Handle Bio-mechanics

[Slidewinder]

Tinus and NavigationHazard:
I wonder if the Slidewinder handle would slip under those rules. It is, after all, not changing any of the mechanics of the machine. The improved bio-mechanics of the prototype handle might very well result in improved times for competitors due to more direct application of force and reduced fatigue. A new world record with the Slidewinder handle would certainly make people sit up and take notice (I better work out more to prepare).
Robert

[Bob S.]

The C2 ergometer is a machine, and the user of the machine is a human being. The handle is therefore the human/machine interface. A good handle design is one that makes the human/machine interface as seamless as possible. The human should not be forced to accommodate the machine - the machine should be designed to accommodate the natural movements of the human. By this criteria, the C2 stock handle is an abysmal human/machine interface. It's a rigid stick. It does not in any way accommodate the natural positional changes of the hands and arms as the stroke progresses.

Why, after almost thirty years, has Concept 2 not recognized and corrected this problem?

In the evolution of rowing machine technology, the "Slidewinder" handle is the missing link. It creates a seamless human/machine interface. It adapts so well to the user's natural movements that essentially, it disappears. Mechanically, the user and the machine become one.

I predict that future ergometer users will look back and wonder why everyone tolerated the rigid, single-piece handle for so long.

The C2 machine was originally designed for rowers and OTW sweep rowing has just the one rigid handle. Since it moves in an arc, the C2 handle falls short of being a true simulation. Sculling involves two rigid handles, again moving in arcs, so the C2 handle lacks two features of sculling - the separate movement of the two hands and the movement in an arc. There have been other designs that more closely simulate handle movements of sweep rowing and sculling, but I have seen them only at much higher prices.

Your design makes sense for indoor rowing machines that are used for exercise or for indoor rowing competition, but I don't see that it would have a market for the OTW rowing clubs that use C2 machines for exercise at those times when it is not practical to launch. For all its faults, the rigid handle of the C2 would suit that purpose more effectively than a handle with more mobility.

Unfortunately the mechanics of oars, sweep or scull, do not accommodate the natural movements of the human body and I think that is is unlikely that anyone could come up with a simple design that would.

Bob S.

[Slidewinder]

Bob S:
The response of members of the Trent University rowing club conflicts with your statement that the Slidewinder handle would not appeal to "OTW rowing clubs that use C2 machines for exercise...when it is not practical to launch." The prototype handle was enthusiastically received by the Trent athletes.

Since the C2 stock handle forces a movement that is bio-mechanically flawed (ie:angulation of the wrists at the completion of the stroke), and as you point out, replicates neither the sweep nor the sculling action, the choice is obvious. A rower who is suffering from repetitive stress injury caused by winter workouts on the C2 machine equipped with the rigid handle is not going to be much use to the team when it comes time to launch.
Robert

[kkishore]

slidewinder wrote

Also, it wouldn't be appropriate to use the C2 forum to advertise and sell a product.

I see the c-breeze, shoxbox and coreperform seat being discussed here in the forums.

If you are not willing to invest time, money in manufacturing, marketing the handles, and so strongly believe that it is a good alternative to the existing handle, why dont you speak with concept2 and see if they would be willing to sell it as an add-on optional?

Looking at it differently, what do you want me average guy to do? Look at slidewinder and feel bad that I dont have it , if I cannot buy it anywhere else.

BTW I am a rookie and even I didnt like the handle from day one. I felt a lot of wrist pain for the first week and thought I am doing something wrong. Then corrected my technique looking at the UK site. But even after a month now my left forearm and biceps feel very bad after an hour of rowing.

[TabbRows]

Sidewinder,

Probably steping off the deep end here...but...in your video, your form on recovery is way off, your knees are coming up well before your body and arms are over. When you use your prototype handle you avoid this because you are turning your wrists from parallel to perpendicular to the rail and on recovery they're outside the knees. This is NOT mimicing the oar action in either a scull or a sweep boat. The twist in the arms also permits one to pull further back than they would in a boat. I don't know what that doohickie on the back of your seat is, but if a rower/erger's layback is proper, there's not a issue of lean back and touching the rail. If your technique is in good form, you wouldn't be worried about your feet coming back too far either so that foot stopper isn't helping technique. I agree that the C2 is not a perfect simulator for OYW rowing, but it does help in practicing good technique. Any changes to the C2 shouldn't encourage one's technique to get poorer. JMO. YMMV.

[bloomp]

I must admit your design is interesting (and very well built), but how would it stand up to much more intense work? I also do not see the point of the handle rotation. That is the very last thing I would want to be doing on a piece where my body is already working itself to the point of exhaustion...

[Rockin Roland]

I have to agree with TabbRows. Anyone with half decent rowing technique wouldn't need any of those items that you have designed. I'm also not aware of too many people that erg wearing a loose shirt.

