That was something Mike Caviston covered on the old thread:marge wrote:While were on the subject of the wolverine plan i had a couple of questions.
After recording a new PB for a 2k what changes do you make to your training. For instance say ive been doing a level3 workout (12k + 500m every session, avg pace kept constant) and just got a PB on a 2k trial. Should i change my pace to meet that of my new 2k split reference or stick with the pace ive been using?
This can also be asked for a level 4 workout. If im doing a 60mins L4 every week, increasing my strokes every session like it says, should i also change my pace after recording a new PB 2k?
The WP & L4 work especially well for people with an established 2K history. For people who have reached a plateau and are looking to build a foundation on which to reach a higher peak, I think Level 4 training can be very helpful. But the trickiest thing about the Wolverine Plan is determining the correct Ref Pace for a novice, or someone with rapidly advancing fitness. For someone with an established training history, the procedure may simply be to start a training season with a Ref Pace one second faster than the previous year. In my own case, I’ve been working with the same Ref Pace for four years, but I’ve been making small progress by starting each season with a slightly higher volume and/or at a slightly higher average stroke rate (and therefore advancing farther by the end of the season).
Do the workouts you are doing now seem appropriately challenging (hard, but not TOO hard)? Given your current Level 4 workouts and formats, is there room to progress with the established L4 progressions for the next several weeks? If not, then you should readjust based on what you estimate your 2K to be based on your Level 1-2 training history. But if the workouts seem to be at the correct intensity, then just keep steadily building until this season is over and think about planning with more precision next year. For Levels 1-3, I propose guidelines for relationship between workout intensity and 2K pace. But I also encourage people not to become overly obsessed about the relationship (“If I pull xMadx for 2K, what should I pull for 4 x 1K, 10K, etc. etc.?”) The most important thing is to start where you can start and gradually, steadily, consistently build on that. Good luck!
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.
To repeat a piece of advice I’ve given to beginners before: don’t become too obsessed with rapid improvement and with getting it all right now. Take the long view. Just enjoy the ride for a while and develop good habits to use when the going starts to get a little tougher. Specifically for Level 4 workouts, if you can follow your current Ref Pace without hitting the 20spm-average before the end of the season, then just stick with what you’ve been doing. Next year plan to start with a faster Ref Pace based on your best 2K this year, and spend some time in the off-season getting comfortable with doing some sequences using the faster Ref Pace so you can begin your next competitive training period as smoothly as possible.
This was in reference to the specific situation where a rower moves from the novice to the varsity level and really begins to bloom as an athlete as a result of maturity, greater training volume, the inspiration of training with older/more experienced teammates, forming more ambitious personal goals, etc. – they were improving so rapidly they would rack up large totals even while trying to hold back. Giving them a new Ref Pace didn’t really change the way they did the workouts, it just brought their goals more in line with their abilities. As I’ve said again and again and again – setting Ref Paces for beginners is not an exact science.(mpukita @ Dec 4 2005, 07:46 PM) wrote: The only thing I don't understand is when Mike says:
"If you reach a point where your totals are exceeding the goal of the next 2K pace on the Pace Chart, you will be reassigned a new 2K pace for reference."
Hmm, let me think about this. 70’-90’ is probably a little more than most people could or should do continuously with the Level 4 format. Let’s use 60’ for the sake of discussion. I would say if someone progressed to 1200 strokes in 60’ (6 x 200 or the equivalent, i.e., an average of 20spm) it would be time to try a new Ref Pace. I think 1208 strokes are the most I’ve ever done in 60’, and that was almost five years ago. At my current pace I’ll probably make it to about 1190 strokes this year. If someone has reached 1200 strokes mid-season, they clearly have chosen the wrong Ref Pace – but what are you gonna do? I’d try to finish out the current season as well as possible and choose a Ref Pace more accurately next year. So, let’s say someone has reached 1200 strokes with a particular Ref Pace but there are till several weeks to go in the season. Two alternatives would be to 1) continue with the same Ref Pace and progress to faster sequences (the 202-210 range) or 2) go to the next fastest Ref Pace and go back to using slower sequences. Nether solution is perfect but I’d go with #2 (faster Ref Pace, back to slower sequences). How far back to go (which slower sequences to use)? Well, you’d cover about the same number of meters in 1170 strokes (19.5spm average) using the next fastest Ref Pace (vs. 1200 strokes with the slower Ref Pace). But to account for the greater intensity of more force per stroke, I’d probably drop back a little further, probably to about 19-19.2spm for 60’ with the faster Ref Pace. You'd be covering fewer meters than before but working harder to do it. It would also probably be necessary to set aside a few sessions just to practice with the new paces for the various stroke rates (i.e., get used to consistently hitting the faster paces for the various rates).(mpukita @ Dec 4 2005, 08:57 PM) wrote: Would it be safe to say that if one could do 70' to 90' at the top (or bottom depending how you view it) of the sequence charts (longest distances), that resetting reference pace would be good to do? If so, how would you suggest one go about this?
Well, that’s what I’d do, but what the heck do I know? Oh, and to reiterate one other key point about the Level 4 sequences. The faster ones at the bottom of the table are almost theoretical ideals. If you have chosen your Ref Pace correctly, you won’t be able to do them in continuous formats. When I am fully trained, I can barely do the 220 sequence as an isolated 10’ piece (which I try to reach as part of the 4 x 10’ format).
Not necessarily. This has always been a little ambiguous. You could fix the distance and gradually increase pace, OR keep pace constant and gradually extend the distance, OR do a combination of both. Whatever feels more comfortable. I tend to do a little of both. I tend to start at some distance (e.g., 16-20K depending on my overall fitness when I start a training cycle), work the pace down by about 1 sec/500m over several weeks, add another 1K to the distance @ the same pace, work the pace down another second or so over several more weeks, add another 1K, etc. My general recommendation would be to work the distance up to at least an hour (which might be 12K for some folk and 17K for others). Someone who can’t fit so much volume into their training might limit their L3 row to the 10K/40’ range, but I would then hope that there is a 60’ L4 in the weekly schedule. In other words, to repeat a previous recommendation, I suggest at least one 60’ continuous endurance session per week.(bmoore @ Dec 28 2005, 01:38 AM) wrote: Finally, I understood the guideline for the long L3 workout was to maintain the pace and keep increasing the distance each week.
If someone is only doing a single L3 row per week, I would suggest keeping it continuous (see previous comments for a complete explanation). Breaking a distance down into 3-4 segments with short rest breaks is also good training; in fact I do something similar with my 2nd weekly L3 workout. But if I were only doing one, I’d keep it continuous.(FrancoisA @ Dec 28 2005, 11:12 AM) wrote: Instead of a 16k at 2:01, I would suggest that you could occasionally do 3 x 4k with 1:00 rest at 1:58 or faster. It could also be 4 x 3k with 0:45 rest, a 6 x 2k with 0:30 rest, etc. The idea is to get a little rest so that your pace is faster than your 16k L3, but not too long, so that your HR stays elevated.
