Ranger's training thread

[ranger]

And besides, what does this have to do with sharpening for BIRC?

500s, 1:36 @ 30 spm (13.3 SPI), working up to 1Ks?

Sounds like great sharpening to me, especially for a lightweight a couple months shy of 60.

ranger

[ranger]

I'd say that he is more like a rower that spends his time sending pointless messages to this stupid thread instead of rowing - just like many of the rest of us.

Not sure where you get this, Bob.

I do about four hours of training a day.

For me, it's "both-and," not "either-or."

Don't know about you and others, though.

ranger

[ranger]

If you only pull 9.5 SPI and have to rate 42 spm to do a 500m interval at 1:36, 8 x 500m, not to mention 20 x 500m, becomes a pretty tough slog, no?

500s are quite a bit easier at 30 spm.

The stroke cycle is two seconds.

.5 seconds for the drive; 1.5 seconds for the recovery.

3-to-1 ratio.

120 df.

ranger

[ranger]

Not that my goals are set at this level, but even a very modest 8 x 500m (3:30 rest) @ 1:36 predicts a new 55s lwt 2K WR, not to mention new 60s lwt 2K WR.

Other than me, there are no longer any other 55s lwts who can do 8 x 500m (3:30 rest) @ 1:36, much less 20 x 500m (3:30 rest) @ 1:36, which is more like what I am shooting for before BIRC.

With this new sweep stroke, I can do 1:36 @ 30 spm (13.3 SPI).

Leisurely stuff.

3-to-1 ratio

Only 48 strokes per 500m.

ranger

[whp4]

No evidence you can do it either!

[rjw]

Other than me, there are no longer any other 55s lwts who can do 8 x 500m (3:30 rest) @ 1:36.....

So when was the last time you did this? And how about as a light weight?

[ranger]

Other than me, there are no longer any other 55s lwts who can do 8 x 500m (3:30 rest) @ 1:36.....

So when was the last time you did this? And how about as a light weight?

I am at weight now.

I am working on these 500s @ 1:36 now.

My pb for 8 x 500 (3:30 rest) is a lot better than 1:36.

1:33.5, and that was rowing poorly at high drag.

I have done 20 x 500m, paddle a 500m inbetween, at 1:36.

In a couple of 2K races, I arrived at 1K in 3:12, right on 1:36 pace.

The 60s lwt WR for 1K is 1:37.2/3:14.4.

I am now rowing well at low drag, so I am quite a bit better than that now.

My plan at the moment for BIRC 2010 is to do the first 1K at 3:10/1:35 pace and then try to push this to 3:08/1:34 at WIRC 2011.

If you are as old as I am and going this fast, especially in a 2K, it helps quite a bit to be able to keep the rate down, e.g., to be able to be comfortable doing something like 1:35 @ 32 spm (12.6 SPI).

In the last quasi-good 2K I did (6:29.7), back in 2006, when I was 55, I rated 31 spm, finishing at 34 spm.

It is largely raising the rate that challenges your aerobic capacity,

Raising the rate cuts down your rest time between strokes.

A weak stroke (just rowing more slowly, taking more time to complete the drive) also cuts down your rest time between strokes.

High drag also cuts down your rest between strokes.

Young, fast rowers, skillful enough to row at low drag, raise the rate pretty easily; old, slow rowers, clumsy enough to need to row at a higher drag, don't.

The best 20s lightweights can push the rate in a 2K up into the lw 40s spm; 60s lightweights are more comfortable in the low 30s spm.

ranger

[ranger]

Love this sweep stroke.

When I add the sweep motion to the technical advances that I have made since 2006 (lowering the drag, using the full slide, relaxing my shoulders at the catch, losing the towel, sitting up straighter at the catch rather than diving, pulling level rather than up at the catch, etc.), when I pulled a 2k, 1:38 @ 31 (12 SPI), I get 1.2 SPI more stroking power.

I am now pulling 13.2 SPI, _better_ than perfect for a lightweight of any age!



Now, I do 1:35 @ 31 spm (13.2 SPI) rather than 1:38 @ 31 spm (12 SPI).

So.

Hey.

That's all she wrote.

Now I just need to keep doing a lot of rowing, 1:35 @ 31 spm, mixtures of 250s, 1', 500m, 750s, 1Ks, 1250s, 1500s, etc.

And I am ready to go for BIRC.

4 x 1K, 1:35 @ 31 spm (13.2 SPI) predicts a 6:20 2K.

Given that BIRC is a one-shot affair, with no qualifying rounds, it might also be important to do at least one at-home 2K trial before Nov. 21st.

ranger

[ranger]

BTW, 13.2 SPI is pretty much a full _three_ SPI better than I pulled back in 2002-2003, rowing poorly at max drag.

