 » October 20th, 2010, 11:59 am

ranger wrote: Base pace is 6K pace.
Of course it is.... Because YOU said it.

IMO: Base pace is the average pace you do when you actually complete the distance (or time) in question.

ranger's 2010:

Base pace 1k = (unknown)

Base pace 2k= 1:40.x

Base pace 5k = (unknown)

Base pace 6k = (unknown)

Base pace 30' = (unknown)

Base pace 10k = (unknown)

Base pace 60' = (unknown)

Cureton stated he would turn in all his "distance trials". He did not. He will not. It's been the same for 5 years => NOTHIN' DOIN'

Who cares? I no longer do.
The record shows he's only a talker.

If ranger goes out at 1:35 pace at BIRC he will sacrifice any chance he has to break Roy's record... not that he has one...
Why? ranger needs a 1:28 open rate erg for 60-70 some strokes (500m) to show that he has the raw speed..

He's tried this lots of times recently and failed...

ranger
Marathon Poster
Posts: 11629
Joined: March 27th, 2006, 3:27 pm

Re: Ranger's training thread

Post by ranger » October 20th, 2010, 12:08 pm

mikvan52 wrote:If ranger goes out at 1:35 pace at BIRC he will sacrifice any chance he has to break Roy's record
I'll do things like 8 x 500m (3:30 pace) before BIRC.

That will tell me what pace to hold.

I won't do any pace my training doesn't predict.

If I do 8 x 500m @ 1:32, I will do 1:35 for the first 1K.

If not, not.

My racing over the last two years is no parallel.

This last year, I raced at max drag, unsharpened, still struggling with technique.

Nothing of the sort is going to happen this year.

ranger
Rich Cureton M 72 5'11" 165 lbs. 2K pbs: 6:27.5 (hwt), 6:28 (lwt)

lancs
2k Poster
Posts: 371
Joined: February 5th, 2010, 3:22 pm

Re: Ranger's training thread

Post by lancs » October 20th, 2010, 12:16 pm

ranger wrote:If your UT2 pace is 1:49 @ 22 spm, your AT pace is at least 1:40
But as you know, your UT2 pace isn't 1:49, so of what relevance is this statement to you? :)

Locked