Carla,

I too have trouble keeping track of the L4 numbers. I have started listing the workout on a sheet of paper and keep it next to the erg on a clipboard. I have 6 columns (one for each 10' piece) and in each column is the length of each segment and the stroke rate. Elsewhere on the sheet I keep the pace for each strokerate. I use a PM1 and just estimate splits. I know when I'm slowing down.

I think the main thing is to hit the stroke rates while pulling stong and focusing on proper technique. I also tend to exceed my recommended pace in L4, so the paper helps to keep me focused on the correct stroke rate. Good luck.

A metronome is very helpful and useful.

If anyone wants to use one then go ahead and use it.

This is just like anything else. People can use a computer, or a telephone, or drive a car, or wear shoes, or they can choose to not do those things.

Also it is hard for anyone to know if they will like something, or if it will be helpful, before they have first tried it for awhile to find out.

I am fortunate to have a PM3 monitor. It allows me to put variable intervals (20"- 60'?) with variable rests from 0 to 9'59". I just learned about this option during the past week.

I set up a sequence of 3'2'1'. I now can plan my stroke rates base on how long each stroke rate should last. For instance this week I set up the following sequenec: 20 spm at 3' 18 spm at 2' and 16 spm at ' minute.

When 3' appears when the new interval starts I know the sequence is 20 spm, a 2' interval is a 18spm and 1' interval is 16 spm. With this set up I can devise any number of sequences and as long as I assigned each stroke rate a different time it is easy to remember which stroke rate I am on.

I used this option for my 2x40' - I was able to program 20 intervals with 0'rest. The PM3 allows a set up for up to 30 intervals.

If you don't have a PM3 you might want to consider an upgrade.

Ralph Giarnella
Southington, CT

Ralph,

You can set variable intervals with 0 rest with the PM3? That is really great. I don't think you can on PM2. They have to be the same length of time, though you can change the number of minutes they all are, and the shortes rest period is 10 seconds. So I switched to just using the splits, which at least have no rest between, of course, but you can't adjust them unless you adjust them all. It would be a great help to me to be able to set up the sequences as you described. This is really pushing me over the edge to getting the PM3! I've been only doing the 2 min ones, because otherwise I have no way of knowing if I'm truly hitting the targets or not. Since you can hit the meters and correct average spm. over a 10 minute sequence, at my level of experience I don't feel confident that using the totals over that time period are helpful at judging whether I'm doing it right or not. You can come up with the correct final numbers for a sequence without ever changing your stroke rate or pace at all. And what good is that, if the whole point is to perform exactly what the prescribed workout? Frankly, I don't see how I can properly do the L4 workout without "micromanaging" it. It's an extremely detailed plan and how can you keep yourself on track and know if you are really doing it right if you don't have a way of checking afterwards? If it is really bad to overstroke by even one or two strokes in the course of an hour, how can you prevent that without accurate quality control?

Thanks for the tip.

I'll shut up now.

There is a world of difference between the PM2 and the PM3. At the Ymca where I workout they have 2 C2 B, 2 C2 C and 1 C2 D so I have had to opportunity to try all 3 monitors. There are so many more benefits to the PM3 over the PM2. Another feature I like is called the Rerow. Once you set up a training session with intervals time etc you can repeat the same session without having to reset the computer. You could have several sessions set up and pick the one you want from a list and just hit the rerow button.

The computer also stores the 10 most recent training sessions so that you can wait till the end of your intervals to view the data.

I also like the graph which shows the contour of your stroke. If you have a good stroke there is a nice even countour. If your stroke is not smooth you can see it on the screen. I like to use the graph during warm-ups to try and fine tune my drive. The PM3 costs 185.00 - you get a $40.00 credit if you turn in your old monitor.

I am planning on getting the software and the PM3 Log in Card so that I can down load my workouts onto my computer. Your workouts are put into a spread sheet and just about every stat you could possibly want is there to see. No more writing in a notebook and then having to transfer the data manually to the computer.

Ralph Giarnella
Southington, CT

Actually, I’ve coached dozens and dozens of people in just that position. Which is how I’ve developed the advice that I have.

A point I have been trying to get across – and that others have been echoing – is that first you want to develop your own sense of rating before worrying too much about the paces. You can’t develop your own internal sense of rating if you are using an external cue as a crutch. When you row, look at the monitor. Work to keep the stroke rate fairly consistent as displayed on the monitor. The feedback won’t be perfect but it will be accurate enough. If you are relying on the two-minute summaries from the PM2, you are not getting accurate information! Depending on where you are in the stroke as another two-minute period begins, you might easily get credited for one more or one fewer stroke than you actually took. Over longer periods, these discrepancies even out.

Please! What do you think happens if you go a couple strokes over the limit – you lose all training benefit? You turn into a pumpkin? What? I don’t know how many times I can caution people against taking me too literally on many points. (Conversely, on the point of Ref Pace which I wish you would take literally…) My advice continues to be to look at the meter total for each 10’ sequence and compare it to the L4 tables. You might not be exactly on target but usually within 5 meters one way or the other is pretty good. The important thing is to be consistent when repeating the same sequence – you don’t want to be 15 meters over one time and 10 meters under the next. When you are new to the program, your meter totals will likely not be very consistent. That’s okay. Just keep working to get the ratings correct by paying attention to the numbers you see on the monitor. It’s easy to get a sense of whether you are overstroking your target and if you feel that you are, ease up a bit. You’ll never know if you get it exactly right but you don’t have to know with absolute precision. When you have become comfortable with the different ratings, and with making switches from one rating to the next – up and down – then you can focus more closely on keeping the paces on target. They’ll never be perfectly on target either but just work to be there most of the time and to deviate by no more than 1 sec/500m on any given stroke. If your 10’ meter totals eventually come close to your goals without going too far out of whack too often, you are doing as well as anybody I know of. But if you refuse to start at the beginning, I expect you’ll always be frustrated trying to do Level 4. I hope I’m wrong, but I don’t think I will be.

