Us Indoor Rowing Team Selection

[old] ranger · Post by **[old] ranger** » November 24th, 2005, 6:10 am

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(John Rupp @ Nov 23 2005, 06:15 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(ranger @ Nov 23 2005, 02:14 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>I think you are optimistic by a good 5 seconds.[right] </td></tr></table><br /><br />Based on MC's recent 4x 1000 at 1:35 pace, right around 6:20 flat looks quite possible and I wouldn't at all be surprised to see it faster by Boston.<br /><br />I am basing DH's projection on the easy trial with no competition, and that they tend to do the same thing. Yes in this case it might be 5 or 10 seconds too fast but is certainly possible. <br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />Well, if they row 6:20 and 6:35, respectively, they will deserve many congratulations for reversing the recent decline in their rowing with age. This is hard to do for rowers with their experience. It isn't hard to do at all for me, given I have just now learned how to row!<br /><br />Hey, if Mike rows 6:20, he would even come within three seconds or os of equaling the relative quality of my USIRT trial row in 2003 for the team he was selected for! He would come within a couple of seconds of his 40s lwt WR. I broke my record by a second.<br /><br />But it is _really_ coming now!<br /><br />It has taken three years of work, but it's now emerging like a new-born child of the morning.<br /><br />When I am relaxed and get the timing _exactly_ right (legs-back-SUSPEND-legs-arms), especially the fast legs on the fourth beat, I go along at 1:50 @ 18 spm, 1:48 @ 19 spm, 1:46 @ 20 spm, etc. <br /><br />That's my ideal stroke, the limits of my potential (for this sort of rowing).<br /><br />No problem now with technique. Just have to do millions of meters at 18-20 spm. <br /><br />Long-term goal: 30'r20 @ 1:46. That's fitness with low spm rowing for a 6:16 2K.<br /><br />ranger<br />

[old] ranger · Post by **[old] ranger** » November 24th, 2005, 6:16 am

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>I was told by our national coach that in order to row 6:20 you should be able to maintain 300 Watt (1:45) at 22 - 24 spm. I neglected to ask him for how long.<br />I suspect 20 mins. </td></tr></table><br /><br />Yes, that's about right. I now do 1:45 very easily at 24 spm. I suspect that repeating 20'r24 at 1:45 will be a standard UT1 workout for me as the winter goes along.<br /><br />At the moment, though, I think I will do another month or so of 1:50 @ 18 spm. This is what solidifies technique, and my technique is still very new. My stroke still needs as much tempering as I can give it without neglecting other things.<br /><br />1:50 @ 18 spm over long distances, day after day, is _wonderful_ work for a 55-year-old lwt.<br /><br />With my old stroke, I used to do 1:56 @ 18 spm, and even so, only occasionally, and with considerable damage that needed rest for repair.<br /><br />ranger

[old] Thomas · Post by **[old] Thomas** » November 24th, 2005, 7:22 am

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(ranger @ Nov 23 2005, 01:16 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><br />. . . because you have expressed yourself openly a bit too often on this forum and now they (Concept 2) no longer want to associate with you?<br /><br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />Mike is more popular than ever. Concept 2 would only want to encourage him to post in light of his knowledge, work ethic, and rowing success.<br />

