Wolverine Plan Discussion

[old] bmoore · Post by **[old] bmoore** » November 11th, 2005, 8:49 am

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'>QUOTE(mpukita @ Nov 11 2005, 08:44 AM)</div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'>QUOTE(seat5 @ Nov 11 2005, 01:51 AM)</div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>Thanks, everyone who gave me input on the Level 4 reference pace. I also sort of hate the 16s. I have no trouble hitting the pace I'm supposed to be at, or 5--7 seconds faster, but it's so pokey a rate that my stroke is not smooth, and I find myself trying to drive harder and harder to make the pace the same as for the 18s. </td></tr></table> Carla: You may have shared something above that will help ... a bunch. "I find myself trying to drive harder and harder to make the pace the same as for the 18s." I just want to be certain that you realize that the pace chart gives a different pace for each stroke rate within a sequence. So, for a 1:54 reference pace (my current reference pace), I go to the chart and see that my 16S pace is 2:22, my 18S pace is 2:18, and my 20S pace is 2:13. Soon, I hope to be done with 16SPM bits altogether, because I hate them too. Jerky stroke would be a gross understatement for me! It's horid. I find myself fully compressed counting off a second or two in order not to rush the catch even after a very, very slow slide. Just want to make sure you knew this, as what you wrote above could be interpreted 2 ways. If you do know this, and I read it the wrong way, sorry! Regards -- Mark </td></tr></table> The 16s are not fun, but I'm still able to keep a decent ratio going without pausing. I just have to pull hard and long. It's only 2 strokes less than the 18s but it sure feels different. You need to find a way to still make these good strokes.

[old] mpukita · Post by **[old] mpukita** » November 11th, 2005, 8:54 am

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'>QUOTE(bmoore @ Nov 11 2005, 08:49 AM)</div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'>QUOTE(mpukita @ Nov 11 2005, 08:44 AM)</div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'>QUOTE(seat5 @ Nov 11 2005, 01:51 AM)</div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>Thanks, everyone who gave me input on the Level 4 reference pace. I also sort of hate the 16s. I have no trouble hitting the pace I'm supposed to be at, or 5--7 seconds faster, but it's so pokey a rate that my stroke is not smooth, and I find myself trying to drive harder and harder to make the pace the same as for the 18s. </td></tr></table> Carla: You may have shared something above that will help ... a bunch. "I find myself trying to drive harder and harder to make the pace the same as for the 18s." I just want to be certain that you realize that the pace chart gives a different pace for each stroke rate within a sequence. So, for a 1:54 reference pace (my current reference pace), I go to the chart and see that my 16S pace is 2:22, my 18S pace is 2:18, and my 20S pace is 2:13. Soon, I hope to be done with 16SPM bits altogether, because I hate them too. Jerky stroke would be a gross understatement for me! It's horid. I find myself fully compressed counting off a second or two in order not to rush the catch even after a very, very slow slide. Just want to make sure you knew this, as what you wrote above could be interpreted 2 ways. If you do know this, and I read it the wrong way, sorry! Regards -- Mark </td></tr></table> The 16s are not fun, but I'm still able to keep a decent ratio going without pausing. I just have to pull hard and long. It's only 2 strokes less than the 18s but it sure feels different. You need to find a way to still make these good strokes. </td></tr></table> For me, easier said than done ... I'm still searching ... as U2 plays ... "I still haven't found what I'm looking for." Couldn't resist Bill, it's FRIDAY.

[old] seat5 · Post by **[old] seat5** » November 11th, 2005, 9:29 am

I do know that there are different paces for the different stroke rates, it's just that it feels so stupid to be puddling along at 16 and 2:24 when it feels so much more worthwhile to be doing 16 and 2:18, or even down to 2:12. Same for all the other rates and paces. The first 16 I did yesterday I did at the pace I was supposed to, but once I had done some 18s and 20s, it just felt better to do them at the right rate but drop the pace by 5 or 6 seconds. I'm so used to doing long pieces and trying to keep my avg. pace the same that I find myself trying to keep the pace the same in these workouts even though I'm changing the rate. Like trying to maintain the same mph even when you're going uphill on a bike, as opposed to on the flats, which is another demon of mine. If I really concentrate I can make the stroke smooth, but I was taught to have "fast hands" away at the beginning of the stroke, a slow slide,and an explosive drive, so to make16 spm smooth I end up with slow hands, slow slide, and explosive drive. Sometimes I end up with a jerky pause between hands away and moving up the slide; when I first tried this last year (and gave up, because with PM1 & no metrenome I went nuts) I actually found myself stopping and waiting in the attempt to slow the rate down. Since I've done all my rowing for several years without straps and at at 10MPS, as suggested by Paul Smith, it's not like I've been in the habit of shuttling up and down the slide at 35 spm and 2:05 or something crazy like that, either. I guess 16 and 2:24 must be like paddling gently and letting the boat ride?

