Concept2 Forum

hi! i have a question..if i was able to do a 60 minute piece at a 2:09.2 anda 25 spm, what do you think i could do a 6k at?

This may be completely up the wrong path, but I plugged in your 60 min piece into the Running Times Race Time Equivalent Calculator and came back with 24:38. That is a 2:03.2/500m pace and seems at least in the ballpark of a reasonable estimate. Perhaps some of the more scientifically minded folks can shed some light on the logic behind such calculators and whether they have a use in rowing. That are expose the wrong thinking in using such a tool. Hope this helps to start the thread. -Matt

my0064 wrote:That is a 2:03.2/500m pace and seems at least in the ballpark of a reasonable estimate.

I think that would be about right and if I were you for a first attempt would go along at 2:04 pace for the 1st 5k and if you still have plenty of energy left in the tank at the end you can bring the average down (more than you think) in the final 1k. Good luck .

2.04/500 for 6k.

One protocol says your 60 minute piece should be 76% of your 2k. 6k should be 85%.

60 min at 2.09/163 watts gives you a 2k of 214 watts.

85% of 214=182 watts, which is about 2.04.

Tom

my0064 wrote:This may be completely up the wrong path, but I plugged in your 60 min piece into the Running Times Race Time Equivalent Calculator and came back with 24:38. That is a 2:03.2/500m pace and seems at least in the ballpark of a reasonable estimate. Perhaps some of the more scientifically minded folks can shed some light on the logic behind such calculators and whether they have a use in rowing. That are expose the wrong thinking in using such a tool. Hope this helps to start the thread. -Matt

This sounded like a great tool, but when I tried it for predicting 2k times from my times for other ranking events this season, the results were ridiculous, ranging from 7:34 to 9:44. My actual 2k season best was 8:26.7. Results:

HM @ 1:33:55.7 predicts 7:34
13325m @ 60’ predicts 7:52
10k @ 45:17.1 predicts 8:03
6717 @ 30’ predicts 8:07
6k @ 25:55.5 predicts 7:54
5k @ 21:31.3 predicts 7:58
1k @ 4:02.0 predicts 8:51
0.5k @ 1:55.5 predicts 9.44

These were all done this season at 4000 ft of altitude. I haven’t done an FM this season, so I checked out my time for last season:

FM @ 3:18:52.3 predicts 7:32. My best actual 2k time last season – here at altitude – was 8:18.5

Except for the 10k and 30’ pieces, the numbers show a clear trend of the shorter events predicting slower and slower times. Those two pieces were not the all-out efforts that the others were, so they still fit in reasonably well with the trend. The trend is consistent with the theory that we lose strength more rapidly than endurance as we age (I just turned 82 last week), but this wide range of numbers seems rather extreme. I have strong doubts about how well this convenient tool for predicting running times applies to erging times. It certainly does not work for me.

Bob S.