Nov 27 2015

# Strength & innocent number play

**Today’s session**

Strength training today, preceded just by a prolonged warming up on the erg (3km at very easy pace).

The same set as last week.

- Pull ups – 10/9/7
- Pistol Squats with a dumbbell – 15/15/15
- Dorsal raise on Gym Ball – 15/15/15
- Squats –
**purple**bodylastics band – 15/15/15 - Crunches & twist
**with dumbbell**10/10/10 - Squatted row with orange bodylastics band – 15/15/15
- Lunges with dumbbell – 15/15/15
- Breast press with
**black**bodylastics band – 15/15/15

The bold is where I went up a notch in terms of resistance. I need to find a way to increase the resistance on the leg exercises. I’d like to work in a 10-15 rep range, lowering the resistance if I can’t do 3×10, increasing it if 3×15 is achieved easily.

I feel I am nearing the end of the first “block” of strength training and need to start defining the second block.

**Some play with numbers**

All the lactate measuring has stimulated me to reread a physiology book I own. In chapter 2, “fuel for exercising muscle”, I found an interesting figure that indicated the “typical” maximal rate of ATP generation (in mmol ATP/kg dry mass/s) for the different energy pathways, as well as the maximal available energy.

Assuming 7.3 kJ/mol that can be released from ATP, of which 60% goes to heat directly, and assuming a mechanical efficiency of 25%, a 72kg LW man should be able to produce 630W for about a minute. (I am ignoring the PCr pathway.) Assuming that on shorter rows (<500om) the average power from glycolysis is determined by the maximum available energy through glycolysis, I am able to make a crude approximation for the power and pace dependence on distance rowed.

The blue dots are the Nonathlon target pace/power for my age and weight group. The black line is my prediction.

I am amazed that this crude calculation even ends up in the right ballpark. Sometimes calculating things seems to work. My calculation also gave as a result that during a 2k, roughly 85% of the power comes from aerobic energy pathways.

Of course a couple of things are wrong. First, the nonathlon values are an average over age group records. They don’t represent one typical rower. We all know that there are sprinters and steady state rowers. Second, I have no model for the decline of the power from Aerobic processes as the distance increases, so my prediction. is too fast for any distance above 10k. It is also interesting that the 2k is faster on nonathlon. Could this be because the 2k is the standard distance? Finally, the balance of the different pathways as a function of power is individual and much more complex than my crude model.

gregsmith01748

November 27, 2015@ 6:19 pmAn interesting model. One thing that struck me was that the nonathlon targets are done by distance. So it is likely that individual will be skewed to shorter or longer distances. If you split your model into a fast twitch and slow twitch contribution you might be able to improve correlation.

It might be fun to collect individual nonathlon data into a family of curves to compare against.

Take me to the river … No | Rows And All

February 11, 2016@ 9:12 pm[…] So horizontally it shows the interval length in minutes on a log scale, and vertically (erg) power. The solid blue line is the best effort the program found in my training data. So, for example, at the edge of the “Z7” and “Z6” zones, you can see that I have done a full minute at just under 400W. This was from the 1 min on / 1 min off session on January 4. Actually, the entire “Z7” part of the curve is from that session. The red curve is my 2k erg test from November 15. The dashed blue line is a (pretty bad) fit. I guess that with more data the fit will become better and the whole thing could become a kind of a pace predictor. Reading about their model, I discovered that it’s a more sophisticated version of what I did in this blog post. […]