Is this a feature in Row Pro?

[Tim K.]

I was logging on to ask this question and there was a reply to a question that made me realize its not just me that could use/want this.

From another thread:

............ Secondly, and I think you can make the most progress here is working on your stroking power. You could do some rate 18 stuff, instead of rate 20...............

Is there a feature somewhere in Row Pro that would graph force x stroke length for each stroke, similar to that video of the brother and sister rowing with a phone app showing acceleration (sorry, couldnt find the video). I know the PM has a goofy little graph that has no units and its x axis is time which dosnt produce anything useful I can think of. I would think being able to dissect your stroke the way was done in the brother sister video would be a fantastic way to improve your power. It would answer a lot of questions for me. Is my or arms just along for the ride?

[Bob S.]

Is there a feature somewhere in Row Pro that would graph force x stroke length for each stroke, similar to that video of the brother and sister rowing with a phone app showing acceleration (sorry, couldnt find the video). I know the PM has a goofy little graph that has no units and its x axis is time which dosnt produce anything useful I can think of. I would think being able to dissect your stroke the way was done in the brother sister video would be a fantastic way to improve your power. It would answer a lot of questions for me. Is my or arms just along for the ride?

The old ErgMonitor http://www.ps-sport.net/ergmonitor.htm does that. Unfortunately, although that website says new version available, the "new" version is for Windows XP. It has used both length and time for the x-axis, but I believe that the one used on that page is time. However, the stroke length for each stroke is available in the data table - 127.4. If you zoom in, the caption can be seen as Drive Length (cm):.

Lots of data available here. One thing it does not have is HR.

Bob S.

[Tim K.]

Thats exactly what I was talking about! So not a Row Pro feature. That shouldnt be that hard to incorporate.

[Carl Watts]

Thats exactly what I was talking about! So not a Row Pro feature. That shouldnt be that hard to incorporate.

The only thing that ErgData has that I miss is the stroke counter. The rest of the information is "Cool" but is not really required to accurately track and analyse your performance.

Pete is adding a stroke counter to RowPro, not sure it will be immediately available in V5 but its very easy to implement for them, they already capture every stroke so its simply a counter.

If your target is 18 or 20 spm you want to know if your rowing 18.0 or 20.0 spm, not some massively rounded down figure as you have on the PM monitor.

[bisqeet]

What about saving the stroke data on rowpro and using the famed excel sheet. That gives you the power/stroke....

[Tim K.]

. The rest of the information is "Cool" but is not really required to accurately track and analyse your performance.

Long story short, several years ago I was an avid auto performance enthusiast, still am but dont spend anywhere near as much time at since the kids came along. When I first got into it a dyno was the only tool you could use to measure a cars performance. I bought an 1100 hp Chassis dyno and spent hours tuning my own and others cars, learning a lot along the way. The main thing I learned was tuning with a dyno left a lot to be desired. The C2 is a dyno, nothing more.

I searched around and found a company that provided equipment that actually measured in cylinder pressure and crank angle. For every single combustion event! I bought and tried it out. Within the first hour my own personal car (a turbo 2L getting 30psi boost) went from making 475 hp to 535 hp. 60 hp! for doing nothing other than analyzing the stroke and making educated adjustments. Not only that but the way I had it tuned to make 475hp I had small detonation events occurring which over time very easily could have caused damage. I then went on to work my way up to a huge shot of NO2 which promptly caused a head gasket leak. Head gasket leaks are almost always a result of "knock". I went back and ran over the data and found that there was not even a hint of detonation. The cylinder pressure was simply so high the head bolts stretched. I had the block machined to accept 3/8' head studs and the car went on to make over 780hp with out incident.

This isnt my graph but this is what one combustion event or stroke looks like:



In short, my opinion is that analyzing stroke data is a lot more than just "cool", just like the video of the brother sister team analyzing their stroke data demonstrated areas to improve, analyzing your own stroke can easily net areas to improve and possibly even prevent injury.

