Ranger's training thread

[KevJGK]

has my top-end UT1 become 1:40?

On the basis that you can't hold 01:40 for 2K, that’ll be a no.

[macroth]

Still wrong, Richiepoo ! Call up your brother, really, if you're still on speaking terms.

Here's a few terms you could look up if you cared enough to learn something: agonist, synergist, antagonist, stabilizer. Oh, and glut/glute, too, while you're at it.


And lord, what you do on the erg, even if you were doing what you claim you do, is light-years away from picking up a 250lb sandbag, let alone 3500 times.

[lancs]

has my top-end UT1 become 1:40?

You, I and everyone reading here knows the answer to this. I'll give you a clue. It begins with 'n' and ends with 'o'.

That would be astonishing

Correct. It would be astonishing had it happened. But it hasn't happened and never will. It's probably about 14sec/500m from happening I'd say.

What is it about your pathology that leads you to increasingly ridiculous statements such as 'my UT1 is now 1:40'? Do you have any insight into your illness?

[ranger]

Here's a few terms you could look up if you cared enough to learn something: agonist, synergist, antagonist, stabilizer.

For performance, the issue is the strength, endurance, and energy required of a muscle, given some task, not whether it is an agonist, synergist, antagonist, or stabilizer.

ranger

[ranger]

What is it about your pathology that leads you to increasingly ridiculous statements such as 'my UT1 is now 1:40'?

Like most people, when I am stroking lightly (e.g., an SPI below my natural stroking power), I row a 3-to-1 ratio with a sub-threshold (top-end UT1) heart rate.

At 95 df., stroking lightly, when I am in a 3-to-1 ratio, I am pulling 1:40 @ 30 spm (11.7 SPI, 10 MPS).

.5 seconds for the drive.

1.5 seconds for the recovery.

When you are stroking lightly, what is your normal rate and pace when you are in a 3-to-1 ratio?

How long is your normal drive time?

ranger

[snowleopard]

What is it about your pathology that leads you to increasingly ridiculous statements such as 'my UT1 is now 1:40'?

Like most people, when I am stroking lightly (e.g., an SPI below my natural stroking power), I row a 3-to-1 ratio with a sub-threshold (top-end UT1) heart rate.

Gibberish. What is the longest continuous row you have done at 1:40 with a UT1 HR: 500m?

(Ratio is irrelevant in this context BTW. Just something else that you don't understand but you like to throw it in because it makes it seem like you know something.)

Incidentally, why aren't you out OTW yet?

[macroth]

Here's a few terms you could look up if you cared enough to learn something: agonist, synergist, antagonist, stabilizer.

For performance, the issue is the strength, endurance, and energy required of a muscle, given some task, not whether it is an agonist, synergist, antagonist, or stabilizer.

ranger

I see, it's just poetry and fantasy then. It doesn't matter if you swing your back with your abs or if you swing your arms with your calves, it's all just words.

Words are all you have left these days, and you can't even get them right.

[aharmer]

Ranger, how in the hell would you ever know what it's like to bend over and pick up 250 lbs? You've never done it in your life. Show me a video of you deadlifting 250 lbs. Until you do, you might want to stick to discussing what you know: doing jacknives and plugging meaningless numbers into an excel spreadsheet.

[hjs]

Ranger, how in the hell would you ever know what it's like to bend over and pick up 250 lbs? You've never done it in your life. Show me a video of you deadlifting 250 lbs. Until you do, you might want to stick to discussing what you know: doing jacknives and plugging meaningless numbers into an excel spreadsheet.

Peakforce versus a weight. Highjumpers often have a peakforce 6/7 times there weight, of course this means they can lift that 6/7 times there weight.

Pure Ranger logic, utter nonsence

[ranger]

Ratio is irrelevant in this context

Nope.

Just the opposite.

It's definitional.

If you are stroking lightly and naturally, an SPI or so below you natural stroking power, the energy cost of rowing is heavily dependent on your ratio, how long you are working vs. how long you are resting on each stroke cycle.

ranger

[snowleopard]

Ratio is irrelevant in this context

Nope.

Just the opposite.

It's definitional.

If you are stroking lightly and naturally, an SPI or so below you natural stroking power, the energy cost of rowing is heavily dependent on your ratio, how long you are working vs. how long you are resting on each stroke cycle.

Wrong context

Your assertion is that 1:40 is your new top end UT1. It isn't. DF, ratio, SPI blah blah is irrelevant.

Make smoke with any combination of the aforementioned but nothing disguises the reality that you cannot get beyond 500m @ 1:40 with a "UT1 HR". Added to which your UT1 HR is entirely bogus because you don't have a clue what your max HR is. And that despite having a brother who could organize professional evaluation in a heartbeat.

[NavigationHazard]

Muppet. Reducing the drive time in relation to the recovery does have a positive effect on boat velocity, stroke rate constant -- but only to the extent that you can sustain the higher force-production required by the shorter drive.

Your 1:3 drive:recovery ratio at 1:40 pace 30 spm is utterly divorced from real-world rowing. You can't sustain it; you won't sustain it; you never will be able to sustain it.

