Olaf Tufte on Concept2 machine -- in HD

[Zeebee]

http://www.dn.no/dntv/?watch=3169

[AJ]

On Jan 20, 1:55 am, Zeebee <zbychobikeri...@gmail.com> wrote:
> http://www.dn.no/dntv/?watch=3169

not exactly classic technique :)

[Walter Martindale]

On Jan 19, 8:55 pm, Zeebee <zbychobikeri...@gmail.com> wrote:
> http://www.dn.no/dntv/?watch=3169

Hmm. "not exactly classic technique" - what's wrong with it? He's
two-time Olympic champion.. I've heard criticism of Drysdale's
technique (too deep, too this, too that) and yet he's 4 x world
champion in the 1X.

Once during a coaching course in NZ we showed videotape of a women's
pair and asked "what would you do to help this crew get faster" (it
was the "before coaching" clip of a crew that was working to get rid
of a hesitation at the catch - a very slight hesitation)... The coach
involved in the critique rattled off all of the technical points where
the crew (as a crew and as individuals) were slightly varied from the
"classic" technique...(balance was off, hanging at the catch, stroke
was opening up too early, bow was bum-shoving, they were leaning way
out at the catch, bending their knees too early - to name a few) and
then he said... "They'll never go anywhere, who are they?" 1991 world
champion and soon-to-be 1992 Olympic champion women's pair, Kathleen
Heddle and Marnie McBean...

Maybe we should look at "what are they doing that makes them so fast,
and how can I help them improve" instead of "what are they doing
wrong" when we look at people rowing or sculling (or erging)....
Another thing to look at is "OK, if so many people who are winning
international races are doing technical point a, b, or c "wrongly"
according to my technical model, maybe I should examine my technical
model." Considering that most published technical models - from
MacArthur, to Redgrave, to most coaching manuals (the ones I've read
from Australia, NZ, Canada, USA, and UK, anyway) have some version or
another of Fairbairn's technique models, perhaps coaching hasn't kept
up with the available knowledge or research on what makes boats go
fast....

When I was just getting started in coaching, the Kiwis were regularly
dominating the M8+ (early 1980s) - I was support staff for Canada at
the 84 Olympics, when one of the coaches asked the Kiwi coach (Mahon)
why the Kiwis were so good from such a small country - the answer was
along the lines of "You know all that sports science research done by
Hagerman and others? We take it seriously" or something very close to
that.

Example: Classic coaching has the blade depth with the top edge just
under the surface, with the "pocket" developing at the back of the oar
to ease extraction. Sliasas et al., have done modelling on this and
published it... I asked Andrew S. (a rower and coach) if he'd
considered checking the modelling software for blade fluid dynamics
with different depths, and I cited conversations I'd had with Valery
Kleshnev about blade depth (1/2 a bladewidth of water above the blade
is best) - he ran the models that afternoon and came back to me with
"wow, it's more efficient to be deeper" - but all the coaching manuals
still say "keep the blade at the surface"....

ooh... I'd better turn rant mode off...
ZEE - thanks for posting the link...

Cheers,
Walter

[sully]

On Jan 20, 9:00 am, Walter Martindale <wmart...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Jan 19, 8:55 pm, Zeebee <zbychobikeri...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >http://www.dn.no/dntv/?watch=3169
>
> Hmm.  "not exactly classic technique" - what's wrong with it?  He's
> two-time Olympic champion..  I've heard criticism of Drysdale's
> technique (too deep, too this, too that) and yet he's 4 x world
> champion in the 1X.
>

He's right, it isn't "classic technique" and you are
right that there's often things in "classic technique"
that can be improved on or radically changed
and blade depth is a great example.

Would you then take what he's doing in the
video on the recovery and teach it to all of
your rowing charges?

This is the constant problem, we look at
very fast scullers who are doing very good
things to make a boat go but there are things
they could do better, or do things that may not
be optimal but are comfortable for them.

