Drag factor, spm and speed

[OhBeWan]

Trying to improve my 5k time by comparing my season's best to other guys my age. Not everyone posts statistics about their workout. I picked 3 guys in my age group who are much faster than me and who post their statistics. They were all about the same in height, drag factor, stroke rate and time. Their averages are 6'1" tall, 27.7 SPM, drag factor 111 and speed of 1:51.9 per 500M. I am 6' tall, 25 SPM, drag factor 130 and speed of 1:57.7 per 500M. So, I am roughly one minute slower than these guys. The obvious thing I should be doing is easing off the drag factor, but I cannot increase my SPM enough to increase my speed. When I set the drag factor to 120 or so and increase the SPM to 28, I cannot get the speed into the lower 1:50's. Maybe I should shorten the stroke and not go back as far? Maybe I should speed up the return?

Why do I use a drag factor of 130? Well some folks on here said that coaches use that as it is the closest to on-the-water. I do not care whether this is correct. I am just telling how I began training at 130.

Is it leg strength? I don't think so as I put 450 pounds on that Precor Inclined leg press and lift it many times for multiple sets. No one in the gym lifts anything close to this. Squats, Lunges - many of them.

Is it cardio? I don't think so. My resting heart rate is around 44 to 48. I used to be a high school runner. My doctor rarely sees EKG's as perfect as mine.

Is it form? I have been on the Concept2 rower for more than 10 years, have a few million meters under my belt, etc. Never had any coaching but I have compared a video of my rowing to some of the textbook rowers. I don't see that I am doing anything wrong.

Using the Free Spirits Rowing predictor, I get 19:02 which is 1:54.2. This is based on a 100m of 16.9 and a one hour of 14,512 meters. I used other season's bests and got similar results. My best ever 5,000 was 18:58 or 1:53.8 per 500 M, but that was 9 years ago. I do not know what my drag factor or stroke rate was for my PB.

Here are some conclusions: 1) Don't count on an 18:58.4 again. We all age. 2) I am used to a drag factor of 130. I should try lowering it and increasing the stroke rate. 3) As a test I should lower my drag factor to 120, increase the spm to 28, and see how close I can get to 1:55.

Any other helpful, non-sarcastic, supportive recommendations? Thank you in advance.

[MPx]

After 10 years erging at DF 130 I think searching for a silver bullet in DF is likely a waste of your time - indeed I think everyone just needs to find a comfortable place for their style and then just leave DF alone.

Nevertheless if you're doing the same as you always did, its likely to give the same results so changing something is required for improvement. As you know, the erg measures work and presents that work as a pace. If you want to go faster, you need to work harder. So a stronger stroke or more strokes or both. Both of those require you to get fitter and/or stronger.

You don't give away age/weight/training volume/training plan or many other factors that will affect your performance - and these factors will have a much greater affect than DF. Comparing the stats you do give, I too am 6 foot but I set my DF at (about) 145. Looking at my SB 5k it recorded DF143, 30spm and 1:53.4 pace. So you might conclude from that comparison that you actually need to up the DF as well as up the Rate. That's not what I'd suggest - although I do think r25 is way too low for a TT, its closer to training rates.

I suspect what's really needed is a proper training plan. You'll get better by stimulating your body's adaptation by working harder. If you don't have the knowledge/experience to develop something that specifically suits you, take a look at the Pete Plan 5k https://thepeteplan.wordpress.com/5k-training/ and see what's involved. Following a structured plan through a couple of cycles over 3 to 6 months should make a significant difference - unless you are already very well trained. If you're already doing as much training as you're prepared to do and you're already trying as hard as you're prepared to try then I'm afraid there's not much hope of a breakthrough.

Best of luck with it - and let us know how you get on.

[OhBeWan]

Thanks, MPx. I too am 67. Weigh 220. I do not currently follow a training plan. I fell in with some youngsters a while back. They had a training plan that I followed for about 3 months. Unfortunately I became sick so I could no longer continue. Don't know if I was improving. They were in their 30's and 40's. One of them pulled a 6:19 2k, so I think it was good training. They were big proponents of a low drag factor. They were at maybe 115 for a 2k.

