2k prediction

ItalianRower · Post by **ItalianRower** » March 8th, 2018, 5:27 pm

For 6x3'on 3'off I went 1:39 at rate 29 and for 12x3 on 3off I went 1:42 rate 28. The rate caps made it quite difficult and these are the first intervals After winter season. I can go around 1:47-49 for 10k and my max watts are 900.
For the 2k I rate 32-34

hjs · Post by **hjs** » March 9th, 2018, 4:08 am

6x 3/3, compare this to 4x 1k on 5 which is around 2k plus 1.

Bit shorter, but 6 reps, and 3 rest and a rate cap.
So a min, plus, plus and plus.
Maybe m 0,5, plus 1, plus 1, plus 1,5 gives 3 seconds.

6.24 ?

ItalianRower · Post by **ItalianRower** » March 9th, 2018, 4:13 am

Will try but I have trouble mantain stroke power at higher rates, any way to io the stroke rate with the same techno?

hjs · Post by **hjs** » March 9th, 2018, 4:34 am

ItalianRower wrote:Will try but I have trouble mantain stroke power at higher rates, any way to io the stroke rate with the same techno?

Thats the golden question...

Good high raters can make a good turn from stroke to recovery. Key is not to overpower the finish, so you can quickly make the turn.
Just rating high with no extra speed is not wise, don,t just rate up, but use the rate whichs feels best...

JerekKruger · Post by **JerekKruger** » March 9th, 2018, 4:48 am

hjs wrote:Maybe m 0,5, plus 1, plus 1, plus 1,5 gives 3 seconds.

Wouldn't it be 2 seconds? You're comparing it to 4x1000m/5r, which is 2k+1, so subtracting 3 from this gives 2k-2.

hjs · Post by **hjs** » March 9th, 2018, 5:00 am

JerekKruger wrote:
hjs wrote:Maybe m 0,5, plus 1, plus 1, plus 1,5 gives 3 seconds.
Wouldn't it be 2 seconds? You're comparing it to 4x1000m/5r, which is 2k+1, so subtracting 3 from this gives 2k-2.

I am getting old.......

hjs · Post by **hjs** » March 9th, 2018, 7:51 am

hjs wrote:
JerekKruger wrote:
hjs wrote:Maybe m 0,5, plus 1, plus 1, plus 1,5 gives 3 seconds.
Wouldn't it be 2 seconds? You're comparing it to 4x1000m/5r, which is 2k+1, so subtracting 3 from this gives 2k-2.
I am getting old.......

Ehh on second thought no. Its 2 seconds compared to 4x1k, so 3 against 2k, 1.36 was right.

JerekKruger · Post by **JerekKruger** » March 9th, 2018, 9:12 am

hjs wrote:Ehh on second thought no. Its 2 seconds compared to 4x1k, so 3 against 2k, 1.36 was right.

You're right that I was wrong, but by the looks of it you're wrong again too

If you did 4x1000/5r at 1:39 that would suggest a 1:38 pace for 2k. Because 3min is a bit shorter than 1k we add 0.5s to get 1:38.5. The extra reps subtracts 1s to get 1:37.5. The shorter rest subtracts another second to get 1:36.5. Finally the rate restriction subtracts a final 1.5s to get 1:35.

That said the calculation is a bit ad hoc, and I think 1:36 sounds like a more reasonable prediction anyway, 1:35 seems a bit optimistic.

hjs · Post by **hjs** » March 9th, 2018, 9:58 am

JerekKruger wrote:
hjs wrote:Ehh on second thought no. Its 2 seconds compared to 4x1k, so 3 against 2k, 1.36 was right.
You're right that I was wrong, but by the looks of it you're wrong again too

If you did 4x1000/5r at 1:39 that would suggest a 1:38 pace for 2k. Because 3min is a bit shorter than 1k we add 0.5s to get 1:38.5. The extra reps subtracts 1s to get 1:37.5. The shorter rest subtracts another second to get 1:36.5. Finally the rate restriction subtracts a final 1.5s to get 1:35.

That said the calculation is a bit ad hoc, and I think 1:36 sounds like a more reasonable prediction anyway, 1:35 seems a bit optimistic.

How can something so simple still go wrong again and again

JerekKruger · Post by **JerekKruger** » March 9th, 2018, 10:31 am

hjs wrote:How can something so simple still go wrong again and again

How do you think I feel. I'm a mathematician and I got it wrong first time. Even the second time I had to break it down into the steps I wrote to make sure I had it right

hjs · Post by **hjs** » March 9th, 2018, 10:37 am

JerekKruger wrote:
hjs wrote:How can something so simple still go wrong again and again
How do you think I feel. I'm a mathematician and I got it wrong first time. Even the second time I had to break it down into the steps I wrote to make sure I had it right

Yeah, you simply start to doubt your thinking.
In this case it is not the math, its the starting point where I messed up.

ItalianRower · Post by **ItalianRower** » March 10th, 2018, 1:20 pm

Today I did 4x3000m on 3:00 rest at 1:49.7 rate capped at 22. I think I could go for 1:37 on my 2k, any considerations based on today's effort?

hjs · Post by **hjs** » March 10th, 2018, 1:42 pm

ItalianRower wrote:Today I did 4x3000m on 3:00 rest at 1:49.7 rate capped at 22. I think I could go for 1:37 on my 2k, any considerations based on today's effort?

To far away from 2k work. Maybe you have other sessions yourself around 2k work?

ItalianRower · Post by **ItalianRower** » March 10th, 2018, 2:21 pm

Well I have the one I posted but I feel 1:35 and 1:36 are possibly a bit too ambitious

hjs · Post by **hjs** » March 10th, 2018, 3:11 pm

ItalianRower wrote:Well I have the one I posted but I feel 1:35 and 1:36 are possibly a bit too ambitious

I ment around the last 2k you have done. Its a smart thing to do certain sessions you can compare. If so you can predict a 2k very well.

Concept2 Forum

2k prediction

2k prediction

Re: 2k prediction

Re: 2k prediction

Re: 2k prediction

Re: 2k prediction

Re: 2k prediction

Re: 2k prediction

Re: 2k prediction

Re: 2k prediction

Re: 2k prediction

Re: 2k prediction

Re: 2k prediction

Re: 2k prediction

Re: 2k prediction

Re: 2k prediction