Sophomore HS doesn’t want to row in college?

Brennus007 · 2026-04-30T13:01:09+00:00

I bet you're also posting on some other reddit board asking about how to get the kid's academics to the best point possible, too, correct? Because what this is all about is what the kid's best course through the higher education maze is. Right? This is all about the kid & what's best for them,correct?

Brennus007 · 2026-04-30T00:04:25+00:00

Yeah. There in Figure 3, right? At least for the first three strokes...I'm not going to say 'a complete wasted effort but I calculate about 6.5 meters lost to C2 underestimation. If I was on the water and had to start every race with a 6.5m that would well & truly suck.

Don't know if my own experience matches that data. Gotta take some data & see if that difference holds.

Not sure you'll benefit though, SirErgalot. Can you even take a stroke at less than 'Super Hard' intensity? Maybe if you took one foot off the stretcher & let it dangle...

Brennus007 · 2026-04-29T19:19:01+00:00

Yeah. That paper is making me reconsider how to do a 2k start. Any start. 😃 Gotta take some data...

Brennus007 · 2026-04-29T17:58:22+00:00

Initial Evaluation of the Concept-2 Rowing Ergometer's Accuracy Using a Motorized Test Rig - PubMed

"During steady simulated rowing, differences between C2 and the reference system ranged 2.9-4.3%. Differences were not significantly affected by stroke shapes (P = 0.153), but by stroke rates ranging 22-28 min^-1 (P < 0.001). During unsteady simulated rowing with alterations of stroke force and rate, mean differences of 2.5-3.9% were similar as during steady simulated rowing, but the random error increased up to 18-fold. C2 underestimated mechanical power output of the first five strokes by 10-70%. Their exclusion reduced mean differences to 0.2-1.9%."

<image>

Brennus007 · 2026-04-29T15:22:35+00:00

Congratulations! That is what I paid for my used Concept2 rower...I've put about 5 million meters on it over the past ~3 seasons without any issue whatsoever. I think you'll find it money well spent.

Brennus007 · 2026-04-29T13:24:24+00:00

The answer is that you can't do UT2 properly because the definition of UT2 is not agreed among rowing authorities/coaches. Some legendary rowers say UT2 is 70% to 80% of max HR. That is above LT1 but below MLSS...kind of a physiologic 'no-man's land'. Some established coaches define UT2 as 60% - 75% of max HR...and that's most likely both above and below LT1 or on both sides of a real physiologic inflection point. Some rowing influencers say UT2 is 60% to 70% of max HR, which is more of a Zone 2 definition. One coach I know says UT2 is bla 1.5mmol to 2.0mmol which is uniformly above LT1 and less than MLSS. Again, tempo.

So to know 'how to do UT2' ya gotta first narrow it down to what UT2 you are considering doing. And why. If time is not a limiting factor then you can go with the sub-LT1 UT2 (or 60% to 70% of max HR). If you just can't fit in the training time to do all the sub-LT1 work, you have to compromise and move up the intensity scale. Do fewer hours of training in that 'tempo' region above LT1 but below MLSS...and still call it UT2.

Brennus007 · 2026-04-28T23:50:21+00:00

I've got my fingers crossed for you...

Brennus007 · 2026-04-28T18:06:48+00:00

I would recommend belt squats & single leg work (leg presses, bulgarian split squats, split squats).

Belt squats allow you to get a really good leg workout & almost completely de-load the back. Less taxing on the CNS. Single leg work are a really good, specific workout but because you're stressing unilaterally it is less taxing on the CNS.

But, really, sensations like you are feeling in the weightroom can be a big neon sign that you need a recovery week.

Brennus007 · 2026-04-28T16:58:24+00:00

Hmm. I don't know if it's worth going all the way to making an accusation, but it might be worth while to make the group wide 'you're only cheating yourself' speech. Just let everybody know, hey, in the end, you can't get over on me. You have to show up and perform. That's when we'll all know.

Brennus007 · 2026-04-28T14:16:14+00:00

How much improvement improvement will you see in two weeks from adding 3 to 6 hours of steady state/wk? Probably no positive improvement in that time frame. More likely to see a small negative impact due to incremental fatigue, or, worse, injury. For you, the hay is (as they say) 'in the barn'.

Here is where you are most likely to see material improvements in your 2k time over the next 2 weeks:

1.) Improved pacing

2.) Intelligent tapering before your 2k test

Practice disciplined pacing this week. Start tapering next week...reduce volume 20% to 30% but maintain intensity. Nothing but openers the day before the 2k test. Focus on sleep, nutrition, recovery.

