Rowing SPM - Cardio Vs. Power

[aussieluke]

compared to my training, which I think of as nearly pure aerobic work:
100k+/week of which 80-90% is rate 18, pace 2:05-2:08, HeartRate sub 130.

Is that really what your week consists of, Dean? On that basis my aerobic work is way too fast

But this is 100k +

If you're doing half that or less, then I think you need to be going faster / UT1 to get the most out of it.

I'm only doing 30' a day at the moment and because of that I'm sticking in the range of 2:03 - 1:57

...but still low rate (19-22). Trying to stick to 10w/stroke as much as possible.

[hjs]

compared to my training, which I think of as nearly pure aerobic work:
100k+/week of which 80-90% is rate 18, pace 2:05-2:08, HeartRate sub 130.

Is that really what your week consists of, Dean? On that basis my aerobic work is way too fast

But this is 100k +

If you're doing half that or less, then I think you need to be going faster / UT1 to get the most out of it.

I'm only doing 30' a day at the moment and because of that I'm sticking in the range of 2:03 - 1:57

...but still low rate (19-22). Trying to stick to 10w/stroke as much as possible.

High volume is fine, but you need some speed, all year round. Deans weak link

[aussieluke]

High volume is fine, but you need some speed, all year round. Deans weak link

Not suggesting there is anything wrong with high volume - the opposite in fact - lots of relatively slow volume is probably the best thing you can do in my opinion.

But if you don't have the time to do the volume, you're going to have to do less volume but a bit harder.

One hard interval session every 7-10 days seems to be working ok for me.

[hjs]

High volume is fine, but you need some speed, all year round. Deans weak link

Not suggesting there is anything wrong with high volume - the opposite in fact - lots of relatively slow volume is probably the best thing you can do in my opinion.

But if you don't have the time to do the volume, you're going to have to do less volume but a bit harder.

One hard interval session every 7-10 days seems to be working ok for me.

I never have been able to get in the mindset to do high volume. Erging is to boring. Also haven,t done much speed during the season. Strenghttrained though. Which is anaerobe ofcourse. Result, ok strong, mwa aerobic fitness

[MarkEg]

Boredom is my issue too. The thought of sitting there for an hour plus, doesn't appeal.

[aussieluke]

Boredom is my issue too. The thought of sitting there for an hour plus, doesn't appeal.

Netflix and subtitles are steady state requirements for me!

[hjs]

Boredom is my issue too. The thought of sitting there for an hour plus, doesn't appeal.

Netflix and subtitles are steady state requirements for me!

I can,t look at a screen and row at the same time, really think this only gives you junkmeters. Ut2 is relative easy, but not so slow you do it with some concentration.

[bisqeet]

compared to my training, which I think of as nearly pure aerobic work:
100k+/week of which 80-90% is rate 18, pace 2:05-2:08, HeartRate sub 130.

Is that really what your week consists of, Dean? On that basis my aerobic work is way too fast

in winter, erging is my main activity, but even in summer when im OTW, mountainbiking, swimming - I still manage about 80-100km.
and yes, 80% is at about that level of intensity; HM's at R18 2:04-2:08. MHR 60-70%
10% is about 70%.


I limit fast pieces to 1/week (the other 10%) and mostly those are either "longer" distances; CTC, ITC, missing nonathlon pieces.
My weekness is, as Henry quite often states, the twitch muscle training, quick power stuff.
I'm a crap 1 minute/500m, 1000m and I hate 2k's..
But then they were this year not a priority. the shortest race I did was 12k OTW, so I just didnt see the point.
but comparing paces between 5k-30mins-10k-60mins-HM the pace trend is relatively flat compared to your normal fast 2k erger (say sub 6:40)...

Speed is like the edge on a knife, easy to achieve and easy to lose. only needs to be achieved when needed. All year round PetePlan (in my opinion) is not a good usage of time. You are better off doing the boring stuff.
Think of a pyramid. the bigger the aerobic base the higher the possible apex...


yes, its boring and needs distractions and time, but the result can be worthwhile. Unfortunately there is no shortcut to aerobic fitness...