Maybe I should adopt some training program. My workouts are intense. I alternate between lifting weights, long slow distance, high intensity interval training and long hard rows. Based on what these youngsters did and the level of difficulty of my current workouts, I don't know if a structure plan would help.

I actually was looking for a silver bullet in the DF. Or at least a discussion on how you could tell what is right for you. These young dudes who pull a 6:19 telling me that a 115 on a 5k is all I should do. And these are some incredibly strong power lifter dudes who do lots of cardio. And you MPx, do great with a 145.

Thanks, MPx. A more organized training plan and don't over-analyze DF may be the answer. I will let you know.

[Dangerscouse]

After 10 years erging at DF 130 I think searching for a silver bullet in DF is likely a waste of your time - indeed I think everyone just needs to find a comfortable place for their style and then just leave DF alone.

Just to confuse matters a bit more, I've used circa 110-132 for extended periods of time, and I've found that all of them have been useful in varying degrees.

I do totally agree that there is no perfect DF, and it's very much a matter of preference. Knowing that Cam (Wharram) rows everything at over 200df, and exceptionally strong rows too, makes my back hurt just thinking about it.

[iain]

I have found that I get used to a certain speed of drive, as a result a "blind" row leaves the watts surprisingly proportional to DF over a fair range so lowering DF will mean my "natural" stroke is slower! However this can be increased when you get used to it and at a lower DF I find I tire slower (but I am a weak lightweight so may not have the reserves you do). So basically it is worth experimenting, but I would suggest just lowering 5DF and holding there for a week. If it is quicker by the end perhaps repeat. But generally people who are relatively stronger than they are fit have a lower optimum rating and this seems to fit you.

I do think upping rating is probably what I would suggest to try first even if 27 might be above your optimum, even 26 will make a difference. This is best done by doing shorter intervals. In recent years (and I am only 56) I have found that my diaphragm tires at higher rate for mid and longer distances (but probably do too much of my training at lower rates), so essentially a key part of upping rating for me is increasing the fitness of this muscle and doing it in short bursts is the most effective way.

I tend to do 15 x 500, 12 x 600, 10 x 700, 9 x 750, 7 x 900 and 6 x 1k all with 1' rest to prepare for an all out 5k (if I have time), doing one a week and trying to maintain the same pace as the previous average with the last a reasonable 5k predictor.

PS I have found that I am relatively slower on TTs of 5-7k than others and put this down to lower ratings.

I can produce 30%+ higher work per stroke for short bursts, so not sure why you can't manage low 1:50s at 28SPM. If you mean for more sustained efforts, a 12% increase in rating is huge so no surprise you find this hard to maintain. Also your current 5k is at 8.6WMin, even at 28SPM this only produces a 1:53, so you are asking yourself to generate as much work per stroke with much less rest, so no surprise that the increase seems tough. Better to address it gradually!

[Sakly]

I'm not that tall and barely heavyweight, my recent 5k was at DF 130 and rate 27 at a pace of 1:44.6.
For long steady I often use much lower DF around 100-110, can get below 1:50s with that on low rates as well. So it doesn't seem to be a question of DF.

Fully agree to Mike, a proper training plan addressing all factors to perform well on a 5k needed.

[MPx]

I actually was looking for a silver bullet in the DF. Or at least a discussion on how you could tell what is right for you. These young dudes who pull a 6:19 telling me that a 115 on a 5k is all I should do. And these are some incredibly strong power lifter dudes who do lots of cardio. And you MPx, do great with a 145.