Mike Caviston

I have started to reread Mike's posts on this thread, and have noticed that for L3, he recommended that it should be continuous. Previously, I had done 3x4k and 4x4k with 0:45 rest.
So tonight, I decided to do a 60 min continuous piece. My goal pace was 1:55, since I had done 1:54 for the 4x4k earlier this week. I started at 1:57, then about 4 minutes into the row, started to see some 1:56 on the monitor, then some 1:55. 10 min into the row, I was comfortably rowing at 1:54. Then, I stated to see 1:53 and 1:52. The projected distance was getting increasingly close to 16000m! 15 minutes into the row, I decided to go for it!
To make a long story short, I succeeded! I did 16031m at an average pace of 1:52.2 @ 24 spm

Here are my splits and stroke rates:
12:00 3123m 1:55.2 @ 23 spm
24:00 3193m 1:52.7 @ 24
36:00 3221m 1:51.7 @ 24
48:00 3236m 1:51.2 @ 25
60:00 3255m 1:50.5 @ 25

Previous PB was 15712m (1:54.5 @ 27 spm). That is, considerably slower and at a much higher spm! I could not imagine two months ago that 1:52 @ 24 spm would become a comfortable pace!

The radical improvements are not due to a better cardio, since I was training 3 to 4 hours a day for triathlons at the time; they are the results of the L4 workouts.

L4 training is not only beneficial to your 2K, but IMO is essential for performing at longer distances.

Happy training everyone, and thanks again Mike!

Francois

Jeff:

OK, pictures of things in Italy often do not tell the whole story. They were likely stock photos from C2 Italy. The machines are poorly maintained Model Cs with PM2s, which I have never used. How do I get a drag factor with a PM2? At damper 1, these feel like 10 on my D at home. Ouch!

Two workouts, so far, while here. An L4 30' piece yesterday with 1K w-up and 2K cool down. I was trashed from the trip and business I had to get done, so just under 10K and at least I was able to get it in. Today, 10K of what I'd call fartkek ... warmup and cool down included along with 1K pieces at L4 paces and rates, plus some 500s at sub-2:00 just to have some fun. Still getting adjusted to the time change and poor sleep. I'll have to take this into account if I ever travel overseas to race with the friends I've made here on the web. 3 days is probably a good period to get acclimated.

I will do the 500s that much faster because my analysis showed that I was likely "dogging" my L1 and L2 workouts based on my PB pace (I always felt I still had lots of gas in the tank after the L1 and L2 workouts I did before). I found it to be true when I did the 4 x 2000 last week. I feel I've got that more in line now, and will take baby steps from here.

Ciao ... Marco

No



but very good selection of beers here ... excellent!

DRAG FACTOR
Hold down the OK button , then press REST to have a drag factor displayed in the lower right display window. Repeating this button sequence will turn off the drag factor display.

I had the same experience in Boston with 2 run down C erg's at Gold's gym. Not only were they run down but the monitors did not work.


Ciao! Ralph

Mark:

Doc has given you the answer on the PM2. I used a PM3 in the U.K. and actually prefer my "good old" PM2. Above the OK it also says Ready. The five setting on mine is about 150, which has not really been used all that much except for the last six months.

On the U.K. site there is a document I have downloaded "Indoor Rowing Training Guide_v2.pdf". There is quite a bit of useful (and of course useless) information in it, including full instructions on how a PM2 operates. You can find it at http://www.concept2.co.uk/guide/downloads.php. It is a 6.2 MB file, however. That, along with the basic Wolverine Plan and the collected postings of Mike are a very useful reference folder.

I think your assessment on the 500's is right. You'll have no problem with the 1:49. I've just read one of Mike's most recent posts "Training with the WP should include 6 workouts per week or more . . ." which is not surprising coming from a 180Km per week coach. I'm just going to have to find another day and move up to six. The added volume should allow me to increase the L1 and L2 work and still stay at a reasonable percentage of overall meters. Counting recovery rowing at 2:41, my 5 workouts are now around 50Km and the sixth should bring that to just over 60Km if it's a 40' L4. It will be nice to have three L4 workouts in a week. After about 4 weeks, I'll move my L1 and L2 up to four pieces, probably on alternate weeks.

I'll bet you're glad to at least find some equipment to use.

Jeff

ThanksRalph. I'll try it "domani".

Gazie!

Marco

Just some Wolverine Plan personal comments.

I don't follow the Wolverine Plan Level 4 progression as intended, which probably means I don't follow the Wolverine Plan. I also adjust my Level 4 reference pace and other level paces based on current 2k ability.

Level 1.

4 x 1k: I have been doing this session with 5 minutes rest, which was based on a 2:11 recovery pace plus the time it might take to reset the PM2, right down my time, etc. I have a hard time getting the recovery meters rowed in a reasonable time so, to ensure I start fairly consistently, I use the time element for the rest period. The session forces me to concentrate from the point where the suffering begins. I have caught myself using my upper body to get the pace intead of using my legs.

