Jacking the erg - Effective training?
- johnlvs2run
- Half Marathon Poster
- Posts: 4012
- Joined: March 16th, 2006, 1:13 pm
- Location: California Central Coast
- Contact:
Well then it won't help you for me to quote more from the link.jamie wrote:Quoting does not imply understanding
bikeerg 75 5'8" 155# - 18.5 - 51.9 - 568 - 1:52.7 - 8:03.8 - 20:13.1 - 14620 - 40:58.7 - 28855 - 1:23:48.0
rowerg 56-58 5'8.5" 143# - 1:39.6 - 3:35.6 - 7:24.0 - 18:57.4 - 22:49.9 - 7793 - 38:44.7 - 1:22:48.9 - 2:58:46.2
rowerg 56-58 5'8.5" 143# - 1:39.6 - 3:35.6 - 7:24.0 - 18:57.4 - 22:49.9 - 7793 - 38:44.7 - 1:22:48.9 - 2:58:46.2
Re: The original erg jacker
[quote="John Rupp"]
Your statement that my statement was not correct is the one that is not correct, as my statements are correct.
quote]
John, I am glad that you know more about my testing methods and results than I do. I stand corrected.
When I say that I put a 3/4" plank under the front end of the erg, I mean that I raised the front end of the erg 3/4" from its normal position. The slope of the rail will change, but I didn't mention that.
"Words mean what I want them to mean, nothing more, nothing less!"
rjh - tanks for confirming a vision about jacking the erg that I must have had in a dream.
Cheers,
Paul Flack
Your statement that my statement was not correct is the one that is not correct, as my statements are correct.
quote]
John, I am glad that you know more about my testing methods and results than I do. I stand corrected.
When I say that I put a 3/4" plank under the front end of the erg, I mean that I raised the front end of the erg 3/4" from its normal position. The slope of the rail will change, but I didn't mention that.
"Words mean what I want them to mean, nothing more, nothing less!"
rjh - tanks for confirming a vision about jacking the erg that I must have had in a dream.
Cheers,
Paul Flack
- johnlvs2run
- Half Marathon Poster
- Posts: 4012
- Joined: March 16th, 2006, 1:13 pm
- Location: California Central Coast
- Contact:
Re: The original erg jacker
You're welcome, Paul.canoeist wrote:John, I am glad that you know more about my testing methods and results than I do. I stand corrected.
It is good that one of us remembers the results.
bikeerg 75 5'8" 155# - 18.5 - 51.9 - 568 - 1:52.7 - 8:03.8 - 20:13.1 - 14620 - 40:58.7 - 28855 - 1:23:48.0
rowerg 56-58 5'8.5" 143# - 1:39.6 - 3:35.6 - 7:24.0 - 18:57.4 - 22:49.9 - 7793 - 38:44.7 - 1:22:48.9 - 2:58:46.2
rowerg 56-58 5'8.5" 143# - 1:39.6 - 3:35.6 - 7:24.0 - 18:57.4 - 22:49.9 - 7793 - 38:44.7 - 1:22:48.9 - 2:58:46.2