2000m row challenge

If your rower has a wattage output, the wattage on a 2k test is a pretty reliable stand-in for your V02 max, which allows you to peg an intensity number for all sort of programming
 
selfcritical said:
If your rower has a wattage output, the wattage on a 2k test is a pretty reliable stand-in for your V02 max, which allows you to peg an intensity number for all sort of programming
Click to expand...
do you have a table or something that correlates watt output to VO2max?
 
There's a goofy formula, but you can mostly ignore it, because programming usually goes "x percentage of vo2 max" when it's calculated off of that. So you can just take the wattage, and apply the percentages directly to it to target sessions.

For example the Tabata protocol has each interval pegged at 170 percent of VO2 Max. You do your test, get 200 watts as your average for the 2k, and try to stay around 340 watts for each 20 second interval

http://www.concept2.com/indoor-rowers/training/calculators/vo2max-calculator this will do the math
 
selfcritical said:
There's a goofy formula, but you can mostly ignore it, because programming usually goes "x percentage of vo2 max" when it's calculated off of that. So you can just take the wattage, and apply the percentages directly to it to target sessions.

For example the Tabata protocol has each interval pegged at 170 percent of VO2 Max. You do your test, get 200 watts as your average for the 2k, and try to stay around 340 watts for each 20 second interval

http://www.concept2.com/indoor-rowers/training/calculators/vo2max-calculator this will do the math
Click to expand...
170% of VO2 max? That doesn't make sense. Does the protocol say that, or 170% of your average wattage?
 
This study consists of two training experiments using a mechanically braked cycle ergometer. First, the effect of 6 wk of moderate-intensity endurance training (intensity: 70% of maximal oxygen uptake (VO2max), 60 min.d-1, 5 d.wk-1) on the anaerobic capacity (the maximal accumulated oxygen deficit) and VO2max was evaluated. After the training, the anaerobic capacity did not increase significantly (P > 0.10), while VO2max increased from 53 +/- 5 ml.kg-1 min-1 to 58 +/- 3 ml.kg-1.min-1 (P < 0.01) (mean +/- SD). Second, to quantify the effect of high-intensity intermittent training on energy release, seven subjects performed an intermittent training exercise 5 d.wk-1 for 6 wk. The exhaustive intermittent training consisted of seven to eight sets of 20-s exercise at an intensity of about 170% of VO2max with a 10-s rest between each bout. After the training period, VO2max increased by 7 ml.kg-1.min-1, while the anaerobic capacity increased by 28%. In conclusion, this study showed that moderate-intensity aerobic training that improves the maximal aerobic power does not change anaerobic capacity and that adequate high-intensity intermittent training may improve both anaerobic and aerobic energy supplying systems significantly, probably through imposing intensive stimuli on both systems.
 
So 170 percent of the intensity at vo2 max (measured in wattage) multiplied by 1.7....So here vo2 max and avg wattage @ vo2 max would be used interchangably.

Which is definitely not impossible- i've done it but it's vomit-inducing intensity.
 
selfcritical said:
This study consists of two training experiments using a mechanically braked cycle ergometer. First, the effect of 6 wk of moderate-intensity endurance training (intensity: 70% of maximal oxygen uptake (VO2max), 60 min.d-1, 5 d.wk-1) on the anaerobic capacity (the maximal accumulated oxygen deficit) and VO2max was evaluated. After the training, the anaerobic capacity did not increase significantly (P > 0.10), while VO2max increased from 53 +/- 5 ml.kg-1 min-1 to 58 +/- 3 ml.kg-1.min-1 (P < 0.01) (mean +/- SD). Second, to quantify the effect of high-intensity intermittent training on energy release, seven subjects performed an intermittent training exercise 5 d.wk-1 for 6 wk. The exhaustive intermittent training consisted of seven to eight sets of 20-s exercise at an intensity of about 170% of VO2max with a 10-s rest between each bout. After the training period, VO2max increased by 7 ml.kg-1.min-1, while the anaerobic capacity increased by 28%. In conclusion, this study showed that moderate-intensity aerobic training that improves the maximal aerobic power does not change anaerobic capacity and that adequate high-intensity intermittent training may improve both anaerobic and aerobic energy supplying systems significantly, probably through imposing intensive stimuli on both systems.
Click to expand...
Yeah it still doesn't make sense. 100% of your maximal oxygen uptake is as far as it goes, no matter what how much you push. I don't see how it would be possible to calculate the extra 70% even as an oxygen deficit, because it's not a linear change. It's not very well worded. If they mean +70% of your wattage at 100% VO2max, then it makes sense. As in 170% of your wattage at 100% vo2max.

I'm not too fond of "tabata" (it's HIT with short intervals and max effort) training in general as this holy grail it was marketed as. I don't like how they specified the starting and end point AND +/- values in the moderate group, but only showed the flat (I'm guessing mean?) difference in the "tabata" group. It seems disingenous, but I only read the abstract.

There's a few issues with the VO2max studies in general. Starting point matters a lot, as the relative potential of increase is much higher with a low starting point. Also, genetics. Some people respond well, and some just barely respond.

On another note, It's interesting that the highest VO2max recordings are all cross country, long distance runners and cyclists:
http://www.topendsports.com/testing/records/vo2max.htm

EDIT: Just saw your second post. Yeah I got it then, but the wording of 170% VO2max is a poor choice.
 
Sano said:
Yeah it still doesn't make sense. 100% of your maximal oxygen uptake is as far as it goes, no matter what how much you push. I don't see how it would be possible to calculate the extra 70% even as an oxygen deficit, because it's not a linear change. It's not very well worded. If they mean +70% of your wattage at 100% VO2max, then it makes sense. As in 170% of your wattage at 100% vo2max.

