How to go about achieving a personal best

[rhyszoe]

I am one of the old stagers (65 years old) on this site, but am still interested in improving my performance. With the handle in my hand, I find it hard not to go all out! Being a stayer rather than a sprinter, I concentrate on 5000 metres, 30 minutes, 10,000 metres and 1 hour. Whether I try to improve on a personal best depends on how I am feeling at the time once I get going; the temperature and humidity on the day also has a bearing on it. It occured to me that I may be able to improve by putting more method into my madness!
Should I start slower and try to build up the speed as I go, or should I set myself the average speed required and try and hang in there for the distance or time? Should I set myself a rating and stick to it for the duration, or should I increase it over time and finish with a sprint? And how often should I go about trying to set a personal best in any event?
I am not unhappy at all with the progress I am making, but have learnt over 65 years that there is always some one out there who knows more about it than me!
Any thoughts?

[jamesg]

Short term, it's pacing will give you most advantage. What pacing scheme though, has to be found by trial and error; but we know already that too fast out of the traps is a killer. Warmup can also be critical, but for longer pieces a slow 5 minutes is enough, or even just moving off at a slightly lower pace. Whether to squeeze ourselves at the finish or not depends on how we feel, but at a guess I'd think most tend to start whipping the horse at about a third or a quarter distance from the finish; where whipping may only mean upping the rating by 1 or 2. Then in the last minute we'll try to see what our current max HR is, so as to make the next trial even worse.

Long term, technique and using it, where technique means getting as much muscle as possible to do the necessary work; I was surprised to see recently that using less muscle, to produce the same amount of power, elicits a higher heart rate; so distributing the work over more muscle could be sustainable for longer, at the same power level. In the end this will mean full use of the legs.

Three to six months between attempts; shorter won't show much, unless starting from unfit. However this does not mean most work can be slack; every single stroke has to be a personal best.

[Atorrante]

I think James has give you a best answer to your question. The only think I can add is that the effort that will give you best time results must be at the gross middle of the piece, not at the beginning neither at the end, and it's all about pacing yourself and stay focused.

[Cyclingman1]

It is quite interesting that this topic appears again very soon after "Realistic improvement in older athletes," which is on the first page of the TRAINING category.
I might suggest that a perusal of that topic may be interesting because the subject, namely me, was 65, now 66, and desiring to improve 2K time.

I completely agree that many factors impact immediate performance: how one is feeling, rest, humidity, temperature, etc. And then stragegy. I know that I am still messing with Drag Factor. I see StrokesPerMinute discussed a lot. I don't really target SPM. I aim for a pace/500m based on what I know I can do and what I'm trying to do. I try to pull hard enough, often enough to achieve the desired result. All rowers learn that going too fast at the start is a prescription for dying half way through any distance. It is a balancing act.

The entire subject of how often and how to try to peak is pretty involved. It is hard to resist trying to get PB's. I think a beginner can get away with trying PB's frequently, because they are on an improvement curve. I'm certain that veterans peak and then resume a training phase that targets a peak months down the road. It would be counterproductive to force a peak try.

The poster did not indicate how long he has been rowing. If only for a short time, I am amazed that 10K and 1 hour rows are being done. I have yet to do either one in my quest for improvement.

[Bob S.]

From the perspective of 87yo, I must say that you have to face the fact that there comes a time when you run out of significant improvement options and the effect of aging inevitably brings you down hill. Beginners can improve rapidly by learning to use the erg more efficiently and those who have been inactive can make big improvements by just becoming more fit. For myself, I had many years of rowing experience, but was weak as a kitten after an aortic valve replacement and triple CABG in July of 2003. For the next 4-5 years I was having a great time picking up PBs and a few WRs along the way. No PBs in the 2k, 30', and 60', since those were done 12 years before that, but I had not done the events that have been added to the ranking since then, 500m, 1k, 5k, 6k, 10k, HM, and FM. These were all new.

