Pondering the Beginner Pete Plan

[dmuskett]

Well, went to do 4.2 - 3x1000m w/ 3 minutes rest. Did it after a crappy day of work, with a cold brewing, and in a particularly dry spot of my 500 calorie a day deficit. And by "did it" I mean I bailed early in the second interval.

Code: Select all

Time	Meters	Pace	Watts	Cal/Hr	S/M	
4:05.6	1,000m	2:02.8	189	950	30	163
4:05.6	1,000m	2:02.8	189	950	30	163
r346m			

Looks like I made it 364 meters into the second interval, which apparently doesn't really log well. Was trying to pull a 2:03 and just... didn't have it.

Sat there on the rower for about 2 minutes and said "I'm not gonna end my day like this" and loaded up a 5k to at least get me to 4.4, the 6k meter row.

Code: Select all

Time	Meters	Pace	Watts	Cal/Hr	S/M	
24:09.6	5,000m	2:24.9	115	695	18	152
4:56.7	1,000m	2:28.3	107	668	19	144
4:53.3	2,000m	2:26.6	111	681	18	149
4:50.1	3,000m	2:25.0	115	694	18	153
4:46.6	4,000m	2:23.3	119	709	18	154
4:42.8	5,000m	2:21.4	124	726	18	161

Slowly rowed my way into it.

I've got two rest days now and I'll come back for these intervals again on Friday, with more calories in my belly and hopefully less work stress.

[mitchel674]

Week 3.2 is the 2 x 2000m, r4. Pete says to try and pace this 2 seconds faster than the 6000m piece the day before. This put me at a slow target of 2:18 but who am I to argue. Interval pacing has never been my strong suit.

[Nomark]

Week 3.2 is the 2 x 2000m, r4. Pete says to try and pace this 2 seconds faster than the 6000m piece the day before. This put me at a slow target of 2:18 but who am I to argue. Interval pacing has never been my strong suit.

I struggle a bit with the concept of longer intervals too. I know Pete says to do them marginally quicker than steady state but it doesn't make sense to me. Unless it's meant for more experienced rowers who have less of a gap between their all out pace and steady state it just seems to be too slow to be hard and too short to be effective.

Which brings me serendipitously onto week 9. I didn't have time for 8000m so I also did long intervals - 9.5 2x10 minutes (although my subconscious accidentally programmed in 8,000m anyway so I had to stop at 10 minutes have an approximate 2 minute rest and re-enter it!). I didn't really have a goal, just work on my stroke, but I might try speeding these sessions up to actual interval pace. It felt like a good, strong workout, but only 20 minutes (ish) and only a little faster than SS. I wonder if trying to get close to 2:00 would be more beneficial? Especially as next up is more steady state so no need to be well rested.

Code: Select all

Time	Meters	Pace	Watts	S/M	
10:31.4	2,316m	2:16.3	138	23
10:00.0	2,190m	2:16.9	136	22

[PleaseLockIn]

Week 3.2 is the 2 x 2000m, r4. Pete says to try and pace this 2 seconds faster than the 6000m piece the day before. This put me at a slow target of 2:18 but who am I to argue. Interval pacing has never been my strong suit.

I struggle a bit with the concept of longer intervals too. I know Pete says to do them marginally quicker than steady state but it doesn't make sense to me. Unless it's meant for more experienced rowers who have less of a gap between their all out pace and steady state it just seems to be too slow to be hard and too short to be effective.

Which brings me serendipitously onto week 9. I didn't have time for 8000m so I also did long intervals—9.5 2x10 minutes (although my subconscious accidentally programmed in 8,000m anyway so I had to stop at 10 minutes have an approximate 2 minute rest and re-enter it!). I didn't really have a goal, just work on my stroke, but I might try speeding these sessions up to actual interval pace. It felt like a good, strong workout, but only 20 minutes (ish) and only a little faster than SS. I wonder if trying to get close to 2:00 would be more beneficial? Especially as next up is more steady state so no need to be well rested.

Code: Select all

Time	Meters	Pace	Watts	S/M	
10:31.4	2,316m	2:16.3	138	23
10:00.0	2,190m	2:16.9	136	22

I would do them at close to 2k pace, maybe 90% of the power, perhaps as submaximal 10 min tests. If you want to work on the stroke, i found r20 training helped significantly (although my high rates are not great at all)

If I were you, I would get close to 2:00. I would start at 2:10 and go from there.

week 2 day 2 - 4*750m 2R
3:03.x, 3:03.x, 3:03, 3:02.x all at r24. Last interval I went crazy, going down to r27 1:51 before realizing i should step back, I could increase the pace later, so held ~2:01 pace after dropping down. I could've gone more but I had tutorials after. It's what I get for a >20hr / week course, but I don't focus extremely on rowing - I focus hard on academics. This is why i should've stayed home and went to somewhere pretty strong, even if the course sapped my energy.

