I've completed 3 morning sprints of different lengths for an average of 2080 WPH.
While that's not blindingly fast, and I know it'll improve with training, it's still triple the production of one normal day with my old method, performed in 43 minutes of sprint writing instead of 4 to 6 hours.
My question comes with the editing. I haven't yet done the editing sprint exercise, partially because it doesn't make complete sense. Chris claims the editing phase is faster than the actual writing, and it seems your results bear this out. However, I can't help thinking that my editing will be slower than actual writing because I'll be paying attention to finer detail.
I do multiple stages of editing. This question seems to refer to my first edit. I consider my first draft to have the sole purpose of getting words on the page. The 2nd draft (the first edit) is supposed to get the writing into some kind of readable form, including tension and cohesion.
I've done a lot of second draft writing lately. My first draft writing is pretty similar to yours, averaging in the 2000 to 2500 range. Second draft is ranging more between 2500 and 3000. So not a huge increase. I also notice that I'm adding about 20% to my first draft word count, meaning that it's taking me close to the same amount of time to write each draft.
As far as why the WPH is faster, though:
1. Sometimes it's really slow if the first draft is a complete mess and I have to move a lot of stuff around. Even in that situation, though, I haven't seen numbers as low as my lowest first draft number. I think, for me anyway, it's simply easier to think and work when I already have words on the page.
2. Not every word/sentence/paragraph needs any attention at all. Some I read and I'm like, "That's good. I like it." If I have to completely rewrite 3/4 of a chapter (and I do that at the same rate as my first draft), my overall rate will still be faster since 1/4 of the chapter was basically done at reading speed.
I'm also noticing as I advance deeper into my first draft, that the quality is improving, making my 2nd draft go faster and faster. Is that the flow advantage that Chris mentioned or was it me finding my voice for this book? No idea. Maybe a little of both.
I understand the first edit is content editing and the last is meant to be proofreading, but where in the process does the writer actually improve on the quality of the narrative, the quality of description, showing versus telling, and employing active voice where passive sneaks into the prose? Descriptive quality and conscious showing seem like editing activity that will take a decent amount of focus. That attention to detail seems contrary to speed. Perhaps I'm wrong. Like I said, I haven't done the sprint editing exercises yet.
First, understand that I believe everyone should take Chris' process and fit it to how they work instead of fitting how they work to Chris' process. I don't think I'll ever get my second draft to be twice the speed of my first draft.
Back to your question: I improve everything with every edit, but that's just how I work. I know some writers go through each edit with a specific thing in mind. I don't. I try to add content, description, flow, tension, etc. every time through. Typically, each draft gets better and better, though, so I end up doing less and less each time through, making the final edits much faster than the first ones.
Again, though, that's just me. You need to figure out what works for you.
Should I expect all these things to improve as I train this new creative process? Will sprint editing be slower if these details need a lot of work?
I think that your best bet is to just do it and see what happens. Keep detailed records for several months. Use those records to analyze what worked for you and make your process more efficient.
Did any of this help you?
If not, I'm more than willing to elaborate if you have more thoughts.