Questions about the interactive 2K programme

[Bob S.]

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

The main problem in using HR is the lag. It takes a long time for the HR to get up to speed. In my own experience, the lag time seems to increase as I get older. HR is fine for the long pieces if you are patience enough to wait until it sort of levels off. For short intervals, there is just not enough time. Also, for intervals, it is going to vary a lot, depending not only on the length of each interval, but on the rest times, the type of rest, and the number of intervals.

Are you gearing up yet for the ice-scraper challenge?

[jackarabit]

Damien writes:

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

I have also heard that "the legs pump the heart." All that dirty venous blood has to get back thru the pump to the filter/exchanger. Back pressure and delay of that process by a heart that throttles back too soon probably isn't good. I've seen some speculation that cessation of hard exertion without warm down may correlate with DVT. They hot walk horses, don't they?

I also put down the handle and continue to work the legs while drinking/toweling off. I hadn't thought about which leg muscles are involved. It does seem that the calves and hamstrings would do most of the flexing (and pumping) if the effort required to get forward to catch position is greater than the effort to flatten the legs.

[jamesg]

HR band theory is dead now?

HR theory has always had an unfortunate association with DDR activity in other fields, and maybe one was invented to mask the other.

A key idea in HR band theory is finding the AT deflection point. Does anyone do this periodically? I think it's enough to follow Xeno's dictum: pull fast or pull slow, but not in between. Or a standard Interactive, based on tests and Power bands. The name of the band (UT, AT, TR) is just a label, what counts is the Power delivered.

I see HR as useful in a number of cases:
Beginners who can't row will find it hard to get their HR up and maybe will wonder why they have to rate 35 to go slow.
We may need to keep HR down for cardiac health reasons.
Keeping it down will ensure we are doing endurance work, which is what's needed for normal life: no one sprints 10 miles on foot or a mile out to sea only to find he has to come back under his own steam.
If I see HR spiralling up, it's clear I'll have to slow down soon and/or cut some lumps off my sculls; once is enough for this.

[PaulG]

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

The main problem in using HR is the lag. It takes a long time for the HR to get up to speed. In my own experience, the lag time seems to increase as I get older. HR is fine for the long pieces if you are patience enough to wait until it sort of levels off. For short intervals, there is just not enough time. Also, for intervals, it is going to vary a lot, depending not only on the length of each interval, but on the rest times, the type of rest, and the number of intervals.

Are you gearing up yet for the ice-scraper challenge?

Agreed, I never reach the HR band in AN pieces but often exceed them in the dreaded TR prices. They are the toughest.

Yup, after last winter I need another coveted icescraper from Rick Bayko's NE2KC. I'm in as long as my back holds out which right now is problematic.

[SelfWillRunRiot]

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.

Great thread. Looking to work on my 2k and think I'll try this program (unless anyone on here knows a more effective one).
2 questions:
1. What is hf?
2. Are you all establishing UT1, UT2, AN, etc via gas exchange testing using a metabolic cart or subjective HR measures? I have access to a cart and administer metabolic assessments regularly at work but never on the erg.

[hjs]

1. What is hf?
2. Are you all establishing UT1, UT2, AN, etc via gas exchange testing using a metabolic cart or subjective HR measures? I have access to a cart and administer metabolic assessments regularly at work but never on the erg.

Heart frequency for 1
No, most don,t, they just use rest and max hf and the bands are based on those, which ofcourse is not 100% correct.

I myself btw, don,t use hf at all, just pace strokerate and feel. I have nothing against hf based training, but it does not match my way of training.

[gregsmith01748]

hf is the same as HR. I think it is a Dutch or German version of the acronym.

The bands are determined by percentages of your measured resting heart rate and maximum hr. For resting hr, measure it a few mornings upon waking while still in bed and use the lowest reading. For max, you can do a step test, or just use the highest you've seen in a very hard workout. The two reading s are used to come up with your heart rate range (HRR).

Each band is a range of percentages. UT2 starts at 60% of HRR. UT1 starts at 70% of HRR. These are just estimates, but give you an idea of the intensity of the training.

