If the discussion here is still the Wolverine Plan, I want to express how I have found the importance of also the 4 x 1k session in guaging 2k ability. 8 x 500 meters is good, but I have found 4 x 1k is better at really testing myself.

I do this session with 5-minutes rest. I tried to row the 1000 meters as recovery in-between pieces, but the rest appeared to get too long so, I limit myself to 5 minutes rest. It had been several months were I had actually done this session with all four 1k's. I had been avoiding the session because of problems completing it. I am so glad to share here that I got it done at below a goal pace of 1:36. From my notes:

Level 1 4 x 1k with 5-minutes rest.

150 drag.
1. 1:35.6 @ 31 spm
2. 1:35.3 @ 31 spm
3. 1:35.7 @ 32 spm
4. 1:35.9 @ 32 spm

Average: 1:35.625

It has been several months were I have completed all four 1k's. Additionally, I don't recall doing them this fast. After the second piece, I considered finishing the last two at 1:35 but recalled how I have not done all four in quite a while. The last piece was a real test. Felt gagging coming on in the last 100 meters and did gag in the last 30 meters. Very excited in the last 300 meters that I was going to get this session completed at goal pace (1:36). Could really feel it in my legs.

Previous 1k sessions:

August 11th: Took 10-minutes rest after fourth piece.
August 2nd: In fourth piece, stopped after 350-meters and did 2 x 500 meters
July 19th: 4th piece became 500-meter piece.
July 12th: Abandoned fourth piece after 500-meters
July 8th, 1k Time Trial 2:59.9

Congrats on completing the session. How do think it relates to your 2k score? Could you do 1:35.625 average = 6:22.5 for a 2k or how much faster could you go?

Thomas,

This will always be a Wolverine Plan discussion, regardless of the hijacking and off-topic attempts.

Nice job with finishing the 4x1k. I'm still able to lower my average pace each week, but it's getting harder. Finishing the prior work is the key for me to be able to get this workout done. The mental side looms pretty large at times. I try to negative split this workout, which means I start a bit slower but it's still on my goal pace for the workout.

Anyway, thanks for the relevant post on an actual Wolverine Plan workout.

June 28th was the last time I did a 2k where I scored a 6:26.0. I should be able to get under 6:24 based on the results of that 1k session.

Bill:

I have not been doing these a full week yet -- just three L4 workouts actually. I find it much, much easier to get the rate correct first, and then make sure the pressure (pace) is correct. Trying to do both is much more a crapshoot for me.

It does appear to me that it's a "even pressure" process. It seems that similar pressure at (in my case since I started at the very bottom of the chart) 16 and 18 SPM will yield the pace desired. My problem is keeping that "feel" of the pressure while also changing the rate. I liken it to that old game of patting yourself on the head and rubbing your stomach at the same time. Once you get it, you get it, but while you're trying to get it, it's almost comical -- a great demonstration of lack of coodination.

BTW, I still don't "get it", but I think I'm getting better. I'm not a real coordinated guy to begin with -- ball sports were never my forte. In fact, I suck at all the ball sports. The only thing I do with any real coordination is snow ski (alpine).

RowPro is a great tool to map the average rate and pace during the pieces to really analyze where you go off the plan.

I will say that doing 40' to 70' pieces is much less psychologically demanding with the variety of the 10' and 6' sequences. In relation to a straight 60' piece the six 10' sequences fly by in comparison.

I'll also say that it's quite a workout even though the average pace of the piece is much, much slower than I would do a typical 60' row -- but it's clear that I'm using more power per stroke but many less strokes. The work is done differently. It works well with a "Routine is the Enemy" philosophy around fitness training, as the L4 workouts are quite a "change up" from L1/L2/L3 which are either intervals, or faster, even-pace pieces.

Now I just need to start creeping up the chart by adding the 4 strokes per workout recommended. Where did you start and how fast did you progress?

-- Mark

Confessions of a Wolverine Plan Newbie
Day 1: Level 1 / 8x500 @ 2k -1

After a 2k warmup (I believe the WP calls for a lot more than eight minutes of warmup, especially before a Level 1 workout), I did an 8x500 this morning with a target pace of 1:46.8 (2k reference pace = 1:47.8), with a 500 m recovery piece between each interval at 2:32.

Actual times = 1:46.7, 1:46.8, 1:46.8, 1:46.8, 1:46.7, 1:46.7, 1:46.8, 1:45.5 --> ave = 1:46.6

Observations:

• Active recovery makes a big difference. After my second interval, based on how hard I thought I could pull when feeling this tired, I was thinking there was no way I could pull another 500 m at 1:46.8, let alone another six. But as I pulled my recovery pieces, I progressively felt good enough for another work piece.
• 2k -1 is a good starting point for an 8x500. It was tough - I was breathing really hard after each work piece - but achievable - I had enough gas to put it into a higher gear for the last interval.
• Maintaining the macro splits (i.e. the overall interval times) is not too hard. In each of the first seven intervals, I was showing 1:46.8 with 20 m to go. The three intervals I finished at 1:46.7 were those where I pulled a bit harder on the last two strokes. Of my seven recovery pieces, four were 2:32.0, two were 2:32.1, and one was 2:31.9.
• Maintaining the micro splits (i.e. the instantaneous splits) is a bit harder. After the first four or so strokes to get within 0.5 s of my goal split, my instantaneous splits were between 1:44 and 1:49. During the recovery pieces, my first stroke was over 3:00, but down to 2:32 after 250 m.

After my last work interval, I promptly fell off the erg. Suffice it to say, I did not cool down for 15' - 20', let alone stretch.

The next time I do an 8x500 (scheduled for three weeks from today), I'll use a goal pace of 1:46.6.

arakawa:

I did the exact same w/o today -- my reference pace is 1:54 from a 7:38.2 best for 2K. I rounded down. I am almost as new to the Wolverine Plan as you are.

I've done these twice before. I averaged 1:58.4 the first time (10/1) with a target to be under 2:00 for each, and 1:53.7 the second time (10/28) with a target to be under 1:54 for each. For these, my PB for 2K was just over 7:59.