[old] FrancoisA · Post by **[old] FrancoisA** » November 11th, 2005, 11:52 am

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'>QUOTE(mpukita @ Nov 11 2005, 01:27 AM)</div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>Francois: I think doing the low SPM L4 training, and then moving up the chart, will build a powerful stroke. I'm with you. I'd rather do a high stroke rate, fast sequence, than a low stroke rate, lower pace sequence. The low SPM workouts, with the power required to hit the rate, is plenty of work for me! -- Mark </td></tr></table> First, if you divide the watts generated at a given pace by the spm, you will notice that the power that you have to apply to the handle at each stroke stays pretty much constant for stroke rates of 16, 18, 20, 22 and 24. It is only at 26 spm that the power needed makes a jump (i.e. you need to apply more power for each stroke). At least that is the case for my reference pace of 1:43. So, the reason why low spm L4 makes me feel weak has nothing to do with power; in fact I do my active recovery between L1 intervals at L4 pace @20 spm, and do my L3 at L4 pace @22 spm. The weakness I feel is very much like one would feel when "hitting the wall" or being in a mild hypoglycemic state. I can only conjecture as to why that happens. I remember Mike mentioning that the L4 workouts could deplete your glycogen. My HR is quite low for those low spm L4 sequences, therefore I am in "fat burning" mode. Yet, the power needed at each stroke must burn the glycogen. So at the muscles level, I am burning glycogen, but the system doesn't tap its glycogen store because it is in fat burning mode. After 30 minutes of this, I start to feel very weak. Also, I rarely train at such low level HR, and I find HR in the 90-130 uncomfortable to maintain for long period of time. That being said, I will revisit those low spm L4 sequences no later than tonight.

[old] arakawa · Post by **[old] arakawa** » November 11th, 2005, 1:12 pm

Confessions of a Wolverine Plan Newbie Day 3: Level 2 / 5x1500 @ 2k x 108.3% Full disclosure: Although this was my third daily WP workout, my plan called for me to do it Wednesday morning, not this (Friday) morning. I don't have a good excuse for why I didn't do it on Wednesday like I was supposed to. Don't ask me for the excuse and I won't lie to you about it. Today's workout was a 5x1500 @ 1:56.7, with 1125 m (1125 = 1500 x 75%) recoveries @ 2:32. Actual paces = 1:56.7, 1:56.7, 1:56.7, 1:56.7, 1:53.4 --> ave = 1:56.0 Work stroke rates = 27, 27, 27, 27, 29 SPM Recoveries = 2:31.8, 2:31.9, 2:31.9, 2:31.9 Recovery stroke rates = 18, 17, 16, 15 SPM I even did a cooldown 2k @ 2:32.0 / 14 SPM immediately after recording my last work interval - no falling off the erg after the workout today. Observations:<ul><li>Before I started this workout, I thought it's going to be easy. My 5k PB pace is 1:56.2, so a 5x1500 @ 1:56.7 with nearly six minutes of active recovery between intervals shouldn't be a problem. It turned out not being easy, but it was not as hard as my L1 8x500 a few days ago. I shifted into a higher gear for the last 500 m of my last interval, red-lining it for the last 10 strokes (my last stroke was around 1:36).</li><li>As I got more and more fatigued after each work interval, I took two breaths during each stroke's recovery for more and more of the 1125 m recovery pieces. I think I was taking two breaths per stroke recovery the entire last 1125 m recovery piece. Anyway, I think that's the fundamental reason why my recovery stroke rates were getting lower and lower (down to 14 SPM for the 2k cooldown).</li></ul>The next time I do a level 2 5x1500 (scheduled for three weeks from last Wednesday), my target pace will be 1:56.0 - a fair jump from today's 1:56.7, but I guess 1:56.0 is closer to my true current 5x1500 capability.

