Effects of the drag factor on performance and on physiological parameters

[Nomath]

I am a little confused. Are you saying the average rower on the Concept2 doesn't feel a catch until the body has moved 23 cm (9 inches)? My guess is there is more to it than that. Perhaps the catch occurs sooner by simply bringing the shoulders back (and the oar handle with it). I think your number do not reflect reality.

What I am saying is that any rower who has his arms straight at the catch, not just the average rower, must first accelerate his body to a considerable speed (1-2 m/sec) before he can apply force to the handle (beyond the 25-40N for extending the shock cord). Look at the graphs from studies that used a force and speed sensor at the handle, e.g. the figures in the paper of Colloud (2006). My numbers reflect reality for non-elite rowers.

I suggest that you take place on the erg. First put the damper in position 10 and do 5 hard strokes. You will feel that after the initial two strokes the feel of the handle comes early. Now put the damper in position 1 and do 5 strokes. You will feel that after the intial two strokes the feel of the handle comes quite late in the movement.

[frankencrank]

I am a little confused. Are you saying the average rower on the Concept2 doesn't feel a catch until the body has moved 23 cm (9 inches)? My guess is there is more to it than that. Perhaps the catch occurs sooner by simply bringing the shoulders back (and the oar handle with it). I think your number do not reflect reality.

What I am saying is that any rower who has his arms straight at the catch, not just the average rower, must first accelerate his body to a considerable speed (1-2 m/sec) before he can apply force to the handle (beyond the 25-40N for extending the shock cord). Look at the graphs from studies that used a force and speed sensor at the handle, e.g. the figures in the paper of Colloud (2006). My numbers reflect reality for non-elite rowers.

But they don't need to accelerate their body to the speed of the flywheel before the catch. All they need do is accelerate the handle to the speed of the flywheel. That involves a lot less mass, while the bulk of the body gets up to speed. there is a catch force then a delay before the force becomes large. Simply straightening the back and "bracing" the shoulders can do a lot of that. No one moves 9 inches before the catch. That is half the slide length for many.

[Nomath]

But they don't need to accelerate their body to the speed of the flywheel before the catch. All they need do is accelerate the handle to the speed of the flywheel.

How do you do this with straight arms, i.e. proper rowing technique?
I am out.

[frankencrank]

But they don't need to accelerate their body to the speed of the flywheel before the catch. All they need do is accelerate the handle to the speed of the flywheel.

How do you do this with straight arms, i.e. proper rowing technique?
I am out.

You can't bring your shoulders back without bending your arms? Anyhow, we must be doing it somehow as no one needs 9 inches before the catch. While I haven't studied it I have never "felt" that the catch comes from the legs. Power comes from the legs.

Edit, I have gone and looked at some YouTube "how to row" videos. It appears that some do need about 9 inches slide before the catch. Let me revise my comment. No one should need 9 inches before the catch. some of the technique I see is not what we were taught. Our backs and shoulders were not passive observers at the catch. I will try to do a video to see what I do, not that any of you care.

Edit: Figure 8 on page 491 of the paper "Fixed versus free-floating stretcher mechanism in rowing ergometers: Mechanical aspects" by F. Colloud et al. in J of Sports Sciences, May 2006., referenced by Nomath in another thread, shows the forces on the handle in relation to handle position comparing fixed and dynamic ergometers. No force can be applied to the handle until the catch occurs. Close examination of that figure shows that the catch occurs essentially immediately on the dynamic erg. On the fixed erg there is a substantial variation with some not catching until the handle has moved about 9 inches while others catching almost immediately with the mean being somewhere in between. In both cases substantial power doesn't occur until the handle has moved several inches but "the catch" can occur early - probably depends on technique.

[hjs]

Of course we know this? Really? Then why a thread entitled "Effects of the drag factor on performance and on physiological factors" as if everyone doesn't know? You know you can improve power by increasing drag factor and, yet, you choose not to? Or, you know you can increase power by increasing DF but choose not to because you are afraid of injury?

The fact that newbies learn that a lower drag factor is more in line with their capabilities is not evidence that a lower drag factor is better for the experienced. The fact that "everyone" did this little experiment when they were newbies doesn't mean the results would be the same as they improve.

Your data that, from a training and performance perspective, that "easier" is better?

