guidance on drive time during steady state

[erkn000]

Hi,

I have been looking for any guidance on potentially focusing on drive time while doing steady state or volume training.

I am interested in improving my 2k time and have started incorporating more steady state into my training. My understanding is that the purpose is to "stress" and not overload your aerobic system. From what I have seen, this entails rowing at a lower SPM as well as slower pace, with focus on one's heart rate. Doesn't one risk rowing at lower power per stroke at a slower velocity per stroke by doing this? In other words, could one maximize potential gains by rowing each stroke with the same force and velocity as a 2k piece and letting SPM fall where it needs to hit the HR target?

Thank you!

Regards,
Ed

[Tsnor]

..could one maximize potential gains by rowing each stroke with the same force and velocity as a 2k piece and letting SPM fall where it needs to hit the HR target?

Not sure if the potential gains are maximized with this approach, but it is certainly a viable approach. Many people play with low stroke rate during long pieces (optimizing distance per stroke or watts/stroke, etc). Getting much below 15 SPM at a decent long/slow wattage may get you out of the pure aerobic range as per-stroke leg drive picks up. (example weight lifting with rest between sets does not drive up heart rate much, but is absolutely not long/slow and does need recovery time). You do not want to need recovery time from your long slow work -- it's long slow just to avoid that.

FWIW, research has struggled to find either optimal rowing SPM or optimal cycling pedal cadence. Within a wide range it doesn't seem to matter. (example: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19346978/ https://europepmc.org/article/med/10994916 , although you can find studies that differ) Logically it seems a slower cadence / lower SPM should be more energy efficient and allow a higher output level at the same internal workload.

[Tsnor]

I am interested in improving my 2k time and have started incorporating more steady state into my training.

If you post what training you plan to do there are people on this forum who are excellent at improving/balancing. Especially with a specific target like an improved 2K time. If you don't have a training plan then post asking for one, getting a good 2K benefits from a good plan -- a mix of intense work and long slow and likely some weight training.

Steady state gives you two things. (1) some adaptation that you don't get with intense workouts. ex: seems to make mitochondria grow in their number and size. And more important (2) gives you extra training hours without driving you into overtraining. Results for elite and casual athletes correlate with training hours - the more hours you do the better the results. But your body (elite or casual athlete) can't take sustained hard work without rest - bad things happen if you try. So you get the extra hours with long/slow.

If you are an Olympic class rower (or runner, or cyclist, etc.) then you are training 10-12 times a week, and all but 2 are long/slow. Thus the 80/20 rule.

If you are more mainstream you might be training 3-5 times a week. Do your 2 hard sessions (intervals, whatever) and make sure you have recovery days between those sessions. Fill in the time between hard sessions with the long/slow stuff. Do keep at least one rest day. If you want more sessions, do two long/slow on the same day.

If you only can do two sessions a week then make them both hard.

If you only want to push for a month, get a good 2K time then stop you should go hard with intervals every other day with a taper the last week. The key here is stop before the training load catches up with you. If you want to drive PBs for the next few years then target 2 hard days/week, with rest long/slow. This is sustainable.

This video gives you an excellent example of a cyclist building a weekly workout schedule based on best practices. Skip the first minute, its fluff. The really good meaty content starts about a minute in. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H9SvLGv2c1E

[jamesg]

1 "stress" and not overload your aerobic system.
2 rowing at a lower SPM as well as slower pace, with focus on one's heart rate.
3 Doesn't one risk rowing at lower power per stroke at a slower velocity per stroke by doing this?

1 Stress and overload are the essence of training; what counts is how much, and this is given by Rating. Up to 23 is aerobic, i.e. distance, UT1. Rowing uses Rating, since the crew can do anything they like, but not row out of sync; also because low ratings let us pull a big stroke early in the training cycle, and the stroke is what has to be trained.

2 No need to use HR as control, on a C2 erg; HR was a proxy for "Intensity" before Wattmeters were invented. The C2 erg shows the Rating and our Power output in Watts. Without these it's difficult to train what needs training. But we can use HR as quality monitor: if HR doesn't go high at low ratings, our stroke is not good enough.

3 The Work per stroke is Watts/Rating (rating has dimension 1/Time). Training for rowing is done by keeping this number high in order to maintain and develop style, strength and endurance.

If by velocity you mean the speed of the pull, this is always high, whatever the rating; but at low rates we get more time for the recovery so can do long pieces. Ergdata shows the numbers.

At my age I see typically 124cm, 40kg, 1.9m/s. About 70% height and 50% weight. This gives me a 6-7W' stroke, enough to keep me alive but not enough for racing.

If planning to race, divide the Watts needed to win by the Rating you want to race at. This tells you all about the stroke needed and that has to be trained. Race plans usually start with plenty of long stuff at low rates, with short high rate pieces just before the race.

If not planning to race, the start of the training cycle is the same, but no point in going over 23 if the stroke is long and full force. This provides strength and endurance; with a month's tapering or less we can in any case TT or race.

[Dangerscouse]

Hi Ed, Tsnor has covered most of the info, and I wouldn't worry about ingraining a softer stroke as this only will happen if you let it.

There could well be a subtle moment when you intuitively know that you need to go faster & harder, but that should be adequately addressed with doing interval sessions, or a hard single distance / time session, and quite often it can be just your ego talking.

A good way of framing the process is that your steady sessions are a reward / requirement for the really tough sessions. The interval sessions are the main source of what will get you faster at the 2k, but underestimate the benefits quite a lot of long & slow sessions will also bring. It's the yin and yang that is essential to progress.

[btlifter]

I am interested in improving my 2k time and have started incorporating more steady state into my training.

If you post what training you plan to do there are people on this forum who are excellent at improving/balancing. Especially with a specific target like an improved 2K time. If you don't have a training plan then post asking for one, getting a good 2K benefits from a good plan -- a mix of intense work and long slow and likely some weight training.

Steady state gives you two things. (1) some adaptation that you don't get with intense workouts. ex: seems to make mitochondria grow in their number and size. And more important (2) gives you extra training hours without driving you into overtraining. Results for elite and casual athletes correlate with training hours - the more hours you do the better the results. But your body (elite or casual athlete) can't take sustained hard work without rest - bad things happen if you try. So you get the extra hours with long/slow.

If you are an Olympic class rower (or runner, or cyclist, etc.) then you are training 10-12 times a week, and all but 2 are long/slow. Thus the 80/20 rule.

If you are more mainstream you might be training 3-5 times a week. Do your 2 hard sessions (intervals, whatever) and make sure you have recovery days between those sessions. Fill in the time between hard sessions with the long/slow stuff. Do keep at least one rest day. If you want more sessions, do two long/slow on the same day.

If you only can do two sessions a week then make them both hard.

If you only want to push for a month, get a good 2K time then stop you should go hard with intervals every other day with a taper the last week. The key here is stop before the training load catches up with you. If you want to drive PBs for the next few years then target 2 hard days/week, with rest long/slow. This is sustainable.

This video gives you an excellent example of a cyclist building a weekly workout schedule based on best practices. Skip the first minute, its fluff. The really good meaty content starts about a minute in. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H9SvLGv2c1E

Sorry for bombing but... once again... I just really want to +1 all of this!