Key workouts to predict 500m / 1k / 2k / 5k TT times

[rhr]

There is no exact formula to cover all rowers, especially as we have differing aerobic / anaerobic abilities.

If you have 2 recent times to reference from, preferably one short distance (500m / 1k) and the other longer (5k / 10k) then you can use the following:
http://www.freespiritsrowing.com/conten ... predictor/

If not, here are some broad workout guidelines for a "balanced" rower (HWT):
Minus means the workout should be done quicker than the projected TT
Example: If you do the 4x250m on R'3 in 1:23.5 then your target pace for a 500m TT is 1:25.0

500m
4x250m on R'3 = 500m - 1.5s

1000m
4x500m on R3'30 = 1k - 0.5 / 1s
12x250m on R'1 = 1k - 2s
10x1' on R'1 = 1k + 0.5 / 1s

2000m
10x500 on R1'30 = 2k - 0.0 - 0.5s
3x750m on R1'30 = 2k - 0.0 - 0.5s
4x1k on R'5 = 2k + 1s

5000m
5x1500m on R'5 = 5k - 1s
4x2k on R'5 = 5k - 0.0 - 0.5s

[Bob S.]

Thanks for the link, rhr. I remember a previous predictor put out by the Free Spirits groups, but this one is new to me and much easier to use. I recently posted some puzzling results in the "what training have you done today thread" and this looks like a good answer to some of the things that have puzzled me. But there is still one major discrepancy and it seems to be in my 500m being far out of line - which that page points out, but the suggested direction was in the wrong direction.

I used my very recent 500m time, 2:03.6 (2:03.6), and a 5km time, 24:15.9 (2:25.) (Oct. 2), to predict a 2k and it came up with 9:09.1 (2:17.3). No way! A couple of days ago, I did an interval session of 4X3' 2' mr, averaging 2:17.3/500m and was really knackered at the end of each interval - although I recovered reasonably during rests (1:30 passive and 0:30 easy paddle).

I also have done a couple of other TTs, so I can compare these with the predicted results.

30' (Oct. 15). Result: 6156m (2:26.1). Predicted: 6102m (2:27.5).
60' (Oct. 27). Result: 11969m (2:30.3). Predicted: 11699m (2:33.7).

The longer distance results are consistent with my past experience, in that I generally do better than predicted at the longer distances. In other words, for me, in the strength vs endurance balance, endurance comes out ahead. Except for the 500m - and that has always been out of line. My low point has always been the 1k. This time the 500m seems to be even farther out of line than it was in the past.

It looks like I had just better leave the 500m out of it altogether and use the longer pieces for trying to estimate a reasonable 2k.

Again, thanks for the link.

Bob S.

[Cyclingman1]

I think the predictor is pretty good. 500m is pretty much an irrelevancy in predicting anything else. Most rowers are either unusually strong or weak in 500m.

I like most of the workouts suggested for the various distances. However, some of them seem like overkill, way too much. For example: 12x250 for 1K, 10x500 for 2K, or 5x1.5K for 5K. I say cut those reps in half.

[sharp_rower]

2000m
10x500 on R1'30 = 2k - 0.0 - 0.5s

I'd rather just do the damn 2k!

[rhr]

I think the predictor is pretty good. 500m is pretty much an irrelevancy in predicting anything else. Most rowers are either unusually strong or weak in 500m.

I like most of the workouts suggested for the various distances. However, some of them seem like overkill, way too much. For example: 12x250 for 1K, 10x500 for 2K, or 5x1.5K for 5K. I say cut those reps in half.

Jim, I forgot another alternative for the 5k you may prefer:
6x1k on R'1 = 5k - 0.0 - 0.5s

[Cyclingman1]

Jim, I forgot another alternative for the 5k you may prefer:
6x1k on R'1 = 5k - 0.0 - 0.5s

The thing is that I really do not look for predictors, per se, beyond 2K. Of course, times in distances have to be consistent. But based on what I do in 2K and assuming I have a certain amount of distance work - a few 30 mins, a couple - of 10Ks - then I generally figure about 5.5 sec over 2K for 5K. But I never have done some sort of specific workout to say what I would do for 5K. The same with the other distances over 2K. I know my pace will be +/- some number of seconds based on surrounding distances. The predictor link is pretty good for that also.

Also, for 1K and 2K, a predictor for me is to do 2/3 race distance at about 95% effort. On race day I should be able to do that pace at full race distance. I think that this one distance is more reliable than deducing race pace from a series of intervals. The intervals are more of a workout than a predictor, although the differences in those two concepts is small.

