Jacking the erg - Effective training?

[Carl Henrik]

So is there anyone wanting to try a session with the erg "heavily jacked"?

In order to learn wether a higher total output is actually achieved one would have to estimate changes in mechanical efficiency as well. This demands some calculations but not too sweaty.

My rowing is on water now mostly so I can't test this much on my own.

[johnlvs2run]

Yes I would like to try this.

Actually I made an additional back footing for the erg, so the railing is level, and this is the way that I usually row. For time trials I just replace this footing with the regular one.

I have done quite a few of the same sessions either way, and have noticed no difference in the times. However, having the railing level feels much better for development of my form, balance, and rhythm.

[Carl Henrik]

That's great John.

I have the impression that you prefer light strokes and a jacked erg will suit that preference.

How much will you raise the erg and over what distance will you attempt the comparison? For valid comparison the piece preferably should be all out. Alternatively HR could be used for a submaximal test, but with lesser significance.

[johnlvs2run]

Hi Carl,

By light strokes, if you mean to use less energy per time, or to go faster per usage of energy then yes. This is what I prefer, to make the most of my energy. Don't you?

I prefer using an unjacked erg, i.e. one where the railing is level. The c2 erg has the railing tilted, i.e. jacked, to the front. I think having the erg tilted one way or the other has little to do with the lightness of one's stroke.

How much will you raise the erg and over what distance will you attempt the comparison?

I have done intense sessions over hours, and also short sprints either way, and found no difference. Compare this to, for example, my finding an immediate and constant 1.5 to 3 second difference on the slides, with the slides being faster every time.

My preference is for keeping the erg/railing level, and that is how I am planning to keep it. For time trials I will continue to jack the erg/railing up with the c2 footing the way they have designed it, but only to meet the c2 guidelines for the rankings. And even though c2 continues to allow slide times that are faster, to be mixed in with regular erg times, and with no indication they were times done on slides.

[johnlvs2run]

My experiments have shown there is no significant difference in times, with the erg/railing raised either 2 inches in front or in back.

For clarification, the regular c2 erg/railing is raised 2 inches in back.

My erg/railing is level.

Paul Flack did some experiments a few years ago where he raised the front of the erg/railing and even hung the front of the erg out a window. Then, if memory serves correct, he did some times with the front of the erg raised 6 inches, i.e. the front of the erg/railing was raised 4 inches higher than level.

With the erg in that position, he bettered all of his times.

Then he put the erg back in the regular c2 position, with the erg/railing 2 inches higher in the back.

He again bettered all of his times.

Likewise to my own experiments, Paul's have shown there was no difference in his times between having the erg/railing raised 2 inches in back or 4 inches in the front.

Because of these results, I think (1) the railing on the regular c2 should be level and (2) it would be nice to have an adjustment on the back legs of the erg, so the railing could be adjusted to be either higher in the back or the front. This way the levelness of the railing could be an individual preference, and also used for training purposes.

It would be instructive and useful to be able to move and change the slope of the railing for these training purposes. Although the net gain of power would be 0 or less, the focus on different muscles, rhythm and timing would be different.

[Carl Henrik]

The way I interpret your descriptions is that Paul was steadily improving no matter the "erg rigging" at the time he did the experiment you talk about and therefore it is inconclusive. As for your experiments with an erg jacked less than proposed they have not included an all out PB attempt or a HR monitored comparison. Therefore you have not been able to conclude there is a difference. This does not mean there is no difference

I must gather some test data on my own it seems. This when I get closer to PB shape and physical improvement won't cloud the effect of the "rigging".

[johnlvs2run]

they have not included an all out PB attempt or a HR monitored comparison. Therefore you have not been able to conclude there is a difference. This does not mean there is no difference

That is not true.

I have not done ranking events on the level erg/railing but have gone for many sprint and session PB's and SB's.

Thus I have been able to conclude that there is no difference.

[johnlvs2run]

Also I immediately found a 1.5 to 3 second difference on the slides.

It doesn't take very long to find, when a significant difference is entailed.

[johnlvs2run]

Paul was steadily improving no matter the "erg rigging"

I wouldn't jump to that conclusion with no evidence.

Paul had reached a certain level with the c2 jacked erg/railing 2" in back.

Then he improved on that level with the erg/railing jacked 4" in front.

Then he improved those times with the erg/railing jacked 2" in back again.

It could be his first set of improvements were due to development of muscles that were being used more than before. Then with this increased strength he want back to the original jacking and improved again, more than if he had stayed with the same level at all times.

