Compare These Training Plans!

[old] aligilli · Post by **[old] aligilli** » December 12th, 2005, 5:33 pm

For a weak/slow rower, which plan is better for improvements in both speed and endurance? Pete or Wolverine?<br /><br />thanks

[old] Polaco · Post by **[old] Polaco** » December 12th, 2005, 5:46 pm

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(aligilli @ Dec 12 2005, 04:33 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>For a weak/slow rower, which plan is better for improvements in both speed and endurance? Pete or Wolverine?<br /><br />thanks <br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br /><br />For a weak/slow rower any of the mentioned plans is good if properly followed. I follow Wolverine because I think that the thing that makes them different (basicly having or not Level 4 sessions) is what makes worthier and more structured Wolverine.

[old] FrancoisA · Post by **[old] FrancoisA** » December 12th, 2005, 7:07 pm

I agree with Polaco. Moreover, the Level 4 training in the Wolverine Plan will definitely help you getting stronger.

[old] H_2O · Post by **[old] H_2O** » December 13th, 2005, 6:03 am

As a weak slow rower (well, it always depends on the vantage point) I would not do any high intensity stuff. Instead I would row at low spm trying to get the power per stroke up. This comes naturally if you row at low spm since you will want to have good splits anyway.<br /><br />Ie. for a while (months) do the stuff that Ranger did (and writes about frequently) scaled down to human proportions.<br /><br />After that try stuff like that suggested by Xeno:<br />3 times 7 mins all out under stroke rate restrictions (22,24,26 spm)<br />(say twice a week).<br /><br />Only then would I consider stuff like 4 times 1K, 8 times 500.<br /><br />Note that the Pete Plan is what gets Pete Marsden (a 6:10 rower) in shape for a 2K.<br />The intensity is too high to maintain year round.<br />It's the type of rowing that will get you in shape quickly but with little improvement year over year.<br /><br />On the other hand the Wolverine Plan is explicitly designed for long term improvement devised by someone who teaches classes in exercise physiology, has a compulsive interest in exercise physiology, keeps up with all the latest findings in the field and holds an erg world record.<br /><br />So if I were to choose between Pete Plan, Uk training guide and Wolverine Plan<br />the choice would be really easy.<br />

[old] Citroen · Post by **[old] Citroen** » December 13th, 2005, 10:53 am

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(H_2O @ Dec 13 2005, 10:03 AM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>Note that the Pete Plan is what gets Pete Marston (a 6:10 rower) in shape for a 2K.<br />The intensity is too high to maintain year round.<br />It's the type of rowing that will get you in shape quickly but with little improvement year over year.<br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />What do you base that on? I'm quite happy rowing an average of 10K per day doing the Pete Plan. I keep looking at the C2 Interactive Plan and the Wolverine Plan and they seem to be very technical compared to the simplicity of the Pete Plan.<br /><br />There are no prescribed rates or paces for the Pete Plan; so you don't have to be a 6:10 rower to use it effectively. <br />

[old] H_2O · Post by **[old] H_2O** » December 13th, 2005, 7:27 pm

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(Citroen @ Dec 13 2005, 09:53 AM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>There are no prescribed rates or paces for the Pete Plan; so you don't have to be a 6:10 rower to use it effectively.<br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />It does prescribe paces and these are not sloppy.<br />There is not a single easy workout and there are three sizzling ones.<br />There are no technique building sessions (low spm rowing).<br />Reason:<br />Pete does not need it but a beginner will need it.<br />Or you might try 15K at 2K+15 at 20 spm which is a grueling session.<br />

[old] rspenger · Post by **[old] rspenger** » December 13th, 2005, 8:31 pm

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(H_2O @ Dec 13 2005, 04:27 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>Or you might try 15K at 2K+15 at 20 spm which is a grueling session. <br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />I just completed my first one about 3 hours ago and it was at 20 spm. To call it "grueling" is a gross exaggeration. In fact, the pace turned out to be a 2k+<13. I started at the proper 2k+15 (after a 15' warmup), but as time went on, the pace gradually dropped and I ended up with evenly negative splits. I was going to try a higher rate, but even with the damper completely closed, the drag factor of the Model is about 155, so it seemed more practical to keep it at 20 spm for the whole piece.<br /><br />Bob S.<br /><br /> <br />

[old] H_2O · Post by **[old] H_2O** » December 14th, 2005, 4:58 am

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(rspenger @ Dec 13 2005, 07:31 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(H_2O @ Dec 13 2005, 04:27 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>Or you might try 15K at 2K+15 at 20 spm which is a grueling session. <br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />I just completed my first one about 3 hours ago and it was at 20 spm. To call it "grueling" is a gross exaggeration. <br /><br />Bob S.<br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />I cannot do it at all.<br />I am on drag factor 98-100 but I am not sure that is the reason since I can develop enough power for shorter periods.<br /><br />I can stay at 2K+15 with 20 spm for 20 mins and then I have 160+ HR.<br /><br />

[old] PeterWilkinson · Post by **[old] PeterWilkinson** » December 14th, 2005, 6:52 am

