Rod Freed

[old] PaulS · Post by **[old] PaulS** » December 14th, 2005, 5:59 pm

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(John Rupp @ Dec 14 2005, 12:55 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(PaulS @ Dec 14 2005, 11:48 AM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>Did C2 really post that? Surely not. </td></tr></table><br /><br />Yes and so did you. <br /><br /><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(PaulS @ Aug 17 2005, 11:59 AM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>it should probably be mentioned that since there was no Drag Factor accounting for the Model A, it was important to follow some rules in how it was set up. IIRC, there should be nothing within 3 feet of the sides or off the end of the flywheel. i.e. Having the flywheel close to a wall would reduce airflow, making for less resistance and skew the results.[right] </td></tr></table><br /><br /> <br /><br /><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(c2jonw @ Aug 18 2005, 04:13 AM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>that mechanical odometer was easy to compromise as you pointed out- proximity to a wall and other ergs made a difference, as would the presence of a coach with baggy pants encouraging his charge on. Funny picture there.[right] </td></tr></table><br /><br />Credibility reins supreme. <br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />Looks like you are still mixed up, we followed those rules (The coach was seated off to the side monitoring, not participating), fairness reigned. And believe me, the coswains stayed well clear of the unguarded flywheel, you could lose any soft bits that got too close.

[old] John Rupp · Post by **[old] John Rupp** » December 14th, 2005, 6:03 pm

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(c2jonw @ Aug 18 2005, 04:13 AM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>that mechanical odometer was easy to compromise as you pointed out- proximity to a wall and other ergs made a difference, <b>as would the presence of a coach with baggy pants encouraging his charge on. Funny picture there.</b>[right] </td></tr></table><br /><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(PaulS @ Dec 14 2005, 01:59 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><b>The coach was seated off to the side monitoring</b>[right] </td></tr></table><br /><br />Point made again! <br />

[old] PaulS · Post by **[old] PaulS** » December 14th, 2005, 6:07 pm

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(John Rupp @ Dec 14 2005, 02:03 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(c2jonw @ Aug 18 2005, 04:13 AM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>that mechanical odometer was easy to compromise as you pointed out- proximity to a wall and other ergs made a difference, <b>as would the presence of a coach with baggy pants encouraging his charge on. Funny picture there.</b>[right] </td></tr></table><br /><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(PaulS @ Dec 14 2005, 01:59 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><b>The coach was seated off to the side monitoring</b>[right] </td></tr></table><br /><br />Point made again! <br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />Indeed. If you only knew "the point". <br /><br />You see John, anyone can just look and see that you are misquoting what was said.<br /><br />WHat about those slides? Any progress?

[old] becz · Post by **[old] becz** » December 15th, 2005, 10:25 am

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(Carl Henrik @ Dec 14 2005, 01:42 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(becz @ Dec 14 2005, 05:26 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'> He exists, he's real, get over it (from someone who works hard, and yet still "can't do that"). <br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br /><br />Let me express my sentiment in reply to this as well. I have have put time and energy in exploring how amazing the performances ranked by Freed is. I do not automatically question the legitimacy by doing that. I never doubted the times and still don't. I like to do math though and Freeds times in my own sport was an exciting subject for this. Maybe I let on another position unintentionally or maybe I didn't. <br /><br />I don't think getting over the ranked times is the right way to go. They symbolize great achievements and should be recognized for how amazing they are. <br /><br />Getting over the question wether they are real or not is IMO up to personality and prioritites as long as no proof is presented. You have presented no proof but still want people to get over it. <br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />Carl,<br /><br />I enjoy math as well. My suggestion to "get over it" wasn't in regards to the efforts here to quantify the probability of someone rowing a particular time. If you were to do the same analysis on, let's say, the top runners in the world, or the best cyclists, where would their performances lie on the distribution? They would clearly indicate "unlikely" performances when compared against all runners, or all cyclists. The fact that they are mathematically unlikely doesn't make them any less real.<br /><br />My comment was simply aimed at those who dispute times based on gut reaction, as opposed to fact. I'm sorry if you felt I included you.<br />

