wolverine plan, anyone?

[jackarabit]

05/14/2018
WP (week 4)

L4 42’ [104-110-104-106-110-104-110]
Target strokes: 748. Actual: 749
Target meters: 8128. Actual: 8182

17.8 spm [749/17.8 = 17.83]
5.4 W/s [96/17.8 = 5.39]
10.9 m/s [8182/749 = 10.92]

2k wu

[kcavorsi]

L4

2500m warmup
60' 1,164 strokes 19.4 spm Ref Pace 1:42
192/194/196/192/194/196
Goal meters: 14,986
Meters rowed: 15,105

2500m cooldown

[Mike Caviston]

I don't keep track of anybody's training on a regular basis, so I don't know if you guys have addressed this already. But those are some pretty big gaps between goal and actual meters. Ideally there would be no more than 3-4 meters gap for 60 minutes, and being right on the money isn't that difficult (with practice). I'd be re-examining reference paces and looking at technique. That is, if the intent is to build a foundation for your best 2K somewhere down the road. If you're just putting in meters to get a little exercise, ignore me and carry on. But that goes against the "structured training" thing you seem to be going for (and that the WP was meant to provide).

[jackarabit]

I don't keep track of anybody's training on a regular basis, so I don't know if you guys have addressed this already. But those are some pretty big gaps between goal and actual meters. Ideally there would be no more than 3-4 meters gap for 60 minutes, and being right on the money isn't that difficult (with practice). I'd be re-examining reference paces and looking at technique. That is, if the intent is to build a foundation for your best 2K somewhere down the road. If you're just putting in meters to get a little exercise, ignore me and carry on. But that goes against the "structured training" thing you seem to be going for (and that the WP was meant to provide).

Demo Dummy has no ego. Next go I’m stepping down reference pace from 2:08 to 2:10.

[kcavorsi]

I don't keep track of anybody's training on a regular basis, so I don't know if you guys have addressed this already. But those are some pretty big gaps between goal and actual meters. Ideally there would be no more than 3-4 meters gap for 60 minutes, and being right on the money isn't that difficult (with practice). I'd be re-examining reference paces and looking at technique. That is, if the intent is to build a foundation for your best 2K somewhere down the road. If you're just putting in meters to get a little exercise, ignore me and carry on. But that goes against the "structured training" thing you seem to be going for (and that the WP was meant to provide).

Been doing the program now for 17 weeks, 6 sessions a week with three 60' L4's per week. Started at 17.8spm and have added 6 strokes per week. I have been going over my goal meters, more so over the past few weeks. It seemed to me that over time, what "feels right" at a given stroke rate, particularly in the range of 17-20, has crept down, for example I find myself usually at 2:02/500m at 18 spm rather than my target of 2:03. I've chalked this up to improved fitness/power/technique, and haven't been fighting it so far. Been at ref pace 1:42 as my best 2K before starting the program was 6:48. Hadn't considered using a different ref pace as your suggestions in the past cautioned against using a ref pace faster than your best 2K. Am I getting gready and trying to do too much too fast? Should I force myself to ease the pace conistently back to targets? I assumed this would also happen naturally as I continue to add strokes and higher spms. And don't get me wrong, these sessions stil do not fell easy by any means. Any additional advice/guidance would be much appreciated. I don't have a lot of experience but absolutley love this plan, and am certainly interested in maximizing what I can do at the 2K distance over the long term. Thanks

[jackarabit]

I don't keep track of anybody's training on a regular basis, so I don't know if you guys have addressed this already. But those are some pretty big gaps between goal and actual meters. Ideally there would be no more than 3-4 meters gap for 60 minutes, and being right on the money isn't that difficult (with practice). I'd be re-examining reference paces and looking at technique. That is, if the intent is to build a foundation for your best 2K somewhere down the road. If you're just putting in meters to get a little exercise, ignore me and carry on. But that goes against the "structured training" thing you seem to be going for (and that the WP was meant to provide).

Demo Dummy has no ego. Next go I’m stepping down reference pace from 2:08 to 2:10.

And if that doesn’t work to calm things down and put meterage on the goal, I’ll try ref pace 2:06.

