What Training Have You Done Today???

[old] Jim Barry · Post by **[old] Jim Barry** » February 8th, 2005, 12:36 pm

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'>QUOTE</div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>My "picture" of physical training, I think, is very large indeed, much larger than that of any rowing coach or trainer that I have run into, either here on this forum or elsewhere. </td></tr></table> If you ever run into Igor Ginko you'd get this deal: (This is written last spring by Gavin Frase, a US National Team rower). "I currently train full-time in Augusta, Georgia with 8 other national team rowers under Coach Igor Grinko, who has coached both the U.S. and Soviet Union teams. I am training full-time in order to achieve my goal of rowing in the 2004 and 2008 Olympics. We train twice a day, 6 days a week, 50 weeks a year. Our mornings begin with 2 hours of weight training and 1-2 hours of on-the-water training. During the morning rowing sessions we will often focus on power. In the afternoon we lift weights again for 1 hour and row again for 1-2 hours. In the afternoons we may work on our endurance or building aerobic capability. My favorite part of the week is the renowned Sunday morning dam row, a 22-mile row along the entire stretch of the Savannah River in our single shells." Elite rowing (e.g., elite coaching) is typically massive, it appears. A write-up by Garrett Miller (U.S. lightweight) I surfed up a few years ago was also amazing for the level of commitment (and sacrifice) it takes at the top. Gavin won silver (ltwt 1x) at the Head of the Charles in 2003 and has won Bronze in the Panamerica games (he is also an Alum of my college though we rowed at different times).

[old] ranger · Post by **[old] ranger** » February 8th, 2005, 2:11 pm

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'>QUOTE</div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>Elite rowing (e.g., elite coaching) is typically massive, it appears. A write-up by Garrett Miller (U.S. lightweight) I surfed up a few years ago was also amazing for the level of commitment (and sacrifice) it takes at the top. </td></tr></table> Sure, there is no topside to effort in sports--or demands for effort (e.g., from coaches). The more the effort (properly applied and without damage), the better the result, whether the effort comes from the insiide or out-. I am in no way an elite rower. I am just an old fart having fun. I understand entirely the logic of elite athletic training, though; such training is not at all limited to sports. I am no longer a young man. At this age (54), I have now experienced that elite realm of no topside limit on effort many times, in many arenas. Been there (many times), done that (many times). It iis indeed (!) fun to take the limits off of effort applied, especially in sports, and while I have not yet done that completely in my rowing, I have certainly been extreme at times (six hour workouts, etc.). If things go well over the next year or so with my work on technique, I'll take the lid off my effort entirely and go for broke. THEN, we'll _really_ see what can happen. I can work _very_ hard. Better yet, as I work toward limiits; as I get out there--further and further; I like it--more and more. Twisted? Nah. Just a lot of fun. There is _nothing_ more satisfying than pushing an innate gift to the limits of performance. If you pass up the opportunity to do this--whenever and wherever it presents itself--you are a boneheaded fool. ranger

[old] GeorgeD · Post by **[old] GeorgeD** » February 8th, 2005, 11:11 pm

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'>QUOTE(ranger @ Feb 9 2005, 02:56 AM)</div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>I agree with your claim that my potential is 6:20; I disagree with your claim that I don't know how to set up and manage the training that can get me there. </td></tr></table> Well Ranger I am sure we all admire your confidence - and you wouldn't want a coach that listed out in public 3 events you were going to compete in that you then had to pull out of - or set public goals such as hour rows at 1:44 / 25spm which is easily going to put you in the top 10 for all ages and weights for a 60min row. I would think that by then he would be saying that 6:20 will be but a formality once you have done the AT work. Then again a good coach may also not wish to create that public expectation and subsequent pressure for you to actually perform. George

[old] John Rupp · Post by **[old] John Rupp** » February 9th, 2005, 12:19 am

Actually Rich has done very well left to his own devices. Where he got into trouble was getting diverted from his own devices. If there was a competition for rowing 24 spm at 1:42 pace then Rich would do very well. However that is not a competitive stroke and never ever will be a competitive stroke. It's also not very fun to think of going to a race and rowing with that kind of a background. I can understand him not wanting to compete under such circumstances and lack of preparedness.

[old] chickenlegs · Post by **[old] chickenlegs** » February 9th, 2005, 2:43 am

1000 m x 6, 2'30" rest. all at 1:40.0 (or barely under) @ 26 spm. next goal is to decrease rest to 2'.

