Us Indoor Rowing Team Selection

[[old] ranger]

<!--QuoteBegin-george nz+Nov 26 2005, 03:24 AM--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(george nz @ Nov 26 2005, 03:24 AM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--QuoteEBegin--><!--QuoteBegin-ranger+Nov 26 2005, 08:54 PM--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(ranger @ Nov 26 2005, 08:54 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--QuoteEBegin--><br />I am developing my stroke, ................<br /><br />ranger </td></tr></table><br /><br />Why do you keep saying this when there are numerous posts where you say you have the technique sorted <!--QuoteBegin--><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'><!--QuoteEBegin--> april 2005: ... Technique is _very_ nice now, entirely relaxed and natural. ... </td></tr></table>. and that it is no longer an issue. If you do not mean this but in fact are trying to communicate something else entirely please do so - heck you are the English professor.<br /><br />George <br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />In terms of timing, positioning, drag, etc., my technique is now fine, has been for some time now. I am now developing muscular specialization, endurance, habituation, relaxation, rhythmicity, and therefore mechanical and cardiovascular efficiency with this new stroking power. The latter is what the 2K is all about. Hard to believe you don't realize that, after all this time.<br /><br />I am now rowing long distances at 14.7 SPI. I used to row long distances at about 8 SPI, i.e., with about _half_ the stroking power.<br /><br />Pretty different, George. Takes a while to get used to.<br /><br />ranger<br />

[[old] ranger]

Given my sports background, my anaerobic capacities and experience with these capacities is also highly developed. In track, I was a half-miler. In swimming, I was a sprinter, 50m and 100m free. In skating, I my competitive skating I also a sprinter. On the other hand, my extensive canoeing experience got me used to paddling all day, day after day, week after week, month after month.<br /><br />Odd combination, I guess, extreme endurance sports on one hand and sprinting on the other. <br /><br />Odd combination, too: swimming/canoeing and running/skating. Upper body _and_ lower body.<br /><br />But these things sure come in handy in rowing.<br /><br />The 2K combines the two. The 2K combines the two. <br /><br />For rowing, you need all four.<br /><br />ranger

[[old] ranger]

<!--QuoteBegin--><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'><!--QuoteEBegin-->What I wanted to stress was that Ranger's 5K PB his out of sync with his L4 reference pace of 1:33. </td></tr></table><br /><br />My L4 reference pace is 1:37. I am rowing at 18 spm at a 1:31 reference pace. I am not following Caviston on this.<br /><br />As I have just explained, IMHO, the best training for rowing is implicational and one-directional. It moves from low rates to high first developing strength, muscular efficiency, relaxation, rhythmicity, and therefore stroking power, and only then moving on to developing endurance with this stroking power, aerobic capacity, and anaerobic capacity.<br /><br />On this point, I think Caviston and the WP is wrong.<br /><br />I suspect that the use of a constantly rotating exercising of the training bands in the WP is just a pragmatic compromise of this ideal developed by rowing coaches whose athletes need to be competing regularly over extended periods. <br /><br />IMHO, this compromise is unnecessary for the individual amateur adult rower who is under no pressures to compete until they are ready.<br /><br />ranger<br /><br /><br /><br />

[[old] ranger]

<!--QuoteBegin-John Rupp+Nov 25 2005, 05:02 PM--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(John Rupp @ Nov 25 2005, 05:02 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Rich,<br /><br />You're doing 1:50 pace, with breaks.  How long without a break?<br /><br />Rod Freed has done 1:45 pace for the half marathon, with NO breaks.<br /><br />His 2k is 6:39.  <br /><br />The prospects are not looking very good.  <br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />A few seconds. Usually about 15 or so? I just try to keep the rowing under my anaerobic threshold so that I can keep going.<br /><br />ranger<br />

[[old] ranger]

<!--QuoteBegin--><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'><!--QuoteEBegin-->What I wanted to stress was that Ranger's 5K PB his out of sync with is L4 reference pace </td></tr></table><br /><br />My aerobic capacity is just fine, given my age. I can't make much progress there, I think. I can row for an hour with my heart rate flat at 172 bpm. This is just fine.<br /><br />What I am trying to do is get more efficient--muscularly and technically--i.e., faster at the same heart rate. <br /><br />ranger

[[old] ranger]

Just relaxing and rowing normally, not concentrating on my stroke at low rates, 1:40 comes very smoothly and easily now at 26 spm. That's 13.5 SPI. I will try to repeat 2K at this rate and pace, when I get there in my training.<br /><br />That would put me on track for a 6:24 2K.<br /><br />ranger

[[old] Andreas]

When last did you guys looked at the topic heading of this thread!?!?!?!?!

