Benefits of long-distance aerobic training

[Charles Carroll]

Dear all,

Here is a brief and very nice paragraph by Volker Nolte on long-distance
aerobic training. You can find it in the July 2015 issue of the “Rowing
News” on p. 58.

“If you were to choose one — and only one — type of workout to improve your
rowing, what would it be? (Disclaimer: Such a regime will not lead to
optimal training results.) Physiologically, about 80 percent of the energy
you need in a race comes from the aerobic energy supply system. That’s your
body’s capacity to turn glycose and oxygen into energy, with dioxide and
water left as end products. Those who can produce the largest amount of this
type of energy can row the fastest. And the best way to develop this system?
Long-distance training. Throw in a few high-intensity bursts of 10 strokes
or less and you have a built-in strength component. So long as you give
yourself a minimum of five minutes between pieces, you can perform this
workout over and over without worrying about having to recover. (Anaerobic
workouts require significant recuperation time and thus can’t be repeated
easily.) The goal of long-distance training is to get your body moving
efficiently over a long period of time. The beauty, in addition to how
repeatable it is, is how much variation it allows for. Whether you row at an
18 or tap it long at 24, the result—improved aerobic fitness—will be the
same.”

I am concerned about the proposition that you can do long-distance aerobic
training without worrying about having to recover.

I know that many of you have trained hard for serious competition — i.e. 3
to 6 hours a day, 6 days a week. Have you found that you don’t have to worry
about overtraining so long as you limit your workouts to long-distance
aerobic training? Or have you eventually had to take in account the complete
volume of training?

I would think that after hours and hours of long-distance aerobic training
you are going to have to take into account recovery time. But I haven’t put
in the hours of training to know whether this is true.

Just curious …

Cordially,

Charles


---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

[Charles Carroll]

Christian Dahlke once told me that 92 percent of his training was
long-distance aerobic training. Christian was in the German lightweight
eight (LM8+) that set the World Record for a 2k back in 1992 — i.e. 5:30.24.
The record still remain unbroken.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_world_records_in_rowing#Men

I am sorry I didn’t ask Christian about planning for recovery during his
training.

[I. M. Rowin]

" So long as you give yourself a minimum of five minutes between pieces, you
can perform this
workout over and over without worrying about having to recover. (Anaerobic
workouts require significant recuperation time and thus can’t be repeated
easily.)"

I read this as referring to recovery between the 10 stroke high intensity
pieces, not the total workout. I do this sort of thing often, with 10-20
race pace bursts over an hour and a half of SS rowing. It seems quite
beneficial. The bursts keep the attention level up, emphasizing proper
technique.

I. M.

[Charles Carroll]

How interesting! It never occurred to me to read Volker’s premise your way.
This is exactly why I love rsr so much.

Let me see if I understand you. In a 90 minute Steady State aerobic workout
you do 10 to 20 10-stroke high intensity pieces with about 5 minutes
recovery time between each piece.

Am I correct in thinking that in your 10-stroke high intensity pieces your
heart rate climbs to an anaerobic level? What do you do during the recovery
time to get your heartbeat to return to an aerobic zone? Do you paddle
lightly? Or do you pause and wait?

Somewhere I seem to remember reading that when the heart has been beating at
an anaerobic rate and then drops to an aerobic heart rate, you still tend to
draw energy from the anaerobic energy supply system. In other words, it is
much easier to move from an aerobic zone to an anaerobic zone than it is to
move in the opposite direction. I don’t know if this is true. My memory
these days leaves much to be desired. But I think this may be why Volker
writes, “Throw in a few high-intensity bursts of 10 strokes or less.” I read
“10 strokes or less” as Volker’s way of trying to keep us drawing energy
from the aerobic energy supply system. Once you change to the anaerobic
energy supply system it is much harder to go back.

I have a friend who years ago was racing the long course at our Annual Lake
Tahoe Regatta when he capsized. By the time he climbed back into his shell
everyone else was way ahead of him. To catch up he pulled really, really
hard in a fast sprint and thoroughly exhausted himself in less than a
minute. At that point everything seemed useless and he quit trying. It took
about 15 to 20 minutes of sculling in a mild aerobic zone before he
recovered. This made him realize, he said, that while you can switch from
aerobic to anaerobic very quickly, it takes much longer to switch back the
other way.

[I. M. Rowin]

As long as I space the speed bursts at least several minutes apart, my HR
only increases about 20 bpm over the 10-12 strokes. During longer anaerobic
pieces, it usually takes 2-3 minutes for my HR to level out to a new bpm.
That may be due to my advanced age :-( At the end of each burst I
immediately return to my SS rate. The HR quickly drops back down after a
few strokes.

This is very different from Tabata workouts where the recovery period is
only half of the high intensity period.

I.M.

"Charles Carroll" wrote in message news:cvtnrd...@mid.individual.net...

[thomas....@googlemail.com]

Its worth noting as well that the question asked was

"If you were to choose one -- and only one -- type of workout to improve your

rowing, what would it be?"

With the disclaimer that this would not be the most effective way to train. Given the question, Volke's response is inline with research that has shown 80%+ of the energy used in a 2000m is aerobic, and also large amount of study data (not just rowing but all other sports) which that suggest that long aerobic workouts with short amounts of high intensity is the way to go and.

