Given The Choice..

[[old] John Rupp]

It will be interesting to find the similar information for new open lightweight World Record holder, Elia Luini.<br /><br />Since he is about the same height and weight, or a bit less, than Ebbesen, his ratings will likely be quite similar too.<br /><br />I'm sure this information will soon become known. Time will tell.<br /><br />By the way, Ebbesen is still the World Record holder for the 30+ division, and lowered his own record this past year.

[[old] GeorgeD]

Deleted

[[old] Mark Keating]

<!--QuoteBegin-John Rupp+Jan 22 2005, 08:41 PM--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(John Rupp @ Jan 22 2005, 08:41 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--QuoteEBegin--><!--QuoteBegin-Physicist+Jan 22 2005, 01:40 AM--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(Physicist @ Jan 22 2005, 01:40 AM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--QuoteEBegin-->You're demonstrated to anyone else reading that he's an idiot </td></tr></table><br /><br />That's not very nice, whatever your name is -- I see you've still not got up the gumption to post it -- calling anyone else reading an idiot. <br /><br />And the proper word to use is "you've", not "you're".<br /><br />You're is the conjunction for "you are".<br /><br />You've is the conjuction for "you have". <br /> </td></tr></table><br /> the only thing i wish to add is, THANK GOD FOR THE CHAP WHO GAVE US THE "IGNORE USER" OPTION!

[[old] John Rupp]

[[old] John Rupp]

The reason I do no more than 8 meters per stroke, is because that is the same meters per stroke as long time World Record holder, Eskild Ebbesen.<br /><br />Also he is over 6' tall, weighs more than me, and is much younger.<br /><br />I am less than 5'9, weigh 143 pounds or so, and am 58 years of age.<br /><br />Considering all of these things, Ebbesen is probably also much stronger.<br /><br />Thus since 8 meters is the longest distance he covers per stroke, I feel this is good enough for me too.

[[old] John Rupp]

Picture of Elia Luini on the way to a new World Record of 6:02.6, February 12, 2004.<br /><br /><a href='http://www.ruderverband.ch/news/upload/luini_erog.jpg' target='_blank'>http://www.ruderverband.ch/news/upload/ ... rog.jpg</a>

[[old] GeorgeD]

Post deleted as inappropriate<br /><br />George

[[old] John Rupp]

The Athens Olympic site shows Elia Luini as being 6'0 tall (184cm) and 154 pounds (70kg).<br /><br />Here are some results from BIRC 2002:<br /><br />"The pre-race betting, however, mostly centred around last year's winner Leonardo Pettinari of Italy who, so the rumour went, had the world record of 6:03.2 in his sights. Pettinari had qualified for the final in the fastest time with a 6:10.7. The second fastest time was by Elia Luini, his partner in the world champion double scull, and it was clear then these two were going to be hard to shift. <br /><br />"From the start, Pettinari and Luini got off quick; rowing almost in unison, they got their <b>stroke rate up to 45 a minute</b>, a good couple of pips quicker than anybody else in the race. Luini perhaps had half a metre, but never more than that. <br /><br />"At the half way stage, both Italians were lying outside World Record pace, but seemed in control. <b>Both rowed incredibly long, relaxed strokes</b> and Pettinari in particular seemed untroubled. <br /><br />"At 1,100 metres the indoor world champion struck, <b>raising the stroke race a notch from the 38 s.p.m. he had been hitting</b>. Almost before the rest of the field had chance to respond, he hit again at the 1,200 metre mark and had opened up clear blue water on Luini for the first time. <br /><br />"As the line came, Pettinari took his second world championship in a time of 6:05.0, the second fastest lightweight time in the world ever. Just behind him was his fellow Italian in 6:06.5 (Elia Luini)."<br /><br />Thus in 2002 they both had long relaxed strokes, at 38 spm or higher.<br /><br />The same as Eskild Ebbesen and Graham Watt.<br /><br />I've not found Elia Luini's rate in his WR but this, along with their 39 spm at Athens, is good support that his WR rating was much the same.

[[old] GeorgeD]

<!--QuoteBegin-John Rupp+Jan 23 2005, 04:18 PM--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(John Rupp @ Jan 23 2005, 04:18 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--QuoteEBegin-->The same as Eskild Ebbesen and Graham Watt.[right] <br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />I would not be so quick to continue to use Graham Watt as an example of the 'worth' of high stroking. As I was the one to relay the information to the forum about his stroke rate, due to the fact that I was sitting on the floor next to him at the time. As I said then it was only an estimation and was based mainly on his finish, I also know that Graham wanted to improve on his technique and also was looking forward to spending much more time on the water - he does not particualry like erging, particularly 2k's and if not for the Boston trip would have been quite happy for that to be his last. High rating is not typical of how Graham trains I think you will find (but may be wrong). Graham's great ability is based around a life style that includes a lot of multi-sports and outdoor eventing, he has as a result a tremendous aerobic base and all round strength.<br /><br />regds George

[[old] Mel Harbour]

<!--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-->  The real test is not in some scientific study or research with lab rats, but what top rowers actually do in their training and competition.<br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />Yes, this is fair enough. The problem is (as everyone keeps trying to point out) that you then quote a load of examples about what top rowers do in competition, and none about what they do in training.<br /><br />You then make a load of statements about what you should do in training.<br /><br />Perhaps you have some detailed information about the way Eskild, Elia and so on train. If you do, then all you have to do is share this information with the forum, and people might start believing what you're saying.<br /><br />But then you're probably so busy loving yourself for coming up with the idea that I must be the same person as my girlfriend (even in the face of people who've met both of us speaking up!), that you won't bother to read my post (properly).

