1:14 can’t be the world record? Toward the end of senior year of college (last year) I did some rowing training for fun. I did 1:23 my first time and my best is 1:19. 5 seconds is a lot, but I don’t think I should be that close after only doing it for a few weeks. Not like I am Pudz strong either, my best deadlift is only 505 and best squat 425.
[quote]jtrinsey wrote:
1:14 can’t be the world record? Toward the end of senior year of college (last year) I did some rowing training for fun. I did 1:23 my first time and my best is 1:19. 5 seconds is a lot, but I don’t think I should be that close after only doing it for a few weeks. Not like I am Pudz strong either, my best deadlift is only 505 and best squat 425. [/quote]
And you’re probably got some height to you. I’m pretty sure 1:14 is indeed the world open record last I checked as well. In rowing you’ve got guys training for a year to drop half a second (not split second, actual half second) for a 2k for a year in the elite echelons. As the times drop, seconds, half seconds, and tenths, become exceedingly harder to get. So what doesn’t sound like much (5 seconds) is truly a ton. It’d be like asking michael phelps to drop a full 2-3 seconds off his 50 fly (shorter distance makes it harder to take off). I’d be interested to see the stats but I assume that when you get sub 1:18 the amount of people who’ve done it get lower and lower.
Makes sense. And yeah, I’m 6’3" with long legs for my height. Kind of like sprinting I guess; it’s a lot easier to go from 12 seconds to 11 in then 100m then 11 to 10. Gotta be a frustrating sport to compete in. Mad respect to anybody who actually competes where the races are a lot longer- at least 2000m right? I tried a few 2000s and they turned my legs to jelly.
I’m gonna see if I can pick a used one up for my house. It’s gotta be more interesting than running for cardio.
[quote]jtrinsey wrote:
Makes sense. And yeah, I’m 6’3" with long legs for my height. Kind of like sprinting I guess; it’s a lot easier to go from 12 seconds to 11 in then 100m then 11 to 10. Gotta be a frustrating sport to compete in. Mad respect to anybody who actually competes where the races are a lot longer- at least 2000m right? I tried a few 2000s and they turned my legs to jelly.
I’m gonna see if I can pick a used one up for my house. It’s gotta be more interesting than running for cardio.[/quote]
Olympic racing is 2k. Exhibition races are 4k-6k in the fall called head racing with a staggered start boats on the fly spaced 15-30 seconds apart. The 2k (sprints) are stand still starts 6-8 boats across.
More interesting then running? Unlikely. Staring at that monitor for a 60-90 minute steady state row is hell. Granted I’ve been rowing/erging 10+ years now so I hate the machine with a passion.
[quote]LiquidMercury wrote:
[quote]jtrinsey wrote:
Makes sense. And yeah, I’m 6’3" with long legs for my height. Kind of like sprinting I guess; it’s a lot easier to go from 12 seconds to 11 in then 100m then 11 to 10. Gotta be a frustrating sport to compete in. Mad respect to anybody who actually competes where the races are a lot longer- at least 2000m right? I tried a few 2000s and they turned my legs to jelly.
I’m gonna see if I can pick a used one up for my house. It’s gotta be more interesting than running for cardio.[/quote]
Olympic racing is 2k. Exhibition races are 4k-6k in the fall called head racing with a staggered start boats on the fly spaced 15-30 seconds apart. The 2k (sprints) are stand still starts 6-8 boats across.
More interesting then running? Unlikely. Staring at that monitor for a 60-90 minute steady state row is hell. Granted I’ve been rowing/erging 10+ years now so I hate the machine with a passion.[/quote]
Don’t let him kid you. It doesn’t take up to 10 years before you start hating the erg. I only started rowing last fall and already I hate the erg with a passion. Especially when I’m alone and have to do 29min pyramids, it just gets boring and lonely. It takes a lot to push yourself to get your ass on that erg and keep going all out. I personally took some time off the last couple months to get some strength training and running hills to get used to lactic acid. So soon I need to start getting ready again come fall for when I head back to university to row again.