[Bob S.]

2. Are you all establishing UT1, UT2, AN, etc via gas exchange testing using a metabolic cart or subjective HR measures? I have access to a cart and administer metabolic assessments regularly at work but never on the erg.

Only a very few would have access to that. One common practice is to base the zones on percentages of the wattage expended on a recent 2k time trial. Another is to base them on percent of maximum heart rate or on available heart rate range, i.e. max minus resting. Often the base data is not really solid but just a guess, whether it is a fictional 2k time or a maximum heart rate not based on a clinical testing. For a lot of ergers, the zones are set by feel rather than system based on solid data. Actually that is not too bad after doing that for a lot of pieces and refining it along the way.

Before posting, I found that your questions have already been answered and Greg explained the idea of heart rate range in far better detail. However, I am sending this in anyway, since I think that my first and last 2 sentences in that paragraph are appropriate.

Bob S.

[SelfWillRunRiot]

Thanks guys, I appreciate the input! I couldn't find all of your responses until I clicked on post reply. Sorry for my delay, still poking around here.

[teddyDK]

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.

My pulse droppet 40/min today. My shape isnt really good

[Norower]

Update:

Im on week 12 of 16 of the programme. My setting is Athlete Level 2, 3 Sessions a Week. The test i did after 8 weeks lowered my 2k time from 7:18.6 to 7:09.9.
I adjusted the programme after the test(week 8) to mach my new 2k time. Ive followed advises to train each zones using %Watt of my 2K and not following %HRR(which i think work out very well). You have to calculate your min/max Watt for each zone since the interactive 2k programme dont display that.
So far this programme suits me quite well, the variation in the sessions are meaningful. Ive no idea if my improvement are good or bad, but personally im quite satisfied. My next goal are 2k under 7min, it will be hard but seems doable now.

[SelfWillRunRiot]

Update:

Im on week 12 of 16 of the programme. My setting is Athlete Level 2, 3 Sessions a Week. The test i did after 8 weeks lowered my 2k time from 7:18.6 to 7:09.9.
I adjusted the programme after the test(week 8) to mach my new 2k time. Ive followed advises to train each zones using %Watt of my 2K and not following %HRR(which i think work out very well). You have to calculate your min/max Watt for each zone since the interactive 2k programme dont display that.
So far this programme suits me quite well, the variation in the sessions are meaningful. Ive no idea if my improvement are good or bad, but personally im quite satisfied. My next goal are 2k under 7min, it will be hard but seems doable now.

Thanks for the update!

I'm on this plan as well, 4 days per week and haven't tested out yet but already feel some improvements. I think 4 days is too much when you take in to account my weightlifting and martial arts schedule but I'm powering through.

[Norower]

Thanks for the update!

I'm on this plan as well, 4 days per week and haven't tested out yet but already feel some improvements. I think 4 days is too much when you take in to account my weightlifting and martial arts schedule but I'm powering through.

Sounds like tons of training in my world, dont overload yourself then

[SelfWillRunRiot]

Thanks for the update!

I'm on this plan as well, 4 days per week and haven't tested out yet but already feel some improvements. I think 4 days is too much when you take in to account my weightlifting and martial arts schedule but I'm powering through.

Sounds like tons of training in my world, dont overload yourself then

Yeah seriously, I'm thinking of dropping back to 3 days rowing although I'm not sure on how to adjust my plan. Should I enter new parameters in my IA set up or just omit a day? Not sure which day to omit.

[Norower]

Thanks for the update!

I'm on this plan as well, 4 days per week and haven't tested out yet but already feel some improvements. I think 4 days is too much when you take in to account my weightlifting and martial arts schedule but I'm powering through.

Sounds like tons of training in my world, dont overload yourself then

Yeah seriously, I'm thinking of dropping back to 3 days rowing although I'm not sure on how to adjust my plan. Should I enter new parameters in my IA set up or just omit a day? Not sure which day to omit.

You can try enter new paramenters, it seems session 3 are left out when you compare 3 and 4 days a week.