Mark--

I've always understood the reference pace to be in seconds not watts.

So if you're doing your level 1 4x1k at 1.53/500, a comparable level 2 would be at 2.02/500. (113x1.08). Things don't always work out so neatly in practice.

Tom

Chris,

I completely agree with what you've just written.
BTW, your best 5K is consistent with your best marathon. Both are very good!

Last Summer, I was following the training plan in the book "Daniels' Running Formula" by Jack Daniels, which has a lot of similarities with the WP, and the training plan in Joe Friel's "The Triathlete's Training Bible". So every four weeks was a recovery week where volume and intensity was almost cut in half. At the end of that recovery week I would do a minor race or a time trial. I have done recently 17:50 for a 5K race, and 18:13 for the 5k run portion, including transition, of a triathlon; that is after a 750m swim and 20k bike! I usually perform well after an extensive warm-up!

My best 5k is 16:32, done in less than optimal conditions, and that was 20 years ago!
At that time I was completely ignorant of training principles. I would just run at "anaerobic threshold" pace for 6 to 8 miles every day and would usualy sprint the last mile. No intervals, no weekly long run, etc! Now that I know a lot more, I no longer have the VO2 max and recovery capacities that I had.

Oh well, such is life, I guess!

Cheers,

Francois

Hi Mike

It wasn't subtle, given that you pointed directly at the post on warmups. I must admit that while I have read everything you have posted at least twice, I do not remember it all and have to refer back constantly, I have more than one Word doc where I copy all your posts for easy reference and searching. You should not be offended as we are only human and most try hard to assimilate the data and not be repetitive. I have noticed from time to time that when a repetitive question is asked, one of the members who follow your posts will help direct the questioner to the answer. Maybe you could let us be your teachers aids.

I think that rather than being concerned about whether people remember what you post you should be concerned with the fact that this thread has the highest ratio of page views to posts, almost 50 to 1, and since I tend to believe that most viewers like myseld view once for a set of new posts there are probably many times that 50 who view.

At the risk of being labelled a "Caviston Groupie", I would like to extend my thanks to you for your time and effort, I am sure it is appreciated by many others as well.

Fred

I’m sorry Fred, that’s just not good enough (wink, wink, wink, wink)!

That’s usually my first approach. And I like to use others’ explanations as a sounding board. I can see what points I need to clarify or expand, and sometimes others explain things more clearly than I have.

Mike Caviston

Nobody has this down cold. I (and many others) am often inconsistent when expressing intensity as time or Watts, and often when I try to simplify things I end up making them more confusing. Let’s try it again.

The term “Reference Pace” or “Ref Pace” refers specifically to a person’s best 2K pace from the most recent training/racing season. For Level 4 training, one needs to take the average pace from last season’s best 2K and round to the nearest whole number; when in doubt, it’s probably best to be conservative and round to the slower pace. For example, if last year’s best 2K was 7:10.0, the 500m pace is 1:47.5, which would be rounded to 1:48. Then consult the WP L4 tables for the appropriate whole-number paces for various stroke rates when performing the different L4 10’ or 6’ sequences. (The issue of selecting a Ref Pace without having performed a 2K, or if someone is clearly more fit than their previous best 2K, is tricky. I have discussed this extensively in the past and have nothing new to add at this point.) For Level 4, calculate all paces as time and don’t start messing around with Watts or things start to get pretty complicated (unless you want to start doing stroke rates or Goal Paces in decimals rather than whole numbers). The appropriate starting point for Level 4 regarding stroke rate is roughly an average of 18spm (+/- .2)

For the other WP Levels (L1-L3), at the beginning of a new training cycle there is a need to select appropriate paces for the various workouts. I have made suggestions for minimum (slowest acceptable) paces when starting a new cycle, assuming a certain amount of baseline fitness has been maintained in the off-season. (Off-season training is a topic I need to address more completely in the future.) In this case the “Ref Pace” can be the previous year’s best 2K pace extended to tenths of a second (e.g., 1:47.5 from the example above). This will help create a frame of reference for where to begin training. The assumption is that one doesn’t want to waste time starting at too slow a pace, nor risk burning out too soon by selecting too fast a pace. My recommendations provide a ballpark compromise. Here are some specific recommendations:

8 x 500m (L1) starting pace is 2K pace
• “2K pace” means last year’s best 2K pace
• Some might not find this challenging enough, and may begin a little faster, but no more than 2K – 1
4 x 1K starting pace is roughly 2K + 3
• It may also be determined by multiplying 2K pace by 1.03 (e.g., 1:47.5 * 1.03)
• It may also be determined as 90% of 2K power in Watts
• Note that all of these methods don’t coincide exactly and they’re all just ballpark figures anyway
4 x 2K starting pace is roughly 2K + 8
• It may also be determined by multiplying 2K pace by 1.08
• It may also be determined as 78% of 2K power in Watts
• Corresponding pace for 3K/2.5K/2K is a little slower and for 5 x 1500m, a little faster
60’+ Continuous (L3) starting pace is roughly 2K + 15
• Or 2K * 1.16
• Or 2K Watts * .64
• This recommendation means that ideally someone begins a training cycle with enough endurance to row continuously for a distance that will correspond to 60’ or more at the designated pace

Inevitably, this will lead to the question, “What if I can’t do the minimum suggested pace?” As I see it, you then have three choices:
1) Do it anyway
2) Quit rowing altogether; you’re hopeless
3) Do what you can do, and build from there
I recommend the third option.