[quote]A_Lemay wrote:
Don’t let him kid you. It doesn’t take up to 10 years before you start hating the erg. I only started rowing last fall and already I hate the erg with a passion. Especially when I’m alone and have to do 29min pyramids, it just gets boring and lonely. It takes a lot to push yourself to get your ass on that erg and keep going all out. I personally took some time off the last couple months to get some strength training and running hills to get used to lactic acid. So soon I need to start getting ready again come fall for when I head back to university to row again.[/quote]
So true, I was trying to be optimistic. Lucky for me I live down south and can get on the water year round (if I truly wanted to deal with being on the water at around freezing temperature in Dec/Jan) so my time on the erg is as limited as can be; though I will say that bringing erg times down is best done by erging and not as much on the water for the most part.
Personally, I’d advise you not to take too much time away from the erg/water. Even during what I consider the off-season for my high school aged athletes I encourage them to at least get on an erg 3 times a week for steady state besides whatever other workouts they may be doing. I’m of the opinion that more work should honestly be done in the off season then during the season. Better to come in with a huge aerobic base so that you can spend your in-season time on boat speed on the water instead of having to play catch-up.
[quote]LiquidMercury wrote:
So true, I was trying to be optimistic. Lucky for me I live down south and can get on the water year round (if I truly wanted to deal with being on the water at around freezing temperature in Dec/Jan) so my time on the erg is as limited as can be; though I will say that bringing erg times down is best done by erging and not as much on the water for the most part.
Personally, I’d advise you not to take too much time away from the erg/water. Even during what I consider the off-season for my high school aged athletes I encourage them to at least get on an erg 3 times a week for steady state besides whatever other workouts they may be doing. I’m of the opinion that more work should honestly be done in the off season then during the season. Better to come in with a huge aerobic base so that you can spend your in-season time on boat speed on the water instead of having to play catch-up.[/quote]
Ya I can see where you are coming from and I def need to get my focusing on my cardio pretty good soon. I would have been rowing this summer for my town’s team but money/time wouldn’t allow it unfortunately so I’ll be at a bit of a loss coming back to my university team. It also doesn’t help that I’m a heavyweight and am only 5’11. I’m already at a disadvantage so I really need to step my game up that much more. I wonder if you had any suggestion?
Steady state on the erg. Best times I ever pulled were doing 70-120 minute steady state pieces on the erg once or twice a day during the off season. I’d just pop a movie in, and pull. When you can do 120 minutes or so at sub 1:55, 2k’s really just stop seeming quite as bad. This was back when I had no access at all to water and only an erg for 10 months.
Out of interest Liquid what was your 2k when you were pulling 1:55 for 120 minutes? And how does that compare to now and when you were at your heaviest?
Excellent blog as well, really incite-full training info.
When I was doing 1:55 for 120 minutes, I was pulling 6:31 (fastest test at the time). This, however, was with no AT or AN work. Since I was still in off-season training mode I hadn’t started to wind up. Injury side lined me before I could start adding in AT/AN work. I’d of expected myself to be in the mid 6:20’s range had I not had to take 6 months off. I then went on to other things and started playing lacrosse for the school and started packing on the size. At 160 lbs pre-injury to 215 lbs by my senior year of college. Since my training focus was different and I wasn’t training competitively for rowing while at 215 lbs I do not know how my performance would of changed. I know my power changed immensely and I was able to crank out a 500 reasonably well, but more then that and my tank was gassed.
LM:
Good info. I used to agree with the idea of just pulling as hard as possible at 10, but I’d like to think I’m smarter now, rowing at a damper setting of 6 (don’t know the drag).
Tips on C2 maintenance?