Based on the new PB, I shot for 1:52 today, and achieved:

1:51.8
1:51.8
1:51.8
1:51.7
1:51.7
1:51.2
1:51.6
1:49.1

AVG: 1:51.3

Since I did a 4 x 1,000 last week at an average of 1:53.8 when I had a target of 1:54, I feel I should have set a faster target for these 500M pieces, but feared dropping too much too fast and having the wheels come off.

I'd be interested in the corelation between the 8x500 and 4x1000 times of others. In my case, I'm shooting for a 2 sec. pace difference now. Should it be higher? Should I just keep dropping until I fall apart and miss the target on a set and then back off?

I also do active recovery for these -- same distance at just under 2:30 pace. It's faster than the recovery pace suggested for 1:54, but it suits me. I do a 1K warmup and 1K cool down and do the recovery after each of the 8, even the last one. The 1Ks I do at 2:15 just to get things moving.

-- Mark

So it sounds like good advice for Level 4 newbies is to concentrate first on getting the desired rates on command, and paces will eventually fall into place. While this may be difficult at first, practice is key, and it shouldn’t take more than a couple sessions before some improvement occurs.

When I have a little more time next week I plan to revisit the topics of warm-up and active recovery. But my workout this morning was 4 x 1K, and since that workout has recently been mentioned, let me make a few observations. (I said quite a bit about this a few months ago on another thread. Previous Comments) 4 x 1K is both the toughest and most valuable workout I do to prepare for 2Ks. For the fall I have been doing it only every third week (in January I plan to start doing it every alternate week). Last week I did a 2K trial instead of a Level 1 workout, so it had been four weeks since I last did 4 x 1K. I was plenty nervous before hand, but the workout went well. Even though I shouldn’t have been surprised based on the overall progress of my training, it’s always good to see the general progress confirmed with good execution of a tough workout.
The results (including my sub-interval pacing format):

1st piece GP: 1:35.4 [actual time & pace: 3:10.4 (1:35.2)]
200m GP: 1:37 [actual pace: 1:37.0]
400m GP: 1:36 [actual: 1:35.8]
600m GP: 1:35 [1:34.8]
800m GP: 1:35 [1:34.8]
1000m GP: 1:34 [1:33.8]

2nd piece GP: 1:35.2 [3:10.1 (1:35.1)]
200m GP: 1:37 [1:36.8]
400m GP: 1:36 [1:35.8]
600m GP: 1:35 [1:35.0]
800m GP: 1:34 [1:33.8]
1000m GP: 1:34 [1:34.0]

3rd piece GP: 1:35.2 [3:10.0 (1:35.0)]
200m GP: 1:37 [1:36.8]
400m GP: 1:36 [1:35.8]
600m GP: 1:35 [1:34.8]
800m GP: 1:34 [1:33.8]
1000m GP: 1:34 [1:34.0]

4th piece GP: 1:35.0 [3:09.7 (1:34.9)]
200m GP: 1:37 [1:36.8]
400m GP: 1:36 [1:35.8]
600m GP: 1:35 [1:34.8]
800m GP: 1:34 [1:34.0]
1000m GP: 1:33 [1:33.0]

So I beat my overall goal for the workout by .2 seconds, which is pretty rare for me (I generally either get the goal exactly or sometimes go .1 sec under), but my goal was a little conservative. Splitting each 1K into 200m segments makes things go by a lot quicker since each segment only lasts about 38 seconds so I’m constantly reaching another milestone and I have plenty to think about in the meantime trying to hold my pace and rate objective for each segment. My final 200m @ 1:33 wasn’t pretty (became short & rushed), but every other segment went smoothly. Several weeks ago when my overall GP was 1:36-ish, the 1:34 pace wasn’t very pretty. Now I’m handling it pretty well, and the hope is I will eventually have good technique @ 1:33 as well.

This is probably a good opportunity to remind everyone (as the discussion shifts around between different WP training Levels) that all Levels are integral to the overall Plan and all need to be addressed with equal concern for detail. Happy training.

Mike Caviston

experimenting with -ve splits:

1. +ve: last 4x1k and 4x2k sessions. Attempted with detailed plan and -ve split targets for each piece and each 1/5th segment within each piece (a la Mike C's recent notes, pretty significant and formal -ve splitting). Great results, psychological breakthrough, never done these workouts with so little pain! Almost left looking forward to next week/fortnight (in case of 4x1k).

2. -ve: never minded 8x500 anywhere near as much as those above. Always used to start at last time's pace and see if could go faster last 2 or 3. Practicaly a quote! Anyway, curious me felt that last week's 4x1k was so cool that I'd see what 8x500@X was like doing X+0.6/X+0.2/4xX/X-0.2/X-0.6 and each 500 split into 5 segments. Each segment done a la 4x1k type pacing. eg. X+2/X+1/X/X/X-1.............I think I discovered something already known by some........ I couldn't cope after 4 intervals, and whilst "near death" / "no way 8" is a familiar experience at 3/4/5 intervals I was really dying/feeling faint/dizzy etc.
Managed to start 5th but binned the extreme -ve splitting and did much flatter (target X+0.5/X/X/X/X-0.5) interval. Survived, managed 6th/7th and 8th all faster.

2. ctd However, and this is a first time in 4 years of recording HBs and intervals, whilst each interval's pace increased 3/4/5/6/7/8th, max 2 HBs were achieved at 3rd and 4th intervals when still doing "X+2/.../X-1" type splits. Yes, 100m is short and upping pace every 20 secs is harsh but I was surprised how seriously hard this seemed, especially after my positive experieces with this pacing, even on 4x1k. Could argue down to warm up but I'd done a hard 12 mins before each session and even so the striking thing for me is that I've never gone faster for less HB stress in an interval session before. Provisional lesson: 500m at 4secs pace spread really does cause high stress/demands.

Oh well, live and learn (the hard way) (and not confusing high stress with "bad" or "low stress" with optimal pacing)
Guy

Mike:

Great explanation. It seems to me -- King Newbie -- that the way the plan is structured (or your explanations here) you take into account the psychological aspects of training ... splitting up the 1Ks into 200M segments, negative micro-splits (200M), etc. etc. This is similar (with respect to the head) to the rate and pace breakdowns of the L4 workouts. It appears you feel it's important to have something technical to focus on, or is this just a byproduct of the plan?