[old] ranger · Post by **[old] ranger** » December 15th, 2005, 11:21 am

<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'> I think he DOES listen to what coaches say, then makes his own choices, and according to his posts works very hard on what he feels works best for him. </td></tr></table><br /><br />Much of the rowing advice given by coaches on these web lines is very good, and I have benfited enormously from it. Coaches can also be good for your discipline; they can have you do things that you might not do otherwise. Nonetheless, I resist giving over my training for rowing to a coach.<br /><br />Besides the one I cited (personal enjoyment, personal challenge) and the one that Gary cited (being able to take what you think is best from a variety of coaches), there might be quite a few reasons not to give your training over entirely to a coach.<br /><br />(1) All coaches tend to have biases toward doing certain things rather than others, usually based on their personal experience with the sport. Why suffer from these biases? <br /><br />(2) Coaches can just be wrong in various ways. That is, they can give bad advice on certain issues, rather than good. <br /><br />(3) If you have a lot of experience in individual sports, you know your body better than any coach, especially any new coach, in the sense of any coach that you have just joined up with.<br /><br />(4) Not giving over your training to a coach lets you experiment with odd/new training methods, when you would like. If everyone trains alike, no one gets an advantage from their training. Innovative training can give you a competitive edge.<br /><br />Just my views on these things!<br /><br />ranger

[old] Bayko · Post by **[old] Bayko** » December 15th, 2005, 12:06 pm

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(becz @ Dec 15 2005, 02:25 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><br />My comment was simply aimed at those who dispute times based on gut reaction, as opposed to fact. I'm sorry if you felt I included you. <br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br /><br />This is interesting (and I'd guess that I am one of the one's you aimed your comment at) because I see it exactly 180 degrees opposite. I see the acceptance of ANY time posted being accepted on blind faith that it is legitimate (gut reaction) as opposed to fact. WHERE is the FACT to back up those times?<br /><br />The closest we have come yet is that Ralph referred to a piece in <br />which it said that he sent a photo of the monitor to C2 after a 30:00 score. That is at least something, I'll admit. I will also refer you to post #337 on the Ranger-News to Shock thread, where there is a photo posted of a PM3 with the force curve spelling out Ranger. Does that make it a fact that a PM3 can do that?<br /><br />Also, Ralph used the 30:00 to make his case. While I do find the statistics interesting, showing that it such a performance is possible, it no more proves that Freed did it than that I did it, or any other 50+ lwt. And it find the half-marathon far more incredible. Consider all 50+ lwt times for the past five years, which are still searchable in the rankings:<br /><br />1:14+ times: 2 - Both Rod Freed<br />1:15+ times: none<br />1:16+ times: none<br />1:17+ times: none<br />1:18+ times: none<br />1:19+ times: 4 - Chapman, Adams, Hodge (twice)<br />1:20+ times: 3 - Hastings, Meredith (twice)<br />1:21+ times: 10 - seven different guys<br /><br />His average pace for the 1:14:11.2 that he posted in 2003 is faster than the fastest 5km done by anyone other than him!<br /><br /><br />Then after you make the case for any individual performance, consider that in 2003 his 10km, 30:00, 6km, and 5km that were all not merely slight improvements over previous world records but quantum leaps, were done in a five day period from February 18th to February 22nd. If he has not only such great endurance but also greater recovery powers than anyone else ever known in the world of endurance sport, then exercise physiologists from around the world should be banging down his door to discover the secret of his success.<br /><br />"As opposed to facts?" I'm interested in facts. Show me some facts. People simply believing that he did those scores are not facts. People believing that someone "could have done" those scores based on statistical analysis is also not fact.<br /><br />The opening post of this thread posed the question<br /><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'>I must confess I always believed it must be true.because it was written in our newsletter.........does anyone actually know this man and even better confirm or deny these wonder performances........I'm beginning to wonder.<br /> </td></tr></table>. So far the answer is "No."<br /><br />Rick<br />

[old] ranger · Post by **[old] ranger** » December 15th, 2005, 12:29 pm

Rick--<br /><br />I'm not saying that there is any proof that Freed did it, but I continue to think that the 1:45 for a HM is not at all impossible for a 50s lwt. It is the reflex of 1:48 for a FM, which I also think should be in reach for this division.<br /><br />ranger