And of course, the reverse question, “What if I can go faster?” Well, in general, good for you. You’re starting at a faster point which will hopefully translate into a faster endpoint when the season concludes. But just remember the general recommendations about not getting too greedy or biting off more than you can chew. Just like the first couple hundred meters of a 2K seem pretty easy even when the pace is fast, reality sets in pretty quickly. Setting too fast a tone early often results in peaking early or burning out before the season is completed. Also use good judgment about how rapidly you increase the pace from one workout to the next. Early in the season, especially for a beginner, it is probably alright to make bigger jumps than an experienced athlete might make or than the same beginner might make later in the year. But I recommend that after a period of 3-6 weeks, limit the rate of progress to no more than .2 sec/500m per week for any of the WP training Levels. Maintain slow, steady, consistent progress for the bulk of the training season. Perhaps with 2-4 weeks to go before the end of the season (i.e., your big race for the year) push the intensity across the various training Levels a little harder if you think you can. Beginners especially shouldn’t worry too much about getting their absolute best performance in the first year, because such a thing just isn’t possible. Your goal should be to have a good experience in your first year, to gain valuable practice, and to come back next year hungry and prepared with the wisdom to perform even better. If you plan well, you can continue that cycle (do good this year, learn more, do better next year) for many years.

Mike Caviston

I get that a lot from my wife, do you know her? hmmmmm.........

Fred:

I believe we must be related ... through marriage ... sounds like my wife is your wife's twin ...

-- Mark

Hi, I've got a question, don't know if this is the right place for it or not, but all the discussion of rowing as it compares to cycling has me thinking...

When Lance Armstrong was recovering from cancer, he and his coach Chris Carmichael made a conscious decision to train Lance's body to cycle at a higher cadence than his competitors could. It was a break with conventional thinking. The reasoning behind this move was this: by turning a smaller gear at a higher rate, most of the burden of Lance's work would be placed on his aerobic system instead of on his musculature. By doing this they 'saved' Lance's muscles, keeping them fresh for a final sprint or a breakaway. Compare this to Lance's arch-rival Jan Ullrich, and most other cyclists, notorious for turning huge gears at a low cadences and for finishing behing Lance. You could see this training in action on the long climbs- as the cyclists began to suffer on the steep grades, they would begin to come out of their saddles in order to generate more power. Lance, on the other hand, would shift to a smaller gear and increase cadence.

My question is this: does this approach to cycling have any relevance to rowing? In other words, what would happen if someone did SS/Level 4 work at a 24-28, but still within target HR? Could you train your body to work at higher stroke ratings, and by doing so handle more effort throught the aerobic system, 'saving' the muscles for a sprint/move?

What works for cycling is not applicable to rowing. What cyclists are doing when they are using smaller gears and cycling at a higher cadence is shifting the work from the type IIa, glycogen using fibers to the type I fat burning fibers. Glycogen is available in a limited supply in the muscles. It is important for high intensity work. If you use it up at the bottom of the hill it will not be available at the top of the hill. The type I fibers use primarily fat as a source of energy which even in thin thinnest athlete is available in abundance.

Lance also learned to use smaller gears and a higher cadence because it is easier to accelerate when using a smaller gear. A higher cadence is less efficient when it comes to total calorie consumption but is very efficient when it comes to glycogen sparing.

In rowing, a 2K race uses up very little glycogen, so glycogen sparing is not an issue. A 2 K race requires approximately 150 calories. A single day in the Tour De France requires a minimum of 3500- to a maximum of 10,000 calories. Your body cannot store 10,000 calories in the form of Glycogen.

In rowing the point of diminishing returns comes somewhere between 32spm-36 spm. By training at the lower spm you recruit more fibers, type I and typII to produce more work per stroke and increase your distance per stroke. If you can then perform the same work per stroke but at a higher rate you will end up with a higher work rate per minute.

There is a certain amount of energy expended in moving your body back and forth which is separate from the energy transfered to the ergometer. As you increase your spm there is more work done just moving you body and this is waisted energy. It is more efficient trying to produce the same work at a lower spm than at a higher spm.

In cycling the higher cadence also burns up extra energy but it is at the expense of the type I fibers. In cycling there is also a point of diminishing returns which is a cadence above 100. Sprinters in cycling can reach cadences of up to 130+ in the highest gears producing wattage outputs in the 1600 watt range- However the sprint only lasts about 10-20 seconds.

