42195 Meters...tough, Very Tough.

[[old] John Rupp]

<!--QuoteBegin-PaulS+Oct 20 2004, 06:13 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td class='genmed'><span class='genmed'><b>QUOTE</b></span> (PaulS @ Oct 20 2004, 06:13 PM)</td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--QuoteEBegin-->the slides were shown to provide a 6% advantage.  That's right<!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><br>Yes that's right, a 6% advantage.<br><br>But none of the rowers showing a 6% advantage were as heavy as Xeno.<br><br>The heavier the rower, the bigger the time advantage on slides as compared to legitimate erg times in the rankings.<br><br>Multiplying the 2:30 slide time by 1.06+ gives an erg time of 2:40 or slower.

[[old] Sir Pirate]

<!--QuoteBegin-John Rupp+Oct 20 2004, 10:05 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td class='genmed'><span class='genmed'><b>QUOTE</b></span> (John Rupp @ Oct 20 2004, 10:05 PM)</td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Sir Pirate,<br><br>Your response is misleading.<br><br>There is a MAJOR difference between slide and erg times.<br><br>For someone of Xeno's weight the difference is somewhere around 10 minutes for the marathon distance. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><br> I don't think it is misleading John. The point I was making is that the effort Xeno put into the marathon is no less or no greater because it was done on slides. If he did do it without slides, yes, he would have been slower but I am sure the effort would have been the same. The time is irrelevant.<br><br>Regards<br>Sir Pirate

[[old] Pete Marston]

Awesome row Xeno. The glute pain is the one thing that stops me having a go at the full marathon. It took me a few attempts at the half marathon to not get that any more over that distance, and to bring my HM pace down to 1:46. The thought of going a bit slower and rowing the same distance again? One day, maybe...<br><br>Any thoughts on the cause of the glute pain? I think it's simply repeated use of the muscles, and not really anything to do with sitting on the seat, and so cushions / towels won't help (I use nothing for a HM). So what's the best way to avoid that? Less strokes (ie lower rate) or less power per stroke (ie higher rate)? Obviously it's a compromise in the middle somewhere I think, as either extreme will make it worse.<br><br>Pete

[[old] Daren C]

That's incredible. Much respect.

[[old] bgood]

(this is not a reply to Xeno - at 48 I could never do what he does)<br>I think if you keep rowing longer and longer sessions the pain will go away. I've gone through leg, knee, rear-end and blister pain this year.<br>I used to think I could never make it through a 5k row, but 315+ rows later this year, the only problem I have with a full marathon (4 this season) is finding the time and keeping focused. I did weeks of 5k's then weeks of 10k's moving up to 15k, HM, 25k, and 30k's and finally the FM. I like the 15k and 25k rows the best because they fit into 1 and 2 hour workouts.<br>I'm sure my training is all wrong but it works for me, plus I've lost 30 pounds.<br><br>Brad Forbes

[[old] dadams]

Paul and John,<br>Boys boys boys....must you be sent to your rooms until you can be good?

[[old] PaulS]

<!--QuoteBegin-John Rupp+Oct 21 2004, 03:45 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td class='genmed'><span class='genmed'><b>QUOTE</b></span> (John Rupp @ Oct 21 2004, 03:45 AM)</td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Multiplying the 2:30 slide time by 1.06+ gives an erg time of 2:40 or slower. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><br> "Quote" means the entire sentence in context John, NOT clipping off the truthful parts to make it agree with your incorrect view of things.<br><br>*Your math is still wrong, 150minutes (2:30) * 1.06 is 159minutes (2:39), so now you say that 2:39 is "slower" than 2:40. Still living in "Bizzarro World" I see.<br><br>Please stop now, this is getting embarrassing for you, and I'm not without compassion, but I may be swayed if you choose to continue.<br><br>- Paul Smith<br><br>* Shown for illustrative purposes only, there is no valid study in which this 6% figure has been illustrated. It has been made up out of thin air. (so to speak) The proponent of it has yet to even get on a pair of slides. I suggest he visit Xeno's gym and take in a workout on them and show how easy it is to do better.

[[old] Godfried]

<!--QuoteBegin-bgood+Oct 21 2004, 03:27 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td class='genmed'><span class='genmed'><b>QUOTE</b></span> (bgood @ Oct 21 2004, 03:27 PM)</td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--QuoteEBegin-->I think if you keep rowing longer and longer sessions the pain will go away. I've gone through leg, knee, rear-end and blister pain this year.<!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><br>I agree.<br>My first HM ( May ) the back of my feet started to burn after 14k, my first FM ( Oct ) they started to burn after 28k. So I expect they won't hurt somewhere next year.

