On Water Vs Erg Rowing

[[old] tditmar]

I saw this article from Men's Health magazine and it got me thinking about much of what I read on the forum.<br /><br />First, I don't believe rowing is just another aerobic sport. Or, what I mean is, it is in a unique class of aerobic sports because of the strenght aspect involved. Somewhere I read an article that said the stroke in the elite levels is like consistently lifting 160lbs. That has to have a different effect on your body than other aerobic sports. Rowers are not thin. Lean yes, but not thin. They are muscular. Look at the biceps on some of the elite rowers mid stroke (a picture of Xeno comes to mind), and there is no doubt the muscles are getting an amazing workout. <br /><br />The reason I am thinking of this was from the responses to a cyclist who wondered if the erg would be a good way to increase his muscle bulk compared to cycling. I believe it would, but it seemed like everyone was telling him no. I know is has with me, and I was already on the muscular side. Why do people seem to insist it is not muscle building? Am I reading many of the responses wrong? Maybe it is not bodybuilding, but I believe it does increase muscle mass. It is not the same exercise as running or cycling. I don't see how it could even be in the same category.<br /><br />It is not explosive. It is funny how your body responds to whatever exercise you seem to be working on primarily. After running I feel light on my feet, after Oly lifting, I feel like I can dunk, and after erging I feel like I could grapple someone to submission, but could not dunk. But that is a muscle response feeling. That also tells me it is a muscle workout as well as aerobic.<br /><br />Lastly I also found it interesting someone recently posted regarding an endurance athletes heart he had an event of tachyardia and luckily a physician recognized something in his charts and said this guy must be a "rower or weightlifter." <br /><br />Oh, I actually forgot the question explaining the title to this post which is...What is the physiological difference between on water rowing and erging? The article below addresses on water rowing, but would it translate to the erg physiologically?<br /><br /><br />The article:<br /><br />Fitness <br /> Scull Session<br />Leave the silly canoe at home this weekend. It's time to row a real boat<br /><br />By: Bill Stump <br /><br />The jockstrap full of cold river water actually relaxed me. I was learning to scull-a 50-cent word for rowing a $5,000 boat-and had been preoccupied with the thought of falling in. Getting baptized 10 minutes into my first lesson let me quickly move on to the important stuff, like learning to work two oars with enough synchronicity to send a 27-foot-long, 12-inch-wide single scull neatly through the water. <br /><br />I was practicing off the dock of the Vesper Boat Club in Philadelphia, one of 10 boathouses that sit shoulder-to-shoulder along the Schuylkill River. Each house-part social club, part hall of fame with burled wood and sepia-toned photos of past champs-perfectly captures the sport's Ivy League pedigree. <br /><br />But rowing is expanding beyond the tweedy set to regular guys like us who desire a peaceful yet powerful workout. An hour on the water burns about 750 calories-more than cycling or running. It also hits your butt, legs, back, shoulders, arms, and abdominal muscles. (continued below...) <br /> <br /><br />Overall, rowers are among the world's fittest athletes, with nearly double the lung capacity of mere mortals and an average body-fat level below 8.5 percent. <br /><br />Developing an efficient stroke (which is the most important aspect of rowing) requires a kind of Zen mindfulness. <br /><br />Trying harder doesn't work. You have to repeat the stroke until it's second nature-piecing together its various components until, like hitting a 300-yard drive in golf, it becomes powerful in its effortlessness. <br /><br />After a few hours of slapping the river near Vesper, I finally delivered a few good strokes and felt the boat lift and jump forward. "Hey," said Jonathan Burns, my partner for the day and an Olympic hopeful, "did you feel that?" I did, and it was perfect. And that's why I'll be back.

[[old] Dickie]