Whereas a faster cadence is more efficient use of the available energy in cycling in rowing you need to get the most power possible into the oar or erg in the shortest possible time.

Ralph Giarnella
Southington, CT

Did my Level 1 workout tonight as a pyramid of 3,500 meters. Did not have a 1K time, so thought I'd shoot at Mark's and aimed for 1:48.

500 1:51.9
750 1:51.8
1K 1:47.9 (3:35.9 with splits of 1:48.8 and 147.1)
750 1:51.7
500 1:51.3

Very happy with my progress on the WP.

Thanks Mike.

Jeff

Yes, Chris Carmichael's approach has relevance to rowing, and works for rowing in exactly the same manner as it does for cycling. Carmichael had Armstrong do "muscle tension" intervals a couple of times a week in pre season, where he would cycle uphill in a high gear at 50-55 rpm for 10:00... cycle very easily for 20:00 or so in between... and repeat this 3 or 4 times. This is from memory so I would need to check to verify the exact rpm and time for recovery.

Much more often than this, CC had LA keep the cadence high, at least 88 rpm or higher, again going uphill, and for much longer periods of time. Then he would increase the rate and intensity for the last 500 meters.

The slow cadence training was not new with Carmichael.

Olympic Champion, three time World Champion and twelve time national champion Connie Carpenter details the same type of training in her book "Training for Cycling", Perigee Books, 1992 as follows:

"One specific power building exercise is to go out and shift into a big gear so that you are pedaling slowly, 30 to 40 spms, while sitting rock still in your saddle. Don't even use your arms, but rest your wrists on the handle bars. Ride like this for several minutes. In essense this is a form of weight trainning but is cycling specific. Andy Hampsten prefers this type of training. It was suggested to him by Massimo Testa" of Italy." Hampston was an excellent climber and known for spinning up hills at high rates.

It's no secret that the top lightweight rowers, Eskild Ebbesen, Elia Luini et all, spin along in their 2k's at high ratings.

This is just another general reminder for anyone relatively new to the Wolverine Plan. I get at least a couple requests per week via e-mail or PM from people looking for more info about the WP. First of all the original Wolverine Plan document (the one I wrote for the University of Michigan women’s team) can be found HERE. That document was never intended to be fully comprehensive, and while it explains a great deal it doesn’t make clear every aspect of training with the WP. This thread contains my most recent and comprehensive attempts to clarify the WP (and it is still a work in progress). Anyone interested in the WP should read all my comments here from front to back at least a couple of times. So far that means over 70 pages of print in a Word format, so that will take some work, but that’s the way it is.

Some people contact me and say, “No, no – I just want a simple one paragraph summary” or “Just give me a schedule of workouts to do”. If you’re looking for something that basic, you need to look elsewhere. There is a Chinese proverb that says "Give a man a fish and he will eat for a day. Teach him how to fish and he will eat for a lifetime." I’m trying to teach people how to fish. If I were a nutritionist, I would be trying to educate people about carbs and fats and vitamins and minerals, and people would be saying “Knock off the mumbo-jumbo! Just tell me what to eat for breakfast, lunch and dinner.”

So – either roll up your sleeves and get to work digesting all the nuances of the WP, or move on to some other simpler plan. I get paid the same amount either way (that is, nada).

Mike Caviston

If you're going to compare cycling cadence and rowing stroke rate it might behoove you to look at similar duration events. So, in cycling, you might look at the cadence of 4K pursuit riders or prologue stage rides (which can be very close to the 2K rowing duration) if you want to compare with 2K rowing events. (This might be complicated by fact that pursuit riders use a fixed gear and the prologue riders using a range of gears). For these events, the cycling cadence remains high--70-100 rpm. I'm not sure why the cycling cadence is still much higher than the rowing stroke rate.

Ralph, I'd love to see some proof of your statement that "In rowing the point of diminishing returns comes somewhere between 32spm-36 spm." and "By training at the lower spm you recruit more fibers, type I and typII to produce more work per stroke and increase your distance per stroke."

I ask because it seems like this statement is a underlying principle of many training plans. I ask too because, this morning, it felt very unnatural to row at 18 and 20 spm. I would think the "specificity principle of training" would suggest a higher spm. BTW, I am also a cyclist, and riding at a cadence of 100 feels just as unnatural.

t.

The statement that the point of diminishing returns is somewhere between 32-36 spm is really based on my own observations and not necessarily on any scientific study. However if you analyze the various components of a full stroke you will be better able to understand the rationale behind my statement.

The stroke obviously consists of 2 major components the drive and the recovery. In general the ratio of recovery to drive is about 2:1. At 20 spm the entire stroke would take 3 seconds so that would be 1 second for the drive and 2 seconds for the recovery.

For illustration purpose lets assume that the distance per stroke a 20 spm is 12 meters- during the drive you will cover about 4 meters +/- ( have not done the math) and during the recovery you will cover about 8 m.

