Ranger - News To Shock

[[old] Byron Drachman]

<!--QuoteBegin--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--QuoteEBegin-->She was doing between 9 and 11 workouts of swimming a week, each about 2 hours. </td></tr></table> <br /><br />If we take 10 workouts a week as an average, that's about 1040 hours of swimming per year. Toss in three hours for the running, Stairmaster, cycling, per week and you're near 1200 hours per year, which is at the upper end of the first row in Table 9.1 Training Volume by Competitive Level, International level, page 100, Rowing Faster, edited by Volker Nolte, in the chapter by McNeely, Designing Your Training Plan.<br /><br />Byron

[[old] FrancoisA]

<!--QuoteBegin-george nz+Dec 9 2005, 12:52 AM--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(george nz @ Dec 9 2005, 12:52 AM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--QuoteEBegin--><!--QuoteBegin-FrancoisA+Dec 9 2005, 12:51 PM--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(FrancoisA @ Dec 9 2005, 12:51 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--QuoteEBegin--><!--QuoteBegin-PaulS+Dec 8 2005, 11:23 PM--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(PaulS @ Dec 8 2005, 11:23 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Oh, you know I have no problem with "pushing the envelope", I can tell you that it has been pushed as far as I have ever seen on less than 3 hours/day (6 days a week), but I think that was probably even a bit too much, with plenty of room for optimization. <br /> </td></tr></table><br />At the elite level, four hours a day of training is pretty standard, although it is usually done in two training sessions.<br /><br />I was just looking at Janet Evans training recently. She set the WR in the 400m, 800m and 1500m more than 15 years ago and they have never been broken. She was barely five feet tall an weighted 99 lbs.<br /><br />She was doing between 9 and 11 workouts of swimming a week, each about 2 hours. She was running 40 minutes before the morning practice, four or five times a week. She did 20 min of exercise on a Stairmaster machine or on a bicycle 3 days a week. She also did 300 to 400 sit-ups daily. Moreover, she did weight 3 times a week, and another 3 days a week of stretch cords.<br /><br /><b>Sounds a lot like Ranger's training!</b> <br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br /><br />Interesting thanks for that ..... so she did this everyday for 2 years without competing, no pace work, no interval work, no changing intensity, no speed work, all her swimming was at the slow rate, one stroke - no testing to see if it was working, no evaluation ..... sounds interesting. ...... all while holding down a full time job without a coach or support team to monitor progress or the effectiveness of her training?<br /><br />hmmmmm might be a bit like Rangers, just not sure.<br /><br />Can you post a link please as I have never heard of an elite athlete training like this and would like to read more as it is contrary to everything I have ever read.<br /><br />cheers George <br /> </td></tr></table><br />George,<br /><br />The similarities between Ranger's approach and Janet Evans' training I alluded to were with respect to the volume of training and the cross-training aspect.<br /><br />Of course, she had a coach, was competing regularly and her progress was monitored. <br /><br />The reference I used was "Swimming fastest" by Maglischo.<br /><br />Cheers<br />

[[old] george nz]

No problem Francois I am just talking shit .... I agree that for an elite athlete in training full time there is the possibility of that volume of training. However it is within a controlled structure that is managed and monitored .... Rangers volume is none of these - they are junk meters as far as I am concerned. Strenuous no doubt, bringing about meaningful adaptation - I would dispute. And training that is not geared towards the goal of adaptation is junk - and how do we tell if it is working we test regularly and analyse the effectiveness of the immediately preceediing work phase in conjunction with the overall goal.<br /><br />Ranger by his admission does none of this - testing is not necessary it interupts his training, he knows better<br /><br />George<br /><br />ps I like reading your opinions Francois so keep posting them

[[old] dennish]

