Watts Per Kilogram

[old] AtlCyclist · Post by **[old] AtlCyclist** » October 25th, 2005, 1:29 pm

I come from a cycling background where the gold standard for fitness is the amount of watts produced per kilogram of body weight. For example, Lance produces nearly 7 watts per kg at his anaerobic threshold in the Tour. An exercise physiologist quoted in the NY Times said there are only about 20 people in the world capable of producing that number (and half were at the Tour).<br /><br />What is the equivalent number for a world class rower? Are they producing equivalent numbers? Given rowing uses more muscle groups than cycling it would seem like rowers would produce more raw wattage. Should I aim for a watts per kilogram target in my training OR should I rely only on times?

[old] PaulS · Post by **[old] PaulS** » October 25th, 2005, 1:51 pm

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(AtlCyclist @ Oct 25 2005, 10:29 AM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>I come from a cycling background where the gold standard for fitness is the amount of watts produced per kilogram of body weight. For example, Lance produces nearly 7 watts per kg at his anaerobic threshold in the Tour. An exercise physiologist quoted in the NY Times said there are only about 20 people in the world capable of producing that number (and half were at the Tour).<br /><br />What is the equivalent number for a world class rower? Are they producing equivalent numbers? Given rowing uses more muscle groups than cycling it would seem like rowers would produce more raw wattage. Should I aim for a watts per kilogram target in my training OR should I rely only on times? <br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />It's pretty tough to compare cycling to Rowing due to the nature of the power input. Cycling is a rather constant power production, whereas Rowing at very high rates might be as little as a 1:1 ratio of input/coasting, but is probably on the average of 1:2, and can be greater than 1:3. now if you had a cyclist make one crank, then coast for twice the time that a revolution took, then repeat, their "power output" could be compared more directly. You could probably find some Rowers that have become medium competitive cyclists (they weight too much), but probably not the other way around (cyclists aren't large enough). Of course there is always the exception, I know of a Mr. Hastings that does well in both arenas of lwt Rowing and Cycling.

[old] AtlCyclist · Post by **[old] AtlCyclist** » October 25th, 2005, 2:30 pm

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(PaulS @ Oct 25 2005, 01:51 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>[It's pretty tough to compare cycling to Rowing due to the nature of the power input. Cycling is a rather constant power production, whereas Rowing at very high rates might be as little as a 1:1 ratio of input/coasting, but is probably on the average of 1:2, and can be greater than 1:3. now if you had a cyclist make one crank, then coast for twice the time that a revolution took, then repeat, their "power output" could be compared more directly. You could probably find some Rowers that have become medium competitive cyclists (they weight too much), but probably not the other way around (cyclists aren't large enough). Of course there is always the exception, I know of a Mr. Hastings that does well in both arenas of lwt Rowing and Cycling. <br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />I hadn't thought of that, but, of course, that makes perfect sense. <br /><br />A guy on my cycling team came from a collegiate rowing background (I believe as a lightweight) and went from Cat 5 to Cat 2 in twelve months. If you're familiar with the USCF category system, you'll know that's quite impressive. As a benchmark, he rowed a 6:28 2k.<br />

[old] Jim Barry · Post by **[old] Jim Barry** » October 25th, 2005, 2:42 pm

<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'>What is the equivalent number for a world class rower? </td></tr></table><br /><br />For LW male rowers holding 5watts per kg over an hour is perhaps the equivalent metric. The erg is not as efficient as the bike as Paul mentions. 7watt/kg is without question impossible as it would mean stringing 10 consecutive WR LW 2k rows together (and then some). <br /><br /><br /><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'>Should I aim for a watts per kilogram target in my training OR should I rely only on times? </td></tr></table><br /><br />Just work on your times. If you are a Heavyweight who want to race LW then it gets complicated. There can be a few kg's around the border that allow you to race in the LW class, but can be disproportionately costly in terms of time.

[old] Carl Henrik · Post by **[old] Carl Henrik** » October 25th, 2005, 3:03 pm

E. Ebbesen has done 350.x w for an hour and that might be the best hour a lwt have done. That was probably below 5w/kg for him as he only weighs <72 for competitions I should guess. <br /><br /><br />There is cyclist on the UK site called Dan Staite that ergs and bikes. He's had his VO2 max measured larger than Armstrongs (88.8) and he has pulled a whopping 6:19 for 2k on the erg as well. That's world class as he is lwt. So clearly some cyclist can erg as well. ...if they train for it...