Your data that injuries are reduced on lower drag factors? (sprinting or not) I'll admit injuries are increased when one does something new and or different but that is due to change, not drag factor necessarily.

We all like what we are used to. Change is hard. Change like this takes time to adapt. Cyclists have the same problem, change that can make them better usually slows them down before they see improvement (egos are a tough thing to overcome). Many cannot see the forest for the trees. Elites, as a group, (there are exceptions - the very best never stop asking how they might improve even more) are the hardest to change as they are used to winning and afraid of change from what works for them. Just below elites are the easiest to change as they are looking for something to make them better.

So, give me the data that suggests one DF is better than another. Where is the data that says the recommendation that DF should be between 100-115 is best.

What is wrong with rowers experimenting with DF to see if they can find a better DF for them? Do you recommend they not do this?

If everyone knows this, why does it seem to me nobody knows it? When I told those who joined my experiment group what I wanted to do not a single one came back and said, "we know that."

Its more or less your thread, certainly not mine. I have used all kind if drags, from 80 to 220. My 2k drag is 120/25

Lower drag is not “easier” infact its more difficult, but more comfortable and less dangerous.

No high drag is simply more to pull against, and as a 30 year plus erger And you being a newby I know I know

110/15 is to low for good, alright for woman. There is no data. Drag used very much stems from otw rowing. There are people using higher drags at races. There even are people using drags of 300 plus. And yes, don’t say thats not possible it is. And people do.

Experiment all you want, but thinking that 30/40 years of using this machine by 1000 s en 1000 s of people nobody every thought of this before and never did? Common. Every trick in the book has been tried. To think you are the first is pretty bizar. Go look in a gym, everybody sets the drag to max...

[frankencrank]

Of course we know this? Really? Then why a thread entitled "Effects of the drag factor on performance and on physiological factors" as if everyone doesn't know? You know you can improve power by increasing drag factor and, yet, you choose not to? Or, you know you can increase power by increasing DF but choose not to because you are afraid of injury?

The fact that newbies learn that a lower drag factor is more in line with their capabilities is not evidence that a lower drag factor is better for the experienced. The fact that "everyone" did this little experiment when they were newbies doesn't mean the results would be the same as they improve.

Your data that, from a training and performance perspective, that "easier" is better?

Your data that injuries are reduced on lower drag factors? (sprinting or not) I'll admit injuries are increased when one does something new and or different but that is due to change, not drag factor necessarily.

We all like what we are used to. Change is hard. Change like this takes time to adapt. Cyclists have the same problem, change that can make them better usually slows them down before they see improvement (egos are a tough thing to overcome). Many cannot see the forest for the trees. Elites, as a group, (there are exceptions - the very best never stop asking how they might improve even more) are the hardest to change as they are used to winning and afraid of change from what works for them. Just below elites are the easiest to change as they are looking for something to make them better.

So, give me the data that suggests one DF is better than another. Where is the data that says the recommendation that DF should be between 100-115 is best.

What is wrong with rowers experimenting with DF to see if they can find a better DF for them? Do you recommend they not do this?

If everyone knows this, why does it seem to me nobody knows it? When I told those who joined my experiment group what I wanted to do not a single one came back and said, "we know that."

Its more or less your thread, certainly not mine. I have used all kind if drags, from 80 to 220. My 2k drag is 120/25

Lower drag is not “easier” infact its more difficult, but more comfortable and less dangerous.

No high drag is simply more to pull against, and as a 30 year plus erger And you being a newby I know I know

110/15 is to low for good, alright for woman. There is no data. Drag used very much stems from otw rowing. There are people using higher drags at races. There even are people using drags of 300 plus. And yes, don’t say thats not possible it is. And people do.

Experiment all you want, but thinking that 30/40 years of using this machine by 1000 s en 1000 s of people nobody every thought of this before and never did? Common. Every trick in the book has been tried. To think you are the first is pretty bizar. Go look in a gym, everybody sets the drag to max...

This is not my thread. I am simply responding to what another started and responding to what others comments as I feel I have some expertise and useful experience in this area.

Lower drag is regularly referred to as being easier. I think that is because it feels less stressful because the forces are lower. Or, because when one becomes stronger higher drags allow better performance and newbies can't do them. However, it can be harder (depending upon the power) because it can be less efficient, especially at higher power. That means the hands and feet don't feel the stress the muscles are being put through. I don't understand why you say lower drag is less dangerous?

