Removing The Limits

[[old] John Rupp]

I was feeling quite ragged yesterday, and decided to row this morning without looking at the monitor.<br /><br />My usual pace has been an easy 2:20 this summer, because of the humidity, once a week or so doing something faster but not feeling comfortable with the saturation of the air. Thus this morning I determined to go as easy as possible, and not even try to keep up with the 2:20 pace, but rather to just row for time.<br /><br />I did some exercises, ran, warmed up, and then covered the monitor with some paper, leaving only the cumulative time and drag factor still showing. I also reduced the drag factor, from 75 to 68, to make this as easy as possible.<br /><br />My goal was just to finish today, which I was not able to do yesterday.<br /><br />I set off for the first of 3x 30:00 rows. Afterwards I estimated my average was 2:22 to 2:24 pace but it turned out to be 2:13.1. Thus was surprising! Perhaps I had been using more energy trying to restrict myself to a pace.<br /><br />After a 10 minute break I set off on the second one, which felt about like the first one so my estimate was 2:14. This one turned out to be 2:12.1.<br /><br />Then another 10 minute break and I determined to go easier on the last one. My estimate was 2:18 pace and it turned out to be 2:13.9. Very easy.<br /><br />2:13.3 ... 6749 ... 68df ... (last 2:00 at 28 spm)<br />2:12.1 ... 6814 ... 68df ... (last 2:00 at 28 spm)<br />2:13.9 ... 6725 ... 67df ... (last 2:00 at 29 spm)<br /><br />The stroke rate felt the same on all of them. The monitor rounds up, thus 28spm is 27.01 to 28, and 29spm is 28.01 to 29, giving me just over 8 meters per stroke.<br /><br />Update: the stroke rates were for only the last 2:00, not averages.

[[old] John Rupp]

Tonight I cut two holes out of a piece of rubber from left over truck tire innertube, and taped this to the monitor from the top.<br /><br />This way it is easy to flip up the facing and get my times after rowing.<br /><br />I am very interested in this new method, as it is totally inner intuitive, vs focused on external stimulation.<br /><br />I am very interested and am looking forward to do repetitions this way. Not necessary for the times, but rather for the inner feedback and feelings while doing them.<br /><br />Whether going too slow, or too fast, this is an easy way to solve that dilemma.

[[old] TLCoons]

Interesting data, John!<br /><br />I have no quantitative stats to add to your findings -- just the observation that almost every time I have been worn out and ignored the monitor during a "sure to be disappointing" performance, I, too, was pleasantly surprised at my overall distance over a fixed time. On a few occasions, I even set my personal bests.<br /><br />Can't wait to see if you uncover any more little gems. <br /><br />Metrics rule.

[[old] Coach Gus]

<!--QuoteBegin-TLCoons+Aug 22 2005, 06:00 PM--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(TLCoons @ Aug 22 2005, 06:00 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Interesting data, John!<br /><br />I have no quantitative stats to add to your findings -- just the observation that almost every time I have been worn out and ignored the monitor during a "sure to be disappointing" performance, I, too, was pleasantly surprised at my overall distance over a fixed time.  On a few occasions, I even set my personal bests.<br /><br />Can't wait to see if you uncover any more little gems.  <br /><br />Metrics rule. <br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />Occasionally, we will cover the monitor except for the HR readout. It's surprising sometimes what games our mind will play if you can see split times. Most of the time, with the monitor covered, the split will be faster at the same HR.

[[old] Carl Henrik]

John,<br /><br />Wow, those are quite high rates for those paces! I knew you liked high rates but not how much!<br /><br />I have also done LSD sessions with the monitor turned away, and likewise, I have been positively surprised by the pace afterwards. Seems we don't need the monitor to avoid being too soft on ourselves, intstead one can easily focus on other things. I think the monitor is quite entertaining though with power curves, pace boats, splits, instantaneuous paces and power reading...and all you can try to derive from this while erging. I have begun thinking about a marathon row during the winter. But I think that watching a movie (or two!) might be the best for that.

[[old] PaulS]

<!--QuoteBegin-John Rupp+Aug 22 2005, 06:38 PM--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(John Rupp @ Aug 22 2005, 06:38 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--QuoteEBegin--><br />2:13.3 ... 6749 ... 28spm ... 68df<br />2:12.1 ... 6814 ... 28spm ... 68df<br />2:13.9 ... 6725 ... 29spm ... 67df<br /><br />The stroke rate felt the same on all of them. The monitor rounds up, thus 28spm is 27.01 to 28, and 29spm is 28.01 to 29, giving me just over 8 meters per stroke. <br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />John, Too bad you "igged" me so quickly. This has been a good method for a long time of getting people to relax and pay attention to what "feels" right to them, some quite fast folks have been known to race with their eyes closed for the majority of their race. I think it was Lisa Schlenker who ended up having a PM malfunction at a race and still went on just fine simply due to having a good feel for what she was doing. Of course she is also an Olympic class athlete.<br /><br />The PM does not simply "round up" for SR however, it uses the normal rounding rules.<br /><br />Displayed 28 = 27.5 to 28.4 actual, etc.... (It would be nice to see the 0.5 resolution return)<br /><br />There have also been studies showing that slowing people down (when walking) takes them out of their "efficient" zone and actually burns more calories/time. Of course that's not what better performance is all about, but does track along with your conclusion that it might have been more difficult for you to maintain a slower pace at a lower Stroke rate.

