Ranger's training thread

[hjs]

I'll warm up and then see if I can do a 1:32.x 500 m at 38 spm.

2:21 pm

Well I failed...

View Detail IND_V
500m
Mar 06 2011

1:32.1 - 500 - 1:32.1 - 42 - 149

:18.3 - 100 - 1:31.5 - 46 - 138
:18.2 - 200 - 1:31.0 - 39 - 148
:18.3 - 300 - 1:31.5 - 36 - 152
:18.7 - 400 - 1:33.5 - 42 - 155
:18.6 - 500 - 1:33.0 - 48 - 154

My bad.

Weight 160 lbs
Drag factor 108
two holes showing on footstretcher adj.

For a better time I should have kicked w/ 150m to go..

THIS IS MY BEST 500M OF THE 2011 RANKING SEASON BY 0:00.1

Good improvement Mike. Well done.

[ranger]

Beautiful rowing this morning.

1:44 @ 26 spm (12 SPI) is now _very_ smooth and relaxed for UT1 rowing.

That's right on my target.

1:44 is UT1 for a 1:34.6:16 2K.

Technique is now _entirely_ in place.

Just playing around, I also find that 10MPS @ 1:34 now very solid and relaxed.

A nice exercise now would be working up to 20 x 500, 1:34 @ 32 spm (13 SPI, 10 MPS).

Race pace 500s at 10MPS.

The goal when you are doing 20 x 500m should be to get through each 500m with your HR just tipping over your anaerobic threshold in the last 10 strokes of each interval (for me, about 175 bpm).

It looks as though this is right around where I am.

My anaerobic threshold is 172 bpm.

Here, I get almost half way through the interval with my HR at only 150 bpm.

Here are a few strokes to show you the scene:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BcF3JBt7TP4

I'll get some full 500s posted over the next few days to show you where my HR is at the end of each of these 500s.

For a little lightweight like me, 32 spm is a _very_ relaxed rate for race pace 500s.

I must be in a 3-to-1 ratio.

To my eye, drive time doesn't seem to be much over half a second.

So, recovery time is 1.4 seconds.

The full screen on the horizontal axis is 1.2 seconds.

My drive at 32 spm doesn't go half way across the screen.

Nice peak force on my stroke, no?

Vertically, I now get the whole screen, with a smooth, left-leaning haystack.

A full 135 kg.F. of peak force.

Astonishing stuff for a 60s lwt.

ranger

[macroth]

I'm sorry, is that 30s video supposed to show something solid and relaxed? You're all over the place! Reminds me of your BIRC race data.

[ranger]

I'm sorry, is that 30s video supposed to show something solid and relaxed? You're all over the place! Reminds me of your BIRC race data.

No, I'm not "all over the place."

Look at the force curve.

The rowing is perfectly fine, given that I haven't been rowing at race pace in training, and, sure, need to move on to this sort of rowing to get it entirely smooth and consistent.

I was playing around with this picture-taking _after_ doing 20K working with 1:44 @ 26 spm, so I was pretty tired, which might explain some other things.

ranger

[ranger]

BTW, on the topic of these 10MPS 500s, it is a question whether Mike can do _one_ 500m, 1:40 @ 30 spm (11.7 SPI).

1:37 @ 31 spm (12.4 SPI) is probably out of the question.

A 500m, 1:34 @ 32 spm (13 SPI), is so far beyond Mike's reach it's ridiculous.

Why?

Poor technique--length, quickness, balance, timing, sequencing, footwork, rhythmicity, etc.

So, if I can get through 20 x 500m, 1:34 @ 32 spm, it will make a certain sort of statement, I think.

20 x 500m is done at 2K.

So 20 x 500m @ 1:34 predicts a 1:34/6:16 2K.

Mike is taller than I am and a couple years younger.

We have about the same non-fat body mass.

Unless I am training for a lightweight race, I am just fatter.



As I remember, Mike has never done 8 x 500m (3:30 rest), free rate, at much better than 1:39.

That is right on expectation if his 2K is 1:42.5.

8 x 500m (3:30 rest), free rate, is done at 2K - 3, or for some who like sprints more than distance work, 2K - 4.

ranger

[mrfit]

Ranger wrote:

(1) No, stroking power is not a fake measure. It is just a measure of how and when you are rowing well or poorly, holding your technique together or giving it up for other purposes. Sure, to go fast OTErg in some situations you don't have to row well or hold your technique together. But my argument here, and hope overall, is that rowing well, on the whole, is faster than rowing poorly. And, honestly, I can't think of anything that would argue otherwise. If it turns out that this isn't the case, so be it. But I am giving it a shot.

