Help me go sub-7:00 for the 2k

[Sideshow Bob]

peak power can be improved with training, but there's a genetic component, as well. if you were born with a high proportion of slow twitch muscle fibers, you'll likely have great endurance but never the leg speed required to generate high peak power. for better or worse, i'm the reverse. always had crap endurance (and always will) no matter how much i trained, but on the flip side, i could dunk a basketball at 5'10". horses for courses and all that.

[MarkEg]

After reading all this, I did a peak power test earlier (10 seconds at DF200 as described) and the biggest number I'm seeing consistently is 513. What does that say about my 2K potential?

[hjs]

After reading all this, I did a peak power test earlier (10 seconds at DF200 as described) and the biggest number I'm seeing consistently is 513. What does that say about my 2K potential?

1.28.0 compared to 146.5 2k, so 18.5 power spare. Shows me that you don,t have a lot of spare room left to improve 2k with this raw power. Also the high drag will give you extra power which you don,t have at your normal drag.

Including some work to improve your strenght could be usefull if you ask me. Others think differently though

[MarkEg]

After reading all this, I did a peak power test earlier (10 seconds at DF200 as described) and the biggest number I'm seeing consistently is 513. What does that say about my 2K potential?

1.28.0 compared to 146.5 2k, so 18.5 power spare. Shows me that you don,t have a lot of spare room left to improve 2k with this raw power. Also the high drag will give you extra power which you don,t have at your normal drag.

Including some work to improve your strenght could be usefull if you ask me. Others think differently though

That's pretty much what I thought--thanks. I spend most of my time working on my aerobic base but should probably, in light of all this, be doing more strength work!

[hjs]

After reading all this, I did a peak power test earlier (10 seconds at DF200 as described) and the biggest number I'm seeing consistently is 513. What does that say about my 2K potential?

That's pretty much what I thought--thanks. I spend most of my time working on my aerobic base but should probably, in light of all this, be doing more strength work!

So relative untrained, should be relative easy to get some more power.

[MarkEg]

[/quote][/quote]

So relative untrained, should be relative easy to get some more power.[/quote]

Interestingly, I dropped the drag down a little, to 185 and pulled consistent 570. What does that say??!

[hjs]

[/quote]

So relative untrained, should be relative easy to get some more power.[/quote]

Interestingly, I dropped the drag down a little, to 185 and pulled consistent 570. What does that say??![/quote]

Mostly a "little" at these higher drags you now roughly pull these powers. I would say try a few more drags, say 110/30/50/70 and see how that goes.
Be carefull though, stuff like is hard on the body, do go overboard and trash around every day, better take a few days inbetween. A period of say 6 weeks, twice a week some stuff like this should get your power up.

[LarryRow]

Lots of interesting posts, thanks for contributing.

I need to be careful not to hurt myself, that's my first priority. High drag work certainly puts a lot more stress on the back and other areas, so I won't do it often.

You know, runners train for specific distances, they specialize. World record holder milers don't run marathons. Why not the same thing for rowers?

I don't see the need to row a half marathon if I want to maximize my 2000m time. I would concentrate on building up my strength at shorter distances. Yes, aerobic capacity is important, so longer work is necessary, but I think there is point of diminishing returns where your strength is reduced if you continually row long distances.

Marathoners develop muscles that are incredibly resistant to fatigue but they don't develop strong muscles that make them excellent milers.

My sprinter friends run about twenty miles a weeks, with a lot of high intensity work. My middle distance friends run 60-80 miles a week with a lot of long slow distance. I don't think I need 80,000m a week if I want to maximize my 2k time. I just need to figure out how much volume makes sense.

Just some food for thought.

[ArmandoChavezUNC]

That's not how it works, Larry. You don't somehow lose strength by doing a lot of SS.

You're trying to compare runners to rowers, but rowers race 2k races, not marathons. Yes, some rowers train those long distances, but no medals are awarded at regattas for the fastest 26 mile row. Serious rowers don't train to set a WR over a marathon distance - their focus is the 2k.

