Ranger's training thread

[ranger]

Roy has switched to cycling

Sure, and why not?

Given his training, Roy was just getting worse and worse at rowing.

He didn't have any hope of besting Brian Bailey's 60s lwt WR, which shows that his 55s lwt WR was always soft.

Roy's 55s lwt WR won't last long.

Seibach will blow it out of the water, perhaps by as much as 10 seconds.

The midpoint between the 50s and 60s lwt WRs is 6:33.5, not 6:38.

Regardless, now that I am rowing well (13 SPI) at low drag (95 df.), I am going to pull a lwt 6:16 at 60, and when I do, I won't care than a bunch of younger folks were much slower.

No matter how hard he tried, like Mike VB, Roy would now have difficulty pulling 6:50.

ranger

[Citroen]

Funny that this would come from you. Isn't a 7:02 "worse" than a 6:41?

I didn't get my weight right and so was out of gas.
It didn't have anything to do with my rowing [or anchor hauling with breaks].
As a heavyweight, well fed and watered, I would have pulled 6:30.

So why didn't you do that? Why force yourself to FAIL by forcing yourself to glory LWT?

[Citroen]

Roy has switched to cycling

He didn't have any hope of besting Brian Bailey's 60s lwt WR, which shows that his 55s lwt WR was always soft.

Funny that, nor do you.
If the 55 LWT was that soft, why didn't you beat it?

[ranger]

Funny that this would come from you. Isn't a 7:02 "worse" than a 6:41?

I didn't get my weight right and so was out of gas.
It didn't have anything to do with my rowing [or anchor hauling with breaks].
As a heavyweight, well fed and watered, I would have pulled 6:30.

So why didn't you do that? Why force yourself to FAIL by forcing yourself to glory LWT?

No reason to fail as a lightweight.

I just have to get my weight right.

Roy is exactly the same, as are most heavy lightweights.

ranger

[ranger]

Roy has switched to cycling

He didn't have any hope of besting Brian Bailey's 60s lwt WR, which shows that his 55s lwt WR was always soft.

Funny that, nor do you.
If the 55 LWT was that soft, why didn't you beat it?

I was learning to row rather than preparing to race.

I don't have to beat Roy's record to show that it is soft.

There are lots of others who can do the job just as well.

By rowing a lwt 6:16 at 60, I will demonstrate the point anyway.

Brain Bailey's 60s lwt WR is entirely legitimate.

It is spaced exactly the same 17 seconds from the 50s lwt WR that is found among the heavyweights, too.

But 6:16 will best it by 26 seconds.

It will also best the 50s and 40s lwt WRs.

ranger

[PaulH]

As a heavyweight, well fed and watered, I would have pulled 6:30.

Go on then.

[PaulH]

Roy is exactly the same, as are most heavy lightweights.

But you're not a heavy lightweight - you've said multiple times, even when asked not to, that you're a little lightweight.

[snowleopard]

No reason to fail as a lightweight.

I just have to get my weight right.

Roy is exactly the same, as are most heavy lightweights.

But you do fail and repeatedly. You can no longer manage your weight because: a) you are a glory lwt; b) you don't do anything like the volume of training that you claim; and c) your are addicted to alcohol and food.

Rocket Roy is not exactly the same. He's got all his marbles for starters. He made weight comfortably and set a new WR. You crash diet/dehydrate to make weight and fail repeatedly.

Failure is only useful if you learn from it. You just make the same mistake over and over again. That makes you pretty dumb by any measure. It's no wonder you're being pensioned off.

[ranger]

Put in a second 10K for the day.

Ended with some sprints at a bit of a higher drag, 140 df.

Wow.

Learning to row well (13 SPI) at low drag (95 df.) _really_ fires the engines when you put up the drag.

You go like lightning!

At 140 df., I now get 1:31 @ 34 spm (13.7 SPI), just stroking naturally.

Yikes.

That's not a very high drag. Right about normal.

My force curve at 140 df. looks just about the same as my force curve at 95 df. except it is higher and fatter.

I get 135 kg.F on every stroke with just a normal pull. My force curve goes right to the top of the screen.

Drive time is still less than .6 seconds, though, so at 34 spm I am still in something close to a 3-to-1 ratio.

Amazing.

1:31 is my target for 8 x 500m (3:30 rest).

