Converting walking to rowing

[RowtheRockies]

John,

I suspect that you could improve your perathalon scores substantially and be on par with the elites if you now start using your legs.

Rich

[ancho]

John,

I suspect that you could improve your perathalon scores substantially and be on par with the elites if you now start using your legs.

Rich

Agree with that one!

[smb69]

Walking is more of an all round exercise and you use your legs more than in rowing, which is mostly an upper body exercise.

oh my god.. everything you say gets more ridiculous

you are a crazy old man.. im sorry.. for the amount of time you apparently spend rowing and talking about rowing... jesus... that was really a curveball even for your crazy self

[ragiarn]

I have had a Concept 2 for three years and have used it off and on . . . mostly off.

My doctor recently told me that I wasn't getting enough exercise for weight loss. We figured that I was getting around 2 miles a day of walking and he subscribes to the 10,000 steps or 5 miles a day routine. While I don't think "5 miles" is set in stone, it's a good goal for me.

OK . . . so what is the rowing equivalent of walking a mile? I'd like to row and walk.

I walk a mile in around 20 min now. That's at a speed where I can talk and walk comfortably fast. If I were to mimic the same effort on a rower for 20 min I'd be rowing a pace of 3 min per 500 m. That's still being able to talk.

Of course, the walking involves different muscles and I'm pushing my body weight up with every step (around 2000 steps per mile) while swinging my arms. My legs are also swinging as I step.

The rowing action has some differences. I'm using my quads to push my weight . . . but it's horizontal. And of course, there's no arm or leg swing . . . but there's pulling. Stroke wise, I'd be doing roughly 600 strokes in the same 20 min.

That's about where I'm stuck. Has anyone thought through this any further? How do you arrive at a rowing equivalent of walking (or running)?

You might be interested in the following information:

Rowing "burns more calories for equivalent power output than cycling or treadmill running," said Frederick C. Hagerman, director of the Work Physiology Lab at Ohio University in Athens, Ohio. Rowing for 20 minutes at a given perceived rate of exertion (say, a 6 on a 10-point scale) burns 10 to 15 percent more calories than would cycling at the same time and difficulty, he said. This is because rowing engages more muscles than most other forms of aerobic exercise, thus burning more energy. Mr. Hagerman has published many rowing studies in peer-reviewed journals.
Rowing "uses more muscles than any other sport except cross-country skiing," said Noel Wanner, a rowing coach, former member of the U.S. national rowing team (1992-1993) and marketing staffer at Concept2, a rowing machine maker in Morrisville, Vt.
The motion primarily works the quads, hamstrings and gluteus (butt) muscles, Mr. Wanner explained, and also exercises the upper back, shoulders, lats (upper back), deltoids (shoulders) and the muscles surrounding the spine. As you complete a stroke, you use your biceps, triceps and forearms, Mr. Wanner says.

I have also read somewhere that legs produce 60% of the power in rowing. Unfortunately I don't recall where I read it. The percentages probably depend on your stroke technique. Since the largest muscle in the body is th gluteus maximus followed by the quads this percentage makes sense to me.

Based on generally accepted guidelines a 150lb individual burns approximately 100 calories.

Based on the PM3 readout 1K of rowing burns approimately 63-65 cal.
Since 1 mi = 1.56 K 1 mile of rowing burns approximately 100 calories. These are just gross estimates. The numbers will vary based on any number of individual variables.

5 miles of walking would then be roughly equivalent to 7.8 K of rowing.

The important thing is to do what you enjoy doing the best. Walking is used an example in prescribing exercise to patients because is the most easily understood for most individuals.
The important point is not whether you walk, run swim or row but to burn the equivalent calories in physical activities throughout the day.

As Nike says "Just Do It"-

[Bob S.]

5 miles of walking would then be roughly equivalent to 7.8 K of rowing.

Ralph,

Is that what you meant to say? Since 5 miles is 8.05 km, which is certainly roughly equivalent to 7.8 km (i.e. less than 4% off), you are implying that walking and rowing are practically the same.

Bob S.

[tomhz]

Walking is more of an all round exercise and you use your legs more than in rowing, which is mostly an upper body exercise.

