Ranger's training thread

[Steve G]

Rich
Did you actually drive to Cincy for the race, did you warm up etc?.
Odd you can do 20K at 1.43 or whatever but cannot sit on an erg and do a 2K.
Some mental block perhaps?

[mikvan52]

i put in another 20K of my sub-threshold...rowing at 26 spm, 12.7 SPI, and a 3.6-to-1 ratio this morning.

I await the IND_V or screen shot of same.
IOW: Please detail the heart rate readings and overall time it took you.

No one believes you, Rich. Give it up: Mr "As far as I can tell, so far,"

To put it another way:
If you can do 20k at 12.7 spi at a 26, then post an IND_V 2k at a 26 and we'll sort out the truth of the matter.
(Putz!)

Impatience never got anyone anywhere

Change of subject doesn't work Rich: You say you did 20k this morning.
Show it (or evade the subject) ... as you wish.. it's your little dream world that has yielded no examples of WR effort since 2003.
You are a 7:0x 2k erg in the current season and a 6:4x erg last...

What was it that made you decide to give up racing for this season? Too much "success"?

[macroth]

macroth--

If you wanted to row at WR levels for your age and weight, the first thing to do would be to spend three or four hours a day for a few years on your general fitness.

Then, you would need to spend a few years at low rates working on technique in order to raise your natural stroking power to (at least) 16 SPI.

Then, you would need to spend a few years working up your distance rowing until you could do 18.5K for 60min.

Then!

Then!

You could sharpen and race and be ready to try to hit your 2K target.

ranger

Ah, the usual ranger fallacies.

Ever wonder why none of the record holders (in any comparable sport) have ever gone through this process?

3-4 hours a day on general fitness is an interesting idea. I'm not an insomniac like you, however, so I don't have the time for that.

Your second mistake is assuming that a few years of technique work are required to increase stroking power. Erg technique is quite simple, really, and stroking power, natural or otherwise is much more dependent on fitness, including strength. This idea that "skeletal-muscular" work is technical and not fundamentally physiological is absurd. Your father would be embarrassed.


Your main mistake is believing that you can get used to everything and anything. This is the problem with the distance fartleking that you've been doing for years at various drags and stroke rates, hoping to "work up your distance rowing", to no effect. Guess what, ranger? No amount of 1:42@26spm intervals will get you to a 1:42 pace marathon. Your body can't handle it. If you weren't so delusional, you would see all the signs, the main one being having to stop so often and never getting close to even 5000m continuous meters at that speed, despite months and years of trying. Sure, people can improve through training. And they do. But there are limits. Your methods have done nothing to push back those limits and, given your age, they never will.

[mikvan52]

I _already_ have three WR rows, achieved in similar ways, through patient training.


OTErg, you don't have anything of the sort--if your talk here is any indication, for good reason.

To reply to this is to again show your inconsideration of achievement of others.

OTErg: I have record that is superior at every distance including the 2k erg since the time I took it up seriously (2008).
I was not a racer in the 50-54 age-group so I cannot be compared to your younger days.
In recent years I went 6:45. You went 6:41 as lwts... That's not a big difference in my book.

I will not detail other erg times and distances because no one here is interested even though they surpass the ranger record. I will say (again):
My erg training is exclusively geared toward success on the water. I do not engage in imitating ranger form that is suited only to the erg.
Rich:
Post a OTW 1k sometime using the stroke you say is perfect for both venues and we can compare notes.
or...Post a OTErg 5k IND_V, 500m IND_V, 60 min IND_V and we can see what your "patient" efforts have done for your rowing.

You are an erg 'glory-weight' w/ modestly good credentials (today)... that is the way it stands. You may equal Brian Bailey's 60-64 lwt mark if you are lucky with the weight cutting BS you engage in. You would never make it through a heats-semis-finals regatta in the real rowing world because you are only partially suited for the indoor 165 lb stuff as opposed to real OTW lwt (160 lb) rowing (for masters)

You claim to have rowed millions of meters OTW. What is your best OTW time at any distance? at any weight? That is the question that interests me.

Remember: erg lwt WR holder, Henrik Stephansen, has only managed 4th place at World's so far... Maybe you should try to emulate the Italian, Miani, instead of the Henrik's DLS you get all moist about

I'd say "good luck with your rowing" but you are hopeless. You're 60 and face it: In your case "it's over" as you are incapable of seeing errors in judgement on your own part. The clock has run out on changes that can be made in your stroke.

Don't believe me? Put your erg on slides and watch it run into back-stops... This is an indication of boat-stopping form.

