New, asking for advice

[iain]

the first 1/2 of the leg drive has almost zero resistance; it feels like I am pulling slack until I am half extended with my legs, then I get some pulling action. This induces bad form since I want to take up the slack with my back and arms to maximize stroke pull. I will keep working on it.

Other possibilities are that you are losing the leg drive by not transmitting it to the handle. 3 common newbie errors:

dropping hands to feet at the catch, so first part of drive is bringing hands up to be in line with the chain. get your body forward before the knees are broken and hold the position, this can get worse when going for length due to tendency to reach forward and down when coming to catch.

not straightening arms at the catch and so arms straighten while legs drive and handle doesn't move as fast - keep arms straight until legs are straight.

back rolls forward at start of catch - sit up straight with a strong not slumped back.

Just some other thoughts. James's stroke length is effective stroke length, if a significant part of the stroke does not move the chain appreciably faster than the flywheel, this will not significantly increase the stroke length at the force assumed.

One final point, rowing is an unusual action in that there is a long time between the major muscular efforts. As a result, unlike other exercises it is a major muscular effort more akin to a squat than normal aerobic exercise followed by a rest. The drive should be quicker than the slide back in most training despite only the drive being against a resistance. I have come across people who have an intrinsic idea that aerobic exercise doesn't involve the level of force required for rowing. Much of the force in rowing is produced anaerobically, but between strokes the metabolic products are reconstituted or metabolised aerobically so that there is little NET lactate production. As a result aerobic capacity predominates and the exercise is classed as aerobic, but not in the way that cycling is.

If you don't find that the above helps, you could try, after warming up thoroughly, pulling as hard as you can for 100m and see how fast a pace you can develop. You might also try as an exercise at much higher drag. This will mean that the flywheel slows down more between drives and you will feel the power coming on earlier as you are engaging the power at a slower speed. Then at lower drags you need to recreate this with an explosive catch from a powerful position to get the power down earlier.

Hope some of this helps to continue your improvement.

- Iain

[johnlvs2run]

Thanks John,
I think your advice was helpful. It has been taking me a while to adapt from cycling into the non-uniform rowing cycle. I really feel like I am making progress. Since I posted this thread a few weeks ago I have been rowing with resistance on 3, but had it on 4 today at the gym (no hrm) when I decided to row hard; I got a new PB, 7:32.3 for 2K @ 33 spm; it also felt like my pulse didn't get as high as my old PB. This is a bit faster tempo than I would like, but an improvement over my old 2K time @ 38.3 SPM. Feeling pretty good about it.
GK

Nice rowing, George!
Great improvements. You're right on 8 meters per stroke.

I've been focusing on these things while rowing on slides.
1- up on my toes, right at the end of recovery, good body position at catch;
2- feet down on heels, pushing down with legs, not yet with quads;
3- as heels are down, driving hard with my quads;
4- firm torso, along with culmination of leg drive with quads;
5- finishing up with a tug from my arms/shoulders, at culmination of leg drive and firm torso.

It helps me a lot to get up on my toes, as much as possible at the end of recovery, actually the balls of my feet, and gives me a good start to the drive. Getting in a really good position is not easy, and takes some focus on timing to take advantage of the end momentum of recovery. In addition this getting up on my toes gives more length to my drive, takes up any slack at the catch, and gives me more power going into the drive from my heels.

Pushing back from my toes then takes more focus to get right down on my heels, before driving hard with my quads. This is a very smooth movement, from one right into the next. There's inclination to go right from toes to quads, but having my heels set first, flowing right into driving hard with my quads, seems to give a better base for more power and speed with my legs. Driving hard with my quads flows right into firm torso through the end of the drive, extending from my heels through my legs culminating with the tug from the handle through my arms and shoulders.

[iain]

Thanks John,
I think your advice was helpful. I got a new PB, 7:32.3 for 2K @ 33 spm; it also felt like my pulse didn't get as high as my old PB. This is a bit faster tempo than I would like, but an improvement over my old 2K time @ 38.3 SPM.

Nice rowing, George!
Great improvements. You're right on 8 meters per stroke.

As stated above, John is at the extreme of the continuum of the optimum balance between power per stroke and rating, advocating higher ratings than others. In addition, he is from the limited group of supporters that the relative length of the phases of the stroke (drive: recovery) should remain the same at all paces (the main advocate PaulS only believes this appropriate for training, not TTs) and therefore that the power per stroke needs to increase by the square of the increase in rating. (most people accept that higher ratings require a shortened recovery). I am too inexperienced to refute John's comments, but please be aware that they are held by a minority of experienced rowers.

