Verified status

[GordG]

Just curious: I noticed only 5 rowers are verified in the top 16 males listed for the 2000m distance, 60-69 age group. Why are rowers not verifying at the top level of the leader board - where tenths of a second make a difference? Personally, I rank my PBs to motivate myself, and gauge my progress in relation to other individuals my age. It seems simple enough to verify.

[JaapvanE]

It seems simple enough to verify.

It requires a PM3, PM4 or PM5 and copying the verification code (when ErgData isn't used). When that didn't happen, you can't get a verified row.

[Citroen]

Why are rowers not verifying at the top level of the leader board

Rows won't get ranked, because it takes effort unless you use Ergdata. Also the real, specialist, expert rowers don't bother rating training sessions because "it's only the ergo".

[Carl Watts]

You can hit the filter and remove unverified rows and just ignore those that are not verified.

Its been a problem for years. Concept 2 finally put in the filter I requested years ago but they are not interested in sorting the bigger problem and that's the verified meters for the monthly challenges or at least running a single challenge a year for verified only results.

I think the excuse that people only have a PM2 is long since dead. The PM3 started producing verified results in 2003, that's 20 years later and the same problem persists.

Its only got easier and easier to get the result verified over the years with the likes of ErgData, RowPro, EXR and the C2 utility so there is now no excuses.

Send an e-mail to C2, because nobody can be bothered doing that either, things will never change.

[MPx]

Verifying times entered for ranking seems like a basic courtesy to me. I don't understand the mindset that says its not important enough to me to bother to verify, but it is important enough to enter the rankings and see my name up in lights. Training times... do what you want, but ranking times should be verified. To me, anyone posting a time in the rankings without verifying is just being selfish. Shame it makes such a big difference - I'm 12th verified, 27th all in. I recognise a few of the unverified names and know they are good for their times - not in dispute - but they aren't PM1/2 users they use modern ergs so what's their problem? Holier than thou and above such scruitiny?

[GordG]

"it's only the ergo".

That doesn't float. They post their erg times on the leaderboard, obviously it means something to them ("ergo" - erg+ego)

[GordG]

You can hit the filter and remove unverified rows
Send an e-mail to C2, because nobody can be bothered doing that either, things will never change.

Thanks Carl, I'm aware of the filter. I don't use it. I like to see just how many people don't have the finger dexterity to push a couple of buttons and write down the code. I was more curious why someone who takes the time to post, doesn't find it important to verify their time. Concept2 can only do so much...there has to be a point where the rower respects the process. If they don't, why post?

[GordG]

Verifying times entered for ranking seems like a basic courtesy to me. I don't understand the mindset that says its not important enough to me to bother to verify, but it is important enough to enter the rankings and see my name up in lights. Training times... do what you want, but ranking times should be verified. To me, anyone posting a time in the rankings without verifying is just being selfish. Shame it makes such a big difference - I'm 12th verified, 27th all in. I recognise a few of the unverified names and know they are good for their times - not in dispute - but they aren't PM1/2 users they use modern ergs so what's their problem? Holier than thou and above such scruitiny?

I somehow missed your post on my first read through, you summed it up nicely. I'm more impressed with the people on the third or forth page who verify their posted times, than some dude in the top 5 who can't be bothered.

[GordG]

When that didn't happen, you can't get a verified row.

Yes, that can happen occasionally, but when 11 out of 16 don't verify their best times, it points to a blatant snub. Why do they bother posing /posting? (rhetorical).

[JaapvanE]

Verifying times entered for ranking seems like a basic courtesy to me. I don't understand the mindset that says its not important enough to me to bother to verify, but it is important enough to enter the rankings and see my name up in lights. Training times... do what you want, but ranking times should be verified. To me, anyone posting a time in the rankings without verifying is just being selfish. Shame it makes such a big difference - I'm 12th verified, 27th all in. I recognise a few of the unverified names and know they are good for their times - not in dispute - but they aren't PM1/2 users they use modern ergs so what's their problem? Holier than thou and above such scruitiny?

Or they like me and think people take this waaaaaay to seriously. You associate "ranking" workouts with "see my name up in lights", which (in all honesty) might attribute way to much weight to this. If it motivates you to row a few meters more a week, good for you. But you assume some sort of competition, where most sane people might not even care to be bothered. And yes, we had this discussion before here.

There are people, like me, who don't give a sh*t about where they stand in any rankings. Where the logbook, as the name very clearly suggests, is just a personal logbook and a personal training tool. Where you use ranking to keep track of your own personal seasonal best and personal best times, just to see if you are improving. But where you don't care what others do, period. Who don't care about timed pieces let alone verified rows. Where they don't care to connect a smartphone to a PM3, or where that decades old machine can't handle a smartphone connection and copying that verification code is just nonsense.

So declaring people selfish, as they outrank your timed piece just because they got on a machine in a gym and rowed a relaxed 2K and accidentily beat you in something you assumed to be some sort of competition, is a bit foolish IMHO. For them, like most of us, it was just another training day where getting more fit and the erg felt better than normal, and they want to keep track of their personal progress.

I, and probably most users, don't care what others do. We just enjoy getting on the erg, improve our fitness and see some personal progress throughout the years. If you use that time as a target to keep yourself motivated, happy to help I guess? But don't assume people are selfish and steal away your spotlight when they beat you and couldn't be bothered to enter a verification code. Might be yet another rainy saterday in a boathouse that didn't go to waste and a seasonal best was set by accident.

