What Training Have You Done Today?

[Sakly]

Long slow session again.

Code: Select all

Time	Meters	Pace	Watts	Cal/Hr	S/M	❤️
2:00:00	28,914m	2:04.5	181	924	17	132
15:00.0	3,680m	2:02.2	191	958	18	133
30:00.0	3,646m	2:03.4	186	940	17	131
45:00.0	3,599m	2:05.0	179	916	17	131
1:00:00	3,594m	2:05.2	178	913	17	131
1:15:00	3,603m	2:04.8	180	918	17	134
1:30:00	3,601m	2:04.9	179	917	17	132
1:45:00	3,596m	2:05.1	179	914	18	134
2:00:00	3,595m	2:05.1	178	914	18	135

[Dangerscouse]

Depends on HRMax.

I have thought along similar lines although I paid little attention to HR. However through Covid at the urging of a PT I started doing SS at UT2 rather than UT1. It took me some time and learning to row smoothly at R16, but I did manage to get the first 45 min or so of SS below 75% of HRMax. I managed to set my only PB (HM) since 2012 (when I was 44) shortly after achieving this, so seemed to do me good. I also set best times in all distances above 500m since 2012.

I slid back during several periods of non-activity, but am slowly getting this back again, able to row R17 at <80% HRMAx unless severely fatigued for over an hour at present with month on month improvement.

I always been a go slow to get faster kinda guy, and circa 70-75% was my preferred range, and I do think that it works for me, coupled with a good sprinkling of grey zone sessions.

However, I've seen too many people in the go hard or go home gang who have succeeded with circa 80% as their preferred range to write off how this is also a suitable option.

I do wonder if we can get too one dimensional with options; when it works for you it must be right for everyone kind of scenario. I'm always challenging my assumptions of what is best as it still surprises me how different we all are even within a relatively limited range of options or circumstances.

[iain]

I always been a go slow to get faster kinda guy, and circa 70-75% was my preferred range, and I do think that it works for me, coupled with a good sprinkling of grey zone sessions.

However, I've seen too many people in the go hard or go home gang who have succeeded with circa 80% as their preferred range to write off how this is also a suitable option.

I do wonder if we can get too one dimensional with options; when it works for you it must be right for everyone kind of scenario. I'm always challenging my assumptions of what is best as it still surprises me how different we all are even within a relatively limited range of options or circumstances.

I did very little exercise before I was 38 and so had no fitness base. I got quicker on UT1+ PP based regimes, but HR stayed high for the work done. I assume that someone with a good base would potentially get less out of UT2 training than I have, but it is difficult to balance rowing with a decent stroke with rowing at a low HR when I have such a poor base. That said, I agree that we all make assumptions that may not apply to everyone. I try and give suggestions and refer to personal information without stating that it is right for others, or perhaps suggest that "I would...) by which I mean that this is my best guess, but I acknowledge I will often be wrong! Apologies if I use short hand and have mislead anyone on the universality of any of my suggestions.

[nick rockliff]

First session since Friday and a long day out yesterday at a London hospital.

Time Meters Pace Watts Cal/Hr S/M
40:00.0 9,527m 2:05.9 175 902 20 125
5:00.0 1,191m 2:05.9 175 902 20 111
10:00.0 1,191m 2:05.9 175 902 20 118
15:00.0 1,191m 2:05.9 175 902 20 121
20:00.0 1,191m 2:05.9 175 902 20 124
25:00.0 1,191m 2:05.9 175 902 20 128
30:00.0 1,191m 2:05.9 175 902 20 130
35:00.0 1,191m 2:05.9 175 902 20 133
40:00.0 1,191m 2:05.9 175 902 20 135

Mouth like a sandpit during that session, very dehydrated I think.

[nick rockliff]

Depends on HRMax.

I have thought along similar lines although I paid little attention to HR. However through Covid at the urging of a PT I started doing SS at UT2 rather than UT1. It took me some time and learning to row smoothly at R16, but I did manage to get the first 45 min or so of SS below 75% of HRMax. I managed to set my only PB (HM) since 2012 (when I was 44) shortly after achieving this, so seemed to do me good. I also set best times in all distances above 500m since 2012.

I slid back during several periods of non-activity, but am slowly getting this back again, able to row R17 at <80% HRMAx unless severely fatigued for over an hour at present with month on month improvement.

