S.l.o.g.g.e.r.

[old] Jim Barry · Post by **[old] Jim Barry** » May 11th, 2005, 10:56 pm

Jane, I think Mike is just saying that the the "what have you done thread" is a bit disorganized and hard to tell what people are doing. Not that the the thread itself is worthless and/or unsupportive. He appears to appreciate what Rick is doing sharing his thorough and introspective planning and long term outlook. Rick is of course a veteran athlete who has been preparing for big events for probably over 40 years now. Not all of us have such a history and I do not think he is faulting beginners who naturally stumble around a bit investigating their interest in the sport. Once you are serious though you should stop the stumbling, the experimenting weekly with "the new idea" and stay on track for months working toward training days you've never seen before. The racing will simply be a consequence of hitting the days you have planned out ahead. A few years ago Mike wrote a great post about why he failed to get faster from 2002 (WR year) to 2003. Great read. It was not random or inexplicable. He traced right back to his original goals, stated where he went off track, and gave statistics in his training that substantiated everything (at least to me anyway). I've read thousands of posts. I think that is the only one I've actually saved to my PC. Rick can probably do the same thing after the BIRC. Rick's got a solid plan here. Stick to it and his racing in England should be just a formality, a result of hard work well done.

[old] John Rupp · Post by **[old] John Rupp** » May 11th, 2005, 11:21 pm

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'>QUOTE(Jim Barry @ May 11 2005, 07:56 PM)</div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>A few years ago Mike wrote a great post about why he failed to get faster from 2002 (WR year) to 2003. </td></tr></table> That was a good post, interesting reading, and was the only one of Mike's that I saved. The first one was a long perhaps 5 or 6 page rant, all single spaced, going into great detail of why he was so upset with another rower on the forum for mentioning his name, and mentioning his plan, without doing every iota if it perfectly as Mike had written the plan and expected it to be done. That was not the only message written in that manner. There were others. So, yes, Mike does quite often have a "tone" to his messages. Dickie, you know this very well, as you have been on the forum for awhile. So chill out, dude. I have no comment one way or the other whether Mike chooses to post or not post on the forum. It is nice when we can focus on our training ideas, results, sharing our commonalities as well as being open to our differences. On the other hand it is really out of place for someone to expect others to beg them to stay. Maybe I should try that.

[old] John Rupp · Post by **[old] John Rupp** » May 11th, 2005, 11:24 pm

Rick, Thanks for sharing your training with the forum. It is not anything that I'd do or have any interest towards, but I appreciate your openness that you are willing to share what you do and being helpful to others. Cheers.

[old] Bayko · Post by **[old] Bayko** » May 12th, 2005, 7:05 am

Oh my Dog! I'm not trying to get anyone upset. The thoroghness of the Wolverine Plan has always impressed me, and prompted me to post my own regimen as a whole rather than a series of pieces. I still refer back to the WP occasionally to make sure that I'm staying on track. Whenever I suggest it to friends I tell them that reading the entire thing is useful because even if the workouts aren't their cup of tea, the thought process behind why things are done is every bit as valuable, if not more so. Thanks again for that Mike. Nothing at all wrong with just exercising instead of training. My wife is the anti-Rick, eschewing anything remotely close to competition. Yet she and I have often used the same machine within minutes of each other with no animosity whatsoever. I was doing things randomly myself back 40 years ago (egads that looks scary written out!) as I started figuring things out. For what it's worth I think that randomness can lead to frustration if some kind of achievement (race result, improvement in PB's) is expected. Initial improvement curves are steep with almost any kind of activity, but eventually reach a plateau. Moving beyond that plateau requires more than spur-of-the-moment decision. My own belief is that planning is useful, if not absolutely necessary, when there are goals in mind. Tom, your machine has been passed on again. Gary decided that he couldn't live without a Model D and sold your C to another potential fanatic for the same price that you sold it to him. I hope that your plan works and that you can get down to Nbpt in January to make your assault on 7:00 (or 7:10, or 7:20). Likewise NE2KC veterans Jim Barry and Fred Dickie. Oh, and belated Happy Birthday Tom. I saw it on the forum home page and meant to email but procrastinated so long that I just plain forgot. Just think, only one mre year before you get to mix it up with Hendershott . Rick