8 x 500 meters: Really good session if I am really sleepy. I know I will get breaks quickly. Not as productice as 4 x 1k. Can give a false sense of 2k ability.

pyramid to and from 1000 meters: Not exactly sure how to pace. Very difficult after the 1k.

There is a another session I have not tried yet but may attempt as a build up to getting all 4 x 1ks under 1:35. It is 3 x 1k, 2 x 750m, 1 x 500m with 5 minutes rest. I can now probably get 3 of the 1k's under 1:35 but the fourth may not be possible. I will probably attempt this session on my next Level 1 since I am planning now on a 1:35 goal pace and want to move away from the 1:36 pace.


Level 2

5 x 1500 meters: The session begins in the fourth and fifth piece.

3k, 2.5k, 2k: Just knowing each one is getting shorter helps push myself when I get worn down.

Level 3
12k. Can sometimes put me to sleep. I really try and just row the pace of 1.156 multiplied by 2k ability since there is a tendency to go too fast and not finish or to go too fast and be to worn down for the next day's session.

15 x 3 minutes with 1 minute rest. Starts out innocently but can become very taxing starting with the eighth piece.



Level 4:
There are a number of Level 4 sessions I do, particularily 200 200 200 200 and 116 116 116 128 128 140. I think Level 4 works for the same reason why weight lifters and body builders change their weight training sessions so as to keep the body from going into a rut and to keep it guessing.

There are a number of times where I am about to fall asleep during a 12k so, I have learned to do a Level 4 session instead.

I have not recorded each 6-minute or 10-minutes session. I can tell during the piece if I am hitting it or not. I gave thought to seeing the accuracy of my effort since I now have access to a PM3. There are a number of times where I might be faster that the given pace and spm and sometimes the spm might go a stroke higher than necessary. The pace displayed is not exact. The pace for 1:52 is actually between 1:51.5 and 1:52.4. It would be unreasonable to try and be exact and more reasonable to give yourself a parameter window to determine your accuracy.

Metrodome? Never tried it or thought about it for that matter. I don't know how it would help with Level 4 since the spm varies as opposed to a metrodome remaining constant.

It's not recommended to use one anyway. But I have a programmable metrenome, so all I have to do is reach down and tap a button and it gives me the new spm beat. If I could find the book that goes with the thing, I could program it to do the whole workout to change the beat correctly for every interval in a given sequence. But that's a pretty big IF!

Hi Thomas,

What reference pace are you using for Level 4? I don't quite understand how you adjust your other level paces.

Regarding L4 sessions, I think it would be beneficial if you incrementally increase them to 60 minutes and add some variety in your sequences; BTW I also like sequence 200!

For L3, I agree that they can be boring! You could try 4x3k or 3x4k with 30 to 45 sec rest, and go at a slightly faster pace. At your level (2K in 6:20) 12 k is the bare minimum; IMO you would benefit from a longer continuous row, up to 20k, once a week.

Don't neglect the 4 x 2k Level 2! Isn't it the distance we are supposed to race eventually ?

Just my 2 cents.

Cheers,

Francois

Hi Francios,

What reference pace are you using for Level 4? Currently, 1:36. I would like to do a 2k by the end of the month to get a look-and-see of where I am at. My goal for the WIRC is to row sub-6:20.

I don't quite understand how you adjust your other level paces. For 12k, I use the formula of 1.156 multiplied by 2k pace. For Level 2, it is 1.083 multiplied by your 2k pace, which is a good place to start. Level 1, 4 x 1k is done at race pace and 8 x 500 is done at about 4 to 6 seconds faster than my 2k pace.

Regarding L4 sessions, I think it would be beneficial if you incrementally increase them to 60 minutes and add some variety in your sequences; BTW I also like sequence 200! During the summer, I was doing alot of longer stuff and found that I was neglecting Level 1 and Level 2 sessions. I was getting some personal bests, like for 60-minutes. I have done a hour of 116 (3' @ 18spm, 2' @ 20 spm, 1' @ 22 spm), which was good. I would rather keep Level 4 to 40-mintues and Level 3 at 12k (usually between 44 and 45 minutes) and at 15 x 3 minutes with 1 minute rest (takes 59-minutes to complete 45-minutes of work).

For L3, I agree that they can be boring! You could try 4x3k or 3x4k with 30 to 45 sec rest, and go at a slightly faster pace. At your level (2K in 6:20) 12 k is the bare minimum; IMO you would benefit from a longer continuous row, up to 20k, once a week. I think there is a point where I can do too much steady rowing. 12k is alot for me. I may consider a 1-hour row which would generate over 16k meters. The suggested break-up is to do 2 x 6k to build confidence if 12k is too intimidating.

Don't neglect the 4 x 2k Level 2! Isn't it the distance we are supposed to race eventually ? I am not sure if 4 x 2k is better than either 5 x 1500 meters or 3k, 2.5k, 2k.

Later,
Thomas

I had to look forever trough this thread to find the pacing suggestions for the Level 2 Pyramid. I'm glad I did though. It's tougher to negative split this workout than just hit an average. I've been sporadically working out since we had our fourth baby last month, and now I think I'm able to get back to it now, although my paces need adjusting. My best average on this before was 1:52.9, so I set tonight's goal at 1:54 using Mike's negative split suggestion.

3.0k Goal 1:54.4 Act 1:54.3
2.5k Goal 1:54.0 Act 1:53.9
2.0k Goal 1:53.4 Act 1:53.3 (Harder than I thought it would be after the first two sets)

Total Goal 1:54.0 Act 1:53.9

Hopefully I can set the paces on these first workouts back so that I don't put the handle down at any time. (Well, maybe at the end).