<!--QuoteBegin-tditmar+May 16 2005, 10:58 AM--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(tditmar @ May 16 2005, 10:58 AM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--QuoteEBegin-->I saw this article from Men's Health magazine and it got me thinking about much of what I read on the forum.<br /><br />First, I don't believe rowing is just another aerobic sport. Or, what I mean is, it is in a unique class of aerobic sports because of the strenght aspect involved. Somewhere I read an article that said the stroke in the elite levels is like consistently lifting 160lbs. That has to have a different effect on your body than other aerobic sports. Rowers are not thin. Lean yes, but not thin. They are muscular. Look at the biceps on some of the elite rowers mid stroke (a picture of Xeno comes to mind), and there is no doubt the muscles are getting an amazing workout. <br /><br />The reason I am thinking of this was from the responses to a cyclist who wondered if the erg would be a good way to increase his muscle bulk compared to cycling. I believe it would, but it seemed like everyone was telling him no. I know is has with me, and I was already on the muscular side. Why do people seem to insist it is not muscle building? Am I reading many of the responses wrong? Maybe it is not bodybuilding, but I believe it does increase muscle mass. It is not the same exercise as running or cycling. I don't see how it could even be in the same category.<br /><br />It is not explosive. It is funny how your body responds to whatever exercise you seem to be working on primarily. After running I feel light on my feet, after Oly lifting, I feel like I can dunk, and after erging I feel like I could grapple someone to submission, but could not dunk. But that is a muscle response feeling. That also tells me it is a muscle workout as well as aerobic.<br /><br />Lastly I also found it interesting someone recently posted regarding an endurance athletes heart he had an event of tachyardia and luckily a physician recognized something in his charts and said this guy must be a "rower or weightlifter." <br /><br />Oh, I actually forgot the question explaining the title to this post which is...What is the physiological difference between on water rowing and erging? The article below addresses on water rowing, but would it translate to the erg physiologically?<br /><br /><br />The article:<br /><br />Fitness  <br /> Scull Session<br />Leave the silly canoe at home this weekend. It's time to row a real boat<br /><br />By: Bill Stump  <br /><br />The jockstrap full of cold river water actually relaxed me. I was learning to scull-a 50-cent word for rowing a $5,000 boat-and had been preoccupied with the thought of falling in. Getting baptized 10 minutes into my first lesson let me quickly move on to the important stuff, like learning to work two oars with enough synchronicity to send a 27-foot-long, 12-inch-wide single scull neatly through the water. <br /><br />I was practicing off the dock of the Vesper Boat Club in Philadelphia, one of 10 boathouses that sit shoulder-to-shoulder along the Schuylkill River. Each house-part social club, part hall of fame with burled wood and sepia-toned photos of past champs-perfectly captures the sport's Ivy League pedigree. <br /><br />But rowing is expanding beyond the tweedy set to regular guys like us who desire a peaceful yet powerful workout. An hour on the water burns about 750 calories-more than cycling or running. It also hits your butt, legs, back, shoulders, arms, and abdominal muscles. (continued below...)  <br /> <br /><br />Overall, rowers are among the world's fittest athletes, with nearly double the lung capacity of mere mortals and an average body-fat level below 8.5 percent. <br /><br />Developing an efficient stroke (which is the most important aspect of rowing) requires a kind of Zen mindfulness. <br /><br />Trying harder doesn't work. You have to repeat the stroke until it's second nature-piecing together its various components until, like hitting a 300-yard drive in golf, it becomes powerful in its effortlessness. <br /><br />After a few hours of slapping the river near Vesper, I finally delivered a few good strokes and felt the boat lift and jump forward. "Hey," said Jonathan Burns, my partner for the day and an Olympic hopeful, "did you feel that?" I did, and it was perfect. And that's why I'll be back. <br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />Constantly lifting 160 pounds is certainly nothing to be dismissed, but it is not the same as elite lifters lifting over 500 pounds. I spent decades powerlifting and olympic lifting and when it comes to the erg it means nothing that I can lift 300 pounds over my head or leg press 1200 pounds, because I have 0 endurance. Being strong and being powerful are two different things entirely as strength is only one part of being powerful (the other parts being distance and time). To strength athletes moving to the erg, endurance is the limiting factor. For endurance athletes moving to the erg, strength is the limiting factor.<br /><br />In the posts you refer to, all exercise builds muscle to a point, and erging may build more muscle in the arms than cycling, but erging is no substitute for weights if you want larger or stronger muscles. I have considerable muscle mass from weightlifting and after 12,000,000 meters I can honestly say that the only changes I have seen is a reduction in weight, I do not believe my muscle mass has declined, but it certainly has not increased either. <br /><br />As with everything, it depends on your goals. If you were an endurance athlete and you want to lower your 2k time on the erg, then start a good weight program in the off-season. If you are a strength athlete and desire to lower your 2k erg time then start a good endurance plan in the off season. if you are an all around athlete then hit the erg and good luck.