At 30 spm each stroke will take 2 seconds- If you maintain a 2:1 ratio then the drive will take .66 seconds and the driver 1.34 seconds. Assuming the drive covers the same 4 m the recovery which is no shorter by a third will cover less than 8 m and this is because the next drive occurs before the boat (or the fan) has slowed down and therefore covered the same distance as above.
However there is a good chance that your drive may continue to take close to 1 sec but that the increased spm is at the expense of the recovery.

You may argue that well during the recovery the fan or boat is going faster however if you do some calculations as to your dps is at 20 spm and your dps is at 30spm you will see that in fact your dps is less the more spm- at least is for me and when I did the calculations on the tables provided by Mike Caviston I found the same discrepancy as the spm increased the dps decreased.

Also note that the shorter the recovery time the less time there is for delivery of oxygen to the muscles and the less time there is for the muscles to recover from the previous effort and the sooner you will begin to increase the lactate levels in your muscles.

At 40 spm each stroke takes 1.5 seconds. At this point most are at a 1:1 ratio that is the drive will take about .75 sec and the recovery takes .75 sec. There is considerably less distance covered during recovery. There is also considerably less time for the drive as well but most importantly there considerably less time for your muscles to recover before the next stroke. So that lactate builds up even faster and the faster it rises the closer you are to having your muscles shut down.

I find that once I get my spm above 32 spm my dps begins to drop dramatically.
Last year when I trained for the Crash B I was training at a spm in the 32-42 range. I was able to maintain a high stroke rate because I had very low dps. My time was just barely under 8 minutes for 2K.

This year after training at the very low spm my dps at 18-20 is around 12+ m and at 32 m it is around 8+ meters and my time for 2k is considerably faster at a lower spm. During a recent 1k time trial my pace for the 4th 200 m at 32 spm was faster than my pace for the last 200 m at 36 spm and my dps for the last 200 m was considerably less as well.

There is definitely a trade off of pace for distance and the big question is where is the point of diminishing returns. I asked that question in an earlier post but there were no takers. I base my conclusions on my personal experience and from analysis of Mike Cavistons tables

Example: Pace 1:50 168 s/10' D 2207m DPS 13 m 220/10' D 2402m DPS 11 m

I will explain the rationale behind the higher cadence in cycling in another post. Suffice it to say that most find it very difficult to keep a high cadence unless there is a conscious effort at training in that range just as it is difficult to maintain a low spm unless there is a conscious effort to train at that range.

Ralph Giarnella
Southington, CT

I like the Wolverine Plan because I can measure my progess through pace-performance as opposed to a training plan based on heart rate, which I think is ambiguous. I think a training plan based on heart rate sets a person up for disappointment in the world of indoor rowing.

But, I think the heart rate measurements can supplement pace-performance training as a motivational tool. A good example is using a heart rate monitor during a 12k at a set pace. If I am consistently doing 12k's at around a 1:50 pace (1.156*2k-pace) in my training over a particular month, a heart rate monitor would probably show that my heart is progressively not having to work as hard to achieve a 1:50 average pace.

Hi Mike,

This is really a nice compliment on behalf of those person's who email you with those type of requests. Your success has shown the way. More than likely these people don't have the time to learn it but do want to set a side the time to do it.

Later,
Thomas

Cycling and running have much more extensive histories and are far more competitive than is rowing, whereas rowing clings to archaic beliefs. Even though Eskild Ebbesen, Elia Luini and others have gone quietly along smashing world records at 41 to 43 strokes per minute, the old guard still doesn't get it.


Yes, it certainly does.


One of my favorite sessions cycling was a series of 1 mile climbs up a 6 to 8% slope, then riding easy, spin surging down, riding easy, and repeating this 5 or 6 times. I had every furlong marked and would check my watch and pace constantly on the way. Also during this I experimented with different gearing and cadence.

What I found is that the fastest and easiest times came when I was spinning up the hill in the range of 96 to 102 rpm, with the higher part of this range being easier and faster. My cadence would start to bog down at 96 rpm and below, and time (pace) could be lost very quickly. I was measuring these in tenths so it was very easy to tell the differences. Going at ratings above 110 were pushing the limits of my coordination, though with more practice perhaps they would have continued to become easier and faster as well.

This session had a *huge* carryover to other types of hill climbs, where I could usually bury riders who were faster than me on the flats. I loved climbing hills -- the main problem being that I didn't like riding downhill at all. There was guy who rode with us in training who scorched down hairpin turns, sliding across the road sideways with one foot down around each of them, fortunately with no traffic coming along, and took part in off road races where he'd come down at 60 mph between trees. I prefer going up.

QUOTE(Fast Forward @ Jan 8 2006, 10:10 AM)
I'm not sure why the cycling cadence is still much higher than the rowing stroke rate.


In rowing you have a recovery, this has to be done but costs energie. You have to pull you body up and you have to move the oars. In cycling you always push with one leg. Completely differant. Cycling is much more smoothly in conversing the power on the paddels. There is no "deadpoint" suchas in rowing.