Sure technique matters. Your row 2006 row demonstrated that. Everyone patted you on the back for that row, you know. I'm not sure why you think you get the moon too.

[macroth]

I'm sorry, is that 30s video supposed to show something solid and relaxed? You're all over the place! Reminds me of your BIRC race data.

No, I'm not "all over the place."

Look at the force curve.

The rowing is perfectly fine, given that I haven't been rowing at race pace in training, and, sure, need to move on to this sort of rowing to get it entirely smooth and consistent.

I was playing around with this picture-taking _after_ doing 20K working with 1:44 @ 26 spm, so I was pretty tired, which might explain some other things.

ranger

2 strokes to get going, then 1:34@31spm, 1:32@33, 1:34@30, 1:35@31, 1:35@31, 1:35@31, 1:35@32, 1:33@33, 1:33@32, 1:34@34, 1:34@32, 1:36@31, 1:34@32, 1:33@35, 1:33@34, stop. Grand total of 17 strokes, only 2 of which were actually 1:34@32.

I understand that you have plenty of excuses (tired, etc.), but this is not "solid and relaxed" 1:34@32spm erging, even though it averages out to that. Varying your rate and pace like that is very inefficient erging, especially at higher speeds (think back to BIRC to remember how it feels like).

If you agree, why claim otherwise in the first place? Posting nonsense and backtracking a few minutes later is also very inefficient forum usage.

There's plenty of things you should move on to, but since you'll never get that 1:48 pace marathon, I guess you're stuck with what you're doing right now.

[mrfit]

I'm sorry, is that 30s video supposed to show something solid and relaxed? You're all over the place! Reminds me of your BIRC race data.

No, I'm not "all over the place."

Look at the force curve.

The rowing is perfectly fine, given that I haven't been rowing at race pace in training, and, sure, need to move on to this sort of rowing to get it entirely smooth and consistent.

I was playing around with this picture-taking _after_ doing 20K working with 1:44 @ 26 spm, so I was pretty tired, which might explain some other things.

ranger

2 strokes to get going, then 1:34@31spm, 1:32@33, 1:34@30, 1:35@31, 1:35@31, 1:35@31, 1:35@32, 1:33@33, 1:33@32, 1:34@34, 1:34@32, 1:36@31, 1:34@32, 1:33@35, 1:33@34, stop. Grand total of 17 strokes, only 2 of which were actually 1:34@32.

I understand that you have plenty of excuses (tired, etc.), but this is not "solid and relaxed" 1:34@32spm erging, even though it averages out to that. Varying your rate and pace like that is very inefficient erging, especially at higher speeds (think back to BIRC to remember how it feels like).

If you agree, why claim otherwise in the first place? Posting nonsense and backtracking a few minutes later is also very inefficient forum usage.

There's plenty of things you should move on to, but since you'll never get that 1:48 pace marathon, I guess you're stuck with what you're doing right now.

Hey, Ranger posted a video of his rowing. This is huge progress! Let's not get picky about word choice.

[aharmer]

Is it any mystery why you only showed us 40 seconds worth? Your legs were already flooding with lactic acid and you were slipping off the pace only halfway through. I think that last stroke was at r34, it was getting tough already. And you're going to do 20x500 at that pace and rate huh? Best of luck Of course you could prove me wrong by posting a video of just one full 500. Of course you could really make me look stupid by posting a screenshot of an entire workout you claim to be doing.

[mikvan52]

17 strokes.. the "shots head round the world", nailing the lid on the coffin of SPI training..
1:34?... for a guy who asserts he has 1:24 speed over 500? GMAFB!!


2 strokes to get going, then 1:34@31spm, 1:32@33, 1:34@30, 1:35@31, 1:35@31, 1:35@31, 1:35@32, 1:33@33, 1:33@32, 1:34@34, 1:34@32, 1:36@31, 1:34@32, 1:33@35, 1:33@34, stop. Grand total of 17 strokes, only 2 of which were actually 1:34@32

hmmm: Let’s give ranger the benefit of the doubt
He rowed 17 strokes at his “golden mean” magic number which means in the end that he was on target for a 1:34 500m piece. Is that his goal? a 1:34 500?
I would think that a 1:24 guy should be able to go 1:20 for 17 strokes... silly me!!!!

Could he continue for another 50 strokes at this at and average spm of 32?
Absolutely not!
AND! We will never see his video or IND_V of this 500 .... I assure all reading this.
Notice too: The absence of his weight figure. Weight matters in the real world!

Now: (more) REAL WORLD:
To get to the finish line requires choosing a pace and a stroke rate that CAN BE SUSTAINED.

