Water vs Erg
cooldude...@gmail.com
the Water or Erging. I personally enjoy erging to get into shape
becasue i can see how fast im going and how much farther i need to go.
I love the Erg. What's your opinion?
KC
cooldude...@gmail.com wrote:
> I love the Erg. What's your opinion?
You're insane. ;^)
Seriously, you've got to do both. It also depends on what boat you're
rowing in... if you're learning to scull a 1x, then it's kinda hard to
get a really good workout like you can on the erg. But if you can get
a hard workout in on the water, it's always better, IMO.
-KC
cooldude...@gmail.com
for crew or rowing but just for a good healthy body.
KC
cooldude...@gmail.com wrote:
> I do love to do both what im saying is if you are wanting a workout not
> for crew or rowing but just for a good healthy body.
If part of that healthy body includes the mind, then I would always
choose on water rowing, if conditions/time allowed.
As for just pure fitness, not including sanity, I'd say it's much
easier to burn more calories in a shorter amount of time using an erg
than it is rowing on water.
-Kieran
anto...@aol.com
confused.....why?
Douglas MacFarlane
anto...@aol.com says...
For a start you don't usually have to wash the erg down after the outing and
put it back into the shed. (perhaps that's not a difference for some folk..)
Douglas
Joseph Meehan
I would suggest a mix. They are not the same. However since you said
getting in shape for rowing, I would say that you need time rowing. You
don't get all the technique on an erg, you only get that by rowing. Frankly
you don't get exactly the same workout on an erg as in the boat,
That said you can work well on the physical strength on the erg.
Now in real life, they are both good and complement and support each
other. Don't worry so much and enjoy both.
--
Joseph Meehan
Dia duit
KC
Well, aside from the extra time required before you can actually start
exercising with a real boat as opposed to an erg (get the boat down,
get the oars, etc.) and the time to put it away (wash, rack, oars)
there's also: the time wasted on the water turning around, slowing down
for traffic, slowing down to steer tight turns, etc. Furthermore, if
comparing a 1x to an erg, IMO most people will be able to go
significantly harder on the erg as far as pure physical output than in
the single -- there's just less to worry about on the erg. You can
almost shut down the mental part of rowing and just hammer away (if you
want).
The OP asked, "if you are wanting a workout not for crew or rowing but
just for a good healthy body." So, ignoring all the technical benefits
of actually getting on the water (not to mention the mental benefits of
getting outdoors) most people can hammer much harder on an erg than in
a 1x (actually for *most* people that's true for nearly all boats, but
especially the 1x). No, erging doesn't work all the same muscles as
real rowing, but I still say you can get a harder workout in on an erg.
As I said previously though, I would personally always choose a boat
if time and conditions allowed.
-Kieran
paul_v...@hotmail.com
In shape for what? In general, Erging would be about as efficient a
way possible to elevate overall fitness as is available. Need to add
some push-ups for balancing out the muscle groups that is not very
involved however.
If for Rowing, the Erg can be the best tool available for improving
what you will eventually do in a boat, or it can be the worst thing to
do. It all depends on how much you are willing to focus on what you
are doing and what you should be doing. Get a fast Erg score and you
will start to hear the "Ergs don't float." mantra from everyone slower,
as if that somehow justifies slow Erg performance. But as with all
stereotypical mantras, it was born out of real trends. I'm not sure
when that mantra got started, but the Erg was born in 1981, I started
using it in 1982 (first exposure to rowing) and became quite fast by
1983, but even during that first year I was already hearing it from
every senior crew member except the one who I had yet to beat (did
finally beat him on the final Erg test of that rookie year, and spent
that and the next year staring at his back in the varsity 8).
If you are concerned with moving boats, make sure to find out what your
coach wants, and practice that every stroke on the Erg so that a
transferable habit is formed in that relatively controlled environment.
i.e. Know how hard it feels to pull at the paces you consider to be
"maximum" effort for a distance or time, so that when you are in a boat
and asked for "full power" during 3 minute pieces, you will know what
that is. Also, being able to know that you are indeed putting the
force on the handle, rather than washing out, will require that feel.