[Edward4492]

Agree whole-heartedly with the "2/3's" rule. I have a pretty strict regimen I follow for 2k race prep. I do a 1300m 3-4 days prior to an event. I go out with my normal race start, then try and settle in and take it to the end with no sprint or change of pace. Mentally it's a lot less stressful than a 2k and from a psychological stand point I know if I duplicate this pace on race day I'll be okay. I think every time we do a 2k there's an element of mental stress there. I continue to throw in a 2k in the 7:05 range from time to time just to keep it in my mind that I can lay down an okay number at any given time. This has become a time I can duplicate pretty much at will. Not that it's super fast, but I remember a year and a half ago when I was doing crossfit and the fastest guys at my box were in the 7:10 - 7:15 range. Go's to show ya how things change when training becomes focused and specific.

Seems like Jim and I are on the same page pretty often.....except I still like my mileage (did 20k today, nice and easy at the gym 8x2500m just cruisin' at 2:05 - 2:10, enjoying the scenery).

[El Caballo]

I used my very recent 500m time, 2:03.6 (2:03.6), and a 5km time, 24:15.9 (2:25.) (Oct. 2), to predict a 2k and it came up with 9:09.1 (2:17.3). No way! A couple of days ago, I did an interval session of 4X3' 2' mr, averaging 2:17.3/500m and was really knackered at the end of each interval - although I recovered reasonably during rests (1:30 passive and 0:30 easy paddle).

I also have done a couple of other TTs, so I can compare these with the predicted results.

30' (Oct. 15). Result: 6156m (2:26.1). Predicted: 6102m (2:27.5).
60' (Oct. 27). Result: 11969m (2:30.3). Predicted: 11699m (2:33.7).

The longer distance results are consistent with my past experience, in that I generally do better than predicted at the longer distances. In other words, for me, in the strength vs endurance balance, endurance comes out ahead....

Bob S.

Bob, I put the above times into my pace prediction spreadsheet. The best 1st order prediction fit gives a 2K prediction of 9:12.5 (2:18.1/500m). The two 2nd order predictions for 2K are 9:12.3 (2:18.1) and 9:13.5 (2:18.5). If I throw out the 500m time, then I get 9:15.4 (2:18.8) from the 1st order prediction (the 2nd order predictions are worthless in this case). Without the 500m time, the other two 1st order predictions look o.k. (i.e. they fit the remaining three times reasonably well, maybe even better) with times of 9:20.5 (2:20.1) and 9:21.3 (2:20.3). However, I think the 500m time is significant to predicting a good 2K, so throwing it out and using only the longer times will be less valid. The online predictor you used is poor for those of us who do better on endurance (it has the poorest fit of the three 1st order predictors in my spreadsheet when all your data above is input).

Bill W.

[rhr]

2000m
10x500 on R1'30 = 2k - 0.0 - 0.5s

I'd rather just do the damn 2k!

Then you aren't doing the 2k at 100%. If you do it at 100% you will closely resemble Willem Dafoe at the end of "Platoon" (including the blood dribbling out of the side of his mouth).

[Bob S.]

Bob, I put the above times into my pace prediction spreadsheet. The best 1st order prediction fit gives a 2K prediction of 9:12.5 (2:18.1/500m). The two 2nd order predictions for 2K are 9:12.3 (2:18.1) and 9:13.5 (2:18.5). If I throw out the 500m time, then I get 9:15.4 (2:18.8) from the 1st order prediction (the 2nd order predictions are worthless in this case). Without the 500m time, the other two 1st order predictions look o.k. (i.e. they fit the remaining three times reasonably well, maybe even better) with times of 9:20.5 (2:20.1) and 9:21.3 (2:20.3). However, I think the 500m time is significant to predicting a good 2K, so throwing it out and using only the longer times will be less valid. The online predictor you used is poor for those of us who do better on endurance (it has the poorest fit of the three 1st order predictors in my spreadsheet when all your data above is input).

Bill W.

Thanks for that, Bill. The problem with that Free Spirits Pace Predictor that I used is that it uses just 2 data points. I remember one that was around several years ago that could use more points. I don't remember just how many, but possibly 5. That would definitely have been better.