Kind regards

Iain

[quest]

Here is a video of world record holder Henrik Stephansen from my blog.
He is rowing at 8 meters per stroke. Do you feel his stroke is too short?

Do you think he would row faster with a lower rating and more handle force?

The video is watched in a better quality and runs a lot easier in its original form - in which it was meant to be watched.

I cannot post urls, but the suffix should be /crash-b_sprints_2007.html - instead.

Best,
Niels Quist

[johnlvs2run]

Thank you, Niels!

[gkucera]

Thanks everyone for your help. I was able to find three significant faults with my technique and have improved my form a lot.
1. The first thing I was doing (as mentioned somewhere above) was that I was rowing in a continuous motion, like cycling, i.e., even intrastroke tempo. This is how I got 38.3 strokes per minute for my personal best 2k (7.32.3). I have a lot better feel now when I row due in part to the fact that I row now instead of "cycle" on the erg.
2. The second thing I did, was focus on keeping my back stiff and straight at the catch. This was very helpful and I am still working on it. I used to (and still do a bit) hunch forward at catch so that I am almost touching the monitor support where the chain enters. This flexibility is surely a plus, but I get more power with less energy keeping my back stiffer. I have not perfected keeping my arms straight yet, but that is less of an issue.
3. The final thing that helped was due to the advice Dougie gave me about not using the straps. I have been rowing strapless ever since and that has been really helpful. I tend to focus on the drive and take the recovery a lot easier.
If I am not focused on speed, but good form I average 10.5 m/s (dps) now. I can get fairly good times without breaking down my form also. I have rowed 2k @ 7:42 with ~10 m/s, which is great. I think I need to increase tempo and sacrifice m/s a bit to beat my old best on the 2k, say 31 spm @ 9 m/s) to get to get to 7 min.
The 5k is a different story. Today I rowed a 20:07.3 with ~9.5 m/s (~26.5 spm). This was the 2nd workout of the day; I am sure I can break 20 minutes on 5k if I am rested and prepare properly.
I am having a lot of fun rowing, but with my goals I will probably focus on increasing distance more than improving my 2k & 5k times. I will start rowing 10k tomorrow and plan on moving up from there to 60' and half marathons, which is more in line with the cross training I need for my cycling.
A big thanks again to all that replied to my request for help! And to those who built up the knowledge base here, Thanks to you as well!

[iain]

Great to hear of your progress in times and technique.

Re your plans. Most people do not believe that the additional training benefit of rows >1hr justify the time required (except as preparation for a marathon, although opinion is divided even on this). I am no cyclist, but elsewhere I remember reading that an hour of erging can be equated to around 3 hours of cycling, so hour long ergs are significant and you might like to rethink doing regular HMs. In addition HMs take a lot out of you, typically taking 3-7 days to recover from (depending upon how hard you do them), so they will mess up your training unless you will be taking a break anyway.

Keep up the good work and keep us informed.

- Iain

[gkucera]

Thanks Iain! Thanks also for the advise you gave me earlier.
I definitely don't have a feel yet of how erging compares to cycling. My hard erging burns 50% more calories than my hard cycling, but leaves me more tired for a given period of time. This is partly due to the fact rowing/erging is new to me.
My short rides are 1.5-3 hours, weekend rides are 5-6 hours and events are 8-9 hours (e.g., http://www.deathride.com/index.html) of riding time.
If the heuristic is correct then I would need to row for 3 hours to simulate an event ride, a hm or fm. If it takes several days to recover that would match with the recovery for an event ride.
However, I do not know if I need to match the effort of an event ride on the erg to get most of the benefit of cross-training. I may be OK with doing 10ks and 1 hours mostly, with hms (per your advise) the day before I travel out of town.
My evidence suggests the 10k and 1 hour rides will be more relevant to cycling; the 2k seems mostly anaerobic to me with the 5k less so. I didn't have a HRM on, I am sure my 2k pb is mostly upper TR range. My PB 5k from yesterday was mostly upper AT.
Regards, George

[iain]

...hard erging burns 50% more calories than my hard cycling, but leaves me more tired for a given period of time. This is partly due to the fact rowing/erging is new to me.

My evidence suggests the 10k and 1 hour rides will be more relevant to cycling; the 2k seems mostly anaerobic to me with the 5k less so. I didn't have a HRM on, I am sure my 2k pb is mostly upper TR range. My PB 5k from yesterday was mostly upper AT.

George, don't pay too much attention to the calorie readings from ergometers (whether rowing, cycling or treadmill). These make large assumptions on efficiency of energy production, muscular activity and, in the case of rowing, stroke rate.

