New member, hi all

[RWAGR]

@Gammmo- agree of course, but criticism should be contextual, feedback specific, and all dependent on the person’s interest in receiving it.

@Henry- sub-6 I would call world class and re sub 5.40, aren’t there literally only 5 people who have done that in history?!

[Droode]

Yes, HJS what about all those sub 5:40 guys who do not rank there pieces because they row for the fun of it and of course for the fitness
Also welcome Stephen I am sorry if we hijacked your thread it is all in good spirit.

[kerosene]

Being fit is extremely relative. Looking at C2 rankings can be deceptive but they tell simething. People who consider themselves somewhat fit will not post embarrssing times as easily as times they are somewhat satisfued with.

in 30-39 yo male (both lw and hw) the time needed to be in top 25% is 7:06.6

To be in top 25% of people, who at least on some level participate in physical activity, is being fit in my books. Not advanced or elite but fit regardless.

Then again to me upper end of novice or at least intermediate can be considered “fit” in general terms. That being in the followig ladder:
Beginner, Novice, Intermediate, Advanced, Elite.

HJS, I think your frame of reference is in the higher end of the spectrum.

Cheers

[hjs]

Yes, HJS what about all those sub 5:40 guys who do not rank there pieces because they row for the fun of it and of course for the fitness
Also welcome Stephen I am sorry if we hijacked your thread it is all in good spirit.

You know the answer, once you are really at the top you this game you ofcourse show it.

Otw guys never "erg for fun" or for fitness they mostly are forced to do so. The ones who are not super great use term like "ergs thise float"

Ps looked at the non ranked results from Germany? With lots of 5.4x times over the years


Shooting the messenger won,t change the facts.

[hjs]

@Gammmo- agree of course, but criticism should be contextual, feedback specific, and all dependent on the person’s interest in receiving it.

@Henry- sub-6 I would call world class and re sub 5.40, aren’t there literally only 5 people who have done that in history?!

Yes, sub 6.40 us super.

Sub 6 is not wordclass. Over the years I think 1000 plus guys have pulled that. But that ofcourse is a matter of definition.
Have seen one of the NS double pull a 4x2k on 5 min, all 4 sub 6...

5k wr is sub 1.30 pace.

By no way am I trying to put people down, I just find nowadays trend, that everybody is a winner and great very soft.
Its a bit like IQ numbers, average is 100. Nothing wrong with that, but compared to a 140/50 human very limited, nomatter how hard we work or not.

[hjs]

Hi all,

Just purchased my first C2 erg, a model D I got off eBay. Thing had been stood in a garage for a few months, chain was in need for a swap etc so just ordered a few spares to get it back to new.

Looking forward to racking up some meters, going to follow the Pete Plan as I build up.

Stephen,

Sorry for the derailing, but feel very welcome, it sometimes goes this way.

[G-dub]

So if my math is right, a 7:00 2K compared to the world record 2K compared to running a mile vs the mile world record = a 4:40 mile. Is that a good time or an easy time? Certainly it depends on who is running it!

[JerekKruger]

So if my math is right, a 7:00 2K compared to the world record 2K compared to running a mile vs the mile world record = a 4:40 mile. Is that a good time or an easy time?

It's not quite that simple sadly. To compare a 7:00 to a 5:40 2k you need to compare their individual powers i.e. 302 and 570 respectively. Hence a 7:00 requires about 53% of the power of a 5:40 2k. To then make the comparison to running we'd need a formula for how power scales with running speed: I don't know of any such formula (and I suspect there isn't a simple one as the running movement changes a lot more at different speeds than the rowing stroke). What we do know is that power output goes up a lot less quickly with speed in running, so we'd expect a bigger spread of times than in rowing.

At a very rough guess I'd say the equivalent to a 7:00 2k in running would be somewhere between 6:00 and 5:30 for a mile.

EDIT: I should also add that, whilst a 4:40 mile isn't going to win you many competitions (there have been a handful of High Schoolers who have gone sub 4) it's probably faster than most people could ever manage. Again, very rough estimate but I'd say it's equivalent to perhaps a 6:20 2k.