Its simply a matter of desire on the companies part. There is already a gear tooth wheel that is used to determine rate of acceleration and can also be used to measure distance. All the hardware is already there and all the data is already being collected, it is just a matter of implementing it (which I admit I have no idea what is involved). Do a run, row pro analyzes data and generates a graph. Real time would be nice but an after the fact is just as good. You would then know the proportions of back arms legs involved in the stroke, you would know if your jerking anywhere in the stroke (which could cause injury). You would not only know that you improved your time but why, have your legs back or arms or the whole stroke improved?

"If you cant measure it, you cant improve it"

[Carl Watts]

Hi Tim, as an owner of a MR2 Turbo for 16 years and counting I have done plenty of work on it myself including building the hybrid turbo. Its been on the dyno twice, once as a baseline and then after all the modifications that took the stock ECU and injectors to the limit. It was a fantastic project that lasted years and it gained another 25kW in the process. I still own the car.

Yes the analysis in RowPro is good, but only to a point. Unlike an engine sooner or later your only going to get slower not faster. I have a mate my age that still talks about "Gains" but approaching 50 you not making gains anymore, if you are all it means is that you were not as fit last month as you should have been, its a downward slope. The aim becomes minimizing the losses not making the gains.

RowPro is a tool in the process, there is a strong online community and this provides the motivation. A combustion engine doesn't need motivation you just put gas in it and turn the key.

The data is "Cool" but essentially you still have to do all the hard work. The PM monitor already provides all you need to take yourself to the limit, its just hard regular training week after week. You can have all the data you want but you still have to put in the meters and that at the end of the day becomes the "Essential" rather than the "Cool".

[Tim K.]

The PM monitor already provides all you need to take yourself to the limit

If that is true they why are people measuring lactate? Why are competitive rowers using accelerometers to measure how the boat is responding to the rowers inquts? Why did you put your car on a dyno when the strip or street is more than adequate to evaluate that level of performance. Fact is you dont even need a PM at all and you can make substantial gains and most of us could reach or nearly reach the level we are at without any tech at all.

Your using the same logic our grandfathers used when indoor plumbing, color tv and fuel injection became available and no one ever suggested any kind of measuring or tech was a substitute for work.

[Carl Watts]

You need the PM monitor or your rowing blind. Pretty hard to measure or compare your progress without it.

I repair loads of them because people say they cannot row without it, you need the feedback.

The Dyno is a tuning tool and a check your still running safe AFR's, its similar to the PM in that months later you can look at your history but for rowing, essentially your looking for a drop in heartrate for a given pace for a distance or time at the same rating. When I say same rating, this is where you need a stroke counter because its the only serious flaw the PM monitor has and thats its average spm calculation.

Yes you can even record your lactate and put it in the notes for your row in RowPro but really i'm not interested in taking it to that level. Other factors like temperature and humidity have a big influence and I record these in the notes. I just row for fitness, I'm sure Elite rowers take it to a whole different level but competition is different. There would be only a very small percentage of people who exclusively use the Erg and never row OTW that get carried away at that level of data requirement.

I guess the problem I have is part of RowPro and even the PM monitor that jump to providing higher levels of data without first getting the basic data right. Some additional features could be added to the monitor but it has remained the same for years now and things like "Games" get added but some really useful stuff could be added instead.

[Tim K.]

Rowing blind, like the way they do it on the water?

Dynos dont check AFR, thats the job of a wide band O2 sensor, completely independent piece of equipment. The whole car thing was just an other analogy (and became a distraction from the actual topic )to relate the fact that a dyno is a good tool and is still the staple of the industry but regardless leaves a lot to be desired. Same as the current PM and row pro (not saying they are not valuable, just that I desire a bit more from them).

