Rowers with a 400 FTP on the bike

[Rower-Cyclist]

Hey guys, just wondering if we have any rowers who can put out a 400+ FTP (60 mins) or 450+ 20 min FTP on a bike, regardless of weight??

[Tsnor]

Here's some data
Jason Osborne
FTP would be ~440 to 460 watts.

20-minute cycling power: ~480 watts (6.67w/kg)
2,000m rowing ergometer score: 6:03 (472 watts)

Using 0.95 approximation 20 min to 1 hour his cycling FTP would be 440 to 460 watts.
Using calculator below his 6:03 translates to 18,100m in a hour at 356 watts
https://ergrowing.com/2k-erg-power-profile-calculator/

(https://www.velonews.com/news/how-olymp ... ling-pros/ )

[Carl Watts]

So there's that rough +30% Boost again then to go from Erg power to Bike power.

I would be interested in say the 1 minute or less, my pick is that its higher than 30% for all out sprints.

Really slow on the Erg or the Bike and the boost required would be reduced.

[Rower-Cyclist]

Here's some data
Jason Osborne
FTP would be ~440 to 460 watts.

20-minute cycling power: ~480 watts (6.67w/kg)
2,000m rowing ergometer score: 6:03 (472 watts)

Using 0.95 approximation 20 min to 1 hour his cycling FTP would be 440 to 460 watts.
Using calculator below his 6:03 translates to 18,100m in a hour at 356 watts
https://ergrowing.com/2k-erg-power-profile-calculator/

(https://www.velonews.com/news/how-olymp ... ling-pros/ )

Thanks for replying, 480 for 20 mins, regardless of weight is what im looking for! not sure on the 0.95 calculation though, I've seen this vary as much as 15-20% less in pro cyclists.

[Rower-Cyclist]

So there's that rough +30% Boost again then to go from Erg power to Bike power.

I would be interested in say the 1 minute or less, my pick is that its higher than 30% for all out sprints.

Really slow on the Erg or the Bike and the boost required would be reduced.

Thats a good rough equation to know. Do you know if theres been any research done on that or just something that appears to come up quite often?

[flatbread]

Thats a good rough equation to know. Do you know if theres been any research done on that or just something that appears to come up quite often?

I've never seen a study that did power profiling over 1min, 5min, 20min, and 60min with athletes who were equally trained (or equally untrained) in both sports.

Sustainable power outputs on the erg are lower than on the bike due to the differences in leverage, the length of the recovery period, and the lower cadences (try doing a 2 x 8min power test on the bike at 65rpm -- you'll end up quite a few watts lower than at a self-selected cadence somewhere between 90-105...I don't want to get into the physiological weeds of it, but low cadence/higher force component reduces the ability to withstand fatigue).

Just like for cyclists, ergers power profiles are going to vary, with some skewed more towards the 1-4min end of the spectrum (what Coggan called the "pursuiter" power profile in cycling) and some skewed more towards the 60min end (the TT'er profile). All those erg predictor calculators are based on averages, and ok, if you happen to be in the middle of the bell curve, the predictor, or "Paul's Law" is going to be accurate, but if you're not, it's not.

I started training on the bike with an SRM in '98, and I've various powermeters ever since, I've done more lab tests than a care to remember since 1984, and I've made out programs for cyclists. From that, I'd say that:

* FTP is not 95% of 20min power, it's not 60min power, it's not the result from a Monod Critical Power curve. For some sprinters, it's the highest steady state they can hold for about 30-35min. For some really fatigue-resistant TT'ers, it's the highest steady state they can hold for 75, even 80min. 50-60min is the Maximal Lactate Steady State duration for most -- but, like those erg watts calculators, that works if you're in the middle of the bell curve, and is well off if you're not.

* The dang 20min test requires a 5min *all out* effort beforehand. That's the Coggan and Allen protocol. So it's not a 20min test. It's a 5min test, followed by a recovery period, then a 20min test. So all those cyclists who warm up and then do a 20min test and figure that 95% of that is their FTP need to go out and do some 40, 60, and 70min tests to really get a better idea of what that 20min without the "blowout" before it means.