[[old] Roland Baltutis]

Rowing would be best described as a power endurance sport. It will build very good lean muscle in most of the muscle groups but those looking at rowing to create body bulk will be disappointed. Long limbs and strength are far more beneficial to rowing than the body bulk muscles of a weight lifter.<br /><br />On water rowing will work a few more muscles than the erg, which are used for boat balance and oar control around the catch and finish.<br /><br />Unfortunately in many cases the body bulk created from hitting the weights will end up with no specific function in sport other than the sport of luring girls into your bed.<br /><br />Roland Baltutis

[[old] Stevo]

<!--QuoteBegin-Roland Baltutis+May 17 2005, 01:35 PM--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(Roland Baltutis @ May 17 2005, 01:35 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Unfortunately in many cases the body bulk created from hitting the weights will end up with no specific function in sport other than the sport of luring girls into your bed.<br /> <br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />Not that there's anything wrong with that <br /><br />

[[old] jamesg]

What is the physiological difference between rowing and erging?<br /><br />Very little, except that the catch is much quicker on water, and the gearing is harder, so that effectively we pull a stroke around 20% longer and may be tempted to pull too hard. This can be a problem, even if we use the same rating and force as on the erg, as it automatically means the CV load is 20% higher: sudden death.<br /><br />But of course sculling is different; it's dangerous, challenging as to navigation and steering, difficult when it comes to going thru wash, chop and wind, needs lots of technique and skill, leaves you no options when you're miles from home; but marvellous when you hear the boat sing under you. The fitness part or whether it's endurance or comes under any other name, is the least of the sculler's problems. <br /><br />But if you look down a 2k course from the start, you won't have much doubt about needing endurance; and even less if you try it.

[[old] PaulS]

James,<br /><br />I've got no idea on the swimming, but 8km/h is certainly slower than you row in even a training 1x, 8mph would certainly not be "leisurely", but is that what you meant?<br /><br />Part of the difference on the water is that the shaft stores some energy that needs to be released during the drive, as well as travels in an arc. Both of these things increase the length of time that we are on the drive, and this requires a considerable amount of patience when making the transition. You could raise the DF to get the same Drive time on the Erg, but then the problem of maintaining the quickness required in a boat requires less attention. This is the big difference between "training" on the Erg with the purpose of moving boats, or just training to spin a flywheel. Unfortunately the transition is always going to be a bit painful due to the extra load incurred, but it's worth it.<br /><br />Cheers!

[[old] jamesg]

My lake's about 4 - 4½ km long, and by the time I've done the rounds the total is about 10 km I guess. This takes me total 6-700 strokes, 50-55 minutes, stops (many) included, but I consider these as at least 50metres each and take them out of the total. So 8km/h is a very rough and personalised average. 500 takes me about 2:05, but there's no laid out course except once a year when the Dragons come. <br /><br />On the other hand, freestyling I never stop and can still manage 2' per 100m with no particular difficulty, except boredom. The only exciting thing is calculating when to turn back if swimming straight out to sea..<br />

[[old] PaulS]

Here there be Dragons?<br /><br />Just for reference:<br />KPH m/s PACE<br />10.0 2.78 03:00.0<br />10.5 2.92 02:51.4<br />11.0 3.06 02:43.6<br />11.5 3.19 02:36.5<br />12.0 3.33 02:30.0<br />12.5 3.47 02:24.0<br />13.0 3.61 02:18.5<br />13.5 3.75 02:13.3<br />14.0 3.89 02:08.6<br />14.5 4.03 02:04.1<br />15.0 4.17 02:00.0<br /><br />You might really enjoy the Garmin Forerunner 201, it's great for keeping track of rowing outings on waters with no current to speak of, no calibration required and can guid you back home if fog rolls in unexpectedly. <br /><br />2:05 500m is a nice clip. What type of boat are you rowing? It also sounds like you've got a nice place to row, is it private, power boat free?

[[old] Masonje]

<!--QuoteBegin-PaulS+May 17 2005, 10:23 AM--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(PaulS @ May 17 2005, 10:23 AM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Here there be Dragons?<br /><br />Just for reference:<br />KPH m/s PACE<br />10.0 2.78 03:00.0<br />10.5 2.92 02:51.4<br />11.0 3.06 02:43.6<br />11.5 3.19 02:36.5<br />12.0 3.33 02:30.0<br />12.5 3.47 02:24.0<br />13.0 3.61 02:18.5<br />13.5 3.75 02:13.3<br />14.0 3.89 02:08.6<br />14.5 4.03 02:04.1<br />15.0 4.17 02:00.0<br /><br />You might really enjoy the Garmin Forerunner 201, it's great for keeping track of rowing outings on waters with no current to speak of, no calibration required and can guid you back home if fog rolls in unexpectedly.  <br /><br />2:05 500m is a nice clip.  What type of boat are you rowing?  It also sounds like you've got a nice place to row, is it private, power boat free? <br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br /><br />Paul:<br /><br />I was happy to see you mention the Garmin Forerunner. I just purchased the 301 yesterday and have not used it yet but I hope to in my single this afternoon. I have a NK speed coach to give me boat data but I needed a new heart rate monitor. It also seemed a nice solution when I cycle or when I row in non-speed coach equipped boats. Have you used yours on the water? Are you happy with it? On paper it seems to be a nifty device but I would be interested in hearing a rower's experience. Thanks.<br /><br />John

