Cross Team Challenge - Discussion Thread

[Dangerscouse]

bit of a fast entry... 9200 plus!

It's not out-of-band with Benjamin Reuter's result in Sept 2017.
http://c2ctc.com/index.php?c_id=152

Know of the guy, never thought it was not a false entry.

I have no idea how he does it considering he's not a professional rower, but I had a horrible feeling that Ollie would beat us (Team Oarsome)

[hjs]

It's not out-of-band with Benjamin Reuter's result in Sept 2017.
http://c2ctc.com/index.php?c_id=152

Know of the guy, never thought it was not a false entry.

I have no idea how he does it considering he's not a professional rower, but I had a horrible feeling that Ollie would beat us (Team Oarsome)

Some people are simply very gifted, although he surely does train well also. Zeidler is ofcourse also a "freak" on both machine and otw.

[Citroen]

Does anyone know what #TOKYROW have chosen for January.
If nobody tells me the January CTC will be a straight, unrestricted 2K.

[Citroen]

The January CTC is chosen.

TOKYROW 2020

20 minutes row at 20 overall SR.

Other than that there are no restrictions.

"Team TokyRow is basically group of the people who are accompanying me by doing rows alongside me (albeit even if just "virtually") and who chose the final three (from an original list of about 20). We wanted something to reflect MY Tokyrow (see obesemanrowing.org.uk) which finishes at the start of the next Olympics in 2020 and most of rows are done at low-rate.

I know there were a lot of discussions on FB about it being able to "cheat" the machine etc with restricted rates but we also had those chats before coming up with our final three which wa then put out to everyone to vote on Twitter. The general view was that knowing how the machine works and how to tweak it is not much different from knowing the bends in a stretch of river - the winners of boat races are not always the fastest athletes but those with experience and knowledge. Ultimately though it came down to the same thing that ANY session could be cheated if people wanted to do so) There is no checking that someone does a 1:45 for a specific session any more than they do that they have rowed at 20 SPM - it is all down to trust and if anyone wants to "cheat" then they can do. The CTC is NOT the Olympics but a fun competition - and if people really feel the need to sheat then it says more about them that any of the challenges.

The final three were:

20 mins at SR20 - 43%
2020m at SR20 - 39%
1096 (number of days for me to complete my 9.6 million) - 18%

But we have listened (and unlike in some other votes not only to the 43% who voted but also those who didn't vote or wanted something else) and have therefore gone with the people's choice. It will also hopefully fulfill one of our aims of bringing the "rowing" and "erging" worlds a bit closer together as a lot of club athletes will normally do a 30/20 as part of their weekly training anyway. Hopefully some club and uni rowers will therefore tweak their normal session and take part in their first C2CTC.

Basically set the monitor for 20 minutes and row 400 strokes (we'll allow 401 but not 402) then record overall distance.

In the spirit of "TokyRow" a smooth steady continuous and row with a consistent SR is the desired way but people can row however they like within the restrictions of 400 maximum strokes. If someone wants to row at 30SR until they get to 400 strokes and then stop and wait until the 20 minutes are up, that's fine - just as long as no more than 400 (401) strokes overall.

I don't think the 401 strokes are feasible for folks on PM2s or folks on PM3/PM4/PM5 without using Ergdata (which has a more accurate stroke counter). The monitors will record 418 strokes as 20SPM (even if it appears to show 20SPM on the display throughout the row and you can't tell until you're finished). To get 401 you'd have to restrict it to 19SPM.

[jackarabit]

If a maximum of 400 strokes is de rigueur for proper execution, it follows that those without an accurate stroke counter app such as ErgData or an electromechanical counter on the seat rail are obliged to keep the tab by either counting strokes or by attaching a cheap pushbutton totalizator to their handles and inputting the count at the finish of each stroke.

A challenge for those who would enjoy exploiting their familiarity with the PM’s notoriously inaccurate method of calculating average rate should not be held concurrently. That would definitely qualify as racing à deux vitesses.

[Citroen]

If a maximum of 400 strokes is de rigueur for proper execution, it follows that those without an accurate stroke counter app such as ErgData or an electromechanical counter on the seat rail are obliged to keep the tab by either counting strokes or by attaching a cheap pushbutton totalizator to their handles and inputting the count at the finish of each stroke.

A challenge for those who would enjoy exploiting their familiarity with the PM’s notoriously inaccurate method of calculating average rate should not be held concurrently. That would definitely qualify as racing à deux vitesses.

That explains in lots of words why the objective of 400 or 401 strokes is entirely impossible. The challenge doesn't cater for folks who only do 398 strokes either.

So I'd propose we modify the rules for the CTC to cover this by always allowing for the rounding of the stroke count and the pace count by PM2/PM3/PM4 & PM5 for stroke restricted rows (as has been the case for all CTC rows of that type in the past).

