New World Record

[old] onethirtyfive · Post by **[old] onethirtyfive** » December 19th, 2005, 6:19 pm

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(John Rupp @ Dec 19 2005, 07:58 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(Xeno @ Dec 19 2005, 12:42 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>slide or no slide, it comes out to be the same over a longer distance. For short bursts using the slide gets you farther down the split time. If you don't use the slide your stroke is longer at the catch and the finish, giving you a certain advantage.[right] </td></tr></table><br /><br />That's not true.<br /><br />I have found the slides to be the same for top speed sprints,<b> but 1.5 to 2 seconds faster for 1:00 repeats</b>. Thus the slides are proportionally faster the longer the distance.<br /><br />Also the body mechanics, i.e. stroke length is not any different on the slides than the erg, however all energy on the slides is put back into the motion for faster and faster times, giving a definite advantage that you don't find on the erg.<br /><br />Additionally note that I am only 143 pounds, still finding this 1.5 to 2 seconds advantage on the slides. Any rower weighing much more than me would find the advantage to be proportionally greater. <br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />Hi John, I dont know anything about slides and have never seen them so excuse the ignorance. <br /><b><br />But how far do you row in 1:00 that this constitutes a distance row?</b> and what distances are you gaining 1.5 to 2 secs (per 500?) if it is shorter than a minute?<br /><br />Also how long have you been using slides that you know all this info - I thought Xeno had his own gym and was a world class rower and now a 'professional' coach - I thought he might have some experience of these things.<br /><br />Thanks, looking forward to hearing more about slides and your background with them<br /><br />cheers

[old] R S T · Post by **[old] R S T** » December 19th, 2005, 8:55 pm

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(John Rupp @ Dec 19 2005, 10:05 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(michaelb @ Dec 19 2005, 01:29 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>It sounds like a great row, and she should be congratulated for her performance. [right] </td></tr></table><br /><br />Yes, congratulations to Sophie Balmary for her fine performance on the erg.<br /><br />For those who think slides are no advantage and don't help you, then that is easy to resolve.<br /><br />Just don't use them any more. <br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br /><br />John <br /><br />How are you doing with your slides? How often do you use them? Regardless of times being faster or not, do you prefer the 'feel' of the slides to a stationary erg?<br /><br />Cheers<br />Richard

[old] John Rupp · Post by **[old] John Rupp** » December 19th, 2005, 9:51 pm

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(onethirtyfive @ Dec 19 2005, 02:19 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>how far do you row in 1:00 that this constitutes a distance row? </td></tr></table><br />I did 50 meter sprints where there was no difference, the erg being faster for all sets except the fastest ones which were the same. Then I did sets of 1:00 on the slides, then the next day on the erg. Usually the second day is faster but in this case the slides on the first day were 1.5 to 2 seconds faster and it was the first time I had ever used the slides.<br /><br />1:00 is not a distance but it is 6 times as far as 50 meters. This progression shows that the longer the distance, the greater the advantage with the slides.<br /><br />Xeno said, "For short bursts using the slide gets you farther down the split time".<br /><br />If that was true then the 50 meters would be much faster on the slides and the 1:00 repeats would be the same, but the situation was reversed. The short bursts were no faster on the slides, and most of them were much slower than the erg. However, the 1:00 repeats were much faster on the slides.<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'>what distances are you gaining 1.5 to 2 secs (per 500?) </td></tr></table><br />For 1 minute, the pace for 500 meters.<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'>how long have you been using slides that you know all this info </td></tr></table><br />Not very long. I did tests on the slides every time I have used them but admit I am only beginning to get used to them. When I am used to the slides then the differences will be greater than when just beginning to use them.<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'>I thought Xeno had his own gym and was a world class rower and now a 'professional' coach - I thought he might have some experience of these things. </td></tr></table><br />I would think so and he probably does, to the point of only using the slides in his gym.<br /><br />This tells me that he KNOWS they are quite a bit faster than doing times on the erg.<br /><br />Considering the slides are 1.5 to 2 seconds per 500 faster for me at 143 pounds, they are going to be far faster than this for Xeno at 250 pounds or whatever he is.

[old] John Rupp · Post by **[old] John Rupp** » December 19th, 2005, 9:59 pm

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(R S T @ Dec 19 2005, 04:55 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>John <br /><br />How are you doing with your slides? How often do you use them? Regardless of times being faster or not, do you prefer the 'feel' of the slides to a stationary erg?<br /><br />Cheers<br />Richard[right] </td></tr></table><br />Hi Richard,<br /><br />I have used the slides just a few times so far and am planning to keep using them more. I would like to use them for a repetition session at least once a week. Eventually I want to have a space where they are set up all the time, and I can alternate sessions with the slides and the erg.<br /><br />As to the feel, they feel about the same as the erg, except the timing is much faster.<br /><br />I do like them a lot.

