6:28 2K

[ranger]

So I am again training to race.

ranger

I've only been reading this thread for a couple of weeks, but.....

RACE ALREADY! GET IT OVER WITH!

Are you really going to train for another 2 years, since you're 58 and are not planning to "race" until you're 60?

Plop your butt down on your erg and race a 2k. Upload the time so we can see where you're at in your training.

I'm very interested to see how close you are to your goals.
Gene

Plopping down and racing 2K has nothing to do with where your 2K score is relative to your potential.

Where your 2K score is relative to your potential depends on where you are in your training.

If you are done with your foundational training and now row well, you get about 12 seconds over 2K from hard sharpening.

I suspect you get about the same from hard distance rowing.

The crucial thing if you want to realize your potential, I think, is to avoid what you are recommending, if at all possible.

Maintain a proper order in your training.

Only race after you have sharpened.

Only sharpen after you have done hard distance rowing and distance trials.

Only do hard distance rowing and distance trials after you have completed your foundational rowing and row well.

Rowing well for lightweights is 13 SPI; for heavyweights, 16 SPI.

In your foundational rowing, row well at low rates (16-26 spm).

For hard distance rowing, lighten up 2 SPI and row long distances at 10 MPS, which should be in and around (1) your anaerobic threshold and (2) 30 spm.

For hard sharpening, maintain this stroking power but shorten the distance and raise the rate to 38-42 spm.

When you race, maintain this stroking power but lower the rate to 32-36 spm.

ranger

[ranger]

Dont forget, Ranger isnt saying he's currently sharpening.. He's in stage #2, and has repeatedly stated that he will not proceed to step #3 until he does one of:
1) a 6:28 in home trial
2) 17,307 meters in 60 minutes (1:44 pace).
3) 10k in under 34 minutes (1:42 pace)

Yes, exactly.

Now you are getting it.

I am done with foundational rowing.

I am now doing distance rowing, with a threshold of 10 MPS and 11 SPI, 1:43 @ 29 spm.

When I am fully trained, I can row at my anaerobic threshold for an hour.

When I am done with distance trials, I will do a 2K at 1:37, which is my 2K target - 3 (and 2K pb).

Then I'll sharpen.

Then I'll race.

ranger

[kini62]

Plopping down and racing 2K has nothing to do with where your 2K score is relative to your potential.

Where your 2K score is relative to your potential depends on where you are in your training.

If you are done with your foundational training and now row well, you get about 12 seconds over 2K from hard sharpening.

I suspect you get about the same from hard distance rowing.

The crucial thing if you want to realize your potential, I think, is to avoid what you are recommending, if at all possible.

Maintain a proper order in your training.

Only race after you have sharpened.

Only sharpen after you have done hard distance rowing and distance trials.

Only do hard distance rowing and distance trials after you have completed your foundational rowing and row well.

Rowing well for lightweights is 13 SPI; for heavyweights, 16 SPI.

In your foundational rowing, row well at low rates (16-26 spm).

For hard distance rowing, lighten up 2 SPI and row long distances at 10 MPS, which should be in and around (1) your anaerobic threshold and (2) 30 spm.

For hard sharpening, maintain this stroking power but shorten the distance and raise the rate to 38-42 spm.

When you race, maintain this stroking power but lower the rate to 32-36 spm.

ranger

Sorry, but I don't understand hardly anything you're talking about. I have a PM2+. I don't know what SPI is. What is MPS?

I'm just curious that you're not curious as to where you're at in relation to your goals. How do you know how close or far you are from your 2K goal if you never do a 2k trial?

You won't see any Olympians entering a race, whether running, cycling, rowing without knowing what their time is.

Running sprinters run many "races" before they actually compete in "THE" race. Without knowing where you are there is no way to know if your training is on the right track.

Just my opinion.

Gene

[kini62]

When I am fully trained, I can row at my anaerobic threshold for an hour.

ranger

No one can perform at their anaerobic threshold for an hour. NO ONE. It defies the term "anaerobic"- without oxygen- Can you hold your breath for an hour? Didn't think so.

