Ranger's training thread

[Fred]

Well, again, this is where you mind is attempting to fabricate a reality that a if you can do 10 strokes at a certain SPI, then you can do 20, and if 20 then 30 and so on. Very naive to say the least.

I did a sub-6:30 2K at 12 SPI when I was 55, without even preparing it. No 55-year-old my size has ever come anywhere near sub-6:30, fully trained. I now row _all_ of my daily training meters, about 20K a day, at 11-13 SPI, usually right around 12 SPI, and now at 95 df. You are right. I have indeed "fabricated" a reality. I have learned how to row well (13 SPI) at low drag (95 df.). Ten years ago, I did nothing of the sort. I rowed poorly (10 SPI) at max drag (200+ df.). ranger

Couple notes:
- 15k is not "about" 20k
- I wont bother addressing the "without even preparing [for] it" claim as we're all familiar with your pre-race claims that "sharpening is going great", immediately followed post race target miss by ~45 sec with "I never sharpened".
- The average SPIs on your sessions are around 8. You cant take the SPI of a few strokes during that session and say you rowed the entire thing at that SPI, that's being dishonest. You've been doing ~15k at an average SPI of ~8. Alternatively you could say that you do 50x200m intervals at 1:48 with active rest.

again, you hide behind these obfuscations to avoid facing the reality of your real ability.

[Fred]

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

You might be able to do an 8 x 500m 3min rest at 1:39 on a good day.

You wont try it, your mind would recoil from the actual results.

[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

Not at all true.

After a _very_ short time, everyone who is anyone in this sport has just gotten worse and worse.

The training logs just record race preparation each year, with the result being a slower time than the year before.

ranger

[Byron Drachman]

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

Yes, I saw that and it made me smile. It is an above average example of trolling. Here is the quote:

Training yourself to row a lwt 6:16 at 60 is a bit different from training yourself do a homework assignment or write a five-paragraph essay that is due at a given date.

It is a bit more like training yourself to write a great epic poem or find a cure for cancer.

What a nice way to start the day: some light humor from our hero and a pleasant 21K OTW.

[Fred]

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

Not at all true. After a _very_ short time, everyone who is anyone in this sport has just gotten worse and worse.
The training logs just record race preparation each year, with the result being a slower time than the year before.
ranger

again, you are proving my point for me by completely avoiding the point I made in favor of a completely unrelated one I did not assert. Your post is an example of a Straw Man and is a logical fallacy.

Your original assertion was that recording your results (time/distance) caused people to go all out in every session.
Your post above merely states the reality that as a person over 30 ages their times typically increase (there are some exceptions, but that's what generally happens as world record times across age categories demonstrate).

again, your mind is attempting to protect you from the irrationality of your position.

[Tinpusher]

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.

Clear to whom? We don't see any clarity at all. Just bluster and vagary.

[JohnBove]

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

You never beat Roy in competition. Every time you raced he kicked your ass. You puddle of puke.

[Citroen]

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

He's edited it out now.

[Citroen]

After a _very_ short time, everyone who is anyone in this sport has just gotten worse and worse.

The crux of that being "EVERYONE" includes you. Your decline from your HWT 6:41 last year to glory LWT 7:02 this year has been much larger and more marked than most of the population.

[ranger]

Your original assertion was that recording your results (time/distance) caused people to go all out in every session

No.

I made two points.

My first point is that a concentration on time over distance rowed makes people go too hard too often, which leads to injury, staleness, sickness, and disappointment.

These are end-games. If you get injured, stale, sick, or disappointed, you can't row at all.

My second point is that a focus on time over distance rowed leads to a concentration on things that just make you get worse and worse.

This doesn't have anything to do with aging.

It has to do with developing your potential as a rower--or not.

It has to do with slow, cumulative, permanent, long-term gains vs. short-lived gains that result from short-term expediencies.

It is fine to concentrate on time over distance rowed when you are preparing to race and/or racing.

But at all other times, it's irrelevant.

When you are preparing to race, and/or racing, your training is over.

You have no more opportunities to get better.

Race preparation and/or racing never made anyone better.

ranger

[ranger]

Fred--

Yes.

This forum is riddled with testimonies of people who have become injured, stale, sick, and/or disappointed--and so have quit the sport entirely.

Almost everyone I knew who was rowing ten years ago in a prominent way is no longer rowing--and for just these reasons.

Some of the injuries have been serious indeed.

Some of the sicknesses have been dire.

Some of the staleness has been permanent.

Some of the disappointment has been very, very deep.

Training that results so often and so predictably in endgames of this sort is a serious misunderstanding and misuse of sport.

ranger

[snowleopard]

This forum is riddled with testimonies of people who have become injured, stale, sick, and/or disappointed--and so have quit the sport entirely.

ranger,

This thread is a testament to your sickness

[Carl Watts]

So bizzare, thousands of posts on "Training" and not a shread of evidence of a result to reflect the training.

Why not just get over it and move on, your a good Erger for your age but not the best, even if you were doesn't the thought ever cross your mind that there is someone better out there, just that they have never got on an Erg or even know what one is ? I mean you only did so well by pure chance, you admitted "Rowing badly" using just your maximal fitness.

Any result that gets you across the finish line is better than posting no result.If you gave it your all you should be happy with yourself. It doesn't mean you have to be any less compeditive, just gracious in defeat.

This is a great forum and the advice offered that is backed up by actual performances by some poeple is truly inspiring, long may it continue.

[ausrwr]

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.

A bit of snippage, but it's validating to see that Rich is returning to his roots. My projection for the next few months:

Having said ad infinitum that low-drag (95) is the way to go, Rich will now say that it has taught him to move fast and with rhythm, and it's time to use his strengths and increase the drag.

The return to anchor-hauling is not far away. The return to posting anything other than one stroke screenshots is somewhat further away.

Let's be honest here: you were never anything other than an anchor hauler; You haven't taught yourself a new way of rowing; And you'll never get anywhere near a 6:16 lwt without Rohypnol.

[Rockin Roland]

This forum is riddled with testimonies of people who have become injured, stale, sick, and/or disappointed--and so have quit the sport entirely.

Almost everyone I knew who was rowing ten years ago in a prominent way is no longer rowing--and for just these reasons.

Some of the injuries have been serious indeed.

Some of the sicknesses have been dire.

Some of the staleness has been permanent.

Some of the disappointment has been very, very deep.

ranger

This is so true of the sport of indoor rowing. However this is no fault of the rower but more to do with the equipment being used. The stationary C2 erg. It's a boring piece of exercise equipment which after all the effort you put in during the workout your still in the same spot as when you started. It goes nowhere.

All you have to show after the workout is a set of numbers that you'd been chasing during the workout on a mind bending monitor. Yet it's very hard on your body and mind and causes frequent injuries.

The people that have left the sport have eventually realised that there are better ways of getting the same fitness benefits without the same problems. Hence they moved on.

Ranger, you however are still thrashing around on the same piece of junk and going backwards. Time you moved on also.