Yes, the erg has been used for many years replicating the feel of the water. Replicating what people are used to. I am submitting that the ergometer has never been used to optimize physiologically what is done on the water. This is about tuning the engine. This is not an easy task. It takes time to retain everything to new stresses, in cycling it would take 6-12 weeks to start to see substantial change and 6-9 months to pretty much maximize the change. I think rowing will go faster because the changes are less drastic.

What my little experiment is doing is demonstrating the potential. Every rower is different and, while I expect rowers of similar ability and background to test similarly, the only way to know what is "best" for you is to test. The rowing ergometer makes this "easy" if one is willing to do the hard work (and it is hard work) to make these changes. If your object is to make the shell or ergometer to go faster this experiment should be something you should do. If your object is to stay fit and loose weight, forget it.

When I saw some of my subjects not reaching peak even at DF10 I wrote Concept2 asking them how one might increase drag factor. They have yet to reply. Perhaps you could tell me how this might be done?

Here is another set of data, not quite as clean as the last set but demonstrating the principle.

1.25 hr Zone 2 workout in 5 intervals totaling 18,918 m. HR pretty stable between 135-138 for each interval. Subject reported HR was a little lower at higher DF's.

DF/time/watts
125/21min/204
148/18min/202
170/15min/209
190/12min/212
211/9min/221

He did not not report slide speed.
Again, this person saw an approximate 10% increase in power at same HR going from DF 125-148 to 211.
He did report highest DF’s felt harder despite HR being a little lower. Few would see this result I would submit.

[hjs]

This is not my thread. I am simply responding to what another started and responding to what others comments as I feel I have some expertise and useful experience in this area.

Lower drag is regularly referred to as being easier. I think that is because it feels less stressful because the forces are lower. Or, because when one becomes stronger higher drags allow better performance and newbies can't do them. However, it can be harder (depending upon the power) because it can be less efficient, especially at higher power. That means the hands and feet don't feel the stress the muscles are being put through. I don't understand why you say lower drag is less dangerous?

Yes, the erg has been used for many years replicating the feel of the water. Replicating what people are used to. I am submitting that the ergometer has never been used to optimize physiologically what is done on the water. This is about tuning the engine. This is not an easy task. It takes time to retain everything to new stresses, in cycling it would take 6-12 weeks to start to see substantial change and 6-9 months to pretty much maximize the change. I think rowing will go faster because the changes are less drastic.

What my little experiment is doing is demonstrating the potential. Every rower is different and, while I expect rowers of similar ability and background to test similarly, the only way to know what is "best" for you is to test. The rowing ergometer makes this "easy" if one is willing to do the hard work (and it is hard work) to make these changes. If your object is to make the shell or ergometer to go faster this experiment should be something you should do. If your object is to stay fit and loose weight, forget it.

When I saw some of my subjects not reaching peak even at DF10 I wrote Concept2 asking them how one might increase drag factor. They have yet to reply. Perhaps you could tell me how this might be done?

Here is another set of data, not quite as clean as the last set but demonstrating the principle.

1.25 hr Zone 2 workout in 5 intervals totaling 18,918 m. HR pretty stable between 135-138 for each interval. Subject reported HR was a little lower at higher DF's.

DF/time/watts
125/21min/204
148/18min/202
170/15min/209
190/12min/212
211/9min/221

He did not not report slide speed.
Again, this person saw an approximate 10% increase in power at same HR going from DF 125-148 to 211.
He did report highest DF’s felt harder despite HR being a little lower. Few would see this result I would submit.

First of all, ofcourse you should be and are free to say anything you want, in the current timeframe thats not a given anymore, sadly enough.

Re Drag, if we remove the cage, we can remove the metal ring, gives a higher drag.
Complete removing the cage ofcourse even more. This will make the spinning fan dangerous. So I do think thats the reason c2 does not tell you.
The other way is also possible, cover the side, towel or anything, this will lower the drag and even mess up the pm. Easy to pull a Wr that way.

Drag in general, 0 would be impossible to do any work.
indefinite high would be impossible to move, so again, zero work can be done. No surprices.
So we know drag needs to be somewhere between those extremes.

