Aging & Drag Factor

[johnlvs2run]

In this WR row, I am at max drag.

I used 220 drag the first day after not rowing for 15 years and it was no issue for me either. I also used drag 80 and drag factors in the middle. Twenty years ago I took the cover off and the drag factor went up to 345, again no problem at all. It is strange to me that people have such issues with whatever the drag factor is, and/or whatever "somebody else" is using. Also it seems to me that using a low drag would be more injurious when people's forms are obviously bad as the movement is faster. But to each their own. It doesn't bother me either way.

[JaapvanE]

I used 220 drag the first day after not rowing for 15 years and it was no issue for me either. I also used drag 80 and drag factors in the middle. Twenty years ago I took the cover off and the drag factor went up to 345, again no problem at all. It is strange to me that people have such issues with whatever the drag factor is, and/or whatever "somebody else" is using. Also it seems to me that using a low drag would be more injurious when people's forms are obviously bad as the movement is faster. But to each their own. It doesn't bother me either way.

I used other machines (NordicTrack) that reach DF450, and I worked out on that DF quite often. But it resulted in strained back and elbows, even with perfect technique. Due to an injury, I had to start on my C2 on DF69. So I'll share my experiences here.

By definition, on a low drag, the flywheel keeps its speed quite long. My experience is that the catch is extremely soft by nature as the difference in speed between flywheel and rower is quite small. Timing of the catch isn't that critical, as the flywheel is decelerating relatively slow. The acceleration in the drive doesn't encounter as much resistance as the only thing you are fighting is inertia. In essence, the flywheel has quite a steady angular velocity (data from dozens of machines we use to calibrate OpenRowingMonitor confirms that). My most common problem in that situation is that I'm too slow for that fast flywheel to effectively catch it, making missed catches really a thing. A slow recovery might remedy that, but that is another story.

A high drag by definition makes the flywheel lose its speed quite fast. This makes catching that flywheel almost trivial. No missed catched on that DF. But in many cases this makes for a hard catch: the chances of mismatching speeds from flywheel and rower are enormous, and the rower will slam into a too slow flywheel. Timing of the catch is critical, as the flywheel is decelerating fast. And then, to get any energy in, you need to accelerate the flywheel quite a lot, just to male it survive the recovery. As the drag is significant, you see an additional resistance from the dragfactor. Making this quite a tough endevour. Angular velocity fluctuates a lot in that high drag scenario. When people's technique isn't perfect, thus breaking arms too early or swing hips too early, a significant load will be put on their joints. That makes this far less optimal from a safety perspective. One mistake, and people will feel it.

I realise that everybody has an optimal drag, where the rythem feels great. For a heavyweight like me, that prefers a slow heavy stroke, it might be on the higher end of the spectrum (I prefer something between DF140 and DF165). Lightweights typically prefer the speed of the flywheel, and prefer a faster lighter stroke.

Having experienced all DF's (69, 75, 85, 95, 105, 115, 125, 135, 145, 155 and 165) for months at an end while recovering, I notice I actually cope with a low DF of around 95 quite well. But I love a DF145 for most work. That is personal preference.

[johnlvs2run]

Having experienced all DF's (69, 75, 85, 95, 105, 115, 125, 135, 145, 155 and 165) for months at an end while recovering, I notice I actually cope with a low DF of around 95 quite well. But I love a DF145 for most work. That is personal preference.

Right. I did the same thing, experimented with everything, except 20 years ago weighed 143 pounds at 5' 8" tall.
Personally I considered the high drags to be more muscular orientated, and the low ones focused more on my nerves, i.e. speed of the catch.
Thus I would often warm up with high drag, to save the nerves, and gradually lower it to 100 for most time trial distances.
For example when doing 10x1k I'd start at 220, and gradually lower the drag to 100 around half way through the session.

[ranger]

Depends on how you row. If you take the catch on your heels with your hams and glutes, hanging your body weight on the handle, you can row at max drag, both safely and with great benefit (in terms of pace).

