The Ranger Plan/ranger Way

[[old] ranger]

BTW, re beginners, I have a case close at hand. Since he came home from his summer work, my son, who is 21 and just graduated from college, has taken up rowing. He used to just row for a few minutes every now and then, but since he has doing it daily over the last few weeks, I suggested that he slowly lengthen his rows, until he got to an hour. Well, he is now there (after only a couple of weeks). He rows for an hour each morning when he gets up, at about 22 spm and 2:12. I suppose I did something similar when I began rowing. He is also running 5-10K or so in the afternoon, a nice combination. He says this regimen makes him feel great. <br /><br />Is this rowing (and other work) "hard" for him? I don't know. But I would suspect that his heart rate is about what mine is when I row my hour rows at 1:48 @ 22 spm (with breaks to stay comfortable). <br /><br />The difference in our two rows, of course, is dramatic. We are both rowing at the same rate, but I am rowing at 12.5 SPI and he is rowing at about 7 SPI. <br /><br />Would it be better for him to start some fast rowing? Why? His technique is wretched. He doesn't have a lot of endurance. He is not generating much power. And so forth. All I am saying when I recommend long rowing for beginners is that it would be best for him, I think, to just keep rowing those hour rows. If he likes it enough, he might do a second hour row in the afternoon (instead of running). And so forth. If he did this daily, my guess is that he would improve dramatically, with no fast rowing at all. I suspect his splits would drop toward 2:00 pace automatically. And then if he got some advice on technique, I suspect those splits would fall below that. With two hours of rowing a day, his training base would be very large, and if he maintained that (or even supplemented it with some cross-training), he might be in a position to become very respectable in his rowing. At that point, he might even want to take up a little sharpening and some competition.<br /><br />ranger

[[old] FrancoisA]

Ranger,<br /><br />If I summarize what has been said so far, and compare it to WP, the main differences between your approach to training (lets call it <b>RA</b>: <b>R</b>anger's <b>A</b>pproach) and the <b>WP</b> would be:<br /><br />1) <b>RA</b>: Reliance of cross-training (as much as 50% of training volume) in order to build a wide aerobic base.<br /> <b>WP</b>: Little reliance on cross-training (firm believer in the specificity of training).<br /><br />2) <b>RA</b>: Periodized, first build a wide aerobic base (UT2, UT1) for 10 months, followed by 2 months of sharpening of almost exclusive AT,TR and AN (L1-L2 equivalent) training prior to important race. Cross-training is used for UT2 during sharpening period. View training as the building of a pyramid: lay first a wide and solide aerobic foundation.<br /> <b>WP</b>: non periodized. Ready to race at any time, since trains simultaneously all aspects that affect performance (L1-L4). View training progression as the growth of a child, where various aspects of the body grow at a somewhat proportional rate.<br /><br />3) <b>RA</b>: Large volume of training: 12 workouts of two hours per week (wide aerobic base).<br /> <b>WP</b>: 9 workouts a week, each about 1 hour, with the exception of a longer row.<br /><br />4) <b>RA</b>: Use HR as a supplemental guide for training (pace, spm are also used but not as rigidly as L4 in WP).<br /> <b>WP</b>: Relies exclusively on paces based on 2K performance. L4 training very rigid regarding pace and spm. <br /><br />Ranger, I think it would be helpful if you could correct/complement on this comparison.<br /><br />Thanks<br /><br />

[[old] Coach Gus]

<!--QuoteBegin-ranger+Sep 25 2005, 08:50 AM--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(ranger @ Sep 25 2005, 08:50 AM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--QuoteEBegin-->...when I row my hour rows at 1:48 @ 22 spm (with breaks to stay comfortable). <br /> <br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />Just want to point out to those who hear someone say "hour row" and think it's a steady one hour row, Ranger's hour rows are actually intervals of an unspecified duration with breaks of some kind of rest. He doesn't say whether they are active or inactive. I'm not sure he actually rows for one hour or whether the breaks are included in the hour. <br /><br />It helps you understand his training better if you learn Ranger speak. <br />

[[old] ranger]

