Ranger's training thread

[macroth]

In my training, I am now rowing right at these targets (1:48 for a FM, 1:45 for a HM, etc.).

ranger

Wait a minute...I'm very much a newbie, but have read almost every single page of this thread over the months that its been going on. Did you just say that you've now rowed a FM at 1:48 and a half marathon at 1:45? Apparently you've rowed them both in the same day because you hadn't done this yesterday?!?!? Very impressive!

A FM is just UT2 rowing; a HM, UT1 rowing.

There are lots of ways to do UT rowing other than trials.

Sure, trials verify what you claim about your top-end UT2 and UT1 paces, but you don't really need the trials to know what's up with this rowing.

You do it every day.

You have zillions of hours of evidence.

ranger

Zillions of hours of taking breaks every few minutes because you can't sustain your pace (rising heartrate and/or declining speed) are NOT evidence that you can perform a half or full marathon at that pace, quite the contrary.

Tell us ranger, why DO you take so many breaks in your UT rowing?

Complete change of subject, but what kind of time are you aiming for in Detroit this weekend?

[ranger]

If, just stroking along naturally at 22 spm and a UT2 HR, one rower does 1:46 pace and another (the same age and weight) does 1:56 pace, the difference in pace doesn't have anything to do with aerobic capacity, even though this difference is _massive_ (10 seconds per 500m, 40 seconds over 2K).

ranger

[ranger]

Tell us ranger, why DO you take so many breaks in your UT rowing?

RWBs is a nice way to learn to row well.

The major reasons to take breaks when you are learning to row well is to relieve the stress of doing something new, to relax, and to correct technical faults.

I no longer need to take breaks when I row.

I now row well; rowing well is no longer new for me; and I now row well in a relaxed and consistent way.

So I am now doing my UT rowing steady state.

Top-end UT2 is 1:46; top-end UT1 is 1:41.

119 df.

I do my UT2 rowing in a 4.4-to-1 ratio; I do my UT1 rowing in a 3.4-to-1 ratio.

These UT paces are an improvement of right around seven seconds per 500m over what I was able to do rowing poorly (10 SPI) at max drag (200+ df.) back in 2002-2003.

There's that seven seconds per 500m again!

Given that decline with age over a decade is usually about four seconds per 500m, my overall gain has been eleven seconds per 500m relative to what I would be doing now if I had not taken the time to learn to row well.

If I hadn't taken the time to learn to row well, top-end UT2 would be 1:57; top-end UT1, 1:52.

ranger

[macroth]

Tell us ranger, why DO you take so many breaks in your UT rowing?

RWBs is a nice way to learn to row well.

I no longer need to take breaks.

I am now doing my UT rowing steady state.

ranger

Liar.

[macroth]

I no longer need to take breaks.

I am now doing my UT rowing steady state.

Top-end UT2 is 1:46; top-end UT1 is 1:41.

ranger

Super-duper liar.

[ranger]

Liar.

Nope.

If you learn to row well at low drag, the combination of effective motion (leverage, timing, sequencing, balance, footwork, quickness, length, etc.) and a high ratio (due to the low drag) makes possible a much higher pace at the same level of effort.

When I am fully prepared, I will now race at 13 SPI and 32 spm in a 3-to-1 ratio at 119 df.

Compared to what I could do technically and skeletal-muscularly back in 2002-2003, when I race, I will now work less, get much more out of each drive, get much more rest between drives, and won't need to use as high a rate.

40% less time working per stroke, 15% fewer strokes per minute, 200% more rest between strokes, and 30% more work done per stroke.

As a result, I will be three seconds per 500m faster over 2K, even though I am now ten years older.

Back in 2002-2003, I raced at 10 SPI and 38 spm in a 1-to-1 ratio at max drag (200+ df.).

ranger

[macroth]

Liar.

Nope.

