Ranger's training thread

[Fred]

Given that I was 55 years old at the time, that 6:29.7 in 2006 has been my best 2K time.
It is the equivalent of 6:21.5 at 50 years old.
6:16 at 60 years old is the equivalent of 5:59 at 50 years old.
The normal decline with age among veterans from 50 years old to 60 years old is 17 seconds over 2K.
ranger

Using your math, you would agree then that the current world record 60's LW 2k is Brian Bailey at 6:40.8 (he set the current mark of 6:42.5 when he was 61)

[ranger]

Nobody cares about how jealous you are of these other guys

Who's jealous?

I am retiring in two years, too, and 2012-2013 is a sabbatical year.

Sure, _very_ soon, I'll have plenty of time for rowing.

30 years?

ranger

[ranger]

Given that I was 55 years old at the time, that 6:29.7 in 2006 has been my best 2K time.
It is the equivalent of 6:21.5 at 50 years old.
6:16 at 60 years old is the equivalent of 5:59 at 50 years old.
The normal decline with age among veterans from 50 years old to 60 years old is 17 seconds over 2K.
ranger

Using your math, you would agree then that the current world record 60's LW 2k is Brian Bailey at 6:40.8 (he set the current mark of 6:42.5 when he was 61)

Sure.

As I remember, like me, Brian was pretty new to the sport when he set the 60s lwt WR.

He's a runner.

14:20 for 5K?

ranger

[ranger]

So, how's that "FM by the end of the month" going

Perfectly.

Couldn't be better.

I think that 1:48 is in the bag.

If so, it will be one of the great rows in the history of the sport.

A watershed of sorts.

A WR-holder at 52 years old improving by six seconds per 500m between 52 years old and 60 years old?

Unprecedented.

Gobsmackingly good training.

If I pull it off, without a doubt, I have the best coach in the world.

ranger

[snowleopard]

No prominent rowers work much at all, if any.

And you are a mediocre age group erger with a season's best 7:02.

What's your point

[hjs]

I just posted my force curve from 2005-2006, when I switched back to hauling anchor at high drag in my racing.

Two weeks before this force curve was recorded, I pulled 6:29.7 for 2K, pretty much exactly what I pulled three years earlier, perhaps with a little decline with age. My hwt pb from 2002 is 6:27.5.

ranger

That is what I said you have no idea what did in your best form.

Given that I was 55 years old at the time, that 6:29.7 in 2006 has been my best 2K time.

It is the equivalent of 6:21.5 at 50 years old.

6:16 at 60 years old is the equivalent of 5:59 at 50 years old.

The normal decline with age among veterans from 50 years old to 60 years old is 17 seconds over 2K.

ranger

It was indeed a good row, but a heavy weight one, a few weeks later you pulled a plus 7.00 lightweight 2k.

What the normal decline is, is not to say, the group that rows is so small that statisticly there is not much to say.

There is something strange though in your line of talking here, for years you are saying that you row a 6.16. But here you say that there is a decline with aging.

A few questions? Why are you now in the camp of the rest of the forum, "aging after 35/40 makes you slower".

And why are you still claiming to row 6.16 every year? After all you are aging so if you keep saying you are still a 6.16 man your potential gets higher and higher each year. That can't be right, ones max potential is a given number. So again as always you are talking from your rear end.

So, how's that "FM by the end of the month" going

Perfectly.

Couldn't be better.

I think that 1:48 is in the bag.

If so, it will be one of the great rows in the history of the sport.

A watershed of sorts.

A WR-holder at 52 years old improving by six seconds per 500m between 52 years old and 60 years old?

Unprecedented.

Gobsmackingly good training.

If I pull it off, without a doubt, I have the best coach in the world.

ranger

[Fred]

So, how's that "FM by the end of the month" going

Perfectly.
Couldn't be better.
I think that 1:48 is in the bag.

It is extremely odd the way your mind works.
You might be able to do a 18:00 5k (1:48 average)
there is no way you can do a 36:00 10k(1:48 average)

and yet your mind has somehow deceived you into thinking that based on some strange extrapolation of the graph of 1 stroke, that you can do a 2:31:54 FM (1:48 average).

and by "can do" I mean actually do it, this week, not talk about doing it, not say you're going to do it and then don't do it. I mean, actually, really DO it. You need to consider how illogical it is, to not be able to do a 36:00 10k, but think you are capable of a 2:31 FM.