I still have some big meters to put in before Saturday at Midnight to get my 200k, but it shouldn't be a problem with two workouts on Saturday.

Why Interval Training?
The heart of the Wolverine Plan is the sub-2k paced Level 1 workouts. These, along with Level 2 workouts, are performed using the interval format – i.e., with periods of high-intensity work separated by periods of low/moderate intensity recovery. The interval format can be manipulated (length & intensity of work & recovery intervals) to target specific aspects of physiology (alactic, glycolytic or aerobic energy pathways). I am a big fan of interval training because it allows us to simultaneously increase intensity and reduce fatigue relative to the same amount of work performed using a continuous format. I might be able to do a continuous 4000m at roughly 350W. Breaking the total into 1000m intervals with appropriate recovery, I might average over 400W and by doing the work in 500m increments I might average more than 450W for the same total distance.

When training to maximize performance of 2K, the major effects we are looking for are to improve energy production (aerobic + anaerobic) as well as increase resistance to fatigue (i.e., improve endurance). When prescribing a training program, the primary variables to manipulate are frequency, intensity, and duration . (For the purposes of this discussion, let’s ignore other factors that will specifically impact rowing, like stroke rate and drag factor.) Frequency refers to number of sessions per week. Intensity refers to pace (measured in sec/500m or Watts on the erg, but quantified during other activities using such markers as velocity, %VO2 max, or heart rate) Duration represents total training volume (which I would express in meters but in some training programs might be represented by total time spent training). A single workout can be quantified by a combination of intensity and duration. Some workouts will be designed to primarily improve endurance, and these will consist of fairly long rows (40-90’) at an intensity sustainable for those durations. For these workouts a higher intensity is preferable to a lower intensity but the intensity must be low enough to allow prolonged, continuous muscle activation that will stimulate the peripheral adaptations associated with greater endurance. Other workouts will feature short periods of work to allow much greater intensity. What I want to stress here is the importance of intensity in triggering training effects associated with greater energy production. Intensity can never be discussed in complete isolation from duration. For example, doing 30 seconds @ 650W would be pretty intense, but the period isn’t long enough to stimulate any significant adaptations (or nobody would be able to use lack of time as an excuse for not being in top shape). So when designing a workout to maximize intensity, for full training effect there will be some minimal duration that must be exceeded.

Promoting intensity is the key to eliciting a maximal training response. There are other considerations, and a smart athlete will look at the intensity of a given workout in the context of the total training load, the amount of recovery between truly intense sessions, the appropriate intensity for a given point in the season, the ability to maintain proper technique, etc. But in general the goal is to maximize intensity (or at least increase intensity relative to previous performances) for the necessary duration. In the case of 2K, the appropriate duration for a race-pace workout (i.e., Level 1 in the WP) is approximately 150-250% of race distance, or 3-5K of total work at race pace or faster. The work periods should consist of intervals of 250-1000m. Shorter intervals or fewer total meters will require higher intensity; longer intervals or more total meters require lower intensity, relatively speaking (but intensity must still be at least race pace). In the WP, I avoid doing more than a few intervals less than 500m in length. An occasional all-out 250m is fun and a chance to push the upper limits, but these rely more on the alactic (phosphocreatine) pathway and less on the rapid glycolytic pathway, and have less application to 2K performance. It is an ego boost to fly through 16 x 250m @ 2K – 5, but someone who relies only on this distance for 2K speed work is in for a rude awakening when they get into the second 500m of an actual race. On the other hand, using distances greater than 1K @ 2K pace provide a great training stimulus, but are difficult if not impossible to sustain for more than one interval, and will probably leave you too fatigued to finish a workout at the desired pace even if the remaining intervals are considerably shorter. I have experimented with sessions that incorporate a 1250m piece into the format, but experience has led me to set 1K as the upper distance limit for Level 1 intervals. Combining all the Level 1 formats I use in the general proportions that I use them, the average length of Level 1 intervals in my own training is roughly 650m. After the work interval, recovery periods should be adequate to allow maintenance of intensity for the entire session. It is practical to keep the recovery intervals from being longer than necessary, but once intensity is compromised the maximum benefit of the workout is lost. I have discussed recovery (active vs. passive, etc.) at some length, but as a reminder my rule of thumb is recover long enough to maintain intensity, but not so long as to begin cooling down.

There are many types of studies on performance that highlight the importance of maintaining proper intensity to stimulate optimal results. For example, the current model for altitude training is “Live High, Train Low” (LHTL). Athletes only need to spend a couple hours a day at higher altitudes to stimulate the adaptations that may positively affect endurance performance (e.g., increased hematocrit). But training at high altitude results in lower training intensity (less oxygen = less aerobic energy) and if continued long enough results in poorer overall performance despite the hypoxic adaptations. (Believe what you want, but the Coloradans who spend most of their time in the mountains before coming down to race at sea level are at a disadvantage to the rest of us.) The reverse of high altitude training is Very Low Altitude Training – simulated by allowing athletes to artificially breath air that consists of say, 60% O2 (vs. the normal 21%). This allows more O2 to be dissolved in the plasma and delivered to the muscles during training, and results in greater training intensities relative to breathing normal air. Athletes that perform VLAT (this has been studies in laboratories using cyclists) are able to perform better under normoxic conditions (21% O2) vs. doing the same training (total volume, interval formats, etc.) while breathing normal air. Simply stated, greater training intensity results in better performance. Many people misinterpret the “value” of ergogenic aids like EPO, creatine, and anabolic steroids. (Personally, I don’t condone the use of any supplements, legal or otherwise.) But the reason these treatments can have a major impact in some cases is not that the athlete uses them just before a race and is magically transformed. Those pro cyclists that abuse EPO (and hope to beat their drug tests) don’t just sit home on their butts all year. They put in the miles just like everyone else. But they are able to work harder than without drugs and so stimulate greater training effects.

