Ranger's training thread

[bellboy]

Mike--

Given your superior OTW rowing, I am amazed at what you do OTErg.

OTW, you work endlessly on technique, reducing the rate further and further, getting as much as you can with each stroke, maximizing effectiveness and efficiency, length and leverage, etc.

Then, when you get OTErg, you throw all of this away.

You thrash up and down the slide like a novice rower, ineffectively and inefficiently, with no regard for technique at all, just pulling as hard and fast as you can, as I did back in 2003, when I was just a gym rat who didn't know shit about rowing.

Heck, I am surprised you don't put the drag up to max, too, given your other behavior OTErg.

The best OTW rowers who do well OTErg don't do what you do at all.

People like Dick Cashin erg at 15.5 SPI and only rate 26-28 spm for 2K.

When they row OTErg, these experienced OTW rowers get the most out of every stroke, and just as though they were OTW, they milk the spinning wheel on the recovery for all it can give them.

They let the boat run!

Result:

They end up with erging WRs, perhaps on very little training at all.

You work like a demon OTErg, never come anywhere near a WR, and from year to year, just get worse and worse.

ranger

Yep. works like a demon and wins in Boston. Whuda thunk it eh?!

[ranger]

Yep. works like a demon and wins in Boston. Whuda thunk it eh?!

I have no interest in rowing 6:50.

My goal for BIRC 2010 is 6:20.

I am a lightweight.

I am a year and half older than Mike.

Sure, Mike might also win the 55s lwts race in Boston at WIRC 2011.

But at 60, in the age division above him, the 60s lwts, I'll outrow him by 30 seconds.

At WIRC 2011, Mike will miss my 55s lwt WR, set at BIRC 2010, by over twenty seconds.

At WIRC 2011, I will break the 60s lwt WR by over twenty seconds.

ranger

[mikvan52]

You can always tell when ranger hits the sauce:
The word s.h.i.t. appears; as do wild accusations with little regard for the facts.... all available to see in my blog.

Oh, well, he's disappointed with his WR prospects.
Rather than say anything vaguely insightful or truthful... he puffs himself up with exaggerations and bold claims...

Paul Wenham will go under 1:42 pace at the BIRC... ranger will not if he goes out at 1:35.
If ranger rows to his capability and sticks to an opening split of 1:39, he will make it to 1500m and fade... otherwise?
My crystal ball shows a hulking troll handling down and stalking back to his lair at the Crowne Plaza or where ever the eff. he's holed-up.

So much for RWB training. Which, he won't admit, was what he was doing this AM. Which, he has told us, he doesn't do right now... It's hard to perform at your optimum when your body has to process all the alcohol.

But I digress: ........ranger will definitely not erg a 2k w/any substantial effort prior to the BIRC.
Why does he say he might?... to get attention.

Pathetic.
Have juice lady serve you another tall one on me: to ease the indignities of old age.

Mike--

Given your superior OTW rowing, I am amazed at what you do OTErg.

OTW, you work endlessly on technique, reducing the rate further and further, getting as much as you can with each stroke, maximizing effectiveness and efficiency, length and leverage, etc.

Then, when you get OTErg, you throw all of this away.

You thrash up and down the slide like a novice rower, ineffectively and inefficiently, with no regard for technique at all, just pulling as hard and fast as you can, as I did back in 2003, when I was just a gym rat who didn't know shit about rowing.

Heck, I am surprised you don't put the drag up to max, too, given your other behavior OTErg.

The best OTW rowers who do well OTErg don't do what you do at all.

People like Dick Cashin erg at 15.5 SPI and only rate 26-28 spm for 2K.

When they row OTErg, these experienced OTW rowers get the most out of every stroke, and just as though they were OTW, they milk the spinning wheel on the recovery for all it can give them.

They let the boat run!

Result:

They end up with erging WRs, perhaps on very little training at all.

You work like a demon OTErg, never come anywhere near a WR, and from year to year, just get worse and worse.

ranger

ranger is so inconsistent: a month ago he was braying about how I couldn't "rate it up" ... Now, I row to high....