But as the disclaimer says, this is thought to not be the most effective way to train, ideally instead you would split the high and low intensity workouts into separate sessions in a "polarised" training plan where 80% (or more!) is long aerobic sessions and the remaining 20% are higher intensity sessions.

The link below shows a summary of the German squad back in 1985-88 where they logged their training and you can see this split in table 2 where they spend the vast majority of their time at aerobic (or sub 2mmol) and the rest

http://www.worldrowing.com/uploads/files/3Chapter4.pdf

Under a Polarised "aerobic" training plan like this recovery is still necessary, but it links back to the idea that the main mistake most make with a Polarised plan is that they make their light sessions too hard and their hard sessions too light. If you are doing the long sessions at the right intensity and have enough gaps between the higher intensity workouts then, as Volke states, you can fit the volume in without burnout

[I. M. Rowin]

I never considered the short bursts as adding much directly to training
effect, but more to maintaining/improving technical aspects of rowing.
Also, I find it helps to stay focused during the long pieces.

I.M.

wrote in message
news:08f3c99d-76a3-43a6...@googlegroups.com...

[Charles Carroll]

> the main mistake most make …

> is that they make their light sessions too hard and
> their hard sessions too light.

Hi Thomas,

Yes! The light sessions too hard and the hard sessions too light! That is my
sin exactly.

[stan...@gmail.com]

One of my favourite sessions encountered in 20+ years in the sport and one I may adopt more and more now as toddlers are very time hungry.

It goes:
4 mins UT2
3 mins UT1
2 mins at circa 5km pace
1 min at 2km pace
4mins UT etc.

repeat for a total of 40-60mins with spinning the boat around occurring in one of the 4 minute blocks.
It's hard but doesn't kill you and is easy to do several times a week.

I stole it off a winning American Coach who said that he did this 60mins x 3 times a week on the erg when it was frozen, alternating with light cross training. and then the same on the water after the thaw.

Some of the Danish sessions are also interesting and very time efficient but brutal. Hard is definitely hard for them.

[thomas....@googlemail.com]

> Some of the Danish sessions are also interesting and very time efficient but brutal. Hard is definitely hard for them.

People with limited time can check out Rojabo, its a paid subscription service which provides a training plan based on your results from two tests (a power efficency test and an endurance test) that then spits out your estimated current 2k and a predicted potential 2k.

http://www.rojabo.com/

It is based on and run by ex-Danish lightweights so, as you say, the sessions tend to be more short and sharp, but if you cant commit to the long sessions required for a Polarised plan id recommend it as a great way to set up a training plan

[Gregory Smith]

Hi,
I subscribed to Rojabo and followed the program for about 4 or 5 months. I thought I would share my experiences.

A little about my background. I am a 52 year old, male rower. I've been rowing for about 6 or 7 years, the last 4 years I've rowing indoors in winter and OTW whenever there isn't ice. I did Rojabo sessions testing on the erg and the sessions almost exclusively on the water.

1. The plan critically depends on how you complete the tests and this is harder to do than it sounds. You are specifically instructed to not push the initial power test too hard, and then you are instructed to push the endurance test as hard as you can. In fact the instructions recommend that you gather your tribe around you to chant while you do it (or words to that effect). What happened to me, and to others is that you push too hard in the power test and thus fail early in the endurance test. When that happens the "plan" concludes that you are a bad little anaerobe and feeds you a diet of sessions designed to improve your aerobic fitness.

On the other hand, if you don't push the power test hard enough, you will go too far in the endurance test and the plan concludes that you are aerobically dominant and feeds you more speed sessions.

It is a challenge to complete the tests knowing that you essentially can decide what flavor plan you want.

2. I found all the sessions to be very intense, even the "D" endurance sessions. My HRs for most sessions ended up near 90% of HRmax. When the recommended warmup was included (which takes about 15 to 20 minutes), the total workout time was close to what I was doing for a more traditional polarized plan. The difference was that there were no "easy days".

3. Over the course of 2 to 3 months, my mid-range speed improved significantly and I did much better in fall head races last year than the year prior, but I plateaued at that point and began to dread training. So I changed back to a polarized plan.

4. One aspect of the plan is rate limited pieces with specific pace targets. The targets obviously need to negotiable for OTW sessions, but they still are really challenging to hold. A result of this was that I ended up pushing my stroke pressure way up and that made it a multiple month project to get back to being able to rate up with a light, crisp stroke.

So, I would recommend Rojabo as a change of pace for a 3 to 6 month period, but plan on a couple of dry runs at the testing to get to something that you feel accurately represents the balance between power and endurance that you've demonstrated in other training. Be careful about burn out.

[wmart...@gmail.com]

On Monday, July 6, 2015 at 8:45:22 AM UTC-4, I. M. Rowin wrote:
> I never considered the short bursts as adding much directly to training
> effect, but more to maintaining/improving technical aspects of rowing.
> Also, I find it helps to stay focused during the long pieces.
>
> I.M.
>

There's quite a body of literature about HIIT (High Intensity Interval Training) where there are short bursts of very very high intensity work interspersed with long intra-workout recovery periods during the session (e.g., 7 x 30 seconds full-tilt-boogie (or, Category 1 in Volker's nomenclature, or similar to a Wingate bike test) with 5 or more minutes of almost-nothing-paced (e.g., 40-50% effort))
Do these, and you don't tax your anaerobic reserves too much (don't deplete your glycogen levels in the muscles) and you don't need much inter-workout recovery.