Tennis elbow and resuming activity

[Dangerscouse]

I do tend to only use fingers as I thought this was preferred? Pretty sure my sequencing is fine though (I assume you mean legs, tilt, pull, release, tilt, legs etc.?). Also, troll or not, there's a lot of biomechanical sense in having a split grip over the fixed bar, surely?

Using just your fingers is, at least imo, a good idea, but it might be dependent on robust enough forearms and also there could be a subtle difference between enough and too little finger gripping, which may cause an issue

As for handle, I do think that there's got to be some merits to a split grip, but, at least ime, I've never had an issue with wrists or elbows from rowing, and I'm experienced enough to say that with confidence.

I'd also second GVC's suggestion of a lighter stroke rate and lower drag factor, which may help

[Slidewinder]

I do tend to only use fingers as I thought this was preferred?

Using just your fingers is, at least imo, a good idea...
As for handle, I do think that there's got to be some merits to a split grip...

The usual advice to hold the handle in the outer curl of the fingers is an attempt, through technique, to overcome the C2 handle design deficiencies. The C2 handle is rigid, it is non-compliant, it has no 'give', so what has to 'give' is the user. At this human/machine interface the user has to adapt to the machine. With a properly designed handle the machine adapts to the natural movement of the user. There is nothing natural about the two fore and aft parallel straight lines the rigid stock handle forces the user's hands to follow, but forty years of indoctrination have so numbed peoples imaginations that they actually think this movement is the way things should be. They look with suspicion at a split handle set-up. They think that being able to rotate one's hands while erging is a radical idea. Point out that with split handles no special grip technique is needed to ensure that the users hands, wrists, and forearms remain in alignment with the direction of applied force throughout the stroke - they don't know how to respond to that. I think they fear that if they admit that the C2 stock handle is junk, their world will fall apart.

[Sakly]

I do tend to only use fingers as I thought this was preferred?

Using just your fingers is, at least imo, a good idea...
As for handle, I do think that there's got to be some merits to a split grip...

The usual advice to hold the handle in the outer curl of the fingers is an attempt, through technique, to overcome the C2 handle design deficiencies. The C2 handle is rigid, it is non-compliant, it has no 'give', so what has to 'give' is the user. At this human/machine interface the user has to adapt to the machine. With a properly designed handle the machine adapts to the natural movement of the user. There is nothing natural about the two fore and aft parallel straight lines the rigid stock handle forces the user's hands to follow, but forty years of indoctrination have so numbed peoples imaginations that they actually think this movement is the way things should be. They look with suspicion at a split handle set-up. They think that being able to rotate one's hands while erging is a radical idea. Point out that with split handles no special grip technique is needed to ensure that the users hands, wrists, and forearms remain in alignment with the direction of applied force throughout the stroke - they don't know how to respond to that. I think they fear that if they admit that the C2 stock handle is junk, their world will fall apart.

Bla Bla.
No oar adapts to the movement of the user, never ever anyone complained about that. It's even worse as there is no balanced load of the back and shoulders during the stroke.
A machine is like it is, use it properly or leave it, but don't blame the machine for what it is (even if there is a bio-mechanically better solution, won't argue against that).

[Slidewinder]

Bla Bla.
No oar adapts to the movement of the user, never ever anyone complained about that. It's even worse as there is no balanced load of the back and shoulders during the stroke.
A machine is like it is, use it properly or leave it, but don't blame the machine for what it is...

Fortuitously, the dual arc movement of the oar handgrips during sculling closely follows the natural movement of the hands as the stroke progresses, so there is no need to complain. There is a balanced load - you are referring to a sweep stroke. But there are lots of reason to complain about the two straight lines parallel movement forced upon the user by the C2 stock handle. Not only is it unnatural, it relates to no known rowing stroke.

A split handle assembly, with about 11" distance from the handgrips to the point of attachment, will, as the stroke progresses and the handgrips spread, provide a decent replication of the latter part of a sculling stroke. This should interest all users, particularly OTW rowers. Also, the ability to rotate one's hands engages other muscle groups and adds variety and interest to the workout programme. What is there not to like?