The reason interval training is such a valuable training tool is that it allows us to “cheat” in such a way that we can work harder than we could using other formats – thereby increasing overall training effects on the various energy pathways. The workouts in the Wolverine Plan are designed to favor a requisite amount of quality, high-intensity training. The specific formats I created were greatly influenced by the work of Edward L. Fox, a professor and researcher at Ohio State University in the 60s-70s. Fox provided a lot of useful information regarding interval training and provided many examples of workouts for athletes concentrating on performance in various distances in running and swimming. I adapted some of Fox’s examples to a rowing format based on competing at 2000m. I also gave consideration to practicality in some cases, such as whether the workout would fit into a given time frame or how simple it would be to run for a group of athletes (i.e., team training).

To review my guidelines for Level 1 workouts (nothing new here but maybe consolidated and clarified for everyone’s benefit):
Warm up thoroughly (see previous discussions). Limit Level 1 sessions to once per week, but include them year-round. At the beginning of a training cycle, the Level 1 8 x 500m pace will be roughly the previous year’s best 2K (perhaps even a little faster but I would suggest no more than one second). The idea is to begin to build speed but only in proportion to overall fitness and to build at a rate that will be sustainable until the season’s final race. Various Level 1 formats include 8 x 500m, 5 x 750m, 4 x 1K, and Pyramid (250m/500m/750m/1K/750m/500m/250m). I rotate among the different formats but make sure to include 4 x 1K every second or third week. This is the most physically and mentally demanding format, but in my opinion, also the most effective. It is the single workout that best predicts for me how fast I can pull a 2K. The general pacing strategy is to even- or negative-split each individual interval, as well as all intervals across the entire workout. (More elaborate pacing guidelines have previously been explained.) The general rule of thumb for recovery is to allow 5 minutes total time (work + recovery) for each 500m of work. For example, do 8 x 500m on 5’ centers: start the piece, finish the piece, perform recovery, and start the second piece 5’ after starting the first (i.e., the entire workout can be completed within 40’). Use 10’ centers for 4 x 1K; do the math yourself to figure out the Pyramid. Actually, I’m not that strict about time when training on my own; I developed the firm time limits for use with group workouts. My procedure is to finish a piece, catch my breath for a moment and record my scores, perform active recovery for the same distance as the previous work interval (just hit “ReRow” on the PM3), take another moment to set the work interval and get mentally prepped, and take off again. If there’s a little variation in recovery time from one piece to the next or one workout to the next, so be it. My first priority is to hit my target splits, and as I get faster and in better shape, I may need even more recovery to keep getting faster. I let the recovery period extend to as much as 2 ½ times as long as the work period if necessary.

Standing vs. running starts:
It is possible to set the PM2 or PM3 for a work distance and a recovery time. The advantage is that you get a clearly defined recovery period and may avoid wasting time dilly-dallying between intervals while futzing with your footstraps or your towel, trying to squeeze out a few more seconds to get psyched up to go again. I don’t think the extra time taken is necessarily reducing the training benefit, but psychologically you do have to get ready to meet deadlines. Races start with or without you, ready or not. With a set recovery time, you can also use the running start to accelerate into the piece (i.e., build up the momentum of the flywheel before the work period begins). If done properly, this can be a good way to settle immediately into your desired pace and practice holding a nice even split for the duration. If abused, you can use a running start to get the flywheel spinning so fast that your initial pace as the work period begins is artificially and drastically reduced, giving you credit for a faster time than you could achieve from a standing start. Even that is okay as long as you are consistent and aren’t fooling yourself with your fast numbers. (With the PM3, it is much harder to “cheat” the start than with the PM2.) Using a standing start means letting the flywheel come close to a halt before beginning the work interval, as at the start of a race. (The flywheel doesn’t have to come to an absolute standstill; just allow 10-15 seconds to let it slow down considerably so that it feels heavy on the pickup.) No set recovery time is entered into the monitor; just start each piece when you are ready. Standing starts give you a chance to practice racing starts, which many people overlook during training and which may come back to bite them during the Big Race. I like to practice getting a solid but smooth start, and to settle into my goal pace as quickly and efficiently as possible. – So anyway, standing vs. running starts each have their merit, but having experimented with each I prefer to do as many standing starts as possible.

Relationship between paces for different workouts:
As I try to keep stressing, don’t give too much thought to the pace of one workout vs. another. Be aware of the relationships, but don’t obsess. Over the course of the season, work to maximize your performance for each workout and by the end of the year chances are things will have fallen into harmony. In general, the pace for 8 x 500m will be about 2K – 3. The pace for the Pyramid (overall average) will be about a half second slower than 8 x 500m. The pace for 5 x 750m will be about 1.5 sec slower than 8 x 500m. The pace for 4 x 1K will be about 3 seconds slower than 8 x 500m (or about the same as 2K). These are generalizations, and a certain amount of variation from person to person is normal.

Stroke rates: previously discussed.