<!--QuoteBegin--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--QuoteEBegin-->ust want to point out to those who hear someone say "hour row" and think it's a steady one hour row, Ranger's hour rows are actually intervals of an unspecified duration with breaks of some kind of rest. He doesn't say whether they are active or inactive. I'm not sure he actually rows for one hour or whether the breaks are included in the hour. </td></tr></table><br /><br />Yes, at the moment. But only at the moment. For the first three years that I rowed, I did the hour rows (and longer) continuously and slowly brought down the pace.<br /><br />I am hoping that the discontinuous, low spm, interval rowing that I am doing now will also lead to continuous rows, but it hasn't quite yet. At the moment, I am not choosing to row my low spm rowing at a lesser power. I am picking a high target in order to force myself to work on technique. I could do the rows easily at 1:52 @ 22 spm, which is UT2 rowing for my 2K pb of 6:28, but I am choosing to row at 1:48 @ 22 spm, with various forays into higher rates. This is UT2 rowing for a sub-6:20 2K, if I can get it to be relaxed and continuous. I am making good progress.<br /><br />I suppose this sort of rowing is another experiment of sorts, like my Zatopek intervals and large quantity of cross-training (skipping, sit ups, stepping, etc.).<br /><br />ranger

[[old] ranger]

<!--QuoteBegin--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Ranger, I think it would be helpful if you could correct/complement on this comparison. </td></tr></table><br /><br />Sounds good so far. You might add these.<br /><br />(1) I am a fan of long fartlek rows, of HM or marathon length: 250s, 500s, 1Ks, alternating these distances on and off at a stiff, but manageable, pace. I call these my "Zatopek" rows. For instance, at various times, I have done 80 x 250m at 1:36, 40 x 500m at 1:39, and 20 x 1K at 1:42. These marathon-length interval workouts also encourage habituation while remaining anerobic.<br /><br />(2) As with my long cross-training, I am a fan of ultra-marathon rowing. One day I rowed 167K (14 hours). I have rowed 100K several times and raced it once. At one time, for a couple of weeks, I rowed a marathon a day. In the Holiday Challenge in 2002-2003, I rowed 1.2 million meters in a month. I think long rowing of this sort can be very beneficial. It also encourages habituation.<br /><br />(3) I also like long bouts of race-pace 500s, 20 x 500m @ 1:36, rather than 8 x 500m at 1:33. This rowing also encourages habituation. <br /><br />ranger

[[old] ranger]

<!--QuoteBegin--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--QuoteEBegin-->These marathon-length interval workouts also encourage habituation while remaining anerobic. </td></tr></table><br /><br />Sorry for the misprint. This should read _aerobic_.<br /><br />ranger

[[old] FrancoisA]

<!--QuoteBegin-ranger+Sep 25 2005, 08:07 PM--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(ranger @ Sep 25 2005, 08:07 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--QuoteEBegin-->(1) I am a fan of long fartlek rows, of HM or marathon length: 250s, 500s, 1Ks, alternating these distances on and off at a stiff, but manageable, pace. I call these my "Zatopek" rows. For instance, at various times, I have done 80 x 250m at 1:36, 40 x 500m at 1:39, and 20 x 1K at 1:42. These marathon-length interval workouts also encourage habituation while remaining aerobic.<br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />Ranger,<br /><br />What recovery do you use (active, passive, how long), say for the 20 x 1K at 1:42 ? <br /><br />Thanks

[[old] afolpe]

Ranger:<br /><br />I'm rather in awe of the amount of time you are able to put into training. I understand that you are also faculty at the U of M, and as a fellow academician (Surgical Pathology, Emory Med), I'm just curious how in the world you find the time for all of this. Surely you must have reading, writing, papers to grade, societies to participate in, University Senate sorts of things? Family time? Sleep? I feel pretty motivated if I can get in my usual bike commute and an hour on the rower during the week, and a few hours of kayak time on the weekends, in the wee hours of the morning. <br /><br />Andrew

[[old] Coach Gus]

<!--QuoteBegin-ranger+Sep 25 2005, 11:52 AM--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(ranger @ Sep 25 2005, 11:52 AM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--QuoteEBegin-->At the moment, I am not choosing to row my low spm rowing at a lesser power. I am picking a high target in order to force myself to work on technique.<br /><br /><br />I suppose this sort of rowing is another experiment of sorts, like my Zatopek intervals and large quantity of cross-training (skipping, sit ups, stepping, etc.).<br /> <br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />Interesting experiment. Most work on technique at lesser power rather than increase power to work on technique. <br />

