Ranger's training thread
Re: Ranger's training thread
ranger, could you update your signature? I think your current one is a little misleading, noting times from 7 or 8 years ago (or maybe more):
Rich Cureton M 60 lwt 5'11" 165 lbs. 6:27.5 (hwt) 2K; 6:28 (lwt) 2K
How about this:
Rich Cureton M 60 lwt 5'11" 175 lbs. 7:02 (lwt) 2K; DNS (hwt) 2K
Rich Cureton M 60 lwt 5'11" 165 lbs. 6:27.5 (hwt) 2K; 6:28 (lwt) 2K
How about this:
Rich Cureton M 60 lwt 5'11" 175 lbs. 7:02 (lwt) 2K; DNS (hwt) 2K
Rich Cureton M 60 hwt 5'11" 180 lbs. 7:02.3 (lwt) 2K
Re: Ranger's training thread
Nice hour bike rides on the Kurt Kinetic every day now at 19 mph and a UT2 HR (145 bpm).
During February, I'll slowly push these rides up to two hours.
That should bring my weight down steadily so that I can row as a lightweight at Chicago and Detroit, my last two regattas of the winter racing season.
ranger
During February, I'll slowly push these rides up to two hours.
That should bring my weight down steadily so that I can row as a lightweight at Chicago and Detroit, my last two regattas of the winter racing season.
ranger
Rich Cureton M 72 5'11" 165 lbs. 2K pbs: 6:27.5 (hwt), 6:28 (lwt)
Re: Ranger's training thread
I haven't done any races, fully prepared, since 2003, even though I pulled 6:29.7 in 2006, unprepared.ben990 wrote:ranger, could you update your signature? I think your current one is a little misleading, noting times from 7 or 8 years ago (or maybe more):
Rich Cureton M 60 lwt 5'11" 165 lbs. 6:27.5 (hwt) 2K; 6:28 (lwt) 2K
How about this:
Rich Cureton M 60 lwt 5'11" 175 lbs. 7:02 (lwt) 2K; DNS (hwt) 2K
Sure, I'll update my signature when I am fully prepared again and race.
Why?
Because then, my pbs, both heavyweight and lightweight, will be 6:16.
ranger
Rich Cureton M 72 5'11" 165 lbs. 2K pbs: 6:27.5 (hwt), 6:28 (lwt)
Re: Ranger's training thread
True.JimR wrote:You are no where near your FM at 1:42
Then again, a FM @ 1:42 predicts a 1:28/5:52 2K.
A FM @ 1:48 predicts a 6:16 2K.
A HM @ 1:45 predicts a 6:16 2k.
A 10K at 1:42 predicts a 6:16 2K.
Yea, with my "Save a Horse, Ride a Cowboy" sessions, it appears that I am getting _very_ close to these targets.
I'll post the screen shots when I hit them.
Stay tuned!
ranger
Rich Cureton M 72 5'11" 165 lbs. 2K pbs: 6:27.5 (hwt), 6:28 (lwt)
Re: Ranger's training thread
My bad ... I should have said "You are no where near your FM at 1:48". I'm not really sure you could actually finish a FM non-stop and this musical fixation isn't helping matters ... maybe your racing issues are because there is no music?ranger wrote:True.JimR wrote:You are no where near your FM at 1:42
Then again, a FM @ 1:42 predicts a 1:28/5:52 2K.
A FM @ 1:48 predicts a 6:16 2K.
A HM @ 1:45 predicts a 6:16 2k.
A 10K at 1:42 predicts a 6:16 2K.
Yea, with my "Save a Horse, Ride a Cowboy" sessions, it appears that I am getting _very_ close to these targets.
I'll post the screen shots when I hit them.
Stay tuned!
ranger
But more importantly ... what irony when I read "I'll post the screen shots when I hit them" ... I assure you I will be far to busy watching the warm places freeze over!
JimR
Re: Ranger's training thread
In 2006, I also paddled in a lwt 7:02 just after pulling a hwt 6:29.7 two weeks before, so these poor individual performances have no bearing on my capabilities.ben990 wrote:ranger, could you update your signature? I think your current one is a little misleading, noting times from 7 or 8 years ago (or maybe more):
Rich Cureton M 60 lwt 5'11" 165 lbs. 6:27.5 (hwt) 2K; 6:28 (lwt) 2K
How about this:
Rich Cureton M 60 lwt 5'11" 175 lbs. 7:02 (lwt) 2K; DNS (hwt) 2K
You are as good as your best performances, not your worst.
ranger
Rich Cureton M 72 5'11" 165 lbs. 2K pbs: 6:27.5 (hwt), 6:28 (lwt)
Re: Ranger's training thread
You can say it, but it's not true.JimR wrote: I should have said "You are no where near your FM at 1:48".
That's exactly where I am.
In my "Save a Horse, Ride a Cowboy" sessions, I am pulling 1:42 @ 26 spm at my anaerobic threshold, 172 bpm.
In my "Steamroller" sessions, I am pulling 1:48 @ 23 spm with right around a FM HR, 155 bpm.
ranger
Rich Cureton M 72 5'11" 165 lbs. 2K pbs: 6:27.5 (hwt), 6:28 (lwt)
Re: Ranger's training thread
Indeed.JimR wrote:My bad
ranger
Rich Cureton M 72 5'11" 165 lbs. 2K pbs: 6:27.5 (hwt), 6:28 (lwt)
Re: Ranger's training thread
seriously, what goes on in your head?