Alternate formats:
There’s no particular reason why workouts have to be formatted by distance (500m increments, etc.) Time would work just as well. Mentally I just prefer watching meters count down rather than seconds (and I think a scientific poll would find the majority of athletes feel the same). But if you wanted to construct a workout based on time, you could do it using the general guidelines explained above: total time approximately 150-250% of 2K time; each interval roughly 25-50% of 2K time; work-recovery ratio approximately 1 to 2.5. While I haven’t done it much in recent years, one format I used to do regularly is 15 x 1’ work/1’ recovery. This tends to violate some of the guidelines I’ve already given (short intervals, short recovery – no time for active recovery) but if your 2K pace is faster than 1:52.5 you end up doing more than 4K total and all in 29 minutes. The short work intervals are balanced by the short recovery intervals and the overall pace will be pretty similar to 8 x 500m. Done at max capacity, the workout can be a real mindf—k as the work minutes take about half an hour while the recovery minutes go by in the blink of an eye. The only problem is you really have to do it a few times to figure out what pace to use for your best performance, and as I’ve explained I don’t think too much short interval work is that useful for 2K.

Level 2 workouts:
These are longer in duration than Level 1 workouts and so must be performed at slower paces, yet they are still rather intense and all things considered are at least as mentally tough as Level 1. The formats described in the WP include 4 x 2K, 3K/2.5K/2K, and 5 x 1500m. Depending on the format and time of year, pace during these workouts may be 90% or more of 2K Watts. A rough estimate of 4 x 2K pace at the start of a training cycle would be 2K + 8. Pace for 3K/2.5K/2K will be pretty similar to 4 x 2K, though maybe half a second slower. Pace for 5 x 1500m is a half to a full second faster than 4 x 2K. A general rule of thumb for 4 x 2K is to allow 15’ (work + recovery) for each interval. Start the second piece 15’ after starting the first one. Or, simply allow 6-8’ recovery after each interval for all formats (a little more for a longer piece and a little less for shorter). Use about 5’ of active recovery and the remaining time spent paddling or stretching.

Whew – I think I just burned off my Christmas calories while typing this!
Happy training,

Mike Caviston

... today ...

LEVEL 1 with 4 x 1,000.

Yikes!

Target average: 1:50.35.
Last average (17NOV05): 1:52.5.
Target improvement: -2.15 seconds on average.
Today's average (actual): 1:53.08.

RESULTS: Not good!

What was I thinking?

My target was 1:50.5 / 1:50.4 / 1:50.3 / 1:50.2

I did: 1:50.4 / 1:51.7 / 1:54.3 / 1:55.9

I blew up after #1. It was all uphill from there.

This was too large of an improvement to go for, obviously. I have also had a bad couple of weeks of training due to travel. Average meters off by 50% or more.

Then, when I looked at my 1K PB, done on 12NOV05, it is 3:36.2 (or 1:48.1).

Probably should have cranked up the pace on #1, set a new PB, and called it a day for the L1 ... and turned it into an L3 or L4 day.

Felt guilty for poor performance on the L1, so did a 5K (L3 pace) piece this evening.

I believe I've found the limits of my current training (or it was just a bad day). No simple answers here, eh?

I'd be very interested in everyone's perspective on how fast training benefits can fall off (and to what extent) when one's training gets impaired in some way (intentionally or unintentionally).

-- Mark

Hi Mark,

Don't be discouraged by this little setback. Tell yourself that you are in this erging activity for the long run.
From my perspective, the first thing one loses when training gets impaired, is speed. Endurance takes much longer to acquire and much longer to lose, and for me, is much more valuable. Why? Because, the more endurance I have, the better I feel. On the other hand, I find little correlation between my well-being and speed improvements at short events (i.e less than 3 minutes).

If I were you, I would concentrate for the next 2 or 3 weeks on good L4 and L3 workouts with only one L2 session per week.

Just my 2 cents!

Cheers,

Francois

Mike,
I agree with Francois.

Based on your 2k times you should be able to easily break 19.30 for the 5k and go under 40.00 for the 10k.

Might be time to do some more endurance work.

Good Luck,
Chris

Hi mark,

For hard training (level 1 for you) you have to be 100% fit and ready, if you are not then you have to be realistic and don's ask yourself to perform something imposseble.
For me a very important factor is the way I feel. Althoug I do have a trainingplan and pace for my worksouts are is never 100% strickt. I adjust if a feel not good enough.

Just keep on training , 2 steps forward and sometimes 1 back

Hi Mark,
I think we made the same mistake , hit LT too soon. I did an 8x500 @ 1:39.4 which I felt I could hold for the distance. At the 5 rep I tried to neg split and hit LT , downhill from there. I find I perform better starting conservative and neg spliting from there . Heres an example.

1:39.3 Should have started @ 1:40
1:39.3
1:39.2
1:39.1
1:38.7 Hit LT (burn)
1:39.3
1:39.2 Was all out here
1:41.7 Included a spell @ 2.00 ! and a last pitch @ 1.36 for last 15 strokes
Ave 1:39.5 *** Not much of an improvement considering the faster start !
Ave HR 167
Ave SPM 31
Perceived effort 11/10
* DF 105

Now check a more gradual (conservative split)
1:41.5
1:41.4
1:40.2
1:40.5
1:40.2
1:39.4
1:39.4
1:36.5
Ave 1:39.9 ***
Ave HR 167
Ave SPM 31
Peceived effort 8/10
* DF 135

Point here Mark is you talk about gains tailing off, I found it hard to pull @ 1:39 stoke let alone hold it for 500m on a lower DF! Which makes me think a more conservative neg splitting is a better way for me.

You'll do better next time , amazing how the body remembers these days

Good luck
Ray

Thanks all!

