The Woverine Plan Versus The Pete Plan

The two plans are similar in what they prescribe on the face of it but does anybody know what the real differences between the two plans are?

Is one more effective than the other?
Are they both as tough mentally and physically as each other?
Has anybody followed both and can provide pluses and minuses for both?
Which plan would you recommend and why?

I would be particularly interested in hearing from Pete Marston and Mike Caviston on this but any and all opinions are most welcome.

Thanks.

I grew up on the Wolverine plan, then used sessions that are very similar to ones tweaked by Pete. Both plans are very good, and give a focus.
I think the real difference in any one training plan in terms of *philosophy* would be rating.... Low rating (power per stroke) v Slightly Higher (rythym) rating. I tend to think which ever you choose they seem to come togethor at race pace (ie at race pace the ratings are +/-2strokes within each other.)

IMHO personal physiology; age; time to train; diet and recovery tend to direct people towards greater success with one more thn the other.

The only practical difference between the two is the lack of "level 4" type low rate rowing in the Pete Plan. The Pete Plan originally came from the Wolverine plan, which I followed for a while, then tweaked to fit in with my schedule / goals / other commitments / physical and mental strengths and weaknesses.

The differences are - followed in full the WP would have you rowing around 11 or 12 sessions a week, many of which at very low ratings. The WP takes a lot of reading and understanding.

Remember that I wrote the PP as a training plan for me to follow, never any intention of other people following it originally.