Steady State: 8k vs 2kx4, 1mr: what's the difference

[dmuskett]

I am rowing for general fitness, not to set records or compete on the water. I've found that I am much happier getting on the rower if I know I am doing something like 2kx4 with 1 minute rest vs pulling a straight 8k. Take a short break to drink some water, rest, etc. Obviously the best rowing to do is the rowing you are going to actually do, I understand that. What I'm curious about is: what does this actually sacrifice? If I am doing 8k at 2:25, or 4x2k at 2:25 with 1 minute breaks, what is the difference in the result from a physical/aerobic viewpoint?

[alex9026]

On the grand scheme of things, not a lot, though I'd be more inclined to row 2x20mins. If I'm splitting up steady state work, I row a split or two quicker on the "broken" pieces, than I would a straight set through.

[Dangerscouse]

I have seen quite a lot of good rowers breaking the SS sessions into two or even three intervals, but it's not something I ever consider as a preference rather than anything else.

There's no difference in your case, so I'd definitely break it up as you think is best. One minute rest is short enough to not make a difference to the benefits, but long enough to possibly make it more bearable

[MPx]

I agree "not a lot" is the best answer to your question. However you don't really give us context within your capabilities. If every session you do is basically to do an 8k as hard as you can and 2:25 is your all out pace, then taking a break (albeit a short one) will have more physiological impact than if the 8k was being done at what we often term Steady State - a slower aerobic training pace. A significantly elevated heart rate can recover quite a bit within a minute giving a lot more room to get going again whereas the difference if HR is only raised to say 60% would not be nearly as noticeable.

Another way of looking at it... You're erging for 38+ minutes - a minute's rest makes little difference. But for an 8k taken as 32x250 1r, you erg for the same time but get 31 minute rest - there's going to be a clear difference with that. Its all just a sliding scale...

[PleaseLockIn]

Even if some research (e.g. Hagerman, don't remember where) says splitting up the intervals for steady state with short rest is as efficient as continuous SS for aerobic capacity...

I would rather keep it continuous to psychologically learn how to keep going even when the training is boring. The breaks will cut down much of the HR drift. For me, keeping it continuous helped with reducing my HR drift and keeping my form over long periods, to the point of it being more automatic.

If you need those 1 minute breaks to make the sessions significantly more bearable, odds are you are going too fast.

The last 5.1 you did (7000m) when you held 2:25.0, your HR started at UT2 (use Free Spirits Rowing calculator https://www.freespiritsrowing.com/forum ... calculator , resting HR = 60, MHR = 179 in your interval, correct me if I am wrong) and ended up at AT in a steady state session. I don't know a lot about the context, but I suggest slowing down the SS by a few seconds.

For context, I https://log.concept2.com/profile/2501432/log/98076553 start my 1st interval at top UT2 (155bpm) and in ~32 minutes at 2:27 it drifted to 162bpm. My RHR is ~59 (give or take, well rested, sitting down) and my MHR was 34-35 beats/10s (manual, got on 2k TT). Even if my MHR was around 204 instead of 210, I drifted to bottom UT1 from top UT2, not top UT2 to bottom AT.

But if splitting it up is much happier for you then split it up like that (though even then I'd rather split it into two sessions)

[p_b82]

Think the others have answered it, but here's my thinking on it.

if the intervals are done at the same pace as the continuous, you're sacrificing the fact you could go faster due to taking the short break.

You're loosing a little bit of the phycological hardening by stopping more frequently, so should you wish to challenge yourself to a longer distance in the future, that shift in mindset will be a little harder to adjust to.

In terms of fitness gains - probably not a lot of difference really.

[iain]

As above. If you have any interest in doing middle or longer distance TTs, then these will be very hard without having rowed through longer sessions continually, although a couple should make up the deficit. Essentially it is much easier to "just get through the interval" than "get to halfway" re pushing second 2k / to halfway through continuous 8k (p_b82's comment re mental toughening).

[Sakly]

I am rowing for general fitness, not to set records or compete on the water. I've found that I am much happier getting on the rower if I know I am doing something like 2kx4 with 1 minute rest vs pulling a straight 8k.