[[old] PaulS]

<!--QuoteBegin-Masonje+May 17 2005, 07:38 AM--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(Masonje @ May 17 2005, 07:38 AM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Paul:<br /><br />I was happy to see you mention the Garmin Forerunner.  I just purchased the 301 yesterday and have not used it yet but I hope to in my single this afternoon.  I have a NK speed coach to give me boat data but I needed  a new heart rate monitor.  It also seemed a nice solution when I cycle or when I row in non-speed coach equipped boats.  Have you used yours on the water?  Are you happy with it?  On paper it seems to be a nifty device but I would be interested in hearing a rower's experience.  Thanks.<br /><br />John <br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />We've done well over a million meters with the Forerunner in our 2x. I just saw the 301 in a store the other day and it was twice the money, but didn't have a chance to see the additional features, I'll have to go look it up in more detail.<br /><br />For rowing, I set up the auto-pause to be active at 12:00/km, but recently changed that to 9:00/km which seem to be better, it still starts on the first stroke, but doesn't count so many meters after stopping as "work".<br /><br />One thing you will be able to do (on clam water anyway) is calibrate your speedcoach accurately. I also have a speedcoach, but the cables always seem such a mess, so it hasn't gotten much use since the discovery of the Forerunner. We actually use 2 so that both people can monitor performance, try subtle changes and note if something worked or not. I have a sef contained Stroke rate device that I watch, but rate is not so important other than to let my partner know "hey, that was a 40, felt pretty good, didn't it. Not quite like the attempts at a 40 in the 8+, aye?" <br /><br />We have a cross-bar wing rigger and use the cycle mount that Garmin sells, very convenient.<br /><br />Another side benefit is that you can review your course later and see if you were going in relatively straight lines as intended. We had a tendency to turn to starboard that has been ironed out.<br />

[[old] jamesg]

PS<br />Mine's a Filippi 1x, carbon fibre and would go like a rocket under adequate power. Plus a pair of C2 smoothies that on dead water really lock on.<br />The lake's open to all comers (Caldonazzo in the South Tyrol), but I've only seen one or two scullers in the last five years. The preferred sports here are soccer, cycling and down-hill skiing, also langlauf. The Dragonboats are very popular too and we have races between all the nearby towns and villages.<br />Just one waterskier motorboat, and they stick to their lanes, so no problem. Our Province (Trentino) has banned other boats with engines larger than 3hp.<br />

[[old] Roland Baltutis]

<!--QuoteBegin-jamesg+May 17 2005, 12:45 PM--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(jamesg @ May 17 2005, 12:45 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--QuoteEBegin-->PS<br />Mine's a Filippi 1x, carbon fibre and would go like a rocket under adequate power. Plus a pair of C2 smoothies that on dead water really lock on.<br /><br />The Dragonboats are very popular too <br /> <br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />A Filippi 1X....... nice boat, you've got me drouling over it already......however I'd trade the C2 smoothies in for some better oars......such as Croker smoothies. I did a simple balance test with them in my rowing shed the other day. I held one C2 smoothie sculling oar loosly, about mid shaft, in my left hand and a Croker sculling smoothie, loosly about mid shaft, in my right hand. Both were equal length with identical inboard & outboard.<br /><br />What do you think happened? Well the C2 smoothie dipped noticably downwards towards the blade and the Croker smoothie was dead level. Without hitting the water that says heaps about the quality of design in each of the oars. I've used both pairs of oars in the scull and loved the superior balance and handling of the Croker oars to the point where they helped my technique.<br /><br />I'm not trying to sell you some oars because I've got no interests in rowing equipment companies.<br /><br />Anyhow, do you find that the Dragon boats create too much rough water for you in the scull. We have to share the river with them for 3 weeks of the year and absolutely dread those weeks. It doesn't matter so much in an eight but in a scull it's a real balance test.<br /><br />Keep it smooth, keep it relaxed<br />Roland Baltutis<br /><br />

[[old] PaulS]

