Questions about the interactive 2K programme

[Norower]

Hello

I want to improve my 2k time with the interactive 2K programme from http://indoorsportservices.co.uk/ and have some questions.

Ive copied some notes from the programme:

''2x15'UT1 means row for 15 minutes in your UT1 range, with a short rest of five or six minutes between each piece.'',does the rest mean no rowing at all or very slow rowing, like double RHR rate?

8x1'AN means row eight one-minute intervals in your AN range, with a one minute rest between each piece. AN = 95-100% of my HRR

Recovery time between intervals
Full recovery between intervals can be considered as taken place when the heart rate has fallen to warm up level (twice resting rate). The intensity of interval-training can be increased by working to 90% or even 80% of full recovery.
The closer the recovery is towards 100%, the more the training will tend towards improving Power, while the closer the recovery is towards 80%, the more the training will tend towards improving lactate tolerance.
Reduced recovery is most effective at the beginning of an intensive interval-training period when intensity takes precedence over quality. Close to competition quality takes precedence over intensity and therefore full recovery is advisable.

I have trouble to drop to double RHR in one minute if i have to row easy between the intervals when i do interval at 95-100% of my HRR, again do i stop rowing or row at an very slow pace, or does it depend on the intensity of the interval?
At the moment i row slow between the intervals but i have an issue that my heartrate are not dropping as much as suggested

[hjs]

Don,t worry about, interval work with short rest is not ment to get a full recovery. Full recovery is for longer pieces where you practice race pace.

Short rest is often no rowing, longer rest is often slow paddling. But in the end its up to you. Its handy to keep the same structure to messure progress though. For the rest do the plan, fill in he details how its suits you.

[Galeere]

Usually the plans leave the option to either row slowly or stop completely. Many advise slow rowing but at the cost of less HR-drop. At 5 or 6 minutes rest a drop to twice resting rate most likely will work but not at 1 minutes rest. I am hard pressed to reach that kind of drop with a full rest (after a few intervals of a hard interval session that does not happen and the 80-90%-rule begins to apply).

[G-dub]

Or do both. Let the HR come all the way down then start a slow row.

[PaulG]

I suggest you take the rest you need to complete the session. You haven't accomplished the intention of the session if you are so fatigued in the last interval that the pace is slow, HR very high, and form all over the place. That's how you might get injured or you may not be fully recovered for the next session the next day (or two days later if you are my age).

Also you might require longer rests periods between later intervals. Believe me, a HR of double the resting rate after the first interval does not feel the same as double the resting rate after the second to last interval. You will be much more fatigued. Take the rest you need to finish the session and in time you can either reduce the rest periods or increase the pace during the intervals.

[jamesg]

i have an issue that my heartrate are not dropping as much as suggested

When fit, HR drops by about 30/minute. If it doesn't your problem is endurance. This was once used as a fitness test: do a standard step test then see how long it takes HR to drop.

Intervals near or faster than 2k pace are best done I'd suggest, if at all, using Watts related to last 2k test, not HR. The IA tables show both.

In the IA, TR is 80 to 105% of 2k W; AN is 105 to 115%.

So if your last 2k was say 250W, TR is 200-260W and AN 260-290W. HR is too slow to react, to be of any use as control in such work, whereas Watts are seen immediately. Even apart from HR band theory being dead now.

The TR spread is wide because TR pieces range from 2x2 to 3x6 minutes. This is a characteristic of the IA, very few WOs are repeated, so every day we have to be careful with the paces, starting slowish. Terry it seems, liked to keep people guessing: quite right too, you never know what will happen in a race.

In any case, don't imagine fast intervals are an alternative to endurance work; they serve to get the crew together and use our hard-earned technique (at 20-23) when sprinting at 40 and rowing at 33. And they let us take a rest before racing, being short. Being short, they can have very little training effect, except as regards technique.

