Very first C2 row 10,000m

[jamesg]

runners, swimmers, cyclists are a lot less preoccupied with spm.

We're not worried about spm. What we want to do is move boats fast with as little effort as possible: technique.

For rowing we begin training at low ratings, because this lets us put the blade in the water at the right place and go on for hours to acquire technique. Technique makes the boat go fast and hardens the stroke; then we can train for endurance, which then lets us train even harder. There's no need to rate high in this sequence: it would be called running before we can walk. We increase rate last of all, when all conditions are in place.

Sports that involve speed probably all have a cube law: so even 10% reduction in rate, if it leads to 10% reduction in speed, implies 30% reduction in power. So 10% less rate is enough to drop from race power to endurance training power; without a stopwatch this 10% will be invisible. It's not exactly the same afloat or on the erg, in part because of the losses at catch and release that increase proportion at high ratings; it's much easier to get the blade in and the handle pulling at low rating.

[hjs]

runners, swimmers, cyclists are a lot less preoccupied with spm.

We're not worried about spm. What we want to do is move boats fast with as little effort as possible: technique.

For rowing we begin training at low ratings, because this lets us put the blade in the water at the right place and go on for hours to acquire technique. Technique makes the boat go fast and hardens the stroke; then we can train for endurance, which then lets us train even harder. There's no need to rate high in this sequence: it would be called running before we can walk. We increase rate last of all, when all conditions are in place.

Sports that involve speed probably all have a cube law: so even 10% reduction in rate, if it leads to 10% reduction in speed, implies 30% reduction in power. So 10% less rate is enough to drop from race power to endurance training power; without a stopwatch this 10% will be invisible. It's not exactly the same afloat or on the erg, in part because of the losses at catch and release that increase proportion at high ratings; it's much easier to get the blade in and the handle pulling at low rating.

The only water I ever see is the water I drink or in the shower, And I don,t want that to move that fast at all. The best technique is the one that gives the best speed on the erg. Rating like a turtle is not needed, If you like it go ahead, but giving every newby the Pavlov reaction to start rating low is silly.

[Cyclingman1]

For some one in the middle of the curve, I’ll pick the 50th percentile of M 50-59, either weight. The 2k time for that this season is 7:48.3 (1:57.1). Stroke rate? How about 34spm to keep it a bit on what I would consider the high side? For the same zones, this would be the rates and paces:

18spm 2:24.5
22spm 2:19
25-6spm 2:09
31-32spm 2:00
37-38spm 1:53.5

Interesting numbers, but I can't say as I really understand them. These numbers seem to imply that to show an approx 5% improvement in pace one should increase the stroke rate by about 20%. It seems to discount the possibility of simply applying more force to the handle. I know that when I ride a bike I control the speed by the force applied to the pedals. In fact, usually to go faster one decreases the cadence, if anything.

My recent rowing experience is this. Two days ago, 8100m at 1:50.8, SR 29. One day ago, 1K at 1:38.3, SR 31. Stroke rate increased by 2/29 or 7% for a speed increase of 11%. I had to have been applying more force to the handle. My numbers are in distinct contrast to the above numbers which imply far less force being applied as one tries to increase the pace. In a way, it seems counterintuitive.

[hjs]

I have been sick the last 10 days and hardly could to do any training. Today first day I felt good enough to do anything. For reference. I am 47 , 186, 90 kg, 10 % ish body fat, best 2k this season 6.26 in a race earl in the morning.

Since there was talk about rate 12, I gave that a try.
Did a 500 meter warm up.

3x2k rest a few minutes inbetween, did not watch that exactly

First 2k used rate 12, good a 155.5 av, feels really wierd high drag 160

Second one rate 20, drag 165 6.58.8, had trouble at first to go not fast, but my lungs soon caught up on me.

Third one low drag and strapless 103 155 av, started around 2.10 ended around 1.45, rate 24/25. Was hard to catch the flywheel after the high drag before.

My normal drag is around 130, for longer work. Use 110 and most meters I do strapless, rating mostly around 24/28, my 2k race rate is 31/32

This session gives me little info, both me not being fit and doing stuff I never do. But though why not show it, to give som kind of idea.

[Bob S.]

Interesting numbers, but I can't say as I really understand them. These numbers seem to imply that to show an approx 5% improvement in pace one should increase the stroke rate by about 20%. It seems to discount the possibility of simply applying more force to the handle.

The numbers are really quite simple. I try to do 300 joules of work with each stroke, whatever the rate. An increase of exactly 5% in speed would require an increase of 15.7625% in power, based on the cubic relationship of power to speed. If the work done per stroke is constant, the 5% speed increase would require that same percentage increase in rate. In cycling, one keeps a high cadence and varies the gears and/or the pressure on the pedals to control speed or to handle changing conditions like winds and hills. In erging, I try to maintain a constant input of work per stroke and vary the stroke rate to vary the speed. I don't claim to be successful at this. I am well aware the I probably shorten the stroke length at high rates, especially when it goes over 50spm in a sprinting finish.

