Decline with age

[lindsayh]

Strength training needn't necessarily be to increase strength, especially once you're older. It could simply be used to maintain your current strength levels or minimise their decline. I'm also not particularly convinced by McNeely's tables for masters athletes (actually I'm not all that convinced by them full stop, but particularly the masters' tables).

My experience is that a lack of strength training will deffo slow down your 500m and 1 minute as expected but is harder to tell what impact it has on the 1k and above. I agree that it is going to be primarily aimed at slowing the decline. In the long term though the main benefit of strength training is the development and maintenance of muscle mass as there is a direct link between muscle mass and longevity. It is often measured by grip strength as a convenient and comparable metric. There is a long term large group longitudinal study been going in Hawaii for 30 years and I understand that the surviving men are the ones with the strongest grip. Longevity is also positively linked to the ability to stand on one leg - a proxy measure of core strength. Muscle also produces IGF2 which is positively linked to longevity and good health.

[jackarabit]

@Jerek Kruger: Tom, my personal problem with large volumes of work in UT2 power zone was getting grooved to that effort level. This year I’ve reduced volume by roughly 25% and moved comfortable, bread n butter pace to mid-UT1 by simply refusing to work below 60% of 2kWatts (2k+23’) including WPs but excepting very short 2-3’paddling (<2k+55’) CDs.

[JerekKruger]

@lindsay - my problem with the tables is that if it's beneficial for a male Olympian to have a 1.8 times body weight deadlift then, so long as they can do so whilst also getting enough aerobic work in, why isn't it beneficial for any other level of rower? Sure, lower level and older rowers have less time and/or recovery capacity so perhaps reaching 1.8 times isn't possible when combined with the aerobic work, but if a 50 year old rower finds that they can already deadlift 1.15 times their body weight without dedicated strength training I'm not sure that I'd agree that they shouldn't do any.

I completely agree that for health/longevity, strength training seems to be a good idea.

@Jackarabit* - I think that's what I find difficult too. The sorts of paces I need to row at to be in UT2 just feel wrong and I've never really gotten used to them. The other problem I have is that my back tends to start giving me trouble when I spend a long time on the erg, regardless of the pace I'm rowing at. Of course this is something I should try to fix independently (probably through strengthening my core).

Funnily I just calculated what 60% of my 2k is (just under 2:00 splits), and it's almost exactly what I've been rowing the easier days of the Pete Plan at.

*I only just noticed the second "a" in your username.

[gregsmith01748]

2. That there is a huge body of compelling evidence that low intensity volume is highly correlated with faster performance over 2K to 6K distances.

This one interests me, but I don't think the answer is so clear for recreational athletes. For professional athletes who are training 20+ hours per week it seems fairly conclusive that (for most at least) doing the majority of their training at UT2 levels yields the best results. The question I haven't had answered is whether, for a recreational athlete who is only able to train for 10 or fewer hours a week, whether there's any benefit to rowing more of that at UT1 levels, or whether they're best sticking with UT2. Perhaps it's clear that 90 minutes of UT2 will yield more benefit that 45 minutes of UT1, but what if you only have 45 minutes of training time? Is the additional benefit of UT1 (if any) worth the additional recovery penalty?

If you've got any references that address this Greg I'd be interested. I'm at a University so can get to some papers behind paywalls.

1. That by most strength benchmarks, more strength work will not make me faster. (Using the McNeely guidelines from Rowing Faster)

Strength training needn't necessarily be to increase strength, especially once you're older. It could simply be used to maintain your current strength levels or minimise their decline. I'm also not particularly convinced by McNeely's tables for masters athletes (actually I'm not all that convinced by them full stop, but particularly the masters' tables).

Hi,

I agree that most of the published research is focused on elite athletes, the pickings are slimmer for recreational athletes. There are a few studies that looked at polarized versus threshold training approaches for sub-elite level athletes with less training time. Seiler summarized the findings in this paper:

http://www.sportsci.org/2009/ss.htm

The original source is this paper:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17685689
The conclusion that I came to is that the most effective way to plan training was to plan 3 hard sessions a week and then do as much LIT as I had time for on the alternate days. This changed the ratio of HIT to LIT to be closer to 25% / 75% versus the 10% / 90% of most elite programs.

