Ranger's training thread

[mikvan52]

ranger is now vying for a spot in the record books in which there are roughly only 12 contestants 60-64 lwts who actually race the 2k

Hardly.

I am trying to row 6:16.

You are not even trying, Rich.
If you were you'd be reporting 80% efforts at 6:4x 2k strength.... everytime you did UT1...

You're not even good at faking stupidity.

[NavigationHazard]

Hard to tell, actually. The archived 1996 results don't show the handicaps, just the adjusted times. Hendershott had a 6:14.0 adjusted. If it was a 6-second handicap that would have put him at 6:20.0. It's "Rowing News" that's the source for the four-second improvement: http://tinyurl.com/4zgh55r

I should add that 4 seconds is a non-trivial improvement. And that age-group WR-holder Carie Graves, at a minimum, got faster as a veteran woman.

[snowleopard]

And I got better by working exclusively on technique

By any definition you care to choose, you have not got better..

Fait accompli, Paul.

At WIRC 2003, I pulled a lwt 6:30.

By working on technique for six months, rowing strapless at low drag, I pulled a lwt 6:29 in the fall of 2003; then a lwt 6:28.

No no no slippery Dick. This experiment began _after_ your final 2K PB. You have not [or will not] have gotten better since then.

The experiment began when you made a calculated decision to no longer post quantitative training results which roughly coincided with the introduction of IND_V. This meant that distance times previously recorded using Just Row, i.e., with breaks, were no longer allowable.

For those that don't know when rowing on Just Row the clock stops and starts with the rower so rest can be taken during an apparently continuous row. Prior to IND_V the honor-based system made it possible to rank such rows.

Yes, ranger is a cheat.

[mikvan52]

Even the words "pulled a" bothers me.

Can anyone spot the problem?

If one concentrates on the mental image of "pulling" as opposed to pushing with the superior muscle groups, an erger falls prey to arm rowing.

"Pulling" is for pikers.... and an even lower from of this is yanking... the way ranger creates his peak force and one-stroke wonder~high spi~ BS

Furthermore:
The erg is a wattage recorder, not a boat speed recorder.
If ergers weren't so vain, C2 would keep records in watts rather than using an arbitrary paradigm in a piece of software that converts it to a fake speed.

ranger says (lying through his teeth) that the best ergers are the best rowers...
All you have to do is look at Stephansen and Miani to see that this isn't right all the time.

Who is Sophie Balmary anyway on the OTW circuit... on the erg she has the all-time WR... but cannot make an A final OTW...

Then there's the LWT v. HWT thing:
OTW: Lwt is 160 lbs
OTE: Lwt is 165 lbs...
Why the difference?
It's arbitrary in both cases.

Can you imagine if C2 decided to make a change and go the the FISA standard? I can imagine hearing the shrieking emanating from the bat cave.

My point: A whole lot of things about erging are pretty darn arbitrary. This is fine. A problem arises when we all start scrutinizing the numbers a little bit too closely.
Is the Model C faster than the D? Good grief?

[Fred]

why do you have a problem posting your "fiddling" session (time, distance and HR)?

What you list--time, distance, and HR--have nothing to do with the fiddling. It isn't a report of what I'm doing.

Well, by definition it is a report on what you did, since you did it and you would be reporting it.

You don't time work on technique. It's counterproductive. When you work on technique (and things like relaxation and habituation), you attend to technique (and things like relaxation and habituation).

Granted, there's no need to go all out for a great time when you are working on technique. That's why your HR wouldnt be all that elevated.

However, no one is asking you to go all out.

We are merely asking you to post the time, distance and HR data for your erg session this morning. That's it. It can not by definition change the nature or purpose of this mornings erg session, as that session is past.

What you are avoiding, is precisely this: quantifying the nature of your sessions. Which would be fine if you werent making any claims about current performance. However since you are making such claims, it is certainly fair of the forum to ask for some data in the form of time, distance and HR.

[lancs]

Fait accompli, Paul.

Dress it up as you like, Rich. The cold hard FACT remains that, by any objective measure you have just got slower. This is a fact. Get used to it.

It's no big deal and to be expected. Your oxygen delivering capabilities are diminishing. This is a fact.

You have less muscle mass than you did 10 years ago. This is a fact.

You are an ex-WR holder and an excellent erger. This is a fact.

You weren't able to beat Roy's soft WR. This is a fact.

Try to respond to this post without the word 'if'...

[ranger]

I certainly agree with PaulS on this:

At low drag (e.g. 98 df.), as I am rowing now, you can keep the rate _waaaay_ up there for long distances, given the light chain and the _huge_ ratios.

