Birc Results.

[old] tjod · Post by **[old] tjod** » November 20th, 2005, 11:00 pm

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(NavigationHazard @ Nov 20 2005, 03:29 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>Here's Schroeder's stroke graph:<br /><br /><img src='http://www.concept2.co.uk/birc/graphs20 ... roeder.png' border='0' alt='user posted image' /><br /><br /><br /><br />That he could come down the stretch at r42 is incredible. So is his first 300m -- 1:22.5 or thereabouts.... <br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br /><br />Could someone explain to a newcomer to IR why the odd numbers along the base of the chart? I assume it's a 2000 meter race, but why the "1229" "1860" etc. ? It seems to vary between rowers. Thank you.<br /><br />tj

[old] rspenger · Post by **[old] rspenger** » November 20th, 2005, 11:49 pm

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(dennish @ Nov 20 2005, 07:04 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>Bob, seconds (86 is pace of 1:26!!!) <br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />Thanks for the explanation, Dennis. It seems that my "obviously not" statement was obviously wrong. I just didn't recognize the 500m time in that format, but it certainly makes it easier for plotting the graph.<br /><br />Bob S.

[old] Matt Newman · Post by **[old] Matt Newman** » November 21st, 2005, 2:43 am

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(tjod @ Nov 21 2005, 03:00 AM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>Could someone explain to a newcomer to IR why the odd numbers along the base of the chart? I assume it's a 2000 meter race, but why the "1229" "1860" etc. ? It seems to vary between rowers. Thank you. </td></tr></table><br /><br />My guess is that its just a quirk of the software that has to deal with a whole variety of different finising times and adjust the graphs to all be the same size - the software struggles to automatically choose round numbers for the x axis.<br /><br />The software also has to deal witha wide varirty of different paces (see below):<br /><img src='http://mattn.uuhost.uk.uu.net/b5_emmao.jpg' border='0' alt='user posted image' />

[old] Bayko · Post by **[old] Bayko** » November 21st, 2005, 4:49 am

Just a quick note to echo what others have said about Schroder/Benton, and to add that Jamie looked perhaps the the smoother of the two while Graham the stronger, but who knows how things might have turned out head-to-head. Both looked well in control and almost instantly recovered, leaving the impression that there was more in the tank if needed. Well worth the wait to watch them both.<br /><br />Also PB's from both Citroen and MicroMonkey, off the top of my head. Congrats to them too!<br /><br />Nipped under 7 by the narrowest of margins myself (Whew! ), which is still a big goal for me.<br /><br />Fantastic time hanging out with forumites and fellow 50+ lightweight hardbodies.<br /><br />Rick

[old] Pete Marston · Post by **[old] Pete Marston** » November 21st, 2005, 5:30 am

A quick note on how smooth some graphs "appear" compared to others - always check out the scale on the pace axis. Graham Benton pulled a 1:10 on about his 3rd stroke, stretching out the scale on the graph, and meaning his graph goes from 1:05 right up to 1:34. Someone who pulled right to their race split on the 3rd stroke, then stayed there all the way, might make their graph look a lot less smooth, because it would show smaller fluctuations in pace.<br /><br />It would appear, though, that the graphs only show whole seconds in pace, and whole spm in rate, so small fluctuations can't be seen anyway.<br /><br />I think a good way to tell how much someone had left is to look at the rate and pace graphs as a pair, and see how the pace matches the rate. Look at Jamie's and Graham's graphs and see how rate and pace increase together throughout, pretty much. Some graphs you'll see rate increase towards the end with no corresponding increase in pace. These people are likely (right on the edge of) blowing up.<br /><br />Looks like quite a mixed bag of results overall from forum people - some great performances, some not so great. Well done to everyone who took part.

[old] Matt Newman · Post by **[old] Matt Newman** » November 21st, 2005, 5:47 am

[old] SteveV · Post by **[old] SteveV** » November 21st, 2005, 6:40 am

Can't wait for the UK site to come back online. Looking forward to reading how everyone got on.

