Training for 2K @75%HR, use Low or High SPM?

[rlboyles]

What's best to train for 2K - 18-20SPM @ 75% HR for say 60min, or 30SPM @ 75% HR? Or a mix of both (as I'm doing right now)?

[gregsmith01748]

You will hear different theories, but I think you want to take strokes with similar drive power whether you are doing a long row at 75% hr or a faster piece. I would do your long rows at 18-20 and then mix in intervals at higher rates and faster splits.

[Cyclingman1]

What's best to train for 2K - 18-20SPM @ 75% HR for say 60min, or 30SPM @ 75% HR?

Who says you have to row 60mins to train for 2K. In the season before my PB for 2K, I had one 10k row at 36:38, DF 140, 33 SPM [no idea about HR] and nothing else over 30min. I just throw that out there to show there is more than one way to skin a cat.

[lindsayh]

What's best to train for 2K - 18-20SPM @ 75% HR for say 60min, or 30SPM @ 75% HR? Or a mix of both (as I'm doing right now)?

I agree with Jim - there are a lot of better things you can do with your time than 60' pieces - once you get over 30' the advantages are pretty slim unless you are very unfit. Better spending time doing other stuff - look at the ISS interactive plan and the Pete Plan for ideas (there is lots of info in these threads about 2km training as well) Interval training is part of it to add to longer steady pieces at varying intensity.

[hjs]

What's best to train for 2K - 18-20SPM @ 75% HR for say 60min, or 30SPM @ 75% HR? Or a mix of both (as I'm doing right now)?

If you row for 60 min at 75% hf and high rate you have to use a very soft stroke. This will not help. Longer sessions can better be done at lower rate. This way you can keep a stronger stroke but at the same time keep the hf in check.

[JLB123]

1) What hjs said. High stroke rate low power will only mess up your technique (you either need to shorten up or rush the recovery to generate low power at high eate)

2) On whether 60' pieces are the best way to prepare - look into aerobic vs anaerobic training and peaking. Massively oversimplified version is: Longer pieces (e.g. 60'+) will make you better in the long run, but in the short term, best way to prepare for a 2k is to do sprint training (e.g. 8x500m). Your programme should gradually move from doing long pieces to sprints as the 2k approaches.

[Edward4492]

Your starting point matters. Jim had success, I'm assuming, largely due to a solid aerobic base built from years of cycling. I came from a cycling background also and while not as successful as Jim, I've done reasonably well on the erg. A raw untrained non-athlete may need the 60m rows just to get the aerobic base in. I like the 20r, high power rows. I used to go up to a full hour. Now my max is 10k, and my new approach is to go back to 2k at 20r, but bump up the power by 5-10w, then work it back up to 10k. I hit a 10k at 20r/200w last week, next I'll shoot for 2k at 20r/210, then 5k etc. The problem with very long rows is that pace/power will have to be compromised to get the distance in. So at some point the move has to be in the direction of shorter,harder.

[jamesg]

What's best to train for 2K - 18-20SPM @ 75% HR for say 60min, or 30SPM @ 75% HR?

75% HR (range?) and high spm imply low work per stroke; fine for warm-up with arms only, but not much else.

The basic training rule is: for any given power output, keep drag, feet and spm as low as possible. This lets us train endurance, strength and technique all at once.

[Cyclingman1]

Jim had success, I'm assuming, largely due to a solid aerobic base built from years of cycling.

I get told that a good bit. And sure enough looking back at a decade or so, through 2011 I was averaging about 4800 miles a year on the bike. Though I started erging in 2012 and had some early success, due to injuries and medical situations my biking dropped off dramatically and my erging has also lagged. But I don't think it was simply miles put in on the bike. It was the intensity. I've always been someone who pretty much "hammers" on every ride. I gained strength and dealing with lactic acid on the bike. In recent yrs the intensity went down. But as it turns out, this year I'm ramping up on the bike and the erging results are starting to show that. Also, it is hard to duplicate the hours spent on a bike. Riding 2-3 hours on a bike is no big deal. Rowing that long is most difficult. Plus the rpm on a bike is 90 or so. Can't do that on a rower. It makes rowing times seem trivial compared to biking.

The basic training rule is: for any given power output, keep drag, feet and spm as low as possible. This lets us train endurance, strength and technique all at once.

I think I break most of those.

[G-dub]

Here it goes, I hope it is taken in the right spirit. Edward, just last week you said that the only way to get better on the erg is by erging. You also said that cross training doesn't do anything (I admittedly may be being selective in word choice). This seems to be what is mostly written about too in other places - that training needs to be selective.

But then the concept that Jim and your cycling background is the reason for your erg success comes up. Henry says "I came into it fit already". And dog gone Morgan does 5K a week plus all kinds of other crazy stuff and is killing everybody? Hill Climber asked at the end of the season...(are you going to take your fitness into bible racing this summer". And my good friend Daniel J is off lifting weights so that he can be a faster erger. I am doing it too - I'm running and cycling in the morning, believing that it is helping my aerobic fitness and expand my potential on the erg. So here is where my confusion is.