[old] Thomas · Post by **[old] Thomas** » November 24th, 2005, 8:04 am

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(PaulS @ Nov 23 2005, 07:16 AM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>Ranger,<br /><br /><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(ranger @ Nov 23 2005, 06:59 AM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><br />Sounds like you are still pissed-off and nay-saying.<br /><br />Oh well. I guess it's hard to change.<br /><br />To each his own.<br /><br />ranger <br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />You are proving your own point, but not about anyone but yourself. Can't you see it?<br /><br />I think you mistake "pissed off" for simply being tired of hearing the SOS that you continue to mutter about.<br /><br />I'll give you an example that could be seen as similar, perhaps you will learn from it.<br />On my Crew in College, there was a M4+ made up of 4 guys from the M8+ and it was pretty damn fast. I got the idea that it would certainly be faster with me in the boat and proceeded to make it clear, through Erg Testing, that I should displace someone from that boat. That didn't seem to work, i.e. the coach kept that boat together. I finally got fed up, and this really went against my instincts, but went right to the coach and told him what I thought should happen. "I should be in the M4+!", his response was somewhat less than favorable. "Maybe, but you're not going to be." I thought, "damn! that went just about how I thought it would.", then I went on and continued to have success with those guys in the 8+, kind of embarassed for being so brash, and hoping that the coach would not mention that moment to the guys, I don't think that he did. I guess in the same situation you would be bad mouthing the coach and the guys in the M4+, in hopes that it would cahnge their minds about something. Guess what, it won't, just as you remain locked into your own destructive mindset while expecting others to be somewhat more benevolent.<br /><br />You also go on about how they should "respect performance" alone, well you don't seem to do that yourself, or you think I lied to you at some point, which makes you very foolish.<br /><br />Still waiting for that "wrong" thing. <br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />Just by going off what you typed here, you were probably not wrong in going to your coach. I would imagine you were in your early 20's and inexperenced in expressing disagreement over sensitive issues. If your coach was any kind of leader or mentor, he should have realized this, taken a breath, and discussed with you his decision and your approach for your own personal development.<br /><br />Ranger has burned himself with Concept 2. <br /><br />

[old] ranger · Post by **[old] ranger** » November 24th, 2005, 8:32 am

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>1:50 pace is a 2k in 7:20 </td></tr></table><br /><br />At "double the d, add 3," 1:50 pace for 64K predicts 1:35 for 2K.<br /><br /> <br /><br />So the goal is set.<br /><br />In 2002-2003, I rowed 1:56 for 64K. When this new stroke is fully training, I think I will lower this to 1:50 pretty easily.<br /><br />ranger

[old] ranger · Post by **[old] ranger** » November 24th, 2005, 8:40 am

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>Ranger has burned himself with Concept 2. </td></tr></table><br /><br />If Concept2 continues its current practices, I don't have any interest in their sponsorship.<br /><br />They don't have anything to do with my rowing. They are not my coaches. I am not on their team. I am not a collegiate rower. In fact, this isn't even rowing (on the water, with boats). It is just working out on exercise machines, like treadmills. <br /><br />I am not sure whether it is crucial to be on good terms with the makers of the treadmill you work out on, especially if they have no interest in openness, fairness, and the generally accepted proceduures of competitive athletics!<br /><br />What does it matter, really?<br /><br />If they would just straighten up and play their own game fairly, I have nothing at all against C2. But I am not sure at all why an amateur athlete has to give up his/her integrity and concern for fairness in athletics in order to be a "friend" of C2 and "earn" their sponsorship. <br /><br />I don't have any interest in doing this.<br /><br />ranger

[old] H_2O · Post by **[old] H_2O** » November 24th, 2005, 9:57 am

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(ranger @ Nov 24 2005, 05:16 AM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><br />...At the moment, though, I think I will do another month or so of 1:50 @ 18 spm...<br />ranger <br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />That would be dangerous if you plan on racing January 21st.<br />Don't underestimate the difficulties of moving from low spm rowing to speedwork.<br /><br />If you have been doing most of your workouts at a similar pace and rate you are now very specialized for this load pattern. I have been in a position where I could maintain 1:50 for an hour yet was under immediate pressure at 1:45.<br /><br />I would already start with rows at 1:45 since this is where you want your AT to be at. Similarly I would start rowing at 1:40 also soon. January 21st is only 8 weeks away one of which will be a week of taper.<br /><br /><br />

