Ranger's training thread

[jliddil]

Ok Navhaz is totally wasting his talent on his day job. This stuff is f'ing hilarious. And he has cred in my book. He doesn't boast about if, when, I will...... He does.

Then again a man (for ranger I use that term loosely) has to have goals and dreams no matter how unrealistic and deluded they may be.

[ranger]

you are a big HW

Sure, I have 148 lbs. of non-fat body mass.

So I have trouble making weight.

I have to be 10% body fat.

I'm not sure that makes me "a big heavyweight," though, given that I now have a dozen or so pretty quality lwt 2Ks in competition, with some of my weigh-ins reading 160 lbs.

In spite of this, you are indeed right that I will now compete pretty well with the big 55s/60s heavyweights.

Oesterling, Hendershott, Foss, Cashin, et al. are all about 6'4", 220 lbs.

NavHaz, of course, is quite a bit bigger than that. NavHaz outweighs me by almost 100 lbs.

Nonetheless, when I am done with distance trials this year and have updated my pbs, now rowing well (13 SPI) at low drag (100 df.), however briefly, I think I will hold _all_ of the 60s hwt WRs from a FM down to 5K.

And if I can do that, I think I will break Hendershott's 60s hwt 2K WR, too.

Understandablly, the 60s hwt 1K (3:00) and 500m (1:21) WRs are probably out of my reach, as they are for most lightweights of any age.

Size helps a lot in the sprints.

That advantage fades as the race becomes longer.

ranger

[ranger]

Beautiful 3-to-1 ratio now at race rate and pace, although, at 100 df., I lose a bit of stroking power at high rates.

The sacrifice in stroking power is fine, though, given the increase in ratio, which makes the whole affair _very_ relaxed and smooth.

1:34 @ 36 spm (11.7 SPI) comes along nicely.

If I race at 100 df., that will be my target.

With my short little lightweight legs, at 100 df. and 11.7 SPI, my drive time is not much more than .4 seconds.

At 36 spm, that still gives 1.2 seconds for the recovery.

This 11.7 SPI is almost exactly what Stephansen pulls in a 2K, but at 42 spm.

36 spm is what Rocket Roy rates in a 2K but at 9 SPI.

2.7 SPI @ 36 spm is worth right around 100 watts.

6 spm at 11.7 SPI is worth right around 70 watts.

With an instantaneous rise to 100 kg. force at the catch and then movement from there up to 125 kg.F. at a peak but with only .4 seconds in duration in all, my force curve is now _very_ efficient.

ranger

[ranger]

11.7 SPI makes 1:40 @ 30 spm (10 MPS, 11.7 SPI) my natural rung on the 10 MPS ladder.

1:40 is my target for 6K.

Then, I can probably rate up to 32 spm for 5K to get to my target of 1:39/16:30.

Elsewhere, 11.7 SPI for distance rowing gives me these:

1:48 @ 24 spm for a FM
1:45 @ 26 spm for a HM
1:44 @ 27 spm for 60min
1:42 @ 28 spm for 10K
1:41 @ 29 spm for 30min

These rates are entirely reasonable.

If I hit these targets, they will all be 60s hwt WRs by a considerable margin--3-6 seconds per 500m.

ranger

[ranger]

Then again a man has to have goals and dreams no matter how unrealistic and deluded they may be.

Really?

Why?

I thought we are just machines.

Train.

Race.

Cite the numbers.

That's the end of it.

Erging is no place for unrealistic, deluded dreaming, much less goal-oriented behavior.

Just do it.

Post the screen shot.

And shut up about it.

ranger

[snowleopard]

Train.

Race.

Cite the numbers.

Post the screen shot.

And shut up about it.

Correct. It's a piece of f@cking gym equipment. It's not an illuminated manuscript.

Rowing [done properly] might be poetry in motion but the erg is just a measurement tool. There's a clue in the name: ergometer.

[mikvan52]

[ unrealistic, deluded dreaming

That's It!
.
ranger isn't A.D.D.; he's U.D.D.

Richey-poo neglects one big thing in his excursis on all thing ergy: a progress report: an indication that he is indeed so "much better", as he claims.

One thing's for sure: right now he's on the path of competitive obscurity. The last two years he couldn't even cadge free airfare to Boston from his friends at C2...
(ouch!)

[ranger]

Nice 75min on the Kurt Kinetic, HR flat at 145 bpm, after 75min on the erg.

I don't seem to be able to get myself to do more than 2.5 hours in any one of my morning sessions.

So, maybe the solution is to tack on a second session before dinner to bring my daily work up to an "ultra."

I won't do my best for a FM trial on the erg unless I can maintain these "ultra" sessions on a daily basis.

All of this work is pretty much UT2, so there is really not much danger in over-working.

It is just a matter of having the patience to put in the time and effort.

ranger

[JimR]

Understandablly, the 60s hwt 1K (3:00) and 500m (1:21) WRs are probably out of my reach, as they are for most lightweights of any age.

Size helps a lot in the sprints.

That advantage fades as the race becomes longer.

ranger

Except that Mike is faster than you over distances 5K and up ... and he weighs less. Kind of shoots your theories all to hell doesn't it?!

JimR

[JimR]

Nice 75min on the Kurt Kinetic, HR flat at 145 bpm, after 75min on the erg.

