Ranger - News To Shock

[[old] PaulS]

<!--QuoteBegin-ranger+Dec 9 2005, 03:26 PM--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(ranger @ Dec 9 2005, 03:26 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--QuoteEBegin--><!--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--> it seems a lame excuse at best </td></tr></table><br /><br />Excuse? Excuse for what? <br /><br />At best, I am using it as an _explanation_ of how I could row 6:27.5, at 52, with a lightweight frame, with the technique I had, first time out in a race.<br /><br />I sure hope standard technique is better for me, but I have no solid evidence yet.<br /><br />ranger <br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />Oh, those were "explanations" and not "excuses", sorry I misinterpretted it. <br /><br />You are either accomplishing "better" (faster) paces for the effort with your "new and improved" stroke (I haven't seen it so am taking your word for it, in spite of <b>no evidence</b>.), or you are not. It seems you have been saying that you are, which would constitute evidence to me. (I don't assume you are making it up. Are you?)<br /><br />Please, communicate in a clear and precise manner, I suspect you should be able to, based on your profession. Yet once again, there has been little evidence to support my suspicion.

[[old] John Rupp]

<!--QuoteBegin-PaulS+Dec 9 2005, 08:23 AM--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(PaulS @ Dec 9 2005, 08:23 AM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--QuoteEBegin-->What I say does not depend on any age/weight classification, if a lwt 12year old girl produced the performances you say you are doing the prediction would be equally valid[right] </td></tr></table><br /><br />Paul's competition of choice. <br />

[[old] John Rupp]

<!--QuoteBegin-ranger+Dec 9 2005, 12:50 PM--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(ranger @ Dec 9 2005, 12:50 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--QuoteEBegin-->I will also do my Zatopek farleks this way now, e.g., 500s at 1:38 @ 28 spm or so, instead of at 38 spm.<br /><br />ranger[right] </td></tr></table><br /><br />Wow you lost 10 spm in 2 years! <br />

[[old] george nz]

<!--QuoteBegin-PaulS+Dec 10 2005, 12:47 PM--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(PaulS @ Dec 10 2005, 12:47 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--QuoteEBegin-->You are either accomplishing "better" (faster) paces for the effort with your "new and improved" stroke (I haven't seen it so am taking your word for it, in spite of <b>no evidence</b>.), or you are not. It seems you have been saying that you are, which would constitute evidence to me. (I don't assume you are making it up.  Are you?)<br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />What makes you think he might not be getting faster?<br /><br /><br /><br />Posted: Mon Mar 01, <b>2004</b> 1:07 am Ranger<br /><!--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-->I have been working on technique, 20K a day at the moment, but I will soon double that with a second session. <b>I do most of the rowing around 1:50 pace, sometimes quicker</b>, sometimes slower, taking breaks as I need them </td></tr></table><br /><br />Posted: Wed Dec 07, <b>2005</b> 4:50 am Ranger<br /><!--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>15K slow doodling around at 1:52 @ 18</b>; <u>80min @ 300 watts on the stepper, HR 155 bpm</u>.<br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />Posted: Mon Mar 01, <b>2004</b> 12:43 pm <br /><!--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-->I can now jump rope for an hour or ride my bike for 2-3 hours with my heart rate at 110 bpm or so. <u>I can step at 270 watts with my heart rate at 130</u>. And I can row for two hours at 2:00 with my heart rate at a flat 125. </td></tr></table><br /><br />Those extra watts have certainly increased the HR on the stepper, I would have thought that given fitness gains the HR would have dropped?<br /><br />How do you take your HR on the erg and stepper by the way as you said you dont use a HR monitor?<br /><br />George<br /><br /><br />

[[old] ranger]