Until the boat stabilizes as a work platform, a lot of effort goes to
waste, you will still get a hard workout, it just won't move the boat
very fast.
I agree that any reasonable day on the water is better than even the
best day on the Erg, and I don't care much about the "just being
outside" thing, otherwise I could put the Erg outside, which I don't.
Being out in a boat, on smooth water, is reason enough to endure the
eventual Erg sessions that allow us to get the most out of being on the
water.
Cheers,
Paul Smith
Dom N
boats have so it is easier to determine how much you have done in terms
of distance, time and effort, making it easier to keep track of your
changing fitness. I do agree that being outside can benefit you
massively; being in a gym with a mirror in front of you and an awful
music TV station on in the background makes you yearn for getting into
a boat.
ollie
cooldude...@gmail.com wrote:
> I do love to do both what im saying is if you are wanting a workout not
> for crew or rowing but just for a good healthy body.
I think it should be quite possible to row competitively and never use
an erg, after all that's how we always used to do it using running,
circuits and weights to improve fitness. You could never learn to row
without getting out on the water.
If I just wanted a good healthy body I personally would still use
running, circuits and weights rather than erging as it isn't really a
whole body workout.
Ollie
paul_v...@hotmail.com
Vested interest aside, Which muscles are being overlooked?
http://www.concept2.com/us/training/tools/musclesused.asp
And also no disagreement that weight circuits can, and should be used
if someone likes.
But how is it possible to say Rowing/Erging "isn't really a whole body
workout.", with a straight face? I know there are no "faces" here, but
hopefully that translates to the international audience.
- Paul Smith
Jonny
> > Which muscles are being overlooked?http://www.concept2.com/us/training/tools/musclesused.asp
>
Just sent this link to my massage therapist. Having better intelligence
on your 'enemy' is essential!
cooldude...@gmail.com
ollie
I think this page is essentially an advert for the Concept 2 erg so not
entirely scientific. The pecs are a major muscle group which are not
really getting a serious workout by "internally rotating the upper
arm". The gastrocnemius isn't getting a lot of work to do either, and
other opposing muscle groups are being used very unequally, like the
back and abdominal muscles, or triceps and biceps. Even some muscles
that are used, like the biceps would be better excercised using weights
as it doesn't work as well with the palm pronated.
I'm not saying that rowing and erging isn't great excercise, after all
I've been doing it for over 30 years, just that other excercises or a
variety of excercises are needed to keep things in balance.
paul_v...@hotmail.com
ollie wrote:
> paul_v...@hotmail.com wrote:
> > ollie wrote:
> > > cooldude...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > > I do love to do both what im saying is if you are wanting a workout not
> > > > for crew or rowing but just for a good healthy body.
> > >
> > > I think it should be quite possible to row competitively and never use
> > > an erg, after all that's how we always used to do it using running,
> > > circuits and weights to improve fitness. You could never learn to row
> > > without getting out on the water.
> > >
> > > If I just wanted a good healthy body I personally would still use
> > > running, circuits and weights rather than erging as it isn't really a
> > > whole body workout.
> > >
> > > Ollie
> >
> > Vested interest aside, Which muscles are being overlooked?
> > http://www.concept2.com/us/training/tools/musclesused.asp
> >
> > And also no disagreement that weight circuits can, and should be used
> > if someone likes.
> >
> > But how is it possible to say Rowing/Erging "isn't really a whole body
> > workout.", with a straight face? I know there are no "faces" here, but
> > hopefully that translates to the international audience.
> >
> > - Paul Smith
>
> I think this page is essentially an advert for the Concept 2 erg so not
> entirely scientific. The pecs are a major muscle group which are not
The link is clearly not a C2 ad, but if I say much more it will
probably be taken wrong.
