Foot position

[GlennUk]

Hi All

When sprinting, often advice is given to try raising the foot compared with normal position, advice i have followed. I understand the idea is that the drive from the legs is as close as practicable to the direction of the slide, seems logical.

After last months CTC iit occurred to me that perhaps, foot height should always be thus and so have been rowing with my feet a notch higher than i would have previously, for my endurance sessions (typically 45minutres upwards)

Before having this thought, i had found a bit of guidance tha suggested feet should be set with the ankle at approx same height as top of the slide, i am not sure where i found it though.

Are there any views about whether using a higher foot position has any detrimental affects in general terms on peforamnce compared with one a notch or two lower?

I did a search and whiuls ti can find lots of threads related to feet, i couldn't find anything which discussed foot position in this context (or at least in the 1st 6/7 pages of my search on here).

Thanks for any thoughts comments.

[btlifter]

Hi All

When sprinting, often advice is given to try raising the foot compared with normal position, advice i have followed. I understand the idea is that the drive from the legs is as close as practicable to the direction of the slide, seems logical.

After last months CTC iit occurred to me that perhaps, foot height should always be thus and so have been rowing with my feet a notch higher than i would have previously, for my endurance sessions (typically 45minutres upwards)

Before having this thought, i had found a bit of guidance tha suggested feet should be set with the ankle at approx same height as top of the slide, i am not sure where i found it though.

Are there any views about whether using a higher foot position has any detrimental affects in general terms on peforamnce compared with one a notch or two lower?

I did a search and whiuls ti can find lots of threads related to feet, i couldn't find anything which discussed foot position in this context (or at least in the 1st 6/7 pages of my search on here).

Thanks for any thoughts comments.

Aside from the more horizontal force expression, there is another consideration for high foot placement when sprinting:

With an increased spm, stroke length is necessarily reduced. Specifically, leg bend is reduced. This allows high feet without knees impeding the movement of the torso, nor excessive ankle strain.

Conversely, if somebody is doing an r20 piece with long strokes, too high of foot placement is likely to disrupt the strokes groove, possibly creating some compromised body positions.

[Tsnor]

Foot stretcher height sets your hip angle for most of the stroke. Too high can be a problem.

"... Raising foot-stretcher height did not increase the horizontal component of foot force. The reduced ability to anteriorly rotate the pelvis at the front of the stroke may be a key obstacle in gaining benefits from raised foot-stretcher heights.” "...Kleshnev shows that the main rowing indicators were better when lowering the stretcher position. ... The stroke length and legs drive were longer by 1.7% and 3.0%, average handle force and work per stroke were higher by 0.6% and 2.4%.” https://www.rowperfect.co.uk/foot-stret ... ls-part-1/ ( I didn't check to see how high they were using to compare "lower" and "higher", don't lower your feet based on this)

Not sure how this would apply to short sprints vs longer rows.

Also, not sure if too high foot stretcher position compromises lung volume given the more compressed chest position. Maybe not as important in a 100m sprint vs a 2K or longer race.

(Too low is not great either, especially in a max force sprint. Low foot stretchers increase the vertical force component, and can lift you right off the seat as the power transfers from feet to your arms.)

[Dangerscouse]

On a purely anecdotal level, I have found that the right foot position just feels right, and when I've been one up or down, it instinctively doesn't feel right.

[JaapvanE]

On a purely anecdotal level, I have found that the right foot position just feels right, and when I've been one up or down, it instinctively doesn't feel right.

But how about your left foot position ?

More seriously, how do you feel it? Is it missing that final part of the drive or a too tight compression? What should I watch out for?

[Dangerscouse]

But how about your left foot position ?

More seriously, how do you feel it? Is it missing that final part of the drive or a too tight compression? What should I watch out for?

Hahaha.

I'm not sure, and I can't say for certain but it just didn't feel quite right at the other positions.

Probably not too helpful, but it's a bit like your preferred drag factor: you have to eliminate the wrong options to settle on what's best.