[old] onethirtyfive · Post by **[old] onethirtyfive** » December 19th, 2005, 10:06 pm

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(John Rupp @ Dec 19 2005, 11:51 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>This tells me that he KNOWS they are quite a bit faster than doing times on the erg.<br /><br />Considering the slides are 1.5 to 2 seconds per 500 faster for me at 143 pounds, they are going to be far faster than this for Xeno at 250 pounds or whatever he is.<br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />Tks for the reply John, interesting observations tho I guess it would be a bit more realistic test once you have done say a series of hard 10ks both on and off the erg near your PB. I would think this would be more definitive.<br /><br />Tell me why do you feel Xeno is being less than honest in his assessments (that is how you comment is phrased) of the impact of slides on times over a distance (more than 500m), it seems to me to be a fairly serious accusation given his prominent position in the sport and in business.<br /><br />Not sure I understand how you would come to such a position - still that is your call and as I have never tried slides I am not in a position to argue<br /><br />cheers <br />

[old] John Rupp · Post by **[old] John Rupp** » December 19th, 2005, 10:23 pm

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(onethirtyfive @ Dec 19 2005, 06:06 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>it would be a bit more realistic test once you have done say a series of hard 10ks both on and off the erg near your PB. I would think this would be more definitive. </td></tr></table><br />Yes I agree with you. I don't plan to do any time trials on the slides as I wouldn't feel right putting slide times in the rankings. However I do plan to do longer extended workouts on them, like I did this morning on the erg. This will be a good basis for comparison over distance.<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'>Tell me why do you feel Xeno is being less than honest in his assessments (that is how you comment is phrased) of the impact of slides on times over a distance (more than 500m), it seems to me to be a fairly serious accusation given his prominent position in the sport and in business. </td></tr></table><br />People have different opinions, even though such opinions can be wrong. I don't know if that means they are not being honest and I didn't say that. My feeling is that most all people are being honest, from their own perspective. Xeno is probably expressing the truth as he sees it. Even if his times are 5 seconds faster on the slides, maybe he would see that is just because he "likes" the slides and thinks there is no advantage to them otherwise. I don't know. People have funny reasons for believing the things they do, not just with rowing but with anything.<br /><br />Cheers.

[old] onethirtyfive · Post by **[old] onethirtyfive** » December 19th, 2005, 11:02 pm

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(John Rupp @ Dec 20 2005, 12:23 AM)</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(onethirtyfive @ Dec 19 2005, 06:06 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>it would be a bit more realistic test once you have done say a series of hard 10ks both on and off the erg near your PB. I would think this would be more definitive. </td></tr></table><br />Yes I agree with you. I don't plan to do any time trials on the slides as I wouldn't feel right putting slide times in the rankings. However I do plan to do longer extended workouts on them, like I did this morning on the erg. This will be a good basis for comparison over distance.<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'>Tell me why do you feel Xeno is being less than honest in his assessments (that is how you comment is phrased) of the impact of slides on times over a distance (more than 500m), it seems to me to be a fairly serious accusation given his prominent position in the sport and in business. </td></tr></table><br />People have different opinions, even though such opinions can be wrong. I don't know if that means they are not being honest and I didn't say that. My feeling is that most all people are being honest, from their own perspective. Xeno is probably expressing the truth as he sees it. Even if his times are 5 seconds faster on the slides, maybe he would see that is just because he "likes" the slides and thinks there is no advantage to them otherwise. I don't know. People have funny reasons for believing the things they do, not just with rowing but with anything.<br /><br />Cheers. <br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br /><br />Yes your right John, how we feel when exercising from one day to the next can really change our perceptions of what works and what doesn't.<br /><br />Sorry if I read your post wrong (did not want to cause an argument), I thought your position on slides was based on fact / knowledge but you've clarified it was just your opinion . I had assumed that Xeno might have had more experience on and off slides, and from the way he and PaulS were agreeing I assumed they both had had more experience on slides than you. My apologies if that is wrong <br /><br />I guess if you feel quicker on slides it is fair to assume that you might actually be quicker, and it will be different for others.<br /><br />catch ya

[old] John Rupp · Post by **[old] John Rupp** » December 19th, 2005, 11:23 pm

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(onethirtyfive @ Dec 19 2005, 07:02 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>I guess if you feel quicker on slides it is fair to assume that you might actually be quicker, and it will be different for others.[right] </td></tr></table><br />Yes that could be the case, except that I felt slower on the slides.<br /><br />My times were faster on them though, so I went by the results rather than how it felt.<br /><br />As far as I know, I am the only person who has ever done any tests comparing the slides with the erg, going by time rather than feel, except a couple of people posted on the old forum that they found the slides to be from 2 to 6% faster than the erg.<br /><br />My results are pretty much the same as theirs.