What it really comes down to is what each person places value in. Im struggling to understand the value of anything other than an average spm and I have read other posts that express the same opinion as me. You on the other hand find it valuable information, Im interested in knowing why. I believe that if the force/stroke length graph was available it would show specific areas to improve. We all have strengths and weaknesses. I know for a fact that as I loose steam near the end of a piece I begin to rely more heavily on my legs and arms and just let my back "coast". The output is the same therefore I am training my legs and arms even harder and back is loosing out and falling further behind. A graph would demonstrate to what extent and if it was real time I could correct as it was happening. That is value to me. When I get to the end I really dont care how many strokes I took, if I did, I can multiply my end average stroke rate by time.


My questions to you:
How do you use an actual stroke count that makes it so valuable?

What basic data in row pro and the pm is not right?

[Bob S.]

My questions to you:
How do you use an actual stroke count that makes it so valuable?

What basic data in row pro and the pm is not right?

Your first question to Carl contains the answer to the second question.

My own answer to that first question is that the inaccurate stroke count gives me phony values for the work done per stroke. Work/stroke is an item that is useful to me, since I try to keep it as constant as I can and use stroke rate to vary my speed.

[Carl Watts]

Not too many people rowing blind on the water these days, technology like gps has seen to that. Plenty of specialized gear now for a boat.

Ok basically lets compare two rows, the distance and time is not a factor.

2.00 pace at 26spm

2:00 pace at 17spm

To use the engine analogy your car would shift gears but you cannot so 17spm is harder than 26spm. You cannot directly compare the two rows to one another, your heartrate is higher at 17spm than 26spm. The issue with the PM monitors is the spm rounding in the results, its terrible. Run a stroke counter and you find out how bad it is, therefore you run into an immediate analysis problem without an accurate spm. You can compare a 20.1 spm average row to a 20.0 spm average row but the rounding in the monitor results is often 1spm out, this becomes a significant error and the lower the rating the worse the percentage error.

RowPro treated pace as a linear function in the analysis, it may have been fixed by now. It needed to use Watts not pace, pace is a cubic function the same as drag is on a car.

I guess I'm lazy and don't want to wade through pages of data doing a load of analysis or having to play with Excel or the likes. What I would like is the likes of the PM5 to do some smart analysis on its own just by you sitting on the rower for a couple of minutes at the finish of your row and it just rapidly logs and graphs your decreasing heartrate and by using some data you have entered like resting and maximum heartrate, age etc spits out some information on your fitness level or fitness improvement when you compare it to a previous row of the same distance/time and rating. It could be done and would be a whole lot more useful than a few games. Even something basic using your heartrate recovery could be useful when you compare it to something you did 3 or 6 months ago. Even a straight timer to start with clocking the time it takes to reach 2 x resting would be good and then save it, at present I need to use a stopwatch.

There is a force curve available in the PM monitor, have not used it for some time now, perhaps I should have a look at it these days with all the low rating stuff.

[Tim K.]

You sir have a bee in your bonnet.

I am sorry, I hate braking down quotes but I gotta put an end to this.

Not too many people rowing blind on the water these days, technology like gps has seen to that. Plenty of specialized gear now for a boat.

That was my point. They have some pretty incredible analysis tools. The erg has comparatively less.

Ok basically lets compare two rows, the distance and time is not a factor.

2.00 pace at 26spm

2:00 pace at 17spm

You are ignoring the two most important components of a piece.

To use the engine analogy your car would shift gears but you cannot so 17spm is harder than 26spm.

There is a comparison but it is definitely not shifting gears. Im not going to make it because I think the car thing is lost so far.

You cannot directly compare the two rows to one another, your heartrate is higher at 17spm than 26spm.

You absolutely can compare the two. The amount of work is identical. If you are traveling at a 2:00 pace, the work going into the boat to make it travel at that pace is identical. The problem with using pace as your measuring stick is that because of the nature speed being a square, the energy required to travel at 1:59.5 vs 2:00.4 is big but both will show as a 2:00 pace. Fact: The work being done to travel at identical paces is the same, regardless of your stroke rate.

