Ranking comparison

[Erg-Mike]

Hi All,
As a sort of competitive soul i like to compare my time with others on the rankings lists. I also like to see, where they allow, the session data associated with their great times. It give me an idea as to what I have to do to get better.
Now my distance of choice is 10,000m and it take me around 43 mins, that's the time it take me to get from 0 to 10,000m. If I slow down or speed up or have to take a break, thats all included. I was surprised to see some of the time at the top of the tree have been using an app called ErgZone. This is a fab app that allows all sorts of training plans to be put together. The one I was looking at was 10,000m in 500m chunks with rest between. The time for the 10,000m was just the row time not the rest time. Now whilst I appreciate that they did a fab time and I could never even think that I would be able to achieve the splits they have done. To say that is a fair comparison between a straight 10,000m in one session and 10,000m with rest breaks, not included, not sure I agree.
It wont stop me, but it does make me more sceptical over the number I see in the rankings.

[Dangerscouse]

Are you sure you're looking at the rankings? Are you looking at a 10k that has just been split into 500m segments?

It only ranks a distance or time if it is done as a stand alone single session. For example, it won't rank a 5k if you do 5k x 2, and it won't rank a 10k that has pre-programmed rests. It will verify the workout, but that's not the same as ranking it.

[JaapvanE]

For example, it won't rank a 5k if you do 5k x 2, and it won't rank a 10k that has pre-programmed rests. It will verify the workout, but that's not the same as ranking it.

Not even in a HM or FM, where C2's own advice is to take a drinking/resting pause every hour?

[Tsnor]

For example, it won't rank a 5k if you do 5k x 2, and it won't rank a 10k that has pre-programmed rests. It will verify the workout, but that's not the same as ranking it.

Not even in a HM or FM, where C2's own advice is to take a drinking/resting pause every hour?

Correct, not even then. A ranking piece is exactly the piece. A workout is whatever you want, but C2 log will not offer the option to rank anything but exactly that piece.

(If your clock is running when you take the drink break, then it is one contiguous piece, and will be available to rank. But the stopped time counts against your total time.) Example if you want to rank a marathon "Set your monitor for a 42,195 meter distance workout. ", nothing else will rank.

[Dangerscouse]

Correct, not even then. A ranking piece is exactly the piece. A workout is whatever you want, but C2 log will not offer the option to rank anything but exactly that piece.

(If your clock is running when you take the drink break, then it is one contiguous piece, and will be available to rank. But the stopped time counts against your total time.) Example if you want to rank a marathon "Set your monitor for a 42,195 meter distance workout. ", nothing else will rank.

Yeah. I don't drink for anything less than 30k, and for a FM or more, I'll drink one handed.

I might try and see what having a bit of water for a HM does, but it's just never occurred to me to have a drink in any weather.

[Dangerscouse]

Not even in a HM or FM, where C2's own advice is to take a drinking/resting pause every hour?

I never knew that was their advice, but rowing one handed isn't too hard when you get used to it. You just need to be careful not to knock the bottle over on the the return.

[JaapvanE]

Correct, not even then. A ranking piece is exactly the piece. A workout is whatever you want, but C2 log will not offer the option to rank anything but exactly that piece.

(If your clock is running when you take the drink break, then it is one contiguous piece, and will be available to rank. But the stopped time counts against your total time.) Example if you want to rank a marathon "Set your monitor for a 42,195 meter distance workout. ", nothing else will rank.

That's pretty harsh, but thanks for the heads up. I was considering a FM split in 4 with decent breaks in between, but this kills the joy of that approach...

[JaapvanE]

Not even in a HM or FM, where C2's own advice is to take a drinking/resting pause every hour?

I never knew that was their advice, but rowing one handed isn't too hard when you get used to it. You just need to be careful not to knock the bottle over on the the return.

See https://www.concept2.com/indoor-rowers/ ... l-marathon

It does not explicitly suggest to create breaks, but it does suggest pauses....

[Tony Cook]

Correct, not even then. A ranking piece is exactly the piece. A workout is whatever you want, but C2 log will not offer the option to rank anything but exactly that piece.

(If your clock is running when you take the drink break, then it is one contiguous piece, and will be available to rank. But the stopped time counts against your total time.) Example if you want to rank a marathon "Set your monitor for a 42,195 meter distance workout. ", nothing else will rank.

That's pretty harsh, but thanks for the heads up. I was considering a FM split in 4 with decent breaks in between, but this kills the joy of that approach...

Why harsh? A race is a race and the rankings are, in effect, a race with competitors completing the race at different times over the year. If you were allowed to not count breaks then I could row 422 100m pieces with a decent rest between each one at 15 seconds each and rank a marathon row in 1 hour 45 minutes.

[Ombrax]

A race is a race and the rankings are, in effect, a race with competitors completing the race at different times over the year. If you were allowed to not count breaks then I could row 422 100m pieces with a decent rest between each one at 15 seconds each and rank a marathon row in 1 hour 45 minutes.

Agreed - the current method is the only fair way to do it. Only in something like a stage race (like the TDF, currently underway) where the rules are established ahead of time, can breaks or rest stops be part of the actual race and not count against your official time. Of course that leads to crazy stuff, like RAAM, where competitors somehow manage to do it on little to no sleep at all.

