New twist on run vs. row time comparisons

[MarathonStan]

I've read some past posts on this evergreen topic, but I've noticed something curious on my return to rowing two months ago, after a prolonged absence, and would welcome insights.

In my running PR days, in my late-30s, my best row times were similar to but always a bit slower than road race efforts: e.g. 5K: 16:57 run vs. 17:44 row. 10K: 34:58 vs. 36:13. Now, however, in my mid-50s and after many injuries and some health issues, my run times are slower by nearly a third, yet my row times are only down 9-10%, which I'm quite happy about. As one example, I just ran a so-so 21:45 for 5K, and could realistically break 21' in the right conditions, yet I just rowed 19:36, something I definitely couldn't do now running, let alone go a min or so faster!

I understand that heavier athletes might do relatively better on the rower, not having to carry their weight as they do running, and other athletes are just more technically efficient at one sport than the other, but I'm still pretty much the same person and I've maintained the same basic weight, (even allowing that there's more fat and less muscle to that weight as I've aged). So, why would my times have deteriorated so much less on the rower?

I certainly hope the machines aren't just reading differently on the later models, leaving me in a fool's paradise. Ideally, I'd like to translate some of the encouraging rower numbers to the roads, but it hasn't happened yet! Again, I'd appreciate any anecdotal insight or more scientific data on this issue. Thanks.

Stan

[Bob S.]

I've read some past posts on this evergreen topic, but I've noticed something curious on my return to rowing two months ago, after a prolonged absence, and would welcome insights.

In my running PR days, in my late-30s, my best row times were similar to but always a bit slower than road race efforts: e.g. 5K: 16:57 run vs. 17:44 row. 10K: 34:58 vs. 36:13. Now, however, in my mid-50s and after many injuries and some health issues, my run times are slower by nearly a third, yet my row times are only down 9-10%, which I'm quite happy about. As one example, I just ran a so-so 21:45 for 5K, and could realistically break 21' in the right conditions, yet I just rowed 19:36, something I definitely couldn't do now running, let alone go a min or so faster!

I understand that heavier athletes might do relatively better on the rower, not having to carry their weight as they do running, and other athletes are just more technically efficient at one sport than the other, but I'm still pretty much the same person and I've maintained the same basic weight, (even allowing that there's more fat and less muscle to that weight as I've aged). So, why would my times have deteriorated so much less on the rower?

I certainly hope the machines aren't just reading differently on the later models, leaving me in a fool's paradise. Ideally, I'd like to translate some of the encouraging rower numbers to the roads, but it hasn't happened yet! Again, I'd appreciate any anecdotal insight or more scientific data on this issue. Thanks.

Stan

Interesting. What this suggests to me is that the injuries and health problems had more of an effect on your running than on your rowing. I gave up running many years ago because my knees couldn't take it. They have given me no problem in rowing.

Bob S.

[joe80]

Not sure that I can offer any insights but I am equally mystified by my lack of ability to post a decent 5km running time.

After more than thirty years of serious running but with increasing injury problems, I started erging seriously in January '06. Initially, the aim was to increase aerobic fitness without having to put in so many miles on the road. I could run a 20m05s 5km at that time and recorded 7m52.4s as my first 2km trial on the erg. According to this running site:

http://www.runningforfitness.org/calc/vo2.php

my VO2max was 49.6 mlO2/min-kg, not far from the 47.1/51.7 values given on the C2 site for trained/untrained athletes of my weight:

http://www.concept2.com/us/interactive/ ... vo2max.asp

I got really into erging and have logged 25,000km+ since the start of 2006. I have done very little running during most of this time and have not competed at all. Currently, my 2km PB is 7m15.5s which translates to a VO2max of 60.2.

Training and racing on the erg has been completely injury free and has had the additional benefit of increasing flexibility. I've not been able to touch my toes since around the age of twelve but now can do that without any difficulty. Since March I have run 2-4 times each week at distances between 3 & 9 miles. Apart from the expected muscle soreness resulting from new activities, the running has been trouble free and I've completed three 5km races and two half-marathons. Whilst being grateful to be able to run at all, I've been bemused by the lack of improvement. My best 5km time was 21m58s back in June. This corresponds to a VO2max of 44.6 according to the running site. My apparent VO2max from the erg should give me ~17m30s on the road. Clearly, there's a huge gap between potential and performance.