[Dutch]

Raising the foot plate to the second from last whole puts me in the perfect sprinting position. I only half slide when doing 100m.
The only negative side is that with maybe 30m to go I can get lazy and stop driving with my legs and just end up bending from my waist.
This is not something I can train out of me, I have to always think drive, drive with the legs each and every 100m.
I find it is quite a discipled event to run through, doing the 100. It all has to be spot on, the visualisation, the warm up, the beginning 5 strokes, the execution and posture all the way through.
All for maybe just a tenth of a second lol.

[JaapvanE]

All for maybe just a tenth of a second lol.

That's why I am more of a long distane rower: then you are talking seconds of difference...

[MPx]

Interesting thread Glenn - and I do much the same as you. Normal erg No3 (three holes showing) puts my ankle bone in line with the top of the rail. 500 and 1min No2 (4 holes showing) and 100m No1 5 Holes showing.

I've done millions of meters like it, so I'm used to it and it feels fine now but may only be that because I'm used to it. Isay that because I struggled at first. On the Model C the foot plates were flat which suited me. On the model D there's a very clear raised platform of plastic which looks to me engineered to go under the ball of the foot to take max force. However, in the No3 position its nearer the front of my foot (ie toes and just the front part of the ball of the foot). My prejudice is reinforced as I'm able to generate more force with the ball of my foot squarely on this raised section when I raise the footplate for the sprints. However, the position of the strap when the footplate is raised and I firmly strap in, means I can no longer lift my heel (as the strap is across the top of my arch) so my stroke is shortened - which is normal for very high rate sprints so no prob, but a bit hopeless for SS at r20. Is it just me or does this affect anyone else? When I first got my D to replace my old C I saw this as a real issue and even toyed with doing some kind of custom strap arrangement, but nearly 8MM later I no longer notice! Still seems odd though to have a design with a fixed strap and platform but a moveable foot position.

[GlennUk]

All, thanks for the feedback and the link to the article.

Reading the article, the actual position of the foo in relation to the erg 'stretcher' is not critical, being able to get shins vertical seems a good indicator combined with how the position feels to the athlete if i am reading the article right.

The article suggests that in fact reducing the height of the feet looks likley to be favourable subject to how the athlete feels.

Thanks for the comments, all interesting stuff.

[GlennUk]

Interesting thread Glenn - and I do much the same as you. Normal erg No3 (three holes showing) puts my ankle bone in line with the top of the rail. 500 and 1min No2 (4 holes showing) and 100m No1 5 Holes showing.

I've done millions of meters like it, so I'm used to it and it feels fine now but may only be that because I'm used to it. Isay that because I struggled at first. On the Model C the foot plates were flat which suited me. On the model D there's a very clear raised platform of plastic which looks to me engineered to go under the ball of the foot to take max force. However, in the No3 position its nearer the front of my foot (ie toes and just the front part of the ball of the foot). My prejudice is reinforced as I'm able to generate more force with the ball of my foot squarely on this raised section when I raise the footplate for the sprints. However, the position of the strap when the footplate is raised and I firmly strap in, means I can no longer lift my heel (as the strap is across the top of my arch) so my stroke is shortened - which is normal for very high rate sprints so no prob, but a bit hopeless for SS at r20. Is it just me or does this affect anyone else? When I first got my D to replace my old C I saw this as a real issue and even toyed with doing some kind of custom strap arrangement, but nearly 8MM later I no longer notice! Still seems odd though to have a design with a fixed strap and platform but a moveable foot position.

Mike

I could have written this almost word for word (except i have only ever owned my model D) but have had the same thoughts re foot position/straps. The article that Tsnor linked to suggests that the lower the better, subject to the rowers preference, which is at odds with my presumption given we are moving ourselves in a linear direction and therefore i would have presumed we would be more efficient with our drive being paralleled, and as close to inline with the direction of travel as possible.

Ill do a bit of googling and see if i can find anything else, that article is geared towards OTW so there may be differences there for reasons which may no be the same on an erg.

I had left my feet raised a notch since doing the CTC last month, but given the articles, I will focus on what feels right given i am not sprinting for a FM later on this month!!!

If i find anything else of interest ill post back here.