[old] Krysta Coleman · Post by **[old] Krysta Coleman** » October 25th, 2005, 3:11 pm

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(Jim Barry @ Oct 25 2005, 12:42 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><br />Just work on your times. If you are a Heavyweight who want to race LW then it gets complicated. There can be a few kg's around the border that allow you to race in the LW class, but can be disproportionately costly in terms of time. <br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />Jim, I am just curious about your comment above. I am quite new to rowing - just a few months into it so far. I am trying to get down under 135 to make female lightweight. Why do you think this may be "disproportionately costly in terms of time"? Thanks,<br /><br />- Krysta

[old] PaulS · Post by **[old] PaulS** » October 25th, 2005, 3:18 pm

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(Carl Henrik @ Oct 25 2005, 12:03 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>E. Ebbesen has done 350.x w for an hour and that might be the best hour a lwt have done. That was probably below 5w/kg for him as he only weighs <72 for competitions I should guess. <br /><br /><br />There is cyclist on the UK site called Dan Staite that ergs and bikes. He's had his VO2 max measured larger than Armstrongs (88.8) and he has pulled a whopping 6:19 for 2k on the erg as well. That's world class as he is lwt. So clearly some cyclist can erg as well. ...if they train for it... <br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />Does Eskild Cycle? I'm pretty sure that I wouldn't want to get into a hill climb against him, even if he doesn't. <br /><br />VO2Max normalized on weight is even less useful than Absolute VO2Max in non-weightbearing sports. Runners, Yes; Cyclists, maybe; Rowers, maybe, but Rowers deal with a more drag with water than cyclists do with air. I had reasonable luck with cycling on flat courses, but at 105kg, the hills were just a time to give away distance. <br /><br />Dan sounds like a great athlete, so is he going to take a shot at Le Tour?

[old] Jim Barry · Post by **[old] Jim Barry** » October 25th, 2005, 3:33 pm

Krysta, <br /><br />What I observe is that some rowers (not all) have some performance sensitivity when they have to race at a low bodyfat percentages. So going from 15% to 10% may not affect perfomance, but going from 10 to 5% (in order to make weight) has a much greater effect especially if the rower gets to their racing weight with a crash diet in the last week or plays a dehydration game for morning weigh-ins and then does not have time to rehydrate. <br /><br /><br /><br />Get to your racing weight really slowly is the key. To bring Lance Armstong back into the thread, this is how he does the weight game. He used to get light for the races but found a performance issue with that and so learned how to stay light and train light.

[old] AtlCyclist · Post by **[old] AtlCyclist** » October 25th, 2005, 3:40 pm

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(Jim Barry @ Oct 25 2005, 03:33 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>Krysta, <br /><br />What I observe is that some rowers (not all) have some performance sensitivity when they have to race at a low bodyfat percentages. So going from 15% to 10% may not affect perfomance, but going from 10 to 5% (in order to make weight) has a much greater effect especially if the rower gets to their racing weight with a crash diet in the last week or plays a dehydration game for morning weigh-ins and then does not have time to rehydrate. <br /><br /><br /><br />Get to your racing weight really slowly is the key. To bring Lance Armstong back into the thread, this is how he does the weight game. He used to get light for the races but found a performance issue with that and so learned how to stay light and train light. <br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />Another good cycling example is Lance's rival - Jan Ullrich. He put on so much weight during the winters that his spring training was all about weight loss, not the type of training he needed to do to win the Tour. Plus, given the fact cyclists are carrying their weight uphill, it's of much more importance to be light.

[old] Carl Henrik · Post by **[old] Carl Henrik** » October 25th, 2005, 3:46 pm

I only know of Dan some that I've read on the UK site. Perhaps someone else knows more?? I think he is not so succesful a cyclist as his VO2max could indicate (not better than armstrong ). Perhaps the duration of a 2k might suit him better than typical cycling races. Or maybe he is to broad shouldered and inefficient on the bike? To low AT maybe? Don't know. <br /><br />It's alway interesting to ponder what great athletes in one sport could do in another. Could some NBA players be great ergers (great as in extremely good, not tall)? Could some cross country skiers be great ergers?

