2008 review: Xeno Müller disappoints.....

Maintenance, accessories, operation. Anything to do with making your erg work.
rowland
500m Poster
Posts: 66
Joined: March 21st, 2006, 12:23 pm

Post by rowland » January 6th, 2009, 1:34 pm

Even if john is trying to be helpful, He never misses a chance to get his digs in about the pm3 monitor or the design of the C2. Some of his suggestion are not helping new members who do not know him.

Their should be a warning in his posts stating his views are his only and are not the the views of the management or staff of C2 or the majority of the members who post here.

Here is some of his latest comments about the pm3
There would be no reason to upgrade, as the pm2 is the best monitor for home us.
That's BS, I am very pleased with the pm3

In the same thread he next posted this statement
If you actually "want" a pm3, then get a used model D, as it is much more quiet than the C.
He can't imagine why anyone would "want" a pm3, even though he rows with one.
I would like to see new people pointed in the right direction, not confuse them with misleading statements or 1/2 truths.

He really should have a warning label under his picture with his dog!

User avatar
johnlvs2run
Half Marathon Poster
Posts: 4012
Joined: March 16th, 2006, 1:13 pm
Location: California Central Coast
Contact:

Post by johnlvs2run » January 6th, 2009, 6:52 pm

Rockin Roland wrote:It it well documented by various rowing organizations that stationary ergs are a great injury risk. There are many elite rowers in Australia with excellent rowing technique still getting injuries that can be directly attributed to use of the stationary C2 erg.
I have to again agree with Rockin Roland, this time about injuries on the stationary erg.

I've probably rowed more meters than 99.99% of those who've used a C2 rowing machine, and have been injured much less. In fact I have never missed any rowing due to injuries. I first got a model B in 1994, later a model C and now model D. I have usually completed in all 10 ranking events each year, plus often have done the max velocity test, have rowed 110 kilometers in a day, nearly 300 kilometers in 3 days, 465 km in a week, and 1 million meters in 19 days during the 2007 holiday challenge, almost always on a grounded erg, and yet have still not missed any rowing due to injuries.

In regards to injuries, there is a major difference between using the slides and the stationary erg, as on the slides the erg moves when you push with your legs, but does not move when the erg is grounded. The latter is conducive to bad form and injuries. I have been coming to the forum for the past 7 years, and have seen those most often suggesting that form be a reason for injuries on the stationary erg, are those who have been most often injured, in some cases not being able to row any more than 20 minutes due to injuries to their wrists, elbows or back.

As pointed out earlier, on the slides you are moving a balance between the erg and your body, also the bungees help to reverse your momentum on each end. You don't even need straps on the slides, as the bungees toss the erg back towards you at each end. Contrary to this, the grounded erg does not move, and the payoff is excessive trauma to the body. Many people who've come to the forum in the past 7 years have gotten INJURED because of taking bad advice about low ratings and jerking the handle hard at the catch. And most of them have since disappeared, though a few still hang around but can't row much due to bad wrists, bad backs and so on.

Leveling the railing by raising the back does not change the angle of the slope between the railing and the flywheel, and it certainly does not make the erg dynamic. The higher the flywheel vs the level of the railing, the more trauma, the more injuries.

Summing up, the grounded erg does cause rowers to have more injuries, as compared to an erg that's dynamic.

It is interesting that grounded ergs have been shunned by the Australian team, and it makes good sense that serious rowers would not use them.
bikeerg 75 5'8" 155# - 18.5 - 51.9 - 568 - 1:52.7 - 8:03.8 - 20:13.1 - 14620 - 40:58.7 - 28855 - 1:23:48.0
rowerg 56-58 5'8.5" 143# - 1:39.6 - 3:35.6 - 7:24.0 - 18:57.4 - 22:49.9 - 7793 - 38:44.7 - 1:22:48.9 - 2:58:46.2

Nosmo
10k Poster
Posts: 1595
Joined: November 21st, 2006, 3:39 pm

Post by Nosmo » January 6th, 2009, 8:53 pm

John Rupp wrote: You don't even need straps on the slides, as the bungees toss the erg back towards you at each end.
You don't need straps on a grounded erg either :D (but strapless does requires better technique particularly on a grounded erg)
John Rupp wrote: The higher the flywheel vs the level of the railing, the more trauma, the more injuries.
We've been through the argument before about where the flywheel should be relative to the railing but not considering injuries.
This I don't understand. Seems one would want your shoulder, hands and flywheel in the same plan so the movement of the hands is inline with the chain, which requires a higher flywheel if one was to mimic an OTW stroke.
John Rupp wrote:Summing up, the grounded erg does cause rowers to have more injuries, as compared to an erg that's dynamic.

It is interesting that grounded ergs have been shunned by the Australian team, and it makes good sense that serious rowers would not use them.
I haven't seen any data but ergs on slides do seem less stressful. How this effects the injury rate I don't know, but as someone else pointed out it would be very hard to decouple the effects of grounded vs slides from other reasons for injuries. It also seems possible that the Australians are using slides for tests for some other reason besides injuries, such as it encouraging a technique more similar to on the water rowing.

(I actually developed problems in my forearms when I decreased my use of the erg and did everything on slides! which actually has nothing to do with the thread except to point out that injuries can have diverse and complicated causes)

laupi
Paddler
Posts: 29
Joined: March 21st, 2006, 5:47 pm

Post by laupi » March 14th, 2009, 11:20 pm

Anyone tried waterrower on concept2 slides?