This brings to my mind an internal debate
I have. I don't think Tufte is really focusing
on his erg work, he's just spinning and doing
the time. He does not erg like he sculls.

With elites I've helped, I counsel them to get
4-8 hrs of their weekly aerobic work by running.
This allows them training time where they're doing
the right stressing on their aerobic energy systems
without being focused or competitive. I also counsel
them to focus on their erg work, pattern in good
body mechanics etc, because repetitive motion is
motion learned.

If you aren't focused on your running, or swimming, or
other cross-train exercise, it doesn't affect the body
mechanics of your sculling, and it has the benefit of
a mental break. All rowing should be focused.

I've considered erg work to be close enough to rowing
to require focus, no dissociation, etc..

Am I wrong about that?

Watching Tufte in the vid causes me to question
myself on this.

[Charles Carroll]

> not exactly classic technique :)

AJ,

What is "classic technique?"

Is technique an end in and of itself? Or is it a means to an end?

If the latter, then mustn't one define the end before one can decide
whether the technique works.

When I scull I have in mind a very specific end -- namely, to get as much
power as I can as quickly as I can for as long as I can.

It seems to me that any technique that achieves this end can be deemed
good.

Or am I being too simple?

Warmest regards,

Charles

[AJ]

Hi Walter - my comment was made slightly tongue in cheek and I had
meant to add the point that when you are a double Olympic Champion you
can frankly do what the hell you like, and single scullers at whatever
level tend to anyway - it's in the nature of the beast.

I think we inhabit rather different parts of the coaching universe and
your expertise and experience is way beyond anything I could claim. I
spend my coaching time with beginner to intermediate junior
schoolgirls where I spend a lot of time trying to get them to sit up -
so they hopefully don't set up lower back injuries, hold their knees
down - so their crews can develop some collective rythym and not bat
up and down their slides like demented puppy dogs, and to not roll
their shoulders down on the recovery so they don't then sky their
blades just before the catch. I suppose the point I was making was
that the way Tufte does his ergs is not the way I would teach
beginners - when you have the legs of Tufte, the core strength of
Tufte, and the lungs of Tufte and you win like Tufte then you don't
fiddle with it in some misguided attempt to impose a 'technical
ideal'. Heavyweights tend to get away with all sorts of technical
lapses or idiosyncracies when they are learning because they are big
enough and strong enough for them to get away with them and still win,
but it doesn't then follow that this becomes the model to follow or
that they wouldn't be faster still if they were to address these
technical 'issues'. I feel a lot of heavy weights succeed in spite of
their perceived technical deficiencies, not because of them. I would
like to see just how fast some top end heavyweights could go if they
were coached to row/scull like the very best lightweights. I remember
marvelling at the Danish Lightweight Four running Redgrave's crew to
about half a length on the line at Henley '99 despite giving away
close to 50lbs a man weight difference and wondering what it was they
were doing right to get that close to the best four in the world. I
would say Mark Hunter is the example I would point to right now.

I wasn't trying to make the case for some kind of ultimate imposed
othodoxy but I still maintain that I wouldn't be using Olaf as a model
for good erg technique. That said if I had a 14yr old girl who was
pulling a 1.48 on setting 8 at R20 then I wouldn't want to intefere
too much either! Watch this space...

Cheers

AJ

[sully]

On Jan 20, 11:36 am, AJ <aja...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> On Jan 20, 5:00 pm, Walter Martindale <wmart...@gmail.com> wrote:

snip

>
> I wasn't trying to make the case for some kind of ultimate imposed
> othodoxy but I still maintain that I wouldn't be using Olaf as a model
> for good erg technique. That said if I had a 14yr old girl who was
> pulling a 1.48 on setting 8 at R20 then I wouldn't want to intefere
> too much either! Watch this space...

I think it's good to look critically at what you see
and make judgements. If you didn't know that
was Tufte, would you change your view?

What if someone told you that guy on the erg
spun it pretty good but when really slow in a
single?