[old] Sir Pirate · Post by **[old] Sir Pirate** » November 21st, 2005, 6:55 am

What happened to you Steve???????<br /><br />Sir Pirate

[old] SteveV · Post by **[old] SteveV** » November 21st, 2005, 6:59 am

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(Sir Pirate @ Nov 21 2005, 12:55 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>What happened to you Steve???????<br /><br />Sir Pirate <br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />Wife was really ill, started with flu symptoms, but by sat night she had fever, hot/cold flushes. Was up most of Sat night with her, she started getting a bit confused/disorientated. She wasn't safe to leave alone. She saw doctor today, she has a virus and throat infection. Unusual as she is normally so fit.<br /><br />Guess that means you win on a technicality. Although seeing your time I see you didn't have a good day 6:34 is a bit slow for you ??

[old] Sir Pirate · Post by **[old] Sir Pirate** » November 21st, 2005, 7:22 am

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(SteveV @ Nov 21 2005, 10:59 AM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>Guess that means you win on a technicality. Although seeing your time I see you didn't have a good day 6:34 is a bit slow for you ?? <br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />Thats bad news Steve!<br /><br />Blame Andy Burrows for my slow time, I missed the start of the race thanks to him <br /><br />Just raced for winning row E & F after that, took to much out of me trying to make the lost time up in the 1st 500m <br /><br />You must have to do a test then Steve? I will race you on Row Pro over 2K <br /><br />Sir Pirate

[old] hjs · Post by **[old] hjs** » November 21st, 2005, 7:26 am

Nice to see that someone is able to pull a 1.10 in a 2 k race. Although I don't think it's wise to do so. The more smooth your pace is, the best performance you will achieve. So rowing at 1.26 I think starting at 1.20 the first 10 strokes is fast enough.<br /><br />But to come back to my first remark. To be able to pull 1,10 will probably mean he can pull even more if he has to, this means he must be een strong man. And that is something you must train, and just making lot's off K is not the way to become strong.<br /><br />For example he rows. 1.26 on an average, his 1.10 is 16 seconds faster. If I translate that to a 6.30 rower. 1.37,5 pace. Minus the same 16 seconds. gives a 1.21 time. most of them can't.<br /><br />I my opinion it's important to train that max speed as well and I almost never hear/read about it. I think that if your 2 k pace feels hard from the begining you don't do enough speed work. The first 500 m must be quite easy. <br /><br />You have to work both ways. endurence and speed/power.<br />

[old] Godfried · Post by **[old] Godfried** » November 21st, 2005, 7:47 am

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(Sir Pirate @ Nov 21 2005, 01:22 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>Blame Andy Burrows for my slow time, I missed the start of the race thanks to him [right] </td></tr></table><br />Next time don't wait 5 seconds - that will get you under 6:30 again

[old] Citroen · Post by **[old] Citroen** » November 21st, 2005, 8:18 am

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(Godfried @ Nov 21 2005, 11:47 AM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(Sir Pirate @ Nov 21 2005, 01:22 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>Blame Andy Burrows for my slow time, I missed the start of the race thanks to him [right] </td></tr></table><br />Next time don't wait 5 seconds - that will get you under 6:30 again <br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />But Andy Burrows nearly missed the start and end of his race due to his heart problems kicking in again during his warm-up.

[old] Niall · Post by **[old] Niall** » November 21st, 2005, 8:23 am

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(Sir Pirate @ Nov 21 2005, 06:22 AM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><br />You must have to do a test then Steve? I will race you on Row Pro over 2K <br /><br />Sir Pirate <br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />Don't forget Sir Pirate, you raced yesterday, Steve didn't. That makes him a lot fresher than you!

[old] Niall · Post by **[old] Niall** » November 21st, 2005, 8:31 am

First set of photos from BIRC have been uploaded by PhotoDigital:<br /><br /><a href='http://www.photodigital.co.uk/vscript/e ... E=1482&P=1' target='_blank'>PhotoDigital BIRC 2005 Photos</a>

Concept2 Forum

Birc Results.

Competitions

Competitions

Competitions

Competitions

Competitions

Competitions

Competitions

Competitions

Competitions

Competitions

Competitions

Competitions

Competitions

Competitions

Competitions