Vertical Hands Rowing Bar

[Slidewinder]

In johnlvs2run's set-up (and in my described alternate iteration of his idea), the macro-geometry at the catch is an isosceles triangle. The distance between the user's shoulders form the base. The user's arms and John's handle structure form the two equal sides of the triangle. The chain connector is at the apex. During use, and under tension, an isosceles triangle is an inherently stable 2-D structure.

It does not work as you describe. In essence, the arm amd rope form the triangle, where the base is shortened during the stroke...

Re: "the base is shortened during the stroke"
Thanks for my morning smile. The base of the triangle is the width of the user's shoulders, which remains constant.

I have a considerable advantage over you in this discussion. I have actually tried johnlvs2run's handle set-up, and I have also built a handle that replaces the rope in his assembly with rigid linkages (method described on pg.2 in my April 30 reply to tadpole). It has a different appearance but retains all of the geometry and functionality of his set-up. Oilite and nylon bushings are used at the pivot points. It is fitted with firm foam bicycle handgrips. I built it about 15 years ago when John and I met on this forum. I still use it. So I know that all I have written about it is empirically true.

But you don't have to build what I built. All you need is a short piece of rope, two short tubes, and a carabiner. Assemble these items as John shows in his posted photo. Two suggestions: Adjust the rope length so there is about 11" from the carabiner to the centre of the handgrip tubes. That works best for me. Also, set the tubes on the rope so that your grip is not perpendicular to your forearm, but at a slight angle. That ergonomically correct hand/wrist relationship will be maintained throughout the stroke, whether your hands are vertical, horizontal, or anywhere in-between. It is such a simple assembly. Try it. You have nothing to lose except your illusions.

[Sakly]

[A free barbell needs to be balanced by the user, so the user can influence the motion pathway, which leads to another joint load, force on different joint parts, where muscles and ligaments run over or are attached.

Hence my example of a dumbell press. When the weight per arm stays the same, so does the force on the shoulder if the path stays identical. But you need to recruit different adjacent muscles to steer it through its path.

No, it does not.
As I explained, a dynamic movement has dynamic effects, momentum, which changes the force vector during the movement for free weights. Even on the exact same path as on a machine. But you will have problems to mimic the exact same path of a machine anyway.
This shows in a good way, that you need to understand different factors of biomechanics, physics and training concepts, which link them together.

[gvcormac]

I hate to add gasoline to this flame war, but it seems to me that rowing and strength/resistance/weight training are entirely different.

I do pull-ups and chin-ups three times a week. I can do maybe a dozen in a set, which is about 100 times less than a typical row. When I do prone-grip (pull-ups) I get sore elbows and forearms. So I generally use D-handles which is a big help.

However, when rowing, I never have issues. That is, I think, because the force is way lower. Even in a 100m sprint, I don't get the arm burn I get from chin-ups or pull-ups. And I never have wrist/forearm/elbow problems with the rower. I can use a light grip and I and remove one hand to scratch my nose or whatever.

Contrast with the SkiErg, where I have to constantly grip each handle. This is more fatiguing for the fingers. Granted, I can holster one grip and row with the other if I need to scratch my nose or adjust my device, but generally my hands remain clasped on the handles for the duration of the workout.

I have corresponded with SlideWinder in the past about his D-handle setup. But I can't convince myself of the need.

[jamesg]

Almost any use of or movement with the hands can be supposed to cause damage. We read of the computer mouse, tennis elbow and risk for pianists, who hit the notes a million times a day with ten fingers in any order, hard or soft as they wish.

However no one suggests modified pianos; nor organs either, with several keyboards, stops to pull out or push in and where the feet are used too.

What is suggested is relaxation and technique. Same for us: cocked wrists, flying elbows, hunched shoulders, closed knee angle, slouched back, tight grip are all decried here, occasionally with immediate result.

Indeed, someone who learns to row or swim freestyle in relaxed style and with rational sequences may well apply the lesson elsewhere too. Long live sport, it saves us from ourselves.

[johnlvs2run]

Slidewinder, thanks for your comments on my handle design.
Here's the handle development thread, along with a photo below of a previous rendition.
I've not located the nylon rope, so am planning to get a longer one, since there's plenty of space to the cage.
Another big advantage of this design (on page 2) is the greater flexibility and comfort for the fingers and hands.

[Slidewinder]

Slidewinder, thanks for your comments on my handle design.

