Numerous times each season rightly and wrongly I get ask similar questions about the sessions I have set on the program. Interestingly, there is rarely a question of the “validity” of the session set but more, how the session should be conducted or why perhaps they struggled with the session.

The below question is a real-life example. My hope is that by explaining my theory and thought behind the session rational athletes and coaches will hopefully have a better perspective of the program design and how to approach sessions. The purpose is NOT to ridicule the idea of asking the question and certainly not this question. Asking questions is a very health process and should be embraced at all costs.

Session in question:

2 x 5000m

Intervals Distance 2x5k/5:00r

2 x 5km @ 24spm Target HR 75-85% Max.

5' rest between pieces.

(this is exactly how it was written in the program)

Example of data available.

The Answer:

Let us start with the session that was set and remember that the information provided is relevant to the indoor rowing machine, specifically this case, the Concept 2. Output, usage, cause and effect are different depending on the type of machine you’re using. The detail (in my opinion) is concise, but all there. For most if not all sessions there needs to be a measure of output and you can elect to have a control factor should you wish too. In the case of this session there are three main measures and controls.

• Power output from the athlete – Splits, Watts (Measure)
• Stroke rating (Control)
• Heart Rate (Control)

Look at these factors as dose responses. Whilst not true in every scenario for many it is true. If you put more into one it will have a direct affect to increase another elements and visa versa if you reduce one. For example.

• If you increase the Stroke Rate, it will likely increase the power output (hopefully they are unified anyway) and thus in turn it will increase the Heart Rate too.
• If I then control the Stroke Rate but look to increase the Power, it will still have the same effect, it is likely though, that it may take the Heart Rate longer to increase, or it would not reach the same level.

In the case of this session. There are two controls in use. The first begin the Heart Rate with an optimal output of 75-85% Max. HR. The second is the stroke rate set at 24spm so therefore the measure of the session is the Power Output (00:00/500 or Watts). They are capped with rating and Heart rate targets, so they are only able to affect and control the power output.

Sessions may well be designed in a different way though. 

2000m (Free rate) TEST

• Measure is the Power Output, Heart Rate and Stroke Rate – the combination of these three will determine how quickly you can complete the distance
• There is no control because we are competing against ourselves looking for the biggest volume possible. It can be telling for the coach to know how the session is approached and what strengths the athlete might have.

3 x 6000m @ UT2 (Zone 2 – 65-75% Max. HR) with 2’ rest.

• The measure is the Power output.
• The control is the Heart Rate.
• In this scenario I would expect the athlete to decide the rating that best suits them. They cannot overstep the Heart Rate Control but there is no Stroke Rate control.

3 x 20’ @ UT1 (Zone 3 – 75-85% Max. HR) with 3’ Rest Rate 22-24)

• The measure is the Power Output or Distance Covered.
• The Controls are Heart Rate and Stroke Rate.
• Essentially, there is just another control to the session to either make sure people stay within the correct Heart Rate zone or perhaps to gain a unified result from a group of people to limit the potential variables with fewer controls.

There is no right or wrong and coaches will differ depending on the groups they are coaching, what they believe is the right thing or even what they are trying to achieve. One of the hardest things for a coach to engrain in athletes A) understanding of the intensity Zones and B) controlling them in the lower intensities.

Athletes are practicing this discipline for a very valid reason. They are motivated to be better. What a brilliant situation to be in; coaching people who want to be there and want to be better. Unfortunately, holding perspective over the situation at hand can be challenging. One of the biggest issues I face as a coach is getting people to understand that not everything I set is a test, seat race or some cunning plan to out someone from the boat. 

Remember it could just be because we’ve thought about the long-term training program and have some objectives we want to achieve. We would of course put sessions normally labelled… TEST, this one is normally the one to focus on for performance and best outcome. Even then though, if it is a monthly test it’s not about achieving a PB every single time especially if you’re an established athlete. The marginal change over the year might be smaller because you are closer to your peak for example.

The point really being the sessions are set specifically for a desired outcome. Mostly the outcome is to train the energy systems and the measure is largely irrelevant other than for checking for progress. 

Here is a quick checklist for adding perspective and understanding to a session:

1. Do you realise not every session is for selection?
2. Have you read the session detail?
3. If yes, what is your measure and what are the controls?
4. Do you understand why the coach may have set this?
5. If no, ask the question
6. Do you have a plan for your session? You understand the measure and controls so do you know how you plan to conduct the session?
   

If you have asked these questions and done these things you should be well on your way to conducting a good session.