Plateau Advice

[sstich]

I'm trying to break a 7:20 2k, and have been hovering around 7:22–7:25 for a couple months. My weekly programming is:

• Monday: Alternate 2k time trial, or 5k tempo (every other week)
• Tuesday: 10k steady state
• Wednesday: 5x500 intervals, with 3:00 rest
• Thursday: 10k steady state
• Friday: 5k steady state

For times, my 2k hovers around 7:22–7:25. My 5k is around 19:35–19:40. I do the 500m intervals at 1:46.0.

Anecdotally, I feel like I hit a wall with faster paces. For example, I can do even splits of 1:51.0 for the 2k, but if I go out just slightly faster, like at 1:50.0, then I die in the last 750m and end up finishing the last 500 at ≈1:53 or slower. Similarly with my 500s, I can do even intervals at 1:46. But at 1:45, my last split falls apart to ≈1:48.

I've been training seriously for about 6 months now. I'm 33 years old, 155 lbs, 6'0".

From reading other questions on the forum, my best guess for improvement is more steady state. So I'm thinking of:

• Replacing my 10ks with 12ks
• Replacing my 5k steady state with another 12k

Is that a good plan? Any other suggestions for how to improve? Would be grateful for any guidance.

[btlifter]

3 quick thoughts:
1. 9/10 times, in my experience, the best way out of any plateau is 1 step back to go 2 steps forward.
2. I'd encourage dropping any time trials, and instead make your 2 high intensity days attainable and progressive. Meaning, find/create workouts that you know you can achieve, then either make them a little quicker or a little longer the following week.
3. Yes, the more steady state you do (generally) the better off you will be. However, the returns on investment from that tend to be gradual and delayed. Having said that, increasing that 5k to 12+k is probably a great place to start.

[MPx]

Agree^^^
So, think in terms of a longer cycle for your hard sessions as you wont get much better in a week, but you might in 4 or 6 weeks. So instead of just a 5x500 3r every week think of others eg 10x 1min 1r; 12x250 90"r; and anything similar so that you have 4+ different workouts covering a similar distance. Then take on (say) your 500s at the pace you know you can do (1:46), but try to make the last rep faster. Even just a fraction might make the average 1:45.8 or something. Then in 4 weeks time when the same piece comes up, set off at last times avg 1:45.8 (you've proved you can do this) and again try for a faster last. Gradually you will ratchet down. Dont go too mad on the first time through your alternates - the ratchet down works quickly enough to make it tough. The joy is you're always doing a pace you've previously achieved, so know its possible. And by having 4 weeks between sessions you've given yourself a chance to have adapted to the training.

I'd switch your hard sessions to Monday/Thursday and make Wed the shortest and/or slowest (2:10ish?) steady state which should offer easier recovery allowing Thursday to be harder. Monday could be a hard go at longer intervals: eg 4x1k 5r; 4x1500 5r; 3x2k 5r rather than another set of sprints.

Best of luck

[jamesg]

What are your typical ratings? If you train at ratings that are too high, you are not training your stroke. This makes a 7 minute 2k impossible (= plateau).

Also, race training is not done all at once. We separate initial low-rate technique and endurance work, which develops the stroke, from short race speed work. When working on speed (called tapering) the total weekly load decreases by about half.

It's impossible to work on speed if already tired by long hard work.

What rate did you use during your last 2k test? To understand what you are doing, you need to keep an eye on rating (strokes per minute) and stroke Work (Watts/Rating). This ratio has to be at least 10, such as 200W at rate 20, for a good 2k.

[sstich]

Thanks @MPx, Thanks @btlifter

@jamesg, for steady state, I'm typically around 23–25 SPM. My last 2k was 33 SPM. At 7:25.4 = 1:51.3/500m, that's 254 watts, so if I understand correctly, I'm short of your 10x rule. It should be more like 25 SPM to produce that pace?

[GlennUk]

Are you following a traning plan at all?

My initial thought is you are erging 5 days in a row, some weeks with a TT. You may wish to take a rest day in there somewhere, you can only improve with proper rest to allow your body to recover.

Id also suggest that for improvements using long slow rows, you may wish to increase them to an hour, depending on your pace, its likley that a the shorter durations are less than 30mins. Increasing from 10-12k probably wont make a vast difference, i would personally consider working to time rather than distance for low intensity workouts, you are trying to get your body to adapt to the exercise which is a function of time, not distance.