Re: Your quote: "A machine is like it is. Use it properly or leave it. Don't blame the machine for what it is." Thanks for my morning smile. Yes, Sakly, I blame the C2 machine, and particularly the C2 handle, for what it is. It is not possible to use a machine "properly" when that machine has been improperly designed.

[JaapvanE]

A machine is like it is, use it properly or leave it, but don't blame the machine for what it is (even if there is a bio-mechanically better solution, won't argue against that).

To me, it is quite simple. The forces are significant, and the amount of meters put in by many rowers is staggering. If this was a big issue, one would have a flourishing market and we all would be heavily debating what the best handle in the market would be. A bit like seat pads.

Among this and several other fora, I never see that debate, especially among the people putting in significant volume. There are two or three commercially available products found in extremely niche websites, but I don't have the impression they are commercially interesting. As opposed to seat pads and chain oiling thingies, which are sold on Amazon with many different options. So based on that, it can't be a big issue.

[Sakly]

Bla Bla.
No oar adapts to the movement of the user, never ever anyone complained about that. It's even worse as there is no balanced load of the back and shoulders during the stroke.
A machine is like it is, use it properly or leave it, but don't blame the machine for what it is...

Fortuitously, the dual arc movement of the oar handgrips

Bla Bla.
Any experienced reader will immediately notice that I am not talking about the dual arc movement.
The machine is not intended to replicate a rowing stroke, comparing it to an actual rowing stroke on water does not make sense.
Anyway, you have your view and try to convince everyone that this is the only truth. Anybody not agreeing and pointing out other factors leading to issues, you call a C2 fanboy for whatever reason.

It would be easier for you to link to a standard post in any of the older threads, than writing the same stuff over and over again.

[Slidewinder]

Bla Bl
The machine is not intended to replicate a rowing stroke, comparing it to an actual rowing stroke on water does not make sense.

Your statement does not make sense. It is called a rowing ergometer. It is used by many, many OTW rowers as a training tool. I'm sure it would make sense to them if the unit better replicated the stroke geometry of actual sculling rather than forcing the hands to follow two back and forth parallel straight lines. A simple split handle assembly does this. The user's hands and arms can then move in natural curved lines, much closer to a sculling movement, particularly during the latter half of the stroke - and also, as in actual sculling, the hands, wrists, and forearms remain in alignment with the direction of applied force throughout the stroke. Install a split handle and the C2 unit instantly becomes a vastly improved OTW training tool.

But most users of the C2 ergometer are non-rowers. They are seeking general fitness benefits, so what good is a split handle set-up to them? It should be obvious. A split handle enables various stroke geometries - hands vertical, horizontal, or anywhere in-between. These are completely viable exercises, engaging other muscle groups, and adding variety and interest to the program. Even OTW rowers, would appreciate a break from sport specific training now and again.

A split handle helps both OTW rowers and the general user to achieve their goals. The stone-age rigid, single-piece stock handle should have been relegated to the dustbin of history decades ago.

[p_b82]

If there were "so many benefits" all rowing style erg manufacturers would supply alternative handles, and gyms would have things to swap in options for users "on the rack" as it were.

but the fact that the above doesn't happen means there is no desire from the wider user community to change things.

those that do want options, can do something as a DIY alternative - as you've and others done. But you're massively in the minority.

Why you still feel the need to come on a forum for a piece of equipment you don't use and bash the same boring drum is beyond me.

[Slidewinder]

If there were "so many benefits" all rowing style erg manufacturers would supply alternative handles, and gyms would have things to swap in options for users "on the rack" as it were. But the fact that the above doesn't happen means there is no desire from the wider user community to change things.

That's what forty years of indoctrination does. Forty years of everyone pulling on a rigid, bio-mechanical abomination of a handle has so stifled the user imagination that they think that a handle that enables a natural curved line of movement, and natural rotation of the hands, is a radical idea. Decades of indoctrination has even lowered the IQ of supposed experts. I recall seeing a photograph of professor of bio-mechanics sitting astride a C2 rower. The photo had caught him at the end of the stroke. There he was, his wrists cocked at an awkward angle, in violation of everything he knows and professes - and a big grin on his face.