For a more average case, my hypothetic man, doing a 7:48.3 2k would be putting out 375 joules per stroke. Stephan Hendriks, in his record setting 2k, was putting out almost double that, around 740 joules per stroke, and doing it at the remarkably high stroke rate of 40spm for almost 6 minutes. His form sort of goes to pieces. In the video you can see a guy holding down the earth with his foot to keep it from jumping around like a grasshopper. That sort of thing has to be an energy waster. It takes a lot of effort to make the whole erg with its rider move like that - which makes his performance even more remarkable

Bob S.

[Bob S.]

First 2k used rate 12, good a 155.5 av, feels really wierd high drag 160

Second one rate 20, drag 165 6.58.8, had trouble at first to go not fast, but my lungs soon caught up on me.

Third one low drag and strapless 103 155 av, started around 2.10 ended around 1.45, rate 24/25. Was hard to catch the flywheel after the high drag before.

My normal drag is around 130, for longer work. Use 110 and most meters I do strapless, rating mostly around 24/28, my 2k race rate is 31/32

Why the high drag at 12spm? I generally leave my drag at 115. It took a long time to get used to low drag, after many years using a model B with the original numberless PM. I hadn't the foggiest idea what drag factor was until I got it equipped with a PM3 (and found out that the B had a low of about 140). Nowadays, if I did change the drag, I would do just the opposite of using high drag at low rates. At 12spm, there is over 4 seconds of recovery and the wheel slows down more than enough with even with a light drag. The only reason I would ever go to a high drag would be at high rate, like in doing a very short piece, 100 - 200m.

I am puzzled that you mentioned rowing strapless at 24/25spm and 24/28spm, but you did not say that for the low rate pieces. Surely you did not need the straps for those.

With regard to my own use of 12spm, I used to do it a lot as part of a wake-me-up pyramid exercise first thing in the morning, 2' each at 12, 15, 20, 24, and back to 12spm. Now I just do 5' at 15spm and 12 m/stroke. It is just a pre-physical therapy warm up to get cardiovascular system well opened up. Now I use 12spm for a 10' warm up for AT pieces, 4' @ 12, 3' @ 15, 2' @ 2, and 1' @ 24spm. For the cool down, I do the reverse of that.

I was out in a masters' 8 one day with a cox/coach who got the bug to do some 12spm practice. It was hell, since an 8 doesn't set worth a damn at low rates. Our man at stroke finally mutinied and took us up to about 20spm, much to the disgust of cox. We had quite a boatful of grumpy, old men that day.

Bob S.

[hjs]

At rate 12 to get any speed I need enough drag to pull against, therefore the high drag. Also absolute strapped, strapless does limit the strokelenght.

I have never had trouble with low drag, only on very short pieces I find it limiting, I like the way the fan keeps spinning, you can use a very soft stroke, fast allright but still soft to keep pace. High drag to me feels much rougher, a slow stroke a the the fan does stop much more between strokes.

The 12 was just to try it out, I does not much have to with rowing, its like jumping instead of of running with a stop after ever jump.

The 24/28 rate strapless is to get the recovery up, my weakpoint is always fitness not strenght, plus I do find lower ratings to hard on the body, keeping the rate up trains fitness, but does not burden the musle and joints to hard.

[Cyclingman1]

In erging, I try to maintain a constant input of work per stroke and vary the stroke rate to vary the speed.

In your example of 31 SPM for 2:00 (203W) and 37 SPM for 1:53.5 (239W), the 19.4% increase in SPM is very close to the 17.7% increase in power needed to go 6.5s/500m faster. But, I'm saying that one can alternatively, or in addition to, increase the force applied to the handle.

My recent rowing experience is this. Two days ago, 8100m at 1:50.8, SR 29. One day ago, 1K at 1:38.3, SR 31. Stroke rate increased by 2/29 or 7% for a speed increase of 11%. I had to have been applying more force to the handle.

My 7% increase in SPM does not come close to the 43.6% increase in power when moving from 1:50.8 (257W) to 1:38.3 (369W). Obviously, my body is generating more force on the handle. I would have to row at 42 SPM using the same force as used for 1:50.8 to row at 1:38.3. Not possible for me given my height.

Now, the question my be, how long can the additional force be maintained? But the question could be just as easily how long can the greatly increased SPM be maintained, not to mention the wasted recovery time with higher SPM.

Who says that constant force to the handle must be used for all speeds? As I said, that is most definitley not done in cycling.

[Bob S.]

Who says that constant force to the handle must be used for all speeds? As I said, that is most definitley not done in cycling.