Or, alternately, erg at less than 110 drag factor to see if you can match your 130 df wattage... Great OTW waters can do this easily. You have to jack up the drag to get a score you want.

I say this not for you but for others who may be interested.

Erg training is great it helps with all rowing success on and off the water but there are pitfalls to watch out for.
The "big stroke" theories of Low Pull and High wattage cannot alone ensure fabulous results in all venues.
My primary message ?: Forget SPI!

ranger can say anything he wants but since he's instituted the spi theory years ago he has not won a major indoor championship. Regardless, such high spi-seeking form would not then lead to winning on the water. I don't "think" this. I know this.
Look at ranger's 64 videos on youtube: There is no example of his being able to move a boat well.

[Yankeerunner]

STILL...NO sign of land. How long is it?

[leadville]

Rangerboy - I'm quite upset with you.

Your recent DNSU (did not show up) screwed up our betting pool. Some, myself included, had wagered on your likely performance, a wager that included beers when we see each other. Your DNSU effectively kills the opportunity to make new friends, and share a beverage and amusement over your most recent failing.

That's awfully selfish, rangerboy.

To add to our dismay, you've completely failed to explain away your absence, except for some allusion to 'not being ready' and not yet sharpening.

Too busy riding cowboys?

Too busy posting?

Too busy reminiscing about the good old days when you actually showed up and raced instead of slinking out of town like a welsher escaping his creditors?

Or just a coward, one who can't back up in public his outrageous claims, one who knows he's deteriorating and can't handle it with grace and resolve, one who resorts to bullshit and blather instead of being a man and putting it on the line.

Skirt get caught in the slide, rangerboy?

You'll never race again, you'll never post any credible results, and you'll never show up for another OTW race.

No, you'll just continue lying and insulting your betters in a vain and misguided attempt to preserve what little self-respect you still have.

[snowleopard]

Has anyone emailed ranger's bother Kirk and simply asked him the question, "What is your brother Richard's problem. Is there anything we should be doing to help?"

[mikvan52]

Maybe we could consult Kirk on Spi too:

A study in proportionality

Answering the question:

Is the spi directly proportional to pace?

Given:
200 watts/20 strokes per minute effort = 10 spi
Will the same percentage changes: faster pace and higher spi give you the same spi?

For instance: If you drop the pace of (200watts) 2:00.51 /500m ten precent what do you get?
2:00.51 is 120.51 seconds
90 % of 120.51 is 108.01 sec or 1:48.01

To get direct proportionality, RAISE the rate ten percent too.. from 20 to 22.
What is the spi? If these magnitudes are directly proportional the spi should remain the same AND REMAIN AT 10…
BUT (!) (1:48 PACE) 278 WATTS / 22 SPM IS A SPI OF 12.6.. (not 10)

This makes spi a useless measure unless you are only referring to one pace (wattage).

Newcomers to this thread often do not realize this.

Last night as part of a longer workout, I recorded 12 minutes at 1:58.5 pace and 20 spm
I was warmed up.
My HR went to 144 at the end (with cardiac drift and averaging beginning to the end of the workout this is below my AT (143 bpm)) I had my AT measured in a Lab. It is not a guess.

This 12 minutes measures 11.x spi

If I were to row 11 spi at 1:45 pace… my %HR would be higher… much higher.
As a marker of effort then, SPI doesn’t help you.

[jlawson58]

Mike--

Even without preparing for it, that is, by just winging it, for the last two years, I have rowed at WR levels for my age and weight.

ranger

Rich- with all due respect- and I hesitate to say this since you have been helpful in giving me tips- but unless you are willing to provide proof of a statement like that there is no reason for anyone to ever believe a thing you say. If you really were doing that you would have done better than the 6:43 or whatever it was at the race last year (a time which to me btw is still beyond comprehension, and which I would pay a lot of money to achieve), or would have posted a IND-V etc to prove it.

The bottom line is that nobody would put up with the abuse you take if they could actually do what they claim they can do and prove it by posting a simple screen shot.

[macroth]

Mike--

Even without preparing for it, that is, by just winging it, for the last two years, I have rowed at WR levels for my age and weight.

ranger

Rich- with all due respect- and I hesitate to say this since you have been helpful in giving me tips- but unless you are willing to provide proof of a statement like that there is no reason for anyone to ever believe a thing you say. If you really were doing that you would have done better than the 6:43 or whatever it was at the race last year (a time which to me btw is still beyond comprehension, and which I would pay a lot of money to achieve), or would have posted a IND-V etc to prove it.

I see you aren't fluent in rangerspeak. Allow me to translate.