[old] Porkchop · Post by **[old] Porkchop** » May 12th, 2005, 10:40 am

I haven't been on this forum very long, so feel free to disregard these thoughts if you choose. Posts on internet forums are personal only if you choose to let them be. I don't know, personally, a single individual who posts here. It doesn't matter if someone insults me online; it doesn't matter if someone disagrees with me online. If the other poster has an idea that is better than mine, I'm delighted. If I conclude that it is not better than mine, I ignore it. Sometimes we argue just for the fun of it. But I don't think anyone is compelled to respond to every disagreement or slight, perceived or real. Life goes on. I keep rowing. I don't need this forum for personal validation. I have a family, three dogs, and a job. I appreciate the occasional "Attaboy" as much as anyone, but that's not why I'm here. A discussion does not have to be warm and fuzzy to be useful. Nor should anyone be discouraged from posting just because someone else may find the post unsupportive. However phrased (and I thought this to be a very civil thread), I found this training discussion stimulating and helpful. I'd like to encourage the posters to continue discussing specific aspects of training like this. I want to hear more about S.L.O.G.G.E.R. as time goes on, and I want to hear more trenchant observations about approaches to training, goal-setting, etc. Porkchop

[old] Bayko · Post by **[old] Bayko** » May 12th, 2005, 11:09 am

Porkchop, is this weird or what? Not five minutes after reading your post I picked up a book "The Greatest Boxing stories Ever Told" to read a quick essay. In the first line the editor described Joyce Carol Oates as "A trenchant--and prolific--observer of modern life..." Before your post I don't think that I had ever noticed the word trenchant. Seeing it twice in five minutes from different sources sent me straight to the dictionary. Thanks for the new word. Rick (always learning, or at least trying to)

[old] Porkchop · Post by **[old] Porkchop** » May 12th, 2005, 11:12 am

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'>QUOTE(Bayko @ May 12 2005, 10:09 AM)</div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>Porkchop, is this weird or what? Not five minutes after reading your post I picked up a book "The Greatest Boxing stories Ever Told" to read a quick essay. In the first line the editor described Joyce Carol Oates as "A trenchant--and prolific--observer of modern life..." Before your post I don't think that I had ever noticed the word trenchant. Seeing it twice in five minutes from different sources sent me straight to the dictionary. Thanks for the new word. Rick (always learning, or at least trying to) </td></tr></table> I'll trade vocabulary builders for training tips any time you want. Porkchop

[old] Mike Caviston · Post by **[old] Mike Caviston** » May 12th, 2005, 12:57 pm

Quoting JaneW: “I call it like I see it and if you've desire to discuss my misinterpretation off the forum, then I am open to it. My only apology is to have caused an inconvenience when stating my viewpoint.” You chose to comment publicly so my final response on this topic is also public. Whether you are apologizing or not, as I said previously – life is too short. That also means too short for grudges. So consider it water under the bridge. But I will mention a couple things. Just before reading your criticism of me, I had been looking at the “Defined Abs Post Age 30” thread, in which you participated. I was to say the least surprised that you would read THOSE comments (which, BTW, I am not personally criticizing) but find the need to tell ME you don’t like MY “tone of voice”. I have always been supportive of people training at ANY level, and I don’t think of ANY body’s accomplishments as insignificant. I think I have done a pretty good job of not comparing myself to others in a way that demeans them. I don’t tell ANYone what their goals should be or what results they should strive for. If someone tells me their goals, and asks for advice in achieving them, they shouldn’t complain if they don’t like the answer. They’re always free to get advice elsewhere. You are looking for encouragement with your training, and I can sympathize. Hopefully you can sympathize that, especially given my meager typing skills, it takes time for me to sit down and organize a post on the forum. I try to do a thorough and accurate job. There are other things I could be doing, so encouragement from forum readers is not unappreciated. Good luck and in the future I encourage you to consider me part of the solution, not part of the problem. Mike Caviston

[old] DIESEL · Post by **[old] DIESEL** » May 12th, 2005, 1:52 pm

Hey Mike, Personally, I think you are probably the most dedicated poster I've ever read on this forum. I have pretty much printed out every post you typed on here and read them with great care. I was a bodybuilder who let the bulking get too out of hand decided he got too big and wanted to get back down to a reasonable weight without a losing too much muscle mass. I used your WP (to the letter, well I did 9 workouts a week compared to your 11) for 3 months and dropped close to 40 lbs. combined with a solid diet. I'll say it again - your Level 4 training is brilliant. However, I hit a plateau, and have had to adjust my training a bit to insure that I don't lose too much muscle mass. Therefore I have had to cut short the WP workouts and start hitting the weights heavy to insure that I don't lose too much unnecessary mass. My goal is to hit 8% b.f. and weigh about 225-230 at 6'4". I am currently at 243 about 11% b.f. (as of my last measurement). However, I still base all my CV sessions on WP workouts - I just cut the volume down and upped the intensity - but it's primarily Level 4, Level 3, and alternating Level 2 and Level 1 each week. (Right now I am doing 4-5 erging sessions a week) - I know it's not to the letter of the WP document - but I hope you don't mind. Your plan works too well and the workouts are fun and challenging - even in an abbreviated form. Also, I hope you don't mind the complements, you sound like a very modest and humble man - so take it for what it's worth - thanks for sharing your training regimen. It's been a godsend - at least for me. take care, D