The first choice (2:10) appears counterintuitive except that I know I overpace @ 16spm and fall short of prescribed pace @ 21-22spm. Dropping from 2:24 to 2:27 at rate 22 should allow me to stop protecting the ego I don’t have about the endurance I most certainly don’t have and hold prescribed paces over my current range of L4 rates.

[Allan Olesen]

Does anyone have experience with building Wolverine L4 workouts on a slower reference pace than your true 2k pace?

Specifically, I am thinking about basing a plan on a 2:11 reference pace instead of my true 2:01 2k pace.

Well, now I got my own experience. It took a few days because I first had to code a home-rolled monitor software for the PC to help me with keeping pace and stroke rate during the workout.

I did a 20' workout consisting of 16/18/16/18/16/18/20/18/16/18 based on reference pace 2.11, just to get a feel for it.

Results (first 10 minutes warm up excluded):

Code: Select all

Time	Meters	Pace	Watts	Cal/Hr	S/M	
12:00.0	365m	2:44.3	79	571	16	105
14:00.0	379m	2:38.3	88	603	18	106
16:00.0	368m	2:43.0	81	578	17	108
18:00.0	380m	2:37.8	89	606	18	108
20:00.0	366m	2:43.9	79	573	16	105
22:00.0	380m	2:37.8	89	606	18	108
24:00.0	392m	2:33.0	98	635	20	108
26:00.0	379m	2:38.3	88	603	18	109
28:00.0	366m	2:43.9	79	573	16	102
30:00.0	379m	2:38.3	88	603	18	108

Ideal paces according to Wolverine table for my reference pace:
16 SPM: 2:44
18 SPM: 2:38
20 SPM: 2:33

So after a little hiccup in the beginning, I was able to keep my stroke rates, and I was able to keep my average pace within a few tenths for each interval. I am pretty proud of myself right now.

And I am happy that I used a 10 seconds slower reference pace. Not really for the reasons I originally stated, but simply because there is a huge amount of learning while trying to follow the workout plan. Getting used to rowing at 16 SPM is hard. Getting used to switching stroke rate every 2 minutes and at the same time switching to a new pace is also hard. If I had set the pace bar too high, I could not have kept the concentration during this relatively simple workout.

Next time I will use a 3 seconds faster reference pace and increase the duration to 40 minutes. I guess I will pretty quickly be using my true 2k pace as the reference pace.

[kcavorsi]

L1

4K warmup

4 x 1K Goal Pace: 1:44.0 (1:44.2,1:44.0,1:44.0,1:43.8)

1:44.1
1:43.9
1:43.9
1:43.6

4K cooldown

[Mike Caviston]

Been doing the program now for 17 weeks, 6 sessions a week with three 60' L4's per week. Started at 17.8spm and have added 6 strokes per week. I have been going over my goal meters, more so over the past few weeks. It seemed to me that over time, what "feels right" at a given stroke rate, particularly in the range of 17-20, has crept down, for example I find myself usually at 2:02/500m at 18 spm rather than my target of 2:03. I've chalked this up to improved fitness/power/technique, and haven't been fighting it so far. Been at ref pace 1:42 as my best 2K before starting the program was 6:48. Hadn't considered using a different ref pace as your suggestions in the past cautioned against using a ref pace faster than your best 2K. Am I getting gready and trying to do too much too fast? Should I force myself to ease the pace conistently back to targets? I assumed this would also happen naturally as I continue to add strokes and higher spms. And don't get me wrong, these sessions stil do not fell easy by any means. Any additional advice/guidance would be much appreciated. I don't have a lot of experience but absolutley love this plan, and am certainly interested in maximizing what I can do at the 2K distance over the long term. Thanks

It's hard to get the right Reference Pace at the beginning if you are relatively new to rowing. Chances are your 2K is soft (doesn't represent your true ability), and even if it is accurate your fitness improves pretty rapidly. Using what "feels right" is okay, probably the best thing to do, up to a point. Just recognize that if you are consistently more than 100 meters beyond your target for 60', you are actually using a faster Reference Pace (look up what your goal would be for 1:41). You might continue planning your workouts based on 1:41 and try to hit your targets as close to exactly as you can. My best advice is to be as consistent as possible with pace at each stroke rate; don't do more or less on a given day depending on how you feel. 6 strokes per week is a good rate of increase at this time, and when you reach a point when you can no longer sustain that rate of increase, you'll need to think about how you want to recycle your training, depending on when you want to reach a peak in performance.

