Us Indoor Rowing Team Selection

[[old] ranger]

<!--QuoteBegin-Ericr+Nov 17 2005, 04:09 AM--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(Ericr @ Nov 17 2005, 04:09 AM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--QuoteEBegin-->What good is it to include somebody on a team when that person only wants to race when he is ready for it? Ready for racing in a pretty obscure sport and a not too competitive weight class. <br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />I was wonderfully prepared to row in 2003--and showed it. Being ready to row or now had nothing to do with the selection process. At the time of the 2003 selection, I had just broken the world record on two consecutive rows (WIRC 2003 and my USIRT trial). Before the world record row at WIRC 2003, I rowed two CRASH-B qualifiers, and after WIRC, I rowed another race at Ridley College. Three weeks after the 2003 trial I broke the world record again at BIRC 2003. Then I went to EIRC 2003 on my own coin and won my race by 14 seconds. I raced 7 times in 2003.<br /><br />Over the last couple of years, I have been changing my technique, so I haven't been racing. This is another issue. I have been waiting to race until I am comfortable with my new technique and have take full advantage of these improvements in efficiency.<br /><br />ranger<br />

[[old] ranger]

<!--QuoteBegin-joanvb+Nov 16 2005, 03:32 PM--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(joanvb @ Nov 16 2005, 03:32 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--QuoteEBegin--><!--QuoteBegin-ranger+Nov 16 2005, 11:33 AM--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(ranger @ Nov 16 2005, 11:33 AM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--QuoteEBegin-->I am not sure what you intend with your comment, ...<br /><br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />The intent was to correct the statement. <br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />Fine. But what bearing does the correction have on the discussion?<br /><br />ranger<br />

[[old] Roland Baltutis]

<!--QuoteBegin-ranger+Nov 17 2005, 04:59 AM--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(ranger @ Nov 17 2005, 04:59 AM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--QuoteEBegin--><br />Over the last couple of years, I have been changing my technique, so I haven't been racing. This is another issue. I have been waiting to race until I am comfortable with my new technique and have take full advantage of these improvements in efficiency.<br /><br />ranger <br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />What a bunch of crap. <br /><br />Come on Ranger, you might be able to fool C2 newbies and the dummies of this world with that nonsense but it just doesn't wash with the more accomplished rowers.<br /><br />We're talking about a piece of gym equipment here, not a boat. Most people get on the thing and just row it. The erg is not that complicated that it requires an exact science to row well. Certainly not to the point that you make out.<br /><br />The real reason we haven't seen you for a while in races is because of your mental condition. I know that your ego will deny it but what you need is a sports psychologist. Regardless of how many time trial records you might smash, C2 can't put you in their team until a sports psychologist straightens you out.<br /><br />Either get yourself sorted out and race or give up the sport completely and divert your energy to something else.<br /><br /><br />Roland Baltutis<br /><br />PS. This post is not intended as a personal attack but rather a solution to an issue that has plagued this forum for quite some time.

[[old] ranger]

<!--QuoteBegin--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--QuoteEBegin-->We're talking about a piece of gym equipment here, not a boat. Most people get on the thing and just row it. The erg is not that complicated that it requires an exact science to row well. Certainly not to the point that you make out. </td></tr></table><br /><br />Sorry, Roland. But it is what you say here that is the pile of crap, not what I have been doing (or saying).<br /><br />My intention in changing my technique has been to work on my major weakness so that I can get better. When I took on this project, I was rowing four seconds under the existent world record in my division. My goal iis to do better than that.<br /><br />When you (and others) are in this position, you can talk as much as you would like. Right now, you are about 21 seconds from the world record in your division. So, when you are 25 seconds better, pick out your major weakness and work on it exclusively to try to get better. I will be interested to see how things come out. <br /><br />My psychological state is just fine. I am just not quite finished training my new technique. When I am ready, I will race. That appears to be soon, hopefully, at the end of January 2006. My training is coming along nicely.<br /><br />My goal for my first race in January, 2006, a couple of days before I turn 55, is to take a parting slap at Graham Watt's 50-54 lwt WR. I will try to row 1:36/6:24. If I get this done, this will be 18 seconds under the current 55-59 lwt WR of 6:42, and with this result, I will be _very_ pleased with the work I havae done of technique, even if I had to sit out a year from racing to get it done.<br /><br />Technique doesn't matter in rowing? Pretty silly claim, Roland, for someone so experienced. When Dwayne changed his technique from rowing at high drag (setting 10, 200+ df.) and pulling first with his upper body, as I used to row, even during my three WR rows, to rowing at low drag (setting 2, 110 df.) and leading with his legs, his times dropped 4 seconds per 500--across the board. <br /><br />His 2K time dropped from 6:03 to 5:47. <br /><br />Technique doesn't matter?<br /><br />Pretty silly claim, Roland.<br /><br />Best,<br /><br />