Heck, I think I'll row 60min at 29 spm, if the drag is down to 98 df.

Who knows?

With my little lightweight legs, at 98 df., pulling 11 SPI, I still might be in close to a 4-to-1 ratio when I am pulling 1:43 @ 29 spm (11 SPI, 10 MPS).

A large ratio of that sort, especially when the work load is so low (light, quick, etc.) gives the illusion that you aren't going very fast at all.

You are not working very hard, and even so, you are resting most of the time.

The biggest challenge is to learn to relax in such an odd situation.

Even a relaxed ratio in something like paddling a canoe is only 2-to-1, 3-to-1 at most.

ranger

[ranger]

Your oxygen delivering capabilities are diminishing.

Sure.

I suspect that, in terms of fitness, I am declining by .5 seconds over 2K a year.

So, in terms of fitness, now, at 60, I am probably 2.5 seconds over 2K slower than I was in 2006, for instance, when I pulled sub-6:30, without even preparing for it, at max drag, still struggling with technique, without even distance rowing, much less distance trials.

Any improvements that I end up making since 2006 will be due to (1) distance rowing, (2) distance trials, (3) sharpening, (4) low drag, and (5) improvements in technique.

The advances won't be due to improvements in fitness. As you say, fitness is now a liability.

So, if I do a FM @ 1:48, it will be a pretty startling endorsement of using some training time to work on technique.

No?

I wonder what I would have been able to pull back in 2006, as a heavyweight, fully trained, with both distance rowing and distance trials, and with a full brace of sharpening, even _without_ lowering the drag and using the technical advances I have made since then?

And I wonder how much the technical advances I have made since then might lower my 2K even further?

We'll soon see!

For instance, given that I pulled 1:54 for a FM back in 2003, given normal decline with age, the prediction is that I should now pull 1:58 for a FM now.

In 2003, I was six seconds per 500m _slower_ than the 50s hwt FM WR.

1:48 for a FM would be six seconds per 500m _faster_ than the 60s hwt FM WR.

Quite a swing!

12 seconds per 500m.

A FM @ 1:48 predicts a 6:16 2K.

Anyway.

Rowing a FM with good technique at 100 df. is sure going to be a different experience from the mess of a FM I pulled rowing like shit at max drag back in 2003.

ranger

[lancs]

Try to respond to this post without the word 'if'...

So, if I do a FM @ 1:48, it will be a pretty startling endorsement of using some training time to work on technique.

[mikvan52]

However, no one is asking you to go all out.

Fred: The essence of the situation is that we are asking and ranger is on a power-trip attempting in vain to remain in control of a situation that he feels is deteriorating very fast.
lancs is correct: Cureton needs to get over the fact that he is falling apart with age (as far as speed goes).
In fact he is doing extremely well... as he points out... 7:02 is a great time for a 60 yr old lwt.

There will be no timed FM result. THere will be no training result w/HR.. He's stuck in denial.


The grey area?
Perhaps... just perhaps TSO fears that he'll lose readership if he "comes out" and says:
My name is ranger and I am a 6:45 erg who hates trying to make weight
After all, don't we all watch the train wreck at the end of the bar rather than the reformed AA adherent who studiously sips on her club soda.

[mikvan52]

We'll soon see!

Why not copy this down and simply repost it every day. You have no other content.

[ranger]

We'll soon see!

Why not copy this down and simply repost it every day. You have no other content.

I have no other content?

We'll soon see!

ranger

[mikvan52]

A search on posts written by ranger that include the words:

"A FM @ 1:48 predicts a 6:16 2K."

has 271 matches!

[jliddil]

One pill makes you larger
And one pill makes you small
And the ones that mother gives you
Don't do anything at all
Go ask Alice
When she's ten feet tall

And if you go chasing rabbits
And you know you're going to fall
Tell 'em a hookah smoking caterpillar
Has given you the call
Call Alice
When she was just small

When men on the chessboard
Get up and tell you where to go
And you've just had some kind of mushroom
And your mind is moving slow
Go ask Alice
I think she'll know

When logic and proportion
Have fallen sloppy dead
And the White Knight is talking backwards
And the Red Queen's "off with her head!"
Remember what the dormouse said;
"Keep YOUR HEAD

[lancs]

A search on posts written by ranger that include the words:

"A FM @ 1:48 predicts a 6:16 2K."

has 271 matches!

A search on posts written by ranger that include the words:

"If..."

has 19809 matches!