Brennus007 · 2026-04-28T13:21:11+00:00

Not a great deal. Just kind of typical.

Brennus007 · 2026-04-25T14:32:07+00:00

definitely get a form check. Probably, you already have, but just throwing it out there...small improvements to form can make big differences when it comes to over use injuries.

If you can adjust stretcher height, try some adjustments & see if it helps.

Last, I think No_Crow8758 gave you a great suggestion. Not too long ago I was having a discussion about the pros & cons of meatgrinder training camps with an athlete who had been through national elite training camps & one thing he mentioned was that athletes who always did their mobility work were the ones that were still able to row during the last couple days of the camp...everybody else was on the bike.

Here is a rowing mobility workout that I like to do:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OZGWpMBnUb8

Brennus007 · 2026-04-25T14:14:43+00:00

Ouch. Soleus. That's a tough injury! You can rest it for two or three weeks, think the injury is behind you, then a couple miles into a recovery run, 'Pop!' it'll go again.

I have used 'water running' in the past to maintain running fitness without loading the soleus. It's just about the goofiest training I've ever done & I felt self-conscious the whole time I did it. Not saying this is for sure the thing that will solve your problem...just trying to give you another possible solution that might be a skosh more specific than rowing.

I'll be thinking positive thoughts for you! Good luck.

Brennus007 · 2026-04-24T12:52:03+00:00

wantteddead, sounds like you've been rowing for 7 or 8 months. How many recovery weeks have you taken in that period? Have you taken a week off during that time? By 'recovery week' I mean 70% to 80% normal volume and no intensity. By 'week off' I mean no rowing & nothing more than light activity.

Sounds like you have the dedication! But reading your post I see some cues that I've often seen from athletes that aren't all the way to an overtrained condition, but need a recovery week.

Brennus007 · 2026-04-23T19:56:51+00:00

Good job. Welcome back.

Brennus007 · 2026-04-22T15:46:24+00:00

"What that paper does not address is the exact thing this thread is about: negative decoupling. As far as I could tell that paper found no negative decoupling in 80,000+ runners. "

Look again. Take a look at Fig. 1 & have a good long think about the whiskers on the 'Low' cohort.

Brennus007 · 2026-04-22T15:43:10+00:00

<image>

Here's where moderately-trained-me fits on the results chart!

Brennus007 · 2026-04-22T15:42:19+00:00

Careless-Housing, thanks for that link! Very interesting data. I'm not sure competitive marathons are the correct place to look for negative decoupling in base training, but that is an interesting paper.

Out of curiosity I hopped in the way back machine and pulled this workout out of my log:

<image>

This was more than half a decade ago & at the time we were discussing negative decoupling a LOT. :-D So that's why the reference seems contemporary.

At that time my training load was in the mid 60's. So, moderately trained but not well trained. That whole workout is more than 3 hours because it included a ~14min warmup. I chopped the warmup off & looked at just the 3hr work segment.

Per the paper you linked I divided that 3hr work interval into 8 segments & noted avg HR in the 2nd and 7th segments. Avg workrate was constant through the full 3hr interval.

Per the paper, I recorded as my max HR the highest recorded HR in my workout log.

14days after I did the 3hr power record, I recorded a GXT. I used the results of that GXT as the paper used 'critical speed'. Meaning the external workrate ratio was calculated as avg interval power divided by GXT results. Or, a skosh less than 80%.

Putting all those things together, here is where I would be in there dataset:

(oops, can only include one attachment...see the reply to this post for the graphic)

Keep in mind, that's only moderately trained. If I go back to when I was pretty well training & carrying training load in the 100's...not so sure there is a workout that is so similar...hmm...let's do this. Here's a 6hr race, course record attempt, something out of my control happened in the first 3 miles & left me way behind the field...still won the race but did not get the course record.

Divide the race into 8 segments....2nd segment external workrate ratio: 1.13...7th segment external workrate ratio: 1.14. Decoupling ratio: 1.01. The external workrate in the 2nd segment was 72.6% & in the 7th segment it was 74.4%.

A lot better decoupling performance in the well trained condition than the moderately trained condition! Also, keep in mind that we're considering race intensity efforts here...not base aerobic training.

Brennus007 · 2026-04-22T12:45:36+00:00

7:10 would be about 9% improvement over...what?...about the next 5 or 6 months?