It's the 'first place' trap. I think you are far more
sound as a coach to question the technique
of someone that is really fast, than to simply
accept it all because they are fastest.

[Carl]

I wouldn't want to assess any good rowers' present boat-moving abilities
or limitations from what they seem to do on an erg. Ergs are to a
greater or lesser degree, even the best of them, mechanical attempts at
simulating but a part of real rowing. By the same token, I might
(supposing I knew enough) like the way they went on skis, or running,
but that would be only part of the package.

If I wanted to know how they'd go in a boat, then I'd want to see them
doing it in a boat. Intelligent rowers & scullers use ergs knowing that
they are not rowing, but using the devices to work on various actions &
muscle groups as well as overall fitness. I guess they may adapt how &
what they do to extract particular benefits, certainly not to show us
what good rowers they are.

Rowing is so much more than a set of bodily motions. Walter has raised
again a theme familiar to us both - greater blade depth - a topic I've
banged on about for many years. How can we know how well a rower will
move a boat until we have some idea of how well they connect with the
water & how much input work they throw away by failing to get a more
efficient interaction of blade with water.

Good rowing is attractive to watch, but the fastest of boat moving is
often uglier than that which looks best. In rowing we don't win races
by scaling some precious aesthetic pinnacle but by doing the right mix
of more work & higher efficiency than our opponents. Harry Mahon was
quite explicit when underlining, on a certain memorable occasion, that
rowing & dressage have very different requirements. Rowing technique is
so often confused with style that a better insight into what would move
boats better is continually obscured.

Without a wider understanding of the hydrodynamics of the oar/water
interaction, rowing will be held back. Without that understanding it is
much harder to detect & define where energy is being uselessly
dissipated between blade & water. In which case, how can one make a
full assessment of a rower from what they do on an erg?

Cheers -
Carl



--
Carl Douglas Racing Shells -
Fine Small-Boats/AeRoWing Low-drag Riggers/Advanced Accessories
Write: Harris Boatyard, Laleham Reach, Chertsey KT16 8RP, UK
Find: http://tinyurl.com/2tqujf
Email: ca...@carldouglas.co.uk Tel: +44(0)1932-570946 Fax: -563682
URLs: www.carldouglas.co.uk (boats) & www.aerowing.co.uk (riggers)

[Zeebee]

On Jan 20, 8:36 pm, AJ <aja...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> [...] I would

> like to see just how fast some top end heavyweights could go if they
> were coached to row/scull like the very best lightweights. I remember
> marvelling at the Danish Lightweight Four running Redgrave's crew to
> about half a length on the line at Henley '99 despite giving away
> close to 50lbs a man weight difference and wondering what it was they

> were doing right to get that close to the best four in the world. [...]

Hei Andrew, here's something that i think may surprise you:
For a couple of years now, Team Tufte's coach is Carsten Hassing
http://www.rowingone.com/n_bio_rower.fwx?no_id=4455
Carsten - a Dane! - was himself a lightweight rower, performing on LTW
coxless four and eight, although couple of years before the race you
mention. Perhaps he was involved as a coach in this? Even if he wasn't
coaching them, or around, surely he's got access to "inside
information" or "trade secrets", whatever it might be. I believe there
is nothing that either he or Olaf wouldn't know about it.

Whenever Carsten Hassing or Olaf Tufte talk about (model of)
technique, they usually use very different terms from what we are used
to hear or read here on r.s.r, in works of Valery Kleshnyev, and
everywhere else. The central term is "The Block" or lower part of the
torso, from diaphragm to pelvis. They talk mostly about *internal*
forces in the body of a rower, about center of mass and using inertia
to ones advantage. Several times I've heard Olaf talking about
technique and it was very much about workings of the hip. Olaf is
using the word "blokk" very much!
So, i believe their ideal model or principles of technique may look
different when applied by different rowers -- when viewed from
outside, in more conventional terms of body parts, angles, and
sequencing. And it does not have to be contradictory.