[old] mpukita · Post by **[old] mpukita** » November 11th, 2005, 2:16 pm

CONFESSIONS continued ... LEVEL 2 ... 1K W/U @ 2:30 ---> 2:05 pace ... 4x2000 w/1000 recovery (2:30 pace or less) after all 4 sets + 1-2 minutes stretch on ball due to lower back "tightness/fatigue" after first 3 ... total rest about 6 to 7 minutes (active/passive combination). 1) 2:02.9/24 2) 2:02.7/25 3) 2:02.6/25 4) 2:02.3/25 This was my first time for this workout. It was work, but not outlandish. No falling off the erg while still strapped in, but not fun. Target was set at about 1.08 x 2K PB pace (1:54) = 2:03. I have a mild cold but noticed no impact from it. Still trying to find "current training limit" for just about all Levels. Getting closer. Can't wait to be doing these all under 2:00. Maybe next time I should just go for it?

[old] mpukita · Post by **[old] mpukita** » November 11th, 2005, 4:37 pm

A quick L3 question for the group ... In the copy of the Plan I have, it says, for Level 3: "Sample workouts include continuous 12K (beginning at shorter distances in the fall and progressing to even longer distances by spring); 2 x 6K (with 7-8’ recovery between pieces); and 15 x 3’ (with 1’ recovery between pieces)." Is that 15 reps of 3 minutes? Just wanted to make sure there wasn't a typo in my copy. Seems like a very different workout than the continuous piece at 12K or the two 6K pieces. Thanks -- Mark

[old] bmoore · Post by **[old] bmoore** » November 11th, 2005, 9:34 pm

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'>QUOTE(mpukita @ Nov 11 2005, 02:16 PM)</div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>CONFESSIONS continued ... LEVEL 2 ... 1K W/U @ 2:30 ---> 2:05 pace ... 4x2000 w/1000 recovery (2:30 pace or less) after all 4 sets + 1-2 minutes stretch on ball due to lower back "tightness/fatigue" after first 3 ... total rest about 6 to 7 minutes (active/passive combination). 1) 2:02.9/24 2) 2:02.7/25 3) 2:02.6/25 4) 2:02.3/25 This was my first time for this workout. It was work, but not outlandish. No falling off the erg while still strapped in, but not fun. Target was set at about 1.08 x 2K PB pace (1:54) = 2:03. I have a mild cold but noticed no impact from it. Still trying to find "current training limit" for just about all Levels. Getting closer. Can't wait to be doing these all under 2:00. Maybe next time I should just go for it? </td></tr></table> Let the training dictate your training. Don't just "go for it" with these workouts. Each time you do this workout, drop your goal pace down to the next whole second (2:02). You'll average just under this based on your splits above. Each time you'll make steady progress. The worst thing is to go for it and have to put the handle down. I've done this too many times. It's frustrating, but not so much that I don't remember to to just let the training dictate the training. My ego gets in the way, and then I blow it, and then I have a setback that can affect other workouts that week. Anyway, be cautious and remember this is a long term commitment you're making to yourself.

[old] Mike Caviston · Post by **[old] Mike Caviston** » November 11th, 2005, 10:20 pm