Where do you keep your feet on the stretchers, high at the top?

Cheers, John. Yes, indeed. If you drive off your heels, you want your feet to be pretty high at the stretchers. I use three holes showing. DON"T DROP YOUR FEET ON THE FOOT STRETCHER (as many recommend), if you want to drive off your heels. Low feet at the stretcher throws you up on your toes and you CAN'T keep your heels set. With low feet at the stretcher, you CAN'T hang your body weight on the handle at the catch with your hams and glutes. You can only push straight back the rail off your toes with your quads. And hey, that's great, if you are 6'5" 220 lbs. with massively long, strong arms and legs. But it isn't good at all for little guys like you and me. We aren't long and strong. So when we row, we shouldn't use a contemporary rowing stroke, which uses length and strength to generate HIGH STROKING POWER to generate pace. We should use a CONIBEAR stroke, which uses a maximal "swing" of the back with the core muscles, a maximal use of the body weight, and a brief drive time and so high rate, to generate pace.

[Cyclingman1]

I know that Rich has irritated the heck out of people thru the years, especially with his incessant bombardment of his rowing ideas, etc. I agree with Nick, let him say his piece. Try what he says: push the damper to ten and raise the foot rests with several holes showing. It won't take long to evaluate his suggested technique. Report back on your findings and results. If you don't like this thread, avoid it.

[johnlvs2run]

Cheers, John. Yes, indeed. If you drive off your heels, you want your feet to be pretty high at the stretchers. I use three holes showing. DON"T DROP YOUR FEET ON THE FOOT STRETCHER (as many recommend), if you want to drive off your heels. Low feet at the stretcher throws you up on your toes and you CAN'T keep your heels set. With low feet at the stretcher, you CAN'T hang your body weight on the handle at the catch with your hams and glutes. You can only push straight back the rail off your toes with your quads. And hey, that's great, if you are 6'5" 220 lbs. with massively long, strong arms and legs. But it isn't good at all for little guys like you and me. We aren't long and strong. So when we row, we shouldn't use a contemporary rowing stroke, which uses length and strength to generate HIGH STROKING POWER to generate pace. We should use a CONIBEAR stroke, which uses a maximal "swing" of the back with the core muscles, a maximal use of the body weight, and a brief drive time and so high rate, to generate pace.

Rich, thank you very much for sharing those those details. I have noticed all these things you have mentioned, and shall keep them in mind. I hope you get to stay on the forum, but if not I wish you the best of success and will see you next March. Keep up the great training!

[JaapvanE]

If you don't like this thread, avoid it.

If he started his own thread, I'd agree with you (I think?). But he is actually messing up someone else's thread, that had a totally different question. So this behaviour is actually disturbing the normal functioning of a forum, and people with valid questions will not get a decent answer due to this.

[johnlvs2run]

the normal functioning of a forum

I'm fine with his postings, but if you don't want to see them, then put his nickname on ignore and they'll disappear.

[JaapvanE]

the normal functioning of a forum

I'm fine with his postings, but if you don't want to see them, then put his nickname on ignore and they'll disappear.

That is not my point. He litters his irrelevant ramblings in random threads, derailing them as others react. As some point out: blocking this guy is only partially helpful as others will respond to him. Poor adccl8z will not get his valid question answered because of this rude behaviour. There is some basic etiquette in forums for a reason. He is violating that.

[johnlvs2run]

That is not my point.

The point is that "you" don't want to see his messages. Thus, block him, and the problem is solved.

[ranger]

Rich isn't giving advice to anybody. He's doing what he's always done, putting his thoughts out there and people just bite. Just take it with a pinch of salt and simply ignore him.

Isn't he? He just told me 3 or 4 times that my rowing technique is unsafe, implying that I should change my technique to avoid injury....

