Realistic improvement in older athletes?

[Cyclingman1]

I am the lab rat. 45 min is a 10K row at 2:15/500m. I could see maybe a 40 min 10K.

[Robert Wildes]

Cyclingman1 I would think that a 40 minute 10K would be pretty easy for you.

Your numbers are superior to mine and I am 7 or so years younger so will offer
no advice to you. I am guessing that you have a pretty extensive aerobic background
from cycling that might be partially responsible for your excellent times, particularly
for a relative newcomer to erging.

My guess is that Xeno Mueller is not familiar with Mike Caviston. I do not think he would
have singled Mike out had he known of Mike's resume.

[hjs]

I am the lab rat. 45 min is a 10K row at 2:15/500m. I could see maybe a 40 min 10K.

147 5k so 151 ish for the 10k is possible, 2.00 you can do including few coffee breaks

[rjw]

I am the lab rat. 45 min is a 10K row at 2:15/500m. I could see maybe a 40 min 10K.

147 5k so 151 ish for the 10k is possible, 2.00 you can do including few coffee breaks

That is true but I am not advocating 45' at 2:15 - way too slow for you. I would suggest 45' at a firm pace around 1:51ish as Henry has suggested.

I also like the 5k sessions that you do. A suggestion would be to lengthen them a bit each week - say, to 20', then 6k and so on up to maybe 30' while keeping the intensity.

[Cyclingman1]

All good advice gentlemen. Yes, 2min/500m might be a bit of a cakewalk. I doubt if I could do it. I would look up and it would be 1:49.

[Nosmo]

I just brought that subject up because a large percentage of commenters seem to think that mega-mileage is the end all, be all of training.

really? None of us as far as I know are saying you don't need intense intervals, just that you do better in the long run with distance also.

I'm just saying don't put too much emphasis on textbook, picture-perfect style. Results do count.

Same thing happens in rowing, I know this very well. If you want to ignore technique fine, but any bad habits are very hard to correct (I speak from experience). If you want to get the WR by working hard fine you can do it, but you probably would have it by now if you were willing to post videos of your rowing, ask advice and think.

[mikvan52]

I have yet to even do one 10K. I don't see a platueau looming. It takes time to develop strength. I do feel that my 250, 500, and 1000 m rows will and are giving me the capacity to row faster in longer rows - 2K, 5K, and 30 min. I'm not prepared to say where that will end. I am quite confident that I'm going to blow right through the world's best time for 65+ 2K and then my sights will be on 60+ best times.

Do I misunderstand the meaning of "sights .. on 60+ "
Interesting:
.
Paul Hendershott's 60-64 record will be hard to beat by anyone over 65...(IOW: unprecedented)

Hint: Don't look at arithmetic values (difference in seconds) but rather factors that involve the real physical world's exponential influence (watts).
1:40.5 pace vs 1:35.75 pace is best appreciated by the avg power percentage difference in watts rather than the mere number of seconds difference...

A 6:42 2k vs Hendershott's 60-64 hwt WR involves

a diff. in seconds: 4.75 seconds / 100.5 sec = 4-5 %

but a diff. in watts: 345 vs 399w = 44/345 = 12.7%

What I am saying here is that to get 5% faster requires 12.7% more power... Do highly trained 66+ year olds get 12.7 % more powerful....?

I've harped on this elsewhere.
All this being said: Great job with your rowing!

Record junkies, like myself, are also aware of the presence of one (6:18.6) Dick Cashin will turn 60 in 2014....

[mikvan52]

Comment on Xeno and Caviston...
Both these guys have performed great services tot he sport as coaches... I've watched this for years...

I should let Xeno describe torque ... but I believe he means that most erg rowers don't use high enough drag factor combined with being unable to coordinate the use of the large muscle groups int he body to produce this torque....

I witnessed Caviston warming up at Boston this year... I see him as being on his way back having concentrated on work elsewhere...
Caviston and Siebach were a pleasure to behold going head-to-head... "in the day" (both in their 40's)

I am currently using Xeno's help to raise my game OTW...

[Cyclingman1]

Mikvan,

I guess the tone of my posts might be throwing you off a bit. I am actually quite impressed with Hendershott’s 6:23. It just so happens to be the next time after the 65+ record. I doubt very seriously if I can get below 6:30. I’m having a hard enough time trying to get to 6:40. I have not placed any bets on getting there. I feel the pain on the third 500m every time I row a fast 2K.

Re: predicting future times based on younger times. With veteran rowers, I wonder if there is room to reduce times. I suspect that the times just keep drifting up. It will be interesting to see if 6:18 at age 58 translates into below 6:23 at age 60.

Re: being optimistic. There was a poster today in a thread that has since disappeared who seriously claimed to have a mission of going from a current 6:42 to 6:16 in 6 weeks. This from a 61 year old man named Ranger.

I have been rowing my 2K’s at around 155 DF, SPM around 32 for what it is worth.

Thanks for the encouragement.

[mikvan52]

Cyclingman:
Great to see a newer person with such talent as you clearly have.
All the best in your ambitions!

[Citroen]

Cyclingman:
Great to see a newer person with such talent as you clearly have.
All the best in your ambitions!

You've not yet warned Mr Grattan to ignore anything and everything that Ranger has ever written (or may write in future) on here.

[Bob S.]

Cyclingman:
Great to see a newer person with such talent as you clearly have.
All the best in your ambitions!

You've not yet warned Mr Grattan to ignore anything and everything that Ranger has ever written (or may write in future) on here.

I sent a PM.

Bob S.

[Cyclingman1]

Ranger seems to be a pretty good rower, although his plans and advice also seem to be either optimistic or strange.
I have no idea what his offense is re concept2 forums. I simply want to keep it all reasonably positive, although criticism of my words and actions is fine.

[Bob S.]

Ranger seems to be a pretty good rower, although his plans and advice also seem to be either optimistic or strange.
I have no idea what his offense is re concept2 forums. I simply want to keep it all reasonably positive, although criticism of my words and actions is fine.

There is no criticism of you intended here. Your responses to that thread were quite appropriate. You showed a healthy degree of skepticism. Re Ranger: His accomplishments several years ago were impressive at the time. His more recent results have been spotty. His claims to the future are most likely just a put on, but have been remarkably effective at stirring up a lot of forum members, especially in the UK.

Bob S.

[Yankeerunner]

Re: being optimistic. There was a poster today in a thread that has since disappeared who seriously claimed to have a mission of going from a current 6:42 to 6:16 in 6 weeks. This from a 61 year old man named Ranger.

Just as an observation, the first time that he predicted an imminent 6:16 was 2003 and seemed to be a snipe at Mike Caviston's 40+ lwt record of 6:18. Since then he has predicted 6:16 'by the end of the season' every season. By 2006 the closest that he came was 6:29.7 as a heavyweight. A couple of years later I think he managed a 6:38 also as a heavyweight, and since then nothing under 6:40. Nothing at all wrong with those times, but nothing close to 6:16 either. And yet he keeps predicting it and keeps trashing other rowers, favorably comparing his fantasy goals to their actual times.

While a 61-year-old going from 6:42 to 6:16 in 6 weeks would indeed be unprecedented, his unfulfilled predictions are not. They have an 8 1/2 year history of consistency.