I know the link is to a C2 web site, but if you went there and read it
you would see that it came from "Kinesiology of the rowing stroke, NSCA
Journal, Volume 10, Number 2, 1988, Thomas Mazzone, M.D. Wyoming County
Community Hospital, Warsaw, New York". But maybe C2 controls that
Journal, I just don't know. If not, surely it is a peer reviewed
professional document that should inspire at least a bit of confidence
in it's contents, if not for the hippy head ban alone. [;o)
I like the 30 year reference, I guess that would make you arrogant for
mentioning it. (I don't personally think so, but that has been
suggested to me when I have posted something similar regarding personal
experience.)
Cheers,
Paul Smith
Kieran
snip
> I like the 30 year reference, I guess that would make you arrogant for
> mentioning it. (I don't personally think so, but that has been
> suggested to me when I have posted something similar regarding personal
> experience.)
>
> Cheers,
> Paul Smith
Since you're so fond of accuracy in recollecting what transpired in a
given thread Paul, I thought I'd remind you since you seem to have
forgotten. I called you *pompous*, not arrogant, and for reasons
unrelated to your bragging. It was *you* who claimed to be arrogant,
and related it to your experience. I just agreed with you after the fact:
paul_v...@hotmail.com wrote:
> KC wrote:
>
>>paul_v...@hotmail.com wrote:
>>
>>>KC wrote:
>>>
>>>>LOL... too true.
>>>
>>>Yes, I know, that's why I said it.
>>
>>Why do you always have to be so pompous, Paul?
snip what I wrote...
>
> "Always"? That's a bit of exaggeration on you part, Mr. Wizard.
>
> Anyway, if you are going to toss about another insult, I prefer
> "arrogant" to "pompous", as it includes the characteristic of being
> proud of what one has accomplished and experienced. Self-assured
> would
> be even more accurate. It's at least nice that you interpretted what I
> said correctly, as opposed to reading it wrong and then insulting me
> because of your own errors. Refreshing actually. Let's try to keep
> that going.
>
> - Paul Smith
Yes, let's try to keep that going. Seems you're fallible too. Lucky
for you I'm more forgiving than you are.
-KC
paul_v...@hotmail.com
Kieran wrote:
> paul_v...@hotmail.com wrote:
>
> snip
>
> > I like the 30 year reference, I guess that would make you arrogant for
> > mentioning it. (I don't personally think so, but that has been
> > suggested to me when I have posted something similar regarding personal
> > experience.)
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Paul Smith
>
> Since you're so fond of accuracy in recollecting what transpired in a
> given thread Paul, I thought I'd remind you since you seem to have
> forgotten. I called you *pompous*, not arrogant, and for reasons
> unrelated to your bragging. It was *you* who claimed to be arrogant,
> and related it to your experience. I just agreed with you after the fact:
No, I remember fine, nice semantic wriggle though.
First of all, it ain't bragging if you've done it (though I suppose it
is still arrogant), and I don't say I've done something unless I have,
kind of an honesty thing going on there too. You are just like the
"ergs don't float" idiots who just want to insult someone who they
aren't willing to admit may just be a bit more accomplished than they.
The funny thing is, all the results suggested that those types were
flat wrong, but they would never relent on the line of BS. Imagine,
stubborness like that?
Of course you're also the one who is among people here "who know what
you can do", but you are just too humble to talk about it yourself.
Nice little compfy club, too bad it's so exclusive, it won't make much
progress, but everyone will feel good.
You seem to think you've just got it all figured out, when you don't,
but all the best with that.
Cheers,
Paul Smith
Kieran
> Kieran wrote:
>
>>paul_v...@hotmail.com wrote:
>>
>>snip
>>
>>
>>>I like the 30 year reference, I guess that would make you arrogant for
>>>mentioning it. (I don't personally think so, but that has been
>>>suggested to me when I have posted something similar regarding personal
>>>experience.)