[old] JaneW. · Post by **[old] JaneW.** » May 12th, 2005, 10:11 pm

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'>QUOTE(Mike Caviston @ May 12 2005, 09:57 AM)</div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>Quoting JaneW: “I call it like I see it and if you've desire to discuss my misinterpretation off the forum, then I am open to it. My only apology is to have caused an inconvenience when stating my viewpoint.” You chose to comment publicly so my final response on this topic is also public. Whether you are apologizing or not, as I said previously – life is too short. That also means too short for grudges. So consider it water under the bridge. But I will mention a couple things. Just before reading your criticism of me, I had been looking at the “Defined Abs Post Age 30” thread, in which you participated. I was to say the least surprised that you would read THOSE comments (which, BTW, I am not personally criticizing) but find the need to tell ME you don’t like MY “tone of voice”. I have always been supportive of people training at ANY level, and I don’t think of ANY body’s accomplishments as insignificant. I think I have done a pretty good job of not comparing myself to others in a way that demeans them. I don’t tell ANYone what their goals should be or what results they should strive for. If someone tells me their goals, and asks for advice in achieving them, they shouldn’t complain if they don’t like the answer. They’re always free to get advice elsewhere. You are looking for encouragement with your training, and I can sympathize. Hopefully you can sympathize that, especially given my meager typing skills, it takes time for me to sit down and organize a post on the forum. I try to do a thorough and accurate job. There are other things I could be doing, so encouragement from forum readers is not unappreciated. Good luck and in the future I encourage you to consider me part of the solution, not part of the problem. Mike Caviston </td></tr></table> Dear Coach Caviston, Thank you for your letter and you'll find an e-mail from me too. Delete my message from above. I prefer to speak with you privately now. My best to you always. Jane

[old] seat5 · Post by **[old] seat5** » May 15th, 2005, 6:12 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'>Until then I seem to have made myself a personna non grata in that arena. </td></tr></table> Nope! I just wish I had the courage to compete "for real" and do time trials with witnesses without freaking out utterly. One of these days maybe I'll manage to elevate my work on the erg from "getting some exercize" to "training". Your approach seems more approachable than some plans, which are really set up for elite athletes, not recreational fitness types. Thanks for sharing it.

