2k excellence?

almostflipped · Post by **almostflipped** » January 3rd, 2008, 11:48 pm

My best 6k this semester was a 22:26. The split was ~1:52.x

Probably around 6:52-55 right now. I would suggest 6-8 erg workouts a week if you want to break 6:40.

George Dunning · Post by **George Dunning** » January 4th, 2008, 12:39 am

almostflipped wrote:
My best 6k this semester was a 22:26. The split was ~1:52.x
Probably around 6:52-55 right now. I would suggest 6-8 erg workouts a week if you want to break 6:40.

I think you could do it on less:- 2 x UT1, 2 x AT, 1 x AN sessions and 2 days rest. If the rest of your life is active (and from memory your young

so it probably is) then you can have fun and have sub 6:40 as well.

george

Elamonta · Post by **Elamonta** » January 4th, 2008, 2:08 am

Wait a minute have FUN and have sub 6:40 impossible

George Dunning · Post by **George Dunning** » January 4th, 2008, 3:53 am

Elamonta wrote:Wait a minute have FUN and have sub 6:40 impossible

come on dude with a sub 1:30 500 you are dogging it on that 2k time you have posted

, get some endurance under you belt and get it done

george

ps If your not having fun then it gets all very tiresome (listen to an old man)

bmcgraw · Post by **bmcgraw** » January 4th, 2008, 9:51 pm

Elamonta,

I row at Carnegie Mellon University (club). The only big races we goto are Charles and Dad Vails.

Thanks for the 2k prediction/advice.

Jamie Pfeffer · Post by **Jamie Pfeffer** » January 5th, 2008, 1:25 pm

Master reading on a stair machine or elliptical. Then you can do 90 minutes on a Sunday. You'll take care of your weight-reducing workout and some assigned reading at the same time. I did this throughout college and law school. I still do it when I do reading for articles that I have to write.

George (I believe it was he) seems right to me. You have loads of power (1:30 for 500 meters is fast). As soon as you develop commensurate endurance, you'll break 6:40.

To me at least, it's much easier to build endurance than to increase power.

kirbyt · Post by **kirbyt** » January 5th, 2008, 3:57 pm

Jamie said:

To me at least, it's much easier to build endurance than to increase power.

I'm with you there, Jamie. I'm following a modified version of the Wolverine Plan and my long intervals, low rate work and long distance workouts all suggest I should be around 6:30 but my short stuff says no way.

In the off season I'm going to try a few things to develop a little more power/sprinting.

Kirby

Jamie Pfeffer · Post by **Jamie Pfeffer** » January 5th, 2008, 4:10 pm

Kirby: We have almost identical numbers (in the 6:30s; 16,6something for 60 minutes; 165 pounds; same general age). What's amazing to me is your 2K time compared to your 1K time. The former is almost exactly double the latter.

I'm confident that we'll both go sub 6:30.

Where do you live? I hope to see you at a race this year and say hello.

johnlvs2run · Post by **johnlvs2run** » January 5th, 2008, 4:46 pm

kirbyt wrote:suggest I should be around 6:30 but my short stuff says no way. In the off season I'm going to try a few things to develop a little more power/sprinting.

Maybe hop in the c2ctc for this month.

almostflipped · Post by **almostflipped** » January 5th, 2008, 4:54 pm

To me at least, it's much easier to build endurance than to increase power.

And that is where results may vary. I've always found the opposite to be true for me. The power came easily but the endurance took some work.

George: I am curious why you would recommend regular AN work at this stage of the year for bmcgraw rather than TR work? I always think of regular AN work as something to be used closer to peaking, which for bmcgraw should not happen until May, or in conjunction with shorter TR pieces.

philrow · Post by **philrow** » January 5th, 2008, 4:58 pm

Jamie Pfeffer wrote: To me at least, it's much easier to build endurance than to increase power.

I agree. It may be because of just becoming involved with rowing that I am able to do this, but I've decided that at least for now it is valuable to sort of "phase train." That is, I found that lifting weights occasionally while doing a lot of erging, running, stairs, etc., just didn't provide for strength gains. When I stopped the aerobics and focused on gaining strength through lifting, I experienced a great deal of strength gains, which were reflected in my erg times. It seems as if strength is not something that just happens as a bi-product of usual rowing training. I found that after resuming endurance training even for a short period, that indeed my new strength and my developing endurance combined for substantial increases in performance for longer rows.