[jackarabit]

James, that is the clearest explanation of O'Neill's Interactive 2K programme and the utility (necessity!) of %2K watts as controller of short interval efforts that I have encountered. Thank you! Jack

[Bob S.]

James, that is the clearest explanation of O'Neill's Interactive 2K programme and the utility (necessity!) of %2K watts as controller of short interval efforts that I have encountered. Thank you! Jack

Second that wholeheartedly! I was going to post a comment myself about a particular issue, but I liked Jack's broader response. The issue I had in mind was the wide range of the TR band. I have often griped about that and wondered what was the purpose behind it. Now it all makes sense. A little late for me, since I am no longer following any program, but it is nice to have my curiosity satisfied.

Bob S.

[Hillclimber]

For my part, I always move at rest: sometimes full strokes; sometime legs only. the calves are not known as the "second heart" for nothing and to me it's just common sense to keep things flowing.
Then again, I can barely keep still at the office desk lol
Damien

[Norower]

Thanks everyone for meaningful input. Ill take this into account for the rest of the programme.

Another question:
My last 2k test are around 10 sec slower than my PB. This is what I put into the programme, but fex UT1 range show: UT1 - Intense Aerobic 149 - 162 70 - 80 2:13 - 2:06 60 - 70,
I have to row around 2:02-2:05 to get my HR around 155 ish for fex this session 2x12'UT1 should I instead focus on watt for each session and not on heartrate and time/500m?

[jamesg]

For UT2, UT1 and AT, use whatever you like, remembering that longer time (or distance) is better than higher speed. Low HR doesn't mean you're not training and the IA in any case will want longer distances as you go on.

Details may depend on where you are in the schedule and on the number of weeks total.

For the shorter AT pieces and for TR and AN, use Pace or Watts (they're the same thing, there 's a direct mathematical relationship between Watts and "speed"). This because you start with low HR and may be tempted to blast off and will then be forced to stop, so Watts or Pace allow better control. Watts have better resolution, you can see even 1W difference, whereas the Pace resolution is about 3%; but clearly this gives you a more stable readout.

Always record what you do, and use it next time to define paces etc. The IA is a guide, not Law.

[hjs]

Thanks everyone for meaningful input. Ill take this into account for the rest of the programme.

Another question:
My last 2k test are around 10 sec slower than my PB. This is what I put into the programme, but fex UT1 range show: UT1 - Intense Aerobic 149 - 162 70 - 80 2:13 - 2:06 60 - 70,
I have to row around 2:02-2:05 to get my HR around 155 ish for fex this session 2x12'UT1 should I instead focus on watt for each session and not on heartrate and time/500m?

Do you have and use correct Hf numbers? Not often that I see people complaining about having to go to fast.
Btw ut1 is not soft, you have to work pretty hard.

[PaulG]

So if your last 2k was say 250W, TR is 200-260W and AN 260-290W. HR is too slow to react, to be of any use as control in such work, whereas Watts are seen immediately. Even apart from HR band theory being dead now.

That's a little disconcerting. Why do you say HR band theory is dead now? Just when I was starting to understand it.

[Norower]

Do you have and use correct Hf numbers? Not often that I see people complaining about having to go to fast.
Btw ut1 is not soft, you have to work pretty hard.

Yes the Hf numbers are quite accurate. I'm going next saturday to an test facility to measure max Hf, Vo2 max etc so I will get it verified there.
Maybe I had an bad test day and the program was influenced by that. Ill tune it up to my PB, its that what i want to beat anyway, well under 7 min are my goal.

[hjs]

So if your last 2k was say 250W, TR is 200-260W and AN 260-290W. HR is too slow to react, to be of any use as control in such work, whereas Watts are seen immediately. Even apart from HR band theory being dead now.

That's a little disconcerting. Why do you say HR band theory is dead now? Just when I was starting to understand it.

James talks about the upper bands. Hf does not work well here. The work done is to anaerobic for hf being usefull.