[Nosmo]

About a quarter of the world is retired.

True, and 68.9% of statistics are made up.

[aharmer]

For a 1:48 marathon guy, a 1:48 5k would be nothing more than a warmup for the daily session. If the fool were to ever show us a full 5k at 1:48 you'd see a skyrocketing heart rate and stroke rate, and it would sound like a mashup of 100 porn videos with all the heavy panting going on.

A real 1:48 marathon guy would defend himself and at least show a 5k at 1:48 with a nice smooth rate and HR throughout, and would be able to speak in full sentences during the last 500m.

An attention seeking whore would hide behind his keyboard and tell lies while never doing a single piece he brags about.

[ranger]

or a 1:48 marathon guy, a 1:48 5k would be nothing more than a warmup

Sure, as I have been reporting, I have now been working with 1:40 @ 30 spm (11.7 SPI, 10 MPS).

No reason to warm up much.

Just do it.

At the moment, I think I am making the most progress in my training by pushing my HR to top-end UT1 from day to day rather than rowing at UT2.

Sure, I'll race the FM in a 4-to-1 ratio at a low UT1 HR, but I don't need to row in a ratio that high and HR that low from day to day.

That's a waste of time.

3-to-1 is fine.

At 95 df., I am in a 3-to-1 ratio at 30 spm.

ranger

[ranger]

there is no way you can do a 36:00 10k(1:48 average)

Not at all true.

I have done 1:45 for 9K rowing badly at max drag.

I now row well at low drag.

So I am _much_ better than than now.

My goal now is 10K at 1:42.

30 spm

11 SPI

95 df.

3-to-1 ratio

.5 seconds for the drive.

1.5 seconds for the recovery.

This is exactly the rowing that I am now doing for 20K from day to day.

ranger

[rjw]

or a 1:48 marathon guy, a 1:48 5k would be nothing more than a warmup

Sure, as I have been reporting, I have now been working with 1:40 @ 30 spm (11.7 SPI, 10 MPS).

Actually, there is the rub Rich. IMHO what you are reporting and how you are reporting it is meaningless as it is not quantifyable or repeatable, except by you.

Your only quantifyable row this year has been a 7:02 2K and that was rowing well at BIRC. That predicts about a 2:50 marathon.

[bellboy]

So, how's that "FM by the end of the month" going

Perfectly.

Couldn't be better.

I think that 1:48 is in the bag.

If so, it will be one of the great rows in the history of the sport.

A watershed of sorts.

A WR-holder at 52 years old improving by six seconds per 500m between 52 years old and 60 years old?

Unprecedented.

Gobsmackingly good training.

If I pull it off, without a doubt, I have the best coach in the world.

ranger

And when you fail miserably you without doubt will have the worst coach in the world. If you had trained like a sane man you had a chance at beating Roy's record but you didnt. You disappeared up your own fundament and just_got_slower.

[ranger]

Actually, there is the rub Rich. IMHO what you are reporting and how you are reporting it is meaningless as it is not quantifyable or repeatable, except by you.

In training up a new technique, you are the only one who matters.

Sure, when you race, fully prepared, you can display your results.

But until then, there are no "races" to parade.

Just improvements in technical effectiveness and efficiency.

My first race will be a FM @ 1:48.

If I succeed, it will imply all of the rest of my targets, so your fears/anxieties/doubts/questions/etc. will be put to rest.

No?

In the meantime, you just have to be patient, as I have been.

If you _not_ patient, then that just says something about you, and your limitations.

It says nothing about me.

ranger

[ranger]

when you fail miserably you without doubt will have the worst coach in the world.

Hardly.

I am rowing at WR pace, as good as anyone has ever rowed.

What I am trying to do is _better_ than anyone has ever done--by a country mile.

If I fail, I just return to the (boring) norm.

No male with a WR row, 40 to 70, has ever gotten any better.

If I don't get any better, my coach is just as good as the other coaches out there.

But no better.

Your attitudes toward this situation are wildly off base.

You seem to assume that, with good coaching, I could do better than am.

How so?

There is nothing whatsoever to support that claim.

ranger