I'd also be interested in your perspective on the differential recommendations in terms of pace for 8x500, 4x1000, and the pyramid of 250/500/750/1K/750/500/250. Or should they be the same since the average distance covered is same or similar? I do see in the plan that it's recommended to start at 2K reference pace, and then "let it develop". Should one just start to slowly drive the pace up with every repeat of the specific workout? Any advice on how much each time or how to determine "next step"?

I also see that I need to focus the active recovery on being low SPM (16-18) at the target recovery rate rather than higher SPM at 2:30 pace. I now realize, after reading this again and again, that this is trying to achieve, during active recovery, perhaps a conditioning of the body and mind for a "more power per stroke" advance in performance -- consistent training for consistent performance (even during recovery). Cool stuff.

-- Mark

I have 4.4 seconds between my 4x1k and 8x500m sessions. 4 seconds was recommended to me a few months ago, and it seems to have held true. I've done both of these workouts several times now, and have established these workouts on their own, so I can now crank them down individually instead of comparing them.

Get more aggressive on your 500m sets. I'm off to do mine with a 1:38 goal pace.

Bill:

Thanks. I'm convinced I need to do as you've suggested.

Regards -- Mark

I find these comments very helpful.

John, go back to your own thread!

Please don't feed the animals. They'll get used to human presence and begin to harass other unsuspecting humans.

Confessions of a Wolverine Plan Newbie
Day 2: Level 4 / 40' = 176/180/176/180

Today's piece was a 40' Level 4 workout, made up of the following 10' sequences:

• 176 = 2'/2'/2'/2'/2' @ 16/18/20/18/16 SPM --> 2288 m
• 180 = 4'/3'/2'/1' @ 16/18/20/22 SPM --> 2305 m
• 176 = 2'/2'/2'/2'/2' @ 16/18/20/18/16 SPM --> 2288 m
• 180 = 4'/3'/2'/1' @ 16/18/20/22 SPM --> 2305 m

• 16 SPM @ 2:15 --> 13.9 mps
• 18 SPM @ 2:10 --> 12.8 mps
• 20 SPM @ 2:06 --> 11.9 mps
• 22 SPM @ 2:01 --> 11.3 mps

Actual distances & stroke counts:

• 1st 10' = 2292 m / 174 strokes (+4 m / -2 strokes)
• 2nd 10' = 2314 m / 180 strokes (+9 m / +0 strokes)
• 3rd 10' = 2305 m / 180 strokes (+17 m / +4 strokes)
• 4th 10' = 2315 m / 182 strokes (+10 m / +2 strokes)

Observations:

• There's a lot to plan and remember for a Level 4 workout. I typed it all up and printed it out, and put the piece of paper on a clipboard resting on a standing fan next to the erg. The default 8-point font at a distance of about six feet was a bit too small for me to read while rowing, even at 16 SPM. I'm going to swing by my local Staples and get one of those document holders that people put on their computer displays, so I can have the information physically closer, and use a larger font.
• There's a lot to think about during a Level 4 workout. I knew going in that I would need to pay fairly close attention to the monitor, so I didn't bother to put a DVD in the player (which I usually do with any workout over 20 minutes long), opting instead for the iPod. I couldn't concentrate on what I was supposed to be doing, in terms of stroke rate and pace, with the music in the background, so I took the earphones out after about 3 minutes. Of the four 10' sequences I pulled today, only the first one was understroked. It must've been the few seconds it took to remove the iPod without throwing it.
• After reading the various comments on how one might actually maintain stroke rate and pace during a Level 4 workout, especially in a workout whose size is defined by time duration as opposed to meters, I thought I'd set my PM2 to report meters covered so far - after all, average pace is not too informative for a Level 4 workout that changes pace throughout. Since I know the stroke rate and the pace for each sub-sequence, I can compute the meters per stroke (mps), then watch the meters covered climbing. For example, if I'm in the middle of a 16 SPM sub-sequence at 2:15, I need to get 13.9 mps. If the last digit of the meters covered is a 7 at my last catch, my next catch is when the last digit of the meters covered is a 1. I found it easier to fine tune the timing of my next catch when I watch numbers that tick over nearly four times a second (2:15 per 500 m = 3.7 meters per second) as opposed to a number that ticks over only once a second (the seconds digit of the remaining time) or "using the Force" and hoping that I had the right stroke rate. I ended up watching the last digit of the meters covered on the recovery (not enough attention left to look at the other digits), looking at the instantaneous pace through the drive, and the instantaneous stroke rate as I started the recovery. I still need to work on tightening up my stroke rate and pace. Until I added up the strokes in the post-mortem, I actually thought I understroked all four 10' sequences, because I saw instantaneous stroke rates that were lower than my target more often than I saw stroke rates that were higher.
• The 40' of this Level 4 workout went by really fast, despite having no TV and no music to row to. I was so engrossed during the entire stroke (catch, drive, and recovery) trying to keep my stroke rate and pace on target that I rarely had time to look at the time elapsed. I had to remind myself from time to time to look at that, so I'll know when I need to change my stroke rate and pace. I think I actually did my first 2' sub-sequence for nearly 3' before I realized I was supposed to have picked up the pace. That probably also contributed to my understroking the first 10' sequence.
• Compared to yesterday's Level 1 workout, today's Level 4 workout didn't seem as tiring - I certainly didn't fall off the erg panting when I was done like I did yesterday. I had the energy but not the time for a cool down (meeting at work first thing). Towards the end, I was thinking, I could hold this pace forever. But I remembered that one of the goals of Level 4 is to build up endurance gradually and in a sustainable fashion. I also remembered that I have a Level 2 5x1500 tomorrow.

The next time I do a 40' Level 4 (scheduled for one week from today), I think I'll add four strokes to the third sequence to make it a 176/180/180/180.

Based on a previous post by Mike about some of my LVL4 progressions you would do better to add the 4 strokes to one of the 180 intervals. A better training effect is had with a 176/180/184/176 than a 176/180/180/180 ... even though the total number of strokes is the same.