But in the last 4 years, I can see a very steep decline, not just on the erg, but in all other physical activities as well. My normal walking pace has dropped from a brisk 4mph to less than 3 (with canes to transfer some of the load to my upper body) and it is increasingly painful in the knees, hips and spine. There is no reversal of age deterioration. If you are unskilled and/or unfit, yes, you can improve, but there is a limit.

Bob S.

[Carl Watts]

Temperture and humidity has a big effect and it pay's not to try doing PB's close together as you need plenty of time off between to resume just the normal training and recovery, thats about all I would add to the above.

[mikvan52]

Writing from a background of having been fit my entire life, and also still wanting to improve, I like to make the following suggestion. I kind of goes along with what Bob S is saying...

Try to get better on a percentile basis in your age/weight group... <<
This being said, never give up... The alternative is only more pain and unhappiness with one's lot as the years go by...

My grandfather instilled this in me... When I was teen he could walk me into the ground.... It made a huge impression on me... The man was incredibly tough and resilient... to the end.

As for improving at distance events on the erg as a veteran.

My approach now at age 59 is to find out the level where I can train without wearing myself out... I did this with a blood lactate test ($100 cost in the US) Now, for example, I know that at 135 bpm I'm at 2 millimols concentration and will not overtrain if I do 40-80min of steady state rowing.... Something that is great for building stamina for the distances you've chosen. Why guess or estimate? Know your personal chemistry... It's well worth your while

My chosen distance is now 5k OTW or roughly 20' of peak effort.... So, I'm a "distance/mid-distance" guy too. I'll even be going after the WR at 60' lwt in a few months...

My feeling about putting together an optimum training program for distance is that it has to be varied and most probably designed by an expert... of which there are many...
Veterans tend to sharpen too much for the amt. of aerobic power they've developed....
If the 2k is 80% aerobic power then how much aerobic power is associated with 14-17k (the hour row) ... It's a whole lot.

The great news is that the more we are at it without "over-kill" the better we'll perform against the "quick results"-minded guys...

Incredibly boring... but true...

I'm in my 42nd year of rowing.... (&/or long distance running)... I've seen how the greats have stayed that way through the years... I've studied their training programs ... which can be improved (yes) but (!) look at what they've achieved with what they devoted themselves too... Xeno Muller Is one: ( = Olympic Record at 2k OTW in Atlanta ) Tom Bohrer is another (= super fast 2500 meters at WIRC plus two Olympic Silver Medals in Seoul and Barcelona)

For us, with fading physical attributes, we can listen to the guys who've "been there and done that" like Xeno and Tom and Pete Marston and Mike Caviston... We don't need to be testing new stuff... That can be reserved for the up and coming guys.....

[NavigationHazard]

Actually I disagree with your last sentence. The overwhelming bulk of the rowing-specific studies that have been done has involved prime-aged male athletes. Readily available training plans invariably reflect this bias. However there's good reason to think that rowers a bit further on in life may need different strategies. But what those might be is right now more in the realm of individualized anecdote than of systematic program....

[Bob S.]

Actually I disagree with your last sentence. The overwhelming bulk of the rowing-specific studies that have been done has involved prime-aged male athletes. Readily available training plans invariably reflect this bias. However there's good reason to think that rowers a bit further on in life may need different strategies. But what those might be is right now more in the realm of individualized anecdote than of systematic program....

An important point, Nav. I really have the feeling of being in the wilderness on this. What should I expect of myself? I would bet that not even the gerontology experts can provide good answers to this. A further complication, of course, is that I can't get a good measure of what I can do at sea level competition, based on my results here at 4,000ft.

Bob S.

[Cyclingman1]

A lot of "older" guys may have a competitive background, if not in rowing, in some other sport. Sure, it is nice to win - do well. But it would seem that health and fitness may be more important, especially for the older.

What it takes to be fit and healthy should perhaps lead the discussion as far as training, pace, amount of training, etc.