[old] becz · Post by **[old] becz** » December 15th, 2005, 1:01 pm

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(Bayko @ Dec 15 2005, 11:06 AM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(becz @ Dec 15 2005, 02:25 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><br />My comment was simply aimed at those who dispute times based on gut reaction, as opposed to fact. I'm sorry if you felt I included you. <br /> </td></tr></table><br />This is interesting [snip]<br /><br />The opening post of this thread posed the question<br /><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'>I must confess I always believed it must be true.because it was written in our newsletter.........does anyone actually know this man and even better confirm or deny these wonder performances........I'm beginning to wonder.<br /> </td></tr></table>. So far the answer is "No."<br /><br />Rick <br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />Having a photo and a witness is more evidence than we usually get to validate claimed performances on this forum. If it was manufactured, it's certainly an elaborate scheme for the small world of indoor rowing. If you choose to dispute someone's time, then it's up to you to disprove it. Unfortunately that's the way of the world. This is indoor rowing, no governing body, no court of arbitration. Frustrating? Maybe. But if you're going to dispute someone's performance, do it based on facts (which is what I meant). I don't have to provide you with facts that the feat was done, because I'm not the one complaining. Why is Paul Flack's 34:16.3 in 2003 any more believable, when he is only 7 years younger than Rod Freed? Did you witness this? What about 2001, where Tore Foss's 10k time is signifcantly better than Rod Freed's, and yet he's only 3 years younger. Why do you believe that time? I'm a mid-30's lightweight, and I rowed a 2k in the low 6:20's a few years ago. Do you believe me? If not, why? Because I choose not to compete? Some of us don't need the pats on the back. <br />

[old] Carl Henrik · Post by **[old] Carl Henrik** » December 15th, 2005, 3:42 pm

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(becz @ Dec 15 2005, 02:25 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>Carl,<br /><br /><b>[...]</b><br /><br />If you were to do the same analysis on, let's say, the top runners in the world, or the best cyclists, where would their performances lie on the distribution? They would clearly indicate "unlikely" performances when compared against all runners, or all cyclists. <br /><br /><b>[...]</b><br /><br />My comment was simply aimed at those who dispute times based on gut reaction, as opposed to fact. I'm sorry if you felt I included you. <br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />The analysis was not done just to find where on the distribution they would be, but to compare this with the number of samples from this distribution. For example it is very likely to get at least one 6 on a dice, with 100 people rolling a dice. I'm not sure the performances you mention would be unlikely in this respect. I'm sure some of them would be, but not all. If all of them were, that would suggest there is somthing wrong with the statistical model, since for many samples the frequency of actual performances and their probability should be the same. <br /><br />I was not sure wether you included me or not but still I wanted to state my view. <br /><br />There is one performance my gut feeling says is wrong though, and that's the 500m by 17 year old light weight (69.09kg) Gregg Stephens from 2005 of 1:20.1. I've seen no other performance ranked by him (though I have not looked extensively). A google search on this supposed extreme monster talent which would already at age 17 kick the butt of multi Erg and water WR holder and Olympic Gold medalist Eskild Ebbesen yields no results supporting this talent. Wether he did it or not I can't say but I do not believe it.<br /><br />Perhaps Concept2 should contact him and make an article. I would love to here about this talent and why he is so fast.

[old] ranger · Post by **[old] ranger** » December 15th, 2005, 6:08 pm

<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'>Do you believe me? If not, why? Because I choose not to compete? </td></tr></table><br /><br />The only frustrating thing, I think, is that Freed _never_ competed (did he?) and (seemingly) no longer even ranks his times; but he has most of the all-time best rows in the 50s lwt division.<br /><br />Nice to row in the low 6:20s as a 30s lwt. But what if you had sent in a time of 5:55 for several straight years, never competed in public, and then stopped rowing? I think quite a few folk might be curious about the validity of your times. Something unvalidated to begin with and now even free from investigation stands (supposedly) as the best ever, by an enormous margin.<br /><br />At the same time, as I have mentioned, I do not think that Freed's times are at all impossible.<br /><br />ranger

[old] R S T · Post by **[old] R S T** » December 15th, 2005, 7:36 pm

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(John Rupp @ Dec 14 2005, 10:03 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(c2jonw @ Aug 18 2005, 04:13 AM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>that mechanical odometer was easy to compromise as you pointed out- proximity to a wall and other ergs made a difference, <b>as would the presence of a coach with baggy pants encouraging his charge on. Funny picture there.</b>[right] </td></tr></table><br /><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(PaulS @ Dec 14 2005, 01:59 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><b>The coach was seated off to the side monitoring</b>[right] </td></tr></table><br /><br />Point made again! <br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br /><br />Oh no.....here we go again........