At racing rates in the low 30s, that increased stroking power is worth right around 100 watts, or 9 seconds per 500m at the same rate.

1:44 @ 31 spm (10 SPI) becomes 1:35 @ 31 spm (13.2 SPI).

13.2 SPI is a common stroking power among the better 30s heavyweights, such as Pete Martston.

These days, now that he is in his early 30s, Pete pulls in and around 6:20 for 2K, although in his 20s, he did as well as 6:10.

13.2 SPI is still not rowing very well for a big heavyweight.

People like Big Bird and Dick Cashin row at 15.5 SPI.

Graham Benton rows at 17 SPI (or higher!).

But 13.2 SPI is rowing _very_ well as a lightweight.

Most 60s lwts row with a stroke that is in and around 9 SPI, or 50% weaker than 13.2 SPI.

ranger

[ginster]

That's not my experience at all.

If you just row naturally, taking a full stroke, neither overpulling or easing up, how far you can go depends on your rate, and the stroking power remains pretty much constant.

If you are in good shape, at your natural stroking power, you should be able to row for half a day (100K?) at 20 spm.

so you can row 100k at 1.52 r20? WOW!

that's your definition of natural stroking power is it?

I notice a caveat of "if you're in good shape" - so "natural stroking power" is fitness dependant?

Again - I'm struggling with the objective definitions here - if, for example, I can only hold my 20 spm rate/pace combo for say 30 minutes, does that mean I'm not "in good shape" , or does that mean that its not my "natural stroking power"

how do I tell when I am "in good shape"?

[ranger]

Time to push my heart rate a little more on my bike rides.

I would like to get used to my heart riding in the 160s, rather than the 150s, after I get fully warmed up.

I had my HR riding in the high 150s bpm today.

A little more umph and I can push it over 160 bpm.

ranger

[ranger]

so "natural stroking power" is fitness dependant?

Sure.

If you are not fit, you can't row very fast or very far--at all.

You are missing the basic physical resources.

ranger

[ranger]

so you can row 100k at 1.52 r20? WOW!

Yea, I suspect that I probably can, although I haven't tried it yet.

I did 80K at 1:56 back in 2002-2003, but that was rowing badly at max drag.

I am much better than that now.

I now row well at low drag.

ranger

[mikvan52]

My plan at the moment for BIRC 2010 is to do the first 1K at 3:10/1:35 pace

Please tell us how long BIRC is. I thought it was 2k?
The 2nd 1k will be very interesting if you are under 3:18 at 1k.

What's your best 500m this season (at any weight)?

[ausrwr]

I don't get to do much sweep rowing myself but I know enough to say it is also great fun if you are in a boat with good rowers and it is a torture session if you are in a boat with bad rowers. Here is an amusing saying I wrote down:

Sculling is the superior sport. Rowing with one oar is for the clumsy ones.

Sure.

But at the moment, I am just talking about the erg, not boats at all.

I am asking this:

What kind of motion on the erg can generate the most quickness, endurance, relaxation, efficiency, etc., and therefore easy and sustainable power?

A motion that is closer to sculling, or a motion that is closer to sweep rowing?

ranger

Obviously the one which emphasises the use of one leg over another, one arm over the other, negates one side of the posterior chain... Think about it: if you wanted to lift and move something as quickly and dynamically as possible, why would you begin by getting yourself into an unbalanced position?

If you could be bothered to look at some evidence and apply some thought, you could have a look at Kleshnev's work which shows that scullers exert significantly more force than rowers. Or apply common sense and look at the number of weightlifting records which are set with one leg up on a block and the opposite side of the bar raised.

By all means keep persevering. It's another perfect blind alley for you to lead yourself down and fail to achieve your purported "potential". Or even your actual potential.

There is no way on earth that you can pull 6:16 as a lightweight. The physical capabilities to do that are of someone closer to a 2:15 marathoner, not a barely-sub-3. A sub 9:30 hour Ironman. A nationally ranked swimmer. And this is for athletes in their twenties who haven't started to decline with age. Rich, you were none of these, in spite of the massive amount of time that you did, and continue to, put in to training.

Pure and simple: you do not have the physical capability to pull a 6:16 at any weight. You MAY have it to pull 6:40 or just under in sketchy weigh-in situations. You were already maximally trained and fit and strong when you burst on the rowing scene. Your technique was bad, but that's irrelevant. You were able to apply great force, and that's what counts on a machine.

This not nay-saying. This is an objective analysis of the situation. You are, Prof, the Emperor who has no clothes on. You are the spoilt child who's throwing a tantrum at the realisation that he is not the most important person in the world. Happy for you to prove me wrong, but I doubt it.

Remember, your deeds in the future will speak much louder than your words.