The stepper I use has a heart rate monitor in it.<br /><br />I used my heart rate monitor on and off for quite a while, for various reasons, until I lost it early this summer. I need to get another one. I can't get my heart rate on the erg without a monitor. At the moment, I don't have one.<br /><br />Actually, my intention on the stepper at the moment is to get my heart rate _up_, to my aneorbic threshold and beyond. I've done plenty of UT2 and UT1 work. I need to move on to AT. To begin with, I like to do this progressively through a long session, though, of two hours or so. Then I like to do it by negative splitting over an hour or so. Then I like to do it over half hour trials. Then 30min trials. Then in long intervals (6-10min). And so forth. When I am in my best shape, I can work right at my anaeorobic threshold for an hour or more.<br /><br />No problem with my heart rate going to 165 bpm after 80 miniutes at 300 watts! This is a good bit of work and exactly the result I want. As I said, I think 2-2.5 hours at 300 watts will take my heart to my aneorobic threshold, that is, _very_ hard work. I have been doing this stepping _after_ I erg.<br /><br />My intention on the erg now will be to raise the rate to 30-34 spm and do a lot of light stroking over long distances, in whatever format, to get used to the ratio. This is the rate I will race at. I need to get relaxed and rhythmic with faster stroking after doing so much work at low rates on power.<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-->Then I like to do it over half hour trials. Then 30min trials </td></tr></table><br /><br /> <br /><br />Sorry about the repetition here. <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-->It seems you have been saying that you are, which would constitute evidence to me </td></tr></table><br /><br />Yes, I _am_ saying that. And I am not making it up.<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-->Those extra watts have certainly increased the HR on the stepper, I would have thought that given fitness gains the HR would have dropped? </td></tr></table><br /><br /> <br /><br />270 watts is 1:49 pace on the erg.<br /><br />300 watts is 1:45 pace on the erg.<br /><br />In a pretty hard session lasting as long as two hours, four seconds per 500 in pace makes quite a bit of difference in effort, no?<br /><br />If I am stepping as long as 2 hours and doing 270 watts/1:49 pace at a solid UT2 heart rate (130 bpm) and 300 watts/1:45 pace at a low UT1 heart rate (155 bpm), I am delighted.<br /><br />I can row for an hour or so at my anaerobic threshold: 172 bpm.<br /><br />ranger

[[old] NavigationHazard]

<!--QuoteBegin-ranger+Dec 10 2005, 04:56 AM--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(ranger @ Dec 10 2005, 04:56 AM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--QuoteEBegin-->I can row for an hour or so at my anaerobic threshold: 172 bpm.<br /><br />ranger <br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />To be more accurate, you're claiming you can row for an hour or so at a pace you've decided is your anaerobic threshold because you apparently once held it for around an hour.<br /><br />Was your HR actually flat for a whole hour? That is, on stroke 1 of your 60' PB was it the same 172 bpm that it was on stroke 270 and stroke 1000 and the final stroke as well? IIRC you've already said that it exceeded 172 bpm at the end of the row, when you were striving for meters in the last 3 or 4 minutes. What about at the beginning? Had you warmed up so that you started off precisely at threshold pace, with your sweat system fully engaged? If not, there must have been a rise in your HR until your internal cooling mechanisms kicked in and you started to sweat. On the subject of sweat, did you replace water while you were rowing? If not, and you were sweating, how did the loss of fluid volume not contribute to cardiac drift? Were there no moments during the row when you did something biomechanically -- leaned over, for instance, or squirmed in the seat because your shorts were chafing, or raised/lowered your hand height -- that temporarily altered HR by a couple of beats? Or does "flat" really mean "substantially even once I got into the piece, with mild cardiac drift resulting in a gradual rise to 172 bpm"? <br /><br />It may be that your anaerobic threshold actually is 172 bpm, although as I've noted on the UK forum that's roughly 2 standard deviations higher than the average predicted for you by the Karvonen formula (using the estimated MHR* and measured RHR you yourself have reported). Your response on the UK Forum was <a href='http://www.concept2.co.uk/forum/viewtop ... 917#155917' target='_blank'>"I'm a freak" </a> (verbatim quote -- you said it, not me). <br /><br /><br />You could always prove it conclusively by having proper VO2max/lactate testing done.... <br /><br /><br />*EDIT: 200 [sorry for the typo], which is roughly 5 standard deviations above the maximum heart rate of 170 predicted for 54-year-olds by the 208- (age * 0.7) formula that has supplanted the old 220-age rubric.

[[old] ranger]

I rowed the hour at 1:48. No, my heart rate did not go to 172 bpm immediately. It got there after a few minutes (3-4K?) and then stayed there, flat, until almost 16K, when I pulled the pace down to 1:39 and kicked it in over the last 1K. My heart rate was in the 180s at the end.<br /><br />This year, I am going to try to get myself to do similar sessions cardiovascularly on the stepper, just to see what happens. After 90 minutes at 300 watts, the going get pretty tough, and I suspect my HR will push up toward my anaerobic threshold. If I get to 172 bpm at 2 hours, I might see whether I hold it there to 2.5 hours, marathon length.<br /><br />This will take some getting used to, of course. But I might be able to do it by adding 5 minutes or so each time.<br /><br />I am now doing these long stepping routines daily (in addition to my erging). No problem recovering from day to day. Legs continue to feel fresh.<br /><br />I am not sure that going an hour with a heart rate of 172 bpm is very unusual. When they are climbing, bikers do it all the time, and for a lot longer than one hour. As I remember, as I was watching the Tour this year, that this biker of that now had a HR in the 170s was a pretty standard comment as the narrative of a daily ride went along.<br /><br />ranger