Dollars-2-donuts: ranger’s choice of finish line was “just a few strokes”…IOW: most assuredly not 60-70.
It is bizarre that he thinks that 17 strokes will eventually translate into 2 + hrs of rowing in the same ratio (for his FM)

Back to ranger LA_LA_LAND: He wants us to under-erg-stand “I'll just ha-bit-u-EAT my way to the point where I can Con_Sume more and more strokes. Nay_Eaters never learn.”

ME: “You’re “Full” already, von MannBatt TSO.! So full of it that you will never bring it to Crash-B again because short duration bursts of big watts at low stroke rates fail to get a top athletes like you to the top of the podium” where, incidentally, you once reigned when you (in your own words) rowed like (excrement deleted) (without spi)... Go figure!

And, finally: I’d love to see him attempt this on slides. I can hear the sound of the wreckage… twisted metal flying every which way. It seems Rich likes puting all the uumph on the front end. The slides would reward him appropriately.

[ranger]

17 strokes

No, 1500 or so--20K working with 1:44 @ 26 spm (12 SPI).

Sure, then a bit of foolin' with the camera.

Then breakfast while the video was loading on utube.

Then a nice hour on the Kurt Kinetic, HR steady at 155 bpm.

I'll get a video of a full 500m, 1:34 @ 32 spm (13 SPI) tomorrow, just to show you'all where my HR is at the end of the interval.

The target is 175 bpm or so, just peeking over my anaerobic threshhold on the last ten strokes.

Then, the next step will be working up 8 x 500m (3:30 rest), 1:34 @ 32 spm.

Then I will stretch that 8 x 500m to 20 x 500m.

At least initially, and in training, I like the technical discipline of doing the 500s at 10MPS.

Then, as I raise the pace to 1:31, my target for 8 x 500m (3:30 rest), I can lighten up a little and raise the rate.

I suspect that I will end up racing at 35 spm and 12 SPI.

Even if I don't get 500s ramped up to max by the end of April, if I get to 20 x 500m, 1:34 @ 32 spm (13 SPI), I should be able to rip off a pb-level 2K without much difficulty before the end of the indoor racing season.

That would give me the best 60s hwt 2K for the year, nudging out Spousta, and would keep my streak going.

I have had the best 2K in my age and weight category for the last two years.

RANKING RESULTS 2010

Indoor Rower | Individual and Race Results | 2000m | Men's | Lightweight | Custom Age Range (55–59) | 2010 Season

You are number 1 of 105

1 Rich Cureton 59 Ann Arbor MI USA 6:41.4 RACE
2 Michael van Beuren 57 Hartland VT USA 6:47.6 IND_V
3 Jonathan Rich 56 Winter Park FL USA 6:52.3 RACE
4 Eric Winterbottom 58 Bodytalk GBR 7:01.9 RACE
5 Gary Passler 55 amesbury ma USA 7:05.0 RACE
6 David Sutkowy 56 manlius NY USA 7:05.4 RACE
6 Rolf Meek 59 Oslo NOR 7:05.4 IND
8 John Busk 56 Slangerup DEN 7:07.6 IND
9 Ernest Cook 55 Brookline MA USA 7:08.3 RACE
10 Daniel Devez 56 Port-Marly Rc FRA 7:08.5 RACE

RANKING RESULTS 2009

Indoor Rower | Individual and Race Results | 2000m | Men's | Lightweight | Custom Age Range (55–59) | 2009 Season
You are number 1 of 95

1 Rich Cureton 58 Ann Arbor MI USA 6:41.0 RACE
2 Rocketroy Brook 57 GBR 6:43.8 RACE
3 John Busk 55 Slangerup GBR 6:47.5 RACE
4 Mike Van Beuren 56 Annapolis MD USA 6:50.0 RACE
5 Brian Leonard Phipps 59 Rongotea Manawatu NZL 6:56.9 RACE
5 Rolf Meek 58 Oslo NOR 6:56.9 IND
7 Tor Arne Simonsen 58 Oslo NOR 6:57.3 RACE
8 Thomas Knight 56 newcastle on tyne GBR 7:04.5 RACE
9 Chris Betenson 55 IRL 7:04.8 RACE
10 Daniel DEVEZ 55 FRA 7:05.1 RACE

RANKING RESULTS 2007

Indoor Rower | Individual and Race Results | 2000m | Men's | Lightweight | Custom Age Range (55–59) | 2007 Season