Everyone who rows these days uses a contemporary rowing stroke, which takes the catch on the toes with the quads against a low foot stretcher and pushes straight back the rail, setting the heels late, in the middle or even at the end of these drive, and so not using the hams and glutes until the middle of the stroke, finishing on the heels. Safety is a relative matter. I just mentioned that there are other, safer, more efficient, and so faster, ways to row, e.g., taking the catch on your heels, which provides a more stable connection at the footplate, engages the hams and glutes immediately, and lets you hang your body weight on the handle. What I mentioned about injuries in rowing is not advice; it is fact. Say and do with the facts what you like. What I said personally about how a contemporary stroke injured my ribs is also fact, not advice. Do what you want with the information.

[ranger]

I don't know for sure, but historically, in 1940 or so, I think everyone gave up rowing at high drag off their heels with a big back swing powered by their core, as everyone had been doing for thirty years after CONIBEAR invented his stroke in 1910 or so, because contemporary college kids, and people more generally, tend to be soft in the middle; and if you are soft in the middle, sure, using your back in a vigorous way risks injury. There is no reason you HAVE to be soft in the middle, though. When I first took up rowing, to get strong in the middle, every day, before I rowed, I did an hour long routine of 1000 sit ups and jackknives. I did this routine for 10 years or so, until it seemed to me it was no longer necessary. Why? I am VERY strong in the middle. So I have always rowed, without injuring myself, at max drag with a big back swing. Before 1940 or so, college kids, and people more generally, grew up mostly on farms, doing "chores," composed of hard physical labor which required their core muscles--lifting, hauling, pulling, digging, hammering, chopping, wrenching, bending, throwing, riding, etc. So, being soft in the middle by the time they were 18 wasn't an option. It didn't happen. At this time, and before, rowing was an exclusively MALE and COLLEGE sport, too, which might have some bearing on the issue. There was no such thing as women's or masters rowing.

Paul Simon has some things to say about being soft in the middle these days.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uq-gYOrU8bA

[JaapvanE]

That is not my point.

The point is that "you" don't want to see his messages. Thus, block him, and the problem is solved.

Who are you, that you get to decide for me, what my bloody point is! I'm old and mature enough to decide for myself.

I wanted to see a civil debate about a topic I'm interested in. Now you f*ing idiots made that impossible!

[ranger]

The downside of the historical trend, 100 years old now, of giving up rowing with a big back swing powered by the core, and neglecting the body weight, too, is that elite rowing has become a sport exclusively for the young, tall, strong, and male, who have long strong legs and arms, preferably 6'5", 220 lbs. or bigger. But only .1% of the population have this body type. So rowing has become, famously, one of the most exclusive, sexist, eugenicist, ageist activities in all of sports. No one can do it well who isn't young and male, with a certain rare body type. Too bad, I think. Social activities that are necessarily exclusive, sexist, eugenicist, and ageist went out of fashion long ago, thank God.

Luckily, though, if you are aware of this, on the erg, at least, where you are rowing alone, you can just ignore what all the big tall young guys are doing and do what is best for YOU (small, short, weak, and old!), personally.

That's what I do.

That's why I row with a big back swing at max drag on the erg, driving off my heels at the catch with my hams and glutes, footplate high, hanging my body weight on the handle, and finishing when my legs are done on my toes with my quads, folding my arms into my back and my back into my legs, and so rowing with a brief drive time, high ratio, and so high rate.

That is, I use a CONIBEAR stroke.

https://www.row2k.com/video/1928--Wanin ... oke/25772/

[johnlvs2run]

That's why I row with a big back swing at max drag on the erg, driving off my heels at the catch with my hams and glutes, footplate high, hanging my body weight on the handle, and finishing when my legs are done on my toes with my quads, folding my arms into my back and my back into my legs, and so rowing with a brief drive time, high ratio, and so high rate.

Hi Rich,
The hip hinge does add considerable strong length to the drive and could very well be the solution for me.
What is your opinion of Henrik Stephansen in this video? His form appears to be quite a bit like what you're advocating.
I'm curious enough about this that I'm not going sell the erg yet and will give this a try first. Thank you very much for your comments.