[mikvan52]

But at 60, in the age division above him, the 60s lwts, I'll outrow (mikvan52) by 30 seconds.

I could easily raise a million dollars to wager you will not.

Go to bed now. It's time to sleep it off.

Fact of the matter: SO FAR IN 2010 ranger has out-erged me by 6 seconds.
To be able to increase that margin 500%?..................

I'd guess he's have to increase his watt output about 25%...

Oh, yeah

Here, TSO:
Play with this url for a while:

http://www.machars.net/ultimate.php

408.2 watts = 1:35 pace
350.0 watts = 1:40 pace

difference in watts = 58.2 watts
58.2 / 350 = 16.6 %

Isn't it funny that ranger thinks that sharpening would make him 16.6% more powerful... as he gets older....
(idiot)

[Carl Watts]

No interest in rowing a 6:50 ? I will be surprised if you row a Sub 7 at BIRC 2010.

The plane flight cannot come soon enough for everyone here, hopefully we will get another 24hr break from all this posing.

There is no chance of you rowing a 6:20, it just isn't going to happen, your pre race trails which you clearly have not done any of would tell you that.

Even if you could row a 6:40 at the moment you would have posted it without HR data and called it "Just a UT2 training row" for you.

If you had rowed a 6:38 you wouldn't have been able to get off your Erg fast enough and upload it to the rankings with an IND_V. That's what any other rower with even a hint of current competitiveness in his blood facing his last agegroup WR attempt would do.

Perhaps you should save face and save the planet by not wasting the jet fuel to get to BIRC ?

[ranger]

No interest in rowing a 6:50 ? I will be surprised if you row a Sub 7 at BIRC 2010.

Actually, the hammer in the 60s lwt race at WIRC 2010 pulled 7:04.

So 7:00 is _very_ good for someone my age and weight.

RANKING RESULTS 2010

Indoor Rower | Individual and Race Results | 2000m | Men's | Lightweight | Custom Age Range (59–70) | 2010 Season

1 Rich Cureton 59 Ann Arbor MI USA 6:41.4 RACE
2 Hugh Pite 65 Victoria BC CAN 7:02.7 RACE
3 Robert Lakin 61 Wichita KS USA 7:03.6 RACE
4 Gregory Brock 62 santa cruz ca USA 7:03.9 IND
5 Rolf Meek 59 Oslo NOR 7:05.4 IND
6 Jerry Lawson 62 USA 7:06.0 RACE
6 Gerald Lawson 62 Winona MN USA 7:06.0 IND
8 Leif Petersen 64 DEN 7:08.5 RACE
9 Peter Francis 61 Denver CO USA 7:09.3 RACE

On the other hand, I now row 1:45 @ 22 spm (13.7 SPI).

So, no.

It is unlikely that I will row 7:00 for 2K at BIRC 2010.

As I said, to show why, I'll do a 2Kr30 on Thursday morning here at home before I get on the plane for Birmingham.

ranger

[snowleopard]

It is unlikely that I will row 7:00 for 2K at BIRC 2010.

How true. A DNS is far more likely.

[bellboy]

Yep. works like a demon and wins in Boston. Whuda thunk it eh?!

I have no interest in rowing 6:50.

My goal for BIRC 2010 is 6:20.

I am a lightweight.

I am a year and half older than Mike.

Sure, Mike might also win the 55s lwts race in Boston at WIRC 2011.

But at 60, in the age division above him, the 60s lwts, I'll outrow him by 30 seconds.

At WIRC 2011, Mike will miss my 55s lwt WR, set at BIRC 2010, by over twenty seconds.

At WIRC 2011, I will break the 60s lwt WR by over twenty seconds.

ranger

NO_YOU_WONT

[mikvan52]

to show why, I'll do a 2Kr30 on Thursday morning here at home before I get on the plane for Birmingham.

ranger

Choke! Sputter!!

You will show something? Indeed, you will not.

How about IND_V w/ hr data.... and spm... standard screen shot info...

Right!!!!!!!!
No way.

