Question on Speed

flan48 · Post by **flan48** » September 12th, 2006, 8:39 am

Hello,
I [u]really[/u] am much more concerned with fitness than speed and racing, but I'm very curious:
Just received my new C2 last week. I'm trying to emulate the experts as shown on the included DVD. As such, I am doing 30-35 minutes at 22-23 spm. Burning lots of calories and feeling very comfortable. Also noticed that force curve is very well shaped (so-called slighty left-leaning haystack). However, I also noticed that my 500m split times are in the area of 2:44-2:49 throughout. I have seen from others utilizing similar stroke rates that their splits are in the area of 2:00-2:10.

Is this simply because they are putting more power to the drive? I assume so as my technique seems to be proper. (drag factor is 104-105)

Curious as to your thoughts - thanks alot
Best regards

CoCanes · Post by **CoCanes** » September 12th, 2006, 9:59 am

Your drag factor is set pretty low. A drag factor for a "race boat" feel would be around 115-125. Stroke rate can be decieving as it depends a lot on the rower, I am 6'4" tall so when I row at a 22-23 stroke rating I'm going to have faster splits than someone shorter than me. However if you are concerned mainly with fitness rather than decreasing your times I would suggest sticking with your plan and upping the stroke rate. Try rowing at a 25-26 to feel if you are comfortable. Also focus on driving with your legs too many people try to pull too hard with their backs and arms. A good way to check and make sure your form is ok is to row strapless. It will make you emphasize pushing with your legs, if you are pulling too early with your back and arms you will fly off the back of the erg. Hope this helps.

CoCanes · Post by **CoCanes** » September 12th, 2006, 9:59 am

Your drag factor is set pretty low. A drag factor for a "race boat" feel would be around 115-125. Stroke rate can be decieving as it depends a lot on the rower, I am 6'4" tall so when I row at a 22-23 stroke rating I'm going to have faster splits than someone shorter than me. However if you are concerned mainly with fitness rather than decreasing your times I would suggest sticking with your plan and upping the stroke rate. Try rowing at a 25-26 to feel if you are comfortable. Also focus on driving with your legs too many people try to pull too hard with their backs and arms. A good way to check and make sure your form is ok is to row strapless. It will make you emphasize pushing with your legs, if you are pulling too early with your back and arms you will fly off the back of the erg. Hope this helps.

RowtheRockies · Post by **RowtheRockies** » September 12th, 2006, 12:08 pm

Barry,

Congratulations on your purchase of an erg. Hopefully you will enjoy and benefit as much from yours as I have.

Is this simply because they are putting more power to the drive? I assume so as my technique seems to be proper. (drag factor is 104-105)

In a word, Yes, more power = faster pace. It sounds like your technique may be ok. Depending on what your fitness background is prior to erging, 2:44-2:49 may just reflect your current level of conditioning and will certainly improve over time as you continue to erg.

If you are mainly concerned with fitness and you are getting your HR into your proper zone during your workouts then you are already doing great. Even if you think your technique is good, it would be worth having someone knowledgeable look at it just to make sure you are being as efficient as possible.

Rich

Rich

julieofarc · Post by **julieofarc** » September 12th, 2006, 2:43 pm

I think you'll see that split coming down very quickly as your fitness level rises. When I first got back on the erg, my comfortable rate was around 2:45. Now, I'm fairly comfortable with something in the 2:20 range.

That being said, you might want to check and make sure you're getting your power from the correct part of the stroke- the leg drive. Something like 80% of your power comes from the legs alone. Arms and back make up the rest. Guys can tend to muscle the upper body stuff, so just be aware. (Girls have wimpy upper body strength in comparison...) One drill you can do to at least make yourself aware of the leg drive is to row on the erg with straight arms- so you're just doing legs and back swing. You'll feel what you should be doing pretty quickly. My guess is that you're really not using your legs. (If you want to share your age/height/weight/fitness level, we can give you some better feedback.)

Also, I find that if I've settled into a stroke rating that if I close my eyes I concentrate on the drive more and when I open them 10 or 20 strokes later my split has come down.