<!--QuoteBegin-ranger+Dec 8 2005, 02:30 PM--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(ranger @ Dec 8 2005, 02:30 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--QuoteEBegin--><!--QuoteBegin--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Why dont you find a decent job where you can prove yourself for the economy? I assume you do not have one </td></tr></table><br /><br />I have been working for 35 years and therefore am at the end of my work life, not the beginning. <br /><br />I have had a _very_ successful career working for major research universities, the University of Michigan for the last 20 years. I qualify for full retirement next month and indeed have enough money to retire if I want to, at about the salary I receive now and full benefits. <br /><br />I have already "proved myself for the economy." <br /><br />I have also raised three children to adulthood and been (happily) married for 30 years.<br /><br />I've been thinking...I wonder whether 4-5 hours a day of training is really enough to yield _maximal_ benefits for rowing. 6-8 hours a day might be better! If I retired, I could test whether this "hunch" is true.<br /><br /> <br /><br />Quite a few around here, such as Dennis H. in my own division, are using rowing as a major focus of activity in retirement. Dennis is just my age and has _already_ retired.<br /><br />It _appears_ that Roy works (24/7), but it is hard to tell!<br /><br />I am on the AARP mailing list! I am beginning to receive brochures.<br /><br />ranger <br /> </td></tr></table><br />

[[old] FrancoisA]

<!--QuoteBegin-george nz+Dec 9 2005, 03:11 AM--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(george nz @ Dec 9 2005, 03:11 AM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--QuoteEBegin-->No problem Francois I am just talking shit .... I agree that for an elite athlete in training full time there is the possibility of that volume of training. However it is within a controlled structure that is managed and monitored .... Rangers volume is none of these - they are junk meters as far as I am concerned.  Strenuous no doubt, bringing about meaningful adaptation - I would dispute.  And training that is not geared towards the goal of adaptation is junk - and how do we tell if it is working we test regularly and analyse the effectiveness of the immediately preceediing work phase in conjunction with the overall goal.<br /><br />Ranger by his admission does none of this - testing is not necessary it interupts his training, he knows better<br /><br />George<br /><br />ps I like reading your opinions Francois so keep posting them  <br /> </td></tr></table><br />George,<br /><br />Maybe you are right. The acid test for Ranger is coming very soon. After all his talking, all those years of perfecting his stroke, he must now deliver the goods! <br />I hope he will succeed; IMHO, he certainly deserves it.<br /><br />Francois<br /><br />ps. I like your sense of humor George

[[old] dennish]

Whoa there big fella. Lets not start making proclamations about how I spend my retirement. For the last year working with Paul S. I have never spent more than 45 minutes a day and five days a week on erging. It is not, repeat not, a major focus of my retirement. My workouts are in the most general terms 8k plus warm up and cool down, and lately the workouts have been about 6k with wu and cd. And tangentally fyi, Graham Watt hasn't been on an erg in months. Its his summer and he is ripping it up in his single. At the regatta last weekend he smoked several former national team members. As for me, I sold my single and will concentrate on bigger boats, doubles and up. I just did not enjoy the single much at all, it seemed so aloof and disconnected from what I wanted from rowing. In season rowing is from 5:30 to 6:45, not exactly a major focus. So lets stick to what you know well, how to train long and hard. dennis

[[old] george nz]

<!--QuoteBegin-dennish+Dec 9 2005, 04:44 PM--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(dennish @ Dec 9 2005, 04:44 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Whoa there big fella. Lets not start making proclamations about how I spend my retirement.<br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />Dennis you should realise by now that Ranger doesn't let little things like facts or first hand knowledge get in the way of throwing statements about. <br /><br />George<br />

[[old] george nz]

<!--QuoteBegin-FrancoisA+Dec 9 2005, 04:33 PM--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(FrancoisA @ Dec 9 2005, 04:33 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Maybe you are right. The acid test for Ranger is coming very soon. After all his talking, all those years of perfecting his stroke, he must now deliver the goods! <br />I hope he will succeed; IMHO, he certainly deserves it.<br /><br />Francois<br /><br />ps. I like your sense of humor George  <br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />Yes the acid test is coming but it will not prove that he has gone about his training the best way. I would like to see him do well as I do anyone who competes, but he deserves it no more than others and I would guess that there are many who overcome more hurdles to achieve their goals than he does.<br /><br />George<br /><br />ps If you like my sense of humour your a sick bastard