[[old] ranger]

<!--QuoteBegin-afolpe+Sep 25 2005, 03:49 PM--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(afolpe @ Sep 25 2005, 03:49 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Ranger:<br /><br />I'm rather in awe of the amount of time you are able to put into training. I understand that you are also faculty at the U of M, and as a fellow academician (Surgical Pathology, Emory Med), I'm just curious how in the world you find the time for all of this. Surely you must have reading, writing, papers to grade, societies to participate in, University Senate sorts of things? Family time? Sleep? I feel pretty motivated if I can get in my usual bike commute and an hour on the rower during the week, and a few hours of kayak time on the weekends, in the wee hours of the morning. <br /><br />Andrew <br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />I sleep six hours. I do my rowing from 4-7 a.m. (sometimes earlier). I am done by breakfast. I do my stepping routines after work at 4-6 p.m. when I am teaching. I am more flexible when I am on leave or not teaching (as I am right now; I am on sabbatical).<br /><br />Over the course of my worklife, I have usually spent a couple of hours in the morning (5-7 a.m.) running. I have usually done twice this when I am on vacation or on weekends. During my probationary years before tenure, I had to give up my exercising altogether for a while. I didn't feel well at all when I did this, though. I started up again as soon as I could. I also got tenure (at one of the great research universities in the world), so I guess the sacrifice to my health was worth it.<br /><br />I raised three children. They are all grown now (18, 20, 21) and off to college and elsewhere. So this gives me quite a bit of time that I didn't have before. I am 55 years old, not 30. Over my lifetime, I have done much of the childcare (my wife worked) and so I know how much time that takes. When my first son was born, I did full-time childcare and taught at night. Once during my tenure years, when all the three children were young and I still didn't have tenure, our at home childcare person quit while I was on leave writing for a semester and to take up the slack I did childcare during the day, went to bed at 6 p.m., got up at midnight, and wrote until 8 a.m., when the children got up. Believe me, I know what it takes to bring up a modern family (well). What I wrote that semester turned into the core of the book that got me tenure. It is now over ten years old but is still considered the best book in the field.<br /><br />I suppose I haven't published a ton of things, but there is much more to come. I have only one book; I am in the process on adding to that list on my sabbatical this year. I have about 50 published essays, reviews, comments, etc. I have spent the last few days writing two papers that I am giving next week at the symposium on poetic form in San Diego. I am one of two keynote speakers at the symposium. I am also on a second panel.<br /><br />Normally, I have lots of papers to grade. In my introduction to poetry class, I assign five three-page papers and one five-page paper. With 35 kids in the class (and two classes a semester, three semesters a year), that's about 5000 pages of paper grading a year. I usually do this on the weekends, albeit usually with some distraction that gives me relief from the tedium. So I pretty much work through the weekends. In my poetry class, I meet with every student in the class outside of class three times during the semester in addition to keeping office hours 2-3 times a week.<br /><br />Yes, I have administrative work to do. I was indeed on the faculty senate this last year. I also have departmental committee work. <br /><br />Life is busy, but I like to work, both at sports and my profession. I don't like to be idle.<br /><br />If you are in surgical pathology at Emory, you might indeed work more than I do. But then again you also probably get paid five times as much as I do. To each his own. I like to balance work and other things. I get as much satisfaction out of my family, my rowing, and other things (I have a big garden, I play the guitar and piano, I read a lot) as I do out of my professional life, although I like my job a whole lot, too. Basically, I am paid to think about how poetry works. Not a bad job.<br /><br />ranger<br />

[[old] ranger]

<!--QuoteBegin--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--QuoteEBegin-->What recovery do you use (active, passive, how long), say for the 20 x 1K at 1:42 ? </td></tr></table><br /><br />I paddle an equal distance, 1K, so active recovery. If you do this, each of these Zatopek rows ends up a marathon.<br /><br />I have also done Zatopek 100s, 200 x 100m (100m active rest).<br /><br />ranger

[[old] ranger]