[[old] FrancoisA]

<!--QuoteBegin-ranger+Nov 26 2005, 09:20 AM--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(ranger @ Nov 26 2005, 09:20 AM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--QuoteEBegin-->As I have just explained, IMHO, the best training for rowing is implicational and one-directional. It moves from low rates to high first developing strength, muscular efficiency, relaxation, rhythmicity, and therefore stroking power, and only then moving on to developing endurance with this stroking power, aerobic capacity, and anaerobic capacity.<br /><br />On this point, I think Caviston and the WP is wrong.<br /> <br /> </td></tr></table><br />Ranger, what should also be clear is that when you are in this developing strength phase at low rates, you are, with your other cross-training activities, exercising your aerobic and anaerobic capacities.<br /><br />The progression in the L4 of the Wolverine Plan also stimulates stroking power, muscular efficiency, relaxation, rhythmicity, starting at lower rates first and them progressively moving to higher rates.<br /><br />Therefore, your training plan is not that different from the WP. Hence, if your training plan is right, it therefore follows that the WP cannot be wrong! <b>Q.E.D.</b> <br />

[[old] Bayko]

<!--QuoteBegin-Andreas+Nov 26 2005, 10:55 AM--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(Andreas @ Nov 26 2005, 10:55 AM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--QuoteEBegin-->When last did you guys looked at the topic heading of this thread!?!?!?!?!     <br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br /><br />ALL threads have the potential to be ranger/Rupp threads. They need only to decide to make it so.

[[old] ranger]

<!--QuoteBegin--><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'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Ranger, what should also be clear is that when you are in this developing strength phase at low rates, you are, with your other cross-training activities, exercising your aerobic and anaerobic capacities.<br /><br />The progression in the L4 of the Wolverine Plan also stimulates stroking power, muscular efficiency, relaxation, rhythmicity, starting at lower rates first and them progressively moving to higher rates.<br /><br />Therefore, your training plan is not that different from the WP. Hence, if your training plan is right, it therefore follows that the WP cannot be wrong! Q.E.D.  </td></tr></table><br /><br />Yes, the focus in the WP on low rate rowing is excellent. And yes, you are right that I continue to work on my aerobic and anaerobic capacities in other ways. You need these to be able to work long and hard on stroking power. So the WP is not at all wrong in this, either.<br /><br />However, my personal experience over the last two years has been that, out of the meters you put in on the erg, intense and exclusive concentration on technique and stroking power can be much more effective than expending so much of your rowing time on higher rate rowing (L1 and L2), or even rowing that moves to 24-26 spm (at L3 and L4). <br /><br />For me, I just find it much more effective to make the first and foremost task learning to stroke to the limits of strength, endurance, and technical efficiency with the rate steady at 18 spm or so. Then when this is done, go on up the rate ladder to other things.<br /><br />By doing this over the last couple of years, I have added about 3 SPI to my stroke. That's a lot! <br /><br />I used to race 2K, 5K, and 6K at about 10 SPI. I think I will now race them at about 13 SPI. I used to row an hour at about 9 SPI. I think I would now race an hour at 12 SPI. I used to row a marathon at about 8 SPI. I think I would now row a marathon at about 11 SPI.<br /><br />That is, I would now row a marathon with a bigger stroke than I used to use to row 2K!<br /><br />ranger

[[old] ranger]

<!--QuoteBegin--><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'><!--QuoteEBegin-->You're doing 1:50 pace, with breaks. How long without a break?<br /><br />Rod Freed has done 1:45 pace for the half marathon, with NO breaks.<br /><br />His 2k is 6:39.  </td></tr></table><br /><br />I am rowing 1:50 @ 18 spm, 14.7 SPI.<br /><br />Freed doesn't do any low rate rowing; therefore, he doesn't have any stroking power. I suspect his technique is also poor. He probably rows his HMs at 30+ spm. Result: he wildly underachieves in the 2K, the only game in town.<br /><br />Too bad. Not very smart training.<br /><br />ranger