[[old] ranger]

<!--QuoteBegin--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Oh, you know I have no problem with "pushing the envelope", I can tell you that it has been pushed as far as I have ever seen on less than 3 hours/day (6 days a week), but I think that was probably even a bit too much, with plenty of room for optimization.<br /><br />I suppose there could be an argument for enough quantity to make up for lack of quality, but it's a strange conundrum because the one who does lots of junk would appear to be less lazy than the one who does the quality work. I suppose that each is just lazy regarding a different thing.<br /><br />Don't that that as implying that what you are doing is lacking quality, as it seems to be far more taxing on the system than I would schedule, and even though there is something that is lost in the translation it seems to be good quality stuff. The strange part is that it really should yield some pretty incredible performance capability, certainly the kind of efforts that would be respectable even if there were no specific preparation invloved. But that hasn't been the case over the last couple years regarding competitive events that you were enrolled in.<br /><br />It's really going to be a shame when "johnny bipolar" will have to deal with what should be excellent performances after embarassingly transparent criticism of your technical changes. </td></tr></table><br /><br />I am still learning how to row. No reason to be too demanding about the results this early. I am in this for the long haul.<br /><br />Rowing at 14 SPI is not rowing junk. The cross-training that I have been doing (at 300 watts) is not junk, either.<br /><br />Yes, I think it will yield everything that might be expected, given that I am a 55-year-old lwt, not a 20-year-old hwt (or whatever). I will be happy to hear about those 55-year-old lightweights that you know about who are pushing the envelope on a hour or so of work a day (or whatever). <br /><br />If I succeed in rowing 6:24 over the next year or so, this might be a kind of statement for the effectiveness of the training, no? The 55-59 _hwt_ WR is 6:21. 6:24 is 17 seconds (!) under Dennis' EIRC 55-59 lwt WR row.<br /><br />I think you are overestimating our differences about the need for sharpening, etc. I am not going to neglect these tasks. I just believe in getting down the largest base I can muster before I sharpen.<br /><br />I don't have any background in rowing. Therefore, when I changed to rowing with proper technique, I had to learn the skills and build the musculature to get the job done. This is not an easy task. What I did with my other stroke just drew on my long experience with similar physical tasks: running (pushing off my toes, using my legs), canoeing (hauling with my back and core), swimming (coordinating work with my arms and legs), etc. When done correctly, the rowing stroke is a pretty unusual movement, though. It takes time for the body (and mind!) to adapt to it fully. I am indeed getting that full adaptation now, but it has taken 2-3 years. <br /><br />ranger<br /><br />

[[old] george nz]

<!--QuoteBegin-ranger+Dec 9 2005, 09:32 PM--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(ranger @ Dec 9 2005, 09:32 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--QuoteEBegin--> .... given that I am a 55-year-old lwt, <br />ranger<br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br /><br />Happy birthday, I thought you were not 55 till the end of next January my mistake_it_looks_like you missed out on regaining the record, never mind it is not unusual to get confused at your age. <br /><br />It is great also that you are already a lightweight (supported by your signature saying you are 165lbs) that you will not have to drop any weight come race time Jan 21st - so that will not be an issue.<br /><br />George

[[old] ranger]