Trying to use heart rate to prove something is wrong with software is crazy. Why would you expect to change stroke rate and not expect heart rate to change? Your neglecting to acknowledge the fact that the body is wagging back and forth at the higher rate, breathing is changed depth and/or rate, increased muscle contraction aiding venous flow, there are probably more.

The issue with the PM monitors is the spm rounding in the results, its terrible. Run a stroke counter and you find out how bad it is, therefore you run into an immediate analysis problem without an accurate spm. You can compare a 20.1 spm average row to a 20.0 spm average row but the rounding in the monitor results is often 1spm out, this becomes a significant error and the lower the rating the worse the percentage error.

I gotta say "why care". People are horrible time pieces. No one can maintain a stroke rate to within 0.1 stroke to stroke. Add in physical exertion and we become even worse at it. If the PM was set up to show actual stroke rate the way heart rate variation displays beat to beat variations it would be all over the map, The displayed stroke rate would be worthless. On the water, the number of strokes to complete a distance may be relevant, dont know. On an erg it is completely irrelevant. The efficiency of the stroke on the erg is preordained by the programmers. The PM dosnt care how crappy your form is, how badly the oar enters or leaves the water. All that matters is how hard, how long and how frequently you pull the handle. Rounding errors in the displayed stroke rate are irrelevant. Minute to minute you are not going to be able to maintain exactly the same rate. When your setting up a training session there is a reason you set it up based on time or distance, not on how many strokes you are going to take. Unless your an perfect machine and stroke length and force is identical stroke to stroke paying any attention to counting strokes is a waste of time, they will always be different piece to piece.

Tracking stroke force and length would provide the answers as to why there is a difference.

The force curve on PM 4 is worthless.

[hjs]

Two things Tim.

Using a not optimal strokerate, to low or to high will cost energy, not in the flywheel but in the body. To high a rate will cost energy going up and down the rail to often.
To low a rate will cost energy, we use more peakpower per stroke.
Compared to say running, to high a rate is like using a short dribble, to low is like using giant leaps. The clock won,t notice, but our body certainly does.

Strokerrate, this is pretty easy, if want to row at a certain rate, you simply have to count and check every full minute. If you don,t hit the full minute speed up or slow down a bit. In practise this works out fine and you more or less can row exactly the strokes you want.

[TEISSONJ]

if can share my (little) experience as I am a very new comer in the world of rowing (just the owner of a model D since last Christmas ... so my performances are very poor).
But as a Triathlete I found that Indoor rower is a very good and stable mean to analyse your fitness level improvement or tiredness (compared to running, swimming, cycling).

I own a fenix3 garmin watch that has (as some other watch) the capability with an HRM belt to record R-R values (Heart Rate Variability) not only the HR beats and cadence. With some tools I merge the R-R file with speed, distance, power coming at each stroke from PM5 & Rowpro (put in TCX format). Then I reinject the whole in Firstbeat Athlete (unfortunately the support of the Desktop version was discontinued some weeks ago) and then I get a "rowing" MET max value (Firstbeat Algorithms take into account R-R and speed to compute MET max values for running). As indoor rowing is a very very stable and accurate fitness mean (no wind, water, terrain, temperature, elevation changes), I can have reliable "rowing" MET max values even if they are relative. I think much better than running on a treadmill. And I see directly my improvement (hopefully ).

For me I found that "rowing" MET max are 20% higher than "Running" MET max [knowing that "running" MET max = VO2max (ml/kg/min)/3,5].
What is strange is that if I used the VO2 max calculator from concept2 http://www.concept2.com/indoor-rowers/t ... calculator I found a "rowing" VO2MAx of 40 despite I know that my VO2Max from running is 52. Maybe it only means that I can improve my rowing technique by 20% (my gearbox and my transmission) rather than my available engine power?