Kleshnev in 1998 published an empirical investigation into rowing efficiency. Part of it looked at four coxless fours. The HW honors included a double Olympic Gold winning boat (gold in the most recent FISA Worlds as a coxed boat); and fourth in the most recent FISA worlds as a coxless boat. The LWs had a bronze at the most recent FISA Worlds and a fifth at a FISA World Cup race. Here's what they did:

Rate
MHW1 30.2 spm implying stroke duration 1.97 sec; observed ratio 47.8%; implicit d:r ratio 1:1.09
MHW2 31.1 spm implying stroke duration 1.93 sec; observed ratio 44.8%; implicit d:r ratio 1:1.23
MLW1 30.2 spm implying stroke duration 1.99 sec; observed ratio 48.4%; implicit d:r ratio 1:1.07
MLW2 29.3 spm implying stroke duration 2.05 sec; observed ratio 47.6%; implicit d:r ratio 1:1.10

These ratios can't directly be compared to erg ratios, or even to visual inspection, as Kleshnev's definition of "drive" is idiosyncratic. However elsewhere he's told Cam Rekkers (Rowperfect inventor) that his drive times are 'off' by maybe .15 seconds. If you adjust the above you get

MHW1 adjusted drive 0.79 secs adjusted d:r ratio 1:1.49
MHW2 adjusted drive 0.71 secs adjusted d:r ratio 1:1.70
MLW1 adjusted drive 0.81 secs adjusted d:r ratio 1:1.45
MLW2 adjusted drive 0.82 secs adjusted d:r ratio 1:1.48

That is to say: these world-class real-world rowers (including multiple Olympic champions) rowing along at 30 spm have ratios nowhere close to your claimed 1:3. Why? Because they're not stupid. They've figured out how to balance peak force requirements against ratio, and come down on the side of relatively less force/relatively longer drive.

Of course they could move their boats faster if they could figure out how to decrease their drive time at the same rating. They could go faster as well if they hooked up a 90 hp outboard. But they're pretty much at the physiological limit at racing speeds and ratios around 1:1.5 at around 30 spm.

[bellboy]

Muppet. Reducing the drive time in relation to the recovery does have a positive effect on boat velocity, stroke rate constant -- but only to the extent that you can sustain the higher force-production required by the shorter drive.

Your 1:3 drive:recovery ratio at 1:40 pace 30 spm is utterly divorced from real-world rowing. You can't sustain it; you won't sustain it; you never will be able to sustain it.

Kleshnev in 1998 published an empirical investigation into rowing efficiency. Part of it looked at four coxless fours. The HW honors included a double Olympic Gold winning boat (gold in the most recent FISA Worlds as a coxed boat); and fourth in the most recent FISA worlds as a coxless boat. The LWs had a bronze at the most recent FISA Worlds and a fifth at a FISA World Cup race. Here's what they did:

Rate
MHW1 30.2 spm implying stroke duration 1.97 sec; observed ratio 47.8%; implicit d:r ratio 1:1.09
MHW2 31.1 spm implying stroke duration 1.93 sec; observed ratio 44.8%; implicit d:r ratio 1:1.23
MLW1 30.2 spm implying stroke duration 1.99 sec; observed ratio 48.4%; implicit d:r ratio 1:1.07
MLW2 29.3 spm implying stroke duration 2.05 sec; observed ratio 47.6%; implicit d:r ratio 1:1.10

These ratios can't directly be compared to erg ratios, or even to visual inspection, as Kleshnev's definition of "drive" is idiosyncratic. However elsewhere he's told Cam Rekkers (Rowperfect inventor) that his drive times are 'off' by maybe .15 seconds. If you adjust the above you get

MHW1 adjusted drive 0.79 secs adjusted d:r ratio 1:1.49
MHW2 adjusted drive 0.71 secs adjusted d:r ratio 1:1.70
MLW1 adjusted drive 0.81 secs adjusted d:r ratio 1:1.45
MLW2 adjusted drive 0.82 secs adjusted d:r ratio 1:1.48

That is to say: these world-class real-world rowers (including multiple Olympic champions) rowing along at 30 spm have ratios nowhere close to your claimed 1:3. Why? Because they're not stupid. They've figured out how to balance peak force requirements against ratio, and come down on the side of relatively less force/relatively longer drive.

Of course they could move their boats faster if they could figure out how to decrease their drive time at the same rating. They could go faster as well if they hooked up a 90 hp outboard. But they're pretty much at the physiological limit at racing speeds and ratios around 1:1.5 at around 30 spm.

Are you applying logic and scientific reason to this thread Nav? Dont you know this is a special place where fairies and pixies live. Science has no place here. Von ManBatt makes up the rules as he goes along.

[nharrigan]

Who cares what muscles you need during the recovery?
Anyone can do recoveries.
ranger

Are you referring to the erg? The core muscle do come in handy on the recovery in a boat.

What happened to the FM you had planned?

[Nosmo]

Ranger you should forget about all this indoor stuff and learn to do some real rowing:
http://tinyurl.com/4yr73cs