Aerobic fitness deminishes pretty quickly as has also been stated, so how does ones cycling background have anything to do with ones present erging unless, of course building an aerobic base regardless of the mode does have a positive influence across the modes if you apply it right away. Or does it have more to do with a genetic proclivity toward these type of activities (is this where VO2 max comes in?) and or a built up tolerance (or experience with or desire) for the pain associated with hard efforts that is the reason why your background is able to be helpful? Since the rowing motion is so different than the biking motion and if we believe in specificity I can't imagine how one would prepare you for the other. I wish and hope it would however, since all erg and no bike makes Glenn a dull boy.

[Bob S.]

@ G-dub Re: cross-training. My Uni coach back in the 1940s was a firm believer in specificity. He was one of the top coaches in those days, having coached 3 college eights to olympic gold. I remember one day when he was chewing out one of his gold medal winners about developing bad technique habits. The coach blamed it on the fact that the student was using a bicycle to commute a short distance to classes. Then there is Rocking Roland, an Aussie who used to contribute a lot to this forum. He continually complained about how erging (on a grounded C2) had messed up his rowing form. A final note - I was talking to a physical therapist about rowing recently. She had been a sweep rower in her Uni days a few years ago and now rows in her own single. I asked her what she thought about the differences between sweep rowing and sculling, specifically the problem of the strong asymmetry of the sweep movement. She replied that it had definitely been a problem for her and that she still had issues with it that she was working to resolve.

My own take on this is that specificity is very important for anyone who wants to be at the top in a particular activity, but that in is not in the best interest of the average person who uses that activity to improve or maintain strength and fitness. For that, a more balanced program is needed, especially with regard to opposing sets of muscles. For rowing and erging, that means working on triceps and pectorals, which do little work in the stroke movement.

Bob S.

[jackarabit]

My own take on this is that specificity is very important for anyone who wants to be at the top in a particular activity, but that in is not in the best interest of the average person who uses that activity to improve or maintain strength and fitness. For that, a more balanced program is needed, especially with regard to opposing sets of muscles. For rowing and erging, that means working on triceps and pectorals, which do little work in the stroke movement.

Should be etched in stone! Along with the five pillar oppos for big muscles, I do internal and external shoulder rotations on a cable weight stack every trip to the gym. Muscle tissue atrophies, nerves forget how and when to fire. Jack

[G-dub]

Bob, I'm in total agreement on the specificity arguement. My ponder has to do with why we perceive a carry over effect in other modes. For instance, I have only mountain biker a few times in the last 2 months but the times I did, I felt way fitter and I was way faster than my cronies. I have been mostly erging at varying intensities as well as biking on a stationary trainer at low HR. Why am I fitter mountain biking? It's a totally different mode than either. My outlandish theory is that my brain is allowing more effort because it is translating feelings from the intense erging over and saying "oh, we can do this, we felt this way two days ago and we didn't die". Clearly there is no reason I am more mountain bike fit - the last time I rode was three weeks ago. But I sure felt like I was fitter than ever. Does this crazy idea make sense?

[hjs]

Bob, I'm in total agreement on the specificity arguement. My ponder has to do with why we perceive a carry over effect in other modes. For instance, I have only mountain biker a few times in the last 2 months but the times I did, I felt way fitter and I was way faster than my cronies. I have been mostly erging at varying intensities as well as biking on a stationary trainer at low HR. Why am I fitter mountain biking? It's a totally different mode than either. My outlandish theory is that my brain is allowing more effort because it is translating feelings from the intense erging over and saying "oh, we can do this, we felt this way two days ago and we didn't die". Clearly there is no reason I am more mountain bike fit - the last time I rode was three weeks ago. But I sure felt like I was fitter than ever. Does this crazy idea make sense?

Its simpler. Nomatter what training, it will build fitness. Cardio will develope heard and lungs, plus the muscle used.
Strenghtsport mostly pure power.
Often newbys with a cycling or running background often have good aerobic fitness but lack upperbodypower. They often do pretty good right away on longer stuff after a short while.
Strenghtathles often pull off a fast 500 with not much specific training. Longer work is not great.

For you, rowing does work aerobic fitness and trains the pushing motion of the legs. Precisly what you need on a bike. Toprowers often are good cyclist, on the flat that is. For hills they are to heavy.

[G-dub]

Aha! So there IS a cross over benefit! So while I might not be as fit as I could on a mountain bike, I am a fitter mountain biker. And it should work the other way. If I spend more time in aerobic activities it should benefit all of them. I believe it is both physical and mental. I am starting to believe (I have too much time on my hands) that the mind opens up or keeps open pathways to allow for effort across modes. It accepts the perception of effort and makes what used to be hard seem easier because it is has been conditioned to - even if it is in another mode.