<!--QuoteBegin-dennish+Dec 8 2005, 10:44 PM--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(dennish @ Dec 8 2005, 10:44 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Whoa there big fella. Lets not start making proclamations about how I spend my retirement. For the last year working with Paul S. I have never spent more than 45 minutes a day and five days a week on erging. It is not, repeat not, a major focus of my retirement. My workouts are in the most general terms 8k plus warm up and cool down, and lately the workouts have been about 6k with wu and cd. And tangentally fyi, Graham Watt hasn't been on an erg in months. Its his summer and he is ripping it up in his single. At the regatta last weekend he smoked several former national team members.  As for me, I sold my single and will concentrate on bigger boats, doubles and up. I just did not enjoy the single much at all, it seemed so aloof and disconnected from what I wanted from rowing. In season rowing is from 5:30 to 6:45, not exactly a major focus. So lets stick to what you know well, how to train long and hard. dennis <br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />I didn't say that _erging_ is a major focus of your retirement.<br /><br />Yes, erging (and stepping) a lot is indeed not the best way to do all of the work when the weather is pleasant. When the weather permitted, I also spent a lot of time in the water the past two years. As I get better in my boat, I will spend _most_ of my time there during the spring, summer, and fall. I will also spend more and more of my time in bigger boats as time goes on. I want to race in 8s, too. <br /><br />In nicer weather, I also like to run and bike in order to cross-train, rather than step and skip.<br /><br />How much time do you spend on your bike, Dennis? Sounds like quite a lot.<br /><br />And if add up the daily time you spend on the water, on the erg, on your bike, ...?<br /><br />Anyway, how your spend your retirement is not the topic that Paul and I are throwing around here. Sorry if I misrepresented you. Pushing the envelope is the topic. If you want to push the envelope, you would have to be rowing about 15 seconds faster for the 2K, so it doesn't seem to be your cup of tea.<br /><br />To each his own.<br /><br />ranger<br />

[[old] ranger]

<!--QuoteBegin-george nz+Dec 9 2005, 03:50 AM--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(george nz @ Dec 9 2005, 03:50 AM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--QuoteEBegin--><!--QuoteBegin-ranger+Dec 9 2005, 09:32 PM--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(ranger @ Dec 9 2005, 09:32 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--QuoteEBegin--> .... given that I am a 55-year-old lwt, <br />ranger<br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br /><br />Happy birthday, I thought you were not 55 till the end of next January my mistake_it_looks_like you missed out on regaining the record, never mind it is not unusual to get confused at your age. <br /><br />It is great also that you are already a lightweight (supported by your signature saying you are 165lbs) that you will not have to drop any weight come race time Jan 21st - so that will not be an issue.<br /><br />George <br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />Ah, sorry. I am 54.9--and dropping the weight right now. I want to be at weight by Christmas, a good month before I race. <br /><br />ranger<br />

[[old] dennish]

Ranger, Great snipe!! Actually I am "pushing the envelope" for what I have, sorry its not up to your standards. Haven't been on a bike in two weeks, before that maybe four or five hours a week.

[[old] ranger]

I don't quite understand the talk about what can be accomplished on how little, but so t goes. <br />Everyone pushes whatever envelope they posit for themselves, I guess.<br /><br />At the edges of performance in a sport, these envelopes are not personal, though. They are impersonal--communal, social, historical, etc. I like that. The same is true at the edges of performance in other areas: business, arts, letters, science, medicine, government, etc. In these realms, you can set personal goals, too, but there are also some pretty stable impersonal standards. <br /><br />Nice 80-minute stepping routine this morning, pretty consistently above 300 watts, after my usual 20K slog at 1:52 @ 18 spm on the erg. HR at the end of 80 minutes, 163 bpm. Pushing through the next 40 minutes to 2 hours is what will do the desired deed. I suspect my HR rate will continue to rise during that last 40 minutes and end up somewhere near my anaerobic threshold: 172 bpm. That would be perfect. Then I can get some daily practice kicking it on from there, spiking my HR up to 180 bpm and above: AT.<br /><br />ranger

[[old] PaulS]