According to the web site at the link below they average around 1 hr sleep / day over the race, which typically takes about 11 days. But that's an extreme example that attracts ultra-motivated people who push their mind and their body far beyond what "normal" people can even dream about doing.

https://www.sleep.com/travel/race-acros ... raam-sleep

[jackarabit]

Ombrax, suggest taking a longer look at Le Grande Boucle. There are no breaks nor predetermined rest stops Included IN a stage of the Tour or during any single day’s racing of any multi-day stage race. There is recovery FOLLOWING the conclusion of each stage and concurrent with the the necessity of transport to team hotel, cleanup, massage, dinner, team meeting and lights out, and/or overnite transport (team bus, train, commercial airliner) dependent on distance to next day’s start location. These 12-18 hour “rest stops” are of course not included in a rider’s cumulative time. There are also typically two intercalated rest days off the clock.

“Breaks” within a single stage are ALL taken in the saddle turning the cranks—to include grabbing a bottle from the downtube and snatching a musette in a pre-designated feed zone, There are the highly decorous relief stops which do necessitate a brief time off bike and occasionally less savory episodes of dysentary in the saddle (vide “Splooge” Lemond or the angry bowel syndrome of recently retired Messr. Dumoulin.) The clock never stops, even for the limitations we share with annelid worms. The tour demands supermen who know too well that old tune:

SHAM-MEE, sittin on ya, s()ittin on ya . . . .

[JaapvanE]

A race is a race and the rankings are, in effect, a race with competitors completing the race at different times over the year.

That might be your approach to ranked workouts, but not mine. To me, a ranked workout is my best workout which I use to see if I am improve over time on a certain distance/time. I don't consider them races, as I don't know their personal circumstances nor with what goal they were set.

For example, my normal season PB's are set when doing normal workouts. So no "timed pieces" where I deliberatly aim to set my best time of the season, but just another workout which happends to go really well. Currently, I am recovering from a raptured biceps, so my times are worthless in any sense possible, but improving nonetheless. I see that, because week after week I can rank some workout as a new season's best. And that, to me, is the true goal for ranking workouts.

So assuming that I am in a virtual race with you, and implicitly saying that you beat me (as I currently am at the bottom of any leaderboard possible) is odd, as I never set out to be in a race with anyone to begin with. I am racing against myself, to improve my personal fitness and techique year after year, and that is why I use my personal logbook. You free to assume that you are faster than me if that keeps you motivated, but I don't care as I was never in a race with you or anyone else on the logbook.

And I suspect that C2 approaches it this way as well, as you can rank unverified and even manually entered workouts. So your approach to use 422 100meter sprints can be ranked regardless, you just have to enter it manually. But then I lack the underlying metrics. So it is a harsh that I can't keep track of my performance by ranking the workouts as you can register any other row as ranking, except when you pause, which is the appeoach suggested by C2 themselves for these distances (and beyond).

[Ombrax]

Ombrax, suggest taking a longer look at Le Grande Boucle. There are no breaks nor predetermined rest stops Included IN a stage of the Tour or during any single day’s racing of any multi-day stage race.

I meant the TDF "breaks" between stages, unlike RAAM, where the clock runs 24/7

[Tony Cook]

A race is a race and the rankings are, in effect, a race with competitors completing the race at different times over the year.

That might be your approach to ranked workouts, but not mine. To me, a ranked workout is my best workout which I use to see if I am improve over time on a certain distance/time. I don't consider them races, as I don't know their personal circumstances nor with what goal they were set.

For example, my normal season PB's are set when doing normal workouts. So no "timed pieces" where I deliberatly aim to set my best time of the season, but just another workout which happends to go really well. Currently, I am recovering from a raptured biceps, so my times are worthless in any sense possible, but improving nonetheless. I see that, because week after week I can rank some workout as a new season's best. And that, to me, is the true goal for ranking workouts.

So assuming that I am in a virtual race with you, and implicitly saying that you beat me (as I currently am at the bottom of any leaderboard possible) is odd, as I never set out to be in a race with anyone to begin with. I am racing against myself, to improve my personal fitness and techique year after year, and that is why I use my personal logbook. You free to assume that you are faster than me if that keeps you motivated, but I don't care as I was never in a race with you or anyone else on the logbook.

And I suspect that C2 approaches it this way as well, as you can rank unverified and even manually entered workouts. So your approach to use 422 100meter sprints can be ranked regardless, you just have to enter it manually. But then I lack the underlying metrics. So it is a harsh that I can't keep track of my performance by ranking the workouts as you can register any other row as ranking, except when you pause, which is the appeoach suggested by C2 themselves for these distances (and beyond).

It’s not my approach, it’s C2’s approach to ranked work outs,
‘All ranking pieces must be single distance or timed pieces (no interval pieces) started from a non-moving flywheel. Accelerated starts from moving flywheels during intervals are not accepted as ranking times.’
The fact that people can cheat and enter anything they want in as an unverified row is a frustration for many.
You are saying you want to record your progress over time, as anyone on a training programme is likely to do, to a greater or lesser extent. The place to record that is in your own personal training log, not the Rankings section of the site, that has clear rules for the entries. You only have your fastest time on the rankings anyway.
If I rank my 40 min 10k I want to know where that ranks me amongst people doing the same thing. It’s pointless seeing someone did 35 min but not knowing that it was done by 10 x 1k with 20 mins rest in between.
You wouldn’t say Usain Bolt should have the 400m gold medal at the olympics because he ran 4 x sub 10 secs 100m, so 400m in less than 40 seconds, when the fastest 400m run in one go was 44 seconds.

[jackarabit]

Odd that an educated and articulate EE can’t cotton on to a generally-accepted concept of hierarchy easily grasped by a six year old after a couple of 3-legged sack races.