[old] John Rupp · Post by **[old] John Rupp** » December 15th, 2005, 7:48 pm

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(ranger @ Dec 15 2005, 02:08 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>what if you had sent in a time of 5:55 for several straight years, never competed in public, and then stopped rowing? I think quite a few folk might be curious about the validity of your times. [right] </td></tr></table><br /><br />Like we are curious about yours. <br />

[old] Ralph Earle · Post by **[old] Ralph Earle** » December 16th, 2005, 2:55 am

[/quote]<br /><br />Carl,<br /><br />I enjoy math as well. My suggestion to "get over it" wasn't in regards to the efforts here to quantify the probability of someone rowing a particular time. If you were to do the same analysis on, let's say, the top runners in the world, or the best cyclists, where would their performances lie on the distribution? They would clearly indicate "unlikely" performances when compared against all runners, or all cyclists. The fact that they are mathematically unlikely doesn't make them any less real.<br /><br /><snip><br />[quote]<br /><br />I disagree. The WR 30min record for 50-59 heavyweight men, 8771m, is only slightly better than would be expected by chance, given the number of ranked results. <br /><br />Here is my analysis of C2's WR performances by the other top 50-59 lightweight, Graham Watt:<br /><br />Dist. N* Time Prob. Ratio Actual/Expected<br />1K 64 0:3:06.6 1 in 77 1.2<br />2K 157 0:6:25.8 1 in 200 1.3<br />M 17 2:39:42.5 1 in 22 1.3<br /><br />N*= number of ranked results without Watt, minus obvious slow outliers.<br /><br />In each case, Graham Watt's WRs are also only slightly better than what would be expected by chance, given the number of ranked results. <br />

[old] ranger · Post by **[old] ranger** » December 16th, 2005, 2:57 am

<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'>Like we are curious about yours. </td></tr></table><br /><br />No, just "just as" at all. Just the opposite!<br /><br />Freed was ranking his times but has never raced in public and therefore has never done any entirely verifiable performances. <br /><br />I raced in public many times and therefore did many entirely verifiable performances (in addition to ranking my other times) but for some time now I have not been racing at any distances and therefore not ranking my other times.<br /><br />This winter, I am going to race again in public and therefore again do many entirely verifiable performances and I will again be racing other distance and therefore ranking my other times. <br />Freed has now stopped ranking his times altogether, and if he still rows at all, continues to avoid racing in public and therefore continues to avoid doing any entirely verifiable performances.<br /><br />ranger