There are plenty of people who run 50 miles and more a week. That may well be required to compete. But it is well known that health and fitness is achieved in the neighborhood of around 15 miles a week. I dare say the same applies to rowing. I would really wonder how better one is off when rowing meters passes say 25-28K a week. That is two 5K's, a 10K, and a 30 min. Not a bad week for most of us. I dare say one is only incrementally fitter when rowing 100K on up a week.

[mikvan52]

"there's good reason to think that rowers a bit further on in life may need different strategies"

I agree with this thought... (above) in most ways...

I guess my point is that not all, but much, of what guided athletes to greatness 10-15 years ago is wholly adequate for those of us who can no longer train at similar intensities and volumes....
But how do we pick and choose what is appropriate?

People like Bob S. can help temper the overzealous and over intense programs geared for younger men. He has seen what it takes along the way.

When it comes to basic principles such as : "should I row longer easy distances in the Utilization Zone in order to get ready for long distance rowing rather than concentrating on speed work most of the time?", why become a maverick at age 60?
My suggestion is to do the same types of workouts that younger successful men used to do AND do fewer of them per week rather than getting a lathered up about "the latest flavor"...

It's not very complicated for older men to be competitive.. We have lots of extra time to decide what we should to do next because of our need for so much recovery time between workouts
I feel that the general framework becomes pretty easy to comprehend as we each know what works for us individually over time. Old bodies do not like intense radical change.

[bepah]

After all of this discussion, it seems to me that we may be talking at cross purposes. Your personal best will come only if you are training to increase your performance at a specific distance. Many people will not 'train' using the erg, but use it for their general conditioning, as a means to slow the aging progress, or other aims.

Of course, many people, new to using the erg, will want to see improvements. This is done either by being able to row faster (hence the PB discussion) or longer (we can ignore the ultra-distance records except for those folks who have way too much time on their hands ).

When using the erg for general fitness, 30 minutes a day or so would be adequate, according to many people I have spoken with. When training for PBs, records, and the like, you cannot expect to compete with those who will go to the ends by training for 30 minutes a day. It is the extra work that one must do in order compete at elite levels.

The laziest elite athlet I can remember was Greg LeMond who kept fit in the off-season but trained for the Tour de France by racing in the Giro Italia...which he rarely won.

As to PBs for us over 60, annual PBs might be the way to approach it unless you are willing and able to do the work that elite rowers do as a matter of course. I would like to get my 2K back under 8:00 and expect to do so sometime this year, but have no aspirations for my all time best of 6:55 done in my late 30's. I am comfortable to use the erg to reduce and keep off the weight, lower the blood sugar, cholesterol, triglicerides, and, perhaps, allow me to stop taking blood pressure meds.

If I race, it will be for the joy of competition, maybe just to avoid being last in the race. I feel good after the row and I have more strength through the day.

I post all of my rows and use it as a tool for improving my times (yup, PBs) and showing progress. Even though I am not aiming to compete, I do row over 50,000 meters a week and do not think it is excessive, but what I need to improve my health, clear my mind, and complete my day. A couple of hours is used to complete the workouts (this includes the workout, cooldown, erg maintenance - it is wiped down daily, shower and go).

To sum up, everyone has their own end when using the erg; probably no two people are exactly alike.

[Bob S.]

I challenge the idea that 30 minutes a day is enough - 40, yes, and more does not hurt. It was in the Fall of 2003, just a couple of months after major open heart surgery. I went to a physician about hoarseness which turned out to be a case of GERD aggravated by the tubes used in my throat for the surgery. At the time he also advised me that I should be getting at least 30' of exercise a day with my heart rate "in the zone" which he specified to be 80-90% of max. Since it takes 5-6 minutes at any reasonable pace to get into the zone, I figure that a bare 30' total is not enough. He said at the time that this advice was based on a recent (i.e.2003 or earlier) research report that found that one needed at least 30 continuous minutes in the zone to strengthen the cardiovascular system. I was skeptical and checked with a couple of other sources, including my daughter, who is a physician, and got it confirmed. Later I heard that a follow up on that research established that there was additional improvement on up to 60 continuous minutes.