[[old] PaulS]

<!--QuoteBegin-dadams+Oct 21 2004, 01:48 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td class='genmed'><span class='genmed'><b>QUOTE</b></span> (dadams @ Oct 21 2004, 01:48 PM)</td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Boys boys boys....must you be sent to your rooms until you can be good?  <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><br>Just make mine padded. <br><br>- Paul Smith

[[old] arakawa]

Disclaimers: I am not a physicist. I have never tried rowing on slides. I've never rowed a full marathon (but I've rowed seven half marathons since July 2004).<br><br>Let's first assume that there is a 6% benefit to using the slides (something I and others on this forum are not yet ready to concede).<br><br>I believe there is a distinction between a 6% increase in power output and a 6% increase in speed (distance per unit time, and the inverse of pace - time per unit distance). I poked around the FAQ on the physics of ergometers (http://www.atm.ox.ac.uk/rowing/physics/ergometer.html), and it states that the "[p]ower is (approximately) related to the cube of the flywheel speed". I haven't checked the math myself, but the power vs. pace charts (p5-15) from version 2 of the C2 indoor rowing training guide do show a cube relationship between pace and power (I checked, and it's a cube relationship to within 0.8%).<br><br>With respect to whether or not there is *any* benefit to using the slides, the aforementioned FAQ indicates that there is a benefit (although it does not discuss slides specifically). If the slides were completely frictionless, the center of gravity of the combined rower/erg combination wouldn't move - the rower would go one way, and the erg would go the other. Because the erg stays stationary without slides, the rower must therefore be moving the center of gravity of the rower/erg combination back and forth. Given that you don't get energy back in your legs during recovery (for the physicists out there, the rower/erg system is not a conservative system), energy is necessarily expended moving the center of gravity back and forth.<br><br>I tried to work out how much power (energy per unit time) this back and forth expends, but I got nonsensical answers the first time around.

[[old] Ralph Earle]

Keep in mind that there were only six rowers in the Swedish study. From a previous post:<br><br><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td class='genmed'><span class='genmed'><b>QUOTE</b></span> </td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Figure 4.2.1 on page 20 of Anderson and Brandin's study (http://www.roddsverige.nu/srny/dokument ... apport.pdf) of six very experienced rowers on slides and stationary ergs is a graph of maximum wattage at anaerobic threshold. The values in the chart are not in the study, but if you print the chart and measure the bars, you can estimate the slide vs stationary differences. My estimates are:<br><br>Rower..Slides..Stationary..Difference<br>1............419........428...........-2%<br>2............372........386...........-4%<br>3............335........307...........+9%<br>4............223........214...........+4%<br>5............302........284...........+7%<br>6............307.........312...........-1%<br>Avg........326......322..........+1%<br><br>These differences in watts translate to differences in pace of from 1% slower on slides to 3% faster. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><br><br>Two rowers were somewhat comparable to Xeno.<br> <br>Rower 1 was 27, weighed 93.3kg and had a 5K pace of @1:40.5. He produced 2% FEWER watts on slides.<br><br>Rower 2 was 19, weighed 93kg and had a 5K pace of @1:41.5. He produced 4% FEWER watts on slides.<br><br>So while one rower did go 3% faster on slides, the two most like Xeno were about 1% slower.<br><br>Even if Xeno got a 3% benefit from slides, that's about 4:30, which would make his time at most 3:34:39, which would put him at #2 among all heavyweights over 30 this year and #3 last year.<br><br>Since the evidence is inconclusive, would Xeno like to settle the issue by erging his next Marathon on a stationary erg, his third on slides, his fourth stationary, etc.? <br>

[[old] Sir Pirate]

<!--QuoteBegin-Ralph Earle+Oct 21 2004, 07:20 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td class='genmed'><span class='genmed'><b>QUOTE</b></span> (Ralph Earle @ Oct 21 2004, 07:20 PM)</td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Since the evidence is inconclusive, would Xeno like to settle the issue by erging his next Marathon on a stationary erg, his third on slides, his fourth stationary, etc.? <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><br> <br><br>All in the name of research Xeno <br><br>Sir Pirate

[[old] Xeno]

I am planning on it.

[[old] John Rupp]

<!--QuoteBegin-Ralph Earle+Oct 21 2004, 12:20 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td class='genmed'><span class='genmed'><b>QUOTE</b></span> (Ralph Earle @ Oct 21 2004, 12:20 PM)</td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Since the evidence is inconclusive, would Xeno like to settle the issue by erging his next Marathon on a stationary erg, his third on slides, his fourth stationary, etc.? <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><br> Great idea! <br><br>For the sake of consistency these should be 1 week apart.

[[old] John Rupp]

<!--QuoteBegin-PaulS+Oct 21 2004, 07:14 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td class='genmed'><span class='genmed'><b>QUOTE</b></span> (PaulS @ Oct 21 2004, 07:14 AM)</td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--QuoteEBegin-->2:39 is "slower" than 2:40. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><br>Thanks for your enlightenment, Paul.<br><br>The 1.06 difference is based on time, not power, and with rowers who were lighter than Xeno. Thus the difference for him is likely more than 6%, at least 10 minutes for the marathon distance.<br><br>Sir Pirate,<br><br>Yes it was a fine almost erg equivalent marathon effort.<br><br>Almost, because 42195 / 1.06 would be the equivalent of 39807 meters on the erg, or less than that for Xeno, and 10 minutes short of a full erg marathon effort.