10mps: Race Pace, Stroking Power, And Ratio

[old] mpukita · Post by **[old] mpukita** » December 25th, 2005, 9:19 am

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(george nz @ Dec 24 2005, 10:24 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 25 2005, 01:55 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>Yesterday I rowed 2:24 pace for awhile, at 26 spm with no breaks. Then I did it again the same way. for awhile with no breaks, with breaks in between.<br /><br />I just now figured that, since 2:24 pace is 117.2 watts, that I was using 4.51 joules of energy with each stroke, i.e. my spi was 4.51. <br /><br />Based on this I have determined that a 6:16 is possible, by keeping the same 4.51 spi and raising my stroke rate to 93 strokes per minute.<br /><br />Thanks to Paul Smith again for this one. <br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br /><br />No John the only way you will ever get to 93 strokes a minute is if you use both hands - careful you dont go blind. <br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />

[old] ranger · Post by **[old] ranger** » December 25th, 2005, 1:20 pm

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(george nz @ Dec 24 2005, 06:48 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>I have the power, I dont have the aerobic base, and I did not have the ability to maintain good form over about 27/28spm.<br /><br />I am doing my rowing at s10mps and after a few weeks 27spm is reasonably comfortable, thos requires focus and relaxation. I would like to use the excuse that my size makes it more difficult for me to rate as high as a smaller/shorter person but that is not true, it is just a matter of perseverance and not trying to go to fast to soon and concentrating.<br /><br />I think that unlike Ranger who had the ability to rate high but did not have the power at that stage we are coming at this from different compass points. He now has the power and will match that to his stroking ability, I had the power and now need to develop the stroking ability.<br /><br />Maybe 6:16 is both our potentials <br /><br />George <br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />I like the optimism, George. Good to hear it.<br /><br />I am delighted to hear that you think you have the power to row 6:16. Can you do 20K or so (with breaks, maintaining 2:00 pace over all) at 1:50 @ 18 spm? That would be a good test, I think. This doesn't have much to do with your aerobic base at all, just your relaxed, normal stroking power. You only have to average 2:00 pace over the entire row.<br /><br />If you _don't_ have enough easy stroking power, you will be straining to maintain the 14.7 SPI and will find the row too hard.<br /><br />ranger<br />

[old] george nz · Post by **[old] george nz** » December 25th, 2005, 3:42 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'>Can you do 20K or so (with breaks, maintaining 2:00 pace over all) at 1:50 @ 18 spm? That would be a good test, I think.<br />ranger<br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />Your not suggesting I do a quantifiable test during a training session are you , that is not like you Ranger <br /><br />George<br /><br />ps I think the fact that on an average day I could pull a sub 1:25 / 500 suggests that I am probably strong enough, however the poor technique that would be used and the lack of sustainability shows the 2 areas I need to work on. In my case I dont intend doing that at low rates over many hours.

[old] John Rupp · Post by **[old] John Rupp** » December 25th, 2005, 5:47 pm

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(george nz @ Dec 25 2005, 11:42 AM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>I think the fact that on an average day I could pull a sub 1:25 / 500 suggests that I am probably strong enough[right] </td></tr></table><br /><br />I have to agree with George about this.

[old] george nz · Post by **[old] george nz** » December 25th, 2005, 8:04 pm

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(ranger @ Dec 26 2005, 06:20 AM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>Can you do 20K or so (with breaks, maintaining 2:00 pace over all) at 1:50 @ 18 spm? <br /><br />ranger </td></tr></table><br /><br />Was just thinking more about this but to be honest I cant see how this would prove anything. I could arrive at the 2:00 pace in so many ways as to make the result meaningless:<br /><br />10k at 1:50 / 18SPM - 10K at 2:10 / ?spm<br />5k at 1:50 / 18spm - 15k at 2:03.3 / ?spm<br />15k at 1:50 / 18spm - 5k at 2:30 / ?spm<br /><br />If my maths is right they all would end up at 2:00 pace for the 20k, but they obviously are very much not the same workout<br /><br />George<br />