[old] Xeno · Post by **[old] Xeno** » December 19th, 2005, 11:42 pm

One thing is clear.<br />If you want to do well at a C2 sanctioned regatta you better train without slides for a while.<br />If you want to do well on a C2 rowing machine on slides you need to train a bit on slides as well.<br />The stroke tends to be longer without slides.<br />The stroke tends to be shorter with slides.<br />The rating tends to be lower without slides.<br />The rating tends to be higher with slides.<br />AND there is the conservation of energy. Rower and rowing machine are one system and the sum of all forces equals zero in both cases.<br />Thank you for those who support my thought process about the slide issue.<br />I hope you all have a good evening.<br />XENO

[old] John Rupp · Post by **[old] John Rupp** » December 20th, 2005, 12:21 am

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(Xeno @ Dec 19 2005, 07:42 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>The stroke tends to be longer without slides. </td></tr></table><br />That is not true. The stroke is just as long or even longer with slides.<br /><br />It might "feel" shorter because the movement is so much faster.<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'>The rating tends to be lower without slides.<br />The rating tends to be higher with slides. </td></tr></table><br />These are correct.<br /><br />The same or a longer stroke and faster rating = faster speed.<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'>AND there is the conservation of energy. </td></tr></table><br />The bungees catch the energy at each end and thrust the rower back in the other direction.<br /><br />The same energy is lost on the erg, where the rower needs to use additional energy to change direction each time.<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'>Rower and rowing machine are one system and the sum of all forces equals zero in both cases. </td></tr></table><br />This doesn't mean anything. <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'>Thank you for those who support my thought process about the slide issue. </td></tr></table><br />This is not a political issue.<br /><br />It is a matter of reality vs illusion.<br /><br />I really think Xeno knows the slides are faster but can't admit that they are, so he believes that they aren't. However he continues to only use slides BECAUSE they are so much faster than the erg. In Xeno's case, because he weighs around 250 pounds, the difference is probably around 6% or more advantage in time for him on the slides and he would probably be embarrassed at how much slower he was without them.<br /><br />Additionally, I think the slides are great, and everyone should indeed try them, if they wish to do so.<br /><br />The slides are a step in the direction of C2 developing a dynamic erg, which has already been done with C2 machines. Hopefully they will use this technology and make all the ergs to be dynamic very soon.

[old] PaulS · Post by **[old] PaulS** » December 20th, 2005, 1:07 am

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(John Rupp @ Dec 19 2005, 07:23 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>As far as I know, I am the only person who has ever done any tests comparing the slides with the erg, going by time rather than feel, except a couple of people posted on the old forum that they found the slides to be from 2 to 6% faster than the erg.<br /><br />My results are pretty much the same as theirs.<br /><br />It is a matter of reality vs illusion. <br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br /><br />John, you have once again proven yourself to have an agenda of misinformation.<br /><br />Perhaps "Reality Vs Delusion" would be more accurate.<br /><br />It has been explained a number of times that there have been actual scientific studies regarding this, and while you have read those posts, you've failed to add to your knowlege. I can't find the Hagerman study, but I did find another, unfortunately it is not in English but the Graphs are quite clear, and there may be someone here that could translate the specifics. I've gone over the document with a translator in person and they confirmed the findings of the Hagerman Study where the Use of Slides showed a small but measurable effect of costing more energy. i.e. Slides are not an advantage.<br /><br />Your claim that wthe Rowers weight makes a difference is also laughable, since you also claim that the heavier rower has an advantage simply because they weigh more on the ground bound erg also. Neither claim is correct, but they are also mutually exclusive, yet you state both as if they were facts. Bizzarro World reckoning I suppose.<br /><br /><a href='http://www.ps-sport.net/slidestudy/Slid ... apport.pdf' target='_blank'>Slide Study</a>

[old] John Rupp · Post by **[old] John Rupp** » December 20th, 2005, 2:02 am

PaulS,<br /><br />You claim that a 250 pound man and a 105 pound woman have the same advantages on the erg, and that there is no physical difference between them.<br /><br />You have claimed that muscles don't weigh anything.<br /><br />You insisted that Rod Freed got injured in college even though quotation from him was that it was 15 years after and at the Long Beach Rowing Association.<br /><br />You say the slides are slower even though it has been proven many times they are faster.<br /><br />You state that studies based on heart rates or "feelings" and that are biased are conclusive, and you disregard the actual time trials done by many that prove otherwise.<br /><br />Such jumping to false conclusions of yours has not proven anything, other than reaffirming my previous messages.