Heck, I thought I had a long way to go before I felt comfortable at 1:31 with my new technique, but it seems not.

34 spm in a 3-to-1 ratio?

Not hard at all for 52 strokes.

Maybe I can do 8 x 500m @ 1:31 right now!

I should see.

At 140 df., 1K, 1:31 @ 34 spm, might also be nice to try.

1:31 is my target for 1K.

For me, 8 x 500m (3:30 rest) is 2K - 3.

So 1:31 for the session predicts a 1:34/6:16 2K.

ranger

[ranger]

Put in a second 10K for the day.

Ended with some sprints at a bit of a higher drag, 140 df.

Wow.

Learning to row well (13 SPI) at low drag (95 df.) _really_ fires the engines when you put up the drag.

You go like lightning!

At 140 df., I now get 1:31 @ 34 spm (13.7 SPI), just stroking naturally.

Yikes.

That's not a very high drag.

My force curve looks just about the same as my force curve at low drag except it is higher and fatter.

I get 135 kg.F on every stroke with just a normal pull.

Drive time is still less than .6 seconds, though, so at 34 spm I am still in something close to a 3-to-1 ratio.

Amazing.

1:31 is my target for 8 x 500m (3:30 rest).

Heck, I thought I had a long way to go before I felt comfortable at 1:31, but it seems not.

34 spm in a 3-to-1 ratio?

Not hard at all for 52 strokes.

Maybe I can do 8 x 500m @ 1:31 right now!

I should see.

My 1K pb is 3:07.

So, 1:31/3:02 for 1K would be just about what I need to get from 6:27.5, my 2K pb, to 6:16.

ranger

[aharmer]

Did anybody else notice that ranger compared his quest for 6:16 to curing cancer?

[aharmer]

Yes, you should see if you can do 8x500 in 1:31 right now. Of course you'll do nothing more than talk about it, but yes, you should do it right now. But I don't want to see it so you can use that as your excuse for not showing it.

[ranger]

Yes, you should see if you can do 8x500 in 1:31 right now. Of course you'll do nothing more than talk about it, but yes, you should do it right now. But I don't want to see it so you can use that as your excuse for not showing it.

Why should I do it right now?

It's clear that I am getting all the improvement from doing the FM training, 1:48 @ 24 spm (11.5 SPI) at 95 df.

Fast legs!

Great length, timing, footwork, and leverage.

ranger

[ranger]

13.7 SPI is what people like Pete Marston pulled in his prime (i.e., 25 years old).

Pete pulled 6:11 for 2K.

ranger

[Fred]

"Racing your training" could mean two things:
1) going all out every time you row, trying to personal best every time
2) posting the results of your session (time/distance)
Now, #1 is true, one doesnt want to do that as it can lead to over training and getting discouraged. However, that isnt what you mean when you refer to "racing your training".
You accuse any requester of your time/distance as wanting you to "race your training", proof positive that your use of the term is #2.
Your mind is fabricating reasons for you not to report distance/time. Reporting time/distance doesn't imply you are going all out trying to personal best. Thats just a fact.

The evidence is overwhelming: These two are related.
Those who do (2), as time goes on, more and more do (1).
It is just human to do so. We are not machines. If we are doing cognitive overlays every time we are doing something physical, we start to think that physical performance can/should/must follow those cognitive overlays.
This is a serious mistake.
There is no training advantage whatsoever in fixating your interest on time over distance rowed in a workout.
There is no training advantage whatsoever in specifying "targets" and meeting them, day after day.
There is no training advantage whatsoever in reporting your meters exactly.
There is no training advantage whatsoever in rigorously controlling rest periods, interval distance, time over interval distances and rest periods, etc.
There is no training advantage whatsoever in thinking that each row is like a race even though it isn't a race.
Just listen to your body, have fun, work long and hard, relax, etc.
Go with the flow of your bodily energies and you will avoid staleness, injury, sickness, and discouragement, the end games of the sport that almost everyone who obsesses about time over distance rowed falls victim to, usually in some permanent way that destroys forever their psychological and/or physical capacity to participate in the sport at all.
ranger

I couldnt have demonstrated your dysfunction better than what you did in your post. Here's why: if your assertion was true, then training logs everywhere would abound with evidence of same.
but they dont, so your assertion fails.

Your mind is constructing the argument, all evidence to the contrary, because you dont want to know what your performance is. You prefer to live with the fantasy