New Personal Best! Brag About That New Pb!

[Dangerscouse]

accidential 100m PB - 15.1

The 100m wasn't planned for today, but my son came home earlier than expected, so I only could quit or do some extra short stuff.
I still s*it myself to hurt my lower back, so I estimate it was an 95 percent effort, sub 15 should be possible without much extra training.

Hahaha, accidental PB!!! This is very impressive enough nevermind sub 15

[MartinSH4321]

accidential 100m PB - 15.1

The 100m wasn't planned for today, but my son came home earlier than expected, so I only could quit or do some extra short stuff.
I still s*it myself to hurt my lower back, so I estimate it was an 95 percent effort, sub 15 should be possible without much extra training.

Hahaha, accidental PB!!! This is very impressive enough nevermind sub 15

I think the 100m is by far the least relevant rankable workout (as it has hardly anything to do with rowing, it's more like fast deadlifting), nevertheless milestones like sub 15 allure me
I hope you get your 36min milestone for 10k, THAT is a relevant rankable workout!

[Gammmmo]

15.1s is quite rapid though....I'd have that!!!

[hjs]

accidential 100m PB - 15.1

The 100m wasn't planned for today, but my son came home earlier than expected, so I only could quit or do some extra short stuff.
I still s*it myself to hurt my lower back, so I estimate it was an 95 percent effort, sub 15 should be possible without much extra training.

Hahaha, accidental PB!!! This is very impressive enough nevermind sub 15

I think the 100m is by far the least relevant rankable workout (as it has hardly anything to do with rowing, it's more like fast deadlifting), nevertheless milestones like sub 15 allure me
I hope you get your 36min milestone for 10k, THAT is a relevant rankable workout!

If you take an untrained rower lowpull is one of the most telling variables. Its the base of everything, not very trainable, apart from getting a lot stronger. If your lowpull sucks you will never be very fast.

Relative to build/bodyweight ofcourse.

[MartinSH4321]

Hahaha, accidental PB!!! This is very impressive enough nevermind sub 15

I think the 100m is by far the least relevant rankable workout (as it has hardly anything to do with rowing, it's more like fast deadlifting), nevertheless milestones like sub 15 allure me
I hope you get your 36min milestone for 10k, THAT is a relevant rankable workout!

If you take an untrained rower lowpull is one of the most telling variables. Its the base of everything, not very trainable, apart from getting a lot stronger. If your lowpull sucks you will never be very fast.

Relative to build/bodyweight ofcourse.

That's right Henry, of course you need a strong stroke to row fast, the stronger the better.
What I meant was that a fast 100m result doesn't indicate that you're a good rower, the fastest results are done by super strong and massive athletes, not the very best rowers. And this applies for hobby rowers too, I suppose I'm faster at 100m that, for example, Stu, but there's no doubt that he is by far the better rower

[hjs]

That's right Henry, of course you need a strong stroke to row fast, the stronger the better.
What I meant was that a fast 100m result doesn't indicate that you're a good rower, the fastest results are done by super strong and massive athletes, not the very best rowers. And this applies for hobby rowers too, I suppose I'm faster at 100m that, for example, Stu, but there's no doubt that he is by far the better rower

Good example, Stu limitation is his power. potential you could be faster, that is if you get your fitness up.

And no a powerlifter is not a good rower, but good rowers are not super heavy and often still have a solid lowpull.

I myself find a 100m much more impressive than a longer distance, mostly because speed is poorly trainable, endurance is something we can much more work on. I take talent over hard work We can all work hard, but you need the talent first to make it possible in the first place.

Yesterday, sidestep, saw a guy in the gym, older, deep 40, natural, never seen him bench. Got 160kg easy, 170 just to much. Never would have guessed he could do that. Guy has, in this case had, given his age, great potential to be very strong.

[MartinSH4321]

Good example, Stu limitation is his power. potential you could be faster, that is if you get your fitness up.