The addition of running to my erg training since the Spring has, seemingly, had a beneficial effect. Last week I rowed a 5km PB of 18m54.9s and a 10km best of 38m39.8s. For Wednesday's 5km road race, expectations were high but dashed by a 22m33s performance. There's a world of difference between 17m30s & 22m30s.

Any advice about where to go from here would be very welcome. I'm 61 y.o., 69kg and have a 5km track PB of 14m58s set way back in 1978.

Regards,

Joe

[MarathonStan]

Nice to hear from you, Joe, whereabouts are you? I'm in Montreal.

So, you're a couple of kg lighter and 5 yrs older and you can still kill me. Ommmmm. No ego.... Seriously, w/that sub-15' PR, you had a serious VO2Max in the day. I know mine was 66-67 when I ran the PRs mentioned, and a 2h46 marathon, perfectly consistent w/the shorter distances.

Ah, a little detective work, Joe Keating? But where is London, Ireland???

My only initial thought, may apply to myself in smaller measure, but you have even larger run/row gaps, is that you are cautious due to the possibility of run injury and/or inefficient as you unconsciously try to protect yourself from same, possibly using a less efficient stride length whereas, on the rower, fully confident, you listen to your body perfectly, make the right choices on form and stroke rate. Just a thought....

Pleasure meeting you, sorry if I've guessed the wrong ID, but look fwd to keeping in touch. Not working too hard this moment, will read a bit, then head to the Y for a row. Not sure how hard I'll go after my semi-acceptable 5K just y'day eve and a short night's sleep, but keen to give it a try.

Best,

Stan

[Nosmo]

I think it comes down to specificity. To be good at something you really have to do a lot of it, and if you are not running very much you will be slower.

I've had the same experience both with running and cycling. I am much slower running or on a bike then I used to be but haven't slowed down on the erg (and have certainly gotten much faster in a single due to technical improvements). 15 years ago my best 5K on the erg was slightly faster then I can now do, but I didn't erg or row much back then. I could turn in a couple of sub 5 hour 100mi bike rides on any given weekend of the year. Right now I doubt I could do that pace for 2 hours and I'd be sore afterwards. My body has also changed from rowing more. I don't do weight training but the my upper body is much more muscled then when I was cycling and running. I am a pound or two heavier.
Many years ago when I was rowing in college--in the days before the C2 erg--I was running a fair amount for cross training, but still got much faster when I left college and was primarily running.

[joe80]

My only initial thought, may apply to myself in smaller measure, but you have even larger run/row gaps, is that you are cautious due to the possibility of run injury and/or inefficient as you unconsciously try to protect yourself from same, possibly using a less efficient stride length whereas, on the rower, fully confident, you listen to your body perfectly, make the right choices on form and stroke rate. Just a thought....

Hi Stan,

Yes, Sherlock, there's no hiding my identity I'm an Irish national who has been living in London, England since 1973.

You may be correct about my worries in regard to injury but that doesn't explain the lack of progress. Last night, weather conditions were good, I ran a five mile warm-up without any niggles and there were no problems during the run. During the second half, my breathing was much more ragged than I ever experience on the erg and I was shattered at the finish. It's not a matter of holding back. Perhaps, as Nosmo implies, I need to increase the running sessions and put more effort into them.

Getting back into running and racing, the first thought is how good that feels. It doesn't take long for the old competitive instincts to make their mark.

Watch this space

Regards,

Joe

[mikvan52]

Cool thread!
Will be checking back in...
My one observation right now is : Imagine the mechanical advantage where one "stride" (stroke) in a boat gets you 10 meters down a course

No wonder we older ones like rowing more than running..... Do we?

My times: Best road 10k ~ 31:45 (w.some hills in heat) 1982 ~ Split in the 7(plus) mile Falmouth road race.
Recent 10k OTW ~ September 2009 ~ 37:59 (probably a little short of 10k.. it was a stake race too)
Recent 10k on the erg: 37:19.1 (5/5/2009)

5k on the erg: 17:49 in 2007
5k on the roads: 15:20 in 1982 (Prospect Park, NY)

When I was running, found that rowing slowed me down...
I weighed 152 lbs in and around 1982
I weigh 158-162 now...

[H2O]

The 5K running WR is over 2 minute faster than the 5K rowing record and the two events require completely different body types. So if your 5K rowing PB is within 2 minutes of your 5K running PB, then you seem to be more of a rower than a runner, all the more so since the 2 minutes will for most not be equal to two minutes at the leading edge of the sport.