To overly simplify what Mike said about this ... mixing it up more makes your muscles adapt better. See Mike's previous posts for a lot of good information based on science ... I'm just a hack about this.

JimR

I did my second Level 4 workout today, 168/176/176/188. At first I had the erg on slides, but since it takes me a few strokes to get going nicely on slides without whacking into the ends, I stopped & put the erg on the floor andstarted over.

The way I've been keeping track of the work out is with a white board that is about 36" x 24" --you can write big enough to read it. I list the intervals, numbered, like this

1) 2/16(48)2:26

meaning, 2 minutes, 16 spm (set metronome for 48), pace 2:26. I don't think reading off a computer printout would be very helpful.

I ended up doing all the intervals at faster paces and a few more strokes per intervale than I should have:

1st 10' +47 m, +6 strokes
2nd 10' +83 m, +4 strokes
3rd 10' +37 m, +0 strokes
4th 10', +85 m, +4 strokes

so it ended up being 14 strokes and 252 meters high.
The pace was faster on every interval than it was supposed to be by
3--7 seconds/500 m. (the only one that was any where near close was the first one, which was only 1 second too fast).

I think my ref. pace of 1:57 is too slow as I appear to be doing the workout as though my ref. pace is 1:54 or so.

Should I fix this by going with the faster ref. pace, or by lengthening the workout to 60', or by increasing the number of strokes? I am sort of confused. Does anyone understand what you should do in this situation?

Carla
If I were you I would change my ref pace to 1:55 or 1:56. From what you said earlier about 1:57 2k pace and 2:00 30' pace it appears your 2k pace is relatively weak anyway. It doesn't sound like you are getting a great deal of endurance strain/gain from the 1:57 pieces (if you'd kept to pace!).

I (believe that I) recall, perhaps in original WP document, that Mike (whilst generally reluctant to advise shifting reference paces), would consider doing this if an athlete consistently met not only the metre targets for current ref pace but also those for the next ref pace up. You seem to be an (extreme) example of this.

I am in a slightly less extreme position where my actual level 4 metres are approx those for the 1 sec faster ref pace. I am monitoring it and speeding up my planned progression in terms of average stroke/sequences (eg. weekly x.4 -> x.6 average instead of planned 0.1 weekly increase) in the meantime. This is an option for you too although you are so far ahead of target metres that (as I say, "if i were you") I would try a faster ref pace.
Guy

Carla, I'd lengthen the workout first. Overstroking also makes the workouts easier. Move up to 60 minutes and don't overstroke. I'd then start moving up the progressions. I've been doing 3x 184/188 to get my 60' in.

Masa, I use a small yellow sticky note. It looks like this:



I know that the 180 & 184 simply goes up the above paces (16-22). Above the 2s on the 176 & 188, I pencil in the rate. This gives me all of the elements I need for the workout in one small sheet. I use lots of sticky notes for various pacing for other workouts, but this one for L4 workouts pretty much stays put. I'm getting close to 192, but I think I can remember it's the same as a 188 but starts with the 20.

Friends:

I'm interested in comments on my schedule, as opposed to the intricacies of the WP, as I feel I'm finally starting to understand them (the fine details of pacing, rate, etc.) well enough to "self coach" (for now!).

Like many, I have a wife, family, and I run my own business, so I cannot predict when life's priorities will not allow me to train. I started rowing May 6, 05, with a goal of going sub-7 by the end of this season (April 30, 2006). My 2K time now is 7:38.2 done a few weeks ago on my own -- not in a race. I had some gas left at the end (lots actually), so I am comfortable that 7:38 is easily repeatable or could be bettered right now.

I've started on the WP with the thought that some structure and methodology to my training is better than none, or some haphazard mish mash. I've developed a plan that goes:

L1 - avg. 4K training meters per w/o
L4 - avg. 12K+ t/m per w/o
L3 - avg. 12K t/m per w/o
L4
L2 - avg. 8K t/m per w/o
L4
L3
L4

... over eight days, and then repeats. This is roughly equal to the ratios of the workouts suggested in the plan, although not exact. Meters percentage over these eight workouts, which total 84K meters if my math is correct, break down as:

L1 - 5% (3% to 4%)
L2 - 10% (6% to 8%)
L3 - 29% (22% to 25%)
L4 - 57% (65% to 70%)

(some rounding error)

... where the plan suggests the percentages in parentheses. In reality, the L4 workouts are probably a few percentage points higher than this since 12K is the minimum I get in for most of the L4s I've done thus far. So, I'm close to the percentages the plan and Mike recommend, but not spot on.

I used this combination because it's easy to remember if I'm on the road, and it's an easy ratio of:

1:1:2:4 in a simple sequence that appears to give me the rest I need between the faster, more taxing, L1 and L2 workouts.

I rest when I feel like I need it -- listening to my body as best I can, which has become easier as I've gotten older -- or the day before a race when I want to be totally fresh. Or, when priorities dictate an "unplanned rest day".

Rest is usually 1 day a week or one day every two weeks.

I've started at the bottom rung of each workout in terms of suggested times, and am slowly moving interval times up by 2 sec. pace each time I repeat them, to soon, hopefully, get to my training limit, which I don't feel I've reached yet (i.e. I could work harder right now), and I'm also moving stroke counts up in the L4 workouts.

If I cannot get in one of the planned workouts, I just do the workout, in this sequence, the next possible day I can. If I have a day when I can row for 20 or 30 minutes, but cannot complete the scheduled w/o, I do what I can (maybe a 5K or a 30 minute piece) and pick up with the plan where I left off -- always keeping the sequence regardless of the "stop gap" workout.

I'd be interested in your comments on this approach, and any suggestion you'd have on improving it, knowing the constraints and goal.

Thanks!

Regards -- Mark

Maybe Mike can help on this one? Both arguments as to what I should do seem to make sense.

I was 252 meters over and a total of 14 strokes over.

The meters were supposed to be 8459 in 708 strokes, av. 12 mps, and what I did was 8711 in 722 strokes, which also averages 12 mps, so I wasn't just trading rate for pace and making it easier, I don't think...?

