Crazy new 2k erg strategy - what do you think? Share yours.

[ArmandoChavezUNC]

Bob S. I completely agree with everything you said, but I personally don't like having anyone say anything to me when I am erging. I like to be left alone. For some people coxing is great and they ask for it every time. For me I can't stand it.

On the water it's a different story, though.

[Rockin Roland]

So the debate goes on. Negative splitting vs other strategies.

I've put up my actual results of negative spltting and explained how it works for me.
Cyclingman1 has put up some numbers and explained how his strategy works.

Anyone else game to put up their splits with an explanation?

This is how other members of the forum can benefit if people can share their own splt data with us and provide us with their thoughts. To me that is a lot more beneficial than just producing a link to an article or study that someone else wrote. No point weighing into the debate and saying things like negative splitting works best because Mike Caviston(not having a go at Mike) says so or an alternative because French Rowing Federation says so. To me, people that just throw up a link showing other people's views have absolutely no idea themselves. It would be nice to be able to learn more on this topic from other forum members actual experiences rather than a 3rd party.

[Mike Caviston]

“Mike C's interpretation of what he sees has legitimacy. However, there are plenty of contrary interpretations and ideas about how to race.”

“It would be nice to be able to learn more on this topic from other forum members actual experiences rather than a 3rd party.”

Negative splits correlate with greater success than other strategies. That’s not interpretation, that’s a simple description of the facts. Yes, there are plenty of alternate strategies for racing. Results from 1000s of races reflect “actual experiences” more meaningful than a handful of accounts from a few people who bother to post here.

[Cyclingman1]

OUCH!! I guess some of us, in particular me, simply choose to post slower times than they could. It is a pity.

[hjs]

OUCH!! I guess some of us, in particular me, simply choose to post slower times than they could. It is a pity.

Which is very common, during races the fly and die approach is by far the most used one. Certainly among young rowers and also for otw rowers a fast start is common.

[Cyclingman1]

So hjs, you are simply going to repeat the gross distortions of OarConsequences of a few posts ago? If one does not drink the negative split KoolAid, then one necessarily is using a fly and die strategy? And you think you are contributing anything at all useful to this discussion?

Why don't you respond directly and intelligently to the actual data that I presented in my rowing, instead of resorting to labeling that has absolutely no legitimacy.

[Citroen]

So hjs, you are simply going to repeat the gross distortions of OarConsequences of a few posts ago? If one does not drink the negative split KoolAid, then one necessarily is using a fly and die strategy? And you think you are contributing anything at all useful to this discussion?

Why don't you respond directly and intelligently to the actual data that I presented in my rowing, instead of resorting to labeling that has absolutely no legitimacy.

What part of Mike Caviston's detailed research don't you understand? Mike has shown, with lots of empirical data that fly'n'die doesn't work and that negative splitting is the optimal strategy. On the water there can be some advantage to going out fast to get ahead of your opposition for the gamesmanship aspect (but it has a cost). There's no point trying to start a flame war with Henry just because your hair-brained theory has been proven to be invalid.

[Cyclingman1]

I understand perfectly well what Mike C. is saying. I happen to think it is overstated and not near as conclusive as he maintains. He chooses to ignore or dismiss contrary evidence.

As far as a flame war, it is not me labeling others' efforts as fly-and_die, hair-brained, or such. Maybe I should come up with a unflattering label for negative splits to even the playing field. I know you would not be taking sides in this discussion, right? Wouldn't you be a neutral observer?

[hjs]

So hjs, you are simply going to repeat the gross distortions of OarConsequences of a few posts ago? If one does not drink the negative split KoolAid, then one necessarily is using a fly and die strategy? And you think you are contributing anything at all useful to this discussion?

Why don't you respond directly and intelligently to the actual data that I presented in my rowing, instead of resorting to labeling that has absolutely no legitimacy.

I have seen numerous races in all kind of sports and have done so for myself, I have seen mike van C research, so I don't think I need one extra man results to give me extra information.
You are a new erger and tend to disagree with everything that has proven results, you never posted any of your splits, you only post you (very nice) results, but that alone does not mean that your way of training is the best.

I myself don't think that negative spliting is the best way, I think, based on numourous races I have seen that a roughly evenly paced race with a fast finish will give the best results.

What I said about races is actual data, almost every race you see people going of way to fast and losing time in the second half, the winnars are almost always the ones that pace themselves wel.

Actual data, I follow track, swimming, cycling speedskating. Al top results there are set by pacing relative flat, even the 400 and 800 track where the fly and die approach still is widespread a relative conservative start gives the best results.