You purport to row for hours every day, and yet it takes a 300 mile journey and warming up for you to decide you're not ready to race...
What were you thinking the morning before you set off?
What changed your mind about competing?
YOu always say that your training predicts your racing absolutely, so we shouldn't be surprised that you can't row a 2k, but I am fascinated by the fact that you went to the venue before wimping out..
You purport to row for hours every day, and yet it takes a 300 mile journey and warming up for you to decide you're not ready to race...
What were you thinking the morning before you set off?
What changed your mind about competing?
YOu always say that your training predicts your racing absolutely, so we shouldn't be surprised that you can't row a 2k, but I am fascinated by the fact that you went to the venue before wimping out..
Re: Ranger's training thread
Until I am fully prepared to race, there is not much to think about when I race. I just show up and try to do my best. It is entirely different when you are fully prepared to race. You know exactly what you are going to do. You are ready to do it. Then you just do it. When you are not ready to race, you don't know what is going to happen.ginster wrote:seriously, what goes on in your head?
You purport to row for hours every day, and yet it takes a 300 mile journey and warming up for you to decide you're not ready to race...
What were you thinking the morning before you set off?
What changed your mind about competing?
YOu always say that your training predicts your racing absolutely, so we shouldn't be surprised that you can't row a 2k, but I am fascinated by the fact that you went to the venue before wimping out..
My technique is now fixed.
And I am rowing as a heavyweight for a while.
Both of these things help.
Over the last few years, it has been _very_ stressful for me to race as a lightweight, unprepared, still struggling with technique.
But I have done passingly well (6:41), nonetheless, in fact, much better than anyone else my age and weight.
ranger
Last edited by ranger on January 31st, 2011, 12:41 pm, edited 5 times in total.
Rich Cureton M 72 5'11" 165 lbs. 2K pbs: 6:27.5 (hwt), 6:28 (lwt)
Re: Ranger's training thread
Sure, I have been learning to row well (13 SPI) at low drag (119 df.).ginster wrote:You purport to row for hours every day
It ain't easy.
It takes a lot of hard training to get the job done.
Different matter entirely than just preparing to race, rowing badly (10 SPI) at max drag (200+ df.), as I did back in 2002-2003.
No veteran (50+) has ever rowed well.
Most 60s lwts pull 9 SPI.
For lightweights, rowing well is 13 SPI, that is, rowing with about half again as much stroking power.
I don't have a chance of pulling 6:16 at 60 unless I do it rowing well (13 SPI) at low drag (119 df.).
Rowing badly (10 SPI) at high drag (200+ df.), I would have to rate 42 spm to pull 1:34/6:16/420 watts.
Not much chance of that.
At 13 SPI, 1:34/6:16 is 32 spm.
ranger
Last edited by ranger on January 31st, 2011, 12:18 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Rich Cureton M 72 5'11" 165 lbs. 2K pbs: 6:27.5 (hwt), 6:28 (lwt)
Re: Ranger's training thread
ranger wrote:True.JimR wrote:You are no where near your FM at 1:42
Then again, a FM @ 1:42 predicts a 1:28/5:52 2K.
A FM @ 1:48 predicts a 6:16 2K.
A HM @ 1:45 predicts a 6:16 2k.
A 10K at 1:42 predicts a 6:16 2K.
Yea, with my "Save a Horse, Ride a Cowboy" sessions, it appears that I am getting _very_ close to these targets.
I'll post the screen shots when I hit them.
Stay tuned!
ranger
And that will be when hell freezes over. When porcine creatures sprout wings and when the four horsemen come a thunderin' across the sky. You poor deluded tragic man. I almost have sympathy for you. Almost
Re: Ranger's training thread
Wrong again! You couldn't even break 7:04...and you weren't paddling, you were blowing up repeatedly.ranger wrote:In 2006, I also paddled in a lwt 7:02 just after pulling a hwt 6:29.7 two weeks before, so these poor individual performances have no bearing on my capabilities.ben990 wrote:ranger, could you update your signature? I think your current one is a little misleading, noting times from 7 or 8 years ago (or maybe more):
Rich Cureton M 60 lwt 5'11" 165 lbs. 6:27.5 (hwt) 2K; 6:28 (lwt) 2K
How about this:
Rich Cureton M 60 lwt 5'11" 175 lbs. 7:02 (lwt) 2K; DNS (hwt) 2K
Wow, and the department still put you out to pasture. You must really suck at your job!
You are as good as your best performances, not your worst.
Re: Ranger's training thread
Yea, so I am told.whp4 wrote:You must really suck at your job!
Students want to have fun in class and get high grades without doing much or learning anything.
My colleagues want to politicize the academy and revolutionize society (from the left), using the ivory tower as a bunker.
The administration of the university wants to make money.
I don't serve any of these agendas.
I am a political conservative who researches and teaches a difficult subject to small classes of students and a handful of interested professionals, none of whom are at my own university.
I am happy to retire.
Although I will continue to do my intellectual work, retirement will reduce tensions between my agenda and the very different agendas of my employer, colleagues, and students.
In this case, I will enjoy watching from the bleachers.
I hear the popcorn is salty and the hot dogs steamy.


I am looking forward to the show.
ranger
Last edited by ranger on January 31st, 2011, 12:47 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Rich Cureton M 72 5'11" 165 lbs. 2K pbs: 6:27.5 (hwt), 6:28 (lwt)
Re: Ranger's training thread
So now we know - the best 2K you can do at the moment is to not even pick up the handle.ranger wrote:I just show up and try to do my best.