--
Yours Virtually, Zibi

[Charles Carroll]

> Whenever Carsten Hassing or Olaf Tufte talk about (model of)
> technique, they usually use very different terms from what we are used

> to hear or read here on r.s.r, in works of Valery Kleshnev, and

> everywhere else. The central term is "The Block" or lower part of the
> torso, from diaphragm to pelvis. They talk mostly about *internal*
> forces in the body of a rower, about center of mass and using inertia
> to ones advantage. Several times I've heard Olaf talking about
> technique and it was very much about workings of the hip. Olaf is
> using the word "blokk" very much!
>
> So, i believe their ideal model or principles of technique may look
> different when applied by different rowers -- when viewed from
> outside, in more conventional terms of body parts, angles, and
> sequencing. And it does not have to be contradictory.

Zibi,

I could not agree more with thinking that rowers should not try to adapt
themselves to a technique; but instead should find a technique that they
can adapt to themselves.

Isn’t this just another way of saying that rowers should be coached for
their strengths? Olaf Tufte in the video link below praises the perfection
of Vyascheslav Ivanov’s sculling, and then adds that he could not possibly
copy Ivanov because he is not built like Ivanov.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p5G6uH-epxk&feature=relmfu

I have a question regarding the video link of Olaf Tufte’s erging.

Why is he using a static erg? I would think that if Olaf Tufte was serious
about training on an erg, he would use a dynamic erg, preferably with a
wobbly seat.

Another reason I cannot take the video seriously is that the erging is so
poor. There are many videos on the internet of Tufte’s sculling. In all of
them he shows himself to be an elite sculler with a powerful and
accomplished technique. I simply do not understand why he would abandon all
this and be content to erg so poorly, unless of course he was just engaging
in horseplay.

Warmest regards,

Charles

[Zeebee]

On Jan 23, 2:40 am, "Charles Carroll" <charles_carr...@comcast.net>
wrote:

> Isn’t this just another way of saying that rowers should be coached for
> their strengths? Olaf Tufte in the video link below praises the perfection
> of Vyascheslav Ivanov’s sculling, and then adds that he could not possibly
> copy Ivanov because he is not built like Ivanov.
>

A couple of weeks ago i was at the annual conference of rowing coaches
of Norway. [I couldn't always follow the discussion cause it was in
different dialects of Norwegian, and the main speaker used some weirdo
Danish. :-) ] At some point the example of Ivanov was mentioned. Then
Dr. Einar Gjessing -- inventor of the famous ErgoRow ergometer -- said
that Ivanov's technique was optimal in his times when slide rails were
still quite short. he said that "Ivanov was a World Champion of short
tracks -- he made the best use of them, but on a modern boat with
longer tracks this technique probably wouldn't be so effective" or
some sort of it. Then, Mr. Thor Nielsen quickly added: "Sixty fife!
Sixty five centimeters it was!"

> I have a question regarding the video link of Olaf Tufte’s erging.
>
> Why is he using a static erg? I would think that if Olaf Tufte was serious
> about training on an erg, he would use a dynamic erg, preferably with a
> wobbly seat.

Dunno. It beats me too.
Well, we all know how it is... "No one breaks the winning
combination." Preparing to fifth Olympics, having a medal on a double
in 2000 and then two golds on a single, he would need a VERY GOOD
REASON to *change* something, don't you agree?

Valery Kleshnev in his talk some time ago described a cycle, how
technical innovations or innovative methods in rowing become widely
used. It takes years! He said something like from 12 to 16 years, or
so, don't remember exactly. Anyway, it goes like this: It takes some
unknown coach working with unknown trainee, preferably a junior, who
are not under pressure, to experiment with something new in order to
get the edge over competition. If they succeed, *IF* and only if this
trainee makes international success as elite rower some years later,
it becomes widely known. And often it gets into a mainstream only when/
if this trainee becomes a coach himself.