A 2k is often quoted as 80% aerobic, although it is definitely TR. I would doubt anything over 1 min is mainly anaerobic. However, as there is a long gap between drives (when the useful work is done), even steady rowing initially derives much of the energy anaerobically, it is just that the metabolic products are then furtehr metabolised aerobically during the recovery. I have read that there seems to be growing acknowledgement that most exercise uses multiple pathways and the aerobic anaerobic transition has a much larger overlap for all activities than previously assumed.

I agree that you might not need the sharper erg workouts to benefit your cycling, the only question is will you not get bored just doing long distances? On distances, A substantial portion of these should be sub-maximal to avoid over training and allow your body to recover and therefore get fitter, so a hard 10k might be AT, but doing it regularly at UT1 pace will be beneficial. Other options are longer intervals with short gaps to rehydrate and allow the HR to moderate a little (90" to 3'), so 2x5 or 6k, 4 x 3k etc.

Regards

Iain

[M. Podolsky]

HMs take a lot out of you, typically taking 3-7 days to recover from (depending upon how hard you do them), so they will mess up your training unless you will be taking a break anyway.

Everyone's different. If you look at the "honor board" on the C2 site you'll find people of all ages rowing significantly more than 21km on a daily basis. 21097m is roughly equivalent to a 60 minute row followed immediately by a 6km, which doesn't sound as daunting as "half marathon". But since you won't know until you try, it's probably best to plan for a weekend off after the first HM in case you need the time to recover.

[iain]

HMs take a lot out of you, typically taking 3-7 days to recover from (depending upon how hard you do them), so they will mess up your training unless you will be taking a break anyway.

Everyone's different. If you look at the "honor board" on the C2 site you'll find people of all ages rowing significantly more than 21km on a daily basis. 21097m is roughly equivalent to a 60 minute row followed immediately by a 6km, which doesn't sound as daunting as "half marathon". But since you won't know until you try, it's probably best to plan for a weekend off after the first HM in case you need the time to recover.

I guess it depends upon the pace used. I would be inteersted to know what pace the meter gurus use for regular HM or FMs. I would not expect to feel recovered in 24 hrs unless the pace was 10k + 15S or so, but I agree that people will differ.

- Iain

[M. Podolsky]

I guess it depends upon the pace used. I would be inteersted to know what pace the meter gurus use for regular HM or FMs. I would not expect to feel recovered in 24 hrs unless the pace was 10k + 15S or so, but I agree that people will differ.

Last month I did the HM at a pace of 10km+6 and then did 3x5km at a decent pace the next day. If you do even a moderate amount of cycling, you get used to longer periods of sustained effort.

[iain]

Last month I did the HM at a pace of 10km+6 and then did 3x5km at a decent pace the next day. If you do even a moderate amount of cycling, you get used to longer periods of sustained effort.

I find that I can do 2 and sometimes 3 hard sessions back to back, but the recovery is cumulative and I then need several days to recover. Are you saying that you could keep doing workouts at this intensity and length without ever needing more than a day off/ easy day periodically?

[M. Podolsky]

I find that I can do 2 and sometimes 3 hard sessions back to back, but the recovery is cumulative and I then need several days to recover. Are you saying that you could keep doing workouts at this intensity and length without ever needing more than a day off/ easy day periodically?

I can't do more than a few days of intense short distance intervals in a week, because I can really feel them in the legs. But longer rows are more about endurance than power, and I'm not sure I need much in the way of recovery for this kind of work. A day off every now and then seems to be enough for me.

When the weather was nicer I was able to include a lot of inline skating and cycling, and by mixing things up I almost never felt the need for a rest day. I wonder if sometimes recovery is at least partially a mental thing.

[gkucera]

The most I have rowed in a day is 10k, so I can't really contribute much to the discussion yet. I will offer my current theory based on my little experience.
I am used to hours of upper UT1 average during rides. I have not yet felt the heart/lungs/general body exhaustion from rowing that I have felt from long rides early in the season. Of course my hardest day rowing has been three all out 2ks with warm up/warm down and 500m between sets. I believe my muscles (back/arms) are not yet accustomed to rowing and are the limiting factor. I also believe that longer rows would have an impact on overall fatigue, but do not know yet.
I am currently working out three days and then resting one, even though I sometimes don't feel like I need it. As I start rowing more like 15k-20k per day I will probably have a different opinion. We will have to wait and see.
Other than warm up and down, I have only rowed at AT and TR. With my first 10k (today or tomorrow) I will try to row @ UT1 just for the experience. I hope Mr. P is correct and that I can use an easy 10k as a rest day every so often.
Regards, George