[old] chickenlegs · Post by **[old] chickenlegs** » December 20th, 2005, 2:06 am

in rowing (and erging) rate is a factor that affects speed.<br />there is no optimum rate that applies to everybody, but if you want to go faster (cover same distance in less time) you should row closer to 30 spm than 15 spm.<br /><br />do we all agree on this?<br /><br />however, rating too high will slow you down, not speed you up, over any distance that requires aerobic capacity.<br />rating a 50 spm will get you super fast splits for a few strokes, but if you try to keep it up you will either blow up (and finish last) or go quickly up and down the slide with very little power (and finish last).<br /><br />so optimum is high (28-36) but not too high.<br />any rower with some experience knows this.<br /><br />keeping up this rate (while mantaining efficient technique and ratio) is hard.<br />it requires rowing proficiency and a lot, and i mean a lot, of cardiovascular fitness.<br /><br />to go fast on the erg you need to keep the rate up on the erg.<br />to go fast on the water you need to keep the rate up on the water.<br /><br />the two are similar, but not exactly the same.<br />if you have raced in both (i have and i think others on this forum have as well) you have realized that keeping any given high rate (say 30 spm) in a boat is 'easier' than it is on an erg.<br />if you have raced different size boats (i have) you also know that it is 'easier' to mantain a high rate in a big boat (like an 8+) than in a small boat (1x).<br /><br />an erg on slides it is not a boat, it's still an erg, but it is a step closer to a boat than an erg off slides.<br />on a stationary erg, if i row at 30 spm, it means that in any given minute i have to push my seat away from the footstops 30 times and i have to pull myself up to the footstops 30 times.<br />on an erg with slides, if i row at 30 spm, i have to push myself away from the footstops 30 times a minute and 30 times a minute i have to get back to the footstops, BUT on slides the footstops are also coming towards me.<br />the footstops come towards you in a boat too.<br /><br />conclusion:<br />if you mantain the same rate on a stationary erg as you do on an erg on slides, there should be no difference in performance for any given rower (which is probably what the scandinavian study mentioned above indicates - it seems quite scientific and the variable in the experiment is probably the type of erg, so the rate should be one of the constants).<br />if rowers are free to race at whatever rate they are able to mantain efficiently (which is what actually happens in real regatas and indoor rowing events), the rowers on slides will have a small (but sometimes that's all you need..) advantage over rowers on stationary machines as they will be able to race a couple of beats higher than the non-sliding rowers.

[old] John Rupp · Post by **[old] John Rupp** » December 20th, 2005, 2:29 am

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(chickenlegs @ Dec 19 2005, 10:06 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>if you mantain the same rate on a stationary erg as you do on an erg on slides, there should be no difference in performance for any given rower </td></tr></table><br />Sure, I agree with that. <br /><br />If you go the same speed, you go the same speed.<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'>which is probably what the scandinavian study mentioned above indicates - it seems quite scientific and the variable in the experiment is probably the type of erg, so the rate should be one of the constants. </td></tr></table><br />Measuring power output while holding rate constant is not scientific.<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'>if rowers are free to race at whatever rate they are able to mantain efficiently (which is what actually happens in real regatas and indoor rowing events), the rowers on slides will have a small (but sometimes that's all you need..) advantage over rowers on stationary machines as they will be able to race a couple of beats higher than the non-sliding rowers.[right] </td></tr></table><br />Yes well a couple of beats rpm is 3 to 4 seconds.<br /><br />Yes 4 seconds is a small amount, but it is quite a bit difference in pace.

[old] onethirtyfive · Post by **[old] onethirtyfive** » December 20th, 2005, 3:34 am

Hi John,<br /><br />tks for your responses. <br /><br />Can you post me a link to the tests that you are basing your opinion on, that supports your position. I realise you have only just recieved slides as a gift so you have not been able to do 'scientific' tests of your own where you can build up a body of data to present. I would imagine that just pace achieved is not really a good judge of energy inputted to the system as that can be manipulated to easily as you have said (hence your own results to date would be inadmissible from a scientific perspective despite them being honestly obtained)<br /><br />So I assume that you must have another source, would love to read it so I can form an objective opinion.<br /><br />cheers for your help

Concept2 Forum

New World Record

Links and Articles

Links and Articles

Links and Articles

Links and Articles

Links and Articles

Links and Articles

Links and Articles

Links and Articles

Links and Articles

Links and Articles

Links and Articles

Links and Articles

Links and Articles

Links and Articles

Links and Articles