The cat would be out of the bag... forever. You would not be able to make wild prognostications... there would be even less basis for newbies to think... "Well, he just might do it"

[Citroen]

to show why, I'll do a 2Kr30 on Thursday morning here at home before I get on the plane for Birmingham.

ranger

Choke! Sputter!!

You will show something? Indeed, you will not.

How about IND_V w/ hr data.... and spm... standard screen shot info...

Right!!!!!!!!
No way.

He won't do that. If he does he'll have been racing his training and that will ruin his race on the Sunday.
He could row 6:38 if he sacked his coach. He'll either DNS, DNF or be well over 7:00 and come in, in tenth place.

[BrianStaff]

Actually, the hammer in the 60s lwt race at WIRC 2010 pulled 7:04.

So 7:00 is _very_ good for someone my age and weight.
<snip>
It is unlikely that I will row 7:00 for 2K at BIRC 2010.

Just a reminder that you rowed a 7:11 during this last year in competitions...TWICE!

[whp4]

When they row OTErg, these experienced OTW rowers get the most out of every stroke, and just as though they were OTW, they milk the spinning wheel on the recovery for all it can give them.

They let the boat run!

You keep saying this, and every time you do, you demonstrate that you do not understand how the monitor works (in other news, water is wet). The monitor measures the work you do on the flywheel by pulling on the chain. "Letting the boat run" as you like to say is beneficial only insofar as it allows your body some extra time to get more oxygen and glucose to those muscle cells before the next effort, and get rid of some of the metabolic waste products. You do not do any work on the flywheel during the recovery. Shortening the recovery helps you out by allowing you to start another drive (thus earning credit for work done on the flywheel) sooner, but taken too far, your body won't be able to apply as much effort to each stroke.

I know, it is foolish of me to expect you to understand anything substantially more complicated than tying your shoes.

[aharmer]

No worries, ranger has a well formed plan ready to launch any day now. He has zero intention of racing at BIRC. A very nice result of 6:40 would be mocked and ridiculed endlessly, and would prove him to be the liar we all contend. Any proof of 6:30 or better fitness would have been posted a hundred times over and rubbed in our face endlessly. It isn't there because it hasn't happened, because he isn't capable of it. Ranger, I can claim to be a 5:55 erger all I want, the same number of people here will believe me that believe you're going to pull 6:20 at BIRC.

The only question remaining is what excuse he will come up with. After all, this is nothing more than a male soap opera for ergers. Will it be a family emergency preventing him from traveling? Assuming weather patterns are normal he can't use a storm. He knows flight schedules are published so he can't say his flight didn't go if it really does go. Freak injury is the most probable cause of his DNS. A trip on a step causing a turned ankle...a thumb slammed in a car door prohibiting him from holding the handle. He's already used that one and been caught in the lie, so he'll probably have to think of something else. What else? A pathological liar is capable of incredible stories, any other theories on what might pop up the next 7 days?

[ranger]

But you're not doing repeat 1Ks at 1:35 right now

Nope.

Not yet.

But that's the intention for this week.

ranger

[ranger]

The monitor measures the work you do on the flywheel by pulling on the chain. "Letting the boat run" as you like to say is beneficial only insofar as it allows your body some extra time to get more oxygen and glucose to those muscle cells before the next effort, and get rid of some of the metabolic waste products. You do not do any work on the flywheel during the recovery.

Indeed.

(1) With a long, effective stroke, you do a lot of work on the flywheel by pulling the chain. If you row at low drag, this work, if quick enough, produces a _very_ bried, "snappy" drive, despite its length, especially if you are a short, little lightweight like me. At 120 df., my drive at 13-14 SPI is now only .5 seconds. When I rowed at max drive and only pulled 10 SPI, my drive time was as long as .8 seconds.