I don't want to discourage you from trying to make the humble C2 machine better. Obviously you've given this a lot of thought and I also would like to see improvements on the C2 erg.

However, C2 no longer have the best erg on the market. They have dropped to no.4. The Oartec Slider and Oartec Simulator are both better ergs than the C2. Then there is the Rowperfect erg which is even better still.

The best erg handle that I have ever used is the spring loaded timber handle on the new Rowperfect. It simulates the flex of the oar at the catch and reduces injury causing load on your body. It's the right shape and weight and doesn't encourage you to pull with your arms like your handle does because of the emphasis being taken away from the leg drive.

It looks to me that the direction you are taking with your C2 modifications is heading more towards comfort rather than technical form. No doubt there are people out there that prefer it like that.

[Tinus]

However, C2 no longer have the best erg on the market.

You mean the best rowing simulator. Altough, the best erg might be the water rower because it makes the least noise.

It looks to me that the direction you are taking with your C2 modifications is heading more towards comfort rather than technical form.

I like the rotation and displacement of the handles at the end of the drive. They exactly help to improve technical form in the sense of making better use of the posterior shoulder muscles and enforcing a sideways force component instead of only in the direction of the chain (note how some people make longer strokes by pulling the handle towards the chin... not needed with this device). Of course shaping a real oar like the Oartec device is a better. However this solution is elegant due to it's simplicity (like the rope). It's should not be talked down because some better (but larger or more complex) alternatives exist.

[Bob S.]

Bob S:
The response of members of the Trent University rowing club conflicts with your statement that the Slidewinder handle would not appeal to "OTW rowing clubs that use C2 machines for exercise...when it is not practical to launch." The prototype handle was enthusiastically received by the Trent athletes.

Since the C2 stock handle forces a movement that is bio-mechanically flawed (ie:angulation of the wrists at the completion of the stroke), and as you point out, replicates neither the sweep nor the sculling action, the choice is obvious. A rower who is suffering from repetitive stress injury caused by winter workouts on the C2 machine equipped with the rigid handle is not going to be much use to the team when it comes time to launch.
Robert

Interesting that the members of that club would be interested. I suppose that they have a long erg season so that they would be more concerned about such possible problems. For occasional erg workouts when it is too windy to row in ordinary shells (as compared to rough water shells), I don't think that it would be a concern.

Actually, I can't see that there is any problem. Personally, I have never had a wrist problem with the C2 handles that I have used - the straight , wooden handle of my old Model B nor the angled, plastic handle of my current model D and I have done many million meters on the two machines, almost 7 million on the D, which I got in 2006 and I had the B for 15 years before that.

As far as angulation of the wrist is concerned - what angulation? I watched my wrists carefully during my 10' wakeup row this morning and it appears to me that my forearms and hands stay in a straight line for the whole drive. I can't detect any bending of my wrists. What is the problem???

Bob S.

By the way, you did not address the issue I raised of ergonometric problems with oars. There are things like that fairly drastic asymmetry of sweep rowing and the minor asymmetry of having one hand over the other in sculling. Another item is the action of either the wrist or the fingers in feathering the oars. I was taught to use the wrist for sweep rowing, oh so many years ago. Much later I took up sculling and was told that it should be done with the fingers because using the wrists would cause carpal tunnel syndrome. I was 66 by that time and had a hell of a time trying to adapt to that. Later I found that a lot of scullers do use the wrist drop for feathering and have no problem with it.

If the oars cause ergonometric problems, then I would think that it would be much more of a concern for rowing clubs than possible wrist angulation on a rowing machine.
Bob S.

[Slidewinder]

TabbRows:
Others have sent personal messages criticizing my technique, and I accept and thank everyone for those criticisms, but criticism of my technique is not criticism of the Slidewinder handle design. The prototype handle is certainly not forcing me to rotate my hands too much, or forcing me to have poor co-ordination between my knees and arms, or forcing me to bring my hands too far back at the finish, and so on.

Now the stock handle, that is a different matter. It forces the user to maintain a fixed hand position throughout the stroke, regardless of the orientation of the user's arms. With the Slidewinder handle there is never a discrepancy between hand position and arm orientation. Even for people with less than perfect technique, such as myself, it ensures that the hands, the wrists, and the forearms, will always be in line with the direction of the applied force. Bio-mechanically, this is as it should be.
Robert

[Citroen]

Others have sent personal messages criticizing my technique...

Perhaps you should publish a video of your rowing with a normal C2 model D handle on a normally configured ergo. That way folks may be able to see if your strange design results in any improvement or deterioration of your untrained technique.

Or perhaps you should improve your technique by studying this video.


Some folks report getting golfer's or tennis elbow. I get pain in my left wrist but that's the direct result of a cycling accident and 6 weeks in plaster.