[old] Ralph Earle · Post by **[old] Ralph Earle** » December 16th, 2005, 3:02 am

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(becz @ Dec 14 2005, 06:11 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(John Rupp @ Dec 14 2005, 12:52 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(becz @ Dec 14 2005, 09:26 AM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>C2 USA did a piece on Rod Freed many years ago, in which he talked more about his training, even discussing how he tried rowing extreme distances using a CamelBak so he wouldn't have to stop to drink. He exists, he's real, get over it (from someone who works hard, and yet still "can't do that").[right] </td></tr></table><br /><br />Are you sure that was Freed, and would you happen to have a copy of the article?<br /><br />Thanks much. <br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />John,<br /><br />Yes, it was definitely Rod Freed. It was in a C2 Update newletter, maybe as much as ten years ago. It talked about him rowing 100k+ distances, included a picture of him, etc. Unfortunately I don't have a copy. It may be possible to get it from C2. <br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />And here is an item from the September 2000 British C2 Newletter:<br /><br />Concept Spotlight: Rod Freed <br />For this fortnight's Concept Spotlight, we thought we'd throw the net slightly wider than usual and see what foreign fish we could fetch up from the bottom of the indoor rowing depths. <br />So putting on our Arran sweaters and waterproof trousers, we set sail on the good ship Concept Spotlight, corn pipe clenched firmly between manly teeth, the tang of brine in the air. Then we got bored of the metaphor and just checked out the On-Line World Rankings (http://www.e- row.com/ranking/home.asp) <br />Rather than pretend that we baited our lines and hooked a particularly hefty whopper, instead we had a quick search of the best overall times in the world registered this season so far to see if there was any particular person, or fish, that stood out. <br />There we found Rod Freed, a 51 year old Maths professor from California, USA who's broken the 17,000 metre barrier for the hour row, a feat impressive enough to stop us throwing him back. <br />Rod describes himself as having been "very small, weak, uncoordinated, and lacking in endurance as a child, so that I had no success at all in youth sports." When he was 16 years old, in true Charles Atlas style, he began to run and lift weights and at the University of Virginia in the late 60's and early 70's, took up rowing where he fell under the wing of Paul Wilson, a successful US sculler. <br />"He insisted that we do all workouts at a race pace ('you'll perform like you practice, and "long-slow distance" teaches you to go slow')." <br />A serious back injury put temporary pay to his on-water rowing in the early 1980's, but a chance introduction to an Indoor Rower three years ago means that he might be back on the water soon. <br />"I think that I'll always be better on the rowing machine than on the water due to my lack of coordination. However, interestingly enough, I think that the Indoor Rower has improved my technique. By watching the monitor, I've learned that what feels harder doesn't necessarily make me go faster. Examples abound: (1) a quick catch feels "easier" than a big "weightlifting-type" slug at the catch, but the quick catch lets me go faster; (2) keeping my hands lower at the catch and during the drive lets me go faster; etc.). <br />"Through indoor rowing I've also learned that I seem to have some sort of comparative advantage in the longer pieces. This is a relief to me: at the Long Beach Rowing Assoc., we did lots of 500 metre pieces in practice, and I always performed poorly, despite achieving high heart rates (in fact, my best 500 wasn't much faster than 1/4 of my best 2,000m). Despite the high heart rates, I thought that perhaps I just didn't have enough character to push hard enough on the shorter pieces. Now I've learned that I just have no "top end" (although I'm working on it). My best 2,000m is 6:39, and my best 500 is 1:32." <br />So what sort of training routine does a mathematics professor at California State University follow then? A pretty intensive one it seems: <br />"I do three different workouts (along with weightlifting: leg press, clean, leg extension, leg curl, calf raise, pull ups, seated rowing, upright rowing, dips, lateral raises, and sit-ups). Some people like more variety to stay fresh, but I like to stick to these three workouts, so that I can compare times, and thus motivate myself to (try to) improve. I've borrowed extensively from what US swimmers do, from the book Interval Training by Mathews and Fox, and from Paul Wilson (e.g., I still try to do everything at a race pace). Heart rates are quite high after each piece (186-192 beats per minute at 30 seconds, back down to 144-156 bpm at 1 minute: resting heart rate 60-65 bpm). These workouts evolve over time as I learn more, but right now they are as follows: <br />Monday and Thursday <br />5-6 minute warm up - light paddle building to full speed <br />30 minutes - - distance averages between 8580 and 8650 metres <br />Seven minute rest 25 minutes - - distance averages between 7125 and 7175<br />Tuesday and Friday<br />5-6 minute warm up 6000 meters - - times average between 20:35 and 20:55<br />Seven minute rest 6000 meters - - times average between 20:50 and 21:10<br />Seven minute rest 4 x 600 meters on, 1 minute off <br />Four minute rest 4 x 30 seconds on, 1 minute off (to try to build some kind of speed)<br />Wednesday and Saturday<br />5-6 minute warm up <br />5 x 4 minutes on, 1.5 minutes off <br />Seven minute rest <br />5 x 4 minutes on, 1.5 minutes off <br />Seven minute rest 5 x 1 minute on, 30 seconds off <br />Four minute rest 4 x 30 seconds on, 1 minute off<br />Sunday<br />3-5 minute warm up <br />40 minutes on recumbent stationary bike (trying to go as far as possible) <br /><br />Rod's work-out is obviously a pretty intensive one, training as he does seven days a week. We showed his training plan to Terry O'Neill to see what he thought of it. <br /><br />"Reading Rod's workouts I can see why he doesn't have a very good top end performance. The sessions are pretty straightforward but we don't know what else in terms of the weight programme mentioned are included on these days. I would suggest that there is so much training going on that the body treats it all as sub-maximal and this is why his 500m split is relatively poor and that he is better at the longer pieces. Rowing 2000m flat out does require a sound aerobic platform but at the end of the day it will only take 6-8mins for most people. This makes it a power endurance sport and if too much emphasis is placed on the endurance and not enough on the power, then the 2000m time will suffer. Research has shown that when trying to combine power and endurance training in the same session, the power training does not have a negative effect on the endurance training but the endurance training does have a neutralising effect on the power training. Rod's training programme is varied and challenging and the sort of programme that Trans- Atlantic rowers should look at because it is so demanding. As for improving your 2,000 metre time, however, no chance."