[[old] ranger]

<!--QuoteBegin--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--QuoteEBegin-->This post is not intended as a personal attack but rather a solution to an issue that has plagued this forum for quite some time. </td></tr></table><br /><br />Sorry, Roland. But it is obvious, to both newbies and experienced rowers, that your note is just another personal attack and therefore not only not a solution to anything but just more of the same, which makes the situation worse.<br /><br />I have suggested repeatedly what will end this discussion: All that C2 has to do to end this discussion is to state explicitly that the selection process for the USIRT is based on the relative merits of the verified 2K trials submitted, as determined by the race committee or the coaches, rather than on other, unstated, ad hominem, criteria. <br /><br />This is the easiest thing in the world for C2 to do, especially since, if I understand most of the comments here, it is assumed, even if it isn't true, that C2--right now--is doing just that. Stating this policy explicitly will just open up the selection process to public view and review, rather than keeping it a closed door affair, decided at whim and subject to no standards of fairness or merit.<br /><br />ranger

[[old] Thomas]

<!--QuoteBegin-ranger+Nov 17 2005, 04:34 AM--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(ranger @ Nov 17 2005, 04:34 AM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--QuoteEBegin--><br />This is the easiest thing in the world for C2 to do, especially since, if I understand most of the comments here, it is assumed, even if it isn't true, that C2--right now--is doing just that. Stating this policy explicitly will just open up the selection process to public view and review, rather than keeping it a closed door affair, decided at whim and subject to no standards of fairness or merit.<br /><br />ranger <br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />It would be a major mistake for Concept 2 to address this issue.<br /><br />This topic will eventually end.

[[old] dadams]

<!--QuoteBegin-ranger+Nov 17 2005, 07:07 AM--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(ranger @ Nov 17 2005, 07:07 AM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--QuoteEBegin-->When Dwayne changed his technique... <br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />How did I get sucked into this madness??!?!??!??!

[[old] ranger]

<!--QuoteBegin--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--QuoteEBegin-->It would be a major mistake for Concept 2 to address this issue. </td></tr></table><br /><br />Why? If selection for the USIRT is based on the relative merit of the 2K trials performed, as determined by the race committee or coaches, as many here seem to be asserting, if not presupposing, it should be _easy_ for C2 to address this issue. In fact, it would be so easy that they should have done it immediately, from the beginning. Then there would have been no issue at all.<br /><br />On the other hand, if...<br /><br />I agree with you about the second hypothetical. Thus, the "smart" silence from C2.<br /><br />If I were C2, I am not sure that I would like to be known as devious and dissembling, though, just because I was smart, in control of the situation, and could get away with it. <br /><br />Intelligence is not the only virtue. It is _certainly_ not the most basic or most respected one. <br /><br />ranger

[[old] John Rupp]

<!--QuoteBegin-Roland Baltutis+Nov 17 2005, 03:31 AM--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(Roland Baltutis @ Nov 17 2005, 03:31 AM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Come on Ranger, you might be able to fool C2 newbies and the dummies of this world with that nonsense but it just doesn't wash with the more accomplished rowers.[right] </td></tr></table><br />Roland Baltutis 2K 6:13.4<br /><br />6:13.4 - 5:37.0 = 36.4 seconds.<br /><br />What would you consider accomplished Roland?

[[old] ranger]

John--<br /><br />Roland is 43 years old and a heavyweight. The 40s hwt WR is 5:52, not 5:37.<br /><br />Nonetheless, 5:52 is 21 seconds under Roland's 6:13.<br /><br />And this is nothing said against rowing 6:13! I wish I could row 6:13. 6:13 is a fine 2K, in any estimation. <br /><br />The project of trying to break a world record that you have already broken twice, though, is something altogether different, I think. This takes some doing, especially if you are going to do it by radically changing your technique rather than by getting fitter.<br /><br />I can't get any fitter than I was in the fall of 2003. But given the (wretched!) technique I used then, I can sure learn to row more efficiently.<br /><br />So that is what I have been doing.<br /><br />ranger

[[old] Thomas]