I considered that a warmup might be enough to do this, but I found that after I finished a warm up and got the main workout started, my HR had dropped way out of the zone and still took some time to get back into it. My solution to this was to switch to AIOs (all-in ones) - not the revealing rowing kits that a lot of Brits seem to favor, but a continuous 40' workout in which I do 5' of buildup which gets me up into the zone, 30' of 20spm at a pace that will keep me well in the zone, and 5' of cool down. My HR stays in the zone through most of the cool down, so I am sure of getting at least 30' in it. I was also doing occasional longer middle sessions giving me some total workouts of 50' and 60'. I alternated this with fast paced hikes with slight elevation gain and a couple of days a week on a tread mill at a local fitness center. In all of these, the goal was to get at least 30' of exercise with my HR in the zone. As can be seen in the records, this program worked very well. !8 months to the day after the operation, I entered a competition and qualified for the free Boston trip.

After that it sort of went to hell. I got hooked on getting back into competition again and going to erg PBs and WRs and all that stuff, so I was into erg competition training instead of just conditioning and post-op cardio rehab. I still tried to get 30' in the zone each day, but a lot of competition training is not consistent with this. Today I did a Pete Plan workout that is a good example of this - a pyramid interval, 250m, 500m, 750m, 1k, 750m, 500m, and 250m, with rests of about double the time for each interval. For me that meant 2', 4', 6', 8', 6', 4', and finish with a 12' cool down. I also did a 12' warm up before the main workout. No doubt it was a good workout and on the 250m and 500m my pace was far under my current 2k pace and the recommendation just said <2k. My rests were active at 12spm and a very easy pace. What pace I couldn't tell. I was using RowPro variable intervals and during the rests the only information I got was time from the computer and HR on the erg monitor. Needless to say, I was never in the zone for long for any one interval - only about a minute into the rest parts. So no continuous 30' in the zone.

In the last couple of years, I have also given up the daily bit. I stuck with it until I could bag the 85+ category (categlory?) 2k WRs, but for the 2 following seasons I have not been doing any serious training and I dropped to erging every other day last season and every third day for this one. I haven't been back to the fitness center for quite some time now, and my walking has slowed to the point where it can no longer get me into the zone, even with canes to take some of the strain off the leg joints. All this probably means that I am no longer get the cardiovascular exercise that I should be getting. I have my annual cardio appointment tomorrow, so I may find out just how much that has gone downhill. The most obvious bodily deterioration is in my knees, hips, spine, and eyesight (Mac-D).

Bob S.

[bepah]

Bob,

The 30 minute number I threw out is just a number I have heard from my cardiac nurses at the VA. Their experience with the vets is that they are lucky if they can get some of these gents to do 30 minutes a month. If I do 30 minutes, I do not feel like I have done enough......the 10Ks I am doing for March Madness are goo and I will attempts a 1/2 marathons for the final row.

Aerobic fitness takes a lot of time to develop, especially if you are on the erg....just my random thoughts and opinions.....

[Bob S.]

Bob,

The 30 minute number I threw out is just a number I have heard from my cardiac nurses at the VA.

My comments were based on this quote:

That is two 5K's, a 10K, and a 30 min. Not a bad week for most of us. I dare say one is only incrementally fitter when rowing 100K on up a week.

The 10k was the only one of those that would get most anyone in the zone for 30 continuous minutes. Cyclingman1 and I obviously have completely opposing views regarding long distance stuff. My own view is based partly on that research work that I referred to in that post, partly on my old uni coach's program of lots of long rows mid-season, and, for a big part, on my own bias toward doing long rows, which I like and are what I do best. Checking the rankings, it looks as if there are only 4 of us octogenarians crazy enough to complete and rank full marathons on the erg. No, I didn't do those for fun. It was for competition in the nonathlon and picking up WRs. Up to a half marathon is fun. The FM on the erg is just pain.

Bob S.

My unfulfilled dream was to do a major ocean row. To me, that is what real rowing is all about - not this skinny boat stuff and indoor mechanical gadgets.