You might also try lowering your stroke rating (to a 16 or 18), and seeing if you can pull a 2:49 there. The key is ratio- reaaaaaly slow up the slide (I think 'light on the footstretcher') and then quick legs down and arms away at the same rate.

Let us know what you figure out, okay?

Julie

flan48 · Post by **flan48** » September 13th, 2006, 2:28 pm

Thanks all for your responses. I have been without Internet access for the last 24 hours, hence my delay.

I really thought my technique is good, recovery ~1/2 drive speed. In fact, my first row on the C2 was at 26 spm, yet same split time as with 22-23 spm.

I have been erging for 4 years or so, first 3 on a Tunturi R710 (similar to C2) and then on a piston type (Kettler Kadett -very high quality for this type of rower). I have also been doing power walking/some jogging for 119 or 20 years and weight training for over 25 years. So, I believe I am pretty fit (I'm age 60, 5'6", 172 lbs.)

I really, really am more4 concerned with fitness than speed, just wondering as to your thoughts. I'll see what happens at a higher damper setting, 4 vs. 3, and even slower recovery speed/higher drive thrust.

Thanks again!
Barry

johnlvs2run · Post by **johnlvs2run** » September 13th, 2006, 3:52 pm

Hi Barry,

Welcome to the forum.

Your rowing and drag factor sound fine.

It takes awhile for your muscles and body to get used to the exercise.

I started out rowing at an easy 2:50 pace for the first few weeks and gradually brought the time down. Also I kept bringing the drag factor down lower. Now I'm using a drag factor of 65 for most rowing. My PB's have ranged from 77 for the marathon to 109 for 500 meters.

Your force curve and rowing 30 minutes already are excellent.

Good for you.

flan48 · Post by **flan48** » September 13th, 2006, 4:08 pm

Hi Barry,

Welcome to the forum.

[i]Your rowing and drag factor sound fine.

It takes awhile for your muscles and body to get used to the exercise.

I started out rowing at an easy 2:50 pace for the first few weeks and gradually brought the time down. Also I kept bringing the drag factor down lower. Now I'm using a drag factor of 65 for most rowing. My PB's have ranged from 77 for the marathon to 109 for 500 meters.

Your force curve and rowing 30 minutes already are excellent.

Good for you.
_________________
John Rupp [/i]

John,
Thanks very much for your welcome and other remarks.
Best regards

jamesg · Post by **jamesg** » September 14th, 2006, 5:03 am

As JR says, you're doing fine.

If you want to work a bit harder still, you'll have to look at technique, in particular the length of your stroke and the catch and release positions. At the catch you have to be well forward, but still in a strong position. It's important to first develop a perfect stroke that works you hard, and then use it to get fit.

Numerical controls you can use are HR range%, Watts/kg (divide power ouptut in W by your weight in kg) and Watt-minutes/stroke (divide Watts by stroke rate). The C2 engineering ensures that these values are reliable and exactly describe reality.

For a given HR Range%, you'll see the other two parameters increase in time with both fitness and technique. I'd guess 2 W/kg and > 7 W'/stroke are possible for you during long distance pulls.

Another simple check is to watch how far the boat travels per stroke, using the metre readout. The further the better, that's what rowing is for. At pace 2:30 and 20 spm, you'd be moving the "boat" 10m.

johnlvs2run · Post by **johnlvs2run** » September 14th, 2006, 11:40 am

Hi Barry,

JG and I agree the length of the stroke is important.

Personally I feel the distance traveled per time, i.e. the pace, is more important than the distance traveled per stroke. The latter is better defined by the size and shape of the rower, and the comfort, ease, efficiency and effectiveness of one's form, rhythm, and style.

At a 2:30 pace I usually take around 25 strokes per minute, and most of my rowing is right around 8 meters per stroke. Taller rowers, because of having a longer reach, can take less strokes and still cover the same distance or farther per time, or take the same spm and go faster. This is more a factor at lower ratings, as shorter rowers have the advantage of being able to rate higher, more easily, than can tall ones.

