Effects of the drag factor on performance and on physiological parameters

[Dangerscouse]

I was also part of this, but my plans have overtaken the experiment that he wanted to do.

I have settled on 130ish as my new df, but I was a bit concerned that a higher df was just going to compromise my lower back, which is why I don't use it. I think the higher df works for some, but not everyone, and it's been tried and tested by so many people over the years that it's always going to be very hard to find something that has been missed

[btlifter]

I was a participant.

The way I understand the logic is that it takes more energy to contract a muscle more quickly rather than more slowly. The physiology of this is beyond my understanding, but anecdotally it seems to track with my experiences. For example, it is easier FOR ME to deadlift 150kg, via applying approximately 155kg of force, than it is for me to deadlift 100kg really quickly, via applying of 155kg of force.

Subjectively, this has been the case on the erg for me as well. I don't have to move as quickly to apply the same amount of force with a df of 200+ as I do with a df of 130. Accordingly, both hr and rpe are lower for me with a higher df (up to about 200; from 200-220 doesn't seem to make a difference either way), at the same pace.

Granted, there are at least three VERY IMPORTANT caveats that I should mention, and that limit any sort of extrapolation:

1. I have not spent a lot of time training at a more standard df. I have tried different dfs and found higher to be better for me. But, more practice with lower df may change that.
2. I'm heavier (110kg) and stronger than most; I can't imagine that these factors don't impact one's optimal df.
3. I'm not sure what type of muscle fiber dominance I have, but I have historically been atypical in how I best generate power. For example, I am very poor at change-of-direction speed, or at maintaining speed/power outside of a linear movement pattern; on the other hand I had a high standing vertical leap. I could also run fast (relatively speaking) but was quite slow off the starting line. My VERY unscientific analysis of these qualities MAY further lend themselves to the more gradual power application that seems to be required at higher DFs

Anyway, I wouldn't put too much stock into my preliminary n=1. But, it's interesting, to me at least.

[Big J]

I was a participant.

The way I understand the logic is that it takes more energy to contract a muscle more quickly rather than more slowly. The physiology of this is beyond my understanding, but anecdotally it seems to track with my experiences. For example, it is easier FOR ME to deadlift 150kg, via applying approximately 155kg of force, than it is for me to deadlift 100kg really quickly, via applying of 155kg of force.

Subjectively, this has been the case on the erg for me as well. I don't have to move as quickly to apply the same amount of force with a df of 200+ as I do with a df of 130. Accordingly, both hr and rpe are lower for me with a higher df (up to about 200; from 200-220 doesn't seem to make a difference either way), at the same pace.

Granted, there are at least three VERY IMPORTANT caveats that I should mention, and that limit any sort of extrapolation:

1. I have not spent a lot of time training at a more standard df. I have tried different dfs and found higher to be better for me. But, more practice with lower df may change that.
2. I'm heavier (110kg) and stronger than most; I can't imagine that these factors don't impact one's optimal df.
3. I'm not sure what type of muscle fiber dominance I have, but I have historically been atypical in how I best generate power. For example, I am very poor at change-of-direction speed, or at maintaining speed/power outside of a linear movement pattern; on the other hand I had a high standing vertical leap. I could also run fast (relatively speaking) but was quite slow off the starting line. My VERY unscientific analysis of these qualities MAY further lend themselves to the more gradual power application that seems to be required at higher DFs

Anyway, I wouldn't put too much stock into my preliminary n=1. But, it's interesting, to me at least.

I think that I am very similar, albeit not quite as strong or fast.

I don't bother with less than about 180 DF now, and I'm usually in the 190 to 200 zone. Even on UT2 work, warmups and cooldowns, anything less just feels like I'm pulling against nothing.

My natural rate seems to be on the low side though, so high drag and a long stroke work to my advantage.

[Tony Cook]

My n=1 ‘experiment’ is that back in the day I was very strong in the leg drive dept and clueless at erging. Used the C2 as a bit of a toy in off season fitness training with everything at max damper - DF about 200 and never more than 10 mins on the machine. Trained with other ‘big boys’, who all did the same. At age 30 I did a 6:31 2k at that drag and no more than 28 SPM. Our lighter smaller team mate would fly up and down at 36 SPM but couldn’t match our speed.
Played on and off over the years very dubious at the gym types who said to put the damper down to 4, I couldn’t see how I could go as fast at 4 as I could at 10.
Last year with another knee op and lockdown I used the C2 as my rehab and fitness tool and due to the recovery decided to experiment with the lower drag factor. I had read much around the subject over the years and discussed it with an ex Olympic rower who lives nearby and started to do everything at 130 DF thinking I’d up it as I got fitter and stronger. With the time to experiment I now do most of my training at 120, 2k and 500m TTs at 130. For sprints, 1’ and 100m, I have tried max but find I’m quickest at 160.
While I’m never going to be as strong as the half my age me I can get quite close to the times I did then, and quicker at 5k - only tried it a couple of times as a youngster and only just got under 20 mins. So I suppose I am comparing two different people, one 30, strong and fit and one pushing 60 with arthritic knees but a much better erger.
I’m tempted now to try a few pieces at high DF just to see what it feels like again. Maybe I’ll surprise myself and crack the 6:30 2k!!

