About what I figured . . . I got the TICKR, which, along with the Polar, was recommended in r/rowing; even if it's not accurate, hopefully it's precise.

I worded that wrong, percentages remain the same but the actual training heart zones will be higher than normal.

Damn If you hit 185 you gotta be a bit over 190. Too bad it means jack shiet.

I've hit 202 at the end of a 10k race when I thought I was dying.

10/27: W7D3

A
OHP: wu, 115x8x3, x6
Pullups (bw): 3x8

B
CGBP: 165x9x2, x7
Hammer Strength Row: 3x12

C
DB Incline Fly: 3x14
Facepulls: 6x12

Misc
Skullcrushers: 75x12x3
Rope Upright Row: 3x12
Overhead Rope Tri: 3x12

60 minutes.

Decided to just make it official and condense down to an upper/lower split officially, considering I've been skipping back day after rowing around half the time. Supersetting in back is obviously something I'm used to, and took not that much additional time, so seems worth it.

10/28

PP W5D3: 7000 m (total: 1:59.5/24 spm/179 HR)

1.4k1 - 1:59/24 spm/171
1.4k2 - 1:58.7/23 spm/178
1.4k3 - 1:59.6/24 spm/180
1.4k4 - 2:01.1/25 spm/181
1.4k5 - 1:59.1/25 spm/187

Felt kind of sluggish, but better than the last time I did this distance; kind of faltered towards the end, understandably so given my HR, apparently. Still a fair bit of room for progress, it seems.

HR looks really high for an endurance session. These are meant to be fairly comfortable. There should be no need for faltering if you're sluggish because the pace is that easy. The general advice for most people cardioing is to slow down the endurance ones.

I can't really comment because I didn't even know what that is. Rowing rotation is messed up. Are those 1400m intervals? Where is the recovery? Is that time per 500m? I don't know who made this crap notation up.

Steady state, no rest between - those are just the splits.

Rowing "pace" is time per 500 m, yes; this was 7k with no breaks.

And I am assuming this is the maximum lactate steady state, where lactate produced is being balanced by lactate being removed.

So this is a 28 minute lactate threshold row. Which is close to what a tempo run is.

Yeah these blow but since your lactate threshold is 20 beats above mine, the heart rate data is fine.

I still think this type of training is overrated. The science is split on the results but I think the main reason is that for many folks, this type of training is race specific. So it basically teaches you to be able to hang out at these heart rates without crying uncle because of your innerEV.

Not a fan but I am also of the opinion that these workouts make you leave the gym like you are floating on clouds. I believe they cure depression, the endorphin release after 15 minutes must be off the charts. So I occassionaly put up with this crap.

That you are even putting up with this crap all by your lonesome on a C2 in a corner of a wall, is impressive. Montecore power rating increase, maybe this guy doesn't have a small heart after all. Which probably means my most dangerous challenger to S&Fs fittest man title. Worried now.

You're right loco, but pete's plan doesn't call for a lactate threshold row. It calls for just general endurance.

I agree. I think the long rows on BPP are supposed to be done at UT1 level which I believe is 65-75% of max heart rate.

Yeah I don't even know what bpp is and don't plan on even looking at it seriously. I did get a hit that it's hellish.

What is this for? A good 2k time?

I have done everything from hell to easy plans for endurance training. I gravitate towards polarized, much better for my tastes. So intervals and long easy stuff.

It's a rowing plan for beginners (Beginners Pete's Plan) to prepare them to train on the Pete's Plan, which is a training plan for 2k races.

So, assuming the 75% is a reasonable goal, I should be sticking to around 150 HRM for the steady state work? Seems like it might be kind of slow, but I'll see how it goes I guess.

As I was alluding to when I originally asked this question, I didn't really have any idea if I should be training to a pace or training to a heart rate, albeit trying to increase work capacity/efficiency using whichever path chosen. I'll try HR based training for a bit, but don't want to use it to backdoor outsized influence from my innerEV.

Well I did waste my time looking at it. Good luck with that 12000m row coming up in a month or two.