Keep the chain oiled (if you own your own you received a bottle of chain oil, if you’re out you can buy some on the C2 website). Store the erg inside. Eventually the internal band is going to loosen over the years and hours and hours of use (keep in mind this isn’t a factor for most people, more so just rowing clubs where an erg may see 1500 hours+ of use in a year). Wipe down the sled (bottom part) after each use to keep grit/sweat off and you should have an erg that stays working for years and years.
first time at the c2 rower was today. i did something like “500m/100r?” not sure what that means but the time said 1:34.9 , 1:35 and the distance said something around 550m … so i’m guessing it’s sub 1:35 for 500ms … maybe for 550ms?
apparently the 100r is rest / cool down. did it again right after for 1:35.5 for 500m. both were at max resistance on the wheel.
1:41.6 for 500m at about 6 with a drag factor of 134-136.
Question: How much does the s/m matter? I am doing like 28-29, which I have read is too high. I just started rowing and would like some insight as to how to improve on time. Thanks
^^Im not the expert but your strokes per minute will depend on how tall you are/how long your arms are. If you’re shorter you’re gonna have more s/m that someone with longer limbs… I think Liquidmercury can give you more insight but I think it has to do with hight/limb length
.greg.
[quote]gregron wrote:
^^Im not the expert but your strokes per minute will depend on how tall you are/how long your arms are. If you’re shorter you’re gonna have more s/m that someone with longer limbs… I think Liquidmercury can give you more insight but I think it has to do with hight/limb length
.greg.[/quote]
Not so. The thing with rowing (at least on erg slides and on the actual water) is that people of varying heights and proportions have to match up. When a coach says to base at a 36 for the race, then all 8 (or however many are in the boat depending on the type of boat) have to be at a 36. A 36 is a 36 is a 36 no matter what your height. Now stroke rating can be varied even at a given rate. Since the stroke is broken down to recovery and drive, you could have a variety of different “strokes” in appearance due to the nature of this ratio.
For example: You’re at a stroke rate of a 20. This means that every stroke (recovery+drive) is equal to 3 seconds. Now within this 3 seconds, you could have a 1 second drive and a 2 second recovery, a half second drive and a 2.5 second recovery, a 1.5 second drive and a 1.5 second recovery etc. etc. As a rower the most efficient thing to do is maximize your recovery while minimizing your drive while staying at full slide. The only way to do this (assuming you do not shorten your stroke) is to apply more power. More power = faster drive time, and therefore at a given rate, more recovery.
Now lets bring height into the picture. Since usually (not always since rowers have variable degrees of flexibility, pelvic tilt, lumbar curvature, and other varying aspects) taller rowers have longer strokes, to maintain a specific ratio at a specific rate, they may need to have varying levels of exertion. Exertion =/= power output levels. Keep in mind that a taller rower has more leverage thus in part nullifying the fact that he has more distance to move on the slide. This leverage often-times (and this is why rowing contains so many tall athletes) actually results in a positive gain on the time:force:exertion continuum.
Now, one may ask will a taller rower have a harder time hitting a higher rate? The answer to this is two-sided. Yes in the sense that they do have a longer stroke, but however as I hinted at earlier, the leverage helps. In terms of max-stroke rate though, the advantage goes to a shorter rower since leverage increases as it moves farther away from the fulcrum point. That being said, rowers almost never reach a max stroke rate as for the most part no one has the ability to apply max power at this rate and it is thus inefficient and has very large diminishing returns past a few strokes.
As a side note, if you don’t look pretty erging or rowing, you’re not doing it right. Though it may be painful and hell on a slide if you can stay looking pretty chances are your maintaining proper angles and technique. Rowing is often described as art in motion.
[quote]bubbarock wrote:
Question: How much does the s/m matter? I am doing like 28-29, which I have read is too high. I just started rowing and would like some insight as to how to improve on time. Thanks[/quote]
Stroke rate matters for a variety of reasons. Certain rates are more efficient at certain levels of exertion. For instance I’m not going to rate the same at a 500 as I am for a 2k as I am for a 120 minute steady state row. Even amongst rates there are differences. For instance lets say I have my kids do a 5k race but I’m making them do it with a stroke rate cap of 24. The reason I may do this have to do with technique issues, the fact that I want them to learn to apply force to the oar and not let the rate do some of the work, that they need to learn balance (which is harder at the lower rates) or a variety of other issues. Now if they are doing this 5k race at a 24, then they’re close to full pressure most of the time (mostly hovering around 90% until the sprint). I can also say lets do a 90 minute steady state row at a 24 (I wouldn’t since this is a bit high for steady state) and their exertion levels would be closer to 65-70% of max effort.