WIth regard to strength training, I haven't seen any "real" research about it, but most of the things that I have read align reasonably well with the position that McNeely takes in Rowing Faster. Almost all sources agree that strength training is a useful part of a program for balance and injury prevention. I think it is even more important for athletes over 50 because of real research about changes in muscle composition.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3928819/

So, I am convinced that I should add strength training, but since I have limited time, what should I reduce to make room?

I certainly don't want to come off as having all the answers because I am genuinely struggling with this topic.

[jackarabit]

JerekKruger writes:

The sorts of paces I need to row at to be in UT2 just feel wrong and I've never really gotten used to them.

Actually my problem with mid-UT2 pace was that low UT2 pace began to feel even better. After 4MM+meters in 2016-17 season, I admitted to myself that I was a worthless, old fart who “. . . sits on the erg ALL day [huge exaggeration] and does NOTHING!” [also slightly hyperbolic as I never worked below 45% 2k watts]. Still a worthless old fart but 9”/500m improvement on yearly average pace in 17-18 to date.

[JerekKruger]

Thanks for the links Greg and don't worry, I don't read your posts as though your claiming to know all the answers. You have a lot of interesting insight into the scientific literature which I'm always keen to read.

I think your "the hard days then as much LIT" model makes sense, though the question of UT1 Vs UT2 still comes up for me (unless UT1 doesn't count as LIT). I guess partly it's a case of self experimenting and accepting that you'll never find the absolutely optimal training schedule.

[gregsmith01748]

I have always used the guideline that ut1 is lit. I usually do my endurance work with a hr cap at the top of the ut1 band. And adjust power up and down so I am near the cap in the last few minutes of the workout.

[gregsmith01748]

Hi,

I've been doing some more work on the statistical analysis of concept2 rowing rankings. I just published the first 2 parts of what will be a 4 or 5 part series of articles on the topic over on the rowsandall analytics blog.

Please check it out.

http://analytics.rowsandall.com/2018/02 ... thodology/

http://analytics.rowsandall.com/2018/02 ... ent-rates/

[Droode]

Hi,

I've been doing some more work on the statistical analysis of concept2 rowing rankings. I just published the first 2 parts of what will be a 4 or 5 part series of articles on the topic over on the rowsandall analytics blog.

Please check it out.

http://analytics.rowsandall.com/2018/02 ... thodology/

http://analytics.rowsandall.com/2018/02 ... ent-rates/

Interesting and well organized thoughts on aging and rowing performance, thank you for your work on this subject and making it readily available.

[bob01]

Ditto


When are the rest available.... Keep us informed please

ATB Bob

[Livio Livius]

Do not know if already mentioned but some scientific study on ageing in running by Elmer Sterken Endurance and Age: Evidence from Long-Distance Running Data. Well trained decline is 0,5-0,9% VO2max per year for masters.

https://www.rug.nl/research/portal/file ... /01E47.pdf

[sander]

I have been able to witness the preparation, analysis and writing up of the series of articles. Greg put a lot of effort into this, and I think it is entirely worth it. This could be a great source of information for Masters indoor rowers. A couple more articles are coming up and Greg will definitely keep you informed here (or I will do it if he forgets).

[hjs]

Andrew Benco 6.01,7 new WR 50 plus man.

Was 6.07 for a very long time. Andy Riply.

[Dangerscouse]

Andrew Benco 6.01,7 new WR 50 plus man.

Was 6.07 for a very long time. Andy Riply.

I have just seen this too. Absolutely stunning effort.

[Droode]

This is just bro science on my part but from the images of most first and second place finishers for men 40> That I have seen over the years the lean muscle mass to fat mass seems to be very important. My guess is that more muscle the more power and less energy wasted supporting useless fat, this seems to apply to both lw’s and hw’s however it seems some of the hw’s have the ability to use there fat and leverages more effectively than a lw could. I guess what I am trying to say is strength training is more important for the 40> athlete and younger men and women can get away with less also staying as lean as possible appears to create a more efficient athlete. Do not neglect your off the erg strength training and try and keep that fat off both will improve your quality of life and performance.