[old] ranger · Post by **[old] ranger** » November 24th, 2005, 10:39 am

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>hat would be dangerous if you plan on racing January 21st.<br />Don't underestimate the difficulties of moving from low spm rowing to speedwork.<br /><br />If you have been doing most of your workouts at a similar pace and rate you are now very specialized for this load pattern. I have been in a position where I could maintain 1:50 for an hour yet was under immediate pressure at 1:45.<br /><br />I would already start with rows at 1:45 since this is where you want your AT to be at. Similarly I would start rowing at 1:40 also soon. January 21st is only 8 weeks away one of which will be a week of taper. </td></tr></table><br /><br />Yes, in an ideal world, it is not the best plan. But then again, the world is not ideal. I can only work with what I have to work with. The best thing for my racing right now is to do what I need to get fully comfortable with my new technique. The rowing at 18 spm @ 1:50 does this.<br /><br />You were doing a couple of doing daily hour rows at 1:50 and 18 spm and you felt "under immediate pressure" when you tried to row 5K at 1:45 @ 24 spm?<br /><br />I doubt it.<br /><br /> <br /><br />Sure, if you were doing the hour of 1:50 @ 26 spm (or whatever). _Not_ if you were doing the hour of 1:50 @ 18 spm. <br /><br />Different universe.<br /><br />BTW, I don't taper. I just keep my normal schedule. I work hard every day.<br /><br />In my normal rotation of workouts, I don't rest, either.<br /><br />ranger

[old] ranger · Post by **[old] ranger** » November 24th, 2005, 10:46 am

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>I would already start with rows at 1:45 since this is where you want your AT to be at. Similarly I would start rowing at 1:40 also soon. January 21st is only 8 weeks away one of which will be a week of taper. </td></tr></table><br /><br />This is the backwards, misbegotten logic of most of the training that is done around here. It seems to be the local wisdom that you get faster at doing something by doing it--over and over. <br /><br />Not so, IMHO.<br /><br />IMHO, training for rowing is implicational and one-directional.<br /><br />You get better at AN rowing by doing TR rowing. You get better at TR rowing by doing AT rowing. You get better at AT rowing by doing UT1 rowing. You get better at UT1 rowing by doing UT2 rowing.<br /><br />So what the heck. If you just want to get better, do UT2 rowing all of the time! Then when you get to where you want to be, start working up the rate ladder.<br /><br />That's what I'm doing. <br /><br />It's looks as though my UT2 rowing has just arrived at the point that I want it to be. So I need to do it as much as I can be lock it in at that level. Then I can move on to the other training bands.<br /><br />ranger

[old] dennish · Post by **[old] dennish** » November 24th, 2005, 12:33 pm

Gorge, Thanks for the kick start on my brain. Exactly as Graham told me but I had totally forgotten. A fern. now that I'm trying to recall, seems Anne even gave us some botanical background on it. Yikes, getting old has some pratfalls . d

[old] John Rupp · Post by **[old] John Rupp** » November 24th, 2005, 2:25 pm

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(Thomas @ Nov 24 2005, 03:22 AM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>Mike is more popular than ever. Concept 2 would only want to encourage him to post in light of his knowledge, work ethic, and rowing success. </td></tr></table><br /><br />Thomas, <br /><br />You are one of the funniest guys on the forum! Keep them coming!! <br />

[old] H_2O · Post by **[old] H_2O** » November 24th, 2005, 8:16 pm

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(ranger @ Nov 24 2005, 09:46 AM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>So what the heck. If you just want to get better, do UT2 rowing all of the time! Then when you get to where you want to be, start working up the rate ladder.<br /><br />That's what I'm doing. <br /><br />It's looks as though my UT2 rowing has just arrived at the point that I want it to be. So I need to do it as much as I can be lock it in at that level. Then I can move on to the other training bands.<br /><br />ranger <br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />What in your view is more important:<br /><br />[a] be rock solid at 1:50 spm18, or<br /> breaking the WR on January 21st?<br /><br />You already have enough power for a 6:24 row. A couple of years ago I rowed 6:25 with the following stats at the time:<br /><br />30 mins: 8411m<br />spm20: 1:54 (and not for long, not even 30 mins)<br />5K: 17:28<br />10K: 36:18<br />FM: 2:48<br /><br />You can beat all these and so why not go for it on January 21st with a reasonable preparation rather than pursuing a) in a dogmatic fashion?