Intuitively, it does seem like I need to do more L3 and L4 work to build my aerobic base. I probably also need to start adding some HMs to my training. My longest (continuous) rows are 60' L4 sessions and some 12K L3 sessions.

Cheers!

Mark--

You say your results were "not good.' I say they look "predictable."

A 2 second/500 M improvement is an ENORMOUS jump. It's no surprise you blew up.

Do the level 1's every week, or every other week. Go for small improvements--less than half a second/500.

Endurance work always helps, but you're not suddenly going to go lots faster unless you train to go faster. Be realistic about what you've prepared yourself to accomplish when you sit down on the machine.

Tom

This is the first place I have encountered someone who advocates high intensity (race pace or higher) workouts all year 'round. While I personally like the idea myself (I find it more interesting to do an intense interval workout than long, slow ones), I'm curious why you believe this to be the right approach.

I certainly can't speak for Mike, but 1 interval session/week out of 6+ weekly sessions would be hard to classify as "excessive", and would also keep addaptive value of those intervals high. It seems to fit in nicely with the overall plan that is steady progress throughout the "cycleless year".

Plus, as some have mentioned, "going real fast is fun"

Peter Coe, the father and trainer of distance runner Seb Coe, wrote, "Middle-distance racing is about endurance and speed together. . . .One of our maxims has been that if speed is important never venture very far away from it." (p. 181, "Better Training for Distance Runners," Human Kinetics.)

Coe and co-author David Martin include race pace workouts year-round in their training plan, although the proportion of speed work increases as racing season approaches.

Tom

I don't know if "excessive" is the right word. It's certainly not mine. I think the issue many coaches and physiologists have with a year-round intensity approach is two-fold: 1) you can get many of the benefits of this intensity in a relatively short period of time, and 2) to sustain that kind of intensity training all year round would take a psychological if not physical toll.

If I remember correctly, Stephen Seiler (rower and physiologist) would argue that you can get the benefits of higher intensity workouts in as little as 4-6 weeks. Other folks suggest longer, but not year-round. Even Mike, in one of his posts, described how, given his limited available time to train one year, got the bulk of his improvement in just weeks (and his whole training program was only 26-weeks).

I think that it is important not to take Mike's statements out of context. If you follow Mike's description of the WP program from the beginning to end the philosophy and the rationale of the various aspects of the program become clear. Mike does not advocate the same maximum intensity from the beginning of the season to the end of the season but rather a graduated intensity throughout the training season.

The level 1 sessions, which should only compromise 3-4% of total meters for the week, should be "performed at intensities of 95-105% of competitive 2K pace".

The distances of these L 1 intervals are a maximum 1000 m. He recommends that in the beginning of the season to set a pace that allows an individual to complete all the intervals within the set with the first interval being the slowest and the last being the fastest. Each successive attempt at the same interval set should be a little faster than the previous interval attempt. In this manner you are increasing your ability to sustain the higher intensity over time.

If all goes well by the end of the training session you set a new PB 2k.

In my opinion 26 weeks is a very long time for a preseason training session. Any longer and there will not be much time left for the competitive season.

Ralph Giarnella
Southington, CT

I think Mike is fairly consistent in saying that Level 1 intensity is the heart of the WP, and whatever you do, you don't sacrifice intensity. But, let's use his post as context.

He says: "At the beginning of a training cycle, the Level 1 8 x 500m pace will be roughly the previous year’s best 2K (perhaps even a little faster but I would suggest no more than one second)."

That's a high intensity workout. Period. My point is that there are few folks that advocate that level of intensity "year round".

I appreciate and understand your comments about the workouts comprising only a small amount of total workout time, and how there is a graduated approach to the intensity, but the fact remains that this approach is rare--in my experience--in the world of training and racing. Not that it is wrong. I applaud a different, well-considered approach.

I'd like to know more about the reasons for year-round level 1 training.

Tom:

Thanks for the feedback!

Yes, you're right, but I have just recently started with the Wolverine Plan and started very conservatively. I've been trying to creep up on my training limit for workouts such as this (4 x 1000) because I've only done it - now - 3 times.

Based on my 2K best, 7:26.1 (1:51.5), I ought to be able to do the 4 x 1000 in this pace -1 (or so), meaning 1:50.5. That's what I elected to shoot for, and why. While it was a big improvement to target, my last 4 x 1000 (done a bit more than a month ago) at the average of 1:52.5 was a challenge, but not a world record effort. This had been an improvement of -1.3 seconds in pace from the 4 x 1000 before it. I probably should have shot for a 1:51.5 yesterday, to be safe.

Now I can recalibrate, back off a bit, and give it another go in a month or so, as that's what it takes me to work through the three different interval combinations for L1 in my 6 or 7 workout per week implementation of the WP.

I very much appreciate the reinforcement of the importance of the L1 and L2 speed work, as well as the small steps for improvement.

I'm sticking with the Plan.

Regards -- Mark

I am very much not an expert, and certainly would not speak for Mike, but because the Plan suggests a very balanced mix of speed and distance, with many more meters being devoted to aerobic work (L3) and "aerobic power per stroke" work (L4), there is, in my opinion, very little chance of burning out from too much speed work. Doing an L1 every week or two allows one to stay sharp, while not burning out ... and seems, to me, to be a smart way of protecting the gains one has made which we all know can evaporate quickly with poor, little, or no training.

Mark,

Maybe if you ask Ranger, he can help you out with it.

Mark, start bumping up your 12k by 500m each week. That will build to your long workout each week.