Sorry to potentially burst that bubble - but as Stu said, making a change in DF has worked for him at times so do give change a go if you want. DF is all about finding a sweet spot best suited to your strengths on the erg. The guys on 115 will be fine - they will just have a naturally very fast drive to make that work, particularly as they rate up. Personally I find it much more tiring to try to put enough energy into the handle at any DF below 130 to achieve the same pace as I can (more) easily maintain at north of 140. Indeed when going for the ultra sprints I have to increase DF a lot more to get the flywheel to slow enough to catch it and add energy when rating north of 50spm.

I'm with Iain on thinking there's much more to be gained by training to increase your rate from 25. Your comparator guys were nearer 28 - that's a huge difference....and I'm suggesting a true 5k TT effort is likely to need higher still. Your HIIT sessions are likely to be where you get to grips with higher rates. If you do sprint repeats, do you do those at r30 or more?? If not, you should try it!

[Tsnor]

Trying to improve my 5k time

Is it cardio? I don't think so. My resting heart rate is around 44 to 48. I used to be a high school runner. My doctor rarely sees EKG's as perfect as mine.

5K time is hugely aerobic. You need to improve your aerobic output. If your 5K rowing time is not where you want it it is because you do not have the aerobic performance to deliver the times you want.

Resting heart rate is not a predictor of aerobic performance. Your 5K rowing time, your 1 hour power and your cycling FTP are all good measures of aerobic performance.

At a 1:57.7 split your 5K erg output is 214.7 watts, very roughly a cycling FTP of 220 to 260 watts. Nice but not exceptional. You've got room to train to improve.

There are a billion approaches to improving FTP. Most work. Some burn you out. Google improve FTP and see what seems credible to you. For me the following seems most reasonable.

Short term (4-6 weeks) you can improve aerobic and total performance with heavy workouts (VO2max workouts) but this approach plateaus. From your post I'd guess you've done the VO2max style workouts until you are not getting additional benefit. If you had a 5K erg race in 6 weeks I'd say go hard with HIIT and threshold workouts 3 to 4 days a week, then plan to back off after the race. Training to peak for a race is not long term sustainable.

Long term (months to years), and to make large gains (over long time) one approach that works well is adding hours of long/slow to a training plan that includes 1 or 2 intense days/week. Tons of medical studies link hours of time spent long/slow to aerobic performance. Cycling training info is easier to find than rowing specific, and the training procedure works the same. Running training for distance also works. So do the nordic sports and even speed skating.

IF you are willing to share,
-- how many hours a week do you train?
-- what is your max heartrate?

[Cyclingman1]

Older guy here. Occasionally a sort of fast rower.

Concerning DF. You pick DF based how fast you can row [pace] and can you sustain it. For me and MPX 115 DF is burdensome. I have to put way too much energy into the handle at low DF. I have been a more or less 135-150 DF rower for 14 yrs. I get a lot more bang for the buck at a little higher DF. 200 DF is way too high. Wears me out immediately.

And then there is my favorite stat: Watts/SPM. I like to see 8-10 W/SPM. But that number can be manipulated. One can row at 200W [about 2:00] at 20 SPM, that is 10.0 W/SPM. That is not a sign of fitness. Let's say I am pulling 10 W/SPM at 30 SPM, that is 300W or about 1:45 pace. You've got to put energy into the handle and keep SPM up. This is what one trains for in intervals. One might try for 11-12 W/SPM at 30 SPM.

215W at 25 SPM or 8.6 could be ramped up to 8.6 * 30 = 258W. That is about 18:30 5K. There's a reason all Olympic rowers are in the 30s for SPM.

Since we have the reporting of 67 years old here, I'll share some of my age 67 rowing:

2K: 6:48.8, 1:42.2, DF/SPM 160/31 Watts: 328 Watts/SPM: 10.6
5K: 17:34.7, 1:45.4, DF/SPM 150/30 Watts: 298 Watts/SPM: 10.0.
30': 8269, 1:48.8, DF/SPM 145/28 Watts: 271 Watts/SPM: 9.7.
10K: 36:29.1,1:49.4, DF/SPM 145/28 Watts: 267 Watts/SPM: 9.5.

