Experience with IP2K vs PP

[G-dub]

Along with Lindsay, I rolled from the PP into the IP to prep for a 2K. The IP is different since the interval sessions don't really repeat and the plan has one working within bands. The days between the hard sessions are more spicy too at UT1 which skews the hard sessions a little. The PP let's you know where you stand at all times. The IP seems to keep it a secret. The question I have for anyone that has experienced both is: does the IP eventually reveal who you really are with a nice surprise ? Its too late now to change with a week to go, but any insight from anyone that has followed both would be lovely to hear. I've done what it asked me to do. Just don't know what it did!

PS - I think the place where I have noticed improvement is actually on the UT1 rows. I am handling them much better than when I started the IP.

[Bloodbuzz Corio]

Glenn - what's your plan in the lead up to/taper for the race? I'm certainly not going to suggest you do a 4x1k - as I know it's not your favourite - but have you considered an 8x500 say as your final really hard one and also some sort of indicator as it's a session you have done plenty of times before?

[jamesg]

does the IP eventually reveal who you really are with a nice surprise

Yes, most of the IA is endurance and technique, but the last month or so provides the know-how and control for racing. So the surprise can be in the right direction.

[lindsayh]

does the IP eventually reveal who you really are with a nice surprise

Yes, most of the IA is endurance and technique, but the last month or so provides the know-how and control for racing. So the surprise can be in the right direction.

I guess different strokes for different but for me the IP seems a better bet when there is a known race 2k goal 3 to 6 months in the future.
The PP is more intense as each of the three hard sessions are very hard and have a goal of getting faster each cycle. Unless you are relatively new that is really hard to sustain for more than 3 or 4 cycles I suspect. The PP is really good to improve 2k times though and gives feedback as you go.

The IP structure at 6 sessions a week includes 3 steady sessions like the PP but they are structured a bit differently using longish intervals repeated. The 3 harder sessions though are different - one AN, one TR and one AT. To me this mimics/prepares for the different stages of the 2k race and as you get to that last 3/4 weeks you concentrate on that as the UTI sessions reduce. It is kinda making sense for me and I don't think I would have managed a 6 month PP program so well. The IP has more variety and is a bit easier for me to stick with. I am expecting a nice surprise!

[G-dub]

I too like the IP and will stick with it going forward into the year. The variety and focus on UT1 and AT will help me. And next time through there will be something to compare to! Rohan, I think a PP workout might jam up the brain! There is a workout I did last year a week before that I may do Saturday just to create some perspective. I do think that the taper part of the program will be important.

[Bloodbuzz Corio]

Glenn what settings are you planning to use after your race? Back to 24 or 26 weeks and start again?

One of the things that I've been interested to see from both your and Lindsay's posts over the last few weeks is an almost complete absence of UT2 and a lot of UT1 - I did dial up a 26/6 plan for myself to see what it looked like and was interested that there was no AT till week 4 and no TR till week 8.

[G-dub]

Ro - Its hard to imagine starting over again! But my guess is that I will still have a major goal to work off after the race. I think I might do a 24 month schedule to spend time on cardio and to regroup for a while. Might do it for 5 days a week so I can mountain bike and the other stuff I like to do. I like the UT1 work in there. I think that it is too easy for me to get soft with UT2 - especially when only doing it an hour or less. We shall see. I might take up fishing after this race on the 4th.

[lindsayh]

Glenn what settings are you planning to use after your race? Back to 24 or 26 weeks and start again?
One of the things that I've been interested to see from both your and Lindsay's posts over the last few weeks is an almost complete absence of UT2 and a lot of UT1 - I did dial up a 26/6 plan for myself to see what it looked like and was interested that there was no AT till week 4 and no TR till week 8.

It would be hard to go back to the beginning if you are really fast but if you have more potential improvement then you could go back to 24 more weeks but recalibrate to a new goal - say 6:50 rather than the 7:00 you had achieved and this would change the paces of all the sessions. There seems a lot of logic behind the progressive changes and the ramping up of intensity as it progresses. I guess I have never done a lot of UT2 so the UT1 stuff has suited. The early weeks are interesting but boring - lots of base stuff. If you are pretty fit you could do a 16 weeks and shorten that or you could start in at week 8 of a 24w I guess. (My view may change entirely if things don't go to plan in a few weeks though!!)