At least I have a 8Wmin stroke in intervals. It was difficult to hold it but I am glad I did. I should do some higher-rate work - maybe try to do Week 4 at r28-r29. My speed will increase, probably not to 1:56 (Nomark standard) in 3*1000m 3R but I would be pleasantly shocked if I manage that.

[mitchel674]

Well, went to do 4.2 - 3x1000m w/ 3 minutes rest. Did it after a crappy day of work, with a cold brewing, and in a particularly dry spot of my 500 calorie a day deficit. And by "did it" I mean I bailed early in the second interval.

Code: Select all

Time	Meters	Pace	Watts	Cal/Hr	S/M	
4:05.6	1,000m	2:02.8	189	950	30	163
4:05.6	1,000m	2:02.8	189	950	30	163
r346m			

Looks like I made it 364 meters into the second interval, which apparently doesn't really log well. Was trying to pull a 2:03 and just... didn't have it.

Sat there on the rower for about 2 minutes and said "I'm not gonna end my day like this" and loaded up a 5k to at least get me to 4.4, the 6k meter row.

Code: Select all

Time	Meters	Pace	Watts	Cal/Hr	S/M	
24:09.6	5,000m	2:24.9	115	695	18	152
4:56.7	1,000m	2:28.3	107	668	19	144
4:53.3	2,000m	2:26.6	111	681	18	149
4:50.1	3,000m	2:25.0	115	694	18	153
4:46.6	4,000m	2:23.3	119	709	18	154
4:42.8	5,000m	2:21.4	124	726	18	161

Slowly rowed my way into it.

I've got two rest days now and I'll come back for these intervals again on Friday, with more calories in my belly and hopefully less work stress.

A lot to learn from a session like that. Good on you for completing the 5k.

[iain]

We're all saying the same thing RE the HR - aka don't keep it low for the sake of keeping it low while you are building up to achieve ABC pace over distance Y. (insert as applicable).
When a person gets fit enough, the HR will come down if they continue to progressively overload their system - aka get faster/fitter.

p_b82, I cannot currently row a 7.5k 30min and I suspect that this would not apply to many masters rowers and quite a proportion of the ladies who erg, so your prescription would mean many people not concentrating on maintaining a good stroke.

I think you're missing the point - I'm not saying at all that people should row with a strong stroke - or even what is strong for a given person.

My point was IMO it is better to use a "weak" (to use some people's words) stroke at a higher rating to achieve an aim, and then afterwards to build up to making that stroke stronger and reducing the rating - if starting from a position where the goal is currently unachievable regardless of rating and the distances are greater than 1000m.

my 10k at 6.88Wmin (2:06.6 r25) had a HR at the end ~95% max; my 30min was ~7.5Wmin (2:06.1 r23) with Hr ~98% max - technically a "better" stroke than the 10k, but it was only 0.5s/500m (2W average) faster.
by all the various predictors out there, my 10k is "better" than my 30min score...

and neither come close to a 7500m 30min either - my CV system just can't support that output currently regardless.

I read your initial post to imply that you shouldn't worry about the strength of your post until you are rowing <2:00 for 30 min. I agree that maintaining a strong stroke for significant distance is a challenge and does put a load on CV. But suggested lower rating was an alternative to stopping when HR got too high and restarting after recovering. As a TT I agree that the 10k is a "better" result. But as a training guide I would say the 30 min is more encouraging (assuming that you were not compromising your stroke to lengthen it) and provides a better base to build on when CV fitness is improved.

I don't think there is only one approach, it is just that I know my stroke is generally less good at low work per stroke as I fall into dropping my hands or not straightening my arms at the catch and so "losing" the start of each stroke, bad habits to allow. But in any event, you are talking a modest difference not the 50% that prompted these discussions!

[iain]

Week 3.2 is the 2 x 2000m, r4. Pete says to try and pace this 2 seconds faster than the 6000m piece the day before. This put me at a slow target of 2:18 but who am I to argue. Interval pacing has never been my strong suit.

I struggle a bit with the concept of longer intervals too. I know Pete says to do them marginally quicker than steady state but it doesn't make sense to me. Unless it's meant for more experienced rowers who have less of a gap between their all out pace and steady state it just seems to be too slow to be hard and too short to be effective.

I would do them at close to 2k pace, maybe 90% of the power, perhaps as submaximal 10 min tests. If you want to work on the stroke, i found r20 training helped significantly (although my high rates are not great at all)

If I were you, I would get close to 2:00. I would start at 2:10 and go from there.

week 2 day 2 - 4*750m 2R
3:03.x, 3:03.x, 3:03, 3:02.x all at r24. Last interval I went crazy, going down to r27 1:51 before realizing i should step back, I could increase the pace later, so held ~2:01 pace after dropping down. I could've gone more but I had tutorials after. It's what I get for a >20hr / week course, but I don't focus extremely on rowing - I focus hard on academics. This is why i should've stayed home and went to somewhere pretty strong, even if the course sapped my energy.