<!--QuoteBegin-ranger+Dec 9 2005, 12:32 AM--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(ranger @ Dec 9 2005, 12:32 AM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--QuoteEBegin--><!--QuoteBegin--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Oh, you know I have no problem with "pushing the envelope", I can tell you that it has been pushed as far as I have ever seen on less than 3 hours/day (6 days a week), but I think that was probably even a bit too much, with plenty of room for optimization.<br /><br />I suppose there could be an argument for enough quantity to make up for lack of quality, but it's a strange conundrum because the one who does lots of junk would appear to be less lazy than the one who does the quality work. I suppose that each is just lazy regarding a different thing.<br /><br />Don't that that as implying that what you are doing is lacking quality, as it seems to be far more taxing on the system than I would schedule, and even though there is something that is lost in the translation it seems to be good quality stuff. The strange part is that it really should yield some pretty incredible performance capability, certainly the kind of efforts that would be respectable even if there were no specific preparation invloved. But that hasn't been the case over the last couple years regarding competitive events that you were enrolled in.<br /><br />It's really going to be a shame when "johnny bipolar" will have to deal with what should be excellent performances after embarassingly transparent criticism of your technical changes. </td></tr></table><br /><br />I am still learning how to row. No reason to be too demanding about the results this early. I am in this for the long haul.<br /><br />Rowing at 14 SPI is not rowing junk. The cross-training that I have been doing (at 300 watts) is not junk, either.<br /><br />Yes, I think it will yield everything that might be expected, given that I am a 55-year-old lwt, not a 20-year-old hwt (or whatever). I will be happy to hear about those 55-year-old lightweights that you know about who are pushing the envelope on a hour or so of work a day (or whatever). <br /><br />If I succeed in rowing 6:24 over the next year or so, this might be a kind of statement for the effectiveness of the training, no? The 55-59 _hwt_ WR is 6:21. 6:24 is 17 seconds (!) under Dennis' EIRC 55-59 lwt WR row.<br /><br />I think you are overestimating our differences about the need for sharpening, etc. I am not going to neglect these tasks. I just believe in getting down the largest base I can muster before I sharpen.<br /><br />I don't have any background in rowing. Therefore, when I changed to rowing with proper technique, I had to learn the skills and build the musculature to get the job done. This is not an easy task. What I did with my other stroke just drew on my long experience with similar physical tasks: running (pushing off my toes, using my legs), canoeing (hauling with my back and core), swimming (coordinating work with my arms and legs), etc. When done correctly, the rowing stroke is a pretty unusual movement, though. It takes time for the body (and mind!) to adapt to it fully. I am indeed getting that full adaptation now, but it has taken 2-3 years. <br /><br />ranger <br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />First off, you really should read what I say before spouting off to the contrary.<br /><br />Secondly, when you first broke the 50-59lwt WR, you considered that a "envelope pushing" performance, or at least you certainly talked about it as if it were. What did I tell you at the time? (hint: "it will be broken again soon") Apparently I was right.<br />Apparently you give more value to your WR's than to anyone else's, even after they have been surpassed, that is interesting. Dennis has done a lot of work on changing things with his stroke over the past year and we never even discussed the WR (the first I heard that he had it was on the webcast of the EIRC), the only focus was steady progress.<br /><br />You are right in that you have a lot to learn about rowing, hopefully this will come with time, but progress is slower than I would expect. <br /><br />Finally, if you don't produce a fantastic time after all this "Ranger freestyle" training I'd be very surprised, simply for the fact that the Paces you say you are maintaining for specified distances can be correlated through my (and others) experience to be predictive of other paces at other distances. If you can't produce the predicted results you may want to reconsider your training strategy with respect to Erging/Rowing performance. Your 1:52 Marathon would point to a 1:32 2k (Paul's Law), but only a 1:40 2k ("double the D add 3") and you are predicting a 1:36 2k for yourself, which by my standard would be disturbingly slow based on the numbers. (This example is for illustrative purposes, I seem to remember you saying something about a 1:52 or faster Marathon, so I think I'm being conservative even with the example.)<br /><br />Please stick to what you know to be factual regarding me or others, it's much less frustrating. Unless you are trying to be frustrating, which is fine, but don't pretend or claim otherwise.