[old] ranger · Post by **[old] ranger** » February 9th, 2005, 4:38 am

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'>QUOTE(GeorgeD @ Feb 8 2005, 10:11 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(ranger @ Feb 9 2005, 02:56 AM)</div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>I agree with your claim that my potential is 6:20; I disagree with your claim that I don't know how to set up and manage the training that can get me there. </td></tr></table> Well Ranger I am sure we all admire your confidence - and you wouldn't want a coach that listed out in public 3 events you were going to compete in that you then had to pull out of - or set public goals such as hour rows at 1:44 / 25spm which is easily going to put you in the top 10 for all ages and weights for a 60min row. I would think that by then he would be saying that 6:20 will be but a formality once you have done the AT work. Then again a good coach may also not wish to create that public expectation and subsequent pressure for you to actually perform. George </td></tr></table> At this stage in life, I am just competing as a hobby. I don't belong to a national team (or whatever). Therefore, what I do in my racing has no crucial bearing on anyone or anything. If I want to race, I race. If not, not. Yes, I think that 6:20 will be a formality once I have done the AT work. Of course, I have also done two _years_ of other work on this project up to this point (and another three years of rowing before that). If it takes me another year, the whole affair will have taken _three_ years of very specific (daily, twice daily, or thrice daily) work, preceded by three years of more general, less specific work. This is quite a bit of effort and quite a long time. No flash in the pan. ranger

[old] ranger · Post by **[old] ranger** » February 9th, 2005, 4:46 am

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'>QUOTE(John Rupp @ Feb 8 2005, 11:19 PM)</div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>Actually Rich has done very well left to his own devices. Where he got into trouble was getting diverted from his own devices. If there was a competition for rowing 24 spm at 1:42 pace then Rich would do very well. However that is not a competitive stroke and never ever will be a competitive stroke. It's also not very fun to think of going to a race and rowing with that kind of a background. I can understand him not wanting to compete under such circumstances and lack of preparedness. </td></tr></table> You are right that I am not yet ready to race. It is indeed hard to race at 36 spm if you have been training at 24 spm. This doesn't mean that I am not making progress in my training, though. It just means that I need more time to prepare. Yes, my training lately has been guided by what I have learned from others who know more about rowing than I do (Mike Caviston, Paul Smith, the C2 interactive Plan, etc.) rather than what I already know from my experience in other sports. Nothing wrong with this. I am not being forced into anything, though; I am choosing to follow this advice. Why? It is _good_ advice. I am stubborn and independent minded, but I am not _totally_ unable to learn! It takes a while for something/someone to convince me, especially when it is foreign to my experience and involves a pretty big change of mind, but I can indeed be convinced. ranger

[old] ranger · Post by **[old] ranger** » February 9th, 2005, 4:54 am

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'>QUOTE</div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>Then again a good coach may also not wish to create that public expectation and subsequent pressure for you to actually perform. </td></tr></table> Expect whatever you want to expect (or not). I am just relating what I think. Sure, I could be wrong. Then again, on parallel things, I haven't been wrong about these things so far; so there again isn't much evidence that I will be wrong this time. 50s lwts have rowed over 17K for an hour row (as have 40s lwts). Saying that I am going to do this is not at all saying that I am going to do something unprecedented. In fact, "double the d, add 3" on the basis of my 6:28 2K pb _predicts_ a 17K hour row. ranger

[old] ranger · Post by **[old] ranger** » February 9th, 2005, 6:17 am

George-- BTW, assessments of potential ability, I think, are very different from predictions of particular performances on particular dates in particular venues. The latter often go awry for accidental reasons, but the former are pretty easy to get a handle on from performances in day-to-day training, curves of improvement, resources not yet drawn upon and applied, level of commitment, and so forth, and therefore are much more stable. For instance, when I said I thought I was going to break the lwt 50s WR in the spring of 2002, my first attempt in the fall of 2002 was a complete failure; but again, only for accidental reasons (pre-race eating and drinking, stroke rate used in the race, sharpening routines employed in training just before the race, etc.). Even when I failed on that particular day, it was clear that I was still _capable_; it just took me another try (six months lateer) to get the job done. The improvements/achievements I am predicting now (17K+ in the hour row, 6:20 2K, etc.) are on no schedule. If they happen at all, they will happen when they happen. I have no idea when that will be. Nonetheless, at the moment, all evidence suggests that they will indeed happen (at some point). ranger