I wonder if Xeno Müller will go for a hybrid sysem eventually after bragging so much on statc ergs. Lets see if Xeno gives us a heads up in 2009.

Bob S.
Marathon Poster
Posts: 5142
Joined: March 16th, 2006, 12:00 pm

Post by Bob S. » March 15th, 2009, 10:25 am

laupi wrote:Anyone tried waterrower on concept2 slides?

I wonder if Xeno Müller will go for a hybrid sysem eventually after bragging so much on statc ergs. Lets see if Xeno gives us a heads up in 2009.
According to the water rower website, the weight ranges from 117 to 200 pounds, depending on the model. This is much too heavy for the slides to be any where near as effective as they are with lighter weight indoor rowers. Actually there are other manufacturers of water resistance rowers than Waterrower. It would be interesting to hear how they compare.

By the way, water rowers have been around a long time. I first heard about them in the earlier 1990s from a friend that had been asked by some one that made them at that time to give an endorsement. My friend won an Olympic gold medal in sweep rowing 50 years ago and he told me that he preferred the water rower to C2 air resistance machine. He said that it had a feel that was closer to actually rowing OTW. I never saw any to try out and ended up getting a C2 (model B), which I was familiar with.

I don't know whether or not my friend ever did give them an endorsement. That was over 25 years ago and I have not been in touch with him since then.

Bob S.

laupi
Paddler
Posts: 29
Joined: March 21st, 2006, 5:47 pm

Re: 2008 review: Xeno Müller disappoints.....

Post by laupi » September 3rd, 2011, 9:40 am

Has anyone seen Xeno. I realized he is back with c2. Looks like he praises anyone who provides sonsorship..... Kids beware!

russtanton
Paddler
Posts: 7
Joined: March 7th, 2011, 11:06 am

Re: 2008 review: Xeno Müller disappoints.....

Post by russtanton » September 3rd, 2011, 1:48 pm

laupi wrote:Has anyone seen Xeno. I realized he is back with c2. Looks like he praises anyone who provides sonsorship..... Kids beware!
I have been in touch with Xeno, and I specifically asked him for a dynamic rower recommendation (Rowperfect, Oartech or Concept2). He did not try to dissuade me from purchasing any of the three but could tell me of his positive experiences with Concept2's dynamic, as that is the erg he is currently using. After a short trial of both Rowperfect and C2's dynamic at the San Diego Crew Classic, I could not feel enough differences to make a call. Unless Xeno had used all three extensively, you really cannot expect him to recommend other than what he does use on a regular basis. He was very definitive recommending dynamic versus static, and I ended up putting my older C2 on slides.

Russ

User avatar
Rockin Roland
5k Poster
Posts: 570
Joined: March 19th, 2006, 12:02 am
Location: Moving Flywheel

Re: 2008 review: Xeno Müller disappoints.....

Post by Rockin Roland » September 4th, 2011, 1:29 am

Xeno makes his living from rowing hence, as with any professional, it's strictly "cash for comment". Several people on this forum have tried unsuccessfully to obtain an honest opinion for free on either technique or various different erg brands. What do you expect him to say.

On a public forum he's obviously only going to promote what his current sponsor wants. At one stage he was actively promoting "Waterower" ergs and even was going to be a "Rowperfect" Rep. Unfortunately for him, because he's been involved with so many different brands, people can't take his endorsements seriously anymore.

However, I'm sure if you pay him enough money for a private opinion he'll open up his heart and tell you what he honestly believes. Just not in public for free.
PBs: 2K 6:13.4, 5K 16:32, 6K 19:55, 10K 33:49, 30min 8849m, 60min 17,309m
Caution: Static C2 ergs can ruin your technique and timing for rowing in a boat.
The best thing I ever did to improve my rowing was to sell my C2 and get a Rowperfect.

JRBJR
500m Poster
Posts: 86
Joined: December 7th, 2006, 12:25 am

Re: 2008 review: Xeno Müller disappoints.....

Post by JRBJR » September 4th, 2011, 9:22 am

Rockin Roland wrote:Xeno makes his living from rowing hence, as with any professional, it's strictly "cash for comment". Several people on this forum have tried unsuccessfully to obtain an honest opinion for free on either technique or various different erg brands. What do you expect him to say.

On a public forum he's obviously only going to promote what his current sponsor wants. At one stage he was actively promoting "Waterower" ergs and even was going to be a "Rowperfect" Rep. Unfortunately for him, because he's been involved with so many different brands, people can't take his endorsements seriously anymore.

However, I'm sure if you pay him enough money for a private opinion he'll open up his heart and tell you what he honestly believes. Just not in public for free.
We know that Xeno prefers "dynamic ergs" over static ergs because he's said as much on his blog website. That's also why his rather small Costa Mesa studio was filled with C2 ergs on slides even through the slides took up a lot of valuable floor space (he could have signed up more students using static C2s). And why he started promoting the new RowPerfect Indoor Sculler back around 2007, several years before it was ready for official production. His jump to the static Waterrower came only after a very long wait for the RowPerfect, the move to an even smaller studio, and the need for endorsement dollars. BTW, his technique videos with C2s on slides are extremely informative. He has a new C2 Dynamic Erg video out but I haven't seen it.

Post Reply