Ranger's training thread

[Fred]

In fact, I should make weight in no time.
My weight is pretty good right now.

I don't like to weigh myself.
It's depressing!

Guess no one could have captured the dilemma your emotional issues place you in better than you did with these two posts.
The first post is the delusion of what you want so badly to be true, the second post is your mind protecting you from the reality by recoiling from any form of measurement.

I am not sure why you want to measure _anything_ when you are training.

Right, hence your "all sport is art", disingenuous "metrics" such as your "SPI/HR for undefined distances".. All attempts to gain recognition while at the same time avoiding any real objective performance measurement.

The reason to measure in training is fairly simple, that way you know if what you're doing is effective or not.

The reason for not measuring anything in training is also very simple, that way you dont know if what you're doing is effective or not, and you can say anything you want, as you aren't really saying anything.

[Bob S.]

Yea.

1:48 pace is 1250 calories (sic) an hour.

So, I burn right around 1000 calories (sic) for each 10K.

ranger

Actually, your PM would show approximately 750 cals (sic), at a 1:48 pace for 10k. 36 minutes, right?

To burn 1,000 Calories in a 10k would require a rate much faster than 1:48. However, it can also be done at an extremely slow pace, if you take almost 3 hours and 20 minutes to do it.

ext, p vs. C graph.jpg (58.77 KiB) Viewed 6179 times

On the other hand, it is no trick at all to burn 1000 calories (1kcal or 1Cal) in a much shorter piece at just about any rate.

Whoops! I just noticed that I made that same error myself in one of the 4 places that I used the term on that graph.

Bob S.

[ranger]

All attempts to gain recognition while at the same time avoiding any real objective performance measurement

No, I am just pointing out that history repeats itself, repeatedly.

When I first took up rowing, I didn't measure anything.

In my first race, when I was 51, I was four seconds under the 50s lwt WR.

I have three WR rows.

I have won all of the major championships.

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

Last year, no one my age and weight came within 20 seconds of my 2K, and I didn't even prepare to race.

ranger

[ranger]

The reason to measure in training is fairly simple, that way you know if what you're doing is effective or not.

Lord.

If it isn't _obvious_ to you whether you are doing well or not in a sport, you are deaf, dumb, and blind, and have never had anything to do with sports in your life.

ranger

[ranger]

And, how do you figure your SPI, 1:48 pace, HR of 155 is 75% HRR, ratio, weight, % of body fat if you are not cognitive overlaying?

I am no longer training.

I am preparing to race.

My training is over.

Fait accompli.

I now row well (13 SPI) at low drag (95 df.).

No veteran has ever rowed well.

ranger

[Fred]

The reason to measure in training is fairly simple, that way you know if what you're doing is effective or not.

If it isn't _obvious_ to you whether you are doing well or not in a sport, you are deaf, dumb, and blind, and have never had anything to do with sports in your life.

two points:
1. you quote "measurements" on a continuous basis so your statement above would apply to yourself. You just pick ones that you can mangle in one way or another to suit your purposes. SPI for undefined distances, % of a max HR that is fiction, session distances that are made up, etc... You have invented more "measurements" that you use to describe your training than anyone else here. There is really only one measurement you avoid like the plague.. the most simple and objective one: time/distance.

2. you consistently miss your own predicted performances by a larger margin than anyone I have ever heard of, pointing to an extremely high degree of unawareness of your capability going into a race.

[ranger]

And, how do you figure your SPI, 1:48 pace, HR of 155 is 75% HRR, ratio, weight, % of body fat if you are not cognitive overlaying?

Actually, right from the beginning, knowing all sorts of things about what you are doing technically (SPI, drive time, ratio, peak force, drive length, etc.) might be great for your rowing.

But knowing what pace your are going never made anyone better as a rower.

For most rowers, knowing what pace they are going just tells them how bad they are.

It doesn't tell them anything about how to get better.

ranger

[Gus]

I am no longer training.

I am preparing to race.

My training is over.

ranger

This is for Byron, because he'll be quoting this in the near future when you use the excuse of not having prepared for racing when your result ends up being so far off your prediction. That's if you do your race in a public venue. There will only be one and then you'll go back into hiding behind hundreds of additional thread posts making even more outlandish claims. If you do your race in private, you'll either not finish or your time will be so slow you won't post the results here. Then you'll continue on with the same BS you've been posting for years. Same end result either way.

So after 7 years of not preparing to race, you are now doing so. No question. No doubt. For sure. No lying about it.

[ranger]

There is really only one measurement you avoid like the plague.. the most simple and objective one: time/distance.

No, I don't, as I just detailed.

Time/distance is exactly what is used to measure a performance.

But training is not a performance.

It is an opportunity to get better.

Knowing how fast your are going tells you nothing at all about how to get better.

ranger

[ranger]

Same end result

Yes.

The "end result" has been excellent.

For the last two years, I have rowed 2K faster than anyone my age and weight in the history of the sport without even preparing for my races and without even having racing as my major intent.

Competitively, you can't be better than the best.

ranger

[ranger]

If racing is your major intent and therefore you just prepare to race, and race, prepare to race, and race, you just get worse and worse.

The evidence for this is overwhelming.

You only get better by overcoming your weaknesses.

When you race, you hide your weaknesses and parade your strengths.

Training is an opportunity to overcome your weaknesses and get better.

Therefore, training doesn't have anything to do with performance/racing, time over distance rowed.

ranger

[Fred]

And, how do you figure your SPI, 1:48 pace, HR of 155 is 75% HRR, ratio, weight, % of body fat if you are not cognitive overlaying?

Actually, right from the beginning, knowing all sorts of things about what you are doing technically (SPI, drive time, ratio, peak force, drive length, etc.) might be great for your rowing.

But knowing what pace your are going never made anyone better as a rower.

For most rowers, knowing what pace they are going just tells them how bad they are.

It doesn't tell them anything about how to get better.

ranger

Such a bizarre post Rich. SPI is derived from pace and stroke rate (average Watts per stroke). Pace MUST be known to calculate SPI.

Expanded out, you are saying: "It's irrelevant what the average pace/rate is for a session such as a 10k, what's really important is to know the pace/rate for a few strokes in that session."

You need to accept the fact that a 36:00 10k is not the same as a 40:00 10k where you saw 1:48 every once in a while.

It just isnt.

[bellboy]

Same end result

Yes.

The "end result" has been excellent.

For the last two years, I have rowed 2K faster than anyone my age and weight in the history of the sport without even preparing for my races and without even having racing as my major intent.

Competitively, you can't be better than the best.

ranger

Didnt you get your arse handed to you on a plate in a rather "competitive " manner at BIRC. After all you can't be better that the er....third best can you?

[ranger]

Expanded out, you are saying: "It's irrelevant what the average pace/rate is for a session such as a 10k, what's really important is to know the pace/rate for a few strokes in that session."

That depends on what you weaknesses are.

If you major weakness is that you row poorly, sure, the most important thing to know about each stroke is that you are rowing well.

How many strokes you take is irrelevant.

You take as many as you can!

Knowing your pace over some distance rowed doesn't have any bearing on how to row well.

ranger

[Gus]

Same end result

Yes.

The "end result" has been excellent.

ranger

That we can agree upon. 10,000+ thread posts. No one has or likely will come close.