I do understand why there doesn't seem to be a ton of support for my current lifting/strength-gain phase of training. The best way to get better at rowing is to row. But, for someone such as myself who still has an extraordinary amount of progress to make -- I think -- having come from a background with little regular physical activity, that such phase training can be beneficial. As I recall from reading from a number of various sources, it takes years of regular training to fully culminate the benefits of aerobic and strength training. Instead of slowly progressing by trying to increase strength and endurance when the training for each can clash, I feel I make much faster progress indeed followed by some regression in either strength or endurance when in the "off" phase for either dimension. For example, I think Xeno's recommendation of such huge volume with lifting once a week won't really help increase strength per se. But, I think Xeno assumes a more developed skeleto-muscular system than I have. Also, obviously, his program is based solely for rowing and at a high-performance level, so it makes sense that lifting is largely left out. I think such rowing-specific specialization is very appropriate for those who are already at such a high level, such as yourself. Once I stop cutting off 15+ seconds per 2k, then I'll most likely start emphasizing aerobic training more. But perhaps not. We'll see how this training effects my performance!

Phil

almostflipped · Post by **almostflipped** » January 5th, 2008, 5:17 pm

Once I stop cutting off 15+ seconds per 2k,

The methodology you claim is not as unusual as you would think, just perhaps taken a step further than most would use. A well made program will tailor parts of the year around an individuals strengths/weaknesses in order to maximize gains. This may even lead to a decrease in aerobic work for some cycles if strength is seen as a major limiting factor. When choosing a program you should see that it fits for your current stage of development.

As for when you will stop dropping 15+ seconds, just as a word of advice, it is very common for HS athletes to drop that much time. I think what you have done in terms of researching, learning, and understanding training methodology is great and would absolutely encourage you to continue as the long term benefits will be significant. However, keep an open mind and always remember that what is working for you now in HS may not be what your body needs in college and beyond. Use the knowledge you are gaining now to be able to adjust your program as you edge closer to full potential.

kirbyt · Post by **kirbyt** » January 5th, 2008, 9:01 pm

Jamie, I live in Edmonton, Alberta. It's a little off the beaten path but I may go to either Toronto (CIRC) or Boston (WIRC) in '09 or '10 I'm hoping. We have no major comps. in our province, last year I entered in the open lightweight division and won silver with just a 6:49--there were only 5 of us and the guy who beat me (6:40) was 23 yrs. old.

As for my 1k PB, I never really do 1k's seriously so I just took that time from a 4x1k interval.

Kirby

PS: 16,600 for 1 hour is a lot better than I can do, that's a great time for a lightweight.

kirbyt · Post by **kirbyt** » January 5th, 2008, 9:29 pm

John, I did the ctc and ended up with 43.0. Very painful, all half slide which goes against everything I believe in--I may try again with a more sensible approach.

Kirby

Jamie Pfeffer · Post by **Jamie Pfeffer** » January 5th, 2008, 11:11 pm

Kirby: You can bridge the gap between 16,250 and 16,650 relatively quickly. You clearly have a strong engine (I'm three inches taller than you; yet we pull nearly identical scores). Chances are, though, you don't train specifically for a 60-minute row -- particularly at this point in the year.

Maybe we'll meet in Toronto next year. I'm going to the Canadian Championships this year.

Phil: In the fall, Xeno had us lift weights twice a week, three weeks a month in September and October. In November, we lifted twice a week for the first two weeks. Now that we're getting close to indoor racing season, he has us focusing more on the ergs. To me, "periodizing" (or "phasing") is a great part of Xeno's system. Segmenting the year makes the training pass quickly (at least for me).

Given the few ergs your school has, I admire your ingenuity. In the 80s (probably before you were born), there was a Clint Eastwood movie called "Heartbreak Ridge." He boasted that his Marines knew had to "improvise, adapt, overcome, and win." I view your lifting program as embodying that credo. "No ergs? No problem," you say. You'll just go do sets of 50 below-parallel squats with 135 pounds. Physiologically, you're probably taxing yourself similarly.