Concept2 Forum

Second attempt, powered by Starburst, with more sensible pacing this time:

1' @ 1:49.8 r27, 1:20 rest
2' @ 1:47.7 r26, 1:40 rest
3' @ 1:48.8 r25, 2:00 rest
1' @ 1:47.5 r27, 2:00 rest
2' @ 1:47.7 r27, 2:00 rest
3' @ 1:47.3 r27
total: 3333 m @ 1:48.0 r26

For my return to erging, I chose the CTC. This may have been unwise. I didn't expect to be fast, but I thought I would do a little better than this: 1' @ 1:41.0 r32, 1:20 rest 2' @ 1:47.9 r27, 1:40 rest 3' @ 1:51.3 r26, 2:00 rest 1' @ 1:46.7 r29, 2:00 rest 2' @ 1:52.3 r26, 2:00 rest 3' @ 1:52.7 r25 ...

another exercise that I have no idea of what it's called but it follows the motion of the waving cat that I see in Chinese takeaways in England Yes! The motion of the Maneki-neko is a perfect way to describe what is said to be one of the best lifts for strengthening the rotator cuff . I've read tha...

Interesting. I wasn't aware of the Los Gatos Rowing Club. I see that they don't have a whole lot of water, but I bet it's calmer than the bay, and it's closer to where I live. I'll have to check it out.

Hanzo wrote:I found this picture pretty much spot on with pain location

Where is the spot? I can't see anything definite beyond that giant blob of plasma or whatever it is on the translucent man's shoulder. Is it supposed to be a lens flare?

I'm glad we're on the same wavelength, Stu. As soon as I do a workout, I'm going to post it in the Team Oarsome thread.

I'm going to do something this week. Really, I am. It will be slow and short. I have to start somewhere.

The weather is very congenial. One could easily row year-round. The trouble is that the Bay Area doesn't have much of a rowing culture. As far as I know, there's only one rowing club for adults in the South Bay. It's in Redwood City, 33 km from my current digs.

There are trailer parks in Sunnyvale, but not in my immediate neighborhood. I live across the street from Apple Park . I don't work there. I work at another big tech firm. I've hardly done any rowing all year, but that's about to change. First I'm getting back on the erg, and if it goes well, I'll s...

Tinpusher wrote:Even I had to join FB to keep up with things.

Ugh. Facebook. What a drag.

Why can't the team use a forum outside Facebook?

lindsayh wrote:Hi Stupe!!

Hello, Lindsay!!!

Dude, what are you doing in Wroclaw?

What happened to Team Oarsome? Does it exist in any useful capacity? Do we have an active forum thread somewhere?

intentionally altering or abandoning well-understood, commonly-accepted meanings of "pace," "time," and "average." I have been using the commonly accepted meanings of "pace", "time", and "average". In erging, we express pace as time per distance, with the usual unit of distance being 500 m. Time is...

a liberal application of mathematical fertilizer I had a similar reaction when I first saw the proposal. After musing over it, I saw the appeal of taking the average of the paces without regard for the distances over which they are achieved. It may help to think about a more extreme example. Consid...

Citroen wrote:1:12.0 for 400 is 1:30.0/500m

Citroen wrote:So there's a bug in your code for calculating the 400m split.

No, there isn't. If you enter 1:12 for the 400 m interval, it correctly calculates a 1:30 pace.

If you enter 1:21 for the 400 m interval, it correctly calculates a 1:41.3 pace.

You have inverted a couple digits and entered 1.21 instead of 1:12 Indeed, I should have written 1:12 for the 400 m piece. Thank you for pointing out the error. Putting aside the dubious pace=time premise of the calculator I wouldn't call it a dubious formula. It takes the pace for each of the four...

hjs wrote:So a "math help" link could help.

The following web page computes a score for 400/300/200/100 as described by Nick.

http://michaellaszlo.com/ctc-helper-august-2016/

For example, respective times of 1:21, 0:51, 0:33, 0:16 yield a score of 5:37.5.