I mean there are different ways to skin a cat. For example mile training has higher intensity stuff. And there are marathon programs with higher intensity stuff.

Here I saw that there was an option for adding a couple of easy days. If you are only doing three days a week, then even the steady long row can be slightly higher intensity.

Based on some forum posts I saw, this is a very challenging program. I would immediately go to the suggested lowest min spm for the long steady row. I think that's 21. See how this affects heart rate. Even according to whoever this Pete guy is, the steady rows are defined by comments like this to define a 6000m row

….............
The distance is still increasing by 500m each week, but your fitness and technique will be progressing rapidly too, so I bet you want to row further than this?

Look back at the average pace of your last 5000m session a few days ago. Aim to row at that pace consistently through this session, and don’t give in to any temptations to go faster, especially towards the start. Remember “technique, relaxation, efficiency”.

............

That sounds like it shouldn't be a ball buster day.


Also I have rowed a tiny bit, and I am blasting 40spm for my 500m intervals. 21 most be a joke. But maybe not so much for a tall. Like I said, I will be the first to say I don't know much about rowing. But WTF at using spm to guide intensity.

He's not using SPM to guide intensity. You can maintain the same SPM while greatly varying intensity. He's stressing the lower SPM on the long rows in order to get the trainee to focus on developing a powerful and efficient stroke.

Pete's Plan is no joke. Many strong rowers train with it.

Yeah, I don't get it, on Pete's plan I only saw spm to suggest the long row intensity . So he is pulling with too much power? Why is he working so hard? And so why log the spm instead of the wattage?

loco,

I'm doing four rowing sessions every eight days, with an upper/lower lifting split the other four days. Not really sure where to fit in an extra session in there, but it may end up happening at some point.

I'm working so hard because I'm trying to make sure I keep a sub 2 minute pace, which is apparently pretty strenuous for an old man. 2:03-2:04 would probably be loleasy; I'd imagine I'll probably have to drop the pace at least a bit as the meters keep increasing.

Why is that important (the sub2 pace)?

The later weeks you are doing 10000m+ every week for the long row, looks awful near lactate threshold heart rate.

What a load of loco aids.

Monte,

Move down to 2:15-2:10 for long rows. You should be able to double the distance without any real issue in maintaining pace. Also, congrats on being able to get your heart to beat really fast and not die?

loco,

Because cardio is supposed to be pain and 2 minutes is a nice round number?

DM,

2:15 is a pace I could basically do ad infinitum, but 2:10-2:05 seems semi-reasonable. We'll see what the HR data says I guess? If 150-155 feels doable for an hour+, I guess that's my answer. Re: fast heart rates, see my answer to loco; this is mostly a socially acceptable form of cutting myself.

I saw a nice little chart by Terry O'Neill that had UT1 at 70 to 80% of MHR/20-24 spm.

So that makes sense that you went with 24spm for the shorter ones. But looks like your heart rate is too high and you need to start gravitating to 20 spm now.

And to me it makes sense that I would use closer to 24 and you closer to 20, even maybe 19. But hey, just trying to learn this stuff, just in case.

I definitely trend towards higher stroke rates as I get tired, which probably means my initial pace is too high . . . Meh. I'll try something like ~2:05 for tomorrow's row and keep it down towards 20 spm and see if that's any more sustainable HR-wise.

loco,

Umm... stroke rate and effort aren't really correlated in the way you think. I literally posted about this before. There is certainly a tradeoff, but just saying "dropping your stroke rate will lower your heart rate and time" would not be accurate.

https://www.sas.com/content/dam/SAS/...eid=e650405f24

This may help clue you in since they exclude SPM for novices due to a variety of body types/technique issues present with novice rowers that virtually don't exist at high levels where everyone is about the same level of mongo tall and has literally world class technique!

Monte,

Sure, would agree with all that. Generally undershooting your intensity on longer rows is better than overshooting. Overtraining is a real thing especially when just starting out on a whatever program.

Monte, ignore what loco says about stroke rate. Faster stroke rate does not necessarily mean faster splits and higher heart rate.