I did some playing around with the FSPP using the 6 combinations that are available when you use 2 out of 4. The results were not exactly helpful, but I found them amusing:

60' and 500m: 9:03.5 (2:15.9)
30' and 500m: 9:06.3 (2:16.6)
5km and 500m: 9:09.1 (2:17.3)
60' and 30': 9:17.5 (2:19.4)
60' and 5km: 9:30.5 (2:32.6)
30' and 5km: 9:31.8 (2:22.9)

Quite a wide range of possibilities. Fortunately my goal (9:20) is somewhere in the middle of the mess, so I have a shot at it if I can stay healthy for the next 4 weeks (the Beach Sprints on Jan. 31). With that additional uncertainties of how much will I lose on going to a grounded model D from my dynamic and how much I can gain by being at a 4000' lower elevation, I am not at all sure just what it is that I should be shooting at. Common sense tells me to just aim for the 9:20, but ego tells me to go for broke (and that is probably a good word for it). At one point I thought that I was going to have 2 shots, but I just learned that the 2 nearest satellite regattas are on the same day. In previous years the San Diego event was usually one week before the Long Beach races, but that is not the case this year.

Bob S.

[Bob S.]

Today’s workout was chosen to provide an additional data point for 2k prediction. It turned out better than I had hoped, although it was a rotten time trial in regard to control. Obviously the first 500m was a typical fly and die start, but I was so far under my goal, 4:30, that I just stayed with it for awhile, figuring that I could hang on long enough after the sag to finish out under the goal. It worked OK and, in fact, I could even dig up a bit of a sprint for the last 100m – well at least it was a tad faster than the previous 300m.

I haven’t fed it into any predictors yet. I just ranked it and entered it in the nonathlon, where it picked up a fair number of points over the earlier entry, which was based on my 5k. Last week’s 500m was a much greater contributor, of course, but to get anywhere in the rankings I will have to do a half marathon and I don’t know if I can handle that long a piece any more.

None of these can count for records, so I am reluctant to do any more TTs other than a 2k at a sanctioned event. There are only 2 others left, the 6k and the 10k, and there are not many nonathlon points to pick up in either of those.

Date End @ Time Meters SPM HR /500m Cal/hr Watts W'/S %2K
1km TT
1/3/15 15:54 04:26.0 1000 40 141 02:13.0 812 149 3.73 1.17
Split or work interval results
1/3/15 15:54 00:25.9 100 39 119 02:09.5 854 161 4.13 1.26
1/3/15 15:54 00:25.4 200 38 134 02:07.0 888 171 4.50 1.34
1/3/15 15:54 00:25.7 300 40 140 02:08.5 867 165 4.13 1.29
1/3/15 15:54 00:26.0 400 39 145 02:10.0 848 159 4.08 1.25
1/3/15 15:54 00:25.8 500 42 147 02:09.0 861 163 3.88 1.28
1/3/15 15:54 00:26.6 600 41 147 02:13.0 812 149 3.63 1.17
1/3/15 15:54 00:27.7 700 41 148 02:18.5 753 132 3.22 1.03
1/3/15 15:54 00:28.2 800 40 147 02:21.0 729 125 3.13 0.98
1/3/15 15:54 00:27.7 900 43 147 02:18.5 753 132 3.07 1.03
1/3/15 15:54 00:27.1 1000 44 144 02:15.5 784 141 3.20 1.11

Bob S.

[DanielJ]

What's a smart time for 6 x 750m R5'? I was guessing something like 2k, maybe 2k-0.5.

Oh and how about the 3k-2.5k-2k on R7' (or perhaps longer rests)?

[Hillclimber]

2000m
10x500 on R1'30 = 2k - 0.0 - 0.5s

I'd rather just do the damn 2k!

Then you aren't doing the 2k at 100%. If you do it at 100% you will closely resemble Willem Dafoe at the end of "Platoon" (including the blood dribbling out of the side of his mouth).

That's worth a thread in itself, the 100% part. My first 2k, years ago, was so brutal i actually stopped pulling with about 600m to go, for prob 3-4 seconds. that was agony. that was 100%. a true 2k best effort performance is 90% being in top form and 110% mental toughness. the freespirits predictive model shows a 2k for me using my current (3 mo old) 5k and more recent 500 and it is about 1 second faster than my current SB. what whip-wielding barbarian developed those algorithms anyway?

[Hillclimber]

clarification for above: a predicted pace of "1 faster.

[hjs]

How had a 2k is also depends on one fitness. Look at Stephanson pulling his lightweight Wr, he goes like made, but after the finish he is still pretty ok. The more sprinter types suffer more.