I still don't know how I got in 14 extra strokes in the 40 minutes, because I was using a metrenome and driving consistently on the accented beat. I computed the strokes by using "recall" when I was done, and doubling the average spm given by the PM for each 2 minute interval. 8 of the overstrokes are accounted for by my 16's ending up being 17's, 4 by 20's that ended up being 21's, and two by an 18 that was really a 19.

I have to say, the 40 minutes really seems short, with all this cogitating going on!

Under L4, MC says "Intensity is generally ~ 80-90% of 2K". I think he means the fictitious C2 ergspeed, so the L4 power (due to the cube law) is between 50 and 73% of 2k power. This is another route to suitable L4 paces, tho' still based on the 2k test: use half your 2k power at rating 16 and at higher ratings increase in proportion.

MC's numbers seem to imply a conventional 2k rating of 32; if you did your 2k test at a lower rating, I think you'll find the tabled 2k-based L4 paces slow. Doing the prescribed paces at just one stroke slower makes a 5% difference in work per stroke.

Anyway there's a simple control: if I can't wait for my two minutes at 22 to be over to drop to 20 (as usual), and then find that hard too, I reckon I'm at the right work level.

Using Watts, it's very easy to relate work levels to rating: choose a number, say 9, multiply by the rating, then stick to that W level at that rating. Adjust to taste, but make sure you always pull a long hard and effective stroke. After all we're training for water where nothing else will do.

Watts are also more accurate than paces: we train mostly from 160 say to 300W, 140 steps; but the corresponding paces go from 2:10 to 1:45, 35 steps, and me only from 2:08 to 2:00 or 8 steps. Too grainy.

Hi people,

I’m hip-deep in a couple projects right now, so don’t have a lot of time for WP discussion. (I’ll be able to devote more time next week.) But I’m keeping tabs on the thread and appreciate the questions and discussion. A couple quick points –

Carla, I can’t say any more about Reference Pace than I already have, except to repeat it’s not an exact science. I know it must seem like a hassle but – please go back and revisit some of my comments from earlier on this thread, or follow the link I posted before to some of my comments from previous threads.

Regarding the general balance in pace between different Level 1 workouts, a rough guide might be something like, if 8 x 500 = A, then Pyramid = A + .5; 5 x 750 = A + 1.5; and 4 x 1K = A + 3. This is only a rough guide and shouldn’t be taken too literally. I think every workout should develop its own history and you shouldn’t become overly obsessed about how one relates to another (or how one training band relates to another). Having said that, if your 4 x 1K is more than 4 seconds slower than your 8 x 500, then you might expect to bring the two paces a little closer as your overall endurance improves.

Mark’s description of his schedule seems to be a good real-life attempt at maintaining some structure when total structure isn’t possible. I need to re-express my overall suggestions for percent of workout meters in each Level adjusted to include warm-up. That topic is on my short list.

James is correct that Watts is a more accurate and meaningful way to compare training bands than pace. My initial figures were an off-the-cuff generalization for a group of people who really didn’t want to hear about Watts! Another thing to address in the future.

Happy training,

Mike Caviston

Mike:

Thanks for the above. I'm about to do the A Pyramid for the first time soon, and this will help me select a pace that *could* make sense based on my 8x500 and 4x1000 times thus far.

Regards -- Mark

Still not sure which way to go, after reading everything I could find on it...I think I will drop the reference pace to 1:56 and see how it goes on Thursday's 50' (that will my first Level 4 over 40' and I think jumping to 60' might be too much). I'm already doing the 40' L4's at the paces that go with that reference pace anyway with no trouble. That would be faster than my 2K pace, but my 2K pace is stupidly slow in comparison with the other distances (something I'm trying to rectify by following a proper training plan instead of winging it).

Carla: I don't know what your times, etc are, but here is something else to think about. How are you doing in the other training bands (Lev 1-3) with the reference pace you have established? I fell into a bit of a bind as I chose a reference pace that was too fast at the beginning (I had what I thought were good reasons at the time). I was easily able to support the level 4 workouts at the correct splits and paces (overstroking does make the workout easier; just getting to the correct rate may help the workload). I was also able to do the other levels at the beginning with the exception of Level 1. I couldn't get anywhere near the ref pace-2 on the level 1's. This should've been a clue. As I progressed through about 6 weeks of training I improved across all levels and then somewhat stalled at the level 1 workouts.

All the other levels are meant to support Level 1 workouts. The fact that I couldn't support the level 1 workouts at the chosen reference pace even though I could support Level 2-4 has caused a problem that I am in the middle of correcting. So just make sure that the new reference pace works out for the Level 1.

Remember that the goal of the WP is to improve 2K time, not 10K 60 min or 1/2M times!.

Sorry this was long-winded, but hope it may help. KJG

ooh-rah

I second that (or third that, I guess). The longer pieces are fun, and entering those times in the rankings and Nonathlon provide added incentive to keep up the training. But the main racing distance is the 2km, and the Wolverine (and other structured programs) zeros in on that.

Rick

Ah, now I am getting it better. Level 3 & 4, no problem--I'm 6 or 7 seconds faster/500 m than I'm supposed to be, with plenty left in the tank at the end.

I am doing 4 workouts a week, so I'm supposed to be alternating Level 1 and Level 2 once a week. So far I've done one interval workout (this is my first full week). I'm not sure if it qualifies as a Level 1 or a Level 2 because I was doing an interval thing for a team challenge. 4 x 750 with 2 min passive rest. My splits were 1:54.6, 1:56.7, 1:55.4, 1:56.7. I think the slowest you are supposed to do those is at your 2K PB pace? which was 1:57.

So now what? If I do Levels 3 & 4 using the Level 1 reference pace as a guide, it's not even a workout. Should I do the Levels 1 & 2 with one reference pace and Levels 3 & 4 with another? I can't see that doing Level 3 & 4 so much slower than is even slightly challenging is anything more than a waste of time.

Next week I will do my team challenge thing in addition to a real Level 1--probably 8 x 500, and that will be more accurate.

I don't see how overstroking makes the workout easier if your meters are also higher by the correct number to correspond with the additional strokes; it does make it easier if you come out with the planned number of meters and you do it in more strokes than you were supposed to. If your average strokes per meter is what it should have been, seems to me it's the same deal. If I am missing something here please straighten me out as I'm not known to be the most logical person around!