[old] Mike Caviston · Post by **[old] Mike Caviston** » May 16th, 2005, 5:24 pm

Quoting TomR: “Would you offer your list of, say, the five best tweaks in your training regimen during the past 15 years? Perhaps you could also venture an explanation of why you think they worked. I know I should plan the work and then work the plan, but for someone like me going nowhere slowly, part of the fun is tinkering w/ the plan.” Tom, “plan the work and then work the plan” really says a lot. I’m going to steal that for future reference. I’ve been thinking about the best way to respond to your question, and I have to admit it’s kind of a challenge. But here are a few simple rules I follow as a result of trying different strategies, with some brief explanations (I could get encyclopedic if I wasn’t careful). 1) Warm up a lot. For the typical athlete, however much they think they’re warming up, it’s probably not enough. I’ve developed a very structured approach to warm-up (as I have to all aspects of my training) and follow a set routine before each workout (or race). These routines still continue to evolve slowly as I experiment with slight variations, but I’m satisfied with the basic formats. “Warm-up” essentially constitutes a fifth training band (in addition to Levels 1-4) in my program, and I regulate it almost as strictly as I do the other bands to control the overall training stimulus. But my main point about warm-ups is they need to be pretty intense, and leave you hot & sweaty and breathing pretty hard. People who see me preparing to work out and don’t know any better are usually surprised when they find the warm-up wasn’t the actual workout. I have consistently shown athletes I’ve worked with over the years that they’ll perform better if they warm up to the point where conventional thinking would lead them to believe they would be too tired to perform. 2) Develop a routine. A consistent format is more beneficial than a random or constantly changing schedule. Experiment to find a system that works but then stick to it. I don’t believe in periodizing, and keep the same general format year-round. Even if your training includes different phases, keep a consistent format within each phase. Even the same workouts in a different order can affect performance in a way that makes it more difficult to determine true progress. I spoke with an athlete recently who was disappointed her best 2K was a little slower this year than last, even though all of her standard workouts (8 x 500m, 4 x 1K, 4 x 2K, 60’, etc.) were all greatly improved. Turns out she had rearranged her schedule at various points in the year to specifically prepare for a season’s best attempt for each workout (varying the amount of speed work, tapering, etc.) She incorrectly assumed that achieving better performances for her workouts in this manner would translate to a faster 2K. The real key is to improve the various workouts within a consistent or stable training format. 3) Work on consistency. I have found it extremely helpful to develop skill in holding a desired stroke rate and split with minimal fluctuation. I find it helpful to occasionally use combinations of rate and pace that aren’t necessarily optimal for performing the specific workout. In my training, rate and pace are specified for Level 4 workouts and I attempt to stick to them as exactly as possible. For other workouts, I have a range of rates that are appropriate for each pace. The range is fairly narrow, but I don’t believe there is one optimal ratio for all workouts. But whatever rate and pace I select for a given piece or workout, I attempt to hold those numbers with as much consistency as possible. I think the ability to select and hold different rate/pace combinations while training makes it easier to find and hold the most optimal combination during a race. 4) Pacing is critical. There are several things to consider when deciding the best strategy for pacing a workout or race. Mechanically, an even split is most efficient and requires the least expenditure of metabolic energy when averaging a given power output (watts). But (without taking time to justify this with a lengthy physiological discussion), metabolically it is more effective to ease into things a little and gradually increase the intensity as the piece progress – in other words, it is more effective to negative split. (From a metabolic standpoint, “even split” is actually a milder form of “fly and die”.) The trick is not to negative split too much, and sacrifice the metabolic advantage by creating a race plan that reduces mechanical efficiency with too big a gap between the slowest and fastest pace. So for me, the optimal race plan is to start out .5-1 sec/500m slower than my final target pace. But my training strategy is considerably different, and I’ve developed a system where I divide each piece into 5 segments (inspired by the default setting of the PM3) and accelerate the pace 4-5 sec/500m over the duration of the piece. This is true for pieces as short as 1000m all the way up to 25K. I’ve put together a series of tables that allow me to determine quickly the pace for, as an example, each segment of a 4 x 2K workout. I determine the desired pace for the entire workout, which dictates the pace for each 2K (each one the same pace or slightly faster than the previous) and the pace for each 400m segment within each 2K (negative split). I emphasize that this rather extreme format is a training tool and not my idea of the optimal way of pacing workouts for the fastest possible session. But I have created a consistent framework to improve incrementally in a measured way from week to week over the duration of the training period. It also gives me something else to concentrate on, which makes the time go by that much quicker. This has been especially helpful during the ever-demanding 4 x 1K workouts. For some of my staple workouts, like 8 x 500m or 12 x 1250m, I stick to a constant pace for the entire workout. 5) Patience is a virtue. Not only is it critical to pace each workout; it is also critical to pace the season. Just as in a race, it requires discipline to avoid the temptation to go too hard too soon and precipitate the dreaded “fly and die”. I never try to make rapid gains in a short time, but am content to make slow, steady improvement over several months. The glacier moves imperceptibly slow but given time can crush mountains. At the beginning of the season, I determine my goal for CRASH-B, determine the corresponding paces I will need for my core workouts like 4 x 1K and 4 x 2K, then map out a schedule of improvement from the beginning of the training phase to the end [i.e., rate of improvement = (initial pace – final pace)/# of weeks to train.] In the final few weeks before competition, if I think I have it in me, I can decide to up the intensity a bit more (just like deciding you have enough left to sprint the last 2-300m of a 2K). Until recently, I had thought the optimal number of weeks to sustain a full training program was somewhere around 22-26 (using the other half of the year for active recovery and less structured activity), but I am coming to believe that year-round structure is better if the appropriate pacing is used. I hope all this is food for thought. Mike Caviston

[old] PaulS · Post by **[old] PaulS** » May 16th, 2005, 5:45 pm

Darn-it Mike! You keep this up and there will be no "secrets" left!

[old] Mike Caviston · Post by **[old] Mike Caviston** » May 16th, 2005, 6:02 pm

I guess I am pretty much a master of the obvious, aren't I? Cheers! Mike

[old] PaulS · Post by **[old] PaulS** » May 16th, 2005, 6:07 pm

Great stuff actually! Hey, are we ever going to see you in a boat? There's some fun Masters stuff up in Edmonton in July.... Have you seen any detailed information regarding the Rower that died at Dad Vails?

Concept2 Forum

S.l.o.g.g.e.r.

Training

Training

Training

Training

Training

Training

Training

Training

Training

Training

Training

Training

Training

Training

Training