Zone 2 is focused on mitochondrial adaptation and improvement over time. I think there's a fundamental difference between what's being talked about here vs. what's generally considered the benefits of Zone 2. I suppose it would be correct to state that "HRT Z2 isn't going to improve 'X' performance activity" if all you're speaking about is force work for say, rowing specific competitive performance. However, if mitochondrial health is the target improvement metric, I think it's a hard sell that ANY activity performed in that zone isn't beneficial; especially for those of us that view rowing as a tertiary cardio activity, meant to compliment a primary athletic pursuit other than rowing itself. Not saying the video is wrong, but a lot of people are commenting as if the title reads "Why ROWING is not ideal for Zone 2" when really, the video is supporting the inverse (as the ACTUAL title suggests): that "...Zone 2 is NOT ideal for ROWING". That's an important distinction.
Travis, you recruited me into rowing during high school from greater Lawrence. Recently I’ve been getting back into hitting the Erg and doing some more research for my training - I happened to stumble upon this video. Nice to see you and I appreciate everything brotha.
Cycling cadence is measured on each leg. Running on both legs. So they’re actually much more similar at about 180 per minute measuring both legs or 90 measuring one
I am trying to understand what your angle is, you have been back at this a few times. Aerobic base is a demand in sport irrespective of the skill and power demand specificity. Fighters like boxers or MMA run miles and miles in zone 2 in order to increase stamina, directly tranferable to a power sport. True, UT2 and Zone two are not the same, but we know that blood lactate in most people is highly correlated with heart rate during activity. The physiological changes zone 2 training induces are ubiquitous, irrespective of sport. And of course any rower will benefit with building aerobic base using long slow steady state. I am really struggling to understand what you are proposing.
Given the lower cadences associated with efficient rowing, I believe the key concept here is to balance the rower's aerobic capacity with his/her ability to impart sufficient power-per-stroke at the standard race lengths. If you extend the argument...although this might be a silly comparison...the elite power-lifter is likely not at all concerned with aerobic capacity in their training regimen.
@@matthewcirino8752 sure. But we know there is one way to build an aerobic base, which is irrespective of the specific requirements of the sport. Boxers run miles and miles every day when their sport is high intensity three minute rounds. But the physiological changes needed for stamina can only be induced by low heart rate steady state training. Unless Travis has found a unique method of developing an aerobic base unknown to the majority of athletes and trainers. So essentially he suggests that a training method to increase aerobic base used in every sport, is not suitable for rowing?
@Nooneinparticular987 I am not an accomplished rower myself but had the opportunity to live and train with British Olympic rowers at Uni, in prep for the Boat Race. Their training was 70% time spent at around 60-70% maximum heart rate. In terms of lactate for the majority of people this equates to UT2. There were also 3-4 weight sessions per week. And towards the race increase in intensity. This is the typical periodisation. Your body needs a few weeks to adapt to high lactate thresholds. The limiting factor and what takes the longest time to develop is the aerobic base. And this is only built with long max heart rate 60-70% sessions. Following other Team GB rowers like Cam Buchan, this type is training is what is still done. And I assume most rowing coaches use this method. As far as I understand form this video and previous, Travis suggests to row at higher intensity even for long rows. Not sure who else trains this way
Hey man, I hear what you're saying, but I'm a power athlete moreso than an endurance athlete. I squat over 2x my bodyweight, and I'm not a light guy. So I'm wondering if keeping a more traditional zone 2 would be fine for me since I don't get on the rower and ever feel like there's a lack of power. Happy to be wrong though and I'll keep my heart rate more around 80%.
Great question. Power is VERY specific to the motion being used, plus you must realize that your squat ability is a measure of strength, not power. There is no way to replicate the rowing stroke with weights or other resistance exercises, so if you want to maximize performance with rowing any kind of endurance-based distance (essentially anything more than 80 seconds) then you would need to use UT2, UT1 for your aerobic work. Neither of these are HR based zones, so don't let the 60/70/80 stuff distract you. While the majority of athletes will fall in the 70-80 range for UT2, it is a bell curve with a significant number of outliers and if you are one of those outliers HR training will sabotage your progress. My cliff notes version of what you should do is row in the 14-18 spm range, with a drag factor about 10-20 lower than you plan to race with, use a progressive warm up, then settle into a steady pace that is firm but sustainable. Ignore the HR. If you can say more than a couple sentences while rowing you're going too easy. If you can't get out one or two sentences without losing your breath then you're going too hard. Hope that helps. Good luck!
You can definitely train zone 2 effectively with the indoor rower, it just isn't the best way to maximize performance for competition as a rower. I would still encourage you to lean toward low end UT2 though as it will produce a better return for your time invested on the machine. Zone 2 on the erg is best trained with very good technique and high volume (90+ minutes).
What is your opinion about short track and long track speed skating? Short track appears to be closer to rowing as a power endurance sport whereas long track appears to be more of a muscular endurance sport. Appreciate your opinion.