I'm not sure why you're trying to make that comparison. There's no marathon discipline in rowing the way there is in running.

Also, rowing and running are two vastly different sports. The erg rewards mass, running doesn't. You can't compare the two.

[LarryRow]

That's not how it works, Larry. You don't somehow lose strength by doing a lot of SS.

You're trying to compare runners to rowers, but rowers race 2k races, not marathons. Yes, some rowers train those long distances, but no medals are awarded at regattas for the fastest 26 mile row. Serious rowers don't train to set a WR over a marathon distance - their focus is the 2k.

I'm not sure why you're trying to make that comparison. There's no marathon discipline in rowing the way there is in running.

Also, rowing and running are two vastly different sports. The erg rewards mass, running doesn't. You can't compare the two.

I'm not convinced that my comparison is totally inappropriate. The erg rewards mass to a point, that is if you never look at your weight adjusted scores, LOL. In running, mass is not that much of a problem at short distances, it is the longer distances where you pay a huge penalty for additional mass.

Oh, thank goodness there is no marathon discipline in rowing like there is in running. Sign me up to row! I'll take 2000m of pain over 26.2 miles of pain any day.

Runners lose muscle mass when running a lot of mileage in order to train for the marathon. I was down to 155 pounds from 185 when I trained seriously for the New York City marathon, certainly some of that weight was muscle. Is this not true in rowing because we're sitting in a seat and doing power cleans? I just don't know.

[hjs]

Lots of interesting posts, thanks for contributing.

I need to be careful not to hurt myself, that's my first priority. High drag work certainly puts a lot more stress on the back and other areas, so I won't do it often.

You know, runners train for specific distances, they specialize. World record holder milers don't run marathons. Why not the same thing for rowers?

I don't see the need to row a half marathon if I want to maximize my 2000m time. I would concentrate on building up my strength at shorter distances. Yes, aerobic capacity is important, so longer work is necessary, but I think there is point of diminishing returns where your strength is reduced if you continually row long distances.

Marathoners develop muscles that are incredibly resistant to fatigue but they don't develop strong muscles that make them excellent milers.

My sprinter friends run about twenty miles a weeks, with a lot of high intensity work. My middle distance friends run 60-80 miles a week with a lot of long slow distance. I don't think I need 80,000m a week if I want to maximize my 2k time. I just need to figure out how much volume makes sense.

Just some food for thought.

Like Armando says. Otw rowers (who are fastest 2k ergers) only focus on the 2k races, but the bulk of there training is long ut2 work. And this is done with a strong stroke, so the rating needs to be low to be able to do. Set a long distance runner next to a top rower and thet will complete diffferent. Both very aerobicly fit, but the rowers are lots stronger.

80k is way to little for the absolute best, twice or three times that volume is more likely. Not that you should do that, but 2k rowing has nothing to do with sprinting, and compared to running, 6/7 min is already beyond middle distance.

And runners. Take a guy like Gebreselasie. Top marathoner, but also a strong 1500, even his 800 was not slow. Mo Farrah, ditto..etc

[LarryRow]

Lots of interesting posts, thanks for contributing.

I need to be careful not to hurt myself, that's my first priority. High drag work certainly puts a lot more stress on the back and other areas, so I won't do it often.

You know, runners train for specific distances, they specialize. World record holder milers don't run marathons. Why not the same thing for rowers?

I don't see the need to row a half marathon if I want to maximize my 2000m time. I would concentrate on building up my strength at shorter distances. Yes, aerobic capacity is important, so longer work is necessary, but I think there is point of diminishing returns where your strength is reduced if you continually row long distances.

Marathoners develop muscles that are incredibly resistant to fatigue but they don't develop strong muscles that make them excellent milers.

My sprinter friends run about twenty miles a weeks, with a lot of high intensity work. My middle distance friends run 60-80 miles a week with a lot of long slow distance. I don't think I need 80,000m a week if I want to maximize my 2k time. I just need to figure out how much volume makes sense.

Just some food for thought.