[old] ranger · Post by **[old] ranger** » December 25th, 2005, 8:51 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'> I think the fact that on an average day I could pull a sub 1:25 / 500 suggests that I am probably strong enough, however the poor technique that would be used and the lack of sustainability shows the 2 areas I need to work on </td></tr></table><br /><br />Strength is not the issue. The issue is (muscular) endurance with (easy) stroking power, an entirely different matter. Stroking power is the use of strength, quickness, timing, sequencing, agility, rhythmicity, relaxation, etc., in the delivery of power in the rowing stroke. <br /><br />A sub-1:25 500 can mean all sorts of things besides efficient, powerful stroking.<br /><br />Rowing at 200+ df. @ 55 spm and just janking the chain as hard as I can with no resemblance to the force profile of a rowing stroke, I can probably row 1:25 for 500m, too. But since I can only row that way for 500m, what bearing does it have on the 2K?<br /><br />ranger<br /><br />

[old] ranger · Post by **[old] ranger** » December 25th, 2005, 9:04 pm

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(george nz @ Dec 25 2005, 07:04 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(ranger @ Dec 26 2005, 06:20 AM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>Can you do 20K or so (with breaks, maintaining 2:00 pace over all) at 1:50 @ 18 spm? <br /><br />ranger </td></tr></table><br /><br />Was just thinking more about this but to be honest I cant see how this would prove anything. I could arrive at the 2:00 pace in so many ways as to make the result meaningless:<br /><br />10k at 1:50 / 18SPM - 10K at 2:10 / ?spm<br />5k at 1:50 / 18spm - 15k at 2:03.3 / ?spm<br />15k at 1:50 / 18spm - 5k at 2:30 / ?spm<br /><br />If my maths is right they all would end up at 2:00 pace for the 20k, but they obviously are very much not the same workout<br /><br />George <br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />All strokes should be at 1:50 @ 18 spm. Rest/stop/break whenever you would like, but so that the rest does not make the total time of the rowing more than 2:00 pace overall (about 84 minutes).<br /><br />Yes, you can do the rowing in a variety of ways. But the result is not at all meaningless.<br /><br />Try it--any way you would like. Try it for a week--seven different ways. Report back what you experience. If you find the result meaningless, explain why and I will be glad to believe you.<br /><br />The workout is not a race. It is just a workout, with a strong emphasis on efficiency and stroking power.<br /><br />ranger<br /><br /><br />

[old] ranger · Post by **[old] ranger** » December 25th, 2005, 9:06 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'>the poor technique that would be used and the lack of sustainability shows the 2 areas I need to work on. In my case I dont intend doing that at low rates over many hours.<br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br /> <br /><br />ranger

[old] george nz · Post by **[old] george nz** » December 25th, 2005, 9:45 pm

I dont see how pulling for a while at 1:50 / 18spm and then stopping helps with habituation or technique. <br /><br />Surely rowing at a slower pace but continuously is going to be better from a technical and physiological point of view as at least your body will learn to adapt to the stresses. If you are always stopping it will come to accept that is the norm.<br /><br />George

[old] John Rupp · Post by **[old] John Rupp** » December 25th, 2005, 9:58 pm

George,<br /><br />Have you tried doing a 1:25 for the 500 meters at 18 spm and with breaks?

[old] John Rupp · Post by **[old] John Rupp** » December 25th, 2005, 10:01 pm

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(ranger @ Dec 25 2005, 04:51 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>Stroking power is the use of strength, quickness, timing, sequencing, agility, rhythmicity, relaxation, etc., in the delivery of power in the rowing stroke.[right] </td></tr></table><br /><br />I.e., nothing to do with going at 18 spm. <br />

[old] John Rupp · Post by **[old] John Rupp** » December 25th, 2005, 10:09 pm

Excuses:<br /><br />Rod Freed is faster than Rich for the 5k, 6k, 30 minutes, 10k, 60 minutes, and half marathon.<br /><br />Graham Watt is faster than Rich for the 2k.<br /><br />But you see they both did it wrong and didn't row the "right" way according to Rich.<br /><br />George, you see you are also doing it "wrong" because you got a faster time they Rich did, albeit not in the same division.<br /><br />Wrong (definition): All youse guys rowed too fast and didn't wait for Rich!