However, after rowing more than 36 million meters, I hardly pay any attention to the meters per stroke any more and go more by the stroke rate as follows:

spm ... effort
< 25 .. slow / low power
25 ...... easy
27/8 ... moderate
30 ...... good pace / good power
32/3 ... 10k pace / max power for distance
33/4 ... 5k pace / "
36/40 .. 2k pace / "
40+ .... 1k pace / "
46+ .... 500m pace / "

flan48 · Post by **flan48** » October 8th, 2006, 4:45 pm

Hi erevybody,
Well I now have my C2 for a month, and as you all expected, without pushing myself too much, my split time for 30-40 minute rows has come down from 2:44-2:45 to around 2:32.

I have been experimenting with drag factor and found that around 118 (setting of 4) is comfortable.

So, things are progressing nicely, AND I feel just terrific -back and legs feel better (and stronger!) than ever.

Best regards

johnlvs2run · Post by **johnlvs2run** » October 9th, 2006, 8:42 pm

Hi Barry,

That's a nice consistency and improvement.

The drag factor is closely related to pace. A lower df maintains a higher velocity but has less acceleration as the fan doesn't slow down nearly as much between strokes. A faster pace requires more acceleration of the flywheel, which is possible with the inefficiency of the df being higher. Because of this I like using a lower df over distance, and the lowest df for any distance, where it is possible to consistently reach the pace that I'm aiming for.

As the relationship between drag factor and pace is linear and progressive, it can be used to determine a line of df's for various paces. A few years ago I plotted the df's I'd used for pb's at the ranking distances. Interestingly they came to the same df that Eskild Ebbesen used for his long time lightweight record of 6:03.2 for the 2k.

Basically 117 X 90.8s, divided by your pace, gives you the df to use for your pace. Heavier rowers don't have the same fitness and use a slightly higher df than lightweights. For example:

117 X 90.8 / 150s = a drag factor of 71 at 2:30 pace.

PaulS · Post by **PaulS** » October 9th, 2006, 9:10 pm

John Rupp wrote:
Basically 117 X 90.8s, divided by your pace, gives you the df to use for your pace. Heavier rowers fon't have the same fitness and use a slightly higher df than lightweights. For example:

117 X 90.8 / 150s = a drag factor of 71 at 2:30 pace.

That's interesting John, but where in the world did you come up with this formula?

10,623.6/Pace (in seconds) = Drag Factor for that Pace?

While it might work out for a few particular individuals, it hardly seems applicable to 90% of the Winners at WIRC, BIRC, or EIRC.

Please stay calm, I'm genuinely interested in how you came up with this.

johnlvs2run · Post by **johnlvs2run** » October 10th, 2006, 2:08 am

A few years ago I plotted the df's I'd used for pb's at the ranking distances.

Interestingly they pointed to the 117 df that Eskild Ebbesen used for his long time lightweight record of 6:03.2 for the 2k.

The 6:03.2 is a pace of 1:30.8 for 500 meters, i.e. 90.8 seconds.

PaulS · Post by **PaulS** » October 10th, 2006, 11:12 am

John Rupp wrote:A few years ago I plotted the df's I'd used for pb's at the ranking distances.

Interestingly they pointed to the 117 df that Eskild Ebbesen used for his long time lightweight record of 6:03.2 for the 2k.

The 6:03.2 is a pace of 1:30.8 for 500 meters, i.e. 90.8 seconds.

Okay, but what does that have to do with anything? Do you consider yourself and Eskild to be parallel examples?

You also have said Eskild Raced at R40, which is not accurate. Is this more of the same fabrication methodology? (He did Average a rate of 40, but rarely actually was at that rate, perhaps no more than 5 strokes over the entire race.)

Where did you obtain the DF information for Eskild, that is an unusual bit of trivia to have on hand?

Concept2 Forum

Question on Speed

Question on Speed

Speed -Thanks for the Responses

Re: Question on Speed

Thank You John

Speed- Follow-up