Thanks for any thoughts, I'm really trying to get this right.

Carla:

(Excuse me for sounding like an expert on this, because I'm not, but I studied, studied, and studied this, as Mike recommended - or perhaps requested - to get as much out of the writings as possible to avoid asking the same question twice, and bothering Mike needlessly. I just started the plan a few weeks ago, after months of studying it. He's good enough to share his advice and counsel with us - investing his valuable time - and I want to be a good steward of what he provides us and not take advantage. All this being said, I am a beginner, and I am pretty slow.)

As I read it L1 pace should be 2K PB best pace OR FASTER. I try to move these up a notch each time I do them, trying to get to my (current) training limit. For example, I've gone from 1:58.4 avg. for 8x500 down to 1:51.3 and I still have to step it up because it was too easy to hit. I'll try 1:50 pace or below next time I do this workout. My last 4x1000 was at 1:53.8, and was a challenge, so there is some reasonable correlation between my 1:50 target for 8x500 and my 4x1000 best pace. I'll probably try 1:52 or better next 4x1000.

I'm still trying to get to the line between a successful training, and missing the target -- what I call the "current training limit".

Same with L2. START at 1.08x2K PB, and get FASTER over time.

L3 at 85% to 90% of 2K PB OR FASTER. This is the current hardest level for me. I hate L3 days. I have made a pact with myself to get through them, whatever it takes and however it's done -- and it hasn't been pretty.

The idea of L4, as I have come to understand it, is to develop a POWERFUL stroke, at a rate, and then take that same POWER and generate it at a higher rate over time. If you have more meters *AND* more strokes than indicated in the plan, you've essentially moved up in the chart (as Bill recommended) unconsciously, or by mistake (take your pick) -- have you not? To make these more challenging, step up the chart (consciously) for one or more of the sequences you put together to make up an L4 workout.

Also, and Mike just reiterated this for me since I got too focused on it, don't worry about the correspondence between the paces for L1, L2, L3 & L4, unless they are so out of whack that they indicate a flaw in your training plan (or a flaw in your execution of the plan!). Start where he recommends as a baseline (which I did). Then, work hard to get each level of workout to seek their own pace/rate levels that are challenging for you, on their own (which I am STILL doing). This way, the reference pace becomes a guide, but not a limitation.

I'm expecting this "find the right paces" to take a few more weeks, which I'm glad to invest to get on a structured plan that works in balance with the other priorities in my life. I need the structure to improve my times, as you can see. I am no speedster, nor anywhere near world class. My goals now are to get each piece 60 minutes and under to be under the 50th percentile in my age/weight class, and to break 7 for 2K - both by April 30, 2006.

I have gone under 50th percentile (just barely!), as a HW (even though I'm less than a kg. from LW!), for 500M and 1,000M, so I feel that I need to make sure my distance training (L4 and L3) is done properly. I'm within 6 seconds of the "micro-goal" with my current 2K PB (55th percentile). My percentile ranking gets worse as the distances go up (60 min. is 78th percentile). From this data, it appears to me that it's logical to conclude that I need to get more rigorous with L3 and L4 workouts, and/or step them up, which I am slowly doing.

Without some structure, this would be even harder for me than it will be with the plan. I'm very grateful to Mike for sharing his expertise with us.

-- Mark

What if I am able to pull the first 250 m at a pace that is 15 seconds or more faster than my 2k reference pace? Specifically, my 500 m PB is 1:31.7, but my 2k reference pace is 1:47.8, a difference of 16.1 seconds. I'm afraid that, if pull the first 250 m at a 1:30 pace, I won't be able to do the 500 m piece at roughly my best 8x500 pace after only a 250 m recovery.

By the way, for those of you wondering how I can pull 500 m at 1:31.7 but can't break seven minutes on 2k, let me know when you figure it out - I don't get it either (most likely lack of CV conditioning). Until then, it's the WP for me.

It is either a lack of endurance or you are a pure sprinter with lots of fast twitching muscles!
What are your times for 5K and 10K ?

I have the opposite problem: my reference pace is 1:43 but my fastest 500m is only 1:38.2 !

Before I took up indoor rowing, I was a volleyball player, with ~10 hours a week of weight lifting. Neither emphasize endurance. Both emphasize fast twitch muscles.

My best 5k is 19:18.4 (1:55.8), and my best 10k is 39:37.4 (1:58.9).

Carla: Some thoughts: On the overstroking: The idea is to hit the strokes exactly;rate follows pace. Try an experiment in hitting the strokes and see what the rate (split) is. Don't worry about the meters, just pick a sequence and aim to hit the strokes EXACTLY (for a 6x10' continuous piece I am usually never off more than 1 stroke for the whole hour). Here is a quote from Mike's literature (I don't know exactly if it's from the forum or the original plan document:

"USE PROPER TECHNIQUE: Follow the rating sequences exactly as possible. A very common error I see among athletes I work with is to overstroke the planned sequences. Someone may supposedly do a 188, for example, but take anywhere from 2-10 extra strokes. This of course inflates their meters, causing people to increase their reference pace when it isn't really warrented......make sure you achieve the desired ratings with good ratio and slide control.......I strongly recomment rowing with feet unstrapped (not only but most importantly for Level 4)."

If the rates are still too slow and you find out from the 8 x 500 level 1 workout that the ref pace is too slow, see what ref pace the 8x500 indicated. As a ball park try for 1:55 splits for the 8x500 (this would be 2K-2 sec) or a 4x1K at 1:56 splits (8x500 +3 sec). Do the workout with active recovery between pieces. Mike recommends as a general guidline, to start the 8x500 on 5' centers and the 4x1K on 10' centers. This would mean pulling a 500m interval, resetting and rowing at recovery pace until 5 total minutes have passed from ther start of the interval. (A note on recovery pace: I find that I am never as slow as the recovery pace indicates, even when pulling recovery at 14-15 spm; it is a maximum number; don't go slower, but it's ok to go faster but keep the stroke rate down).