Like Armando says. Otw rowers (who are fastest 2k ergers) only focus on the 2k races, but the bulk of there training is long ut2 work. And this is done with a strong stroke, so the rating needs to be low to be able to do. Set a long distance runner next to a top rower and thet will complete diffferent. Both very aerobicly fit, but the rowers are lots stronger.

80k is way to little for the absolute best, twice or three times that volume is more likely. Not that you should do that, but 2k rowing has nothing to do with sprinting, and compared to running, 6/7 min is already beyond middle distance.

And runners. Take a guy like Gebreselasie. Top marathoner, but also a strong 1500, even his 800 was not slow. Mo Farrah, ditto..etc

Oh, yes, top runners can run great times at different distances but they change their training accordingly. They usually transition from being top track runners to being long distance runners as they age. That's because they can no longer compete with the youngest and strongest runners on the track.

Have you ever heard of the McMillan calculator?

https://www.mcmillanrunning.com

You can extrapolate your time at any distance based on your race results. I'm pretty sure the same thing is true of rowing.

You can't be a 2:49 marathoner if you're not a 5:00 miler. It's just not going to happen. If you concentrated on the mile, you could perhaps be a 4:45 miler, and you tell the marathon to take a hike.

I don't consider 6/7 minutes as beyond middle distance, I would say 5000m and up, 13 minutes or more is middle distance. I guess it is how you look at it. To a 400m runner, 1500m is middle distance, LOL.

I think you guys are trying to kill me by putting me up to 160,000 to 240,000m of rowing a week. Have some pity on me. I don't believe that kind of volume is necessary to achieve an excellent 2k time. I will ask Chris Ives about his volume. He's a guy who has certainly achieved an excellent 2k time. Of course, he does have 40 years of rowing behind him.

[hjs]

Larry disagree. 5k is certainly not middle distance. Mile is max for that to me. Middle distance to me means having to do real speed work.

Ps Peter Snell en co, 800 meter gold olympian, ran a marathon or more every week in his training, under Lydiard.

Ofcourse there are relations between distances, you need a certain basespeed to get something done. And age and not being fast anymore is really only partly true. This year the first 40 year old ran a sub 10.00 100 meter.

For myself getting close to 50, last season I pulled my 500m pb, which I will better this year. Also will go for a deadlift pb. Ofcourse in my youth I could have done better. But looking at age is not usefull. Look how you train, where you can Improve.

But, I get the feeling we not on the same page. Simply get to work talk is just talk, do the walk and see where you get.

[ArmandoChavezUNC]

I think you guys are trying to kill me by putting me up to 160,000 to 240,000m of rowing a week. Have some pity on me. I don't believe that kind of volume is necessary to achieve an excellent 2k time.

It all depends on your goal. Do you want to be in the top 99% of your age/weight class? Do you want to be in the top 10? top 100? Really the training needed is dependent on your goals.

I don't get anywhere close to 160k a week - I max out right around 120k. I haven't 2k-tested since February but I suspect my time right now is in the mid 6 teens. In another year or two with my current volume I think it's possibly I could go sub 6:10, but probably not much faster. If I wanted to get to 6:00 or below, I'd definitely need to put in at least 1.5x the volume I am putting in now, if not closer to 2x as much.

Remember that it gets harder and harder the faster you get - it's the law of diminishing returns (and the exponential nature of watts to splits).

[G-dub]

Larry, the journey you are starting is just that, a journey. What you are doing today, and are capable of today, will evolve. The conventional wisdom is for 80% of the meters be in the aerobic zones and the rest in the more intense zones. So you make as many meters as you can without hurting yourself or burning out and you get out of it what you put into it. But as hard as it is to accept, and I sure have tried to rationalize it like you are, the 2K is 80% aerobic. Tthe more capacity there is the better you will do. Certainly staying in touch with speed and power is part of it, but it's mostly, unfortunately, about sitting on that dang thing for volume. So for you to get to 7:00 may not require unbelievable volume because of your size and maybe even the fitness you are brining into this. But to get the absolute best time you could ever do, you would have to make a different set of commitments. So it's really about what you want to get out of it!