Dragging out the 16-week plan

[SlickC2]

I'm half way working through a 16-week rowing company plan and balking at the thought of doing the next stage which takes my heart rate to its max. The fear comes from a heart murmur I have (checked to be benign) and fear of a stroke - the brain damage kind - (there's a family history of these). I'm also thinking that the change from an endurance oriented first half to a strength oriented second half is rather abrupt. I'm wondering if I should repeat the first half with higher damper settings as a way of building strength for the second phase.

The thinking (which may be wayward!) goes something like: The training program concentrates on heart rate zones, intervals and there is a suggested spm for the heart rate zones. But, there is no mention of damper/drag settings. I think that is taken as implicit in the heart zones and suggested spm. And, the accepted wisdom is a drag factor of something around 120. It is also well accepted I think that the higher damper settings are for strength training and the lower for endurance, so what I'm thinking is that I would repeat the first half of the RC plan with a higher damper setting (rather than risk going directly to the higher heart zones in the second half of the RC plan). I've tried this over the past couple of weeks and found that with a gradually increasing damper setting (currently on 9 and a drag factor of some 188-190) it is more difficult to achieve the same times and I'm having to work harder. But I think that is ok as over time I'm sure my strength and times will improve. I'm also more consistently getting into the higher heart zones without pushing it to the extreme.

What this suggests is that there should be a transition in the RC plan, perhaps based on high drag (with appropriate spm) to help build up strength after the endurance phase?

So far I've managed to shave off about 15s from my 2k time (originally 8:40), and hey I'm still alive so that's a bonus! I've yet to go all out for a 500m time (again for fear of a stroke) but I'm managing to get down to 2:02 when I first start to do a 5-10min warmup (not sure why I do this but I also aim to get under 8:40 during the warmup). I know my endurance is getting much better as I can maintain a 2:10 pace for 20min. So, I think working longer at the higher drag is a good strategy for me than trying to go flat out for shorter periods.

Cheers

[Cyclingman1]

Having done a RC plan, I agree that there is a decided shift to TR and AN work about half way through. Presumably the previous UT and AT work has been preparation. There are wide ranges in pacing for the faster efforts. You can stay on the high (slower) side of those numbers. Also, the shift from drag factor of 120 to 190 seems extreme. I would think 150 is more reasonable.

All rowing plans are one-size-fits-all to some degree. If you want to repeat the first half to accommodate your particular needs, there is nothing wrong with that.

[Cyclist2]

I don't see a "suggested spm" or drag factor for the heart rate zones in the 16 week RC 2000m program, I do see a suggested PACE. You can keep a pace with any spm or drag factor. Strokes per minute or drag factor have little bearing on anything except how you feel. I again go back to the bicycle analogy of getting up the hill spinning (high spm) in a low gear or powering up (low spm) in a high gear. You get to the top either way; it's just how you feel doing it. I suggest you find a drag factor that feels "comfortable" to you (most like it around 120-130) and then concentrate on the suggested PACES. For these kinds of workouts I haven't changed the drag factor on my machine for months and I can go fast, slow, hard, easy, low spm, high spm. It's all about how much power you put into each stroke that makes the difference - YOU decide how hard a workout you want; at any drag factor or spm.

[SlickC2]

Jim: I have experimented with differing drags and my "optimum" seems to be about 130. I'm gradually increasing the drag to the point where 190 or so seems to be about the hardest level I can tolerate in doing the first half of the RC plan. It's certainly a lot tougher doing the exercises at 190 than 120.

Mark: Yes you are right that the plan has a suggested Pace. The RC website also has a suggested spm for the different heart zones (see: http://therowingcompany.com/training/gu ... ning_bands).

What I'm trying to achieve is to build up strength and I also agree that there are many ways of doing this. I'm not trying to achieve a given pace or time as the prime motivation (although this would be the ultimate motivation). And, I'm prepared for my times to be off with the higher drag settings in order to build up strength. The cycling analogy is a good one: vary spm for a given gear or vary gears for a given spm - and achieve the same goal/pace. And yes, there is a difference in how I "feel" and the efficiency of energy expenditure. I'm deliberately trying to maximise the pain, and I presume degrade the efficiency, in order to build up strength. I'm remember in my younger days going uphill on a heavy single gear bike and it was a lot more painful than the modern bikes. I think I have the endurance from doing the first half of the plan but the second half requires both endurance and strength - I don't think I have the strength as yet. So, all I'm trying to do is build up strength (and hopefully keep improving endurance in the process) by increasing the drag rather than trying to attain a fast pace.