[[old] ranger]

<!--QuoteBegin--><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'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Rod Freed has done 1:45 pace for the half marathon, with NO breaks.<br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />Yes, I know. Nice row! <br /><br />I think I will do this too before WIRC rolls around this February, although I will row the 1:45 at about 25 spm, 12 SPI.<br /><br />It is important to have a strong stroke if you want to have any top end speed and achieve at the highest levels in the 2K.<br /><br />Freed doesn't have any top end speed. He can only row 1:32 for 500m. <br /><br />Dennis Hastings has the same problem. He also can only row 1:32 for 500m. Therefore, he also rows 2K around 6:40.<br /><br />The best 50s lwts row about 1:25-1:27 for 500m. Therefore, they row 2Ks in the middle 6:20s.<br /><br />ranger

[[old] Porkchop]

<!--QuoteBegin-Bayko+Nov 26 2005, 07:26 AM--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(Bayko @ Nov 26 2005, 07:26 AM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--QuoteEBegin--><!--QuoteBegin-Andreas+Nov 26 2005, 10:55 AM--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(Andreas @ Nov 26 2005, 10:55 AM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--QuoteEBegin-->When last did you guys looked at the topic heading of this thread!?!?!?!?!     <br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br /><br />ALL threads have the potential to be ranger/Rupp threads. They need only to decide to make it so. <br /> </td></tr></table><br />And yet we're drawn to read them, like moths to a flame.

[[old] george nz]

<!--QuoteBegin-ranger+Nov 26 2005, 09:51 PM--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(ranger @ Nov 26 2005, 09:51 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--QuoteEBegin--><!--QuoteBegin-george nz+Nov 26 2005, 03:24 AM--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(george nz @ Nov 26 2005, 03:24 AM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--QuoteEBegin--><!--QuoteBegin-ranger+Nov 26 2005, 08:54 PM--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(ranger @ Nov 26 2005, 08:54 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--QuoteEBegin--><br />I am developing my stroke, ................<br /><br />ranger </td></tr></table><br /><br />Why do you keep saying this when there are numerous posts where you say you have the technique sorted <!--QuoteBegin--><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'><!--QuoteEBegin--> april 2005: ... <b>Technique is _very_ nice now, entirely relaxed and natura</b>l. ... </td></tr></table>. and that it is no longer an issue. If you do not mean this but in fact are trying to communicate something else entirely please do so - heck you are the English professor.<br /><br />George <br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />In terms of timing, positioning, drag, etc., <b>my technique is now fine, has been for some time now. I am now developing muscular specialization, endurance, habituation, relaxation, rhythmicity, and therefore mechanical and cardiovascular efficiency with this new stroking power.</b> The latter is what the 2K is all about. Hard to believe you don't realize that, after all this time.<br /><br />I am now rowing long distances at 14.7 SPI. I used to row long distances at about 8 SPI, i.e., with about _half_ the stroking power.<br /><br />Pretty different, George. Takes a while to get used to.<br /><br />ranger <br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br /><br />This is what you posted today <!--QuoteBegin--><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'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <b>Yes, the stroke is now ready to race with. </b> </td></tr></table><br /><br />so the stroke is either ready or its not .... make up your mind

[[old] Thomas]

<!--QuoteBegin-Canoeist+Nov 25 2005, 09:33 PM--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(Canoeist @ Nov 25 2005, 09:33 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--QuoteEBegin--><!--QuoteBegin-Thomas+Nov 10 2005, 10:45 PM--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(Thomas @ Nov 10 2005, 10:45 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Phil Morris who gave me a ride...<br /><br />Thomas <br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />Thomas, I believe that you meant to say "Phil Morris gave me a lift to the airport". A "ride" in England is not something that two males should be doing in a car on the way to the airport! <br /><br />Cheers,<br /><br />Paul Flack <br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />I just checked a British to American translator and both <i>ride</i> and <i>lift</i> are synonymous.<br /><br />lift (car) n :<br />ride.<br /><br />ride (car) n :<br />lift.<br /><br /><i>Ride</i> obviously must be slang. It is not showing up.<br />