> Another reason I cannot take the video seriously is that the erging is so
> poor. There are many videos on the internet of Tufte’s sculling. In all of
> them he shows himself to be an elite sculler with a powerful and
> accomplished technique. I simply do not understand why he would abandon all
> this and be content to erg so poorly, unless of course he was just engaging
> in horseplay.

Wot? Frankly, i do not understand what you mean. Why you say "so
poor"?

I am impartial to Olaf Tufte, as a person he is a great hero and role
model for me, and because i know him only through rowing i can't
separate his rowing from his personality. But even though i try hard,
i can't see anything poor in his rowing in this video. (Well, maybe
the moment when he is reaching for a sports drink bottle...)
One does not have to necessary like his style, bit "old school"
probably, but it is carefully, precisely executed -- I'd say "a piece
of decent craftmanship".

Charles, can you please say which elements of his rowing you think
look 'poor' here? It's a genuine question -- maybe i overlook
something important?

--
Virtually Yours, Zibi

[Fordmeister]

Ergo's Don't Float

[Zeebee]

On Jan 24, 12:08 am, Zeebee <zbychobikeri...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I am impartial to Olaf Tufte, as a person he is a great hero and role
> model for me, and because i know him only through rowing i can't
> separate his rowing from his personality.

Sorry for the silly error, I AM PARTIAL, of course.
I do not even try to be objective when it comes a the person of my
hero. :-)

--
Virtually, Zibi

[Walter Martindale]

On Jan 24, 4:03 am, Fordmeister <fordmeiste...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> Ergo's Don't Float

So?

[Fordmeister]

I think we agree in terms of your earlier post but what makes an erg score good and a boat run fast are totally different.

My brother's best is 5.58 (better than mine !) but he has never been in a boat and I wont let him touch my erg. I love watching the sculling in the world's. 6 men, six styles but all going very fast. Always my highlight and you can try to figure out how each sculler makes his boat go quick until the next worlds comes about and the whole cycle starts again.

[Walter Martindale]

On Jan 24, 11:35 am, Fordmeister <fordmeiste...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> I think we agree in terms of your earlier post but what makes an erg score good and a boat run fast are totally different.
>
> My brother's best is 5.58 (better than mine !) but he has never been in a boat and I wont let him touch my erg. I love watching the sculling in the world's. 6 men, six styles but all going very fast. Always my highlight and you can try to figure out how each sculler makes his boat go quick until the next worlds comes about and the whole cycle starts again.

True... You won't let him touch your erg? Boat, maybe...
All ergs do is measure the work output based on flywheel kinetics.
Preaching to the converted, I suspect, but most folks who can make a
boat go fast can usually bang off a good ergo score, but we all know
the ergo doesn't imply boat skill.

[Carl]

Would I be right in thinking the problem you see is that, during
recovery, Olaf T lets his knees rise somewhat before his hands have
passed over them?

ISTR a previous RSR discussion on this same divergence between the
time-honoured orthodoxy (= hands > body > slide) & what a fair bunch of
real winners do.

You start by teaching a degree of orthodoxy as a handy way to get a
disparate bunch of physical specimens to coordinate themselves enough to
move a boat reasonably well. Some will find, if they scull or row other
small boats & spend a fair bit of time being their own coaches, that
"received technique" is not the best way for them to move a boat.

Meanwhile, many lesser rowers will mutter about how much faster these
real champions might be, were they to obey convention. Others, perhaps
equally blinkered, will assume it's all down to the boats they are using
that year. And thus the sport will collectively reinforce its mental
barriers against the seemingly unbearable effort (& the possible pain of
having to accept having been slightly wrong)) associated with trying
genuinely to assess what it is, in how they row, that helps those
champions to be so fast.

[Rebecca Caroe]

we're all overlooking the hidden message at the top of the video page
DN, no forside.
it clearly means something cryptic about his technique!

[Zeebee]

On Jan 25, 8:38 pm, Rebecca Caroe <rebe...@creativeagencysecrets.com>
wrote:

> we're all overlooking the hidden message at the top of the video page
> DN, no forside.
> it clearly means something cryptic about his technique!