[[old] PaulS]

<!--QuoteBegin-ranger+Dec 10 2005, 01:56 AM--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(ranger @ Dec 10 2005, 01:56 AM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--QuoteEBegin--><br />270 watts is 1:49 pace on the erg.<br /><br />300 watts is 1:45 pace on the erg.<br /><br />In a pretty hard session lasting as long as two hours, four seconds per 500 in pace makes quite a bit of difference in effort, no?<br /><br />If I am stepping as long as 2 hours and doing 270 watts/1:49 pace at a solid UT2 heart rate (130 bpm) and 300 watts/1:45 pace at a low UT1 heart rate (155 bpm), I am delighted.<br /><br />ranger <br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br /><br />The Equating of "Stepper Watts" to "Erg Pace" is very far fetched.<br /><br />Does the Stepper require you to enter your bodyweight? If not, there is no way it can accurately calculate Watts, as all it does is provide a rate of descent that you are counteracting, far different from the Erg, where the Flywheel is a Constant.<br /><br />It would be like comparing Gamut Erg scores without accounting for the weight on the resistance arm. i.e. "A meaningless comparison."

[[old] PaulS]

<!--QuoteBegin-John Rupp+Dec 9 2005, 04:52 PM--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(John Rupp @ Dec 9 2005, 04:52 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--QuoteEBegin--><!--QuoteBegin-PaulS+Dec 9 2005, 08:23 AM--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(PaulS @ Dec 9 2005, 08:23 AM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--QuoteEBegin-->What I say does not depend on any age/weight classification, if a lwt 12year old girl produced the performances you say you are doing the prediction would be equally valid[right] </td></tr></table><br /><br />Paul's competition of choice. <br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />Well of course John, unlike you, I'm not afraid of being beaten by a girl. <br /><br /><a href='http://www.ps-sport.net/pictures/TwinsAndPaul.jpg' target='_blank'>Yikes! They have me surrounded!!!</a>

[[old] John Rupp]

<!--QuoteBegin-NavigationHazard+Dec 10 2005, 04:26 AM--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(NavigationHazard @ Dec 10 2005, 04:26 AM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--QuoteEBegin-->*EDIT: 200 [sorry for the typo], which is roughly 5 standard deviations above the maximum heart rate of 170 predicted for 54-year-olds by the 208- (age * 0.7) formula that has supplanted the old 220-age rubric.[right] </td></tr></table><br /><br />Such formulas are not accurate.<br /><br />For example, I could guess that you're "around 100 - 55 years of age", and I'd usually be within 20 or 30 years or so.<br />

[[old] John Rupp]

<!--QuoteBegin-PaulS+Dec 10 2005, 05:08 AM--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(PaulS @ Dec 10 2005, 05:08 AM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Does the Stepper require you to enter your bodyweight?  If not, there is no way it can accurately calculate Watts[right] </td></tr></table><br /><br />The erg doesn't either. <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-->Does the Stepper require you to enter your bodyweight? </td></tr></table><br /><br />Yes. You have to enter your bodyweight.<br /><br />I also have some good relative measures of work done, etc., given that I have been stepping regularly for five years or so now on the same machine at the same settings, etc.<br /><br />Back in 2002, I stepped for two hours a session at 250 watts. Last year, I stepped for two hours a session at 270 watts. This year I have been stepping at 300 watts, but not yet for two hours.<br /><br />Today, after erging, I steped for 80 minutes, but at 305 watts. Finishing HR 161 bpm.<br /><br />This stepping work is going _very_ well. Still lots of space to push it longer and faster.<br /><br />I am tolerating the increased wattage very nicely.<br /><br />I am going to try to push these stepping routines to marathon length, 2.5 hours.<br /><br />My guess is that rowing with standard technique and a much more powerful stroke (suspension on the handle, 12-14 SPI, etc.) is steadily strengthening my legs, and this increased leg strength is showing up as better performance on the stepper. With my old stroke, I used to row mainly with my back, rowing off my toes, neglecting my legs and arms. The result, of course, was a much weaker stroke. I now row in the standard way: leading with my legs with the heels set during the "fat middle" of the stroke when the legs and back are applying maximal force.<br /><br />Interestingly, on a stepper, you also drive off your heels, albeit by alternating legs.<br /><br />ranger