First of all , I didn't say constant force, although I suppose that it could have been viewed as implied. The force is not at all constant even during the drive. The force curve on the monitor shows that clearly. What I try to do is put in the same amount of work on the wheel with each stroke, which would mean equal areas under that force curve for all strokes. I have never heard anyone say that. It is my goal and that is all I said.

I quite agree that it is not done in cycling and I thought that I made that clear in my post. My point is that there large differences between cycling and rowing movements and the what works well in one does not have much to do with what works well in the other. Land vehicles powered with a rowing movement (I think that there is one called RowBike) are lousy for going up hills because of the intermittent movement. You lose a lot of momentum on the recovery. That happens on the water as well, if you have a head wind - especially if you are rowing something that has a lot more area above the water line than a slim racing shell. To make headway, it is necessary to use a high rate - by cutting down the recovery time.

Bob S.

Yeah, here it is:

http://www.google.com/search?q=rowbike& ... 9&bih=1106

[Cyclingman1]

First of all , I didn't say constant force, although I suppose that it could have been viewed as implied. The force is not at all constant even during the drive.

Okay. Perhaps I meant the "average force" applied during one stoke. In other words take the integral of the force curve and divide by the time of the stroke to get an average force in whatever units make sense. Once past the obvious fact that the force curve is not horizontal or y = Constant, then perhaps the question of why "constant work" or constant "average force" is the right way to go can be addressed. I can't be that odd in not doing so.

[Bob S.]

I can't be that odd in not doing so.

As far as I know, no one but me uses this approach. I do not advocate it as the only way to use an indoor rower. I was just trying to explain what it was I was doing and why I often use low rates. For me, using low rates is the easiest way to row at low intensities. Doing a lot of fast, light strokes to go at slow paces just feels all wrong. I just feel like I am rushing the slide - a strict no-no on the water - but probably no big deal on an indoor rower.

In an earlier post, you had said that you couldn't say as you really understood the numbers, so I was responding to that. The principle number involved was just the 300j (or 6W') of work that I try to put into each stroke.The 6W' comes from dividing the wattage by the stroke rate and I multiplied that by 60 to convert to joules (or watt seconds).

Bob S.

[jamesg]

My 7% increase in SPM does not come close to the 43.6% increase in power when moving from 1:50.8 (257W) to 1:38.3 (369W).

You say these were at 29 and 31, so your strokework was 9 and 12 Watts/Rating in the two pieces.

If your 2k was at 350W rate 35, your work was 10, and work at between 9 and 12 would be just what's needed to train technique, strength and endurance at that level.

UT1 work is typically 60-70% of 2k race power according to the Interactives, so 350W implies UT1 range 210-245W; done at 9 W', ratings 23 to 27. Any higher rating if done with the same stroke would be AT. There would be little point in increasing the rating just to weaken the stroke to a level that you would not use in a race. But it's all training anyway, so wgad?

You might, because using a higher stroke work forces the legs to do more. When I get on my bike, legs never seem strong enough. The backstop drill lets us see how much work is being done by arms, trunk and legs.

[hjs]

First of all , I didn't say constant force, although I suppose that it could have been viewed as implied. The force is not at all constant even during the drive.

Okay. Perhaps I meant the "average force" applied during one stoke. In other words take the integral of the force curve and divide by the time of the stroke to get an average force in whatever units make sense. Once past the obvious fact that the force curve is not horizontal or y = Constant, then perhaps the question of why "constant work" or constant "average force" is the right way to go can be addressed. I can't be that odd in not doing so.

Instead of looking at work per stroke a ofcourse should look at work per time unit, irrelevant of rate, drag the more work we put in per time unit, the faster the pace we get on the pm. That can be done with more force on the handle, more strokes per time unit or a longer stroke. Often ofcourse a combination.

Using the same work per stroke is not what we often see, look what I did at rate 12 and rate 20, I could give a lot more wok per stroke compared to race rates. Logic ofcourse, not the power per stroke is the limiting factor, but the amount of energy per time unit I can deliver, decreese the rate and per stroke We can give more energy.

Efficiency also playes an important role, the less waist, the more peed we have left, so getting used to a rate we use for racing helps in that way.

[Marc1t]

Blimey what a lot of numbers & figures they dont really mean much to me at the moment maybe they will in time, in my mind its quite simple I have good CV fitness but not much rowing strength at the moment so there are 2 ways to "move the boat at a set speed" pull harder more power per stroke low spm or pull faster less power but more spm end result is the same, for me the latter applies at the moment combined with my hight & weight but as i get stronger the former i would immagine would come into play increase power with spm, result move faster

[Bob S.]

I just noticed that you give your location as Bracknell. Is that as in Bracknell, Berkshire? If so, you might benefit from posting on the UK C2 forum as well. It can be found at "The Rowing Company" website. It is a much more active forum than this one.

Bob S