1 Rich Cureton 55 USA 6:42.6 RACE
2 Roy Brook 55 GBR 6:43.1 RACE
3 Franz Plitzner 55 GER 6:50.0 RACE
4 Rolf Meek 56 Oslo NOR 6:51.7 IND
5 Henry Baker 59 CA USA 6:54.6 RACE
6 Bob Willis 56 Longmeadow Ma USA 6:55.8 IND
7 Robert Willis 56 USA 6:57.1 RACE
8 Robert Orsi 59 newport beach CA USA 6:59.2 RACE
9 David Aldridge 58 GBR 7:01.3 RACE
10 Alain MANGIN 58 FRA 7:02.3 RACE

RANKING RESULTS 2004

Indoor Rower | Individual and Race Results | 2000m | Men's | Lightweight | Ages 50-59 | 2004 Season

1 Rich Cureton 52 Ann Arbor MI USA 6:28.0 RACE
2 Chris Bertram 51 Old Windsor GBR 6:37.7 RACE
3 dennis hastings 53 USA 6:39.5 RACE
4 Roger Prowse 58 Isle of Wight GBR 6:43.3 RACE
5 Taisto Ylönen 50 Kellokoski Finland GBR 6:44.8 RACE
5 Peter ENGLISH 50 GBR 6:44.8 RACE
7 Bob Lisle 52 GBR 6:47.1 RACE
8 Alain Mangin 54 GBR 6:47.5 RACE
9 Aage CHRISTIANSEN 52 Oslo N NOR 6:53.2 RACE
10 George Meredith 54 Gravesend Kent GBR 6:55.7 RACE

RANKING RESULTS 2003

Indoor Rower | Individual and Race Results | 2000m | Men's | Lightweight | Ages 50-59 | 2003 Season

1 Rich Cureton 52 Mi USA 6:30.0 RACE
2 John Harvey 52 Perth WA AUS 6:36.2 IND
3 Roger Prowse 58 Isle of Wight GBR 6:41.9 IND
4 Alain Mangin 54 France FRA 6:43.9 RACE
5 Chris Bertram 50 GBR 6:44.0 RACE
6 Alain MANGIN 55 FRA 6:44.8 RACE
7 Roger Prowse 57 GBR 6:49.3 RACE
8 Jean Paul Tardieu 53 France FRA 6:49.6 RACE
9 Jon Williams 51 Waterbury Center Vermont USA 6:50.1 IND
10 Christopher Eyre 50 GBR 6:50.4 RACE

In 2002, I pulled 6:27.5 and 6:28.5 as a heavyweight.

In 2006, I pulled 6:29.7 as a heavyweight.

A sub-6:30 2K before the end of April, without even fully preparing for it, would revisit my best 2K times of a decade ago, an unprecedented affair.

The normal decline with age from 50 to 60 is 17 seconds over 500m.

For many, the decline is twice that.

ranger

[mikvan52]

More "foolin with the camera"

Rich: It was you who chose to do (what-ever) before your flirtation with the video camera.

Back to analysis:

the mealy-mouther of the Grand River wrote:

my argument here, and hope overall, is that rowing well, on the whole, is faster than rowing poorly. And, honestly, I can't think of anything that would argue otherwise. If it turns out that this isn't the case, so be it. But I am giving it a shot.

Funny I can think of something that argues otherwise:

ranger sez: rowing well is "on the whole" faster than rowing poorly and the measure of this is...
(What?) A 500M TT?

I SHOW THAT "ROWING POORLY" IS FASTER (!) .....WITH THIS VIDEO


The piece:
Start: 55-56 seconds into video (+ 1:32)
End 2:27

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kOtbOHwNOMI

Last time I thought about this…. 1:32 pace for 500m is a bigger score than a paltry 1:34 for 17 strokes
Click "blog" below if you want to read more of my own BS...

[macroth]

Even if I don't get 500s ramped up to max by the end of April,

Still planning on doing all the distance trials in decreasing order before that, I assume? Better get a move on.

[JimR]

I am not sure that Mike's 10 x 2K (1 minute rest) session has much to do with his training, either.

The 10 x 2K (1 minute rest) is a varaition on the "steamroller" training ... you said as much yourself. Mike was able to show he can do something you are unable to do ... yet talked about constantly.

I used the past tense since it seems that after your no show on the 10 x 2K you have moved on to all sorts of other things. It appears you do race your training ... or at least race like your training.

What I really want to know is this ... prior to BIRC you were all about the "investment" you were making in learning to erg at 13 spi and how this was going to "pay dividends" this racing season. It appears you have gone bankrupt ... could you talk about this for a bit???

JimR

[ranger]

Hey, Mike--

Try a max 500m @ 10MPS.

What is the best you can do?

ranger