I always been a go slow to get faster kinda guy, and circa 70-75% was my preferred range, and I do think that it works for me, coupled with a good sprinkling of grey zone sessions.

However, I've seen too many people in the go hard or go home gang who have succeeded with circa 80% as their preferred range to write off how this is also a suitable option.

I do wonder if we can get too one dimensional with options; when it works for you it must be right for everyone kind of scenario. I'm always challenging my assumptions of what is best as it still surprises me how different we all are even within a relatively limited range of options or circumstances.

It aways makes me smile when I see people get told not to use a generic formula to work out max HR. Then immediately tell them to use generic training zones.

My UT2 HR cap worked out at 89% of max HR, so yes, we are all different.

[Sakly]

Depends on HRMax.

I have thought along similar lines although I paid little attention to HR. However through Covid at the urging of a PT I started doing SS at UT2 rather than UT1. It took me some time and learning to row smoothly at R16, but I did manage to get the first 45 min or so of SS below 75% of HRMax. I managed to set my only PB (HM) since 2012 (when I was 44) shortly after achieving this, so seemed to do me good. I also set best times in all distances above 500m since 2012.

I slid back during several periods of non-activity, but am slowly getting this back again, able to row R17 at <80% HRMAx unless severely fatigued for over an hour at present with month on month improvement.

I always been a go slow to get faster kinda guy, and circa 70-75% was my preferred range, and I do think that it works for me, coupled with a good sprinkling of grey zone sessions.

However, I've seen too many people in the go hard or go home gang who have succeeded with circa 80% as their preferred range to write off how this is also a suitable option.

I do wonder if we can get too one dimensional with options; when it works for you it must be right for everyone kind of scenario. I'm always challenging my assumptions of what is best as it still surprises me how different we all are even within a relatively limited range of options or circumstances.

It aways makes me smile when I see people get told not to use a generic formula to work out max HR. Then immediately tell them to use generic training zones.

My UT2 HR cap worked out at 89% of max HR, so yes, we are all different.

Don't know my specific zones, but from training experience I made huge gains from volume sessions (typical 60min, HM) about up to 82-83% HR max, and recently I reduced load to ca. 71-75% HR max, but longer duration (typical HM, 2 hour), which already gave me some gains as well.
Difficult to gauge what works better, but I mainly adjust the intensity and duration by recovery. That also depends much on my gym sessions, which are also very intense recently (ah, no, typically always ).

[Dangerscouse]

Apologies if I use short hand and have mislead anyone on the universality of any of my suggestions.

No need to apologise, I think we all know what you mean and I'm replying in a general sense so if anyone reads it later on there's some additional context to the discussion. It could be a bit misleading otherwise and I always want to pique people's interest in considering all possibilities.

[KeithT]

Little bit faster steady state today, HM r20.

Code: Select all

Time	Meters	Pace	Watts	Cal/Hr	S/M	❤️
1:22:32	21,097m	1:57.3	216	1045	19	147
10:22.4	2,638m	1:57.9	213	1033	20	142
10:20.2	5,276m	1:57.5	215	1041	20	142
10:20.1	7,914m	1:57.5	216	1041	20	144
10:19.9	10,552m	1:57.4	216	1042	20	146
10:19.2	13,190m	1:57.3	217	1045	20	150
10:18.4	15,828m	1:57.2	217	1048	20	151
10:17.5	18,466m	1:57.0	218	1051	20	152
10:14.3	21,097m	1:56.7	220	1057	20	154

My fastest HM this season was in May and had a split of 1:56.3 with a 10 beats higher HR. This one felt so easy today, no drop of sweat at all. Seems my longer sessions and overall mileage is showing some results.

This looks really solid.

[Gustel]

1hr of steady rowing.

Time Meters Pace Watts Cal/Hr S/M
1:00:00.0 13,503m 2:13.3 148 808 20
12:00.0 2,702m 2:13.2 148 809 21
24:00.0 2,689m 2:13.8 146 801 21
36:00.0 2,719m 2:12.4 151 818 21
48:00.0 2,698m 2:13.4 147 807 20
1:00:00.0 2,695m 2:13.5 147 805 21

[Sakly]

Little bit faster steady state today, HM r20.

