Concept2 Forum

Just seeing if there is any interest.

I dont think anyone is going to say its a bad thing to have more categories. Which why I suprised the mile has never been added? - Is it rowed worldwide or is it just a british distance? I have rowed the mile more times in competetion than I have the 2k.<br><br>Chris

Just seen the results - Man did I call that wrong!

8k is just too close to 30mins really, which we already have. 8k I would think is probably about an average distance for people to do in 30mins? (My best is 8750m)<br><br>There are already enough ranking distances and they even perhaps get a bit close to each other in the middle there. Chances are that the best rower over 30mins will also be the best over 10k, and 8k, as they're all so close to each other.<br><br>So middle distance are pretty well represented in the rankings already. The HM and FM cover the long distances well, as there tends to be not too much (IME) difference in pace between 60mins, HM, and FM.<br><br>There isn't really that much space between distances shorter either, but the only places I can see a space would be between 2k and 5k, and maybe the mile.<br><br>Pete

"Which why I suprised the mile has never been added"<br><br>The British added the mile so that they could be at the top of the rankings when they were promoting a charity event two years ago. The distance is too close to the 1K and the 2K to make it a separate ranking event. Too many events makes it hard for rowers to do each one to the best of their ability. Also, the rest of the world is trying to go metric. If distances are going to be in miles, maybe lightweight should be defined as anyone weighing under 12 stones? <br><br>I voted against the 8K because there is already a 5K, 6K, 30 min, and a 10K. These events are enough middle distance events.<br><br>Cheers,<br><br>Paul Flack

Well, let's not have the mile, let's have a 1609m race instead if you want it to be all metric. I think the mile is a good distance between the 1k and 2k, the comps we have in the UK are well attended and go off really well<br><br>The more pertinent question is why don't the yanks race it ? You still have mph in the states and mph signs on the roads, no sign of kilometres yet . So why don't you lot race the mile distance? Is it because you can't match the speed of the Brits?

Would like the mile distance added (British in me coming out) but not the 8km, as like others have said, to near 30mins...and 10km...Like wise i don't really see the need for the 6km either ?

Nothing to do with you also being a Britsh record holder at the mile, then Gary <br>Guess it would technically make yo a world record holder as well <br>8k, no thanks. I'd rather have more in the lower distances, but I'm just lazy

As has been noted, most of the distances are fairly well covered now. The possible exception is the "super sprint" of 100m. That would be an interesting ranking and competition event. <br>

But only if they start including 1/100ths of a second in the timing.<br>Don't want those big boys starting any fights

Watts can determine the winner among equal times in the 100m.<br>They will be measured to one part in ~800, better than 2/100th of a second.

<!--QuoteBegin-Pete Marston+Jul 9 2004, 11:00 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td class='genmed'><span class='genmed'><b>QUOTE</b></span> (Pete Marston @ Jul 9 2004, 11:00 PM)</td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--QuoteEBegin-->The HM and FM cover the long distances well, as there tends to be not too much (IME) difference in pace between 60mins, HM, and FM.<!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><br>Since more people are going for the <b>100k</b>, let's add that.<br><br>BTW, number of entries ( all age , all gender , all weight ) for 2005:<br><!--c1--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>CODE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='CODE'><!--ec1--><br>500m   1067<br>1k      965<br>2k     2098<br>5k     2007<br>6k      704<br>30min  1545<br>10k    1364<br>60min   666<br>21097   467<br>42195    76<br><br><!--c2--> </td></tr></table>