Two examples. My 1min power is laughably low -- barely 500w now at 55, and at 35 it was less than 30w higher. My :05 sprint couldn't break a windowpane. So, my 20min without the blowout is actually right at 95% of my 60min power. with the blowout, my 20min is 98% of 60min. On the other hand, a guy I coached on the road for a few years, who went on to become a Masters World Champion in the team sprint, could crank out nearly 750w for 1 min at 72kg, but his MLSS duration was about 32 minutes, and his MLSS power was a little less than 90% of his 20min test, with the blowout effort.


On the rowing side, unlike cycling there's no place for the specialist sprinter or the big 1-2 minute puncher. 2k is the race distance. So, that sport is going to select for athletes who are skewed towards high-capacity aerobic glycolysis, what in cycling would be "puncheurs" -- the big 4-8 minute "VO2" athletes. Since most research and testing has been done with competitive rowers -- most at a pretty high level -- the testing pool is going to be skewed to athletes who, in cycling parlance, would be "all rounders" on their power profile. So, comparisons between cycling and rowing power profiles are instantly going to be a bit distorted, because there is going to be a wider range of variance in the road cyclists and endurance trackies than there will be among the rowers.

A rower should be able to do good power on the bike right away. For a cyclist, it's all going to depend of how weak their back and core are from riding the bike, and what their hip and hamstring mobility are like. N=1, but I still can't come near my 60min bike power for a 2k on the erg because, although my hip and hamstring mobility are good, I have the core and back of a cyclist -- really good and stable for directing power in to the pedals, but weak when it comes to generating force through my trunk in a dead lift or in the rowing stroke. So I still have a flattish force curve, and my bike and erg watts differ by about 75w for almost any duration (I can do 390w for 7-8 minutes on the bike, but only 320 for a 2k; likewise, I can do 350 for an hour on the bike, but I'd be hard pressed to manage 275 on the erg -- 250 *might* be my limit right now).

Comparisons between the two sports are nifty, and I've wasted a huge amount of time and words blabbing on about it in this post. In the end, I don't think it matters much. Your watts are your watts. The relationship between the two sports is going to depend on a lot of variables, and in the end you have to work on whatever your weaknesses are, in either or both activities (a six-four, 200lb rower is going to be able to put out hella watts on a bike, but he's going to get dropped like a stone on the first real hill, and he's going to have the aerodynamics of a barn; a 140lb climber may be able to whip out nearly 6 w/kg at MLSS, but he's not going to have a lot of meat for the boat, where absolute power beats relative power, even among lightweights -- both of those athletes will have to work on some weaknesses and learn to work within their limiters).

[Claudius]

Comparisons between the two sports are nifty, and I've wasted a huge amount of time and words blabbing on about it in this post. In the end, I don't think it matters much.

I have always called these comparative numbers "volatile".... as said...too many variables are involved to find common ground. Nonetheless, the 25%-30% might work for an online game to have fun. Give us rowers a 25% boost, exclude us from the KOM/QOM/Sprint sections and races.... And we are one happy family, rowers and cyclists.... because I'm both too.

IMO, a strong rower can quickly become a strong cyclist, but a good cyclist without any rowing background needs a lot of time to build up the lack of upper body strength of a rower (including core strength). So it is "easy" for a rower to get a FTP above 300w, but a good cyclist, even maybe a worldstar...could spent a long time on the erg to get that sub 6:45 2k in the house. A Sprinter or a track cyclist will probably do it in a significant shorter time than a climber.

[Carl Watts]

Nonetheless, the 25%-30% might work for an online game to have fun. Give us rowers a 25% boost, exclude us from the KOM/QOM/Sprint sections and races.... And we are one happy family, rowers and cyclists.... because I'm both too.

You can still do sprints on the rower in Zwift but a 30% boost is not enough.

Races are great in Zwift, you just need to be in the right category and if you big and heavy you just choose a course without hills.

Probably one thing in Zwift that is lacking is age group rides but I guess you just have to ride in a lower category to compensate. Bit of a shame however as it looks bad that you can make the 90th percentile in you age category on the rower but have to ride in the D Cat on the bike. Still best not to take the rowing in Zwift to seriously, there is other software for that.