Here are some Level 4 observations based on recent discussion: Reference Paces can be tricky, so it’s important to try to choose one you can stick with for an entire training season. In the absence of a reliable 2K score, probably the best alternative is to estimate 2K ability from a Level 1 workout. This of course assumes the Level 1 workout is performed correctly and with a near-maximal effort. If the L4 workouts feel too easy, one way to increase intensity is too use a more rapid rate of increase in strokes/workout (beyond the suggested 1 stroke/10’/week). But make sure there is room on the sequence charts to keep increasing without passing 200 strokes/10’ before the end of your training season. If you reach the point where you are doing 1200 strokes in an hour and it’s only midway through the season, something has gone seriously wrong. Another option if workouts seem too easy is to increase the length of the workouts. This may not be the best solution since there will be practical limits as to how long you are able to row. Going from say 50’ to 60’ may be a temporary solution, but chances are if you don’t have the correct Ref Pace then the longer workout will soon start to feel too “easy” again. Execution of the workouts with the correct stroke rates is essential to create the structured format for gradual, long-term improvement. If you want to do a workout with higher rates and higher meter totals, there is already a training band called level 3. I think people are overthinking the setting of the monitor for subintervals. I always set for 10’ (or 6’) and am perfectly happy with the results. [That is, a 60’ workout is set up as a continuous 60’ row but I recover the 6’ or 10’ meter/pace totals after the workout along with the grand total.] I can review the meter total for each 10’ sequence and how it compares to my goal and see my overall consistency for a given sequence (e.g., 190) from one week to the next. Setting for 2’ sub-intervals isn’t necessarily better information because in that small a time frame the average spm or meter total can vary significantly depending on whether you happen to be on the recovery or on the drive when the next 2’ segment begins. Over 6-10’, things even out pretty well. When using the PM2 there is less information available on the monitor during the workout, so you have to accept on faith that you are reaching your goals though I have calculated my meter goals by the first 10’, 20’, 30’ etc. so I know if I am on target as the workout progresses. With enough practice and experience I have found I can pretty accurately estimate what my meter total was for each segment without actually seeing until the workout is over; I can just tell by how well each segment seems to be going at the time and if I seem to be a little ahead, a little behind, or right on my goal paces. These days I almost exclusively use the PM3, which allows a little more information to be viewed during the actual workout. I set up the screen to see my overall average pace as well as my average pace for each segment (10’ or 6’) of the workout. That gives more direct feedback about how each segment is going. If, say, one of the segments is 180 (4’/3’/2’/1’), I know exactly where I am for the first 4’ of the segment and can still estimate pretty well over the final 6’. I know what the average pace should be for each segment so as I finish one segment and move on to another I know how well I did on the completed segment. Using index cards or sticky notes or whatever on or near the monitor to keep the workout’s rate and pace changes available for reference is a good practice. But it probably won’t be too long before you chunk all the bits of information for each sequence so that terms like “180” and “188” automatically bring to mind the necessary formats so you don’t have to think in terms of “4’ @16spm @ 2:02, then 3’ @ 18spm @ 1:58, then…” etc. Then all you have to memorize before a workout are the actual sequences you will be using. I never count strokes during a workout for a particular time period but that doesn’t mean that others can’t. I just pay attention to keeping the rate consistent on the monitor. One little trick I do is, if I’m trying to pull @ 18spm and I inadvertently see “19” for a stroke on the monitor, I try to relax enough that I soon see a “17” to compensate. But it gets messy if you see-saw back and forth between 17 & 19 when you’re trying to hold 18, so I really concentrate on holding the one desired rate. It appears that many people are avoiding sequences that follow the 4’/3’/2’/1’ format or the pyramid sequences (176, 186, 196) and simply alternating 2’ at a time between two different rates. I think of the “2s” and the “8s” sequences (178, 182, 188, 192 etc.) as filler between the more challenging and productive “6s” and “10s” (186, 196, 180, 190, 200). The Level 4 format is meant to be more varied than a simple alternation of “up 2” and “down 2” every two minutes or alternating the same two sequences for an entire workout. Now, that is boring! Also, why not get into the odd number sequences (178, 186, 190, 198 etc.)? Consult the PaceVsRate chart: [attachmentid=109] Everything becomes simpler and smoother with a few million more meters under your belt, so hang in there. Mike Caviston