(2) If you lower the rate and let the boat run, you then get a lot of rest before the next stroke, and not just from the lower rate. You also get rest from the shorter drive produced by the good work you do in (1). At low drag, the wheel spins more freely. It doesn't slow down as fast. So, as you are waiting for the next drive, you get more credit for both the work you have done in (1) and the lower rating, both of which increase the recovery time relative to the drive time, raising the ratio. Amazingly, given how I used to row, at 120 df. and 13-14 SPI, given my short little legs, when I am at my race rate, which is now 30 spm, I am in a 3-to-1 ratio. Given that the drive is only .5 seconds and the stroke cycle is 2 seconds, the recovery is 1.5 seconds, three times the drive time. So, sure. During this long recovery, you indeed "get more oxygen and glucose to those muscle cells before the next effort." That is, the work you have done in (1) is not only unusually effective, but for other reasons, becomes unusally efficient, too.

And then this logic is self-reinforcing. The more you improve what you do in (1), the more credit you are given for the effort by an increase in (2). And so on, and so forth, until you are rowing are well as you can, however many years it takes you to get there. As an older rower, your fitness is always declining, and there is nothing you can do about it. So, once you give your best effort, from year to year, you _can't_ improve. You can only get worse and worse.In your late 50s, if you don't improve your technique by (1) and (2), getting more effective and efficient converting the work you do into the pace you can achieve, over 2K, you get worse by a couple of seconds a year--inevitably.

On a more personal note, it is also exciting to me that working on these technical matters is especially beneficial to my rowing, relative to the rowing of my competition, both present and historical. In 2003, I rowed at max drag, not just high drag or medium drag. So my benefit from rowing at low drag, if I have the skill to do it, is maximal. As a short lightweight, rather than a big, tall heavyweight, I also get a maximal benefit from a shortened drive. Given that he is 6'4", I suspect that Paul Hendershott's drive time was quite a bit longer than .5 seconds, even if he also pulled 13-14 SPI. I suspect that Paul also used a drag that was higher than 120 df., which would increase his drive time even further relative to mine now. For the same reason, I suspect that Jon Bone's drive time when he is racing is more like .75 seconds rather than .5 seconds. He is a tall heavyweight rowing at a higher drag.On the other hand, other short, old lightweights, like Mike VB and Rocket Roy, while they also row at low drag, only pull 9.5 SPI and therefore also have a much longer drive time and therefore much lower ratio when they race. To compensate for this weak drive, they also raise the rate, trading rate for pace, further penalizing themselves, shortening the recovery time even further by shortening the time of the stroke cycle as a whole. Stroking naturally, Mike VB rows 1:35 pace at 43 spm, not 30 spm, as I am doing now. This is especially damaging to older rowers with declining aerobic capacity, who, relative to younger rowers, have a special need "to get more oxygen and glucose to those muscle cells before the next effort, and get rid of some of the metabolic waste products," a need that grows, with increasing insistence, as the years go by.The normal decline with age from 50 to 60, for both lightweights and heavyweights is 17 seconds over 2K. My goal this year is to pull a lwt 6:16, 14 seconds better than I pulled when I was 52 in 2003. So, if I accomplish this, the swing in times due to my technical improvement over the last seven years will be right around 28 seconds over 2K, seven seconds per 500m, an improvement of four seconds a year. My fitness was maximal in 2003. Since then, I haven't been able to do anything to improve it, and like others, it has been declining with age.No improvement that I have made since 2003 can be attributed to fitness. In 2003, I broke the 55s lwt WR three times in a row, pulling a lwt 6:30, then a lwt 6:29, then a lwt 6:28, without even knowing how to row, short-sliding at max drag, hauling anchor with my back and arms, dragging my legs behind. In 2003, I rowed these 2Ks at 36 spm, raising the rate to over 40 spm over the last 500. Pulling at max drag, with a sluggish drive of .75 seconds, this means that I raced in a 1-to-1 ratio, with very little rest between drives.Given the dynamics of rowing, this was massively ineffective and inefficient. Finally, there is this: My aerobic capacity is _very_ high for my age. My max HR is still 190 bpm, some thirty beats per minute above the average for someone my age. But back in 2003, I wasted most of this _huge_ physiological advantage relative to my competition with ineffective and inefficient rowing. Sure, back in 2003, I was _very_ good over 2K, nonetheless, but it is clear: if I can make full use of this physiological advantage by rowing well (13 SPI), or even _very_ well (14 SPI) at low drag (120 df.), I can be much better yet.

ranger