[Rower-Cyclist]

I've never seen a study that did power profiling over 1min, 5min, 20min, and 60min with athletes who were equally trained (or equally untrained) in both sports.

Sustainable power outputs on the erg are lower than on the bike due to the differences in leverage, the length of the recovery period, and the lower cadences (try doing a 2 x 8min power test on the bike at 65rpm -- you'll end up quite a few watts lower than at a self-selected cadence somewhere between 90-105...I don't want to get into the physiological weeds of it, but low cadence/higher force component reduces the ability to withstand fatigue).

Thank you so much for taking the time to right your response, lots of information there and a lot of which is in line with what I have found and read. Not sure about the lower cadence being a negative though, I've experienced much higher 20 min average outputs with athletes on a 55-65 rpm and much higher resistance vs the same athletes trying a higher cadence and lower resistance, admittedly this was on an upper body erg. Similar to the 20 min FTP tests not being a 1 size fits all test, its relative to the athletes strengths.

Im currently working in a sport where athletes will be required to put out a 20 min steady state or a 20 min RSI, depending on set up. The mode will be cycling however, weight is not necessarily an issue (sub 100kg). Most cyclists either are too light to put out 450 watts average for 20 mins, or they are sprint cyclists who can hit high numbers but have low repeatability. Rowers can be heavier without the same effects as weight would have on cycling - hence my search arriving here! I guess a rower with a good 6km time is what im after.

[flatbread]

with the legs, lower cadence/higher force = faster fatigue.

try doing a 2k test at rate 16-18 and the drag factor at something ridiculous like 170 or 180, vs, rate 32 and 130 (actually, don't try that!)

also, when looking at what cyclists do for 20min tests, vs what rowers would do for 6k, bear in mind that rowing skews towards absolute VO2 (big fellas of six four, 200lbs, or big gals of six two, 180) whereas cycling, like running and nordic skiing, is a relative VO2 sport, and skews towards athletes under 165lbs (men) and 145lbs (women), except on the track and in the TT.

A 400 watt FTP would be in the area of 6 w/kg for most male cyclists, which would most likely mean someone was paying them good money to ride a bike for a living!

[Rower-Cyclist]

with the legs, lower cadence/higher force = faster fatigue.

try doing a 2k test at rate 16-18 and the drag factor at something ridiculous like 170 or 180, vs, rate 32 and 130 (actually, don't try that!)

also, when looking at what cyclists do for 20min tests, vs what rowers would do for 6k, bear in mind that rowing skews towards absolute VO2 (big fellas of six four, 200lbs, or big gals of six two, 180) whereas cycling, like running and nordic skiing, is a relative VO2 sport, and skews towards athletes under 165lbs (men) and 145lbs (women), except on the track and in the TT.

A 400 watt FTP would be in the area of 6 w/kg for most male cyclists, which would most likely mean someone was paying them good money to ride a bike for a living!

Thanks. Yeah relative isn't too important, were after absolute. Yes, in contact with a few Olympians and professionals. Im hoping we find some rowers who are too heavy to do well at cycling but still putting out 5w/kg.

[Tsnor]

If you are after data for a study of some kind also try hitting Dr. Stephen Seiler. He cycles, used to row, and gets a TON of data by asking for it on his twitter feed.

... we're after absolute. Yes, in contact with a few Olympians and professionals. Im hoping we find some rowers who are too heavy to do well at cycling but still putting out 5w/kg.

[Rower-Cyclist]

If you are after data for a study of some kind also try hitting Dr. Stephen Seiler. He cycles, used to row, and gets a TON of data by asking for it on his twitter feed.

... we're after absolute. Yes, in contact with a few Olympians and professionals. Im hoping we find some rowers who are too heavy to do well at cycling but still putting out 5w/kg.

Awesome, thanks for the heads up.

[Tobias Stoehr]

Hamish Bond posted his 30min bikeerg effort on instagram. The BikeErg allegedly under-estimates Watts. He did 470 Watts for 30min on the BikeErg.

[Tobias Stoehr]

Also Josh Bugajski had big numbers. 410 Watts for 60min on the BikeErg.