Basically rowed like this for several years. Obviously, I could sustain higher DF over distance. W/SPM will decrease over longer distances.

That was then. Now, at age 79, I'm recovering from total knee replacement and then a very persistent case of greater trochanteric bursitis. I got ahead of myself after TKR and caused problems. Now, trying to ramp back up. Over last couple of days:

2K: 7:46.8, 1:56.7, DF/SPM 139/30, WAtts: 220 Watts/SPM 220/30 = 7.3
5K: 19:57.8 1:59.7 DF/SPM 141/30 Watts: 204 Watts/SPM 204/30 = 6.8

Hopefully, there may be something useful in all of this. One thing for sure is that age will catch you. Watts/SPM at over 8.0 is going to be a rarity from this point. My last hurrah happened a little over 3 yrs ago at age 75: Verified 2K: 7:02.6@1:45.6, 163/31, 297/31 = 9.6. Still way under current 75+ WR. My days of pushing 7:00 have fallen by the wayside.

[drluvguru]

I’ve tried jumping from 25 to 28 spm and it’s brutal at first, but it does start to click. Just gotta convince the lungs to get on board.

[iain]

I’ve tried jumping from 25 to 28 spm and it’s brutal at first, but it does start to click. Just gotta convince the lungs to get on board.

Its about getting the breathing right as you need as much oxygen in a much shorter time. It is key if training with shorter intervals that you maintain the same breathing rhythm you require to keep going for longer. It is relatively easy to row at higher rating for 2min breathing once per stroke and building an oxygen debt, but that cannot be readily converted into longer rows!

[Cyclingman1]

Having been reasonably active in this particular discussion for 14 yrs, it seems like there a few "truisms" that are constantly repeated and more or less recommended. Not going to say that they do not have a certain legitimacy, but there is often another way of looking at things.

Truisms:

1. Drag factor needs to be in low 100s. Some of us just do not get good power transfer at that setting causing a great deal of extra effort and that is exhausting. Find out where the most efficient setting is. for me it is 135-150. the other test is can it be sustained for, say, 30 mins.

2. Training needs to include a certain amount of 20 SPM rowing. I can say that in 14 yrs that I've never done 30mins at 20 SPM, or even close. It's nearly impossible to ramp up up to 32 SPM after a steady diet of 20 SPM. Within a few months of beginning to row at age 66, for 30 mins: 8337@1:47.9, DF 135, SPM 32, Watts 278, Watts/SPM 8.7. With age, I've slowed down to some rows at 28-29 SPM.

3. A lot of long, slow pace rowing is required. I can see Olympian and collegiate rowers doing 150K plus a week doing a lot of slower meters. I'm sure at the edges, it helps. but for someone who has time for 25K a week, there is no tome for long slow. that's not to say all rowing needs to be fast. but a lot of it needs to brisk. Of course, intervals are fast.

My bottom line is find out what really works for you and ignore most of the advice.

[milansanremo]

Trying to improve my 5k time

Is it cardio? I don't think so. My resting heart rate is around 44 to 48. I used to be a high school runner. My doctor rarely sees EKG's as perfect as mine.

5K time is hugely aerobic. You need to improve your aerobic output. If your 5K rowing time is not where you want it it is because you do not have the aerobic performance to deliver the times you want.

Resting heart rate is not a predictor of aerobic performance. Your 5K rowing time, your 1 hour power and your cycling FTP are all good measures of aerobic performance.

At a 1:57.7 split your 5K erg output is 214.7 watts, very roughly a cycling FTP of 220 to 260 watts. Nice but not exceptional. You've got room to train to improve.

There are a billion approaches to improving FTP. Most work. Some burn you out. Google improve FTP and see what seems credible to you. For me the following seems most reasonable.

Short term (4-6 weeks) you can improve aerobic and total performance with heavy workouts (VO2max workouts) but this approach plateaus. From your post I'd guess you've done the VO2max style workouts until you are not getting additional benefit. If you had a 5K erg race in 6 weeks I'd say go hard with HIIT and threshold workouts 3 to 4 days a week, then plan to back off after the race. Training to peak for a race is not long term sustainable.