<!--QuoteBegin--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Interesting experiment. Most work on technique at lesser power rather than increase power to work on technique. </td></tr></table><br /><br />Yes, that's what I hear. Perhaps these people are working more on smoothness, recovery, and such like, though (as I do all the time in my 1x on the water, and indeed at a lower stroking power). My technical task on the ereg hasn't been this at all.<br /><br />My difficulty in going from rowing at 200 df. to 100 df. was a massive change in timing, sequencing, and leverage (e.g., I used to row off my toes, use a cut slide, pull and push simultaneously, and slight the finish of my stroke entirely). Changing these things demanded that I change the distribution of my power. I needed to develop stronger legs. I needed to learn to leverage off my heels. I needed to learn to use a full slide and lead with my legs. And so forth. At a lower drag, it is also better to row at a much higher SPI (let the wheel spin!), so I also had to learn a new sort of physical economy: much more muscular stress, much more effort per stroke, but then more rest between strokes, etc. I now row long distances at 12 SPI or so. I used to row long distances at 8 SPI. This is a _massive_ difference. These things are not fixed by lily-dipping around. You need to stress the body consistently and pretty severely in these new ways over long periods of time (I have now been doing this for two years) until it habituates completely to its new tasks. <br /><br />ranger

[[old] ranger]

<!--QuoteBegin--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Ranger, I think it would be helpful if you could correct/complement on this comparison. </td></tr></table><br /><br />I suppose there might be another significant difference between the WP and my approach to rowing.<br /><br />By and large, I don't think that the sort of tight personal surveillance that many people keep on their workout "performances" is very productive. To me, what I do in workouts and how productive it is depends on many things and can't be quantified. I don't log my workouts. I don't keep track of what I do from day to day, month to month, or year to year. Worrying constantly about workout performances, I think, can severely deflect you from what might lead to significant improvement. In many cases, for instance, you first have to get worse at something in order to get better. If you are constantly in fits of self-consciousness about your workout "performances," this might scare you away from ever doing anything that leads to significant improvement! Not good. Long experience has also taught me that the body's energies flow in strange ways that often don't have much to do with your fitness. As a result, when things are not going well, there is no reason to push it. Just do something slower and easier. Wait for the engines. This kind of approach to workouts is antithetical to the common practice, which seems to be dominated by set timed pieces, etc., strictly noted, recorded, and reviewed. For me, a lot of physical performance is just relaxation and "grooving" into the body's needs. <br /><br />Psychologically, I don't row by the numbers. I row by "feel."<br /><br />ranger

[[old] Alan Maddocks]

Ranger wrote ....<br /><br />"This kind of approach to workouts is antithetical to the common practice, which seems to be dominated by set timed pieces, etc., strictly noted, recorded, and reviewed. For me, a lot of physical performance is just relaxation and "grooving" into the body's needs. Psychologically, I don't row by the numbers. I row by "feel.""<br /><br />..................<br /><br />The thing that tends to distinguish great athletic performance (whether sprinting, middle-distance, long distance running) is the appearance of 'relaxation' in those achieving world class performances (Note: Kenenisa Bekele, Allyson Felix, and Tirunesh Dibaba in the recent World Athletics Championships).<br /><br />Relaxation has to be learned. Ranger's training appears to be (for him!) perfectly geared towards achieving this state. <br /><br />I think we misuse the terms "quantity" when talking of volume, & "quality" when talking about hard intervals. We should use the terms "low intensity" & "high intensity". Most low intensity work continued for meaningful duration (60-90 minutes) is "quality training".

[[old] ranger]

<!--QuoteBegin--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--QuoteEBegin-->I think we misuse the terms "quantity" when talking of volume, & "quality" when talking about hard intervals. We should use the terms "low intensity" & "high intensity". Most low intensity work continued for meaningful duration (60-90 minutes) is "quality training". </td></tr></table><br /><br />And then there is what I like to do!<br /><br />The Zatopek intervals I like to do combine significant quality (e.g., 250s @ 2K - 1, 500s @ 2K + 2, 1Ks @ 5K) with generous rest (to stay comfortable) and enormous distance/duration (40K, close to three hours).<br /><br />Great for habituation and relaxation.<br /><br />ranger