[Like!]

[Charles Carroll]

> Charles, can you please say which elements of his rowing you think
> look 'poor' here? It's a genuine question -- maybe i overlook
> something important?

Zibi,

I have finally found the time to take a few frames from the video to which
you linked us and compare it to a video of Olaf Tufte’s sculling, and then
study each video in slow motion.

http://youtu.be/ethHDG4d9So

As a result I am compelled to admit that I am completely wrong.

Initially I hypothesized that if I could show the difference between Olaf
Tufte’s erging and his sculling, I would be able to point to what I found
wanting in his erging. The two videos, however, show that Tufte ergs very
much as he sculls. His catches are the same, his drives are the same, and
his finishes are nearly identical.

On water Tufte is an extraordinarily effective boat mover. So if Tufte ergs
the same way as he sculls, how could I fault his erging?

In short, I am clearly in the wrong to have characterized Olaf Tufte’s
sculling as poor.

The only point I might argue is that he finishes on the erg with his hands
higher than they are when he is actually sculling on water. But this is a
point so minor that it is tantamount to quibbling.

With apologies and warmest regards,

Charles

[sully]

On Jan 29, 11:46 pm, "Charles Carroll" <charles_carr...@comcast.net>
wrote:

> > Charles, can you please say which elements of his rowing you think
> > look 'poor' here? It's a genuine question -- maybe i overlook
> > something important?
>
> Zibi,
>
> I have finally found the time to take a few frames from the video to which
> you linked us and compare it to a video of Olaf Tufte’s sculling, and then
> study each video in slow motion.
>
> http://youtu.be/ethHDG4d9So
>
> As a result I am compelled to admit that I am completely wrong.
>
> Initially I hypothesized that if I could show the difference between Olaf
> Tufte’s erging and his sculling, I would be able to point to what I found
> wanting in his erging. The two videos, however, show that Tufte ergs very
> much as he sculls. His catches are the same, his drives are the same, and
> his finishes are nearly identical.

Nicely done, Charles, but I beg to differ.

Watch Tufte on the recovery in both cases.
In the sculling vid, his legs delay a bit more
on the recovery and his arms get extended
sooner relative to his slide movement. On
the erg, he's pretty much coming out together
and extending his arms into the catch.

I'm not going to comment on relative merits but
simply match what I see in the two vids on
that point.

The last few strokes of a 2k race are not the
best place to see how a sculler rows over
the entire race, Tufte does finish his strokes
in the body of the piece - at this point of the
race he's cutting the finish a bit to be able
to throw more strokes in.

[Charles Carroll]

> Watch Tufte on the recovery in both cases.
> In the sculling vid, his legs delay a bit more
> on the recovery and his arms get extended
> sooner relative to his slide movement. On
> the erg, he's pretty much coming out together
> and extending his arms into the catch.

Mike,

This is terribly embarrassing, but I have to confess that I was so focused
on Olaf Tufte’s drive that I ignored the recovery. I just didn’t think
about it.

You’re right, of course, about the differences between Tufte’s recovery in
a boat and on an erg. The sculling video clearly shows that on the recovery
Tufte’s legs delay more and his arms get extended sooner than they do when
he’s erging.

I have a question. It seems to me that the video also shows that Tufte when
he is sculling gets his center of gravity a little lower than he does when
he’s erging. If you get a moment would you look at the video again and tell
me whether you agree, or if I am just imagining this?

I ask because I think I scull better when my center of gravity is slightly
lower. Of course this means that my back has to be slightly more rounded.