On the lower side, speed of motion is the limitation.
On the high side, raw strenght.
Optimal is betwen those two, and yes there is no single number that is optimal. Thats also why different drag is possible and also used. On the extreme side, talking about fast rowers, I have seen people use drags between 110 and 200 plus.

You are right that drag is aimed at otw rowing. And those people are the best trained and most talented. So they pull the best results. So yes, their drag could not be best. But...

On the shorter work, best results are not set by otw rowers, but strong gym rowers. Talking about 500 and below. Guys pulling very close to 60 min flat max pace. And 1.10.5 (3guys) over 500 meters.
Those guys are very well used to high loads and are strenght trained. They are not “conditioned” by otw ideas. And use drags which give them the best result. And these guys came out to not rowing at max drag, over short distances. Think we can agree the shorter the distance, the more power is needed, the higher drag is usefull.

So if very strong guys, over sprints have found out that max drag is to high, for less strong people over longer distances a even drag is best.

Thats not to say, that some people use very high drags, over longer distances. Great example is the 40 plus Wr marathon. Set by a skier, not rower. He used max drag, rate 30 and pulled 1.45 as a light heavyweight. Low 80 kg.

What I have seen is that more slow twitch people do relative better at high drags, the slower drive could suit them better ?

Re testing. I do think, testing should be done at Time trail speed, after all, thats in the end what matters most. Just a few examples don’t say much. And like I said before, yes high drags do give easier higher speeds, in general, you will see that people using high drags, do use higher spm, to compensate the extra force needed.

And last I do think, drag and max force is not the limiting factor. Fitness is.

A true test would need big different groups, from the same level, who would follow the same training over a long periode of time. Using different drags. Something which I have never seen. Not in any sport. Research is almost always pretty crappy.

[frankencrank]

First of all, ofcourse you should be and are free to say anything you want, in the current timeframe thats not a given anymore, sadly enough.

Re Drag, if we remove the cage, we can remove the metal ring, gives a higher drag.
Complete removing the cage ofcourse even more. This will make the spinning fan dangerous. So I do think thats the reason c2 does not tell you.
The other way is also possible, cover the side, towel or anything, this will lower the drag and even mess up the pm. Easy to pull a Wr that way.

Drag in general, 0 would be impossible to do any work.
indefinite high would be impossible to move, so again, zero work can be done. No surprices.
So we know drag needs to be somewhere between those extremes.

You in a nutshell have put forth the entire thesis, except I am looking at the muscle. Infinite resistance, the muscle can pull a lot of force but do zero work. Zero resistance, the muscle can contract really fast but do zero work. In both cases energy is expended but no work done so efficiency is zero. In between, the muscle is doing some work with some degree of efficiency. What I am looking for is the the best resistance that allows the best performance at the desired power level. It will depend a lot on what you are trying to do, a 500m sprint or a marathon as to what is best for that occasion.

On the lower side, speed of motion is the limitation.
On the high side, raw strenght.
Optimal is betwen those two, and yes there is no single number that is optimal. Thats also why different drag is possible and also used. On the extreme side, talking about fast rowers, I have seen people use drags between 110 and 200 plus.

Good for them. But, who is telling people coming here they need to experiment to find out what works for them and why? That is all I am trying to do. gather some data that gets people thinking. Hopefully, making many better than they would be from just training harder. training smarter works also.

You are right that drag is aimed at otw rowing. And those people are the best trained and most talented. So they pull the best results. So yes, their drag could not be best. But...

As I said earlier I am surprised coaches are not using the ergometer to optimize on the water rowing. "Drag factor" can be manipulated on the water also, if one decided to do so. This tool is being under utilized in my opinion.

On the shorter work, best results are not set by otw rowers, but strong gym rowers. Talking about 500 and below. Guys pulling very close to 60 min flat max pace. And 1.10.5 (3guys) over 500 meters.
Those guys are very well used to high loads and are strenght trained. They are not “conditioned” by otw ideas. And use drags which give them the best result. And these guys came out to not rowing at max drag, over short distances. Think we can agree the shorter the distance, the more power is needed, the higher drag is usefull.

Maybe the OTW people should look around and learn from others. Speed comes from power. Can what the gym people do be adapted to the water. My lightbulb went on analyzing cyclist data.

