Interval v. Steady State

[maestroak]

Let's say I do two workouts like this:

30 min steady state 1:56.8/500m = 7700m total

10x(2/1), 2 on at ~1:52.5, 1 off at ~2:05.4 = 7700m total.

What can anyone tell me about the difference in these two workouts? I know that's a broad question, but I'm interested in any comments. I'm not sure whether this is really much of an interval or not, although the workouts feel different and I know my HR spikes higher in the interval workout than it ever gets in the SS. One thing that interests me is how which should be more difficult (I'm assuming the interval) and how much more difficult should it be. Or put another way, if I were to go for PBs with both of these workouts, any guesses on how big of a discrepancy there would be? I know that generally the intervals are popular and suggested to be mixed in, but really looking for thoughts on this specific workout if anyone has any.

Thanks,

Steve

[Rob]

One way of looking at it is the amount of work you are doing:

For the 30m SS: 219.7W.

For the varying pace: 1:52.5 = 245.8W and 2:05.4 = 177.5W averaging 223W.

[hjs]

Interval is interval if you have rest between the work.
Like you did is more fartleg, play with pace.
Steady state will give the best result if you go for a TT, roughly ofcourse.
Some peope can tolerate pace differences much better then others, depends on fitness, musle fibers....

The term intervals is very broad, you hav short ones, long ones, mix ones, long rest etc.

[Bob S.]

Based on the wattages, and assuming that the SS piece was UT1, the intervals were done at an AT pace. Generally AT pace intervals would be longer. 2 minute intervals are generally done at a TR pace. But, as hjs said, the term is very broad. My comments were based on the use of intervals in the UK programme for the 2k.

Bob S.

[maestroak]

Thanks for the clarification on terminology, I guess I've been using the interval term very loosely. Looks like what I was missing was the cubic relationship between pace and watts. It explains why SS is optimal for any piece because it is the minimum watts for a given pace. I messed around with the numbers and it looks like in my example it would take 3374 watts for a SS piece at 1:56.9 and 3427 for the 2/1 piece at 1:52.5 and 2:06.8. Less than a 2% difference so I guess it's not a very significant difference. May look at my HRs to see if the effect on my body is more dramatic.

Thanks for the replies.

-Steve

[Bob S.]

Thanks for the clarification on terminology, I guess I've been using the interval term very loosely. Looks like what I was missing was the cubic relationship between pace and watts. It explains why SS is optimal for any piece because it is the minimum watts for a given pace. I messed around with the numbers and it looks like in my example it would take 3374 watts for a SS piece at 1:56.9 and 3427 for the 2/1 piece at 1:52.5 and 2:06.8. Less than a 2% difference so I guess it's not a very significant difference. May look at my HRs to see if the effect on my body is more dramatic.

Thanks for the replies.

-Steve

I don't know how you came up with the numbers 3374 and 3427. They certainly could not be wattages on an erg. Half of that would be an absolute max for any rower. Rob already posted that your 30 SS was at 219.7W and the intervals were at an average of 223W. And, yes, 223/219.7 = 1.015, so it is less than a 2% difference. 1.5% as it turned out.

Bob S.

[maestroak]

Ignore me, I forgot watts was a rate. I'm not sure what you'd call what I calculated but the ratio is the same.

-Steve