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(H_2O @ Dec 13 2005, 06:27 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>It does prescribe paces and these are not sloppy.<br />There is not a single easy workout and there are three sizzling ones.<br />There are no technique building sessions (low spm rowing).<br />Reason:<br />Pete does not need it but a beginner will need it.<br />Or you might try 15K at 2K+15 at 20 spm which is a grueling session. <br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />I agree that the Pete Plan (based on Pete's own training regime) assumes a good level of fitness and therefore is not designed to improve base level fitness. I also agree that it is tough and there are no "easy" rows, but then I believe that race prep should comprise hard (and measurable) work.<br /><br />As stated previously, the beginner needs to establish a good level of fitness, which is primarily achieved through UT2/UT1 and low spm pieces. However, it is also true that many people come to rowing from other sports, (such as Dougie who has a cycling background), and may already have good aerobic capacity.<br /><br />As someone who used the Pete Plan as preparation for the BIRC, I believe it is ideal in that context. Unfortunately, due to injury I missed BIRC 2005, so I will continue to use the plan as training for the EIRC race at Manchester on 29th January. After that I will be reverting to more UT2/UT1 and low spm pieces to both improve my base level fitness and aerobic capacity, and as preparation for my first marathon.<br /><br />From late summer/early autumn, when I start working towards BIRC 2006, I will resume the Pete Plan, because as Dougie says, it is user-friendly and does the job.

[old] MarcusLL · Post by **[old] MarcusLL** » December 14th, 2005, 8:20 am

I'm similar to H_20 - I wouldn't be able to come anywhere *close* to a 15k r20 at 2k+15 - my best free rate hour is 2k+14.2, and since the difference between my free rate 30 mins and my 30r20 is slightly over 5 seconds of pace, I'd guess the best I could do would be 2k+19/20.

[old] johnnybike · Post by **[old] johnnybike** » December 14th, 2005, 8:22 am

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(H_2O @ Dec 13 2005, 06:27 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><br />It does prescribe paces and these are not sloppy. <br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />It only prescribes pace as relative to your own 2k time - which may or may not be sloppy

[old] johnnybike · Post by **[old] johnnybike** » December 14th, 2005, 8:31 am

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(H_2O @ Dec 13 2005, 06:27 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>Or you might try 15K at 2K+15 at 20 spm which is a grueling session. <br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />I am a bit confused here H2O. You suggested the above and then go on to say you cannot do it (or imply that 20 minutes is enough for you)<br /><br />The Pete Plan never suggests that session and does not mention low spm work specifically.<br /><br />I like the PP for the same reasons as Dougie. Nice and clear and simple and suitable for any level. I used it when I first started, this time last year and it is just as applicable now as it was then.<br /><br />However, the caveat is that it is a hard schedule. One day rest but otherwise challenging workouts<br /><br />I think the 20spm work is the single session that has most improved by rowing by working on technique and power at the same time. I spent a lot of time doing 5K@20 and that is probably my favourite session<br /><br />One of my targets is to get 15K at 20. I can do it for 40' and will be close to 15K in 60' whenever I try it. However that will be a work-out and a half when it happens<br />

[old] Citroen · Post by **[old] Citroen** » December 14th, 2005, 11:48 am

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(H_2O @ Dec 13 2005, 11:27 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(Citroen @ Dec 13 2005, 09:53 AM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>There are no prescribed rates or paces for the Pete Plan; so you don't have to be a 6:10 rower to use it effectively.<br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />It does prescribe paces and these are not sloppy.<br />There is not a single easy workout and there are three sizzling ones.<br />There are no technique building sessions (low spm rowing).<br />Reason:<br />Pete does not need it but a beginner will need it.<br />Or you might try 15K at 2K+15 at 20 spm which is a grueling session. <br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />The long steady rows are easy. I did a 5K w/u and 6K row today (which counts as a long steady row). Any of the long steady rows can be done at 20SPM. The "hard" 10K on day 6 could be done at 20SPM.<br /><br />When I started the Pete Plan I wasn't a beginner, but it certainly helped a lot to have a plan where I know what I'm going to do each day (rather than fannying about rowing unstructured pieces on a day by day basis).<br /><br />I'm sure a beginner could start slowly on the Pete Plan and would improve using it.<br /><br />I've droppped from > 85Kg HWT to < 70Kg LWT in three months by rowing six days a week. I'm certain my BIRC time wouldn't have been possible without following a plan.

[old] PeterWilkinson · Post by **[old] PeterWilkinson** » December 14th, 2005, 11:58 am

As I said previously, Dougie and JohnnyBike were both aerobically fit before they started using the Pete Plan, and both still regularly do other things in addition to their rowing, (cycling, running, etc.).<br /><br />I have been injured recently, and having resumed training on the Pete Plan it has brought home to me that my own base level fitness is simply not good enough to do the plan justice.<br /><br />On reviewing my training this week, I have decided that I need to do much more low rate, UT1/UT2 work for the next 6-9 months. Then I will resume the Pete Plan in the autumn as my primary training tool for BIRC 2006.