[G-dub]

I agree with that Lindsay. If/when I start over I will plug a day of speed or endurance intervals in there anyway. I wouldn't want to lose touch with that all together.

[GJS]

Glenn, Lindsay.

How do you guys manage those sessions above UT1? Go at the prescribed pace/ wattage? As hard as you think you can manage? Do you ditch the HR all together given cardiac lag?

[G-dub]

The AT ones can still be managed. I usually end up with slower pacing on the second and third rep though! But I also try to stay in the pacing band too. I hit TR and AN based on pacing. But to be honest, on the TR rows, I didn't always go 100% each time like I would have on the PP so that they didnt in effect become AT by the end. By the last couple your HR readings are meaningful. And sometimes for the TR I played with rate caps.

[lindsayh]

Glenn, Lindsay. How do you guys manage those sessions above UT1? Go at the prescribed pace/ wattage? As hard as you think you can manage? Do you ditch the HR all together given cardiac lag?

I think that different people will handle it differently depending on their strengths and weaknesses - sprinty or steady types. I used a HR, SR and prescribed pace/watts depending on the session and tried to stick to what was suggested but some off the numbers just didn't stack up for me of course.
UT1 was based on HR and using 80% (147) as a rough guide but no panic if drifted up to 150. Also watched SR to 22/24 with occasional 20sr pieces at 10w/stroke. Pace was then what was comfortable and held the HR - didn't race to it just let it get up there. Didn't use watts much until the higher ones.
AT - used HR still - just aimed to work harder and get up into the mid 150s with SR26 and OK if drifted up to say 160.
TR used pace targets aiming to get to 95%+ of quite/very ambitious target (in my case 2k @1:40/350w) and sr30. So happy to see sub 1:42. Used 1:1 interval to rest most of the time. They are the hardest ones for me to get right I suspect.
AN is "easier" for me as a sprinty type so I was really pushing them harder - target could be 110% say sub 1:37 but I was down to sub 1:34 for a lot with sr35/36 - think I got to 120% of 350 watts a couple of times . Sometimes added extra intervals to the mix too to make it a bit harder.

[GJS]

Thanks, gents. Very helpful.

I've been thinking about how to progress and aspects of the IP are very appealing. It provides, it seems to me, a pretty manageable introduction to rowing at around threshold and quicker: currently I'm happy above 2:00 doing purely aerobic stuff and enjoy paces below 1:40 but do not venture into 1:40 - 2:00 territory.

I think you both are racing soon: Good luck!

[G-dub]

One thing I noticed was the impact on PE of each session had more consistency than on PP. The power of the strokes was more consistent across the various bands so the percieved exertion was similar. A little less on the UT1 but the AT, TR and AN sessions for me seemed to have similar w/s. I am hoping this is a good thing!

[lindsayh]

Thanks, gents. Very helpful. I've been thinking about how to progress and aspects of the IP are very appealing. It provides, it seems to me, a pretty manageable introduction to rowing at around threshold and quicker: currently I'm happy above 2:00 doing purely aerobic stuff and enjoy paces below 1:40 but do not venture into 1:40 - 2:00 territory. I think you both are racing soon: Good luck!

Thanks Gary - 2 weeks today for us! The IP does leave a little doubt in your mind about exactly where you are with things compared to the PP where you get benchmarks on each session every 3 week cycle so we wont know for sure until it is done - there is a bit off faith involved in sticking to the plan.
There is a lot off talk here about spending relatively small amounts of time in the middle - the "black hole" and there are good arguments about doing the slow steady stuff carefully capped and the TR/AN hard with little in between. have a look on Greg Smith's blog as well.
The other thing that occurred to me this morning is that I have always done a good 2k+ w/u and c/d on nearly every session which is actually UT2 almost by definition even though I don't count it as part of the plan. My Ut1 and AT sessions especially will often have an equal interval added to both ends for that.