So if very strong guys, over sprints have found out that max drag is to high, for less strong people over longer distances a even drag is best.

I don't know what the best drag is for anyone. It is my presumption that most would do better with a higher drag but my main suggestion is that people test themselves then use that result to guide training.

Thats not to say, that some people use very high drags, over longer distances. Great example is the 40 plus Wr marathon. Set by a skier, not rower. He used max drag, rate 30 and pulled 1.45 as a light heavyweight. Low 80 kg.

What I have seen is that more slow twitch people do relative better at high drags, the slower drive could suit them better ?

What I have seen is you can't know where you should be until you test, train, then test again. It is hard, slow, work to optimize.

Re testing. I do think, testing should be done at Time trail speed, after all, thats in the end what matters most. Just a few examples don’t say much. And like I said before, yes high drags do give easier higher speeds, in general, you will see that people using high drags, do use higher spm, to compensate the extra force needed.

I haven't seen that. In my own experience I find that to do the higher drags I have to shorten the stroke because it is the arms that fail.

And last I do think, drag and max force is not the limiting factor. Fitness is.

Fitness is one limiting factor. But, at any given fitness efficiency matters and that is what I am trying to maximize. Maximizing efficiency maximizes the result regardless of the fitness level.

A true test would need big different groups, from the same level, who would follow the same training over a long periode of time. Using different drags. Something which I have never seen. Not in any sport. Research is almost always pretty crappy.

I am not doing formal research. I am trying to do a demonstration project. Maybe some researcher will do this and formalize the result. I don't need someone to tell me what is going on. I think I pretty much know. Let someone prove me wrong.

And, I will agree with you that most research in this area is usually pretty awful. In cycling I always chuckled at studies looking at pedaling technique. First, they looked at forces on the pedal as being technique without accounting for the forces due to gravity which have nothing to do with technique. Then, they would ask people to pedal in some different fashion and then conclude that method was worse than what they were used to. Instead, the only way to know is to train people to pedal in the fashion you desire and then compare.

[hjs]

Re otw rowers and erg.

The fact you don’t here a lot does not mean there is not a lot of research. This forum is for average Joe trying to get fit. Although some would say, this is already “elite” compared to the general population.

The top countries keep there findings hidden, they don’t even show up anymore at races. The very best are seldom to be seen.
And also, not the concept2, but rowperfect is more and more used. A more expensive machine which is much personally adjustable. Sometimes results trickle down, but most does not.

And of course rowing is rowing. If possible the crews do row otw. And in lots of countries that can be done yearround. I live nearby the Dutch rowing olympic track. And thats ice free almost year round. The last 10 years I exactly been once on the ice there. Our winters really have been very mild. Now in december I see crews training outside.

[frankencrank]

Re otw rowers and erg.

The fact you don’t here a lot does not mean there is not a lot of research. This forum is for average Joe trying to get fit. Although some would say, this is already “elite” compared to the general population.

The top countries keep there findings hidden, they don’t even show up anymore at races. The very best are seldom to be seen.
And also, not the concept2, but rowperfect is more and more used. A more expensive machine which is much personally adjustable. Sometimes results trickle down, but most does not.

And of course rowing is rowing. If possible the crews do row otw. And in lots of countries that can be done yearround. I live nearby the Dutch rowing olympic track. And thats ice free almost year round. The last 10 years I exactly been once on the ice there. Our winters really have been very mild. Now in december I see crews training outside.

Just because others are doing their own research (and not publishing it I guess) doesn't mean we can't have our own discussion regarding best ways to improve on the ergometer and on the water.

As I said, there seems to be a lot that can be learned from the ergometer that could be applied to the water. It does seem to me that this tool is being under utilized. Am I the first person to point out that slide speed (muscle contraction speed) is important to power generation and efficiency?

Edit: Let me add. Rowers are not alone. Cyclists tend to either ignore or don't know about how pedal speed affects efficiency and power production. We know what we "know" and that is enough for most people. Tell them something different and you are suddenly a troublemaker.

[Nomath]

I think you are vastly overestimating yourself. Clearly, you haven't read 90% of the scientific investigations on rowing indoors and probably 95% of the studies about on-water rowing. Ignorance is bliss.

[hjs]

Re otw rowers and erg.

The fact you don’t here a lot does not mean there is not a lot of research. This forum is for average Joe trying to get fit. Although some would say, this is already “elite” compared to the general population.