I'm not too fond of "tabata" (it's HIT with short intervals and max effort) training in general as this holy grail it was marketed as. I don't like how they specified the starting and end point AND +/- values in the moderate group, but only showed the flat (I'm guessing mean?) difference in the "tabata" group. It seems disingenous, but I only read the abstract.

There's a few issues with the VO2max studies in general. Starting point matters a lot, as the relative potential of increase is much higher with a low starting point. Also, genetics. Some people respond well, and some just barely respond.

On another note, It's interesting that the highest VO2max recordings are all cross country, long distance runners and cyclists:
http://www.topendsports.com/testing/records/vo2max.htm

EDIT: Just saw your second post. Yeah I got it then, but the wording of 170% VO2max is a poor choice.
Click to expand...

Oh I definitely don't think the protocol makes sense for most people, it was just the first thing where I knew the math off the top of my head.
 
IMG_3828.JPG funny enough, this is part of my HIIT cardio routine along with intermittent sprints on the treadmill.

That is my best time on the rower doing 2000m. I think I could better that by maybe 12-15 seconds
 
I don't understand this challenge. What setting / level do people have the rower on? It's all good people saying "10 mins. 8 mins. 7 mins" etc but no levels!
 
Bubzeh said:
I don't understand this challenge. What setting / level do people have the rower on? It's all good people saying "10 mins. 8 mins. 7 mins" etc but no levels!
Click to expand...

Mine was set to 6. I think someone mentioned that 6 is supposed to match the resistance level of real water.
 
Bubzeh said:
I don't understand this challenge. What setting / level do people have the rower on? It's all good people saying "10 mins. 8 mins. 7 mins" etc but no levels!
Click to expand...
It doesn't matter. on higher levels you will pull harder and get more power per stroke which will reduce your time, but you will fatigue more quickly and probably have worse technique and a lower stroke rate which will increase your time. So choose the level at which you can get the fastest time.
 
Tried 2,5km today and 100 meter sprint. Only because a buddy of mine tried it and wanted to compare times.

255rzig.jpg

Did 2,5km in 9:25, which would put my 2km at 7:37 at the same pace. Seeing that I can cut off 500 meters and have a little more gas in the tank, I think I can hit sub 7:30 on the 2km. It's a lot of fun to row so I'll probably start doing it regularly!

2a5naqq.jpg

100 meter was in 16,8s, I think I could shave a little off the start and finish.

Resistance was 7
 
Last edited:
My best ever at this was 7:04, although this was the first part of a sprint triathlon in my gym, so I was keeping a little in the tank for the upcoming cycle (something like 10km) and run (1 mile).

Yes it is very difficult, as with anything, getting your technique and 'beginner gains' you can quickly shift some big chunks off your time, but it gets a lot harder.

Incidentally I was a level 10 when I did this.

For anyone who has never really used a rower... get on and see how hard it is to pull at an intensity which brings the large number in the middle (your pace,per 500m), down to around 1:45.... basically that's what you need to do for 7mins... it's tough!
 
Bubzeh said:
I don't understand this challenge. What setting / level do people have the rower on? It's all good people saying "10 mins. 8 mins. 7 mins" etc but no levels!
Click to expand...

I mean, the damper isn't really a difficulty setting per se. The effort is reflected in total time or wattage. The damper setting should be based on what makes for a comfortable stroke for you, and mainly regulates how much air is drawn in. If you are very very strong, increasing the damper settings will actually make it easier.
 
selfcritical said:
This study consists of two training experiments using a mechanically braked cycle ergometer. First, the effect of 6 wk of moderate-intensity endurance training (intensity: 70% of maximal oxygen uptake (VO2max), 60 min.d-1, 5 d.wk-1) on the anaerobic capacity (the maximal accumulated oxygen deficit) and VO2max was evaluated. After the training, the anaerobic capacity did not increase significantly (P > 0.10), while VO2max increased from 53 +/- 5 ml.kg-1 min-1 to 58 +/- 3 ml.kg-1.min-1 (P < 0.01) (mean +/- SD). Second, to quantify the effect of high-intensity intermittent training on energy release, seven subjects performed an intermittent training exercise 5 d.wk-1 for 6 wk. The exhaustive intermittent training consisted of seven to eight sets of 20-s exercise at an intensity of about 170% of VO2max with a 10-s rest between each bout. After the training period, VO2max increased by 7 ml.kg-1.min-1, while the anaerobic capacity increased by 28%. In conclusion, this study showed that moderate-intensity aerobic training that improves the maximal aerobic power does not change anaerobic capacity and that adequate high-intensity intermittent training may improve both anaerobic and aerobic energy supplying systems significantly, probably through imposing intensive stimuli on both systems.
Click to expand...
Do you have a source for this?
 
Doesn't this really depend on the resistance level. My wife used to be a rower and trained with Olympic rowers (two of which were multi-gold medal winners). She was really good on the erg machine.

She was very powerful for a lightweight rower (she's 5'10"). The heavyweight chicks were just scary how strong they were.
 
therealdope said:
How about 70+ yrs of middle distance track, cycling, rowing and cross country skiing methods?
Click to expand...
I'm just looking for the study to show to a friend as opposed to a random post on sherdog ya fuckhead. If you spoke to me like that in person i would fkn chin you to yesterday.
 
LatFlare said:
I'm just looking for the study to show to a friend as opposed to a random post on sherdog ya fuckhead. If you spoke to me like that in person i would fkn chin you to yesterday.
Click to expand...

Probably would have a lot trouble catching me since I used a lot of speed training for endurance sports from the time I was 11.

Have you tried googling a review article of published data? http://www.sportsci.org/jour/04/cdp.htm
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,237,050
Messages
55,463,703
Members
174,786
Latest member
JoyceOuthw

Share this page

Back
Top