Gene

[Bob S.]

No one can perform at their anaerobic threshold for an hour. NO ONE. It defies the term "anaerobic"- without oxygen- Can you hold your breath for an hour? Didn't think so. :D

Gene

Why are you ignoring the term threshold? Also "anaerobic" is far more complex than just without oxygen.

Bob S.

[kini62]

No one can perform at their anaerobic threshold for an hour. NO ONE. It defies the term "anaerobic"- without oxygen- Can you hold your breath for an hour? Didn't think so.

Gene

Why are you ignoring the term threshold? Also "anaerobic" is far more complex than just without oxygen.

Bob S.

You're correct. I did not pay attention (at least too much) to the threshold part

But I'm still doubting anyone can remain truly at the "threshold" for an hour. Close maybe. 90% probably. Right at the threshold doubtful.

If you can perform at that level for an hour you're probably not at the threshold.

Gene

[JohnBove]

Sorry, but I don't understand hardly anything you're talking about. I have a PM2+. I don't know what SPI is. What is MPS?

I'm just curious that you're not curious as to where you're at in relation to your goals. How do you know how close or far you are from your 2K goal if you never do a 2k trial?

You won't see any Olympians entering a race, whether running, cycling, rowing without knowing what their time is.

Running sprinters run many "races" before they actually compete in "THE" race. Without knowing where you are there is no way to know if your training is on the right track.

Just my opinion.

Gene

You clearly haven't caught on to the fact that you're corresponding with a head case. All you get, and all you're going to get, is a spew of gibberish and lies. He's never going to do what he says he's going to do. This has been going on for years.

[ThatMoos3Guy]

Alright, now I could be wrong, but anaerobic threshold is the same as lactate threshold. This occurs when your body no longer can remove the lactate level from your system as fast as the lactate is being produced. Lactate is produced by drawing too heavily from the anaerobic respiration system. The mitochondria become over loaded (not enough O2 to accept the hydrogen atoms) so NaDH produced during glycolysis is not allowed entry. The hydrogen atoms of NaDH then bond with the molecules of pyruvate (also a product of anaerobic glycolysis). This forms lactic acid.

In other words, Ranger claims he will be building up lactic acid in his muscles for 60 straight minutes. I find this incredibly hard to believe.

[Bob S.]

You're correct. I did not pay attention (at least too much) to the threshold part :)

But I'm still doubting anyone can remain truly at the "threshold" for an hour. Close maybe. 90% probably. Right at the threshold doubtful.

If you can perform at that level for an hour you're probably not at the threshold.

Gene

Gene,

I was interpreting the term a bit too loosely. My concept was that it meant just barely under the point where anaerobic energy production equals that of the aerobic. I just checked out a couple of definitions on the web and, while they were not entirely clear, I did get the impression that you are right in saying that it was doubtful that it could be maintained for any length of time right on the threshold. In other words, as was said in a later post, if anyone is holding steady at his/her anaerobic threshold, he/she will inevitably have lactate (not lactic acid) buildup.

I started to use AT as an abbreviation for anaerobic threshold and then it struck me why I had that loose concept! That is what is used in the Interactive Programme (sic) and it does stand for threshold. It is supposed to be done at 70-80% of your base 2k power and to get your HR up to 80-85% of your max. Presumably you could go on indefinitely at your AT pace (as defined in the IP) until something other than your cardiovascular system gave problems.

The true AT, as defined in the hits that I checked, would be at the fast end of what the IP calls the TR (for transport) zone or even at the slow end of the IP AN zone. The simple IP doesn't go into a full description of these zones. It just refers to the AN zone as "max." I would hazard a guess that it stands for anaerobic. These things are probably all spelled out in the complete UK C2 training manual, but it has been a while since I skimmed over that and I don't remember the details.

Bob S.