I was thinking about this yesterday during a 12k that I had planned to pace at 1:50. The last few 12k's I have paced at 1:49.5. I can usually tell after the first 2k how the rest of the piece is going to feel. I was worried that a 5 x 1500m with 5-minutes rest session I had done the day before, with an overall average of 1:40.6, and the weight training may put my 1:50 goal pace in jeopardy. The result was a 1:49.3 at 26 spm.

My heart rate was probably in the 170's during the second half yet, I continuted to drive with focus on the 1:50 pace. I think if I focused on the heart rate instead of the pace, the piece would have been significantly slower and I would not have been properly tested.

I have not really been a fan of long distance training. I was really happy to see that the Wolverine Plan outlined a Level 3 pace of 1.156*2k-pace. Basically, if I do just that then I can be pleased with the session and I don't have to figure out if I got pushed or not.

Today, a full LEVEL 1 Pyramid:

(with 2K w/u, recovery equal to each distance, 2K c/d)

1:38.4....250
1:48.9....500
1:51.1....750
1:51.5....1000
1:50.8....750
1:48.9....500
1:39.2....250

DISTANCE AVERAGED PACE: 1:49.06 (target plan under 1:50.0 average)

Last time (25 NOV 05) DISTANCE AVERAGED PACE: 1:50.74

IMPROVEMENT: -1.68 seconds on 500M pace

COMMENTS: This was well below my target pace for the workout, but it still felt relatively easy, with the ability to pick it up a bit toward the end of each piece. Pleased with this workout as I've been doing much more distance and not very much speed work at all over the past few weeks. Hoping this gives me a good indication that sub-7:20.0 is within reach in Cincinnati on 29 January.

Mark:

Thanks for posting that. Good workout.

Seeing the post caused me to go back to my word document of Mike's posts and re-visit the pyramid targets. Ignoring the 250's ("fast as you can") his input was

500 about best 8x500
750 second slower than 500
1K 1/2 second slower than 750
750 better than first
500 better than first

From my previous post on my "abbreviated" pyamid, I should have checked the strategy first. Makes sense though. I'm going to have to create an excel sheet for the distance averaged pace.

Regards,
Jeff

I'll e-mail a copy of what I just put together for today, with a brief explanation. I am no Excel guru, so it's primative. You can probably come up with a better implementation than I ...

A thank you and three questions.

First, the thank you: to Mike for the (continued) time, patience and effort involved in posting his thoughts and responses to questions on the theory, practice and rationale behind training and training plans. I for one have hugely appreciated this over the last 3 years or so.

Second, the questions (in sort of reverse order):
1. Off season: Post the season’s Goal Event, what sort of guidelines can be recommended for transition to and content of the off-season? Do I drop my Level 1 target pace by, say, 4 seconds immediately? Go on vacation and do nothing for 3 months? Gradually wind down intensity and number of workouts etc? My thoughts: decide what level of fitness I want/need to start training again come August / September, then work out an overall level of “exercise” to basically get me physically and psychologically hungry/keen and motivated to get stuck in again.

2. Fast finish: The overall plan is founded upon slow gradual improvements although there is acknowledgement of scope/possibility of pushing harder in the last 6-8 weeks (like the last 300m of a 2k). Are there any views, experience, advice and comments upon the best approach / pitfalls to avoid in this last 6-8 week period? [a relevant question for me now:)]

3. Mid season breaks: Thoughts/experiences regarding interruptions to training schedules, work pressures, illness, vacations etc. How to assess appropriate level /intensity to return? [less relevant now but still ...]

Best wishes to all,
Guy

Hello Ralph

I am curious about how you calculated that a 2k race uses 150 calories and why you say that it uses little glycogen. wouldn't the energy system utilized depend on the intensity of the 2k race?

i would appreciate clarification on this.

thanks

The answer is very simple- look at the reading for calories on the monitor- I have consistently seen 65-70 calories / 1000 m rowed. As the intensity increases the calories/minute increases but then the 2k is over in less time so the avg calories expended is in the 65-70 calories. This a rough estimate that the software calculates based on wattage.

If a 2K lasts 7 minutes that is > 20 calories/ minute

160 calories equals approximately 40 grams of glycogen assuming that you have not used any fat during the 2k- however in reality some fat is also being metabolized even during an all out 2k.

40 grams of glycogen represents a mere 10% of all the glycogen in the body. That means that a 2 k uses very little of the total stores of glycogen in the body. Even if 20 % of the 2 K was done anaerobically there is still plenty of glycogen left at the end of a 2K race.

These numbers are at best just guestimates but they are in the ball park.

Ralph Giarnella MD
Southington, CT

I have a similiar question- we are just 6 weeks away from the Crash-B. At what point do you begin to decrease level 4 sessions and increase the intensity of the workouts? At what point do you begin to taper prior to a big race and what schedule do you recommend?