Don't use multiple reference paces; that's what I tried to do and it backfired after about 6 weeks. Doing 8x500 for almost 2 months, I kept improving but nowhere near the ref pace I was using for the rest of the bands (I was using 1:52 and 1:51 for lev 4, pulling as fast as I wanted for Lev 3 and my best 8x500 was 1:51.7. With the other ref paces the 8x500 should've been around 1:49.5-1:50). I began to stall at the 8x500 and , since I was moving up too quickly in lev 4 was getting close to stalling there also. For me, part of the discrepancy is that I am very weak at 500m and 1K; my strongest distances are those 10K and above; 2K is a stretch for me. That is where experience in the different training bands will help; I am about 2K-1 sec for my 8x500 instead of the more usual 2K-2 sec.

In my old training I was used to going MUCH faster and farther at the longer distances and I am still disappointed that I can't whiz through the 60 and 90 minute workouts with the ease I used to. However, both my 5K time is faster and my current season 10K at altitude is only 10 sec slower than my old PBat sea level and done at 5 spm slower than my PB. So the strength and power has improved and my 2K time this season is already 5 sec faster than my last season time rowed in January.

Keep at it and keep asking questions; there will always be someone ready to answer. You may indeed find that the ref pace is too slow, but wait until you have a full level 1 workout done.

KJG

If you keep following the WP plan, you'll quickly find out if you are a natural sprinter or if your endurance is lacking. If it is endurance, your 5K and 10K times should fall quickly and you will soon be under 7:00 min for the 2K (an event that is 70% aerobic, 30% anaerobic).

Some people are just natural sprinters no matter how much training they do. On the varsity swim team that I train with, some guys are 10 seconds faster than me on the 100m free, but I can keep up with them on a 1500m. We all swim about 12 hours a week, so lack of endurance is not the issue.

Need a WP for rowpro - is it available there as software version?

I just started training 7 beginners. None of them do sub 7, but 3 of them were in the 1:30.1-1:32.5 range for 500meters. Nothing very unusual about your ratio it seems. My 500m time is quite fast in relation to my 2k as well and I've been training endurance for a couple of years now. So to sum up, it depends on genetics and training.

Did a 60' L4 today 168/172/168/172/176/172 w/target distance of 12,897. Actual was 12,860, or 37 meters short. This is the closest I've ever been over this time.

How close have others gotten over an hour row? I just have the PM3 to use to try to nail the rates and paces.

I also only have the PM3 software. I am usually within 1 stroke of pace and the farthest away in meters has been 5 meters. I am usually exactly on the meters as well. I do a 60 min lev 4 twice per week. I have done the workout several ways 1) set up the PM3 as a 6 x 10' interval workout with no rest. 2) Same thing but do a 3x20 with no rest. I don't really like these formats because it doesn't give the 2 minute info. Most recently I just set it for 60 min and set the split length at 2 minutes. You will get 30 splits for the workout, but it gives accurate info. You can also keep track of where the meters should be during the workout by listing how far you should have gone after 10, 20, 30, 40 and 50 minutes. If I need to do this (sometimes I need it and sometimes I don't) I write it on a piece of paper, fold it up and stick it in the card slot of the PM3.

I also count everything; If I am 2 minutes at 18 spm I look for 9 strokes at 30 sec, 18 at 2 min, 27 at 1:30 and 36 at 2. I will count up the whole sequence through the 10 minutes; if I am doing 200 strokes I will keep a running count of splits in my head. I restart the count at 20, 30, 40 and 50 minutes. It gives me something to do as I row. I just make the rate match the pace and I am usually on by the second stroke.

Hope this helps, KJG

I sometimes do 6 or 7 x 1000m with 0:30 rest, as physical and mental training for breaking 37 min for the 10K.

Tonight, for the first time, I was able to do 10 x 1000m with 0:30 rest. Those L1 and L4 workouts have already made a significant difference: my average pace (based on 10 intervals) is now 1:49.2 at 25 spm, versus 1:49.8 (based on 6 intervals) at 27 spm. The last 1000m was done at 1:45.0, only 2 seconds slower than my reference pace.

For a while, I was somewhat discouraged with the L4 training: I was doing the 172 and 176 sequences. The problem was with the 2 min at 16 spm; for some reason that made me very weak. I would rather do a 200 sequence than a 172! In fact, I recently did a 4 X 200 without any problem.

KJG:

This is a big help ... never thought of any of these things to stay on pace & rate. I can see how you can be so close, as I should be. Very nice. Thanks!

-- Mark

Francois:

I think doing the low SPM L4 training, and then moving up the chart, will build a powerful stroke. I'm with you. I'd rather do a high stroke rate, fast sequence, than a low stroke rate, lower pace sequence. The low SPM workouts, with the power required to hit the rate, is plenty of work for me!

-- Mark

Thanks, everyone who gave me input on the Level 4 reference pace.

I also sort of hate the 16s. I have no trouble hitting the pace I'm supposed to be at, or 5--7 seconds faster, but it's so pokey a rate that my stroke is not smooth, and I find myself trying to drive harder and harder to make the pace the same as for the 18s.

For today's L4 I did lower my ref. pace from 1:57 to 1:55, and planned on doing 168/188/188/168/188. The first 10' piece got interrupted by someone at the door and so I finished it but then cleared the monitor and took my final "score" from the remaining 40 minutes.

The results were 190/190/168/190 and +101m, +132m, +98m, and +104m. I felt it was a decent workout. I was glad it was over, but could have kept going, so next week I will go ahead and do 60' instead of 50'. The meters were better than what would be expected at a reference pace of 1:50, 5 seconds faster than what I was trying to do, and 7 seconds faster than the 2K pb pace. And since it was only 6 strokes over for the whole 40', I don't think I was making the workout easier since the meters came out so much higher. In fact avg. mps was supposed to be 11.86 and I ended up with 12.35. The only time the monitor did not read 16, 18, or 20, was for the first few strokes at the very start of a 2 min. interval, after I stopped for a second to change my metrenome, and sometimes the thing would read 67 spm or some ridiculous number like that, so I suspect that's what gave me the 6 extra strokes. I don't think I even really did 6 extra strokes, since I always pulled right on the beat of the metrenome.

