The training programmes that produce Olympians are, needless to say, outstanding. It’s also true that there are certain fundamentals to almost every successful programme: UT2 mileage, erg pieces, technical drills. But the marked differences between the resources and goals of an elite programme and a local club can be disregarded when it comes to designing competitive training programmes. ‘Trickle-down economics’, so to speak, when a club or coach takes their cues verbatim from an elite programme when designing a programme for athletes, is a common occurrence.
There could be a number of reasons behind this:
- Coaches’ past experiences as rowers influencing their expected outcome for clubs.
- National governing bodies basing training and best practice on elite programmes.
- The overachieving mentality that is commonplace in this sport.
Whatever the cause, failure to be realistic about a group’s resources and goals and insistence on adhering to an elite standard works to the detriment of a club, its coaches and its athletes.
Money and resources
No local club can compete with an elite programme on boats, ergs, bikes and weights equipment.
Working within these limitations but still trying to mimic elite programmes, coaches frequently find themselves working around equipment shortages or coordinating multiple time slots for their athletes to erg or strength train.
What’s more, coaches themselves are in a way a resource to be contended with. Paid coaches will naturally have more time to dedicate to their programme compared to a volunteer-based rota of coaches in local clubs.
The athletes
There’s also the athletes themselves. By definition, a local club is drawing from a pool of less experienced athletes than an elite programme.
With new rowers or those coming from novice, most clubs are working with a spectrum of abilities and skill levels. This kind of group has to build up their training at the start of the season, often focusing on technique and injury prevention, before getting into serious mileage and season-defining erg pieces.
Jumping into an intense programme from the outset is frequently leads to frustration, burnout and injury, particularly for less experienced rowers.
The goals
There is also far more variation in the athletes’ individual goals in rowing. In contrast to an Olympic or elite programme with a clear common mission of achieving international success, a local club is more likely to be made up of both recreational and more competitive rowers.
Imposing one training programme and one goal on such a broad group can alienate newer athletes, or those who are balancing rowing with other commitments.
What’s the answer?
By no means is this to say that coaches and athletes should cast off every element of high-level training programmes as unattainable. I think that the best approach is to work in the elements that can be applied from elite programmes into local club programmes.
It is imperative, however, to be very realistic about the capabilities, commitments and resources that a team is working with, and have these considerations influence the training programme. I think it’s also important to allow athletes to give input – not just about the time or energy they can commit to training, but also to suggest what has worked for them in the past.
At the end of the day, the sport of rowing is sustained by a diverse array of athletes, coaches and clubs. Elite programmes are not the end goal for every athlete, and they shouldn’t be seen as a cookie-cutter template for every club’s training programme. Being realistic about the resources and goals of a local club and its athletes will be better on athletes’ mental and physical health, and more sustainable in the long term.