[MarkEg]

compared to my training, which I think of as nearly pure aerobic work:
100k+/week of which 80-90% is rate 18, pace 2:05-2:08, HeartRate sub 130.

Is that really what your week consists of, Dean? On that basis my aerobic work is way too fast

in winter, erging is my main activity, but even in summer when im OTW, mountainbiking, swimming - I still manage about 80-100km.
and yes, 80% is at about that level of intensity; HM's at R18 2:04-2:08. MHR 60-70%
10% is about 70%.


I limit fast pieces to 1/week (the other 10%) and mostly those are either "longer" distances; CTC, ITC, missing nonathlon pieces.
My weekness is, as Henry quite often states, the twitch muscle training, quick power stuff.
I'm a crap 1 minute/500m, 1000m and I hate 2k's..
But then they were this year not a priority. the shortest race I did was 12k OTW, so I just didnt see the point.
but comparing paces between 5k-30mins-10k-60mins-HM the pace trend is relatively flat compared to your normal fast 2k erger (say sub 6:40)...

Speed is like the edge on a knife, easy to achieve and easy to lose. only needs to be achieved when needed. All year round PetePlan (in my opinion) is not a good usage of time. You are better off doing the boring stuff.
Think of a pyramid. the bigger the aerobic base the higher the possible apex...


yes, its boring and needs distractions and time, but the result can be worthwhile. Unfortunately there is no shortcut to aerobic fitness...

Great stuff and will probably be what I focus on. I don't enjoy speed work/ intervals at all. But I also find myself in a position where I want me aerobic work to hurt, so I feel like I'm achieving something ( which defeats the point) So, I like the sub 130 HR idea and will pursue it with some increased volume. Cheers!

[maestroak]

I am about 45 days into owning my Concept2 Model D PM5, and I am learning as I go here. With virtually no experience rowing before, I bought this for my cardio equipment in a home gym I am slowly building (much cheaper than a quality treadmill, and less maintenance issues). The idea being this would cover cardio during the winter vs running outside. Most days I combine this with freeweights after rowing up to 4km-5km.

I am constantly working on my technique as I log more time on the rower. I have been questioning my normal SPM for a couple of weeks now. It sounds like a typical range is 21-30 for most people, with people recommending all the way down to 18 spm. I have also read 30-36 spm for competing. From what I understand a lower spm will help you develop more power with each stroke, leading to more efficiency, and with this base established you can begin to increase your pace.

If I am looking for cardio on the rower, am I wrong to row at a higher spm? My typical pace is 30-32 spm with 1:50-1:55/500m, and after doing that for a few weeks I have found it difficult to row at a slower pace without fully concentrating on the timer. I'm not opposed to forcing myself to slow down, but I just want to know if I am wrong to do it if my purpose is aerobic exercise.

Thanks to all. I'm just trying to learn more about the new equipment in my basement, looking for some help! Hopefully I am not duplicating topics, but I did not find anything speaking to my question here.

I started out the same way and I forced myself to rate down after starting to participate in this board. I rated down to r20 for a long time. I worked on form and then rated back up. Now 30-32 seems blazing and I don't even get that high in an all out 2K. I am around 25-26 naturally, can add power and decrease rate or increase rate and either way take a bit off the pace. I'd suggest rating down and developing that long powerful stroke. Once you have it, you can use as you see fit.

-Steve

[GJS]

Great discussion.

I'm sure this will have been posted before but this excellent Stephen Seiler talk covers a lot of the ground being touched upon.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pf3tczZrUgs

80/20 having been reasonably established (for elite athletes) what should that 20 consist of?

He's reluctant to oversell them but longish, hard intervals - c.4 x 8 mins - seem to provide, across a number of studies, the greatest bang for your buck.

Most athletes incorporate high intensity work across the entire year: there are no lengthy periods consisting solely of long, slow work.

80/20 holds for folk doing 20-30hrs a week but what about us?

My guess is that most elite athletes spend a lot of time on the cusp of over-training. There the rewards are greatest.
I think this holds for us too and - as Luke indicates - this surely means 80/20 will rarely prove optimal (for performance). So far, so obvious.