[ArmandoChavezUNC]

My fastest 5k running is right around 21:00 minutes, while my fastest erging 5k is around 19:10 or so. For a 10k my erging time is far faster than my running time. I am a pretty awful runner but I'm average on the erg. Interestingly one of the fastest runners on the team is one of the slowest on the erg. I'm not sure there's much correlation between speeds running and erging. Just varies from person to person.

[Leo Young]

Whilst there will be some correlation between changes in your rowing and running performances, it's critical to understand that these changes don't occur proportionaly in a normal linear fashion.

When running, there is a is direct 1:1 proportional linear relationship between power output and resultant speed. Accordingly, if you go twice as hard, or exert double the power, then your running speed will also double (except at top end sprint speeds, when air resistance becomes a significant factor). Furthermore, if power output remains the same and you double your bodyweight, then your running speed halves.

Whereas, in activities like rowing, swimming and kayaking, where fluid dynamics are involved, then there is a cubed relationship between changes in power output and speed. On the C2 erg, where air is the fluid being moved, the same relationship exists. So doubling you power output (watts), results in a change of flywheel speed, equivalent to 'the proportional increase in watts, expressed to the power of 0.333', which equals only a 25.96% increase in speed (i.e. 2^0.333 = 1.2596). So you actually need to exert eight times the effort to double your speed (8^0.333 = 2). Changes in bodyweight, without a change in power output, has virtually no effect on speed on the erg.

[row dude]

Nice thread going here. I'll try to help a little.

Being only 5'8, I was never considered "ment for rowing". I was always more of a runner. cruising weight of 147-150 when season was in full swing. I have longer leg proportions and big shoulders if that means anything. My first summer joining the junior provincial team coming out of high school, we had a real rough summer with regards to wind. Everytime the wind would get real bad (as it does over here), our coach would send us on timed runs. The usual was a 6.2k hilly trek road path that would really push us. Other times we'd have to do 12-13k longer runs. Not to say we didn't get ALOT of rowing in but we did run alot.

Where I live there is a pretty popular road race. it's 10 miles - roughly 16k. I think my sister talked me into thinking I could do this race as sort of a suplement to my training around July 22nd. I remember trying really hard to conserve all my energy and respect something I wasn't use to, from start to finish feeling really good; even near the end - sprinting the last 100m. When I did finish the race, I realised I had placed 4th under 20. I was stoked as hell and weirded the hell out.

[Steve G]

Another slant on this to further stretch the running/erging times gap is weight!
Pre erging I normally ran at my best weight of around 138 lbs, after 5 years on the erg I had put on a lot more upper body muscle and sometimes weighed in at 68 kgs (150 lbs)
Now an extra 10 lb weigh to run with according to some of the articles will make you 15 seconds per mile slower, over a 10K that would be 90 seconds, a massive amount. I did see a calculator on line once!

Steve

[Flo]

Steve:

The site below doesn't work well now, but is this what you were thinking about re: correlating weight with race prediction?

http://www.sportscoach.netmx.co.uk/inde ... lay&pid=28

Everyone:

I would think running would be hurt a lot more by a couple lbs. overweight than rowing would be hurt by being a couple lbs. underweight due to the compounding influences of gravity on running. What do you guys think?

What interests me about the lightweight rowing division is that there is an absolute cap on weight. Since, in theory, weight is a leveling constant for all athlete's in that division, it seems percentage of muscle mass to fat, distribution of muscle mass, length of levers are more important than weight, per se.

1. Both running and rowing benefit from lean body mass but for different reasons.
2. Running and rowing may oppose each other with muscle distribution, to some extent. (But could rowing help with stabilizing muscles for running???)
3. Long levers seem to always be good for rowing and can be good for running if the running economy is there but detrimental if it is not . . . or if the levers add too much weight for the chosen running race distance.

Since weight is a constant for the lightweight division, I would think those who do both well are: (1.) a tad tall for running which makes them a good height for lightweight rowing (long levers). (2.) have lean, muscular bodies, (3.) can gain and lose upper body muscle mass easily, (4.) probably have a high percentage of type IIa muscle fibers. (5.) whose ideal running weight is within 10-15 lbs. of the max for the lightweight division.

Rowing will help runners who carry little upper body mass the most since the little mass they gain will help more than hinder running. Rowing will also help aging runners who are losing muscle mass, especially women.

Rowing hurts those who bulk up quickly.

At the end of the day, the law of specificity applies if you want to be great at either one.