[old] AtlCyclist · Post by **[old] AtlCyclist** » October 25th, 2005, 3:46 pm

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(Krysta Coleman @ Oct 25 2005, 03:11 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(Jim Barry @ Oct 25 2005, 12:42 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><br />Just work on your times. If you are a Heavyweight who want to race LW then it gets complicated. There can be a few kg's around the border that allow you to race in the LW class, but can be disproportionately costly in terms of time. <br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />Jim, I am just curious about your comment above. I am quite new to rowing - just a few months into it so far. I am trying to get down under 135 to make female lightweight. Why do you think this may be "disproportionately costly in terms of time"? Thanks,<br /><br />- Krysta <br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />Krysta,<br /><br />Take my thougths with a grain of salt because I'm no rowing expert, but you appear to want to lose 10% of your body weight ((149-135)/149) to move to a lower weight class. That seems excessive if you're in moderately good shape now. I suppose if you feel that it's all excess weight and 135 is your ideal, then, perhaps, it's a reasonable goal.

[old] Ray79 · Post by **[old] Ray79** » October 25th, 2005, 3:49 pm

I heard somewhere that Matthew Pinsent used to go to 110 - 115kg during the winters and then race at 95kg or something crazy like that. Didnt really seem to hold him back much.<br /><br />Going back to Krystas point about weight gains etc. I was told once that if you are a really light lightweight then you can gain 2-3 seconds per kilo on your 2km time (given the right training). So for example a male lightweight of 68kg could still race lightweight if he put on 7 kg and could have a 15 - 20 second improvement in time (again with the right type of training/weight gain).<br /><br />Dont know if this is fully accurate but would be interested in any feedback on this or if anyone has heard anything similar to this.<br /><br />Cheers

[old] AtlCyclist · Post by **[old] AtlCyclist** » October 25th, 2005, 3:49 pm

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(Carl Henrik @ Oct 25 2005, 03:46 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>I only know of Dan some that I've read on the UK site. Perhaps someone else knows more?? I think he is not so succesful a cyclist as his VO2max could indicate (not better than armstrong ). Perhaps the duration of a 2k might suit him better than typical cycling races. Or maybe he is to broad shouldered and inefficient on the bike? To low AT maybe? Don't know. <br /><br />It's alway interesting to ponder what great athletes in one sport could do in another. Could some NBA players be great ergers (great as in extremely good, not tall)? Could some cross country skiers be great ergers? <br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />Perhaps he would do best on the track, not the road. I can't imagine averaging 1:41 per 500 meters for 30 minutes which is his approx. 30 minute record. He must have a big engine.

[old] Carl Henrik · Post by **[old] Carl Henrik** » October 25th, 2005, 3:57 pm

Talking about weight impact on cycling. I've noticed just from biking around town that the climbs are so important because the relative speed differences are much bigger there than on flat ground. You get your speed almost linearly to power output going uphill so that's where you want to be strong. We all know the dynamics of water or air resistance and how double power don't lead to double speed there.

[old] AtlCyclist · Post by **[old] AtlCyclist** » October 25th, 2005, 4:06 pm

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(Carl Henrik @ Oct 25 2005, 03:57 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>Talking about weight impact on cycling. I've noticed just from biking around town that the climbs are so important because the relative speed differences are much bigger there than on flat ground. You get your speed almost linearly to power output going uphill so that's where you want to be strong. We all know the dynamics of water or air resistance and how double power don't lead to double speed there. <br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />Wind resistance can be as bad as hills. In other words, if you get dropped from a group on the flats in a hard ride or race, you're likely to lose massive amounts of time because you'll be in the wind alone while the peloton can share the work. <br /><br />So, on climbs you want to minimize weight and on the flats minimize wind resistance (by aerodynamics and/or drafting). <br />

Concept2 Forum

Watts Per Kilogram

Training

Training

Training

Training

Training

Training

Training

Training

Training

Training

Training

Training

Training

Training

Training