This is the important part.
No need for mental toughness, no need for structured training plans, no need to do anything you don't like.
Get on your rower for as long as you like, take as much rests as you like. It will get you fitter compared to no rowing. It will keep you fit on the level you get with this approach.
If you want a higher level of fitness you get to with this approach, of course you need to change it. But it doesn't seem to be the current situation you describe.

[Tsnor]

Your Body uses different energy systems for very short bursts (30-60 seconds) and longer.

4 X 2K you'll reload and fire the short burst energy system 4 times. The short burst system resets during your rest time.

1 x 8K you'll rely more on the longer duration energy system and only fire the short burst system once.

The difference in training will lead to slightly different adaptation. You can find a million conflicting articles on "best interval duration" and "intervals vs endurance". There is some scientific basis for the body adapting differently (capillary and mitochondria density), but the net seems to be both work equally well. For discussion of equally well google "pyramid vs polarized training".

Agree with above comments that say do what you enjoy doing. If you want to dive deeper: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YBgAr7kLsZY It's from cycling but applies directly to rowing.

[JaapvanE]

Key thing if you row for fitness: keep doing what you love doing (as long as it is healthy to do so). If it becomes a chore, you won't last long.

I would rather keep it continuous to psychologically learn how to keep going even when the training is boring. The breaks will cut down much of the HR drift. For me, keeping it continuous helped with reducing my HR drift and keeping my form over long periods, to the point of it being more automatic.

For me, this indeed is one of the key things for SS training. Being able to sustain a specific pace over a specific distance is something you have to learn if your ambition is to do long distance work. On longer distances, pace initially feels foolishly slow. Once you get near the end, you feel how tough it is to maintain form and that same pace.

If you need those 1 minute breaks to make the sessions significantly more bearable, odds are you are going too fast.

I have the odd problem that breaks (usually 4 minutes halfway a 31K or 42K) really hurt me. It takes me over 500 meters to settle in again, get rid of the nausea, get back into a normal stroke rhythm, etc. Never liked breaks in the first place.

[Nomark]

I am rowing for general fitness, not to set records or compete on the water. I've found that I am much happier getting on the rower if I know I am doing something like 2kx4 with 1 minute rest vs pulling a straight 8k.

This is the important part.
No need for mental toughness, no need for structured training plans, no need to do anything you don't like.
Get on your rower for as long as you like, take as much rests as you like. It will get you fitter compared to no rowing. It will keep you fit on the level you get with this approach.
If you want a higher level of fitness you get to with this approach, of course you need to change it. But it doesn't seem to be the current situation you describe.

Yes, I have to echo this 100%. The best thing any of us amateurs can do is the thing that makes us want to come back tomorrow.

If *you* don't enjoy long rows without breaks, don't do them. You might be able to force yourself to do them for a week or two or a month or two but eventually you'll realize that you dread them and stop altogether. Far better to do what you enjoy. If you want to get fitter, try and push the pace a bit every once in a while, or increase the reps. If you are just happy being active, ignore the pace. I strongly believe that every minute spent doing some effort is better than nothing.

Most people on this forum take things too seriously, myself included. Nothing wrong with that because it helps some of us mentally (I'd get bored without feeling improvement or following a plan) but we aren't top level athletes who have to follow research papers to get the best out of each row, it's just a nice hobby to argue about.

[Dangerscouse]

I am rowing for general fitness, not to set records or compete on the water. I've found that I am much happier getting on the rower if I know I am doing something like 2kx4 with 1 minute rest vs pulling a straight 8k.

This is the important part.
No need for mental toughness, no need for structured training plans, no need to do anything you don't like.
Get on your rower for as long as you like, take as much rests as you like. It will get you fitter compared to no rowing. It will keep you fit on the level you get with this approach.
If you want a higher level of fitness you get to with this approach, of course you need to change it. But it doesn't seem to be the current situation you describe.

Yep. Life is becoming far too measured rather than just enjoying what you're doing for no other reason than you enjoy it. Great comments Sascha