And no a powerlifter is not a good rower, but good rowers are not super heavy and often still have a solid lowpull.

I myself find a 100m much more impressive than a longer distance, mostly because speed is poorly trainable, endurance is something we can much more work on. I take talent over hard work We can all work hard, but you need the talent first to make it possible in the first place.

Yesterday, sidestep, saw a guy in the gym, older, deep 40, natural, never seen him bench. Got 160kg easy, 170 just to much. Never would have guessed he could do that. Guy has, in this case had, given his age, great potential to be very strong.

Yeah, their numbers are really impressive, especially when considering their height and weight too.

We think different here, for me, talent and hard work are on the same level. To be among the best in the world at a popular sport you need a win in the genetic lottery and have to work very hard for a long time. I'm sure there are a lot of people out there who have the potential, but not the ability to work hard enough and therefore are not the very best in the world (Phil Clapp is the first rower that comes in my mind ).

+160kg at +40 years of age is very impressive, I hope I can do this in 10 years!
Benchpress was always my favorite workout. More than 10 years ago I managed 192,5kg, 200 was a big goal but unfortunately I missed it. What was very frustrating is the fact that even on a regional/local level in a little country like Austria you don't have any chance to win without doping. I trained with the former Austrian bench press champion for a few months and he thought I had great potential, but only when using steroids, which never was an option.

[hjs]

+160kg at +40 years of age is very impressive, I hope I can do this in 10 years!
Benchpress was always my favorite workout. More than 10 years ago I managed 192,5kg, 200 was a big goal but unfortunately I missed it. What was very frustrating is the fact that even on a regional/local level in a little country like Austria you don't have any chance to win without doping. I trained with the former Austrian bench press champion for a few months and he thought I had great potential, but only when using steroids, which never was an option.

Natural that seriously strong, build also matters ofcourse, a round barrel chest and shorter arms are handy, but still you gotta handle the weight. I myself never got much above 150, 154 I believe at best. Shoulders have always been my weakpoint, base is wide, so not very stable.

Strenghtsport is the most infected, its more or less accepted, in strongman I don,t think they even test. On the rower ski, records are also set by users. Talking about some sprinters. Tough to stop that. I Have no problem with users, just be honoust about.
In our gym, one of the pt s is a clear user, trains like a moron himself, and yet he “trains” natural clients. pointless what he has to say.

[Gammmmo]

Natural that seriously strong, build also matters ofcourse, a round barrel chest and shorter arms are handy, but still you gotta handle the weight. I myself never got much above 150, 154 I believe at best. Shoulders have always been my weakpoint, base is wide, so not very stable.

Lever length also very important. I've done very little benching but I've done enough to know I'm poor at it even so. 160kg? I can't even do half that for 1 rep. I have long arms. (I'm also naturally more suited to endurance sports but whatever). Contrast that with deadlifts which relatively speaking I am better at. Long arms help with that.

[MartinSH4321]

+160kg at +40 years of age is very impressive, I hope I can do this in 10 years!
Benchpress was always my favorite workout. More than 10 years ago I managed 192,5kg, 200 was a big goal but unfortunately I missed it. What was very frustrating is the fact that even on a regional/local level in a little country like Austria you don't have any chance to win without doping. I trained with the former Austrian bench press champion for a few months and he thought I had great potential, but only when using steroids, which never was an option.

Natural that seriously strong, build also matters ofcourse, a round barrel chest and shorter arms are handy, but still you gotta handle the weight. I myself never got much above 150, 154 I believe at best. Shoulders have always been my weakpoint, base is wide, so not very stable.

Strenghtsport is the most infected, its more or less accepted, in strongman I don,t think they even test. On the rower ski, records are also set by users. Talking about some sprinters. Tough to stop that. I Have no problem with users, just be honoust about.
In our gym, one of the pt s is a clear user, trains like a moron himself, and yet he “trains” natural clients. pointless what he has to say.