[Dangerscouse]

The photo had caught him at the end of the stroke. There he was, his wrists cocked at an awkward angle, in violation of everything he knows and professes - and a big grin on his face.

Is that the basis of your issue? FWIW, I don't finish the stroke like that, so it seems like there's a bit more nuance to this than you acknowledge. Maybe that's why I've never had a wrist issue after circa 45 million metres.

How do you suggest indoctrination and "lowering of IQ" will ease the pain and suffering of supposedly damaged wrists?

[JaapvanE]

The photo had caught him at the end of the stroke. There he was, his wrists cocked at an awkward angle, in violation of everything he knows and professes - and a big grin on his face.

Is that the basis of your issue? FWIW, I don't finish the stroke like that, so it seems like there's a bit more nuance to this than you acknowledge. Maybe that's why I've never had a wrist issue after circa 45 million metres.

And being a professor in biomechanics qualifies him to do research in the field of (human) movement, not as an expert trainer for rowing (might not be his field of expertise) nor suitable as example for others to learn rowing from.

And as a former board member of a university sportscenter, I can tell: sometimes professors just want to have fun and try new things, even if they have absolutely no practical experience in what they are doing. It is a bit the nature of the animal: academics are above all curious.

[reuben]

Billions of meters successfully rowed using the stock handle without injury. And yet, the axe must be ground at every opportunity. The obsession cannot be abandoned, the hyperbole cannot be reduced.

For the record, I haven't suffered due to any "indoctrination" at all, though you've certainly tried.

And to allege that the stock handle has the ability to lower anyone's IQ is ludicrous.

[Slidewinder]

For the record, I haven't suffered due to any "indoctrination" at all...

Of course, all users who profess undying love for the rigid, single-piece C2 stock handle will protest that they have not been indoctrinated. They will declare that they have concluded that the standard C2 handle is the best design and the best choice through independent thought and reason. They confidently tell the OP that there are no design problems with the equipment, that all of his elbow problems are the result of 'poor technique'.

For this reason I respectfully invite Forum members who eschew and deny any influence of herd mentality to complete the following questionnaire. Kindly share the reasoning behind your steadfast love of the standard C2 handle.

Questionnaire:

I _____ (username) think that a split handle that ensures a bio-mechanically correct alignment of the hands, wrists, and forearms throughout the stroke is a bad idea because _____________________ (fill in the blank).

I _____ (username) think that having the hands locked in a horizontal position throughout the stroke is a good idea, and a handle that enables rotation of the hands is bad idea because ____________________ (fill in the blank).

I _____ (username) think that the stroke geometry of two back and forth parallel straight lines forced upon the user by the C2 stock handle is better than the two curved lines stroke geometry of a split handle set-up because ____________________ (fill in the blank).

I _____ (username)think that a handle that enables any lateral movement is a bad idea because ______________________ (fill in the blank).

I _____ (username) think a split handle set up that better replicates an OTW stroke than the C2 stock handle is a bad idea because ____________ (fill in the blank).

I ____ (username) think that a handle that engages other muscle groups via user choice of hand rotation and stroke geometry is a bad idea because ____________ (fill in the blank).

I _____ (username) think that adding variety and interest to the workout program via user choice of hand rotation and stroke geometry is a bad idea because ________________ (fill in the blank).

I look forward to reading the answers.

[Sandeman]

I'm sorry, but I don't think this is helping the topicstarter.
May I suggest we (you) take the discussion about rigid or split handles elsewhere and try to help TS with the questions he's having?

Ontopic: I think I have a tenniselbow as well (or at least some very irritated tendons). Had it since last summer after I cut a lot of bushes in my garden. All advices say it's good to keep moving, but not so much that it hurts.
I kept rowing (although a bit less hard) and my pain didn't get any worse from that.
ps. It still hurts 8 months later (but much better manageble now) and I understand that's pretty normal. So you might be in for a long recovery..

[Sakly]

Questionnaire:
[..]

You take every opportunity to show you do not get the point. This questionnaire is ridiculous.