[[old] jamesg]

On my local lake one day in a 1x, an Italian double (with the flag painted on their blades, so likely no beginners) steamed past me sculling at about 20 (same as me). I managed to keep up with them, almost, for about 20 strokes. They then proceeded to do the length of the lake there and back, twice, apparently same rating, same pace. My lake is 4km long. No idea if that's typical but it's certainly what I saw.

[[old] ranger]

<!--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-->Thus in 2002 they both had long relaxed strokes, at 38 spm or higher.<br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />John--<br /><br />Yes, certainly. There it is. But you should notice that there are _two_ variables in their achievement, not just one: (1) long relaxed strokes and (2) 38 spm, or a high stroke rate.<br /><br />A 6:05 2K rowed at 38 spm is just about 12.5 SPI. This is just the stroking power that I am rowing at now (with the long, relaxed stroke that I have now developed).<br /><br />I suspect that if I were 25 years old instead of 55, I might also be able to row a 2K at 38 spm, but being 55, I can't. Your CV capacity diminishes as you age, you are not able to sustain the same intensity that you could when you were 25 years old. <br /><br />On the other hand, your strength and facility with technique, I would suppose, change very little over time. I can still do 30 pull ups (extension press ups, etc.), just as I could when I was 25. In fact, if anything, I am a little stronger now that I was then. Age doesn't seem to bear on technique, either. If anything, at an older age, you might be somewhat better technically because you might be more experienced.<br /><br />So with _two_ variables involved instead of one, the question becomes more complicated. Are you saying that you have evidence that a weaker stroke with a higher rate is better than a stronger stroke with a lower rate? If so, what is this evidence? <br /><br />It seems to me that the best strategy would be this one: To maximize your potential, take advantage of everything that you can. At this age, I can still take advantage of good technique (a long relaxed stroke, 12.5 SPI). I am less able to take advantage of high rate.<br /><br />To rate high with bad technique (a tense short stroke), it seems to me, would imply a waste of effort and therefore a diminished result.<br /><br />No?<br /><br />At the moment, I suspect that my absolute potential, could I tap it, could be 12.5 SPI at 34 spm, or a 6:16 2K.<br /><br />I have no evidence or logic that supports the claim that I could achieve this potential more easily at 42 spm with a stroking power of 10 SPI. All that this would do is add bad technique and increase the CV load, and both of these things are negative. There is also the evidence that I have _already_ tried rowing with bad technique at a high rate (37-38 spm) and an SPI of just over 10, and the result of this effort was 6:28 (not 6:16).<br /><br />ranger

[[old] ranger]

John--<br /><br />BTW, to learn to row in a relaxed way at 12.5 SPI, all of the authorities advise doing long rows (20K, etc.) at 20-22 spm, 12.5 SPI, and a 70% MHR. Sounds reasonable, no? If you can row 20K or so at 20-22 spm and 12.5 SPI (1:48), you can then slowly lift the stroke rate without the strain of having to pull harder, just the strain caused by the increased rate. The experience of these authorities, is that, given you can meet the target rate, pace, and heart rate at 20-22 spm (UT2 rowing), if you train for it, you can then row with the same stroking power (12.5 SPI in this case) at 24 spm and 80% MHR, at 28 spm and 85% MHR, at 95% MHR at 32 spm, and then (in my case) at 100% MHR at 34 spm. <br /><br />My experience so far is the authorities seem to be right.<br /><br />ranger

[[old] ranger]

<!--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-->Graham's great ability is based around a life style that includes a lot of multi-sports and outdoor eventing, he has as a result a tremendous aerobic base and all round strength.<br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />Yes, as I did with my old stroke, I would guess that Graham Watt is exactly using his strength and great aerobic base to achieve what he does in the 2K. This is evident from the relatively high drag (140 df.), high rate (38 spm), and low stroking power (10 SPI). I wasn't there to watch him, but I assume that Graham doesn't at all have a "long relaxed stroke." I assume that, like other kayakers, he thrashes away as fast as he can, using a lot of upper body, not at all good rowing technique. <br /><br />As with me, I assume that Graham could row much, much faster if he learned to row at 12.5 SPI with a long, relaxed stroke. I don't know how fast, but given his strength and aerobic capacity, I wouldn't be surprise if he could get to 35 spm, a 6:12 2K at 12.5 SPI. <br /><br />Learning to row at 12.5 SPI takes a certain sort of specific training for rowing, though, and as I do, Graham seems to come from a different sort of sports background. To achieve this, he could have to commit himself to this sort of training over a sustained period (several years, I would suppose).<br /><br />ranger

[[old] John Rupp]

<!--QuoteBegin-ranger+Jan 23 2005, 05:58 AM--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(ranger @ Jan 23 2005, 05:58 AM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--QuoteEBegin--><!--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-->Thus in 2002 they both had long relaxed strokes, at 38 spm or higher.<br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />Your CV capacity diminishes as you age ... On the other hand, your strength and facility with technique, I would suppose, change very little over time. <br /><br />I can still do 30 pull ups (extension press ups, etc.), just as I could when I was 25.<br /> </td></tr></table><br />Rich,<br /><br />Your strength is amazing.<br /><br />Most people lose strength as they age, whereas CV based on that strength is maintained through the later decades. Note there are many marathon runners in their 60's, 70's, and 80's, who maintain a great percentage of their top speed (strength). <br /><br />The limitation with age, in almost all cases, is strength, not CV capacity.