+150 is pretty good indeed. In my gym (I don't know how representative that is) there were only a few guys who managed +150, and only one of them + me trained naturally. Shoulders were my weakpoint too.
Yeah, the strongmen don't lie about being natural, I guess they know how ridiculous it would be. I once read a study which had the conclusion that a natural trained man can't get above a fat-free BMI of 28-30, some of these guys are at about 40

[hjs]

Natural that seriously strong, build also matters ofcourse, a round barrel chest and shorter arms are handy, but still you gotta handle the weight. I myself never got much above 150, 154 I believe at best. Shoulders have always been my weakpoint, base is wide, so not very stable.

Lever length also very important. I've done very little benching but I've done enough to know I'm poor at it even so. 160kg? I can't even do half that for 1 rep. I have long arms. (I'm also naturally more suited to endurance sports but whatever). Contrast that with deadlifts which relatively speaking I am better at. Long arms help with that.

https://www.instagram.com/superhurri/?hl=en

Ideal build for bench. Still super powerfull. Think 181 140kg ish Stats for Freddi.

Endurance athletes do zero upperbody work, don,t want extra weight, so its a combi of talent and zero training.

[hjs]

+150 is pretty good indeed. In my gym (I don't know how representative that is) there were only a few guys who managed +150, and only one of them + me trained naturally. Shoulders were my weakpoint too.
Yeah, the strongmen don't lie about being natural, I guess they know how ridiculous it would be. I once read a study which had the conclusion that a natural trained man can't get above a fat-free BMI of 28-30, some of these guys are at about 40

Years ago I did train in a strong gym, lots of users, a good bit of 200 plus benchers, but nobody clean. In the 150/75kg cat. Some clean guys though.

Current gym, very much fitness, two strong benchers, both track and fielders. Shotputter, around 19/20 meters, has 200/210 on the bench and a discus guy, never see him go low reps, but does 140kg sets around 10 reps, very controled. Everything he does is relax, he never seems to really push it.

[Dangerscouse]

That's right Henry, of course you need a strong stroke to row fast, the stronger the better.
What I meant was that a fast 100m result doesn't indicate that you're a good rower, the fastest results are done by super strong and massive athletes, not the very best rowers. And this applies for hobby rowers too, I suppose I'm faster at 100m that, for example, Stu, but there's no doubt that he is by far the better rower

Very interesting thread. IMO, I'm a better rower than you at the moment but you have got more potential than me.

I have always had a suspect lower back, which has been mainly due to a chronically tight right hip flexor and dodgy knees from lots of basketball as a kid. The chiropractors never told me that if I loosened my hip flexor it was going to solve most of my issues so I avoided squats and deads etc on their advice. This has changed recently but I'm too far behind to make up for lost time, but luckily I'm not bothered about being mega strong; I'm strong enough for what I want to do, and my weight training has always been patchy over the past 20 years.

I have also always been a bit more impressed with longer distances as I find this is a bit more meritocratic rather than, at least in part, good genetics.

If I had my time all over again I'd do quite a lot of things differently not least actually knowing what results I used to produce. I only started paying any real attention about 10 years ago, before i just jumped on and didn't remember pace or PBs.

I really doubt I could get under 15 secs but I also know I have never had any interest on testing anything under 500m and usually 5k is as low as I instinctively consider testing regularly. Horses for courses.

[MartinSH4321]

That's right Henry, of course you need a strong stroke to row fast, the stronger the better.
What I meant was that a fast 100m result doesn't indicate that you're a good rower, the fastest results are done by super strong and massive athletes, not the very best rowers. And this applies for hobby rowers too, I suppose I'm faster at 100m that, for example, Stu, but there's no doubt that he is by far the better rower

Very interesting thread. IMO, I'm a better rower than you at the moment but you have got more potential than me.