Long term (months to years), and to make large gains (over long time) one approach that works well is adding hours of long/slow to a training plan that includes 1 or 2 intense days/week. Tons of medical studies link hours of time spent long/slow to aerobic performance. Cycling training info is easier to find than rowing specific, and the training procedure works the same. Running training for distance also works. So do the nordic sports and even speed skating.

IF you are willing to share,
-- how many hours a week do you train?
-- what is your max heartrate?

Your comment regarding cycling FTP is interesting. As a cyclist for decades I have wondered if there is any conversion factor. I'm 63 and have been a rower now for 4 months. I recently did a 19:45 5K which is nothing compared to the 350w average on Assioma pedals for one hour cycling I that I easily did before switching to rowing. I suppose I should be very encouraged if your conversion factor is even remotely close.

Thanks
John

[Dangerscouse]

Having been reasonably active in this particular discussion for 14 yrs, it seems like there a few "truisms" that are constantly repeated and more or less recommended. Not going to say that they do not have a certain legitimacy, but there is often another way of looking at things.

Truisms:

1. Drag factor needs to be in low 100s. Some of us just do not get good power transfer at that setting causing a great deal of extra effort and that is exhausting. Find out where the most efficient setting is. for me it is 135-150. the other test is can it be sustained for, say, 30 mins.

2. Training needs to include a certain amount of 20 SPM rowing. I can say that in 14 yrs that I've never done 30mins at 20 SPM, or even close. It's nearly impossible to ramp up up to 32 SPM after a steady diet of 20 SPM. Within a few months of beginning to row at age 66, for 30 mins: 8337@1:47.9, DF 135, SPM 32, Watts 278, Watts/SPM 8.7. With age, I've slowed down to some rows at 28-29 SPM.

3. A lot of long, slow pace rowing is required. I can see Olympian and collegiate rowers doing 150K plus a week doing a lot of slower meters. I'm sure at the edges, it helps. but for someone who has time for 25K a week, there is no tome for long slow. that's not to say all rowing needs to be fast. but a lot of it needs to brisk. Of course, intervals are fast.

My bottom line is find out what really works for you and ignore most of the advice.

I meant to say a while ago that I agree with all of this. "Accepted wisdom" has a habit of becoming the rules, but in reality there's so much variability between one person and the next, nevermind one day and the next, that you have to have a healthy amount of discretion to mould matters to what suits you best. Caveat erger to misquote the saying.

[Tsnor]

.. As a cyclist for decades I have wondered if there is any conversion factor. I'm 63 and have been a rower now for 4 months. I recently did a 19:45 5K which is nothing compared to the 350w average on Assioma pedals for one hour cycling I that I easily did before switching to rowing.

It's so neat you can pull 350w for an hour. Not a slop 20 minute and scale, 350w actual one hour power.

The rowing watts to peddling watts reported on this forum varies hugely by person.

For me doing max aerobic, even though I do more rowing than cycling, my one hour power is higher on the cycling trainer than the erg by ~40W. Some people do report higher rowing output than cycling, but only a few.

Very high cycling FTPs hit over 400W. The fastest 2025 rowing 1/2 marathon in rankings (1:08) is 375 watts.

Another interesting measure is the upper bound of zone 2 (long/slow 70% max heart rate). For me cycling wattage is 30 watts higher even though I typically do long/slow on the erg immediately before cycling long/slow. Not sure what the gap would be if I reversed the two.

Exercise equipment that display both watts and calories have conversion formulas -- they measure or infer output power then use output power to compute the calories needed to generate that power. Both Lifecycle training cycles and C2 ergs use 25% as their output efficiency in their Calories formula. I would have guessed rowing is inherently less efficient than cycling, but they don't agree. (C2 does have a higher base constant in their formula, so that could be viewed as being less efficient at lower output levels and converging closer at high output.)