As your fitness increases, if you work on distance, your duration will decrease for a set distance, an hour is always an hour, but you will go further, and as your body adapts your HR will remain lower for longer at any given pace/spm.

Also i note you say you have been training seriously for 6 months, what exercise were you doing before that?

[Dangerscouse]

I agree with the above, and the only other thing I'd suggest is to dissect down the 2k, when you do them or as an intervals replacement.

It sounds like circa 1200m is your inflection point, so you use that as your marker. Try doing 1200m at target pace, resting for five minutes, or a bit longer if you want, then doing 800m at your target pace. If you can do this, try doing 1300m & 700m, and then 1400m & 600m etc.

When you're up to 1600m you're probably going to need to increase it by 50m, but reduce the rest to circa 3:30.

That 1600m is where you need to build the confidence as you're going to be really hurting, but not close enough to home. I always find the last 300m is relatively manageable for any session, as I count up to 15 with each stroke, and then down from 15 to 0 to finish. The distraction of counting up is useful, and then when you've got 150m to go, pride and adrenaline will keep you going.

[GlennUk]

and then when you've got 150m to go, pride and adrenaline will keep you going.

Its been a while since i did a 2k TT but ditto this!!!

[sstich]

Thanks, everyone — I'm going to try:

1. Increase my watts/rate ratio, per @jamesg's post — I honestly had never even looked at this before, and didn't realize my watts/stroke was much lower than optimal.
2. Back off doing a time trial every other week, as many people suggested — working instead to either dissect the 2k per @Dangerscouse, or do more progressive speed work per @MPx
3. Up my steady state rows to 1h, rather than a fixed distance.

Thanks again, I'm excited to try the new programming.

[Ombrax]

Up my steady state rows to 1h, rather than a fixed distance.

Re: Timed row vs distance

This may not apply to you, but it's something that I've found bugs me a lot:

I dislike timed rows primarily because rowing harder doesn't make the end of the workout come sooner, so it eliminates at least part of what motivates me to push a bit more for the last x% of the session, when my body's really trying to tell my brain that "this really isn't fun any more, and wouldn't it be nice to back off just a bit?"

[btlifter]

Up my steady state rows to 1h, rather than a fixed distance.

Re: Timed row vs distance

This may not apply to you, but it's something that I've found bugs me a lot:

I dislike timed rows primarily because rowing harder doesn't make the end of the workout come sooner, so it eliminates at least part of what motivates me to push a bit more for the last x% of the session, when my body's really trying to tell my brain that "this really isn't fun any more, and wouldn't it be nice to back off just a bit?"

I would suggest that - for many - this is precisely the benefit of a timed row... less incentive to push ourselves faster than is optimal for the session.

[jamesg]

1 Increase my watts/rate ratio
2 Back off doing a time trial every other week
3 Up my steady state rows to 1h

1 may be a technique problem, depending on how you take the catch. It has to be fast with the legs to get max length, and posture can be critical.
2 a 500 test can show both endurance and high-rate technique without disruption. Expect to go about 11% slower in a 2k (-30% Watts).
3 take it easy but consider stroke quality as to 1.

[GlennUk]

I would suggest that - for many - this is precisely the benefit of a timed row... less incentive to push ourselves faster than is optimal for the session.

Id also add that using a time based regime for slow rate work means that as your fitness level improves you don't need to alter the exercise duraiotn, the spm or HR, the distance you can row for a givcen HR/spm increases.

Whereas for a distance based regime, as your fitness improves you row for less time so arguably need to compensate by increasing distance to obtain the same training benefit.

Your body has no idea how far it has rowed, only for how long!

All JMHO

[Dangerscouse]

Your body has no idea how far it has rowed, only for how long!

All JMHO

I agree and disagree with this. It's relevant if it's kept fairly steady, but if you rowed 17k in 60 mins, rather than 14k, your body will know all about it.

[Dangerscouse]

Up my steady state rows to 1h, rather than a fixed distance.

Re: Timed row vs distance

This may not apply to you, but it's something that I've found bugs me a lot:

I dislike timed rows primarily because rowing harder doesn't make the end of the workout come sooner, so it eliminates at least part of what motivates me to push a bit more for the last x% of the session, when my body's really trying to tell my brain that "this really isn't fun any more, and wouldn't it be nice to back off just a bit?"

A lot of people say that, but I always find that it's more of a problem with distance going up rather than down, not sure why it bothers me. I even convert it to expected distance remaining in my head.

As I don't like timed sessions, it's probably more reason for me to them to do them