Fairbairn, as you might have guessed, supplies a rationale for this. He
writes: “In swinging back the body should be driven out. The old idea of
holding the back straight was all wrong. It held the lower part of the back
much further forward at the finish, and so shortened as well as stiffened
the stroke. Let anyone examine the movement by sitting upright in a chair
and swinging back with the back straight, and then push out the lower part
of the body, and he will at once see how much longer and harder he can
apply his weight by driving the back bellied out like the wind bellies out
a sail, and he is in the best position at the finish to whip the oar round
the turn. Driving the back out allows the whole of the weight to come on at
once, and by carrying the lower part of the body as far back as possible,
it gives a longer and harder stroke, though it does not look as if the
shoulders travelled as far because the lower part of the body goes so much
further back …” (“Steve Fairbairn on Rowing,” p. 435)

But it is getting late and I want to get some sculling in before I have to
go to work again. Maybe I will complete the paragraph this evening, if
anyone’s interested.

Warmest regards,

Charles

[sully]

On Jan 31, 10:47 am, "Charles Carroll" <charles_carr...@comcast.net>
wrote:

> > Watch Tufte on the recovery in both cases.
> > In the sculling vid,  his legs delay a bit more
> > on the recovery and his arms get extended
> > sooner relative to his slide movement.   On
> > the erg, he's pretty much coming out together
> > and extending his arms into the catch.
>
> Mike,
>
> This is terribly embarrassing, but I have to confess that I was so focused
> on Olaf Tufte’s drive that I ignored the recovery. I just didn’t think
> about it.
>
> You’re right, of course, about the differences between Tufte’s recovery in
> a boat and on an erg. The sculling video clearly shows that on the recovery
> Tufte’s legs delay more and his arms get extended sooner than they do when
> he’s erging.
>
> I have a question. It seems to me that the video also shows that Tufte when
> he is sculling gets his center of gravity a little lower than he does when
> he’s erging. If you get a moment would you look at the video again and tell
> me whether you agree, or if I am just imagining this?

He's sitting up more at the finish on the erg, but
remember in the last strokes of a race you
are trying to throw a lot of decent strokes out
rapidly and under great duress, rather than be
the most effective you can with each stroke.

There can be all kinds of differences in
erging and rowing that are due to the rig.
In a single, your hand path on drive is determined
by desired blade depth and rig height
(no such on erg), and
the upper body twist in sweep or the arm
spread in sculling is going to affect the drive
mechanics a bit between boat and erg.

>
> I ask because I think I scull better when my center of gravity is slightly
> lower. Of course this means that my back has to be slightly more rounded.

Just be careful about your perception
of rowing better. things that might
feel better may not be the most
effective.

[Tinus]

On 01/31/2012 12:30 AM, sully wrote:
> Watch Tufte on the recovery in both cases.
> In the sculling vid, his legs delay a bit more
> on the recovery and his arms get extended
> sooner relative to his slide movement. On
> the erg, he's pretty much coming out together
> and extending his arms into the catch.

Is this a bad thing to do on an erg, or even in a boat?

[sully]

on the erg it makes no difference. Indeed I've
seen ppl do things on an erg that would
be horrendous to a rowing shell and crank
up some good scores.

in a boat, a number of things can be affected
1. peak acceleration on the early recovery.
given the same period recovery time, rolling
out of bows more quickly adds more peak
acceleration right after release. That would
be fine except then you are adding relatively
more hull drag, better to delay the slide travel
to reduce deceleration on the recovery.

2. interference with oar handle and knees

3. recovery timing and feeling of "rush" in
team boat.

4. catch preparation. If you're reaching into
the catch with your arms/upper body, it
severely lessens the chance of proper catch timing
with the butt/slide. Not saying it can't be
done, but I haven't seen it.

Tufte does those things in a single, you can
see evidence even in Charles' vid where he's
just piling in the last few strokes of a painful
sprint.

[Charles Carroll]

> Tufte does those things in a single, you can
> see evidence even in Charles' vid where he's
> just piling in the last few strokes of a painful
> sprint.

Yep! He stays with the pack until the last 500m, and then increases the
rate and rows through everyone. I think he actually got up to 38 spm. It
was something like that anyways. Just an amazing feat! Where does that come
from?