Since then, and keeping the level the same, his times have gotten steadily slower.

Thus this is evidence that shows (1) performance times are not significantly different with the erg/railing raised from 2" in back to 4" in front and (2) there very well may be significant training effects from doing sessions with the railing in different positions.

[Carl Henrik]

The way I interpret your descriptions is that Paul was steadily improving no matter the "erg rigging" at the time he did the experiment you talk about

I wouldn't jump to that conclusion with no evidence.

I have not jumped to any conclusions about Paul Flack and effects of erg jacking, only mirrored to you what message I found you to have conveyed.

I do not agree that you have presented conclusive evidence for differences in training effects and erg wattage input. I think few people do.

I feel this needs still more and better data to bear conclusions.

[johnlvs2run]

Hi Carl,

I am not saying that I have presented conclusive evidence, but that my results are conclusive enough for me to conclude that there is no difference.

You probably won't get conclusive evidences unless you have a robot doing the same exact stroke every time, and find the same variation with the slide angle not changing as when it does change.

I am confident with my results already showing that there is no significant difference. If you come up with a more conclusive measurement let me know.

[canoeist]

John's quote "Paul had reached a certain level with the c2 jacked erg/railing 2" in back.

Then he improved on that level with the erg/railing jacked 4" in front.

Then he improved those times with the erg/railing jacked 2" in back again. " is not correct.

I was training with the erg on the ground, sometimes with the erg facing the house, somethimes away. The differential in height was found to be about 3/4 inch.

I did a series of tests with one two inch plank under the front of the erg. I set my fastest times in ten of the ranking categories in a little over a week esting that way.

I did some tests with the back end raised. Performance was miserable. And it hurt the legs! This is really a good way to develop your legs and I should go back to training this way.

With a 4 inch plank under the front legs, there is certainly no reason to do sit ups or buy one of those ab machines seen on TV!

So much fuss was raised about my original inquiry (Thanks Rick for the text) but only one person actually tried it! There was a lot of heated discussion and a fair bit of child like name calling before Concept banned erg jacking at competitions and for rankings. But, for some reason, this edict has never shown up in the rules. Also, very few floors are perfectly level, so some degree of tolerence should be allowed for world records and rankings, but this has never been specified.

The boathouse floor at MIT is notably "erg jacked" and should help any rower performing there. When I did my time trial for the 2002 USIRT, I moved the erg away from the wall to a level area so that nobody could accuse me of cheating. But what about all the people that row there that are oblivious to the wonders of erg jacking?

I am still trying to figure out how to incorporate erg jacking into a real boat. Maybe just add a bungee cord to store energy from the return stroke?

Cheers,

Paul

[johnlvs2run]

I was training with the erg on the ground, sometimes with the erg facing the house, somethimes away. The differential in height was found to be about 3/4 inch.

Jacking the erg 2 inches in back raises the railing about 1/2 of that distance, as the railing is about 1/2 the length of the erg.

The c2 erg/railing comes already jacked up the 2 inches in the back.

Your statement that my statement was not correct is the one that is not correct, as my statements are correct.

However, I think we agree that c2 should make the erg so that anyone can adjust the railing to any angle that they wish.

Doing so would not make any difference to racing times but would allow us to gain the benefits of training with the railing in different positions.

[hjs]

Paul : I did a series of tests with one two inch plank under the front of the erg. I set my fastest times in ten of the ranking categories in a little over a week esting that way.

I did some tests with the back end raised. Performance was miserable

Jr :Paul had reached a certain level with the c2 jacked erg/railing 2" in back.

Then he improved on that level with the erg/railing jacked 4" in front.

Then he improved those times with the erg/railing jacked 2" in back again




ON planet ruppian this means :

Your statement that my statement was not correct is the one that is not correct, as my statements are correct.

[johnlvs2run]

Hjs,

Let me translate for you.

Paul rowed with the regular c2 erg, which is jacked by having the back of the railing raised up, the equivalent of raising the back of the erg 2 inches.

Then Paul raised the front of the erg 4 inches, i.e. which is the same as raising it 2 inches from the level position. He bettered all his pb's that way.

Then he put it back to the regular c2 jacked in back position and bettered all of his pb's again. Do you understand this now.

So his experiments prove that raising the front 4 inches made no difference to his times.

Anyway the point is that we should be able to adjust the slope of the railing, so it is at any level that we want.