Another question regarding starts of a race. I noticed that the rowing instructor at our Y starts her time trials with 2-3 short burts before a regular stroke. I take long steady strokes. Which is best or does it matter?

Ralph Giarnella MD
Southington, CT

Hi Jeff,

Won't you be so kind as to past the link to Mike's article on pacing for the 250-500-750-1k-750-500-250 and 3-2.5-2k pyramids. I was under the impression that all intervals where done at same pace with neg splits. I've been doing the 250 etc. at 1.41.5 at all points and just neg splitting

Would appreciate any help there mate .

Cheers
Ray

from an October 22nd Mike Caviston post on this Thread:

>>>
" ... I use the same approach for other Level 1 workouts (5 x 750m and the Pyramid). That is, I negative- or even-split each individual piece. I don’t do the Pyramid often enough to have developed what I believe would be an ideal strategy, but I do it roughly like this:
250m) fast as I can
500m) about the same as my best 8 x 500m pace
750m) about a second slower than that
1000m) about another half second slower than that (i.e., the 750m)
750m) faster than the first 750m
500m) faster than the first 500m
250m) fast as I can
In the end, my best Pyramid average will end up about half a second slower than my best 8 x 500m average.

My strategy for 4 x 2K and 4 x 1K (again, once I have an overall Goal Pace according to my planned progression for the season) is:
1st piece: GP + .2
2nd piece: GP
3rd piece: GP
4th piece: GP - .2
So if my overall Goal Pace for 4 x 2K was 1:42.0, my target the first piece is 1:42.2; for the second & third, 1:42.0; and for the last, 1:41.8. If my overall Goal Pace for 4 x 1K was 1:35.2, I’d pull the first 1K in 1:35.4; the next two in 1:35.2; and the last one in 1:35.0.

I’ve experimented with a number of formats for unbalanced workouts. (The Level 2 workout 3K/2.5K/2K is an unbalanced workout. I also use an alternate Level 3 format, in addition to continuous rowing, of 6K/5K/4K. [Another variation of this that I’ve used with the UM team is 5K/4K/3K.]) For years, athletes have asked for instructions about how to pace these workouts, and the general guidelines “Make the pace a little faster for each piece” didn’t seem to be specific enough. So I’ve come up with this:
1st piece: GP + .4
2nd piece: GP
3rd piece: GP - .6
So if my overall Goal Pace for 3K/2.5K/2K was 1:42.4, then I’d pull the 3K in 1:42.8; the 2.5K in 1:42.4, and the 2K in 1:41.8. If my overall GP for 6K/5K/4K was 1:47.2, I’d pull 6K in 1:47.6; 5K in 1:47.2; and 4K in 1:46.6. Incidentally, I find the crossover for Level 2 (4 x 2K vs. 3K/2.5K/2K) is just about perfect. For a good part of the season I alternate the two formats on a weekly basis and reduce the pace by two tenths every week (1:44.0 for 4 x 2K, then 1:43.8 for 3K/2.5K/2K, then 1:43.6 for 4 x 2K, etc.) ... "

>>>
Guy

Cheers Guy ,

Thanks for the taking the trouble to do that. I've got this interval coming up tomorow so I wanted to get it right . Guess I'm in for a re-read of this thread

Ray

Well, this question will require more time for me to do it complete justice. I’ll try to revisit it more thoroughly as we get to the end of the current indoor season (i.e., CRASH-Bs for me). But the general idea behind off-season training is to get enough physical and psychological rest to be able to come back next season with a renewed sense of purpose, but at the same time to retain enough baseline fitness to be able to build on this year’s training and not simply recover lost ground next year. I reduce overall volume by something like 25-30% and intensity by something like 10% (Watts). I do more cross-training in the off-season (I like to cycle outdoors) and experiment with alternate workouts on the erg. I go back and forth on keeping detailed training records or not and having specific goals for workouts or not. For me, the grass is always greener. If I try training without goals and don’t keep records, I lose motivation to perform the work. If I do have goals (even modest ones), the psychological burden of always having to perform becomes wearing. But I always stay active and I always keep a sense of what shape I’m in currently and where I need to be at the start of the next training cycle.