"Even though I do interval training every day of my life, and even though I secretly tried some real sharpening workouts but never posted the scores because they didn't live up to the hype, and even though I raced half a dozen times over the winter, which in and of itself is good race preparation, so, having said that, 'even without preparing for it', for the last two years, my best race performances (6:41.x) have been the best times for a 58-59 year old lightweight, ie, I was only a few seconds off the 55-59 world record and just under the 60-64 world record, so that means I rowed at WR levels, even though I didn't actual set a world record in an official category, try as I might."

It's not a lie, it's poetry!

[Citroen]

Rich- with all due respect- and I hesitate to say this since you have been helpful in giving me tips ...

You must be new around here. Ranger has never given anyone any valuable training tips. Every item he posts is full of his same bloviating self-aggrandizing BS and contains no signal within that noise.

If you consider his anchor hauling to be good training you have some serious problems with your technique that may be irreversible. Ranger's technique problems are entirely irreversibly wrong.

[ranger]

That was 8 years ago. Are they aware of how things have unfolded this year, for example? Will they understand if you blame the Mikes (van B and Caviston) for making you twiddle your thumbs in Cincinnati and get behind in your work?

Mike C.'s good rows on the erg were also eight years ago, in fact, nine years ago.

Mike VB has never had any good rows OTErg.

My goals are to be better OTErg than I was eight years ago, and my training is coming along perfectly to get me there.

OTErg, the two Mike's have nothing of the sort going on.

They are just getting worse and worse, if they are rowing at all (it appears that they aren't this year).

Although it is certainly fun to participate, if I can pull it off, breaking my orderly training and racing uprepared is not going to help me get to my goals.

If I want to succeed, I need to stick to my training.

ranger

[macroth]

That was 8 years ago. Are they aware of how things have unfolded this year, for example? Will they understand if you blame the Mikes (van B and Caviston) for making you twiddle your thumbs in Cincinnati and get behind in your work?

Mike C.'s good rows on the erg were also eight years ago, in fact, nine years ago.

Mike VB has never had any good rows OTErg.

My goals are to be better than I was eight years ago, and my training is coming along perfectly to get me there.

OTErg, the two Mike's have nothing of the sort going on.

They are just getting worse and worse.

ranger

Other than confirming your obsession with both Mikes, how does that have anything to do with whether or not your family is aware or 100% supportive, as you say, of your racing this year? The BIRC debacle? Hundreds of miles of driving, on two occasions, to not even race?

[jlawson58]

Rich- with all due respect- and I hesitate to say this since you have been helpful in giving me tips ...

You must be new around here. Ranger has never given anyone any valuable training tips. Every item he posts is full of his same bloviating self-aggrandizing BS and contains no signal within that noise.

If you consider his anchor hauling to be good training you have some serious problems with your technique that may be irreversible. Ranger's technique problems are entirely irreversibly wrong.

They weren't training tips; even as new as I am I know not to listen to those
Believe it or not though, he did give me some technique tips that were cogent and without the usual hyperbole.

[ranger]

Mike--

Even without preparing for it, that is, by just winging it, for the last two years, I have rowed at WR levels for my age and weight.

ranger

Rich- with all due respect- and I hesitate to say this since you have been helpful in giving me tips- but unless you are willing to provide proof of a statement like that there is no reason for anyone to ever believe a thing you say. If you really were doing that you would have done better than the 6:43

I did.

6:41, both years.

RANKING RESULTS 2009

Indoor Rower | Individual and Race Results | 2000m | Men's | Lightweight | Custom Age Range (58–70) | 2009 Season

You are number 1 of 199

1 Rich Cureton 58 Ann Arbor MI USA 6:41.0 RACE
2 Brian Bailey 62 Cheltenham GBR 6:51.8 RACE
3 Brian Leonard Phipps 59 Rongotea Manawatu NZL 6:56.9 RACE
3 Rolf Meek 58 Oslo NOR 6:56.9 IND
5 Tor Arne Simonsen 58 Oslo NOR 6:57.3 RACE
6 Robert Lakin 60 USA 7:00.6 RACE
7 Gregory Brock 61 santa cruz ca USA 7:02.2 RACE
8 Leif Pedersen 63 DNK 7:02.3 RACE
9 Leif Pedersen 63 DEN 7:02.6 RACE
10 Michael Brownjohn 60 Upminster Essex GBR 7:05.2 IND

RANKING RESULTS 2010

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

You are number 1 of 172

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
10 Roger Prowse 65 Isle of Wight GBR 7:10.3 RACE

ranger