You were ahead of me a couple of years in your investigations. From my previous post, my quote, "I built it about 15 years ago when John and I met on this forum.", could be interpreted that I used your set-up as a guide in building my handle. When I joined this forum in 2010 I did so to get opinions on my handle design. I soon saw what you had done. Our set-ups look different but share the same geometry and functionality. Faced with the deficiencies of the C2 stock handle we both independently came up with the same solution, unaware of the other's work. It's kind of like when Isaac Newton in England, and Gottfried Leibniz in Germany, independently developed the calculus in the 17th century, don't you think?

[Slidewinder]

Slidewinder, thanks for your comments on my handle design.
I've not located the nylon rope, so am planning to get a longer one, since there's plenty of space to the cage.

I mention in an earlier comment that I prefer about 11" from the front pivot point to the centre of the handgrips. That distance optimizes the angular progression of the handgrips from catch to finish, for a good partial replication of an actual sculling stroke.

Also, where the handgrip tubes are placed on your rope loops will determine the user's hand/wrist angular relationship throughout the stroke (I'm sure you know this, but for the benefit of others here...). It is easy to establish what that hand/wrist relationship should be: Hold a thick dowel in a relaxed grip and extend your arm to the front. You will notice that the dowel is not perpendicular to your forearm, but at a slight angle. Pistol makers have known this forever. That is why a pistol handgrip is never perpendicular to the barrel, but angled back slightly. A properly designed rowing ergometer handle will maintain that ergonomically correct hand/wrist relationship throughout the stroke. Your handle and my handle share the same geometry and functionality, thereby ensuring that the described proper hand/wrist relationship is maintained from catch to finish, whether the hands are horizontal, vertical, or anywhere in-between. Dear forum members, how does that compare to the C2 stock handle?

[johnlvs2run]

Faced with the deficiencies of the C2 stock handle we both independently came up with the same solution, unaware of the other's work. It's kind of like when Isaac Newton in England, and Gottfried Leibniz in Germany, independently developed the calculus in the 17th century, don't you think?

Necessity inspires our creativity.

I prefer about 11" from the front pivot point to the centre of the handgrips. That distance optimizes the angular progression of the handgrips from catch to finish, for a good partial replication of an actual sculling stroke.

Yesterday I wrapped an old 11' foot 1/8" dyneema cord twice through a carabiner and the handles, making a 5'6" loop.
This added about 15" in length compared to the regular C2 handle, which proved to be too long and was touching the front.
Thus I pushed the cord through a third time, making a 3'8" loop, which added about 9" in length compared to the regular handle.
This proved to be just about right, and made a nice difference compared to the regular stiff handle.

This morning I greatly enjoyed that my arms were free, instead of being held stiffly in place, and they surprisingly got
a greater amount of exercise from the increased movement and range than I had remembered from such a long time ago.
Also my meters per stroke were significantly longer. This type of extension definitely does make the rowing more interesting.
I am pleased, and now I know that a 4' nylon rope will be fine.

[Slidewinder]

I prefer about 11" from the front pivot point to the centre of the handgrips. That distance optimizes the angular progression of the handgrips from catch to finish, for a good partial replication of an actual sculling stroke.

...which added about 9" in length compared to the regular handle.
This proved to be just about right, and made a nice difference compared to the regular stiff handle.

This morning I greatly enjoyed that my arms were free, instead of being held stiffly in place, and they surprisingly got
a greater amount of exercise from the increased movement and range than I had remembered from such a long time ago.
Also my meters per stroke were significantly longer. This type of extension definitely does make the rowing more interesting.
I am pleased, and now I know that a 4' nylon rope will be fine.

After testing different set-ups, 11" was the distance for me, but it interfered with my reach at the catch, so I had to use two 'L' shaped rigid linkages, instead of rope, to form an upside-down 'T' shaped structure. This allowed full reach at the catch after I had removed the vertical struts holding the PM. This opened up a corridor down the left side of the flywheel housing which provided clearance for the nose of the handle structure. The functionality is no different than yours.

May I suggest bicycle handgrips for your set-up. They are available in a variety of shapes and compounds (hard, soft,rubber, foam, gel pads...). Slide them over a couple of pieces of 7/8" OD tubing and feed your rope through them. You could tuck your rope knot inside one of the tubes for a cleaner appearance, and you could fit plugs in the ends of the tubes with a hole for the rope, to better keep the handles positioned on the rope where you like them. Or the tubes could be replaced with 7/8" diameter dowels with a hole for the rope drilled through the centre. Also, you have a bit of a tangle of hardware where the rope connects to the chain. You could probably find a removable chain link that would fit through the cross-hole of the C2 chain swivel connector, and feed your rope through it, which would clean things up there too. It sounds like you don't use your unit much anymore (nor do I), but others who read this and wish to try your set-up will maybe find these suggestions of use. Best wishes to you.