<!--QuoteBegin-Roland Baltutis+May 17 2005, 07:34 PM--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(Roland Baltutis @ May 17 2005, 07:34 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--QuoteEBegin-->I held one C2 smoothie sculling oar loosly, about mid shaft, in my left hand and a Croker sculling smoothie, loosly about mid shaft, in my right hand. Both were equal length with identical inboard & outboard.<br /><br />What do you think happened?  Well the C2 smoothie dipped noticably downwards towards the blade and the Croker smoothie was dead level. Without hitting the water that says heaps about the quality of design in each of the oars. I've used both pairs of oars in the scull and loved the superior balance and handling of the Croker oars to the point where they helped my technique.<br /><br />Keep it smooth, keep it relaxed<br />Roland Baltutis <br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />The New C2 Low<i>i</i> Sculls would probably be to your liking. All you are demonstrating is that the two sets had a different balance point (which can be changed), the Crokers balance point was more near the handle and this makes for a "lighter" feeling oar. Imagine if the balance point were right at the Gate (too light). A shift of a couple inches in the balance point is very significant, the new C2's I tried had a BP ~2.5inches (6cm) closer to the handle and felt "feather light" in use. They moved like lightning out of bow without even trying, I could spin up to a 40 while still at pretty light pressure, but very low ratio. <br /><br />I'm planning on adjusting the BP on my own oars, after I find out what the best way to do that is.

[[old] Roland Baltutis]

[<br /><br />The New C2 Low<i>i</i> Sculls would probably be to your liking. All you are demonstrating is that the two sets had a different balance point (which can be changed), the Crokers balance point was more near the handle and this makes for a "lighter" feeling oar. Imagine if the balance point were right at the Gate (too light). A shift of a couple inches in the balance point is very significant, the new C2's I tried had a BP ~2.5inches (6cm) closer to the handle and felt "feather light" in use. They moved like lightning out of bow without even trying, I could spin up to a 40 while still at pretty light pressure, but very low ratio. <br /><br />I'm planning on adjusting the BP on my own oars, after I find out what the best way to do that is. <br />[/quote]<br /><br />Paul,<br /> I've yet to sight the new C2 smoothies in the flesh. If the balance point has changed, like you say, then they should perform a lot better than the model they replace. With the bigger blade design, I assume you do more work, hence you need to adjust the outboard length to allow for this. Is that the case with the new C2 smoothies? Some of the lightweight women rowers over here cut away a portion of the smoothies blades to lighten the load. Do they do that over there also?<br /><br />You say you can alter the balance point. I didn't think you could do that without reshaping the shaft. Although all shafts may look the same there is a lot of technology in the shaft design with thickness, type of materials used and in built flex points. Much the same as cross country ski poles.<br /><br />Keep it smooth, keep it relaxed<br />Roland Baltutis<br />

[[old] Cran]

<!--QuoteBegin--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--QuoteEBegin-->I did a simple balance test with them in my rowing shed the other day. I held one C2 smoothie sculling oar loosly, about mid shaft, in my left hand and a Croker sculling smoothie, loosly about mid shaft, in my right hand. Both were equal length with identical inboard & outboard.<br /><br />What do you think happened? Well the C2 smoothie dipped noticably downwards towards the blade and the Croker smoothie was dead level </td></tr></table><br />And this is bad because...?<br /><br />fwiw I find my smoothies better now I sawed 2cm off the end of each blade. Probably nothing to do with the balance point, it just makes the spoon pretty much the same size/shape as the big blade.<br /><br />Not tried Crokers.<br /><br /><!--QuoteBegin--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--QuoteEBegin-->We've done well over a million meters with the Forerunner in our 2x. I just saw the 301 in a store the other day and it was twice the money, but didn't have a chance to see the additional features, I'll have to go look it up in more detail. </td></tr></table><br />I've been using the forerunner 201 for about 6 months, fantastic bit of kit <br /><br />Get the bike mount and fit it on the rigger, and have the NK speedcoach on the footplate. No point looking at the forerunner while you are sculling.<br /><br />I set the auto lap to 500m, haven't got on with the auto pause so don't use it, it's not acurate enough. <br /><br />On rolling starts I just make sure I go over the start line at 500m and delete the first split after I finish.<br /><br />For standing starts, just press start and then go on n secs and take n secs off the first split.<br /><br />usefull for coaching as well, can see how fast the boat is going when cycling along side on the towpath.<br /><br />Not convinced I'd use the HR monitor, but if I ever get another one I might get the 301.