[old] BIKERACER · Post by **[old] BIKERACER** » February 9th, 2005, 5:08 pm

Hello everyone. Heading out for my second erg workout which will mirror my am session: 7 minute warmup 16 minutes @ 2:07...70-73%HRR...130-135bpm 7 minute cooldown Treadmill 1 mile run @ 6.8 mph Bike 1/2 hour with 20 minutes @ 200w Later

[old] John Rupp · Post by **[old] John Rupp** » February 9th, 2005, 7:50 pm

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'>QUOTE(ranger @ Feb 9 2005, 12:54 AM)</div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>Sure, I could be wrong. Then again, on parallel things, I haven't been wrong about these things so far; so there again isn't much evidence that I will be wrong this time. </td></tr></table> Actually the evidence is that your training IS wrong. Otherwise you'd be competing, and you've said yourself that you're not ready. Therefore your training HAS been wrong. Whether it comes around in the future is a different matter. Also, yes there was evidence (that you were ready for a world record) in 2002, but there is no evidence now. Is there? Unless I'm mistaken, rowing at 1:42 pace is not the same as rowing at 1:36 pace. Is it? If it is then why aren't you racing this weekend and the next. Uh hmmmm.

[old] cforce · Post by **[old] cforce** » February 9th, 2005, 8:00 pm

Double erg today. 3x19' pyramids (57' in total) and a new speed erg the coach introduced ... 6x500m at 2k pace with 500m 'off' in between.

[old] ranger · Post by **[old] ranger** » February 10th, 2005, 2:27 am

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'>QUOTE</div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>If there was a competition for rowing 24 spm at 1:42 pace then Rich would do very well. However that is not a competitive stroke and never ever will be a competitive stroke. </td></tr></table> You are exaggerating here. I am not trying to row 1:42 at 24 spm. I am trying to row 1:47-48 at 22-24 spm. This is indeed a competitive racing stroke. The distance is a marathon, and the training band is UT2. If I could row a marathon at 1:48 @ 22-24 spm, my training base would be set--forever--and as Jim says, I will have set a new benchmark, of consiiderable importance, in my rowing. This marathon would be 8 minutes (6 seconds per 500) faster than my current marathon pb (2:40:15), and I would gain these 8 minutes using 1776 fewer strokes. Foundational rowing. ranger

[old] ranger · Post by **[old] ranger** » February 10th, 2005, 2:51 am

The other pattern of development for those in the 40s and 50s age groups is avoid foundational rowing, do high rate and high pace workouts aimed primarily at racing 2Ks, and as a result, slow down by 2 seconds or so per year. So, following this sort of training, given that I rowed 6:30 in the 2003 CRASH-Bs, in the 2005 CRASH-Bs, I could attend, race, and row, say, 6:34 or so this year. Woopee. Given that performance, Graham Watt could finish the race, dress, shower, and have a leisurely lunch before I finished. Mike Caviston rowed 6:18 when he was 40; at 44, he now rows 6:26. Dennis Hastings rowed 6:32 when he was 50; at 54, he now rows 6:42. Paul Hendershott rowed 6:13 when he was 51; at 61, he now rows 6:27. Andy Ripley rowed 6:07 when he was 50; at 56, he now rows 6:23. And so it goes... ranger

[old] Laupi · Post by **[old] Laupi** » February 10th, 2005, 5:46 pm

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'>QUOTE(ranger @ Feb 10 2005, 01:51 AM)</div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>The other pattern of development for those in the 40s and 50s age groups is avoid foundational rowing, do high rate and high pace workouts aimed primarily at racing 2Ks, and as a result, slow down by 2 seconds or so per year. So, following this sort of training, given that I rowed 6:30 in the 2003 CRASH-Bs, in the 2005 CRASH-Bs, I could attend, race, and row, say, 6:34 or so this year. Woopee. Given that performance, Graham Watt could finish the race, dress, shower, and have a leisurely lunch before I finished. Mike Caviston rowed 6:18 when he was 40; at 44, he now rows 6:26. Dennis Hastings rowed 6:32 when he was 50; at 54, he now rows 6:42. Paul Hendershott rowed 6:13 when he was 51; at 61, he now rows 6:27. Andy Ripley rowed 6:07 when he was 50; at 56, he now rows 6:23. And so it goes... ranger </td></tr></table> My rowing now is 9:30 for 2k distance. Wish to get a bit faster over the next year. Do you see a chance for that following your theory. I am really hoping. Thanks