Depending on the training and the pieces you are doing you’ll be choosing a rate.
Basic guidelines (and these are huge generalizations):
Steady State (60-70% HR, still aerobic): 18-20 stroke rate, longer pieces 40 mins+ continuous. AKA UT2/1 or CAT6 training
Aerobic work: (70%-80% power, still aerobic on verge of anaerobic): 22-26 stroke rate, shorter pieces in duration, 10-30 minutes in duration. CAT 5 training
Anaerobic threshold work (80-85%): 26-30 stroke rate, 6-12 minute duration. Cat 4 training
Transport work (85-95%): 28-36 stroke rate, usually less then 5 minutes in duration. CAT 3 training
Anaerobic work (95%-Max): 30-Max stroke rate, usually less then 2 minutes in duration. CAT 2 training
As I said these are very broad generalizations. But hopefully will give you some insight.
[quote]LiquidMercury wrote:
[quote]gregron wrote:
^^Im not the expert but your strokes per minute will depend on how tall you are/how long your arms are. If you’re shorter you’re gonna have more s/m that someone with longer limbs… I think Liquidmercury can give you more insight but I think it has to do with hight/limb length
.greg.[/quote]
Not so. The thing with rowing (at least on erg slides and on the actual water) is that people of varying heights and proportions have to match up. When a coach says to base at a 36 for the race, then all 8 (or however many are in the boat depending on the type of boat) have to be at a 36. A 36 is a 36 is a 36 no matter what your height. Now stroke rating can be varied even at a given rate. Since the stroke is broken down to recovery and drive, you could have a variety of different “strokes” in appearance due to the nature of this ratio.
[/quote]
That makes complete sense. I believe he was talking about his S/M in a 500m sprint. I understand on a team everyone has to row the same S/M but what I was getting at (which i obviously wasnt clear about) is that in a one man sprint a shorter guy will have a shorter stroke/recoery than a taller guy and would probably have more S/M given both rowers are at the same rowing level.
Hopefully that makes more sense? But good insight. i like the part about looking pretty while you’re doing it. Ive never heard that before but I like it 
I’m usually too busy huffin and puffin after a few minutes to wonder if im looking pretty lol
.greg.
As I said somewhere in there is that a shorter guy can usually achieve a higher maximum stroke rate, but it’s not going to be efficient. Most competitive rowers doing a 500 for shits and giggles are probably rating between 36-42 at their most efficient (only shortening up the last 75-100 meters or so, remember I said diminished returns). Last time I did a 500 for “fun” I rated a 38 with good ratio and efficiency, bringing the rate up in the last 100 and topping out at 45 (my own tested max rate at full slide is a 51 with a very low load). If I start sacrificing length I can get upwards of 60+ but as I said it just wouldn’t be as effective to do that as my ratio becomes inverse with the drive being longer then the recovery by a significant amount. In a boat I could probably rate close to a 70 but as said just would be stupid since someone rating down at half that would be blowing right by me.
One of the biggest psychological games to play with someone in a race (especially in head racing in the fall where boats are staggered and you’re playing a bit of leap frog out there and there’s much more tactical steering) is to be rating a few beats lower on the rate and just rowing through them, knowing you have the ability to bring the rate up but you being the faster crew are rowing through someone while they’re at a higher rate. In a 2k we used to sit on the lead boat often-times letting them run with a 4 seat lead or so and again being at a lower rate (but higher power levels per stroke) until about the 1100 meter mark and then start to move on them. Nothing more demoralizing not being able to run away from a boat when your at max efficient rating and they’re rating lower then you and just sitting waiting to pounce.
Kind of wordy so essentially a higher rating can translate to more power/speed up to a certain point. Once you go past that point you’d be better off bringing the rate back down as you’re going to be faster.