If you learn to row well at low drag, the combination of effective motion (leverage, timing, sequencing, balance, footwork, quickness, length, etc.) and a high ratio (due to the low drag) makes possible a much higher pace at the same level of effort.

ranger

Which has absolutely nothing to do with the fact that you still take plenty of breaks in your so-called UT training.

[ranger]

you still take plenty of breaks in your so-called UT training.

Nope.

No need.

I now row well (13 SPI) at low drag (119 df.).

I am no longer learning to row.

I am preparing to race.

ranger

[macroth]

you still take plenty of breaks in your so-called UT training.

Nope.

So if you pulled up one of your recent rows automatically memorized by the PM4, we would see anywhere from 3 to 20K at 1:41-1:46/500m average pace?

[ranger]

you still take plenty of breaks in your so-called UT training.

Nope.

So if you pulled up one of your recent rows automatically memorized by the PM4, we would see anywhere from 3 to 20K at 1:41-1:46/500m average pace?

Sure.

I'll post some top-end UT2 rowing (from my "Steamroller" sessions), together with HRs, over the next few days.

I should also do some 5Ks/6Ks at top-end UT1 pretty soon.

When I do, I'll post those, too.

Given that the winter racing season is underway, the pressing issue for me now, of course, is not this UT rowing but AT, TR, and AN race preparation.

ranger

[JimR]

Deleted due to misattribution of quote

I have never understood why it is so hard for you to quote correctly ... but why do you constantly change what others have posted? Rewriting someone's word would make sense when grading papers ... not when quoting.

JimR

[PaulH]

I'll post some top-end UT2 rowing (from my "Steamroller" sessions), together with HRs, over the next few days.

No you won't.

I'd be delighted to be proven wrong, of course, but that seems unlikely. We've already demonstrated that I can predict your training and racing better than you, so I guess now we'll see if that stretches to forum posting activity as well.

[JimR]

you still take plenty of breaks in your so-called UT training.

Nope.

So if you pulled up one of your recent rows automatically memorized by the PM4, we would see anywhere from 3 to 20K at 1:41-1:46/500m average pace?

Sure.

I'll post some top-end UT2 rowing (from my "Steamroller" sessions), together with HRs, over the next few days.

I should also do some 5Ks/6Ks at top-end UT1 pretty soon.

When I do, I'll post those, too.

Given that the winter racing season is underway, the pressing issue for me now, of course, is not this UT rowing but AT, TR, and AN race preparation.

ranger

So in this exchange with macroth you started by claiming you are doing UT1 erging steady state ... 1:41 pace. At no point do you mention distance or rest. Then when you get called on yet another stupid posting you back off to 5K distances maybe (the "I should be").

Yet last weekend you could not get on an erg an pull a 1:41 2K ... which would have been a 6:44 2K. Since UT1 is done for much more than 2K distances it suggests you would have been able to finish strong and get a 6:40 perhaps.

The point here ... your ramblings are so poor now that you can't even keep the obvious inconsistencies out in a single post ... much less over time. Perhaps you should outline your story off-line instead of making it up as you go.

Oh wait ... making it up as you go is the way you train too! Maybe that is the pattern.

JimR

[JimR]

I'll post some top-end UT2 rowing (from my "Steamroller" sessions), together with HRs, over the next few days.

No you won't.

I'd be delighted to be proven wrong, of course, but that seems unlikely. We've already demonstrated that I can predict your training and racing better than you, so I guess now we'll see if that stretches to forum posting activity as well.

PaulH ... it is like you are channelling ranger! Which sounds kind of creepy but pay attention and you too could time the market perfectly and become a multi-millionare!!!

JimR

[PaulH]

PaulH ... it is like you are channelling ranger! Which sounds kind of creepy but pay attention and you too could time the market perfectly and become a multi-millionare!!!

JimR

Sadly I've already proven to my satisfaction that I'm no stock market genius - I'll have to leave that to the exaggerated approximations of ranger.