I too am struggling to get back to training, but it feels like I just need to re-establish my 3 week cycle of L1 & L2 times. The 4x1k gave me the biggest fall off, but last night the 8x500 came in 4 seconds from my best a few weeks ago. I needed the confidence to finish it, but I now know what I can do for next time.

I'm guessing I'm missing about 1 second of pace per week of slacking off. Getting back to it hurts more because I know I've done better, and have had a hard time knowing how hard to go.

Suffering with you...

It's nice that you guys can suffer together!

You are quite welcome, Polaco!

I think you have this backwards. The 2k should be faster than the 4x1k.

The 4 x 1k will be close to 2k pace.

But if you don't like my version, here is Mikes most recent posting on it:
"The pace for 4 x 1K will be about 3 seconds slower than 8 x 500m (or about the same as 2K). These are generalizations, and a certain amount of variation from person to person is normal."

Ummm, I don't think so ... from Mike's pacing post (or at least one of them that I cut and pasted into my WP file):

"For example, if I wanted to row 2K in 6:24 (1:36 pace) by Feb. 25, 2006 [CRASH-B], 1-2 weeks prior to the race I would want to be able to do a 4 x 2K workout with an average pace of 1:40 or faster (+4.0), and a 4 x 1K workout with an average pace in the low 1:35s (-1.0)."

Or did I, as usual, miss something?

The trick is to train at the right pace for you, which as Paul says will be "close" to 2k pace. You know the right pace when you can do 4x1k (or whatever) at consistent to slightly negative splits and finish w/ a near-death experience. Then in a week or 2, you overcome your dread of what's ahead of you, and you do it again, going slightly faster.

Presumably you do some 2k tests along the way to determine how your 2k relates to your interval sessions, so you know how to pace yourself during a race. I've never done 2k at a faster pace than my 4x1k. Mike is different (and a lot faster). But I'm not getting my chain wrapped around the axle about whether I'm faster in a particular interval training session or during a race.

The point is to do the workouts, whatever they may be, according to a plan, trying to go faster every comparable session. Then you race. Lots of guys beat you. If you've stuck w/ the plan, you beat a few guys.

Then you go home and start over.

Tom

Mark – you missed this:

This illustrates pretty conveniently the relationship between training for endurance and training for speed using the Wolverine Plan. The core, the most important aspect of training, is high-intensity Level 1 work. This develops the power to support a fast 2K in competition. But greater endurance results in less fatigue for a given power output – not only during a race (very important) but also during training (extremely important!) The basic approach with WP training is to do L1 & L2 every week, and fit in as much L3 & L4 work as necessary to achieve your ultimate goal. The actual amount of L3/L4 work will depend on whether your goal is to set a world record vs. just maintain some semblance of health & fitness. I fit a lot of endurance work into my training; currently my long weekly row is 25K continuous (i.e., __without__breaks). This gives me the endurance to go hard for 1K, recover more completely afterward, and go hard again for 1Ks 2, 3 and 4. The greater intensity for 4 x 1K in turn develops greater speed for my 2K. That’s why the WP is all about intensity – how to maximize it and keep increasing it – even though the actual amount of high-intensity work is proportionately only a couple percent of the total training volume.

Hang in there with your training. When I get a chance, I have some more observations about handling time off/training interruptions.

Mike Caviston

Mark,

I must have had it backwards, but I thought it was that way. As you know, I don't have the personal experience to correlate the performance between the workouts and the races. Plus, like you, I'm in (or was) in a significant improvement phase, so every few weeks the potential paces kept dropping.

I am also interested in Mike's observations on time off/interruptions. The new baby in November was expected, and I was way too optimistic in my ability to keep training and do everything else.

I'm doing my long L3 row tonight of 17k @ 2:00. It's nice to not have to worry about the intensity tonight.

Please start by reviewing the past 30-something pages of this thread.

1) My concern is rapid gains that plateau too soon. Rather than kill myself for six weeks, I work pretty hard steadily for 26, and ultimately reach a higher peak.
2) Psychological toll? Abso-freakin’-lutely. My advice again and again and again is to start at a challenging but realistic point and progress slowly and steadily for the duration. Still, the risk of burning out early is real. This ain’t no sissy plan.

I’m not sure what your personal experience with 8 x 500m has been, but for me and many other people, 8 x 500m @ 2K pace (with adequate recovery between pieces) is not too demanding. It’s actually pretty enjoyable. Not at all the same as pushing 2K – 4, or doing 4 x 1K @ 2K – 1. My plan is to not really push the limits until 6-8 weeks before the peak competition. But doing Level 1 workouts for the entire season will leave me in position to be even faster for those final 6-8 weeks than otherwise. I’ve described thoroughly my strategy of mapping out my pace for increasing Level 1 intensity gradually over the course of a season and keeping the intensity within the context of overall fitness.

Because it results in faster 2K times than not doing Level 1 training year-round!

Thanks very much for your comments.

Mike Caviston

Mike,

What would you advocate, as far as training is concerned, for the other 26 weeks of the year?

Thanks

Francois

What would you advocate, as far as training is concerned, for the other 26 weeks of the year?

Thanks

Francois

How 'bout "sex, drugs and rock 'n roll"

tony

Mike would never advocate drugs....

Already been there, talked about that to an extent. Essentially, just a kinder, gentler version of the 26 weeks in-season. This is one of the many topics I hope to eventually discuss further.

Mike Caviston

Certainly not! I’d be willing to take up the slack with sex, but it turns out that the ladies aren’t clamoring for middle-aged erg freaks as much as I might hope. But I’m all over that rock ‘n’ roll…