<!--QuoteBegin-Thomas+Nov 17 2005, 05:04 AM--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(Thomas @ Nov 17 2005, 05:04 AM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--QuoteEBegin--><!--QuoteBegin-ranger+Nov 17 2005, 04:34 AM--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(ranger @ Nov 17 2005, 04:34 AM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--QuoteEBegin--><br />This is the easiest thing in the world for C2 to do, especially since, if I understand most of the comments here, it is assumed, even if it isn't true, that C2--right now--is doing just that. Stating this policy explicitly will just open up the selection process to public view and review, rather than keeping it a closed door affair, decided at whim and subject to no standards of fairness or merit.<br /><br />ranger <br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />It would be a major mistake for Concept 2 to address this issue.<br /><br />This topic will eventually end. <br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />The analogy being if this topic was a raging fire, would it be better to throw water and sand on it to put it out or would it be better to just let it burn itself out, in essence would it be better to do nothing.<br /><br />If anyone thought there was some sort of unfair business practice, you could probably take your complaint to the Better Business Bureau or any federal agency that does business with Concept 2. I would think that US Rowing would probably not have an interest since it is not actual rowing and not amateur rowing. If a person were to actaully go to an outside source to complain, you better have together.<br /><br />

[[old] John Rupp]

<!--QuoteBegin-ranger+Nov 17 2005, 09:05 AM--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(ranger @ Nov 17 2005, 09:05 AM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--QuoteEBegin-->John--<br /><br />Roland is 43 years old and a heavyweight. The 40s hwt WR is 5:52, not 5:37.[right] </td></tr></table><br /><br />Oh, okay. There's no age in his signature file.

[[old] John Rupp]

<!--QuoteBegin-ranger+Nov 17 2005, 09:05 AM--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(ranger @ Nov 17 2005, 09:05 AM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--QuoteEBegin-->John--<br /><br />Roland is 43 years old and a heavyweight. The 40s hwt WR is 5:52, not 5:37. </td></tr></table><br /><br />Roland has a 6:16.7 in the rankings at age 43.<br /><br />The wrPATT pace for age 43 is 1:28.4. For age 40 it is 1:26.8.<br /><br />(4 x 1:28.4) / 6:16.7 is 23.1 a second difference, and a PATT percentage of 93.9.

[[old] John Rupp]

<!--QuoteBegin-Thomas+Nov 17 2005, 12:05 PM--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(Thomas @ Nov 17 2005, 12:05 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--QuoteEBegin-->The analogy being if this topic was a raging fire, would it be better to throw water and sand on it to put it out or would it be better to just let it burn itself out, in essence would it be better to do nothing.[right] </td></tr></table><br /><br />Or you could keep using the same faulty building codes and practices that got the fire started in the first place. <br />

[[old] george nz]

<!--QuoteBegin-ranger+Nov 17 2005, 10:59 PM--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(ranger @ Nov 17 2005, 10:59 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--QuoteEBegin-->At the time of the 2003 selection, I had just broken the world record on two consecutive rows (WIRC 2003 and my USIRT trial). Before the world record row at WIRC 2003, I rowed two CRASH-B qualifiers, and after WIRC, I rowed another race at Ridley College. Three weeks after the 2003 trial I broke the world record again at BIRC 2003. Then I went to EIRC 2003 on my own coin and won my race by 14 seconds. I raced 7 times in 2003.<br /><br />Over the last couple of years, I have been changing my technique, so I haven't been racing. This is another issue. I have been waiting to race until I am comfortable with my new technique and have take full advantage of these improvements in efficiency.<br /><br />ranger<br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />Good thing you are not prone to repetition - would this be the 312th or 313th time you have trotted this story out - then again with the growth in the sport there is probably someone from Mongolia who has just joined the forum who may have not heard all this before and before and before and before and before and before and before and before and before and before and before and before and before and before and before and before and before and before and before and before and before and before and before and before and before and before and before and before and before and before and before and before and before and before and before and before and before and before and before and before and before and before and before and before and before and before and before and before and before and before and before and before and before and before and before and before and before and before and before and before and before and before and before and before and before and before and before and before and before and before and before and before and before and before and before and before and before and before and before and before and before and before and before and before and before and before and before and before and before and before and before and before and before and before and before and before and before and before and before and before and before and before and before and before and before and before and before and before and before and before and before and before and before and before and before and before and before and before and before and before and before and before and before and before and before and before and before and before and before and before and before and before and before and before and before and before and before and before and before and before and before and before and before and before and before and before and before and before and before and before and before and before and before and before and before and before and before and before and before and before and before and before and before and before and before and before (did I miss one)<br /><br /> ..... but I doubt it .....sure it will be out on DVD soon. In fact it must be pushing the Bible and Harry Potter as the most published writing in history.<br /><br />George