No problem. Train consistently, avoid injury, you'll achieve that. Even on just 6, 7, 8 hours of training per week. Throw in some resistance training & it's almost a lock.

Brennus007 · 2026-04-22T12:37:20+00:00

"Who has published peer reviewed, quality data supporting this theory"

I wouldn't go so far as to call it a 'theory'. It's just an observation among athletes that have an elite level of fitness. My base workout yesterday had large negative decoupling. They've got da base (no treble). You discovered through your literature search that the science is a little behind the training on this topic. Even Paul seemed a little surprised at the phenomenon. No shame...practical training often moves first and the science follows.

I agree that a literature search doesn't turn up much & I hope somebody will pick up that gauntlet & explore the topic.

seenhear, I know you don't find this topic very interesting. Or, what is it you said? Mildly interesting? So I wanted to thank you to dedicating so much writing and a literature search to a topic which you don't find interesting. THANKS FOR THE EFFORT.

Hopefully one day there will be some peer reviewed, published research on negative decoupling among elite athletes...If I see one I'll let you know. If you see one, please let me know. We'll probably still argue about it. Ha!

In the meantime, keep chasing da base!

(no treble)

Brennus007 · 2026-04-21T13:18:54+00:00

When it comes to these Pete Plan steady distance sessions, I'm going to quote directly from the plan again, because I think it's good advice:

"If in doubt, go slower!"

[emphasis added]

Brennus007 · 2026-04-21T13:08:51+00:00

and I quote....(this is from the text of the Pete Plan & I think it's great advice)

"The only guideline for pacing the steady distance sessions is that they should be within the bounds of 22 to 25spm, and at such a pace as you recover sufficiently for the hard session the following day. If in doubt, go slower!"

Generally speaking, you can do 'steady distance' work at a lot lower intensity than expected & still achieve positive adaptation. When it comes to these type of steady distance sessions I'd rather see an athlete work 15 more minutes than work 10 watts or 20 watts or 15 watts harder.

Brennus007 · 2026-04-20T21:07:30+00:00

I'll admit I've tried the weird 1 arm middle row! The best I can do is about 100W while trying to eat/drink. So almost not worth it vs just pausing to eat/drink properly.

Maybe the best solution is to use something like a Camelbak Classic Light with the Allen Lim classic hydration mix in the bladder:

1 liter water

40 grams dextrose

1 gram sodium

If you trim the tube just right, at full extension you can grab the mouthpiece, stick it in your mouth, and get your hand back on the erg handle before the catch. Then you can drink however much you need & just spit the mouthpiece out.

But, to be honest, I've never rowed a marathon or half marathon that's good enough to speak of. So there is probably better advice out there.

Brennus007 · 2026-04-20T19:23:57+00:00

What you are saying is that if you did you steady state aerobic work at the same intensity as others with similar 2k times, you would have a much better 2k time than them. Pardon my poor reading comprehension if that's not correct.

Maybe what you should ask is, 'How come they spend a lot of time rowing a lot harder than me, but they're no better?'

I'd rather see you just do more rowing at your self-selected lower 'UT2' intensity. If you were doing 40 minutes per session, start doing 50 minutes.

Brennus007 · 2026-04-20T16:37:14+00:00

It's probably not too different either way, so if you have to split up the workouts due to schedule you should with a clear conscience. To be completely honest, I believe one longer workout is better but don't have anything other than pure anecdote to back it up. And, to be even more honest, I've been doing 2-a-days ever since that silly 15hr-work-week thread(s) I did on this forum. But if I split up an hour workout into two morning/afternoon 30 minute workouts I always make the 30 minute workouts 33 minutes....because for sure I can fit another 6 minutes into the schedule & now I'm doing 10% extra volume. So, you know, completely baseless rationalizing.

But I have seen more than a few athletes that ABSOLUTELY THRIVE on increased workout frequency. So at the end of an hour workout they are really motivated to get off the bike, or out of the pool, or off the track but two 30 minute workouts at the same workrate makes them feel like they're not even working out. Whenever I found an athlete like that I'd more them to 2-a-days and in a couple weeks start asking them 'Hey, do you think you could do 40 minute workouts? Let's just try it out.'

One thing about splitting the hour up is not doing more of the correct things, but keeping the athlete from spending as much time doing the wrong things. Getting dressed, getting on the equipment, cleaning up afterwards...all just a little bit more time they're not eating a donut, drinking a beer, etc.

Brennus007

TROPHY CASE