[hjs]

So if my math is right, a 7:00 2K compared to the world record 2K compared to running a mile vs the mile world record = a 4:40 mile. Is that a good time or an easy time?

It's not quite that simple sadly. To compare a 7:00 to a 5:40 2k you need to compare their individual powers i.e. 302 and 570 respectively. Hence a 7:00 requires about 53% of the power of a 5:40 2k. To then make the comparison to running we'd need a formula for how power scales with running speed: I don't know of any such formula (and I suspect there isn't a simple one as the running movement changes a lot more at different speeds than the rowing stroke). What we do know is that power output goes up a lot less quickly with speed in running, so we'd expect a bigger spread of times than in rowing.

At a very rough guess I'd say the equivalent to a 7:00 2k in running would be somewhere between 6:00 and 5:30 for a mile.

7 is just a round number, not much more.

Running is very different, on the erg its about putting energy in the fan, running is moving our body, so very much weight dependend. Rowers are often poor runners, to heavy.

[JerekKruger]

Running is very different, on the erg its about putting energy in the fan, running is moving our body, so very much weight dependend. Rowers are often poor runners, to heavy.

Oh I wasn't trying to suggest that having a certain 2k time would automatically translate to a certain mile time, just trying to roughly say how the two line up in their respective sports in terms of how hard they are to achieve/how many people have the potential to achieve them.

7 is just a round number, not much more.

This is true, but people do tend to fixate on beating round numbers and for many men it's an obvious first target.

[MassiF]

Very interesting thread! Especially for another new member like me.
Sub 7 2K sounds like an impossible achievement to me LOL...OK, I’m really light, 66kg for 180cm and I’ve only started a couple of months ago, but I consider myself reasonably fit, having run for years. No problem in rowing for 60-80 minutes daily, even keeping a low heart rate, but when it comes to a quick 2K I’m happy to go < 8
I’ll keep training

[Gammmmo]

I just find nowadays trend, that everybody is a winner and great very soft.

I think it's almost cultural. People are congratulated on simply *doing* something and when you talk of *how much or how fast or how hard* most people think you're being elitist.

Very interesting thread! Especially for another new member like me.
Sub 7 2K sounds like an impossible achievement to me LOL...OK, I’m really light, 66kg for 180cm and I’ve only started a couple of months ago, but I consider myself reasonably fit, having run for years. No problem in rowing for 60-80 minutes daily, even keeping a low heart rate, but when it comes to a quick 2K I’m happy to go < 8
I’ll keep training

Oh it'll come. I have a background in endurance sports - mainly cycling but a bit of running too. I was 65kg (and 178cm) when I stopped cycling. I then gradually gained weight and within a few months was in the mid 18s for 5K, and in the sort of shape to go sub7. I can go sub7 now pretty much anytime without THAT much effort at all if I'm motivated. Of course, everything then moves on - I really ought to be knocking out 2Ks in the 6:40s now and pushing myself.

[JerekKruger]

I think it's almost cultural. People are congratulated on simply *doing* something and when you talk of *how much or how fast or how hard* most people think you're being elitist.

I think a lot of it comes from how we raise our kids these days (says the fairly young person without kids ). Too much praising and too little pushing. There's a balance of course: push a kid too much to do something they don't want to and you breed resentment (better to let them find something they enjoy then push them to work hard at it), and praising hard work is a good idea I think.

[RWAGR]

I mean sure. But as a dad to three young kids I think we need to come down from our ivory towers a little. I don't buy the whole "the world is falling apart because every kid is mollycoddled" thing. In our context, for example, someone who comes on this forum and wants to get fit enough to achieve a sub-7 should be congratulated. There's nothing soft or weak about wanting to achieve that and then maintain that level and have a life outside erging. And nor should the forum be reserved for the uber competitive type-A people who are always going for a new PB. everyone has different priorities and let's face it, no one on this forum is a true couch potato.

[JerekKruger]

You're right of course Rob, and I hope the OP hasn't been put off the forum as a result of the response.