>>>
>>>Cheers,
>>>Paul Smith
>>
>>Since you're so fond of accuracy in recollecting what transpired in a
>>given thread Paul, I thought I'd remind you since you seem to have
>>forgotten. I called you *pompous*, not arrogant, and for reasons
>>unrelated to your bragging. It was *you* who claimed to be arrogant,
>>and related it to your experience. I just agreed with you after the fact:
>
>
> No, I remember fine, nice semantic wriggle though.
No you didn't and it wasn't a wriggle, nor semantic. I called you
pompous, you said you prefer 'arrogant.' But in this thread you said
that you had been accused of arrogance when you brought up your
achievements. I called you pompous for reasons unrelated to your
achievements, and I have NEVER questioned nor doubted, nor made little
of, your achievements. You have every right to be proud of what you've
done in your rowing career; I'm proud of what I've done too. You ARE
pompous though (IMO). Call it arrogant if you like but what I'm
describing has nothing to do with your achievements (of which I know
very little). Synonyms: pretentious, inflated, turgid, bombastic.
Arrogant is not listed.
> First of all, it ain't bragging if you've done it (though I suppose it
Actually that's a common misconception. While bragging can include
exaggeration, it does not include lying. Ergo, you must have "done it"
in order to brag about it.
> is still arrogant), and I don't say I've done something unless I have,
Nor do I, nor do I accuse people of lying when I have no proof that they
did.
> kind of an honesty thing going on there too. You are just like the
> "ergs don't float" idiots who just want to insult someone who they
Actually, I have never used that saying, nor was it ever used upon me.
We had no reason to. Our coach did not use erg scores in setting boats.
So erg scores were only of interest between the oarsmen to see where
we each stood. Our coach only cared about erg scores to verify that a
given athlete was training and improving physiologically.
> aren't willing to admit may just be a bit more accomplished than they.
I have no problems at all acknowledging when someone is more
accomplished than I.
> The funny thing is, all the results suggested that those types were
> flat wrong, but they would never relent on the line of BS. Imagine,
> stubborness like that?
I wouldn't know... it takes one to know one, I guess.
> Of course you're also the one who is among people here "who know what
> you can do", but you are just too humble to talk about it yourself.
I am proud of many things. Humility is one characteristic that I strive
for, therefore I am not proud of it, for I don't think I have enough of it.
> Nice little compfy club, too bad it's so exclusive, it won't make much
> progress, but everyone will feel good.
Progress toward what? What good does bragging do? If you really want
to know my stats and achievements ask some of my friends, or google
around and search for yourself. None if my past is secret, but I'm not
going to brag all over the net about myself.
> You seem to think you've just got it all figured out, when you don't,
> but all the best with that.
I'm sorry that you think I "seem" that way, but it's not correct. I
don't think I've "got it all figured out" at all. Another
characteristic I strive for is to always learn and always be open to
learning. It goes hand in hand with humility. An arrogant person would
think they had it all figured out. You claim to be an arrogant person.
Do you have it all figured out?
-Kieran
David Gillard
> Vested interest aside, Which muscles are being overlooked?
> http://www.concept2.com/us/training/tools/musclesused.asp
>
The intercostals don't seem to get much of a mention. I have sometimes been
in the position of having erged for months before getting back in a boat.
Rowing (sweep) obviously carries a twisting element that is not found on the
erg. Then there are all the little twitches balancing the boat and finally
there is the difference in the 'system' i.e. static erg nailed to floor and
moving boat on water. I get off the water from the first session back after
a lot of ergs typically with cramp in my hamstrings and aching in my upper
body like I've been through a couple of rounds of boxing.
The C2 erg is a great piece of kit, but it ain't 100% the same as rowing or
sculling.
> And also no disagreement that weight circuits can, and should be used
> if someone likes.
>
> But how is it possible to say Rowing/Erging "isn't really a whole body
> workout.", with a straight face? I know there are no "faces" here, but
> hopefully that translates to the international audience.