At least I have a 8Wmin stroke in intervals. It was difficult to hold it but I am glad I did. I should do some higher-rate work - maybe try to do Week 4 at r28-r29. My speed will increase, probably not to 1:56 (Nomark standard) in 3*1000m 3R but I would be pleasantly shocked if I manage that.[/quote]

May be being too pedantic, but 90% of power is a significant reduction as is 2:10 re 2:00 pace! 2 x 10' is 2-4S slower than 2k if done flat out, but this is an extra session and so intended to be less demanding (although if rest days added then could be done harder).

Long intervals are typically around or slightly slower than 5k pace. BPP aimed at people who haven't done long intervals and so 5k is fairly long for those individuals, hence not demanding all out pace. If done by more experienced or fitter rowers then I agree the pace prescriptions are very conservative.

Re 1ks, I would say 1S/500m slower than 750s would be a good target. I think you would struggle to do 2 at 1:56 based on the 750s. I would say that as a rule you should not go out faster than you believe you can maintain for the interval. This makes it tough to continue when the doubts arise and slowing in the middle is not good practice. Save the high paces for the end when you can maintain them!

Also stop comparing yourself, we have established that Nomark is bigger and so has an inherent advantage!

[Joris]

Week 3.2 is the 2 x 2000m, r4. Pete says to try and pace this 2 seconds faster than the 6000m piece the day before. This put me at a slow target of 2:18 but who am I to argue. Interval pacing has never been my strong suit.

I struggle a bit with the concept of longer intervals too. I know Pete says to do them marginally quicker than steady state but it doesn't make sense to me. Unless it's meant for more experienced rowers who have less of a gap between their all out pace and steady state it just seems to be too slow to be hard and too short to be effective.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but it is my understanding that day 2 is supposed to be the toughest session of the week.
So I would interpret the above session as a full interval workout where you have to give in between 90 and 100%?

Regarding pacing, I follow Nomark. It seems that as a beginner you have a bigger gap between steady state and intervals than rowers who start with a better base. So if you follow Pete's advice, you will in my opinion either do your intervals too slow or your steady state too fast for being a 'recovery' session.

So in terms of the interval sessions for day 2, I don't follow Pete's advice but try to set a target for myself that is ambitious, but where I'm still almost certain I'll make it. Because Pete also says that you have to avoid failing a session. If during the last rep, I can't pace up anymore (or only a little bit), I consider it as a well paced session. If I had too much left in the tank for the last rep, I try to be a bit more ambitious the next time.

[Joris]

Well, went to do 4.2 - 3x1000m w/ 3 minutes rest. Did it after a crappy day of work, with a cold brewing, and in a particularly dry spot of my 500 calorie a day deficit. And by "did it" I mean I bailed early in the second interval.

Code: Select all

Time	Meters	Pace	Watts	Cal/Hr	S/M	
4:05.6	1,000m	2:02.8	189	950	30	163
4:05.6	1,000m	2:02.8	189	950	30	163
r346m			

Looks like I made it 364 meters into the second interval, which apparently doesn't really log well. Was trying to pull a 2:03 and just... didn't have it.

Sat there on the rower for about 2 minutes and said "I'm not gonna end my day like this" and loaded up a 5k to at least get me to 4.4, the 6k meter row.

Code: Select all

Time	Meters	Pace	Watts	Cal/Hr	S/M	
24:09.6	5,000m	2:24.9	115	695	18	152
4:56.7	1,000m	2:28.3	107	668	19	144
4:53.3	2,000m	2:26.6	111	681	18	149
4:50.1	3,000m	2:25.0	115	694	18	153
4:46.6	4,000m	2:23.3	119	709	18	154
4:42.8	5,000m	2:21.4	124	726	18	161

Slowly rowed my way into it.

I've got two rest days now and I'll come back for these intervals again on Friday, with more calories in my belly and hopefully less work stress.

I would try to do my interval session as much as possible at days when feeling fit. If you have to switch up your sessions a bit to do that, I don't think that's a problem (as long as you don't put your different interval sessions too close to each other). Or if you do want to do the interval session anyways, then maybe dare to lower your target a bit, at least for the first rep to feel where you are.

Apart from the above thoughts: didn't you set too ambitious a goal for this session?
In your history, I see that you recently did the 2 * 2,000m session at 2:17.9.
Even though in hindsight that target may have turned out to be insufficiently ambitious, going from there to 2:03 for the 3 x 1,000 session seems like too big a jump?