[old] george nz · Post by **[old] george nz** » December 25th, 2005, 10:48 pm

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(John Rupp @ Dec 26 2005, 02:58 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>George,<br /><br />Have you tried doing a 1:25 for the 500 meters at 18 spm and with breaks? <br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br /><br />No , but unlike Rich my 500 would be at 105 drag (not 200+) and rating less than 40spm avg (not 55+)<br /><br />George<br /><br />hmmmmm with breaks, now theres an idea

[old] ranger · Post by **[old] ranger** » December 26th, 2005, 11:13 am

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(george nz @ Dec 25 2005, 08:45 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>I dont see how pulling for a while at 1:50 / 18spm and then stopping helps with habituation or technique. <br /><br />Surely rowing at a slower pace but continuously is going to be better from a technical and physiological point of view as at least your body will learn to adapt to the stresses. If you are always stopping it will come to accept that is the norm.<br /><br />George <br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br /><br />IMHO, technique is all about the delivery of high but efficient (well timed, sequenced, leveraged, relaxed, rhythmic) power in the drive of the stroke. If you row at lower stroking powers, you don't practice what you need to practice; therefore you never make contact with the task. In fact, as I have been saying, I think you need to row 2-3 SPI above your target 2K SPI at low rates in order to prepare to row with your target SPI at high rates. 1:50 @ 18 spm is 14.7 SPI. I will race at about 12.5 SPI (@ 32 spm).<br /><br />I don't know about you, but when I am rowing at 1:50 @ 18 spm, I take breaks to regather mental concentration on technique (and regain my relaxation in the delivery of that technique) as much as to take a breather. The breaks are as much psychological as physical.<br /><br />No, in this sort of rowing (which concentrates on efficiency and technique) the breaks don't reduce the effectiveness of the work at all. Over time, these breaks slowly disappear, anyway, and the row becomes continuous.<br /><br />Rowing at a low SPI encourages all of the flaws in technique that you are trying to elimiate by doing this sort of work.<br /><br />You can certainly row at a lower _pace_ and still do this sort of work effectively. For instance, instead of rowing with breaks at 1:50 @ 18 spm, row continuously at 1:54 @ 16 spm or 1:58 @ 14 spm. This issue is the stroking power, not the pace.<br /><br />I prefer 18 spm because of the rhythmicity of the stroking at that rate. At 18 spm, I am in a nice 3-to-1 ratio, a natural 4-beat meter, the universal meter of song. <br /><br />Sure enough, I have indeed gained 2-3 SPI of stroking power by rowing this way for a couple of years. This morning, I was doing a smooth 1:25 @ 44 spm (122 df.), with my technique (and its effect, the force contour of my stroke) fully in place. I don't have my watts chart here, but I would guess that is pretty close to 12.5 SPI. I certainly could never do this before, with or without good technique. At high rates, I could only do about 10 SPI, and even so, at a high df. To get to 1:25, I had to row at 55 spm and 200 df. I am happy to see that those days are behind me. <br /><br />IMHO, the problem with rowing at 10 MPS and climbing the rate ladder, as PaulS recommends, is that the SPI is very mild at 27-28 spm (10 SPI, etc.). The major issue ( for me) is what happens to my relaxation, timing, sequencing, length, leverage, endurance, muscular durability, aerobic cajpaciaty, etc., when I row 20K at 15 SPI, not 10 SPI.<br /><br />Rowing long distances with a high stroking power enforces good habits. If you have a PM3, you can also row looking at the force contour of your stroke, as a double check.<br /><br />ranger<br />

[old] ranger · Post by **[old] ranger** » December 26th, 2005, 11:20 am

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(John Rupp @ Dec 25 2005, 09:01 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(ranger @ Dec 25 2005, 04:51 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>Stroking power is the use of strength, quickness, timing, sequencing, agility, rhythmicity, relaxation, etc., in the delivery of power in the rowing stroke.[right] </td></tr></table><br /><br />I.e., nothing to do with going at 18 spm. <br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />Sure it does. Then the same technique (well timed, sequenced, leveraged, etc.) can be delivered at 44 spm (at 12.5 SPI, 1:25).<br /><br />All of the great lightweights row in and around 1:25 for 500m. This is just what I was hitting this morning at 44 spm.<br /><br />Pulling as hard as I could, I was hitting 1:40 @ 22 spm, with my force curve still in nice shape. This is also a significant improvement. 1:40 @ 26 spm used to be close to a limit for me in terms of stroking power. Now it is just my normal stroke--at all rates, paces, and distances.<br /><br />ranger

Concept2 Forum

10mps: Race Pace, Stroking Power, And Ratio

Training

Training

Training

Training

Training

Training

Training

Training

Training

Training

Training

Training

Training

Training

Training