I don't seem to be able to get myself to do more than 2.5 hours in any one session.

So, maybe the solution is to tack on a second session before dinner to bring my daily work up to an "ultra."

I won't do my best for a FM trial on the erg unless I can maintain these "ultra" sessions on a daily basis.

ranger

Good plan ... talk about doubling your sessions for 7 years and see if that makes you faster.

JimR

[ranger]

Understandablly, the 60s hwt 1K (3:00) and 500m (1:21) WRs are probably out of my reach, as they are foryou over distances 5K and up

As far a I know, Mike hasn't done a FM or 100K OTErg, much less 167K, which I did for 14 hours one day.

At the moment, like my 2K pb, my distance pbs are about four seconds per 500m better than Mike's.

When I am done with distance trials this year, I think that margin will be double that.

Then, when I pull 6:16 at 60 for 2K, my 2K will also be better than Mike's by eight seconds per 500m.

Right around half a minute.

20 boat lengths?

ranger

[ranger]

Good plan ... talk about doubling your sessions for 7 years and see if that makes you faster.
JimR

It has.

I have done double sessions for a couple of months each winter and fall I have raced.

So, eight or nine times, now, probably.

So, what, 500 sessions?

I did "ultra" sessions of this sort for the entire summers of 2002 and 2003 (May, June, July, August).

So, what, 250 sessions?

My estimate, then, is that I have done about 750 "ultra" sessions so far while I have been training for rowing over the last decade.

No, I don't think it's just been talk.

An "ultra" is a double marathon.

Six hours of work?

ranger

[JimR]

Understandablly, the 60s hwt 1K (3:00) and 500m (1:21) WRs are probably out of my reach, as they are foryou over distances 5K and up

As far a I know, Mike hasn't done a FM or 100K OTErg, much less 167K, which I did for 14 hours one day.

At the moment, like my 2K pb, my distance pbs are about four seconds per 500m better than Mike's.

When I am done with distance trials this year, I think that margin will be double that.

Then, when I pull 6:16 at 60 for 2K, my 2K will also be better than Mike's by eight seconds per 500m.

Right around half a minute.

20 boat lengths?

ranger

While 5K and up certainly includes a FM and 100K the more common distances have you slower than Mike. Crazy thing is Mike is even better at the 10x2K/1 min rest ... the quantified version of the "save a horse, ride a cowboy session" you are fond of (or were until it was replaced with a newer "shiny object".

In sports typically and life in general there is an expectation that one can "walk the talk" ... something that clearly is lost on you.

But hey ... hide behind the "FM first" approach for another 7 years ... it worked pretty good at BIRC!

JimR

[mikvan52]

Nice 75min on the Kurt Kinetic, HR flat at 145 bpm, after 75min on the erg.

I don't seem to be able to get myself to do more than 2.5 hours in any one of my morning sessions.

So, maybe the solution is to tack on a second session before dinner to bring my daily work up to an "ultra."

I won't do my best for a FM trial on the erg unless I can maintain these "ultra" sessions on a daily basis.

All of this work is pretty much UT2, so there is really not much danger in over-working.

It is just a matter of having the patience to put in the time and effort.

Interesting.
Have you ever head of the principle of working different zones and mixing in rest?

When I was first marathoning (running) in the 1970's I used to succumb to the urge to just go longer and longer on successive days. I was in my late twenties and very full of myself!
Result: I plateaued and got stale. I couldn't get faster than the 2:40's for the 26.2 mile distance. I tried over and over.

I then dropped my volume and implemented enforced short days throughout every week in my yearly routines....
Result: 2 marathons at 2:26

You might want to consider this in your training for a marathon on the erg.

Right now I'm training for 5k OTW. I want to peak in late October. I'm using the same principles I used in my running days.

The consensus among the sensible is to vary workouts and to be careful to not just grind out the meters, to not succumb to bathing one's ego in endorphins just for the kick of it... Or, for bragging rights, log a gadzillion meters/hours more than peers.

Look at this, for example.
A workout I did yesterday. It took longer than 90 minutes to accomplish (including rests) but it did not overload and was only around 15k.

30' of UT1 and 30' in the AT region

Aerobic High Intensity (UT1)

3x10'/2'r (132 bpm goal) ... 80% HR
30' - 7554 - 1:59.1 - 21

10' @ 1:59.4 & 22
10' @ 1:59.3 & 21
10' @ 1:58.6 & 22

AT

6x5'/4' (140 bpm goal).... 85% HR
30' - 8078 - 1:51.4 - 26

5' @ 1:50.8 & 27 >> 141 bpm
5' @ 1:52.7 & 24 >> 144 bpm
5' @ 1:52.7 & 25 >> 136 bpm
5' @ 1:51.5 & 26 >> 141 bpm
5' @ 1:50.8 & 27 >> 143 bpm
5' @ 1:49.8 & 27 >> 148 bpm

Heart rate governs the workout. Plenty of rest allows the body to work reasonably hard but not get exhausted or dehydrated.

Just an idea...

[ranger]

the more common distances have you slower than Mike

No.

I repeat.

Mike's pbs in the distance rows are four seconds per 500m off of mine.

When I update my pbs this year, Mike's pbs in the distance rows will be eight seconds per 500m off of mine.

ranger