Do ergs cause low back injuries ?

[Jamie Pfeffer]

To be fair, the surgeon did not mention C2 by name (he said the "the rowing machine at the gym with the chain" or something like that). And he never said that a fixed-flywheel machine is safer than a moving-flywheel machine. (Though he didn't say the opposite either). I was not trying to malign the study that RowPerfect cites on its website. Rather, I was addressing the theories that I've seen on message boards that say the C2 must be more damaging than rowing on the water. But RowPerfect's site can be perceived as unfair to the C2 because, of course, C2 doesn't have a chance to present its best case on RowPerfect's site. That's just part of commerce.

I'm sure the RowPerect is a great machine. Xeno likes it. And I admit that I think Xeno doesn't just row on water; he nearly walks on it too. But Xeno also rows on the C2. And he has for years. So have I. I learned to row on a Model A; pulled my first test on a Model B; trained on the Model C when it was introduced in the winter or spring of my junior year; now I have a Model E. That's about 20 years of rowing on a Concept 2. Maybe that makes me biased. But for me, it's been a huge part of my life for two decades. Of course, though, if I learned on a RowPerfect, I may be biased toward it.

If the C2 hurts a person's back (or knees), the person can buy slides. Xeno advocates those for training. He mentions slides often in the weekly e-mails that he sends to rowers that he coaches. And one can also lower the drag factor.

This is a good discussion, though. Thanks.

Best,
Jamie

[Jamie Pfeffer]

Rockin' Roland: I believe this is the study you mentioned: http://www.rowperfect.com.au/articles.html#hooper2. Scroll down to "A Discussion of Fixed vs Dynamic Ergometers," Ivan Hooper M.Phty.St (Sports Phty), B.Sc (HMS) APA Sports Physiotherapist Australian Institute of Sport
Rowing Australia Sports Science / Sports Medicine Coordinator

It's an interesting study, but it doesn't conclude the debate. He mentions that combining C2 training and weight training close together could be a problem. Well. Weight training alone can injure athletes as well. The study appears to be mainly a survey of existing literature, rather than rigorous, controlled experiments using the scientific method. It is a good read, though. And makes one curious to try a RowPerfect, but not necessarily to scuttle an erg. Thanks.

Best,
Jamie

[Rockin Roland]

Jamie,
Although I'm well aware of those Rowing Australia/A.I.S. articles comparing fixed to moving flywheel ergs, it's not exactly what I was referring to though.

Ivan Hooper further wrote an article in "Rowing MagOzine" Nov/Dec 2006 page 58. He explains "based on this http://www.rowingaustralia.com.au/hp_ss ... erapy.shtm
and some recent Rowing Australia statistics that demonstrate the high rate of low back injury amongst rowers, I would like to raise some comments and considerations regarding the use of ergometers in training......". Although the Rowing Australia stats wern't published in detail in this article he did go on to make two warnings for stationary erg use. One was about the injury risk of doing low rate workouts and the other doing workouts of greater duration than 30 minutes on the erg.

Unfortunately, as this article appeared in a magazine and not on the internet I'm unable to re-produce it on this forum. I must say though that it had nothing whatsoever to do with Rowperfect nor did it try to promote that product.

[PaulS]

Jamie,
Although I'm well aware of those Rowing Australia/A.I.S. articles comparing fixed to moving flywheel ergs, it's not exactly what I was referring to though.

Ivan Hooper further wrote an article in "Rowing MagOzine" Nov/Dec 2006 page 58. He explains "based on this http://www.rowingaustralia.com.au/hp_ss ... erapy.shtm
and some recent Rowing Australia statistics that demonstrate the high rate of low back injury amongst rowers, I would like to raise some comments and considerations regarding the use of ergometers in training......". Although the Rowing Australia stats wern't published in detail in this article he did go on to make two warnings for stationary erg use. One was about the injury risk of doing low rate workouts and the other doing workouts of greater duration than 30 minutes on the erg.

Unfortunately, as this article appeared in a magazine and not on the internet I'm unable to re-produce it on this forum. I must say though that it had nothing whatsoever to do with Rowperfect nor did it try to promote that product.

Sorry, both of those articles are doing a bit of subjective manipulation of the data to come up with the desired conclusions.

In the Second of the articles here is an example of something that "sounds good", but isn't accurate in any way.

"This is not just a matter of the frame of reference: in the static case (ergometer) you are actually performing more work accelerating your whole body weight up and down the slides, thereby creating high levels of kinetic energy. In the dynamic case (boat) your body weight is relatively
stationary, creating much lower levels of kinetic energy and thus requiring less work to be done to reverse this kinetic energy. It results in an athlete needing to put in six times more energy just accelerating and decelerating their own body weight, compared to on water rowing."

Let's look at what really happens in the two situations, static Ergo and the boat. Relative to the Earth, when the grounded Ergo Rower drives, they will shift their body weight about the length of their legs, now let's get into the boat and row along (the normal condition to be in when rowing a boat), we still have the earth as a reference point (conveniently overlooked in the 'discussion') and when the rower proceeds from the catch to the finish they move their body through about 4m (relative to the earth), about half of that is done during the leg drive, so to duplicate that on the grounded Erg the rower needs a 2m inseam, pretty unlikely.

That said, the Erg + Slides (or RP) the Rowers seat will move nearly nothing at all relative to the Earth on the Drive, yet many will try to say how much more "boat-like" that situation is, when in fact the grounded Erg, at least when it comes to having to accelerate the bodies mass during the stroke, is much closer to the boat.

Now if we want to talk about the recovery, then the situation does change to where the sliding Erg is a bit more like a boat and the grounded Erg is very different. i.e. There isn't really anything to "pull against" (the earth) with either the Sliding Erg or the Boat; The main difference being that the Erg doesn't really care if you yank it back under yourself quickly as far as the displayed "boat Pace" is concerned, but a real boat will, and as fate would have it, the grounded Erg will punish that behavior also by forcing a large waste of energy to reverse the bodies momentum prior to the flywheel being the recipient of the athletes input.

[gliderguy]

Thanks to all for the input.

I've found a model C that I can try for a while before making a decision.

Doug