I guess I'm of the thinking that you have to push yourself beyond your comfort zone in order to improve. But, there is also a risk in me going faster (higher heart rates) so I'd rather push myself in working harder rather than faster. Does this make sense, or am I better off to do weight training rather than yanking the machine at a high drag setting?

Cheers

[hjs]

If you increese the drag and keep the pace alike you are not building strenght. Pace is always number one.

At higher drag, without changing the pace, you simply mke the stroke last longer. What does build strenght is lowering the rate, while keeping the pace the same. This way you have to generate more power per stroke.

Doing short fast pieces also makes you stronger. For instance do 10 stroke faster pieces and paddle inbetween.

I also don,t get what is wrong with getting your heartrate up. Without overdoing it, our heart is build to work both easy and harder. You certainly won,t drop dead all of a sudden. If you feel uncertain about that, go see a doctor and get your heart checked out.

[Blood And Sweat]

Hi -if you have concerns you should get your-good-self professionally assessed. Really. I mean it. By cardiologist stress test.

There is nothing wrong with heart rate controlled training. The hours spent may not give the best possible reduction in your 2 km time but your general health, strength of lower back and endurance will all improve. Your time for 10km will improve. I did this for 6 months a few years ago when recovering from a long period of illness. As I felt better I would work harder and let heart rate climb another 5 beats per min in the session. It worked a treat, as not only was I in poor condition aerobically but just about every blessed part of me had wasted away from a year in bed and I needed the time to get some normal muscles back.
And it still really mean it - get a checkup and then there will be one less thing to worry about
David.

[Edward4492]

I'm a relative new-comer to rowing (actually erging, no boat for me) but have been a bicycle road racer for 10 years.As a point of reference my PR on the erg is 7:13.8, done at what would be considered a very low drag factor (100) and a 32 SR; at age 57, 160lbs. I'm into my third week on the rojabo plan which I started right after CRASH B's and I'm really liking it. It's all wattage based and controlled stroke rate. Like the previous poster said, lowering the SR and maintaining the same pace or power requires a harder stroke. I find it's teaching me to find better techniques to get a harder pull (for lack of a better description) so I can get through the work-outs. I also started the program with a slightly heavier drag factor of 110. I can't fathom pulling at a 180- 190. Not to name drop or speak for someone else, but I believe Mike Caviston is a huge advocate for longish, low rate work-outs and I'm starting to see why. I'm not monitoring heart rate (yet); even on the bike I always figured all that mattered was how fast ya can go and how long ya can last. And I guess that's the big question....what works best? I'll put up the results of my next 2k in another coupla weeks to see if I'm making any progress. Next big target is sub-7min.

[Bob S.]

The Wolverine Plan, as devised by Mike Caviston, is regarded by many elite OTW rowers as the best training plan available. It differs from most other plans in that the core of the plan is in the L-4 sessions, which emphasize control of rates and paces, generally at relatively low rates. However, the plan is much broader than that in that it includes plenty of work at higher rates and lower paces in the L-1, L-2, and L-3 sessions.

Bob S.

[SlickC2]

Many thanks for all the advice which I've tried to implement. I've dropped back the drag to about 120 and found that I can now get a faster pace but I'm tending to "fly and die" rather than maintain a good pace consistently. In fact, my pace over 20mins is worse off than at drag=190. I suspect my times would improve if I wasn't so over-reaching at the beginning.

I have seen a cardiologist who has diagnosed the heart murmur as being benign (but there was still some "leakage"). I'm limiting my max heat rate to about 5bpm less than the theoretical to allow for this.

Bob: I've checked out the Wolverine Plan. I like the mix and focus on pace rather than heart rate zones, and the need for consistency - I think this has been my biggest error in training so far (going out fast and dying in the later stages or not being able to recover during the paddling intervals). I have the spreadsheet for the Wolverine Plan but the slowest 2K Pace listed (in the drop down list in the Table worksheet) is 2:00. Is there a spreadsheet with slower paces? I'm down at 2:10 at the moment. I think I can rework the speadsheet but I'm hoping that someone has done this already?

Cheers

[gregsmith01748]

I have the spreadsheet for the Wolverine Plan but the slowest 2K Pace listed (in the drop down list in the Table worksheet) is 2:00. Is there a spreadsheet with slower paces? I'm down at 2:10 at the moment. I think I can rework the speadsheet but I'm hoping that someone has done this already?

Cheers

Here's the link to the PDF with the whole plan. There is a table at the end with 2K paces 2:30.

http://www.concept2.com/files/pdf/us/tr ... nePlan.pdf

[SlickC2]

Thanks Greg. I managed to get the Data replaced so it now extends the times by 10 seconds out to 2:10. It was a bit fiddly getting the data from the PDF into Excel via Word but it all works now I think.