I'd guess that the majority of rowers will look at the monitor and be 100% satisfied by the number it offers without looking at any split detail. With a 20' row you'd get 4 minute splits by default. To get closer to the 401 strokes you'd have to enforce a rule of 1 minute splits - that is also not practical.

[Cyclist2]

Most of my rows are on time or time intervals because I input my data to the logbook manually and that makes it easier to add up all the different segments (I can control where the clock stops). I also learned how to count to 100 sometime before first grade. So it's real easy. Follow along, pay attention closely.

20 / 4 = 5. 20 x 5 = 100. Watch the monitor for stroke rate, keep it at 20 as you count. Each minute is 20 strokes, each 30 seconds is 10 strokes. Watch the time and adjust your stroke rate if you are going too fast or slow - this will be only a slight slowing or speeding up for two or three strokes to get back on pace. When you get to 5 minutes (or down to 15 minutes on the monitor), start from one and count to 100 again, or if you really want to make it hard keep going to 200, 300, 400. That's four times to count to 100, twice to 200, or once to 400.

Now I know that may be overwhelming to some with expensive electronic gadgets who may have forgotten how to count that high, but step back into the dark ages for 20 minutes and enjoy the challenge.

Sarcastically yours, Cyclist2

(P.S. Have a Merry Christmas, everyone!)

[jackarabit]

Mark’s method consists not only of counting strokes but also of adjusting their frequency on the fly. This is analogous to the operation of the PID (proportional/integral/derivative) process controller used in brewing, drone flight control, and reacting to your MIL’s insistent comments that you were never good enuf for her daughter. Back to the future, lads!

[joe80]

My opinion is that we should be relied upon to take the challenge seriously and aim for 20 spm throughout. If the PM reads '20 spm' the row is valid. If we have a means of counting strokes automatically that's all to the good but many of us are not able to cope simultaneously with intense physical effort and even simple metal tasks like counting. It may help to include a stipulation in the instructions that the splits are evenly timed. This would remove the main opportunity for 'gamesmanship' of, for instance, entering splits of 19 minutes.

Regards,
Joe

[jackarabit]

I agree that the good faith and willingness of everyone to honour a single, fully specified mode or protocol for executing each challenge demonstrates an attitude of respect for the endeavor and for one’s fellow participants.

I am troubled by a challenge which lays out the rules and then suggests an acceptable subversion of those rules (400 strokes maximum, av. rate at rower’s discretion and “sit out” time remaining on the 20’ clock). My opinion is that a single choice of challenge should be made from the following proferred or implied options:

1) 20’ @ rate 20spm, average rate determined and attested by reference to PM.

2) 20’ @ true average rate of 20spm, average rate produced and proved by total stroke ct.

3) 400 counted strokes at any rate it pleases the ergnoscenti (and the reat of us) to do them, 20’ duration removed as a parameter of execution.

[Cyclist2]

My opinion is that we should be relied upon to take the challenge seriously and aim for 20 spm throughout. If the PM reads '20 spm' the row is valid.

1) 20’ @ rate 20spm, average rate determined and attested by reference to PM.

2) 20’ @ true average rate of 20spm, average rate produced and proved by total stroke ct.

I did the row yesterday. Set in 20', 5' splits, counted 400 strokes at 20spm. Both Joe's idea and Jack's 1) and 2) came out the same. Each 5' split was 20spm (100 strokes and 20spm average registered on the monitor). When I read TOKYROW 2020's description, that is what came to my mind - there was no discrepancy between "20' at 20spm" and "400 strokes" (hence my tongue in cheek post). That's how I plan to do the challenge.

[jackarabit]

It being the season of great tidings, good cheer, and a surfeit of much other. I won’t fuss over every bit of OMR’s challenge submission but I am obliged to repeat my observation that 400 strokes free rate is hardly equivalent to 20’r20!

IF the 30’ session is set the same for everyone (including the default splits) and rowed with honest intent to produce prescribed average rate as current rate, the monitor calculation will likely be inaccurate but equally inaccurate for everyone. This is the definition of a level playing field for erg comps, the buoys, bridges and currents of OTW notwithstanding.

Nuff sed. By custom or fiat, let the Performance Monitor rule from this day hence.

[jdmad7]

Dougie,

Can you please resubmit jon's time meters you removed from the board, if you have any issues with a mad entry please get in touch with me directly before acting, you cannot merely remove an entry because you feel its too slow for the given individual.

jd

[Citroen]

Jon can add it back in himself. I assumed it was a posting error when I deleted it.

And, yes I can remove any entry that is outside the bounds of sensibility.

[jdmad7]

Im not too sure how you have become dictator of all ctc given it was us who came up with ctc, was this voted upon? And clearly it was not outside the bounds of sensibility as it was done, and if you had been with the rest of the world on facebook and not hiding in your little dark corner you would have seen his screenshot. Perhaps something needs done about this dictatorship that you seem to run.