Congratulations! It sounds like you’re saying “Woo-hoo! I’m even faster than I thought I would be!” My experience the past couple years has been “Dang! I’m not going to be as fast as I’d hoped I’d be.” My general suggestion is to stick to the basic schedule/format you’ve been using so far, but if the opportunity exists to get faster than planned on some of the key (L1-L2) workouts during the final weeks, then go for it. I try to strike a balance between making my last attempt at a particular workout (e.g., 4 x 1K) the fastest I can possibly perform for the year, and making sure I have a positive experience. It would be okay to miss my final target by a little bit as long as I knew I had performed well overall and had a sense that my overall physiological capacity was about as good as its going to get. I don’t want to crash and burn (e.g., give up halfway through my second 1K). This is more for psychological reasons than anything else. Whatever I do in the last week or two before my most important race, I want to come away with a sense of confidence and to have proven to myself I have the necessary fitness to perform well. The later I get into a season, the less likely I am to really push the pace (that is, really enter the discomfort zone) for an endurance (long L3 or L4) workout. Early in the season I’m more like to be soft on my L1 & L2 goals but firmer on my endurance goals. I shift priorities in the second half and during the last couple weeks before the final race I don’t feel guilty about not increasing or even slightly decreasing the pace for an endurance session, or even stopping a session a little early if I’m feeling particularly beat. I want to prioritize being mentally and physically fresh for the interval sessions. Most years I’ve been able to nail a good 4 x 1K leading into my final race, but one year I was struggling a bit and let myself try a couple extra times in place of other workouts. A couple times I warmed up and did the first piece but I knew I just wasn’t mentally ready for the whole workout (even though there was plenty of evidence I was ready physically), so I finished off with some Level 4 and came back a couple days later to try again. I think I got it on the third try.

Simply stated, my view is that you’re not going to make huge physiological gains in the last couple weeks, but be sure to set the right psychological tone. That can make or break the season and determine how much your race benefits from all the hard physical work you’ve put in.

Again, I can give more of my thoughts in the future. When my training is interrupted for more than a few days, I go through several of my core workouts using a basic diagnostic format that has worked pretty well for me. Workouts like 8 x 500m or 15 x 3’ have a long history with me. I’ll go into them sort of by feel, doing a thorough warm-up and then doing each piece at what seems to be a challenging but realistic intensity, and based on how I feel at that point, decide whether to decrease, increase, or stay the same. Or I take an endurance session like 60’ L4 or 20K L3 and ease into it one segment (e.g., 10’ or 2K) at a time – again, determining as I go along whether to go faster, slower, or keep cruising at the same pace. At the end of these sessions I figure the average pace and compare it to past weeks in my training to see how I did on other workouts at that time. My general experience is that for every one week my training is interrupted from my normal routine, my progress drops back about three weeks. Note that I’m not talking about no training , I’m talking about irregular or reduced training. But probably most people who don’t train as much as I do to begin with won’t experience quite such a drastic decline (I sort of look at it as, the higher up the mountain you’ve climbed, the farther you have to fall).

Happy training, especially those gearing up for Jan-Feb races!

Mike Caviston

Mike,
Thank you for making your plan available to the rowing community. I just did my first Level 4 style work out a couple days ago and was amazed at how fast it felt like the time went.

Question: did you ever post the new rate and split tables?

Thanks again,
Thom

I have found the same thing to be the case, unfortunately. Perhaps 10 years ago it was not the case for me, but I have unintentionally found out that it takes weeks to get back to where I left off. From reading various UK diaries, others have found the same to be true, even those that ran, biked, and/or lifted weights while away from the erg, which supports the idea of being sport specific if you want to make improvements in a specific activity.

My piano instructor used to say that, for every day of practice I skipped, I'd lose a week of progress.

Back on page 14, post #204 (Nov. 11). I'm moving it here.
Click to view attachment
Also, just for the heck of it, in case anyone actually cares, here is a list of resources I have consulted over the past several years when formulating my thoughts on interval training . At some point I’ll get around to compiling lists of resources for other training-related topics.
Click to view attachment

Mike Caviston

My understanding, with the caviott that everyone is different, is that it's a lot more complicated than a simple ratio of 1:3. My general understanding is that that's a good overall ratio for long term detraining effects, eg 1month:3months, but I'm not sure about a time as short as one week. This would kind of fly in the face of most tapering theories, but I know Mike doesn't support tapering. Anyway I think most folks believe little is suffered at all, up to about a week. Not to say you can take every other week off. "Peak Performance" just had a decent article on detraining. They broke up the effects into four components, each with different detraining rates: Cardio-Resp detraining, metabolic detraining, muscular detraining, and hormonal detraining. Closer to home, i think the common belief is that aerobic, steady state training and detraining take longer than the anaerobic end. Unfortunately, according to PP, its the hard earned lactate threshold training that can diminish over just a few days. Their bottom line is that a change in activity (cross-training) is far better than pure rest. In any case, it'd be good to have a thorough discussion of it sometime.

Awesome workout today, a week or so before my first venue race ... validation for me that I can go sub 7:20 and stay on plan ... the WP that is!



LEVEL 1 - 8 x 500M

Shot for average of 1:49.55 (1:49.9, 1:49.8, etc.).

Actual: 1:49.1

All were negative splits except one, where I was banging slides and had to get back in rhythm ... that very much sucked! All intervals, even the banging slides interval, were better than target pace.

Bested my last 8 x 500M from 12DEC05 by -1.45 seconds. Lots of gas left in the tank, but I controlled myself and stayed with a "baby steps" approach. First time under 1:50.0 average for this workout as well.

Thanks Mike!

Good job Mark!

I didn't know you were using slides. Do you find that you have to adjust the ref pace or stroke rate when doing L4 compared to off slides? Also, do you find them easier on your back and shoulders?