You are more or less on your own, with almost no competition, due to your age, and given your stuborn (in my view) nature not willing to try an other approach, which ofcourse is your good right.
Your way of pacing is not the best and if you slow down in the latter stages you could have done better with a more evenly paced scedule. I have no doubt whatsoever about that.

ps I have trouble with you attacking me a bit, that's fine, if we keep it a bit civil Thinking out of the box can be very usefull at times. But not always.

[mikvan52]

I believe that Xeno is not in favor of negative splits. I'm certain that I saw a quote by him on that subject. I have no idea what pacing he actually uses in races.

"This is how I raced 2K on the erg. I added this to my resource page on xenocoach.com. Cheers, Xeno"



"to err is human; to erg is........ "

[Cyclingman1]

M. VanBeuren
101.2 500 101.2 32 0
103.2 1000 103.2 31 0
102.6 1500 102.6 33 0
102.6 2000 102.6 37 0

Isn't that it? Avg 102.4. #1 500: -1.2s; #2 500: +0.8s; #3 500: +0.2s; #4 500: +0.2.

Pretty close to what Xeno was speaking off. Looks like a somewhat quick start, some slowing, then a try to bring it home as well as can. I'm sure you would have liked to seen at least a sec faster on the last 500m.

[mikvan52]

M. VanBeuren
101.2 500 101.2 32 0
103.2 1000 103.2 31 0
102.6 1500 102.6 33 0
102.6 2000 102.6 37 0

Isn't that it? Avg 102.4. #1 500: -1.2s; #2 500: +0.8s; #3 500: +0.2s; #4 500: +0.2.
{edit} more like ... 1st 1k at 1:42.2 (instead of 1:43 planned) 3rd 500 @ 1:42.6 (instead of 1:42), 4th 500 @ 1:42.6 (instead of 1:41)
my plan was to be at an avg of 1:42.4 at the finish line... I positive splitted a little... unintentionally...

Pretty close to what Xeno was speaking off. Looks like a somewhat quick start, some slowing, then a try to bring it home as well as can. I'm sure you would have liked to seen at least a sec faster on the last 500m.

Jim:

Maybe I'll get that second in the last split at Boston... after a decent taper..

I've tried plan Xeno two or three times now this season... It works remarkably well... Somehow, rowing the 2k in three segments, instead of four, is a big plus psychologically... Other greats do it that way too... Tom Boher, for one... (Bohrer was faster than Sir Steven.. in the day... {they erged 2500m at Crash-B in that era})

Truth be told, it's not the race plan that makes you go fast, it's the comprehensive training.... I've drawn on the expertise of many greats to get to where I am now... Xeno is fabulous; so is Bob Kaehler, who added the remedial work I need to do to stay solid...

[Ergmeister]

Truth be told, it's not the race plan that makes you go fast, it's the comprehensive training.

For me, the flat flight plan works best. I can't play high/low effectively as it requires too much thinking, but the drone focus on a split and then hit the gas for the finish is what works best. I started CRASHB training in November and intensified it Jan 1st.

Good luck everybody. Pull hard - have fun - don't puke on your neighbor.

[Bob S.]

Good luck everybody. Pull hard - have fun - don't puke on your neighbor.

Or the erg.

Bob S.

[hbaker]

Sorry, but positive splits win the day.

Here's what's wrong with the simplistic "flat pacing is best" rationale:

Everyone focuses on the losses *in the boat*/*on the erg*, but totally forget the losses *inside the body*, which are as great or greater than those external losses. (Ask any electrical engineer -- or Wikipedia -- about "impedence matching of a source to a load".)

Minimizing the effect of these internal body losses requires positive splits, because the impedence of the body changes as you progress through the race. You're not allowed to change the Concept2 drag factor during a race, so your body has to make adjustments to try to minimize this impedence differential.

For example, during the 1st 500m, your body temperature is at its minimum, your heart rate is at its minimum, and your fatigue is at its minimum. You should "make hay while the sun shines" and blast off with a 500m PR+5secs.

By the 2nd 500m, your heart rate is pushing close to your HRmax, but your body temp still has a way to go, and your fatigue is still low, so you may slow down another +5 secs/500m.

As you get warmer and your fatigue builds, your efficiency will go down, thus producing less distance/stroke even with the same stroke rate, and less blood pumped/heartbeat even with the same heart rate, so your 2nd 1000m will be slower than your first 1000m by ~10 secs.

Your last 500m may or may not be faster than your 3rd 500m, because you're trying to balance your body temp & fatigue with how much gas you have left in the tank. If you started out fast enough, your last 500m will be slower than your 3rd 500m because you barely have enough left in the tank to finish.

So yes, non-flat split pacing will have slightly less efficiency in the boat's/erg's mechanical movement, but this is more than paid back by more efficiency *inside the body*.

Henry Baker, PhD (MIT'78)
Santa Barbara, CA