To put things back in perspective, look at this Mark Lewis video about comparing yourself to others. Especially the part where he went to a gym and rowed a 1:27 500m gym record by accident, you might find interesting....

[JaapvanE]

When that didn't happen, you can't get a verified row.

Yes, that can happen occasionally, but when 11 out of 16 don't verify their best times, it points to a blatant snub. Why do they bother posing /posting? (rhetorical).

They, like me, don't. You assume people post to appear in rankings for some glory, where most couldn't be bothered. We don't care what you do with my times. We just record our times in our personal logbook, and as they are a personal SB or PR, we rank them to keep track of them. Just as I do with my RowsAndAll data, where every SB and PB also gets marked. The logbook is a personal training tool for me, not a publication board. C2 publishes them publicly, might help some, but people have to realise they have to follow their own path. You don't even know whether that time I set was a timed piece or if I was even trying. Big surprise: I'm not. I have quite an active lifestyle, where rowing helps me to keep in shape for Judo and skiing. So pushing myself too far on the rower will hurt me in much more important bits of life.

[Sakly]

It is so easy.
If you want to compare only to verified times, use the filter. Otherwise not. That's it.
Why get upset about others, you cannot change it.
I use rankings for motivation and targets, but that's me. I use verified times to compare, but that's me.
You can handle all differently, but that's you.

[Citroen]

That doesn't float. They post their erg times on the leaderboard, obviously it means something to them ("ergo" - erg+ego)

Ergo == ergometer (aka Rowerg).

[MPx]

Or they like me and think people take this waaaaaay to seriously. You associate "ranking" workouts with "see my name up in lights", which (in all honesty) might attribute way to much weight to this. If it motivates you to row a few meters more a week, good for you. But you assume some sort of competition, where most sane people might not even care to be bothered. And yes, we had this discussion before here.

There are people, like me, who don't give a sh*t about where they stand in any rankings. Where the logbook, as the name very clearly suggests, is just a personal logbook and a personal training tool. Where you use ranking to keep track of your own personal seasonal best and personal best times, just to see if you are improving. But where you don't care what others do, period. Who don't care about timed pieces let alone verified rows. Where they don't care to connect a smartphone to a PM3, or where that decades old machine can't handle a smartphone connection and copying that verification code is just nonsense.

So declaring people selfish, as they outrank your timed piece just because they got on a machine in a gym and rowed a relaxed 2K and accidentily beat you in something you assumed to be some sort of competition, is a bit foolish IMHO. For them, like most of us, it was just another training day where getting more fit and the erg felt better than normal, and they want to keep track of their personal progress.

I, and probably most users, don't care what others do. We just enjoy getting on the erg, improve our fitness and see some personal progress throughout the years. If you use that time as a target to keep yourself motivated, happy to help I guess? But don't assume people are selfish and steal away your spotlight when they beat you and couldn't be bothered to enter a verification code. Might be yet another rainy saterday in a boathouse that didn't go to waste and a seasonal best was set by accident.

To put things back in perspective, look at this Mark Lewis video about comparing yourself to others. Especially the part where he went to a gym and rowed a 1:27 500m gym record by accident, you might find interesting....

Well that's a disappointing reposte. You make one good point - I hadn't considered that people may use the rankings as a no effort way to monitor their season bests. I note mine too at very little effort, but not through the rankings, they're in my sig. PBs are of course always available in history without needing to rank them. Your log book is personal to you yes, but the rankings are how you rank (clue in the name!) which is a competitive position against others. If you don't want to know that...then don't rank and spoil it for those of us taking it waaaaay too seriously.

Your attitude seems to be that you "don't give a sh*t" about what anybody else might want to do, as long as you're able to do exactly what you want. You don't take is at all seriously, so no one else should either. That seems very close to my definition of selfish. You assert "I, and probably most users, don't care" - I don't accept the "most others" aspect of that - my view is that most people who bother to rank a piece are interested in how it ranked compared to others. The rankings are often referred to by both C2 and other forum contributors as the place to see how you compare with others (not the place to note your season best) - so there is a general expectation that these are real times, and like any data, the better its quality the more valuable it is for many different uses and users. I don't think even you would argue that the data quality wouldn't be improved if entries were verified rather than just randomly typed in - sometimes from the erger's memory, sometimes ignoring tenths, or whatever they think is near enough for their purposes.

We all get motivation from different things. I'm not competitive in race terms - simply not bothered if someone beats me or not. My competitive side is closer to yours in that what motivates me is getting my own times better. You'll know that as we age that its not possible in absolute terms to keep improving, but you can monitor it in a relative sense if you can maintain top 50%, or 10%, or 1%, or whatever, for your age group. I target top 5%, but even when it was just top-half earlier in my erging journey, it was frustrating trying to get up against mistaken entries. Yes you can filter out unverified, but that just eliminates loads of valid data to get rid of the few p**s takers and errors. Shame.

[Dangerscouse]

FWIW, I agree with Mike. If someone is going to bother to rank a session, they should also bother to verify it. If there's no importance attached to it, then there are plenty of other ways to manage it without ranking it.

There's always going to be a large variety of how seriously things are getting taken by different people, but I do think that it's, on balance, the right thing to verify it.

I also think that anyone who is willing and able to compete in their 60s, and does take it seriously, deserves to know how they stack up against their peers. Admittedly it can be filtered out, and that's what I usually do on the odd occasion that I check it, but also should that be necessary? YMMV