Thanks

Francois

Francois:

I find no difference in pace with or without slides. L4 workouts are no problem with them.

I do not use them when intentionally going for a PB or racing online, just because the banging, if you have some poor strokes, can waste a whole bunch of energy (I can have a problem with them when doing a racing start for a short piece). Might just be my poor beginners stroke!

I do find them much easier on the back ... don't really have a feel for any difference with the shoulders.

-- Mark

Great workout Mark!
Hadn't seen any posts from you in a while and wondered if you made your high altitude vacation and how you found the rowing if you had.

Jeff

Jeff:

I had to go to Italy from last Friday through this past Wednesday evening, and only got in one row and 5 minutes to hit the site and update my meters while there. Since then, I've been off defending Dwayne Adam's honor, as if he needs my help ... long story about small minds.

My high altitude trip is just after the start of the new month. I'm kind of looking forward to seeing the impact. I've found some ergs, with the help of Dennis Hastings, 10 minutes from where we're staying, so I should be able to get in a row or two while there. Since it's a guys ski trip, and the guys I ski with are serious skiers, we typically ski from first lift up, to last possible run before being cleared off the mountain. That might mean a couple of short 30 minute rows to get 'em in after ski, but before group dinner ... or I'll be an outcast! We've been doing this trip since 1993, and it's a tight group who likes to hang together and is not big on independent activity ... another long story. I'll let you know how it goes.

How's the training?

-- Mark

Congratulations for your workout PB, but isn't the relation around +3 to 4 seconds or so for a 2k.

Which means 7:28 to 7:32 for the 2k.

Good question John ... I'm not sure.

For 4 X 1K, I'd say race pace -1 second. For 4 x 2K, I'd say race pace +4. I'm not sure about 4 x 500M -- but certainly race pace -2 or more. My current PB is 7:26.1, with 8 x 500M PB well above 1:49.1 when I did it, so it may be that I still haven't pushed the 8 x 500M as much as I should, or my personal correlation between the 8 x 500M and my 2K PB is different than most.

My 4 x 2K PB is 1:58.05, done over a month ago, which would indicate 1:54.05 pace, which is also slower than my PB pace.

Guess I'm dogging it at practice, just like in High School (so many years ago!).



Heck, I can't imagine a 8 x 500m at 1:47.5 (RP -4) ... yet ... but maybe I could do that???

I'd probably not be close to that either.

As you said, the 1k's would be the better indication, and what counts is what you do in the 2k.

You got that right!



Ouch!

You might find that the club with the ergs opens early. When I was out west the facility opened at 5:30 am, although I got there every day around 7:00 am. Nothing like an hour erging in the morning to start your day out right.

Funny story (painful actually) about the training. Two days ago I was also doing 500's, but as you may remember I only do 6. Well I was feeling feisty and for the third decided to go for a PB. (For the 6 x 500 I was shooting for and bettered a 1:49 average.) Unfortunately I didn't remember my PB and looked it up in an inaccurate source. So I was feeling really good to have shot for 1:41 and hit it. It actually seemed pretty easy. So, after the entire workout, including a 2K cool down, I see that my PB was actually 1:39.5. That explained why 1:41 was so easy and that's when I made my mistake and said to myself, let's beat the 1:39.5. Well, I did but without warming up again and hit 1:38.7. But it was my worst row since before the WP. I was at 1:37 going to the last 100 and just about everything fell apart. There was absolutely no form whatsoever for those last 100 meters. I managed to hang on to 1:39 and lost probably .2 from what "would have been". Then the next day did I feel it. Pretty much OK now after my 1 hour L4 yesterday. So, a lesson learned.

Looks like the ANCIENTS are giving Dwayne a real run for his money. He might have to move to over 50,000 a day to stay in first!

Have fun skiing. Start out around 5 seconds over your home pace.

Jeff

Good luck finding anything in a western ski town opening before 7am. Drink MUCH (2x, 3x) more water than you normally do at home - you'll need it.

On another topic, I'm having trouble keeping to 16spm on L4. The only way I've been able to do it is to hold a pause at the finish for "1,2" and then start a recovery.

Any comments on how I might be able to keep the slow rate more effectively or efficiently are greatly appreciated.

Dave G

Jeff:

Well, you got 'er done, even if it was ugly. Congrats on the new 500M PB. I want to "update" mine, but want to wait until after this weekend's race ... don't want to mess anything up in advance ... easy for a 47-year-old guy to do, as you know.

And, erg before skiing all day? Yikes! No way! I'm not Dwayne!



-- Mark

Dave:

Mike and the others here have spent lots of time on this. Start here:

http://concept2.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=2692&view=findpost&p=42225

... and also do some other searches on "16SPM" to find what you need. There is lots of good information, and you'll find you are not alone in your issues ... they happen or happened to us all at 16SPM!

Regards -- Mark

Great - thanks for the thread. I'll try it tomorrow morning.

DaveG