Purely from the perspective of a spectator and not based on knowledgeable insight from direct experience with the sport, I'd say short track would not compare well to traditional rowing distances as the longest events appear to be in the 2' range (for men). Also, the POWER in power endurance denotes that there is a strength component. High performance rowers are generally competing at 34-43 spm which means there is a high power output per stroke to reach the same maximal efforts that use cadences of 90ish (cycling) to 180ish (running), and I'm guessing skating cadences are closer to running. I've always though long track skating would be an interesting activity to pursue as a cross training option for rowing though.
I came across this video randomly but there is a very simple solution: zone 2 is just the end of possible fat oxidation . After that you use mostly carbs, protein and lactate is produced as any product. Therefore lactate test. Idk know the exact Watts while rowing but the I guess they are too high during races or training. You can to any activity in zone 2. simple as that. More so, in cycling you can stay in the fat burning zone if you are well trained and manage your carbs and lactate etc. I guess even exceptional zone 2 training won’t match the watts in rowing so it’s shouldn’t be a big focus
You aren't taking cardiac drift into consideration. UT2 is more about perceived effort and not locked in to a heart rate zone. If you do an hour of UT2 keeping the same hrz you will find your splits get higher. If you follow perceived effort your splits will more than likely stay the same or drop. Don't forget rowers are generally training for a 2km distance
hi @swanagediverdan, I'm not following your point there. I've talked in depth about cardiac drift and its implications on the channel but fail to see how it is relevant to this particular discussion (beyond just another reason common HR training practices don't hold up under scrutiny)
My two cents: I always felt that the difference between an easy, steady-state row out to the start line of a race was a completely different activity than the race itself, or even just when the cox kicks up the stroke rate in practice. Technique and body tension have to be dialed in much more, and you don't get to auto-regulate the pace like you do in running or swimming.
When the average person looks up "What is Zone 2 training?" on the internet they will find a zone defined by HR. It is that "common knowledge" that I seek to debunk as it relates to rowing. Also, 99.9% of people using the indoor rower will never test their blood lactate, so discussions based on that metric are more or less irrelevant within this medium and it's audience.
Zone 2 is focused on mitochondrial adaptation and improvement over time. I think there's a fundamental difference between what's being talked about here vs. what's generally considered the benefits of Zone 2. I suppose it would be correct to state that "HRT Z2 isn't going to improve 'X' performance activity" if all you're speaking about is force work for say, rowing specific competitive performance. However, if mitochondrial health is the target improvement metric, I think it's a hard sell that ANY activity performed in that zone isn't beneficial; especially for those of us that view rowing as a tertiary cardio activity, meant to compliment a primary athletic pursuit other than rowing itself.
Not saying the video is wrong, but a lot of people are commenting as if the title reads "Why ROWING is not ideal for Zone 2" when really, the video is supporting the inverse (as the ACTUAL title suggests): that "...Zone 2 is NOT ideal for ROWING".
That's an important distinction.
You are right and his arguments are missleading,
Agree, I like rowing in zone 2, it’s all I use the rower for 😊
Travis, you recruited me into rowing during high school from greater Lawrence. Recently I’ve been getting back into hitting the Erg and doing some more research for my training - I happened to stumble upon this video. Nice to see you and I appreciate everything brotha.
Great to hear you're still rowing! Mike and I had a great time coaching you back in the day.
Cycling cadence is measured on each leg. Running on both legs. So they’re actually much more similar at about 180 per minute measuring both legs or 90 measuring one
Great point!
I am trying to understand what your angle is, you have been back at this a few times. Aerobic base is a demand in sport irrespective of the skill and power demand specificity. Fighters like boxers or MMA run miles and miles in zone 2 in order to increase stamina, directly tranferable to a power sport. True, UT2 and Zone two are not the same, but we know that blood lactate in most people is highly correlated with heart rate during activity. The physiological changes zone 2 training induces are ubiquitous, irrespective of sport. And of course any rower will benefit with building aerobic base using long slow steady state. I am really struggling to understand what you are proposing.
Given the lower cadences associated with efficient rowing, I believe the key concept here is to balance the rower's aerobic capacity with his/her ability to impart sufficient power-per-stroke at the standard race lengths. If you extend the argument...although this might be a silly comparison...the elite power-lifter is likely not at all concerned with aerobic capacity in their training regimen.
@@matthewcirino8752 sure. But we know there is one way to build an aerobic base, which is irrespective of the specific requirements of the sport. Boxers run miles and miles every day when their sport is high intensity three minute rounds. But the physiological changes needed for stamina can only be induced by low heart rate steady state training. Unless Travis has found a unique method of developing an aerobic base unknown to the majority of athletes and trainers. So essentially he suggests that a training method to increase aerobic base used in every sport, is not suitable for rowing?