I have always had a suspect lower back, which has been mainly due to a chronically tight right hip flexor and dodgy knees from lots of basketball as a kid. The chiropractors never told me that if I loosened my hip flexor it was going to solve most of my issues so I avoided squats and deads etc on their advice. This has changed recently but I'm too far behind to make up for lost time, but luckily I'm not bothered about being mega strong; I'm strong enough for what I want to do, and my weight training has always been patchy over the past 20 years.

I have also always been a bit more impressed with longer distances as I find this is a bit more meritocratic rather than, at least in part, good genetics.

If I had my time all over again I'd do quite a lot of things differently not least actually knowing what results I used to produce. I only started paying any real attention about 10 years ago, before i just jumped on and didn't remember pace or PBs.

I really doubt I could get under 15 secs but I also know I have never had any interest on testing anything under 500m and usually 5k is as low as I instinctively consider testing regularly. Horses for courses.

That's very pleasing to hear, thanks! For the short stuff you may be right, but as you never trained for that and your problems with back, hips and knees it's not a fair comparison. For the longer stuff, I would say you're definitely better built than me (+3 inches), your results are several levels above mine. To be honest I think it's too early too estimate my potential, the last 9 months went great, a lot of gains, I learnt a lot, and definitely more to come, but improvements will slow down for sure, I still have newbie gains. I really hope to match and pass your current PBs in the long run

[KeithT]

That's right Henry, of course you need a strong stroke to row fast, the stronger the better.
What I meant was that a fast 100m result doesn't indicate that you're a good rower, the fastest results are done by super strong and massive athletes, not the very best rowers. And this applies for hobby rowers too, I suppose I'm faster at 100m that, for example, Stu, but there's no doubt that he is by far the better rower

Very interesting thread. IMO, I'm a better rower than you at the moment but you have got more potential than me.

I have always had a suspect lower back, which has been mainly due to a chronically tight right hip flexor and dodgy knees from lots of basketball as a kid. The chiropractors never told me that if I loosened my hip flexor it was going to solve most of my issues so I avoided squats and deads etc on their advice. This has changed recently but I'm too far behind to make up for lost time, but luckily I'm not bothered about being mega strong; I'm strong enough for what I want to do, and my weight training has always been patchy over the past 20 years.

I have also always been a bit more impressed with longer distances as I find this is a bit more meritocratic rather than, at least in part, good genetics.

If I had my time all over again I'd do quite a lot of things differently not least actually knowing what results I used to produce. I only started paying any real attention about 10 years ago, before i just jumped on and didn't remember pace or PBs.

I really doubt I could get under 15 secs but I also know I have never had any interest on testing anything under 500m and usually 5k is as low as I instinctively consider testing regularly. Horses for courses.

That's very pleasing to hear, thanks! For the short stuff you may be right, but as you never trained for that and your problems with back, hips and knees it's not a fair comparison. For the longer stuff, I would say you're definitely better built than me (+3 inches), your results are several levels above mine. To be honest I think it's too early too estimate my potential, the last 9 months went great, a lot of gains, I learnt a lot, and definitely more to come, but improvements will slow down for sure, I still have newbie gains. I really hope to match and pass your current PBs in the long run

No - if you start passing Stu in the longer rows you will be passing me too and you are already with me on some shorter stuff. However, your still a youngster, so I guess it's OK I never really never tested the 100m either - think I did it once at like 15.5 but wasn't a best effort. I never paid attention much to a low pull either but have seen 1:15 when sprinting hard, think that is decent. This whole strength discussion is interesting - back when I was more into lifting I once benched 405 LBs but was stronger in the upper-body despite long arms, I never max bench anymore after a major pec tear but I know I can still go over 300#, but again I am strong in upper body and find leg strength more related to the row. I do weights and CF still but I am not much worried about gaining too much strength as I think at 51 I don't have too much more to gain there and improving fitness has been the biggest factor to me. That said, having some extra power in a nice benefit when I need it.