[old] Thomas · Post by **[old] Thomas** » November 24th, 2005, 9:29 pm

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(John Rupp @ Nov 24 2005, 10:25 AM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(Thomas @ Nov 24 2005, 03:22 AM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>Mike is more popular than ever. Concept 2 would only want to encourage him to post in light of his knowledge, work ethic, and rowing success. </td></tr></table><br /><br />Thomas, <br /><br />You are one of the funniest guys on the forum! Keep them coming!! <br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />If you knew what you were doing, people would seek your advice as well, like they have done with Mike.

[old] FrancoisA · Post by **[old] FrancoisA** » November 25th, 2005, 12:35 pm

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(ranger @ Nov 24 2005, 10:16 AM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>Yes, that's about right. I now do 1:45 very easily at 24 spm. I suspect that repeating 20'r24 at 1:45 will be a standard UT1 workout for me as the winter goes along.<br /><br />1:50 @ 18 spm over long distances, day after day, is _wonderful_ work for a 55-year-old lwt.<br /> <br /> </td></tr></table><br /><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(ranger @ Nov 19 2005, 11:18 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>Are you able to maintain 1:37 @ 26 spm ? </td></tr></table><br />Yes, I can do 1:37 @ 26 spm. <br /> </td></tr></table><br /><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(ranger @ Nov 21 2005, 04:47 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>I have been rowing L4 workouts regularly at a 1:36 target for several years, but my current 5K pb is 1:43, not 1:40. <br /> </td></tr></table><br />Ranger,<br /><br />1:50 @ 18 spm is 14.6 spi and 263 watts. It also corresponds do a reference pace of 1:31 for the L4 in the Wolvorine Plan! <br />You can also do 1:45 @ 24 <b>very easily</b>, yet, cannot go faster than 1:43 for a 5K, a 17 minutes event! Quite surprising for someone with your endurance, training 4 hours a day!<br /><br />I think H_2O is right; it is high time you start focusing on higher stroke rates and start doing L1 and L2 training; IMHO, it is already too late for January 21st; those adaptations take more than 8 weeks. You have been telling us for too long that you are able to row <b>easily</b> for <b>long</b> distances at 1:50 @ 18 spm; it is time to move up the ladder.<br /><br />What you have develop, using an engine analogy, is a motor with a lot of torque at low rpm, much like a diesel engine. Those engines are very fuel efficient but usually low on HP! (HP = SPEED!)<br />I don't think you currently have the cardio capacity (VO2 Max) to be able to sustain 14.6 spi at 26 spm (1:36), and this is what you have to work on <b>now</b>. Otherwise, another racing year is going to pass and you will find, again, that your stroke is not quite ready! <br /><br />Please, take this as constructive remarks! Nothing would please me more than to see you break the WRs in the 50-54 and 55-59, not just for the 2K, but also for the longer distances. <br /><br />Regards

[old] ranger · Post by **[old] ranger** » November 25th, 2005, 2:08 pm

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>I don't think you currently have the cardio capacity (VO2 Max) to be able to sustain 14.6 spi at 26 spm (1:36), and this is what you have to work on now. </td></tr></table><br /><br />Yes, 1:50 @ 18 spm is a 1:31 2K reference pace on the WP L4 charts. I don't have any intention of sustaining 14.6 SPI @ 26 spm (1:36) right now, though. So why worry about it? I will race at about 12 SPI. Clearly, I am not (yet?) following the WP. <br /><br />My training is coming along great. No need to change. I am developing my full potential as a rower.<br /><br />ranger

Concept2 Forum

Us Indoor Rowing Team Selection

Competitions

Competitions

Competitions

Competitions

Competitions

Competitions

Competitions

Competitions

Competitions

Competitions

Competitions

Competitions

Competitions

Competitions

Competitions