[kcavorsi]

Thanks for the feedback, much appreciated!

On that note, today was L4 with Ref pace 1:41

2500m warmup

60' 1,170 strokes 19.5 spm
Goal meters: 15,137
Meters rowed: 15,227

2500m cooldown

Felt good, tough but doable. Was still quite a bit over my goal meters, which was a surprise. I really thought during the workout that I would be very close. Will keep at it and try to stay as consistent as possible. My plan is to try to peak in mid July. Will be overseas for a week after that, so my thought was to make that the beginning of an offseason(though I still have not decided exactly what I will do during that time). Then will start a new training cycle based on new 2K time with next goal of participating in an organized race in February.

[kcavorsi]

L2

4K warmup

3/2.5/2K Goal pace 1:48.3 (1:48.7 for 3K, 1:48.3 for 2.5K, 1:47.7 for 2K)

1:48.6
1:48.2
1:47.5

4K cooldown

[kcavorsi]

L4

2500m warmup

60’ 1,170 strokes. 19.5spm. Ref Pace 1:41
192/194/196/198/196/194
Goal meters: 15,137
Meters rowed: 15,214

2500m cooldown

So I think the way set up the monitor results in inflating my meters somewhat for L4’s. I set it up for 6 back to back 10 minute intervals, and when it goes from one interval to the next invariably the pace artificially drops significantly on the monitor. Not sure exactly how much this contributes. May try just setting it for 60 minutes next time and see.

[jackarabit]

05/19/18
L4 44’ [104-176-110-104-180-110]
Ref. pace 2:08

Goal strokes: 784. Actual: 788
Goal meters: 8515. Actual: 8783

17.9 spm [788/44 = 17.90]
5.8 W/s [103/17.9 = 5.75]
11.1 m/s [8783/788 = 11.14]

(Yesterday at the gym I messed about with rate and pace combinations based on a ref pace of 2:10 (2” slower than I’ve been using). After a few minutes of rates 16 thru 18 it was obvious to me that slower paces at the lower rates made the meter overage worse than previously. I simply couldn’t soften the strokes. I returned to ref pace 2:08 for today’s 44’ @ 17.9 actual vs.17.8 prescribed spm. 268m and 4 strokes over goals makes it necessary to try a faster ref pace (2:07) on the recommendation of MC.)

[lindsayh]

So I think the way set up the monitor results in inflating my meters somewhat for L4’s. I set it up for 6 back to back 10 minute intervals, and when it goes from one interval to the next invariably the pace artificially drops significantly on the monitor. Not sure exactly how much this contributes. May try just setting it for 60 minutes next time and see.

I would be surprised if it made much of a difference. I think what you are seeing is at the beginning of each new interval the PM is picking up a "half" stroke and then a full one and it messes with the averages temporarily but won't affect the overall pace much. It will vary each time depending on the actual timing for the start of the stroke.

[jackarabit]

kcavorsi writes:

So I think the way set up the monitor results in inflating my meters somewhat for L4’s. I set it up for 6 back to back 10 minute intervals, and when it goes from one interval to the next invariably the pace artificially drops significantly on the monitor. Not sure exactly how much this contributes. May try just setting it for 60 minutes next time and see.

Seems to me that 6x10’/no rest is effectively identical to 60’ continuous set as 10’ splits in terms of average pace. It is the case that average pace is reset at the transition to new rep but the average of averages is identical to overall average pace if splits are of equal time. In the case of my 6’-10’-6’-6’-10’-6’ progression set as varisble intervals, the math is encumbered by complications but pace average remains independent of execution format if done without rest periods (effectively continuous). If the truth of the matter proves otherwise, I will eat one item of headgear.

Lindsay’s “truncated stroke” thesis may apply but only 5 occurences over 60’ of L4 and those few of random import. We're In the dark here without pace and rate graphed stroke by stroke or the .csv file upon which based.