[Slidewinder]

bloomp and RockinRoland:
The Slidewinder handle is not just about improved bio-mechanics, although this alone should be reason enough to prefer it over the stock handle. It also enables a variety of stroke geometries. Not all of these are rowing related (ie: rotating the hands to vertical at any stage of the stroke) and are often dismissed by rowers as being irrelevant and unnecessary, but non-rowing fitness enthusiasts immediately recognize the value in these possibilities, in that they engage other muscle groups and add interest and variety to the exercise program.

Of the various stroke geometries, the improved replication of sculling is of most interest to rowers. As the stroke progresses from catch to finish, the handle arms spread, following the user's natural body mechanics, and with this movement, there is an attendant angular progression of the handgrips which closely replicates the angular progression of oar handgrips during actual rowing.

Some rowers, presenting themselves as particularly discerning in their choice of rowing related workouts, have commented, "Yes, but your hands don't spread wide at the catch as in actual sculling."

My reply to these "discerning" individuals is, "What portion of the sculling action is captured by the rigid stick of a handle that you have been pulling on for the last twenty-five years?"

It is not difficult to design a rowing machine that completely replicates the sculling action. There are several patents for mechanisms which accomplish this. But to achieve this on the C2 ergometer would require a complete redesign of the machine. The challenge was to obtain the maximum improvement with a minimum of mechanical and structural changes to the C2 unit.

The simplicity of the Slidewinder handle is deceptive. It required several experimental prototypes to work out all the details of structure and geometry - to distill the problem down to its essence. Simple does not mean crude. In any problem, it is the simple solution that is often the most elusive.

The hand over hand action was the last problem to be solved. Possibly that movement only appeals to serious scullers, but it was very satisfying to successfully incorporate it into the final design.

[Slidewinder]

To All:
The guard I affixed to the seat to prevent the tail of a loose fitting garment from getting caught under the seat roller would be a welcome addition for many users.
Some people are embarrassed by their physiques and prefer to wear loose fitting clothes. For these people, wearing a form fitting top to the gym would be humiliating. Other people, fit or not, are simply modest and for that reason choose to wear loose clothing. Because your personal beliefs dictate modesty in manners and dress does not mean you are not interested in staying healthy and fit. If Concept 2 installed a similar guard on their machines, they would in effect be saying to those people, "We respect your modesty."

But the need for that guard is more fundamental than issues of modesty. The C2 ergometer is an exercise machine, meant for gyms and peoples' homes. It is not a turret lathe destined for the factory floor. The turret lathe operator would be expected to observe safety precautions in clothing. No one should be required for safety reasons to wear special clothing on an exercise machine. Anyone who has had their shirt tail get caught under the C2 seat rollers knows that it is not an imaginary hazard. It's a violent, wrenching stop that could very well result in injury. The addition of a simple piece of bent tubing, and the problem is solved.

In summary, fitting the shirt guard to all C2 machines would make sound legal and business sense.

Legal: Reduced possibility of injury claims brought against Concept 2 (eg: 72 year old catches shirt tail under roller, strikes head on seat rail, now in coma. Family says, "Concept 2 is going to pay!").

Business: There must be large numbers of potential customers who presently won't even try the C2 ergometer because their chosen faiths forbid the wearing of snug fitting, revealing clothes. The shirt guard is a small investment with a large potential payback in increased sales and wider customer base.

Robert

[johnlvs2run]

Concept2
the rowing machine
that respects your modesty

[bloomp]

I find it rather simple to put on a t-shirt rather than a shirt with buttons to row in. Even my parents do that. Or you can tuck it in!

However, I don't belive you understand the use of muscles during the stroke. If anything, the only additional muscles that your device uses is those in the forearms that you would rotate with. The rowing machine already uses practically every muscle in the body, minus the triceps brachii, the obliques and pectoralis major, to a large extent. Gastrocnemius, soleus, and the quadriceps group provide the leg drive, while the hamstring group, gluteal group, illiopsoas and foot/anterior shin muscles stabilize. The abdominals, psoas major and erector spinae are essential to proper posture and transferring energy from the leg drive to the torso. In the back and arms, you find the use of the deltoids, trapezius, biceps brachii, and numerous supporting muscles in the forearms and upper back.

What additional muscles does the Slidewinder activate? In your use of the rower perhaps you have found certain muscle groups lacking in terms of work, but that is probably much more of a technical issue.

For what it's worth, during the drive while sculling, the hand placement matters naught when looking at an athletes entire fitness. Scullers have won Olympic gold using one hand in front of the other or one hand over the other. And the hand-over-hand style is at most a centimeter apart, not 5-10cm. What they do not do is pull the 'button' or end of the oar handle alongside their torso at any point. They would lose control of the finish and possibly control of the boat.