[gouldilocks]

While not being as big or powerful as Big J and btlifter, I am in the same camp as them regarding high DF.
I find it far easier to reach a given pace on DF 220 than DF 130, and feel far more comfortable with the slow, steady application of power rather than the fast explosive leg drive required at lower DF's.
After years of rowing at 130ish Df, I switched to doing all my sessions on max DF while training for a 24 hr row.
After that I took off the mesh grille and did most of my sessions on 250 - 320DF, and then set PBs for everything from 5km to 50km on DF 220.

I think it also depends on what your goals are and what you are actually using the C2 for - now,due to my heart condition and the medication required I am no longer in a position to do max effort, anaerobic sessions.
At the age of 55, it is now important to me to maintain strength and muscle mass, and a low spm, high DF approach is the one that works best for me.

At the end of the day, though, it is really horses for courses, and I don't believe there is a single DF range that suits all.

Paul G

[hjs]

Point remains, the strongest people do not pull the best results, 2k and up. And vice versa, the fastest people pull not the best 500m and below.

Training for strenght is not helping for endurance and training for endurance is not helping strenght, talking about the ends of both spectrums.

We now get examples from people who are relative strong compared to their fitness, so at this point, lower ratings and heavy pulls do favor them, but to get better, not their strenght but endurance needs to improve. And if you really do so strenght will and needs to suffer. And higher ratings and softer pulls will get efficient. Toprowers are able to rate high and are not very strong. A sub 6 is nice, but a really good rower pulls that pace over 5/6k and for that fitness is key, not strenght.

[btlifter]

Point remains, the strongest people do not pull the best results, 2k and up. And vice versa, the fastest people pull not the best 500m and below.

Training for strenght is not helping for endurance and training for endurance is not helping strenght, talking about the ends of both spectrums.

We now get examples from people who are relative strong compared to their fitness, so at this point, lower ratings and heavy pulls do favor them, but to get better, not their strenght but endurance needs to improve. And if you really do so strenght will and needs to suffer. And higher ratings and softer pulls will get efficient. Toprowers are able to rate high and are not very strong. A sub 6 is nice, but a really good rower pulls that pace over 5/6k and for that fitness is key, not strenght.

All of your points are facts, and I can't argue them!

What I'm curious about though is the fact that nearly all the best ergers are not primarily training for the erg - it's just something they do to train for their proper sport - OTW rowing. Their proper sport punishes them for being heavy, whereas there doesn't seem to be much of a cost to extra weight on the erg. Therefor, I am left to wonder if extrapolating what the best do and applying it to ourselves may be overlooking important variables.

Of course, this is all speculation on my behalf, and I make no claims! Interestingly, this off-season I will be losing weight (and by extension, losing strength unintentionally), while significantly increasing my training volume. I will also be looking to lower the df a little bit. I have my hypotheses about what will happen, but I will wait for time to deliver the answers.

[hjs]

Point remains, the strongest people do not pull the best results, 2k and up. And vice versa, the fastest people pull not the best 500m and below.

Training for strenght is not helping for endurance and training for endurance is not helping strenght, talking about the ends of both spectrums.

We now get examples from people who are relative strong compared to their fitness, so at this point, lower ratings and heavy pulls do favor them, but to get better, not their strenght but endurance needs to improve. And if you really do so strenght will and needs to suffer. And higher ratings and softer pulls will get efficient. Toprowers are able to rate high and are not very strong. A sub 6 is nice, but a really good rower pulls that pace over 5/6k and for that fitness is key, not strenght.

All of your points are facts, and I can't argue them!

What I'm curious about though is the fact that nearly all the best ergers are not primarily training for the erg - it's just something they do to train for their proper sport - OTW rowing. Their proper sport punishes them for being heavy, whereas there doesn't seem to be much of a cost to extra weight on the erg. Therefor, I am left to wonder if extrapolating what the best do and applying it to ourselves may be overlooking important variables.

Of course, this is all speculation on my behalf, and I make no claims! Interestingly, this off-season I will be losing weight (and by extension, losing strength unintentionally), while significantly increasing my training volume. I will also be looking to lower the df a little bit. I have my hypotheses about what will happen, but I will wait for time to deliver the answers.

Indeed, time will tell, but you exactly point to the point that is difficult to change. Upping the volume, this will cost strenght.
Roughly north of 1 min, aerobic fitness is the most important factor.

Re weight, otw liggtweights are sub 72 kg. Some pull dub 6, the lightest fast time I know of was 6.01 at 69 kg..

Jeremy Azou. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=A7xXzlTaznE
French record 2k lightweight. Uses a relative high drag and low strokerate being a lightweight.

Re otw erging, true, if erging was a pro sport it would be different maybe.

[mitchel674]

Not sure how I missed this thread the first time through.

I just read all the posts and this thread is gold. Comedy gold.

[faach1]

Not sure how I missed this thread the first time through.

I just read all the posts and this thread is gold. Comedy gold.

Indeed, I wonder who Frankencrank is wittering to now!

(I was originally a participant but when I saw he wanted me to do max drag stuff for a 5k, all I thought about was snap city )