Code: Select all

Time	Meters	Pace	Watts	Cal/Hr	S/M	❤️
1:22:32	21,097m	1:57.3	216	1045	19	147
10:22.4	2,638m	1:57.9	213	1033	20	142
10:20.2	5,276m	1:57.5	215	1041	20	142
10:20.1	7,914m	1:57.5	216	1041	20	144
10:19.9	10,552m	1:57.4	216	1042	20	146
10:19.2	13,190m	1:57.3	217	1045	20	150
10:18.4	15,828m	1:57.2	217	1048	20	151
10:17.5	18,466m	1:57.0	218	1051	20	152
10:14.3	21,097m	1:56.7	220	1057	20	154

My fastest HM this season was in May and had a split of 1:56.3 with a 10 beats higher HR. This one felt so easy today, no drop of sweat at all. Seems my longer sessions and overall mileage is showing some results.

This looks really solid.

Thx Keith.
HR average was 80% and only small drift. Some time ago this would have been clearly above this, probably more in the 85% or above range. Good fitness currently

[bassongirl]

I did a 5x750m 2:30r today and rowed an almost perfect score Stroke rate in the third interval was too low:

Time Meters Pace Watts Cal/Hr S/M
16:22.5 3,750m 2:11.0 156 835 25 178
3:16.5 750m 2:11.0 156 835 26 174
r: 2:30 18m
3:16.5 750m 2:11.0 156 835 26 177
r: 2:30 16m
3:16.5 750m 2:11.0 156 835 25 180
r: 2:30 20m
3:16.5 750m 2:11.0 156 835 26 181
r: 2:30 21m
3:16.5 750m 2:11.0 156 835 26 182
r75m

I‘m struggling to row three times a week and keep fit as life is sooo busy at the moment. However this will not change in the coming months.

[Dangerscouse]

1k repeats undefined rests and starting again when HR dropped to 60%.

Physically, it all felt manageable, but mentally, it was like trying to nail jelly to the ceiling, as i just couldn't dial in at all. I left it until the very last moment to bail out, as I still hoped that I could maybe get it back on track. HRM didn't help matters as that didn't kick in until I'd finished the second interval

18:07.9 5,000m 1:48.7 272 1235 28 115
3:49.1 1,000m 1:54.5 233 1101 27 67
r: 0:41 16m
3:37.1 1,000m 1:48.5 274 1241 29 70
r: 0:54 12m
3:35.0 1,000m 1:47.5 282 1269 29 145
r: 1:16 21m
3:33.7 1,000m 1:46.8 287 1287 29 149
r: 1:26 14m
3:33.1 1,000m 1:46.5 289 1295 29 153
r: 1:12 20m
r83m

I should have done this 5k first but that was due to my inability to make decent decisions this morning.

20:37.1 5,000m 2:03.7 185 936 18 129
4:09.2 1,000m 2:04.6 181 922 18 126
4:07.9 2,000m 2:03.9 184 932 18 131
4:07.9 3,000m 2:03.9 184 932 18 131
4:06.5 4,000m 2:03.2 187 943 18 132
4:05.6 5,000m 2:02.8 189 950 18 130

[iain]

It aways makes me smile when I see people get told not to use a generic formula to work out max HR. Then immediately tell them to use generic training zones.

My UT2 HR cap worked out at 89% of max HR, so yes, we are all different.

I haven't had this lab tested (and due to different protocols labs are not quite consistent anyway and the day the test is done). I judge UT1 & UT2 from HR inflections, although I agree that they should probably be in parentheses. That said, I do think the concept of UT2 & UT1 is reasonably well understood and so the terminology is helpful as a guide to a session even if not wholly scientific.

[nick rockliff]

Just a fairly light stroke 10kr23 this evening, still coughing up globs but hopefully nearly cleared up.

Time Meters Pace Watts Cal/Hr S/M
40:40.0 10,000m 2:02.0 193 963 23 127
4:04.0 1,000m 2:02.0 193 963 23 114
4:03.9 2,000m 2:01.9 193 964 23 119
4:04.0 3,000m 2:02.0 193 963 23 122
4:04.0 4,000m 2:02.0 193 963 23 125
4:04.0 5,000m 2:02.0 193 963 23 128
4:04.0 6,000m 2:02.0 193 963 23 130
4:04.0 7,000m 2:02.0 193 963 23 134
4:04.1 8,000m 2:02.0 193 962 23 134
4:04.0 9,000m 2:02.0 193 963 23 133
4:03.9 10,000m 2:01.9 193 964 23 138

[Sakly]

Code: Select all

Time	Meters	Pace	Watts	Cal/Hr	S/M
0:15.9	100m	1:19.5	697	2697	53