Did my first Wolverine workout yesterday: an "Easy" Level 4 4x3k:3m'rest. Did the first 3K at 2:08 pace, paddled for 3 mins and did the next 3k at 2:10 and felt like giving up after the end of that. Kept going at about 2:13 for the next 2 but the butt started to feel numb after the 3rd and the 4th was sheer hard work. Not my idea of "Easy" so I'm dreading what "Hard" must be like! I do have a firm sponge padding on the seat plus sheepkins so I think it may be best if I just got up and walked around at the intervals rather than continuing to paddle away? I did have a great sleep though, so it was worth the effort.

Even though both the Rowing Company and Wolverine plans are geared towards racing, I think the W plan seems more suited to those like me who are mainly interested in building up fitness and endurance. These comments may be premature as I have yet to do any of the other Levels in the W plan!

Cheers

[hjs]

Thanks Greg. I managed to get the Data replaced so it now extends the times by 10 seconds out to 2:10. It was a bit fiddly getting the data from the PDF into Excel via Word but it all works now I think.

Did my first Wolverine workout yesterday: an "Easy" Level 4 4x3k:3m'rest. Did the first 3K at 2:08 pace, paddled for 3 mins and did the next 3k at 2:10 and felt like giving up after the end of that. Kept going at about 2:13 for the next 2 but the butt started to feel numb after the 3rd and the 4th was sheer hard work. Not my idea of "Easy" so I'm dreading what "Hard" must be like! I do have a firm sponge padding on the seat plus sheepkins so I think it may be best if I just got up and walked around at the intervals rather than continuing to paddle away? I did have a great sleep though, so it was worth the effort.

Even though both the Rowing Company and Wolverine plans are geared towards racing, I think the W plan seems more suited to those like me who are mainly interested in building up fitness and endurance. These comments may be premature as I have yet to do any of the other Levels in the W plan!

Cheers

There is nothing easy about this plan, given the way you now train it will not suit your needs, but ofcourse you pick stuff you like about it.
Level 4 sessions do have rate changes, depending on what you choose often per 2 minutes. Say rate 16/18/20/18/16 with exact paces to use. Looking at what you did you that wrong. You don,t talk about rates and did not keep a steady pace

L1 is 2k race pace alike
L2 is roughly 5 race pace alike
L3 is long continues
L4 is rates changes

Al training is based on your real 2k pace.

[Cyclingman1]

The Wolverine plan comes right out of the OTW rowing world, the author of the plan being a college-level rowing coach. I don't doubt that it may be of benefit to ergers, not interested in OTW water rowing, but, nontheless, the plan seems inordinately difficult, especially the entire L4 part of it with its emphais on precise rates. In addition, the plan prescribes a huge volume of work. One wonders if what is suitable for the 18-21 rowing team crowd is really best for the older, recreational athlete.

[SlickC2]

I'm learning the hard way that the W Plan is not as easy as it might seem, particularly the consistency aspect! And, the training is quite long and challenging to boot.

I did a Level 4 4x10':r3'20" today (yesterday's piece was a Level 3 - not 4) to see if I could maintain an even pace and not go silly at the start. I managed to keep the first 3 rows at about 2:09 pace with an spm of 23-26 (drag of about 125). It was all going well till near the end of the 3rd piece when I had to play catch-up to maintain what seemed like a slight drop in pace. On the 4th piece, my pace deterioated to 2:13. I did try to ramp up and down every two minutes but found the whole process hard to control. I do like the discipline it demands but I think it will take me a few weeks (or months!) to maintain consistency throughout each exercise.

Cheers

[hjs]

I'm learning the hard way that the W Plan is not as easy as it might seem, particularly the consistency aspect! And, the training is quite long and challenging to boot.

I did a Level 4 4x10':r3'20" today (yesterday's piece was a Level 3 - not 4) to see if I could maintain an even pace and not go silly at the start. I managed to keep the first 3 rows at about 2:09 pace with an spm of 23-26 (drag of about 125). It was all going well till near the end of the 3rd piece when I had to play catch-up to maintain what seemed like a slight drop in pace. On the 4th piece, my pace deterioated to 2:13. I did try to ramp up and down every two minutes but found the whole process hard to control. I do like the discipline it demands but I think it will take me a few weeks (or months!) to maintain consistency throughout each exercise.

Cheers

Level 4 is low rate, starting at 16/18 spm. So if you used 23/26 you did not read up the explanation. Number one is rate, pace comes second.
Trainingwise is had its effect ofcourse, but strictly speaking this was not close to a l4 row, at best l3.