I would do as you are doing already, and figure 20 minutes of walking or 20 minutes of rowing.

... Are you serious? Rowing as a predominantly upper body exercise? Please, someone, help this man.

No, he is lost.

[whp4]

Walking is more of an all round exercise and you use your legs more than in rowing, which is mostly an upper body exercise.

I would do as you are doing already, and figure 20 minutes of walking or 20 minutes of rowing.

... Are you serious? Rowing as a predominantly upper body exercise? Please, someone, help this man.

No, he is lost.

Unfortunately, he keeps finding his way back here!

[ragiarn]

5 miles of walking would then be roughly equivalent to 7.8 K of rowing.

Ralph,

Is that what you meant to say? Since 5 miles is 8.05 km, which is certainly roughly equivalent to 7.8 km (i.e. less than 4% off), you are implying that walking and rowing are practically the same.

Bob S.

I stand corrected on the conversion from mi to km. I had been using 1.56 km = 1 mi but apparently the correct coversion is 1.6094 Km- 1 mi.

Below is a quote from C2 site re: PM2 monitor:

A Word About Calories:

Due to the differences in body weight and efficiency, calories on the PM2 are only an approximation of calories burned by the person rowing. The formula used in the PM2 is as follows:
Calories = (4x ave. watts/1.1639) + 300 cal/hour x time rowed (in hours).
This formula assumes a person of 175 pounds (80 kg.) and a base rate of 300 cal/hour to move your body through the rowing motion at 30 strokes/minute.

Based on the above formula a 175 lb person rowing at an average watt of 202.55 W for 4 minutes would burn 66.4calories and would row 1 km.
If that person rowed 1 mi he/she would burn 106 calories.

If we then use the commonly accepted (in exercise phys textbooks) value that 150 lb person walking 1 mi on level ground burns 100 calories and extrapolate that to 175 lb person, this 175 person would burn 116 calories to walk 1 mi. These of course are rough estimations based on formulas and not actual calorimetric studies.

I am not implying that rowing and walking are the same but the theoretical numbers seem to point out that the same amount of calories are burned when covering the same distance.

However you need to take into account that the average person walks a mile in about 15 minutes whereas at 202+ watts you would cover the same mile rowing in about 6:24. In other words during the same 15 minutes the rower will burn more than twice as many calories as the walker.

[johnlvs2run]

Walking is more of an all round exercise and you use your legs more than in rowing, which is mostly an upper body exercise.

John Rupp is correct about this.

[Sean Seamus]

as John Rupp is pretty much always correct about everything, it behooves us who do not always grasp his wisdom at first glance, to consider well his meaning

perhaps in this case he is artfully distinguishing rowing from sculling ?
that is, the sliding seat from what I might call a "duck boat" ?

[Sean Seamus]

and then again, perhaps by "upper body" he is referring to the sacred Temple of Wisdom above the shoulders, the skull, and especially the jaw

[Sean Seamus]

but more seriously

if John Rupp is including all the body above the hips (or waist) as "upper body"
then I could perhaps agree that maybe rowing is primarily an "upper body" exercise

However, I'm inclined to think of the body as legs + core + arms,
wherein the core is the platform from which the legs and arms operate.
So, I think of arms (including shoulders and arm musculature originating from the chest and back) as "upper body".
In this scheme, I'd think / imagine, that legs give the greatest contribution to the "force" of a stroke.

But really this is silly - like so many of this type of discussions.
The human body is a system, and all the pieces WORK TOGETHER.

which leads us to that old joke about the Parts of the Body sitting down to discuss who should be the Boss . . . .

[bw1099]

In other words during the same 15 minutes the rower will burn more than twice as many calories as the walker.

So the answer to the original question is that it takes about the same number of calories to cover the same distance when walking or rowing, but when rowing, you go more than twice as fast, so you burn more than twice as many calories in a given time.

Thank you ragiarn.

Too bad we had to suffer through so much background noise to get this answer.

bw

[johnlvs2run]

This is great.

I covered 20 miles in an hour on my bicycle, covering more than twice the distance as rowing and, therefore, burning twice the number of calories! To bad we had to go through all that background noise! Or it could be that rowing is just easier than running and walking, and rowing just doesn't burn as many calories.