Next week's Level 1 should be telling. I ought to be able to do a lot better than I have been expecting from myself, I think. If I can do 1:55 on Level 1, I will proceed with that as the reference pace for the season, and do 60' Level 4's with 168's, 188's, and 192's, until they don't feel like anything, before I go up any higher on the charts.

I'm avoiding the sequences with intervals that aren't 2 minutes because I don't know how to set up the PM2 for them.That 's why I skipped over 180 and 184. Don't you have to have all the intervals the same lenghth?The PM2 can only remember 20 splits, so for longer than 40' I'll have to stop briefly to reset it.

Carla:

You may have shared something above that will help ... a bunch.

"I find myself trying to drive harder and harder to make the pace the same as for the 18s."

I just want to be certain that you realize that the pace chart gives a different pace for each stroke rate within a sequence. So, for a 1:54 reference pace (my current reference pace), I go to the chart and see that my 16S pace is 2:22, my 18S pace is 2:18, and my 20S pace is 2:13.

Soon, I hope to be done with 16SPM bits altogether, because I hate them too. Jerky stroke would be a gross understatement for me! It's horid. I find myself fully compressed counting off a second or two in order not to rush the catch even after a very, very slow slide.

Just want to make sure you knew this, as what you wrote above could be interpreted 2 ways. If you do know this, and I read it the wrong way, sorry!

Regards -- Mark

The 16s are not fun, but I'm still able to keep a decent ratio going without pausing. I just have to pull hard and long. It's only 2 strokes less than the 18s but it sure feels different. You need to find a way to still make these good strokes.

For me, easier said than done ... I'm still searching ... as U2 plays ... "I still haven't found what I'm looking for."

Couldn't resist Bill, it's FRIDAY.

I do know that there are different paces for the different stroke rates, it's just that it feels so stupid to be puddling along at 16 and 2:24 when it feels so much more worthwhile to be doing 16 and 2:18, or even down to 2:12. Same for all the other rates and paces. The first 16 I did yesterday I did at the pace I was supposed to, but once I had done some 18s and 20s, it just felt better to do them at the right rate but drop the pace by 5 or 6 seconds. I'm so used to doing long pieces and trying to keep my avg. pace the same that I find myself trying to keep the pace the same in these workouts even though I'm changing the rate. Like trying to maintain the same mph even when you're going uphill on a bike, as opposed to on the flats, which is another demon of mine.

If I really concentrate I can make the stroke smooth, but I was taught to have "fast hands" away at the beginning of the stroke, a slow slide,and an explosive drive, so to make16 spm smooth I end up with slow hands, slow slide, and explosive drive. Sometimes I end up with a jerky pause between hands away and moving up the slide; when I first tried this last year (and gave up, because with PM1 & no metrenome I went nuts) I actually found myself stopping and waiting in the attempt to slow the rate down. Since I've done all my rowing for several years without straps and at at 10MPS, as suggested by Paul Smith, it's not like I've been in the habit of shuttling up and down the slide at 35 spm and 2:05 or something crazy like that, either. I guess 16 and 2:24 must be like paddling gently and letting the boat ride?

First, if you divide the watts generated at a given pace by the spm, you will notice that the power that you have to apply to the handle at each stroke stays pretty much constant for stroke rates of 16, 18, 20, 22 and 24. It is only at 26 spm that the power needed makes a jump (i.e. you need to apply more power for each stroke). At least that is the case for my reference pace of 1:43. So, the reason why low spm L4 makes me feel weak has nothing to do with power; in fact I do my active recovery between L1 intervals at L4 pace @20 spm, and do my L3 at L4 pace @22 spm.

The weakness I feel is very much like one would feel when "hitting the wall" or being in a mild hypoglycemic state. I can only conjecture as to why that happens. I remember Mike mentioning that the L4 workouts could deplete your glycogen. My HR is quite low for those low spm L4 sequences, therefore I am in "fat burning" mode. Yet, the power needed at each stroke must burn the glycogen. So at the muscles level, I am burning glycogen, but the system doesn't tap its glycogen store because it is in fat burning mode. After 30 minutes of this, I start to feel very weak.
Also, I rarely train at such low level HR, and I find HR in the 90-130 uncomfortable to maintain for long period of time.

That being said, I will revisit those low spm L4 sequences no later than tonight.

Confessions of a Wolverine Plan Newbie
Day 3: Level 2 / 5x1500 @ 2k x 108.3%

Full disclosure: Although this was my third daily WP workout, my plan called for me to do it Wednesday morning, not this (Friday) morning. I don't have a good excuse for why I didn't do it on Wednesday like I was supposed to. Don't ask me for the excuse and I won't lie to you about it.

Today's workout was a 5x1500 @ 1:56.7, with 1125 m (1125 = 1500 x 75%) recoveries @ 2:32.

Actual paces = 1:56.7, 1:56.7, 1:56.7, 1:56.7, 1:53.4 --> ave = 1:56.0
Work stroke rates = 27, 27, 27, 27, 29 SPM
Recoveries = 2:31.8, 2:31.9, 2:31.9, 2:31.9
Recovery stroke rates = 18, 17, 16, 15 SPM

I even did a cooldown 2k @ 2:32.0 / 14 SPM immediately after recording my last work interval - no falling off the erg after the workout today.

Observations:

• Before I started this workout, I thought it's going to be easy. My 5k PB pace is 1:56.2, so a 5x1500 @ 1:56.7 with nearly six minutes of active recovery between intervals shouldn't be a problem. It turned out not being easy, but it was not as hard as my L1 8x500 a few days ago. I shifted into a higher gear for the last 500 m of my last interval, red-lining it for the last 10 strokes (my last stroke was around 1:36).
• As I got more and more fatigued after each work interval, I took two breaths during each stroke's recovery for more and more of the 1125 m recovery pieces. I think I was taking two breaths per stroke recovery the entire last 1125 m recovery piece. Anyway, I think that's the fundamental reason why my recovery stroke rates were getting lower and lower (down to 14 SPM for the 2k cooldown).

The next time I do a level 2 5x1500 (scheduled for three weeks from last Wednesday), my target pace will be 1:56.0 - a fair jump from today's 1:56.7, but I guess 1:56.0 is closer to my true current 5x1500 capability.