@Nooneinparticular987 I am not an accomplished rower myself but had the opportunity to live and train with British Olympic rowers at Uni, in prep for the Boat Race. Their training was 70% time spent at around 60-70% maximum heart rate. In terms of lactate for the majority of people this equates to UT2. There were also 3-4 weight sessions per week. And towards the race increase in intensity. This is the typical periodisation. Your body needs a few weeks to adapt to high lactate thresholds. The limiting factor and what takes the longest time to develop is the aerobic base. And this is only built with long max heart rate 60-70% sessions. Following other Team GB rowers like Cam Buchan, this type is training is what is still done. And I assume most rowing coaches use this method. As far as I understand form this video and previous, Travis suggests to row at higher intensity even for long rows. Not sure who else trains this way
Hey man, I hear what you're saying, but I'm a power athlete moreso than an endurance athlete. I squat over 2x my bodyweight, and I'm not a light guy. So I'm wondering if keeping a more traditional zone 2 would be fine for me since I don't get on the rower and ever feel like there's a lack of power. Happy to be wrong though and I'll keep my heart rate more around 80%.
Great question. Power is VERY specific to the motion being used, plus you must realize that your squat ability is a measure of strength, not power. There is no way to replicate the rowing stroke with weights or other resistance exercises, so if you want to maximize performance with rowing any kind of endurance-based distance (essentially anything more than 80 seconds) then you would need to use UT2, UT1 for your aerobic work. Neither of these are HR based zones, so don't let the 60/70/80 stuff distract you. While the majority of athletes will fall in the 70-80 range for UT2, it is a bell curve with a significant number of outliers and if you are one of those outliers HR training will sabotage your progress.
My cliff notes version of what you should do is row in the 14-18 spm range, with a drag factor about 10-20 lower than you plan to race with, use a progressive warm up, then settle into a steady pace that is firm but sustainable. Ignore the HR. If you can say more than a couple sentences while rowing you're going too easy. If you can't get out one or two sentences without losing your breath then you're going too hard.
Hope that helps. Good luck!
If I’m not racing. Just using a rower for zone 2. I’m 76 and I have C2 rower. I do BJJ, Krac and I lift. I really don’t want to buy a bike
You can definitely train zone 2 effectively with the indoor rower, it just isn't the best way to maximize performance for competition as a rower. I would still encourage you to lean toward low end UT2 though as it will produce a better return for your time invested on the machine. Zone 2 on the erg is best trained with very good technique and high volume (90+ minutes).
What is your opinion about short track and long track speed skating? Short track appears to be closer to rowing as a power endurance sport whereas long track appears to be more of a muscular endurance sport. Appreciate your opinion.
Purely from the perspective of a spectator and not based on knowledgeable insight from direct experience with the sport, I'd say short track would not compare well to traditional rowing distances as the longest events appear to be in the 2' range (for men). Also, the POWER in power endurance denotes that there is a strength component. High performance rowers are generally competing at 34-43 spm which means there is a high power output per stroke to reach the same maximal efforts that use cadences of 90ish (cycling) to 180ish (running), and I'm guessing skating cadences are closer to running.
I've always though long track skating would be an interesting activity to pursue as a cross training option for rowing though.
I came across this video randomly but there is a very simple solution: zone 2 is just the end of possible fat oxidation . After that you use mostly carbs, protein and lactate is produced as any product. Therefore lactate test. Idk know the exact Watts while rowing but the I guess they are too high during races or training. You can to any activity in zone 2. simple as that. More so, in cycling you can stay in the fat burning zone if you are well trained and manage your carbs and lactate etc. I guess even exceptional zone 2 training won’t match the watts in rowing so it’s shouldn’t be a big focus
You aren't taking cardiac drift into consideration. UT2 is more about perceived effort and not locked in to a heart rate zone. If you do an hour of UT2 keeping the same hrz you will find your splits get higher. If you follow perceived effort your splits will more than likely stay the same or drop. Don't forget rowers are generally training for a 2km distance
hi @swanagediverdan, I'm not following your point there. I've talked in depth about cardiac drift and its implications on the channel but fail to see how it is relevant to this particular discussion (beyond just another reason common HR training practices don't hold up under scrutiny)
Sorry Travis. It was a reply to one of the comments here.
My two cents: I always felt that the difference between an easy, steady-state row out to the start line of a race was a completely different activity than the race itself, or even just when the cox kicks up the stroke rate in practice. Technique and body tension have to be dialed in much more, and you don't get to auto-regulate the pace like you do in running or swimming.
Zone 2 is not heart rate defined. It is also anchored on lactic below 2 mmole.
When the average person looks up "What is Zone 2 training?" on the internet they will find a zone defined by HR. It is that "common knowledge" that I seek to debunk as it relates to rowing. Also, 99.9% of people using the indoor rower will never test their blood lactate, so discussions based on that metric are more or less irrelevant within this medium and it's audience.
@@TravisGardner sure, but you completly miss the point of zone 2