In fact, this is what happens. If you look at those who run and walk vs those who row, the runners and walkers, i.e. those who use their legs the most are much leaner.

Rowers don't use their legs as much, don't burn as many calories, and are heavier.

[ragiarn]

This is great.
I covered 20 miles in an hour on my bicycle, covering more than twice the distance as rowing and, therefore, burning twice the number of calories! To bad we had to go through all that background noise! Or it could be that rowing is just easier than running and walking, and rowing just doesn't burn as many calories.

In fact, this is what happens. If you look at those who run and walk vs those who row, the runners and walkers, i.e. those who use their legs the most are much leaner.

Rowers don't use their legs as much, don't burn as many calories, and are heavier.

Below are excerpts from the article:
Stroke for stroke, rowing is a great, all-around workout
Wednesday, November 30, 2005
By John Briley, Special to The Washington Post

"Rowing "burns more calories for equivalent power output than cycling or treadmill running," said Frederick C. Hagerman, director of the Work Physiology Lab at Ohio University in Athens, Ohio.

Rowing for 20 minutes at a given perceived rate of exertion (say, a 6 on a 10-point scale) burns 10 to 15 percent more calories than would cycling at the same time and difficulty, he said.This is because rowing engages more muscles than most other forms of aerobic exercise, thus burning more energy. Mr. Hagerman has published many rowing studies in peer-reviewed journals."

"Rowing "uses more muscles than any other sport except cross-country skiing," said Noel Wanner, a rowing coach, former member of the U.S. national rowing team (1992-1993) and marketing staffer at Concept2, a rowing machine maker in Morrisville, Vt."

The motion primarily works the quads, hamstrings and gluteus (butt) muscles, Mr. Wanner explained, and also exercises the upper back, shoulders, lats (upper back), deltoids (shoulders) and the muscles surrounding the spine. As you complete a stroke, you use your biceps, triceps and forearms,Mr. Wanner says.

Sounds like miracle exercise. So why do so many of these machines sit idle in gyms, while lines form for the treadmills?

"People don't know how to use them properly and most gym employees have no clue," Mr. Wanner offered. "Most people tend to think only of their arms, when it is really the legs and back" that are driving the motion

John Rupp " If you look at those who run and walk vs those who row, the runners and walkers, i.e. those who use their legs the most are much leaner."

The following excerpt should clarify this point:

THE PHYSIOLOGY OF ROWING
Oxford and Cambridge Universities will battle it out for the 151st time on 27th March in the gruelling University Boat Race.
We spoke to EIS Lead Physiologist for the east midlands, Dr Steve Ingham, about the particular physiological qualities required to compete in the sport…

Q) In terms of physical or mechanical output, how unique is rowing in comparison with other sports?

Steve Ingham: The stroke cadence in rowing (i.e. the number of times the muscles are required to contract) is very low compared to other sports, with a maximum of around 50 strokes per minute. On the other hand, Maurice Green, the Olympic 100m sprinter took just 50 strides and in less than ten seconds to win gold in Sydney, that’s about 300 per minute.
At Olympic level, the forces applied to the oar on each stroke amount to an 80kg weightlift. It will be slightly less in the University boat race, but the statistics firmly categorise rowing as a strength-endurance sport.

[color=red(Q) Do rowers develop particular physiology to compete? t[/color]

SI: Generally, rowers will have a large frame, stand around 196 cm tall, weigh 95kg or more and will have a great deal of slow-twitch muscle. In order to perform at that level, rowers develop distinctive physiology to cope. They need to be strong enough and large enought to produce the requisite power and to house the necessary cardiorespiratory system to sustain such a high workload.

Q) Because of that enhanced aerobic capacity, would a rower find it easy to adapt to another sport – endurance running, for example?

SI: No, not necessarily, despite the inherent related qualities in terms of aerobic capacity, distance runners and rowers are extreme opposites in size. Because rowers are in a boat, their body weight can be supported and so can afford to be much bigger than running endurance athletes, where they will have to take the strain of transporting all of their body weight around, for example.
Although rowers will weigh more and the boat will sit fractionally lower in the water, any extra resistance the boat may encounter is easily outweighed by the benefits of being more powerful.