Concept2 Forum

Are you capable or rowing sub 10-mintues for 3,000 meters?

I think of sub 3-minutes for 1,000 meters, which is maybe not possible even if I trained, and sub-6-minutes for 2,000 meters, which is absolutely impossible for me. Some other possible, but not attempted goals for me would be sub 17-minutes for 5,000 meters and 8500 meters for 30-minutes. I think if any of these pieces (1k, 3k, 5k, 30-minutes)were races, I would not feel bad if I did not medal and rowed one of these indicated goals times.

If you vote "no," what would you consider a challenging time?

3K in ten mins is a 1:40 split.
2K in sub 7 mins is a 1:45 split.

Do the maths.

This depends on the weight, height, age and gender of the rower.

And how many watts per kilogram are being produced.

Citroen,

Is that your goal . . . sub 7-minutes for 2k?

Thomas wrote:Citroen,

Is that your goal . . . sub 7-minutes for 2k?

At my age, my height and my level of fitness it was amazing that I ever did a 6:59.0.

I've not had a good year. I fell off my bike last August and the bruise turned into an abcess. Then just as I was getting over that I fell off again and broke my radius (left wrist).

So this season has been completely ruined. I'm only getting back to any level of fitness now and the cycling season is nearly done.

A 3K in 10:00 equates to about 6:30 for 2K.

Tom

tomhz wrote:A 3K in 10:00 equates to about 6:30 for 2K.

Tom

Are you sure? How did you come up with that?

Do we really need another distance?
Almost everyone will be 1.7 to 3 seconds per 500 slower then their 2K time and 2 to 4 seconds faster pace then their 5K time. You can look at the rankings in various categories and have a very good idea of what percentage of people in each group can do 3K in 10 minutes, but why do you care about this distance?

Nosmo wrote:Do we really need another distance?
Almost everyone will be 1.7 to 3 seconds per 500 slower then their 2K time and 2 to 4 seconds faster pace then their 5K time. You can look at the rankings in various categories and have a very good idea of what percentage of people in each group can do 3K in 10 minutes, but why do you care about this distance?

I am not asking to create a new distance for the ranking.

We raced this distance on the internet about four years ago. It was kind of cool because we all raced, for the most part, to be under 10-minutes. If you did not win, in which I believe I did win by rowing sub 9:50, it was a good accomplish to be under 10 minutes. Similar, but much harder, to row a mile under 5-minutes is very respected regardless of what place a person finished.

So, I am just trying to get an idea of what people are capable or possibly capable of rowing for a particular distance that has plus side if you don't medal.

Citroen wrote:

tomhz wrote:A 3K in 10:00 equates to about 6:30 for 2K.

Tom

Are you sure? How did you come up with that?

It can't be much off: a 6:30 2K is pace 1:37.5, a 10:00 3K is 1:40.0 pace. This is "double the D add 4.2 sec" and that is about the value for most people.

Tom

I havent tried a full on 3k but think i could probably do it. I went through 3k in about 10.06 on the way to my current 5k pb of 16.50. I think you would need to be comfortably sub 6.30 for a sub 10.