[old] arakawa · Post by **[old] arakawa** » November 11th, 2005, 11:27 pm

Confessions of a Wolverine Plan Newbie Day 4: Level 4 / 4x10' @ L4 -4 pace Full disclosure: Although this was my fourth daily WP workout, my plan called for me to do it Thursday morning, not this (Friday) evening. I don't have a good excuse for why I didn't do it on Thursday like I was supposed to. Don't ask me for the excuse and I won't lie to you about it. Today's workout was a 4x10', made up of the following intervals:<ul><li>10' @ 2:10 / 16 SPM --> 2308 m</li><li>10' @ 2:06 / 18 SPM --> 2381 m</li><li>10' @ 2:10 / 16 SPM --> 2308 m</li><li>10' @ 2:06 / 18 SPM --> 2381 m</li></ul>Actual distances & stroke rates:<ul><li>2320 m / 16 SPM (+12 m)</li><li>2383 m / 18 SPM (+2 m)</li><li>2318 m / 16 SPM (+10 m)</li><li>2380 m / 18 SPM (-1 m)</li></ul>Observations:<ul><li>My target paces were derived by taking my 2k reference pace (1:48), subtracting four seconds (arriving at 1:44), then looking up the 16 SPM and 18 SPM paces from the Level 4 pace chart. The 16 SPM pace I used today is actually 5 s faster than the 16 SPM pace I used in my previous Level 4 workout (the 18 SPM pace I used today is 4 s faster than the 18 SPM pace I used in my previous Level 4 workout).</li><li>I haven't figured out how to set up intervals on my PM2 where one timed piece is followed by another timed piece, so I decided to time 10' for the work pieces, then measure 507 m for my 2:30 recovery piece. My thinking was, if my recovery pace is 2:32, I'll need to figure out how far I go in 2 s at that pace. It's 7 m. However, I added it to 500 m instead of subtracting it, so my recovery pieces were actually 2:34 instead of 2:30.</li><li>This workout seemed even easier than my previous level 4 workout (40' = 176/180/176/180). I had all sorts of gas left in the tank, despite doing a level 2 workout this morning. I even did a 2k cooldown.</li></ul>I was trying to figure out my next 4x10' Level 4 workout, and came across <a href='http://concept2.ipbhost.com/index.php?s ... 2692&st=60#' target='_blank'>Mike Caviston's post on Creating Level 4 Workouts</a>. I seemed to have been confused from the start about how to set up 4x10' workouts in the first place. Mike says<ul><li>when selecting the stroke rates for a 4x10', the rule of thumb is to add 2 SPM to my base continuous rate (e.g. from 18.6 SPM to 20.6 SPM), and select four 10' intervals that give me that higher stroke rate.</li><li>the recovery period is one-third (not one-fourth) the work period, so the recovery period for a 4x10' is 3:20 (not 2:30).</li></ul>I'll have to look through my notes to find out how I came to my erroneous conclusions about what a 4x10' and its corresponding recovery periods are supposed to be. In any case, my next 4x10' Level 4 workout will be a week from yesterday. I'll pick out four 10' pieces so that the average stroke rate is 19.8 (my 40' and 60' continuous are both 17.8 SPM this week).

[old] Mike Caviston · Post by **[old] Mike Caviston** » November 12th, 2005, 12:38 am

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'>QUOTE(arakawa @ Nov 11 2005, 11:27 PM)</div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>Day 4: Level 4 / 4x10' @ L4 -4 pace </td></tr></table> Am I understanding you correctly? Your workout was 4 x 10’, and each 10’ was the same flat rate for the entire duration, and the pace you chose was your 2K-based Ref Pace minus four?? What on earth does this have to do with Level 4 or the Wolverine Plan? I don’t see how I could have stated more clearly or directly that these modifications are exactly what NOT to do if you want to follow the Wolverine Plan. You can do whatever workouts you want; it’s none of my business. But PLEASE don’t refer to them as “Wolverine Plan” workouts! Mike Caviston

[old] bmoore · Post by **[old] bmoore** » November 12th, 2005, 2:02 am

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'>QUOTE(arakawa @ Nov 11 2005, 11:27 PM)</div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>In any case, my next 4x10' Level 4 workout will be a week from yesterday. I'll pick out four 10' pieces so that the average stroke rate is 19.8 (my 40' and 60' continuous are both 17.8 SPM this week). </td></tr></table> Masa, If you want to do 4x10', and average 19.8, then do a 196/200/196/200 session. The 196 is a pyramid of 2' each @ 18, 20, 22, 20, 18 The 200 is 4' @ 18, 3' @ 20, 2' @ 22, 1' @ 24 Your paces should be 16 - 2:14, 18 - 2:09, 20 - 2:05, 22 - 2:00, 24 - 1:56. Stick with these paces for this season. It looks like you bumped your reference pace because this workout is too easy. I'd have to agree that the way you set it up is too easy. I'd recommend skipping the 4x10' for now. Let your L4 workouts be ENDURANCE workouts and not some modified interval workouts. If you're doing L1 & L2 intervals, along with L3 distance workouts, then you'll need the longer L4 workouts to balance your training week. It looks like you attempted 140' of L4 last week over 3 sessions. Next week do 180' over 3 sessions or 150' over 2 sessions. (I'd do 2 sessions - 70' & a 2x40'. These are a pain in the butt, literally, but they do build endurance, and hitting your pace/rate combo beyond 60 minutes is a mental & physical endurance challenge). I'm pretty much only doing 10' sets. I set it for 60' with 10' splits. (I'm using RowPro). I want to get a body of work under me this year, and then I'll look at the other variations Mike has suggested. So, keep the reference pace constant but increase the duration and start moving up the progressions. You have enough to worry about with increasing the pace on the L1 & L2 workouts. Increase your time or your total number of strokes each week (if you're hitting your pace and distance goals). Don't increase both in the same week. Keep at it. Every workout is a learning opportunity. (So is every post to this forum, apparently).