>
They are both whole if whole means majority, but they are different.
> - Paul Smith
>
KC
David Gillard wrote:
> >
> > Vested interest aside, Which muscles are being overlooked?
> > http://www.concept2.com/us/training/tools/musclesused.asp
> >
>
> The intercostals don't seem to get much of a mention. I have sometimes been
The intercostals have very little function outside of aiding
respiration. Since we have to breathe regardless of what exercise we
do, I don't think it's misleading to not highlight them as part of the
major mm groups that get worked during rowing.
-Kieran
Jonny
On Oct 16, 10:40 pm, "KC" <kc_n...@sonic.net> wrote:
> The intercostals have very little function outside of aiding
> respiration. Since we have to breathe regardless of what exercise we
> do, I don't think it's misleading to not highlight them as part of the
> major mm groups that get worked during rowing.
>
> -Kieran
The intercostals seem to still cop a lot of punishment. Many of the rib
problems that have become common in elite rowers (especially lightie
girls) can be linked to tight intercostals.
The mid-thoracic spine is very much connected to the intercostals and
diaphragm and also connected to the arm and shoulder muscles that work
hard during the draw of the arms and the finish.
Unfortunately I know a little too much about this at the moment because
of my ageing body - my mid thoracic is stiff and I occasionally have
trouble breathing because of tight intercostals.
Pete
if you have the sort of mentality that will let you sit on an erg
staring into space for hours on end but can't maintain work levels
without something telling you you're not working, then probably you
will get fitter using an erg. But no-one will want to row with you
because your technique will be horrible after that much time on an erg
without real rowing, and you will make boats go slower than if you
weren't so fit but could row properly.
Pete
Mike Sullivan
<cooldude...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1160694960.0...@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
If you have a choice, row.
But at the level you're at now, every bit of training will advance your
strength and fitness: run, bike, rollerblade, surf, play soccer, wrestle,
buck hay, dig ditches.
One more note on wrestling. Don't work to make weight. work hard,
train hard, eat smart and well. and wrestle at the weight you're at.
Competitively
in wrestling it may not be as advantageous but healthier for you
athletically
and your maturation. You have the potential for big growth spurts, your
maturing bones need lots of nutrients to support that. There's evidence
that
strength building stimulates that, along with a full healthy diet. EAT!
Stay away from alcohol, also interferes with your growth.
Mike
Nick Suess
"Mike Sullivan" <s...@SNIPslac.stanford.edu> wrote in message news:eh0ib6$kg8
> Stay away from alcohol, also interferes with your growth.
Is that why you grew so tall, Sul>
Mike Sullivan
"Nick Suess" <ni...@scull.com.au> wrote in message
news:eh0nrj$mf8$1$830f...@news.demon.co.uk...
It's why I'm not 6'5" !!!
I didn't start until I was about 22 or so, you can ask JD!!!
JD shoulda been 6'7"
mike
Nick Suess
"Mike Sullivan" <s...@SNIPslac.stanford.edu> wrote in message
>>
>> "Mike Sullivan" <s...@SNIPslac.stanford.edu> wrote in message
>> news:eh0ib6$kg8
>>
>>> Stay away from alcohol, also interferes with your growth.
>>
>> Is that why you grew so tall, Sul>
>
> It's why I'm not 6'5" !!!
>
> I didn't start until I was about 22 or so, you can ask JD!!!
>
> JD shoulda been 6'7"
>
David Gillard
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/6059726.stm
:-)
paul_v...@hotmail.com
Seems fair cop. Guy brings knife to pickaxe fight, gets his arse
kicked, should be end of story, But no, in these days of "loser as
victim" the guy who simply had enough from an idiot who obviously
provoked him to action will be raked over the coals. But maybe not,
would be interesting to know how it all turns out. What happened to
the civilized dueling society?
Besides, I have no particular interest in "The Religion of Peace", not
sure about KC.
- Paul Smith