The top countries keep there findings hidden, they don’t even show up anymore at races. The very best are seldom to be seen.
And also, not the concept2, but rowperfect is more and more used. A more expensive machine which is much personally adjustable. Sometimes results trickle down, but most does not.

And of course rowing is rowing. If possible the crews do row otw. And in lots of countries that can be done yearround. I live nearby the Dutch rowing olympic track. And thats ice free almost year round. The last 10 years I exactly been once on the ice there. Our winters really have been very mild. Now in december I see crews training outside.

Just because others are doing their own research (and not publishing it I guess) doesn't mean we can't have our own discussion regarding best ways to improve on the ergometer and on the water.

As I said, there seems to be a lot that can be learned from the ergometer that could be applied to the water. It does seem to me that this tool is being under utilized. Am I the first person to point out that slide speed (muscle thousands speed) is important to power generation and efficiency?

Edit: Let me add. Rowers are not alone. Cyclists tend to either ignore or don't know about how pedal speed affects efficiency and power production. We know what we "know" and that is enough for most people. Tell them something different and you are suddenly a troublemaker.

Lets assume you are right. Why would we expect you to be first person to think this and start finding this out? Years and years and thousends and thousands of people from lots of countries are using this.

And like I said, no the c2 is not a good tool to use for rowing. For fitness and given its price its great. But there better machines, which mimic rowing much closer.

[frankencrank]

I think you are vastly overestimating yourself. Clearly, you haven't read 90% of the scientific investigations on rowing indoors and probably 95% of the studies about on-water rowing. Ignorance is bliss.

My guess is most have not read 90% of the scientific investigations on anything they might be interested in. That is why forums like this are useful because what you haven't read perhaps others have. From such discussions everyone can get smarter (if they choose to). From this it doesn't seem there are any scientific investigations on slide speed as it relates to efficiency or power. While I may not have read even 5% of the rowing studies what I do understand is human physiology as it relates to endurance sports and I am an experienced rower. I am not sure I am overestimating that.

[frankencrank]

Re otw rowers and erg.

The fact you don’t here a lot does not mean there is not a lot of research. This forum is for average Joe trying to get fit. Although some would say, this is already “elite” compared to the general population.

The top countries keep there findings hidden, they don’t even show up anymore at races. The very best are seldom to be seen.
And also, not the concept2, but rowperfect is more and more used. A more expensive machine which is much personally adjustable. Sometimes results trickle down, but most does not.

And of course rowing is rowing. If possible the crews do row otw. And in lots of countries that can be done yearround. I live nearby the Dutch rowing olympic track. And thats ice free almost year round. The last 10 years I exactly been once on the ice there. Our winters really have been very mild. Now in december I see crews training outside.

Just because others are doing their own research (and not publishing it I guess) doesn't mean we can't have our own discussion regarding best ways to improve on the ergometer and on the water.

As I said, there seems to be a lot that can be learned from the ergometer that could be applied to the water. It does seem to me that this tool is being under utilized. Am I the first person to point out that slide speed (muscle thousands speed) is important to power generation and efficiency?

Edit: Let me add. Rowers are not alone. Cyclists tend to either ignore or don't know about how pedal speed affects efficiency and power production. We know what we "know" and that is enough for most people. Tell them something different and you are suddenly a troublemaker.

Lets assume you are right. Why would we expect you to be first person to think this and start finding this out? Years and years and thousends and thousands of people from lots of countries are using this.

And like I said, no the c2 is not a good tool to use for rowing. For fitness and given its price its great. But there better machines, which mimic rowing much closer.

No one should expect anyone to be the first at anything. It would just seem that I am the first here to bring this up. There is plenty of experimental data in the cycling community to this point. It makes physiological sense. No one has presented any data to rebut the idea.

It doesn't matter which machine you use, it seems ignoring this physiological fact (for any given muscle power there will be a most efficient contraction speed) is ignoring an area of potential improvement.

[ArmandoChavezUNC]

This thread is quite lot and a little rambling so I'm curious if you can summarize what novel approach it is exactly that you think you may have found?

I'm not even sure I understand what you're advocating for in your latest response saying there's an optimal contraction speed for a given muscle power (this seems like a very unclear statement to me).