[[old] Jim Barry]

I've been rowing for a few weeks now on perception and SR (what I knew from my days on the water). The simplicity is fantastic (perhaps I've gotten neurotic about pace over the years). Your body can intuitively get through a row without having the higher level cerebral thinking at the controls. I have some sense that it does get in the way (i.e., see a pace say to self "that's my tiring pace"). Who knows what a tiring pace is? Your body knows. I'm learning (or relearning) to listen to it again. <br /><br /><br />

[[old] dadams]

<!--QuoteBegin-PaulS+Aug 23 2005, 08:55 AM--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(PaulS @ Aug 23 2005, 08:55 AM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--QuoteEBegin--><br /> I think it was Lisa Schlenker who ended up having a PM malfunction at a race and still went on just fine simply due to having a good feel for what she was doing.  Of course she is also an Olympic class athlete.<br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />Happened at EIRC in Paris.

[[old] Pete Marston]

John,<br /><br />Trying rowing with a HRM and record the HR to see whether you really are finding it easier when you think you are. I wanted to do an easy session yesterday as a recovery from a 5k race at the weekend (16:33.6 pb ) so put on a HRM for the first time in a couple of years. I varied the rate and pace over each 500m, and watched what happened to the HR.<br /><br />I do find sometimes that slower can feel harder, so was interested to see what I'd find. I didn't vary the pace by small enough amounts really to find what you observed, but did 500's from 2:19 down to 1:34 to see what difference it made. There wasn't too much change in the HR from about 2:05 down to 1:52 or so.

[[old] John Rupp]

Thanks for all the feedback and comments. <br /><br />Today I noticed the stroke rate at the end was only the rate for the last 2:00, and not the average for the row. Thus today I went through and got the average for the 15 2:00 splits on each row. The results for 3 rows at the 30:00 marks were as follows:<br /><br />estimate then actual<br />(2:11) ... 2:07.0 ... 7084 ... 68df ... 28.67spm ... 8.24-8.39 mps<br />(2:26) ... 2:21.2 ... 6373 ... 68df ... 25.47spm ... 8.34-8.51 mps<br />(2:22) ... 2:18.6 ... 6493 ... 68df ... 26.07spm ... 8.30-8.47 mps<br /><br />The first one felt about like the second one yesterday, though maybe a little faster. It turned out to be faster than expected. The rate at the end was 32spm and that didn't seem right to be my average for the whole thing, so I checked the last 2:00 split which was 1:58.3. Then I went back and averaged the 15 2:00 splits, which gave me 28.67spm for the average. Considering the monitor rounds up, it was actually 28.17 spm, an average of 8.39 meters per stroke.<br /><br />There was smoke in the air during the first one and while I was running before that, so I wanted to back off a lot on the second one. I was also feeling a bit ragged. My estimate was 2:26 but it turned out to be 2:21.2 which was fine. <br /><br />Then I took a break to change togs and replenish, during which I downed a couple blenders full of fresh watermelon juice. This resulted in the necessity for a pit stop at 7:30, but the monitor stops on these so I only lost 6 seconds or so. Otherwise the watermelon felt fine and helped to replenish my system. I felt better on this one and ended up doing a little faster than it felt.<br /><br />The last 2:00 on this 3rd one gave me a stroke rate of 28, but the pace for that segment was 2:10.3. Probably the same thing happened yesterday. I was probably averaging about the same meters per stroke yesterday as today.

[[old] John Rupp]

Here is a picture of the monitor: <br /><br /><img src='http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y41/jo ... tor35b.jpg' border='0' alt='user posted image' />

[[old] John Rupp]

Today I warmed up, did the ab roller and core blaster, ran, then 3x 30:00 again on the erg as follows:<br /><br />estimate + actual<br />(2:12) ... 2:10.7 ... 6884<br />(2:11) ... 2:11.5 ... 6841<br />(2:11) ... 2:07.8 ... 7043 ... drag factor 68<br /><br />The 1st 30:00 today felt rather even, though I didn't check the splits afterwards. The 2nd one had a 2:16.6 average the first 2:00, and 2:08 the last 2. The 3rd one felt more even all the way. The 1st 2:00 were 2:14 and the last 2:00 were 2:03.<br /><br />overall meters per stroke: 8.09 (average), 8.23 (rounding up)<br /><br />The important thing is my rhythm and timing, and the meters per stroke doesn't change that much. Plus I want it to be what it is, and not try to change it to something artificial. Thus today was my last time bothering to check the stroke rate, removing another limitation.<br /><br />I like this method, of going totally by feeling, very much.

[[old] PaulS]

<!--QuoteBegin-John Rupp+Aug 24 2005, 02:40 PM--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(John Rupp @ Aug 24 2005, 02:40 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--QuoteEBegin-->I like this method, of going totally by feeling, very much. <br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />You have expressed several times in the past that you are not interested in making measurable improvements in your fitness on the Erg, so I'd agree that this is exactly the right course for you to take. Why not unplug the PM all together? Then you have "Removed all measurements", fly and be free...... <br /><br />All the best.

[[old] NavigationHazard]

John, 68 strikes me as quite a low DF. When was the last time (if ever) you replaced the bungee cord? My Model C is about 6 years old and the lowest it will yield is about 97.

[[old] John Rupp]

My model C is in excellent condition.<br /><br />It was made in 2000 and only had about 1/2 a million meters when I got it from Ebay last fall.