[ranger]

In 2003, when I was 52 years old and rowed my 60min pb, my HR rose to 172 bpm after a few minutes and then stayed there until the last 1K, when I kicked it in to the finish. My finishing HR was 186 bpm.

Given this, I assume that 172 bpm is right at my anaerobic threshold, or just below.

Assuming anything else is pretty odd.

I don't have an anaerobic threshold of 190 bpm!

190 bpm is my max HR.

And you _can't_ row _over_ your anaerobic threshold for an hour.

When you are rowing just below your anaerobic threshold, you are aerobic, not anaerobic.

This is hard distance rowing, "threshold" rowing.

Two of my great assets, I guess, are (1) my high max HR, given my age, and (2) my high anaerobic threshold, even so.

My anaerobic threshold is almost 90% of my max HR.

Many 20s rowers, I presume, don't have an anaerobic threshold much over 172 bpm.

Mike VB's max HR is 163 bpm; Rocket Roy's is 173 bpm.

ranger

[ThatMoos3Guy]

In 2003, when I was 52 years old and rowed my 60min pb, my HR rose to 172 bpm after a few minutes and then stayed there until the last 1K, when I kicked it in to the finish. My finishing HR was 186 bpm.

What your describing sound like Steady State cardio. Steady state occurs when a stimulus is applied to the body (in this case exercise). At first the heart rate and core temperature will rise, but then after a short amount of time these values plateau and hold steady.

[snowleopard]

190 bpm is my max HR.

When did you last do a step test? You actually have no idea what your max is, do you? When did you last see your HR in the 180s?

My anaerobic threshold is almost 90% of my max HR.

When did you last have a lactate test? Since your assumptions about your max HR are wrong, your assumptions about your anaerobic threshold are also wrong.

[hjs]

190 bpm is my max HR.

When did you last do a step test? You actually have no idea what your max is, do you? When did you last see your HR in the 180s?

My anaerobic threshold is almost 90% of my max HR.

When did you last have a lactate test? Since your assumptions about your max HR are wrong, your assumptions about your anaerobic threshold are also wrong.

Ehhhh you are talking to Ranger, the never aging man, although the time I saw him in the flesh he looked 55 and after his race he looked 70

And no it was not even close to 6.16

[kini62]

You're correct. I did not pay attention (at least too much) to the threshold part

But I'm still doubting anyone can remain truly at the "threshold" for an hour. Close maybe. 90% probably. Right at the threshold doubtful.

If you can perform at that level for an hour you're probably not at the threshold.

Gene

Gene,

I was interpreting the term a bit too loosely. My concept was that it meant just barely under the point where anaerobic energy production equals that of the aerobic. I just checked out a couple of definitions on the web and, while they were not entirely clear, I did get the impression that you are right in saying that it was doubtful that it could be maintained for any length of time right on the threshold. In other words, as was said in a later post, if anyone is holding steady at his/her anaerobic threshold, he/she will inevitably have lactate (not lactic acid) buildup.

I started to use AT as an abbreviation for anaerobic threshold and then it struck me why I had that loose concept! That is what is used in the Interactive Programme (sic) and it does stand for threshold. It is supposed to be done at 70-80% of your base 2k power and to get your HR up to 80-85% of your max. Presumably you could go on indefinitely at your AT pace (as defined in the IP) until something other than your cardiovascular system gave problems.

The true AT, as defined in the hits that I checked, would be at the fast end of what the IP calls the TR (for transport) zone or even at the slow end of the IP AN zone. The simple IP doesn't go into a full description of these zones. It just refers to the AN zone as "max." I would hazard a guess that it stands for anaerobic. These things are probably all spelled out in the complete UK C2 training manual, but it has been a while since I skimmed over that and I don't remember the details.

Bob S.

Thanks Bob. I too am somewhat confused (obviously) at the term anaerobic threshold. As with anything there seem to be many interpretations.

Gene

[Rocket Roy]

So how did the 2k go Ranger?

Did you manage to knock 10 seconds off the WR time?

Apologies if I've missed it, I've not been on here much recently.