[old] Bill · Post by **[old] Bill** » November 12th, 2005, 4:38 am

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'>QUOTE(Mike Caviston @ Nov 11 2005, 11:38 PM)</div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'>QUOTE(arakawa @ Nov 11 2005, 11:27 PM)</div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>Day 4: Level 4 / 4x10' @ L4 -4 pace </td></tr></table> Am I understanding you correctly? Your workout was 4 x 10’, and each 10’ was the same flat rate for the entire duration, and the pace you chose was your 2K-based Ref Pace minus four?? What on earth does this have to do with Level 4 or the Wolverine Plan? I don’t see how I could have stated more clearly or directly that these modifications are exactly what NOT to do if you want to follow the Wolverine Plan. You can do whatever workouts you want; it’s none of my business. But PLEASE don’t refer to them as “Wolverine Plan” workouts! Mike Caviston </td></tr></table> Both of you, I think I can see whats happened here. Has there been a misinterpretation of one of the other posts by Mike - "Alternative 4 x 10' workout - 9 March 09:57:39PM" ? Bill

[old] Bill · Post by **[old] Bill** » November 12th, 2005, 4:48 am

Carla, I have wdifficulty with the 16s as well. Am trying to use a Rowpro pace boat to guide me but have massive difficulty doing a slow strong stroke at 16 and stay exactly with the paceboat rower. Tendency to do strong quick leg push and then burn off some time elsewhere. What puzzles me is that 18s are great no problem at all. They feel good. Bill

[old] mpukita · Post by **[old] mpukita** » November 12th, 2005, 7:36 am

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'>QUOTE(bmoore @ Nov 11 2005, 09:34 PM)</div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'>QUOTE(mpukita @ Nov 11 2005, 02:16 PM)</div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>CONFESSIONS continued ... LEVEL 2 ... 1K W/U @ 2:30 ---> 2:05 pace ... 4x2000 w/1000 recovery (2:30 pace or less) after all 4 sets + 1-2 minutes stretch on ball due to lower back "tightness/fatigue" after first 3 ... total rest about 6 to 7 minutes (active/passive combination). 1) 2:02.9/24 2) 2:02.7/25 3) 2:02.6/25 4) 2:02.3/25 This was my first time for this workout. It was work, but not outlandish. No falling off the erg while still strapped in, but not fun. Target was set at about 1.08 x 2K PB pace (1:54) = 2:03. I have a mild cold but noticed no impact from it. Still trying to find "current training limit" for just about all Levels. Getting closer. Can't wait to be doing these all under 2:00. Maybe next time I should just go for it? </td></tr></table> Let the training dictate your training. Don't just "go for it" with these workouts. Each time you do this workout, drop your goal pace down to the next whole second (2:02). You'll average just under this based on your splits above. Each time you'll make steady progress. The worst thing is to go for it and have to put the handle down. I've done this too many times. It's frustrating, but not so much that I don't remember to to just let the training dictate the training. My ego gets in the way, and then I blow it, and then I have a setback that can affect other workouts that week. Anyway, be cautious and remember this is a long term commitment you're making to yourself. </td></tr></table> Bill: Agreed. In fact, I couldn't agree with you more. When I asked about "going for it", it was a question about setting my new target at 2:00 pace rather than 2:02 or 2:03, as the 2:04 pace seemed a bit too easy and I am yet to find my current training limit within this specific workout. NOT just ripping out the 4 fastest 2Ks possible. This was the first time I did it, and I used Mike's absolute mimimum suggested target of reference pace x 1.08. I'm thinking I could drop 3 to 4 seconds a set (in pace) and still achieve the target across all 4 sets. Now that I think about it, maybe I'm dreaming, because these ARE 2Ks! -- Mark

Concept2 Forum

Wolverine Plan Discussion

Training

Training

Training

Training

Training

Training

Training

Training

Training

Training

Training

Training

Training

Training

Training