wolverine plan, anyone?

[JerekKruger]

Wolverine is found to be to complicated, more or less only the inventor knows how to use it. I have seldom seen people using it.

Indeed. It's worth noting that the PDF hosted by Concept 2 titled "The Wolverine Plan" only contains the bare bones of the Wolverine Plan. This document expands on it a fair amount, but if you really want to get the full picture you'd have to read through most the links contained on this page (you'll probably want to use a browser add on that processes the old code tags).

Both plans, although its really only 1, the second is just a simpler, shorter version, are not representative for modern training.

True, although I don't think modern training programmes include much, if any, alactic work still. Strength training is common, though far from universal, and probably provides much of the same benefits.

Also worth mentioning is that the world of masters rowing is tiny compared to masters running or cycling, so it's quite possible that there is much less work done on developing training programmes specifically for older athletes in rowing than in running and cycling.

[Yankeerunner]

Indeed. It's worth noting that the PDF hosted by Concept 2 titled "The Wolverine Plan" only contains the bare bones of the Wolverine Plan. This document expands on it a fair amount, but if you really want to get the full picture you'd have to read through most the links contained on this page (you'll probably want to use a browser add on that processes the old code tags).

There is great value in reading the full document and not just the bare bones condensed version. Even if you never do the WP workouts it's worth taking a hard look at whether your goals are Training (for competition, even if only with yourself) or merely Exercise. There IS a difference, and the Document spells that out clearly. Stop fooling yourself that it's only a matter of another erger beating you because of better genes.

When first published there were a large number of forumites that gave the L4 at try. It seemed universally agreed that time seemed to pass by more quickly doing, say, one hour of L4 compared to doing one hour of any other erging. Weird, but true.

My only caveat is that weaklings (that would be me) need not apply. Or maybe it should be people with poor technique (that would also be me). I think the WP is a great training plan, but I seem to develop lower back and/or sore knees when I stick with the whole plan. Stronger ergers have not had that problem.

[JerekKruger]

@Yankeerunner - agreed. There's a lot of really useful information in Mike's old posts, regardless of what training programme you're following. I can also confirm that when I spent some time doing L4 workouts the time passed faster than doing the same amount of time flat rated. This doesn't mean everyone should do L4 workouts as written, but certainly including some rate changes in longer workouts can break them up and make them go by faster.

[gooseflight]

Both plans, although its really only 1, the second is just a simpler, shorter version, are not representative for modern training.

Depends a bit on how much time you have available.

If by "modern training" you mean a periodized approach then the benefit of 80% distance/20% intervals only really accrues if you can pack in significant volume. Shorter duration programmes that feature a higher proportion of UT1/AT sessions might just be the best bang if time is limited.

[hjs]

Both plans, although its really only 1, the second is just a simpler, shorter version, are not representative for modern training.

Depends a bit on how much time you have available.

If by "modern training" you mean a periodized approach then the benefit of 80% distance/20% intervals only really accrues if you can pack in significant volume. Shorter duration programmes that feature a higher proportion of UT1/AT sessions might just be the best bang if time is limited.

Certainly, for us, non full time people doing a very high volume regiem is not realistic. 20% is possibly even on the high side.
Its very much ut2 kind of work. Out of season.

[kcavorsi]

Late night L4(late night for me is 9pm after my kids go to bed)

60' 1110 strokes 18.5 spm Ref pace 1:42

2500m warmup

182/184/186/188/186/184
Goal meters: 14,766
Actual meters rowed: 14,831

2500m cooldown

[bob01]

80 20.... more polarized than periodisation

[gooseflight]

80 20.... more polarized than periodisation

Apologies. Meant polarized.

[TomR]

i can't speak for mike c, but i'll try to say a few things he would say more clearly:

periodization. the wp is linear, with the exception that in the "off-seasion," mike c said he would do either a level 1 or a level 2 each week, not both. mike wrote that periodization developed in large part for athletes using performance enhancing drugs, and training was tuned to drug cycles. if you're not using peds, periodization may not fit your situation.

the wp trains all "energy systems" and engages all types of muscle fiber. he tended to reject the idea of training periods attuned to one physiological outcome or another, i.e. training for alactic or anaerobic threshold or what have you. there is not some on/off switch that allows you to train one physioloical characteristic alone. the wp is designed to hit them all in proportions that produce a rower prepared to win a 2k race.

there has been a bit of posting about how the wp may not include adequate training at high intensities. nonsense. the level 1 training, done weekly during the lead up to races, includes stroke rates and paces that are as fast as or faster than race pace. furthermore, long uninterrupted l4 and l3 rows (approx 60+ min) are designed to tire "slow-twitch" fibers to the point where "fast-twitch" are engaged

a rower who adheres to the wp as designed is not going have deficiencies in his or her preparation.

gooseflight suggests a program of ut1 and at for one training less. he may be right, but i'm half inclined to train 4/week using the wp to see how that works. at my age, i'm regularly dealing with flare-ups of chronic injuries. i might actually do ok with a disciplined 4/wk program, rather than trying to row more often and then taking extra days off because of one of my many frayed body parts is on fire.

with apologies to mike c for any misrepresentations.

[gooseflight]

gooseflight suggests a program of ut1 and at for one training less

A bias towards ...

At any age a diet of just ut1/at would not be beneficial. Sometimes a walk in the park is training.

[NavigationHazard]

If you want unadulterated Mike on his own plan, take a look at viewtopic.php?t=4190

The thread [long since locked] was started on the old C2 Forum in 2005.

[Mike Caviston]

I did not suggest that the plans were solely lsd. But rather questioning the absence of faster/power work. Trying to say that as the plans were old that may be the reason as there was a different philosophy then... Sports science has moved on!

I've continued to follow developments in sports science since I first began writing about the WP (it's my profession). Nothing new has come along to challenge the major premises (or any minor ones that I can think of). Regarding your question about purely alactic training (<10 seconds of maximal effort), I don't think it's necessary or particularly useful. But it can easily be incorporated into warm-ups. (I have addressed this somewhere in my past posts).

Wolverine is found to be to complicated, more or less only the inventor knows how to use it. I have seldom seen people using it.

Too complicated? Maybe. Many people certainly make it complicated. There are plenty of people using it who don't post here.

There is great value in reading the full document and not just the bare bones condensed version. Even if you never do the WP workouts it's worth taking a hard look at whether your goals are Training (for competition, even if only with yourself) or merely Exercise.

There's a lot of really useful information in Mike's old posts, regardless of what training programme you're following.

Thanks! I agree (he said without a trace of modesty). I read so many questions about so many aspects of training that I've written about in detail. Not to say that I can solve all the world's training issues but I have solved mine and there was a time I put a lot of time and effort into sharing my perspective; the material is still available (as others periodically point out, along with providing links). I can add that all the principles utilized in the WP are serving me well as I age (57 in a few weeks) and as I use rowing primarily as a training modality for other competitive pursuits.

[kcavorsi]

Today was L3

2500m warmup

Continuous 15,750K
Pace 1:57.8
1:01:54

2500m cooldown

[kcavorsi]

2500m warmup

60’ L4 1110 strokes 18.5 spm Ref pace 1:42
182/184/186/188/186/184
Goal meters: 14,766
Meters rowed: 14,808

2500m cooldown

Felt a bit sluggish today after taking yesterday off and having a few glasses of wine with dinner last night, but stuck it out and overall felt pretty good.

[kcavorsi]

Finished week 8 of WP with L4

2500m warmup

60 L4 1110 strokes, 18.5 spm, Ref pace 1:42
182/184/186/188/186/184
Goal meters: 14,766
Meters rowed: 14,802

2500m cooldown