[dmuskett]

Apart from the above thoughts: didn't you set too ambitious a goal for this session?
In your history, I see that you recently did the 2 * 2,000m session at 2:17.9.
Even though in hindsight that target may have turned out to be insufficiently ambitious, going from there to 2:03 for the 3 x 1,000 session seems like too big a jump?

I absolutely set too ambitious of a goal.

Pete said: "3 x 1000m / 3min rest – A new interval session now, working around the same intensity as the 6 x 500m session you did in week 1 (and perhaps as an optional session last week). Try for the same pace you did for that session in week 1."

My week 1 6x500m I did at an average of 2:03.1, although it was the first 5 at 2:04.5 and the last interval at 1:56.7. So I did the 2.2 4x750 at the target 2:03 from the week 1, and I completed it, although it took absolutely everything I had and more.

Could I have done it with enough willpower and calories in my belly? I don't know, maybe? What was immediately apparent however was that I THOUGHT it was too ambitious of a goal. I sat on the rower thinking I wasn't going to be able to do it, and boy did I believe myself. Would have been much smarter setting out at a 2:07 or a 2:08 and upping the gas the last interval if I had gas left. My plan is to do a 2:08 when I return to the interval on Friday.

[Nomark]

Just to play devil's advocate, and it may be better for more experienced rowers trying to eke out the last drop of performance, but I saw something on Justin Browns Instagram (jbrown1215 on here) that basically said if you don't fail occasionally then you aren't going hard enough. Essentially because it's impossible to always go at 99% of your ability without occasionally miscalculating and going at 101% and crashing and burning.

Not that I have done this yet, and it may be demoralising if you can't rationalise it in your head. It's probably not a good idea for us beginners as we are still feeling our pacing, but maybe it's not the end of the world when it does inevitably happen, and probably better in the long run that it does than we go too easy on ourselves every week.

One thing I have discovered personally is that the first time my last rep split time was seconds quicker than the rest it felt great, like I was a rowing god . Now if its more than about a second quicker it makes me feel like I didn't fulfil my potential on the earlier reps.

[Nomark]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but it is my understanding that day 2 is supposed to be the toughest session of the week.
So I would interpret the above session as a full interval workout where you have to give in between 90 and 100%?

Regarding pacing, I follow Nomark. It seems that as a beginner you have a bigger gap between steady state and intervals than rowers who start with a better base. So if you follow Pete's advice, you will in my opinion either do your intervals too slow or your steady state too fast for being a 'recovery' session.

So in terms of the interval sessions for day 2, I don't follow Pete's advice but try to set a target for myself that is ambitious, but where I'm still almost certain I'll make it. Because Pete also says that you have to avoid failing a session. If during the last rep, I can't pace up anymore (or only a little bit), I consider it as a well paced session. If I had too much left in the tank for the last rep, I try to be a bit more ambitious the next time.

This is good advice (and not just because it follows me ). Every now and then I think we have to step back and remember that there is no one size fits all and the pacing guidance could be based on an imaginary rower who is very different to us, so we just have to do what works. If in doubt go slower on steady state and faster on intervals.

It also takes a couple of months (at least) to get used to the interval distances and the pacing we can achieve as well as the inevitable newbie gains from all the steady state work that (I assume) most of us weren't doing before. This means take the notes as a general guide but as Joris says if it felt manageable last time set a challenging target this time and vice versa, especially when the notes say things like maintain the same pace for 1,000m that you did for 500m, because this is only achievable as a novice when you are improving lots week by week.

[Nomark]

I would do them at close to 2k pace, maybe 90% of the power, perhaps as submaximal 10 min tests. If you want to work on the stroke, i found r20 training helped significantly (although my high rates are not great at all)

Yes, I think that's what I will do. If I can do 3x2000m at around 2-5k pace, I should be able to do 2x10mins too.

week 2 day 2 - 4*750m 2R
3:03.x, 3:03.x, 3:03, 3:02.x all at r24. Last interval I went crazy, going down to r27 1:51 before realizing i should step back, I could increase the pace later, so held ~2:01 pace after dropping down. I could've gone more but I had tutorials after. It's what I get for a >20hr / week course, but I don't focus extremely on rowing - I focus hard on academics. This is why i should've stayed home and went to somewhere pretty strong, even if the course sapped my energy.

At least I have a 8Wmin stroke in intervals. It was difficult to hold it but I am glad I did. I should do some higher-rate work - maybe try to do Week 4 at r28-r29. My speed will increase, probably not to 1:56 (Nomark standard) in 3*1000m 3R but I would be pleasantly shocked if I manage that.

Looks like a great interval session, well done. As you acknowledge you are going for a different goal than most of us because of your stroke limit, so it's a bit tougher. I think upping your rate for some fast intervals will definitely be beneficial.

As Iain says, stop comparing yourself! Or I'm going to start comparing myself to Dangerscouse who can do a hm at my 500m pace.