You can see him shorten up as he begins his sprint. I suspect he loses
distance per stroke, but compensates for this by having more strokes. Or as
Mike wrote, cuts "the finish a bit to be able

to throw more strokes in."

It seems to me you have to admire Tufte's flexibility. For 1500 m he sculls
at the same pace and rhythm, and then, as if it is nothing, changes to a
different pace and rhythm. I cannot imagine how hard that must be, or how
much pain he has to ignore to do it.

Of course you shouldn't forget how massively strong Olaf Tufte is.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YIN6UgCoh08

Can anyone guess how much Tufte's is lifting? With that kind of strength
imagine how hard he can pull on those oar handles ...

[Tinus]

On 02/01/2012 06:30 PM, sully wrote:
> On Jan 31, 3:37 pm, Tinus<martijn.weteri...@wur.nl> wrote:
>> On 01/31/2012 12:30 AM, sully wrote:
>>
>>> Watch Tufte on the recovery in both cases.
>>> In the sculling vid, his legs delay a bit more
>>> on the recovery and his arms get extended
>>> sooner relative to his slide movement. On
>>> the erg, he's pretty much coming out together
>>> and extending his arms into the catch.
>>
>> Is this a bad thing to do on an erg, or even in a boat?
>

> in a boat, a number of things can be affected
> 1. peak acceleration on the early recovery.
> given the same period recovery time, rolling
> out of bows more quickly adds more peak
> acceleration right after release. That would
> be fine except then you are adding relatively
> more hull drag, better to delay the slide travel
> to reduce deceleration on the recovery.

1) Peak acceleration is the wrong term. Coming out together is exactly
doing the opposite in terms of peak forces or acceleration. A delay in
the movement of the seat, means less time for the seat movement which
requires a higher peak velocity and in it's turn a higher acceleration
of the seat. The same is true getting the arms prepared for the catch
much time before the catch starts. It requires a higher peak velocity of
the arm movement.

It is true that there may be a positive effect of having a slightly
lower recovery speed/momentum in the beginning compared to the end but
this must also be balanced with a positive effect of a smooth, constant,
recovery speed.

Further: 2) The interference may be a problem but it is not Tufte's
problem. His arms move in a straight line. 3) no problem for single
scull. 4) If moving together with arms and seat just before the catch is
a problem in timing then it still does not explain why the arms should
be "finished"/prepared before the legs. Why not the other way around?

[sully]

The way I teach it is constant handle speed, but since
the arms body move before the slide starts, the
result is a slide that rolls a bit faster later in the
recovery than initially.

>
> Further: 2) The interference may be a problem but it is not Tufte's
> problem. His arms move in a straight line. 3) no problem for single

my point is the generic difference between erg and single.
If your hands are clear of the knees by a tiny bit on the
erg, it makes no difference, but that sort of clearance in
a single translates to contact in rough water, or if boat
slightly off balance.

> scull. 4) If moving together with arms and seat just before the catch is
> a problem in timing then it still does not explain why the arms should
> be "finished"/prepared before the legs. Why not the other way around?

It depends upon whether you want to pick up the
catch with the arms and add legs to it
or pick up the catch with the legs and
add upper body on the drive.

I think the latter more efficient drive
but can certainly find examples of
exceptions.

I also know of rowers who are very good at
picking up pressure at catch w/ lower body
in spite of 'extra reach' of arms or body
into the catch. They are very coordinated
and athletic, for sure.

[Tinus]

Constant handle speed is one thing. A constant speed of individual body
parts is also a nice feature of a smooth recovery.


Also the part 'since the arms move before the slide starts' leads to a
circular reasoning. You can't use this in as an argument to prove the
very same thing.

>>
>> Further: 2) The interference may be a problem but it is not Tufte's
>> problem. His arms move in a straight line. 3) no problem for single
>
> my point is the generic difference between erg and single.
> If your hands are clear of the knees by a tiny bit on the
> erg, it makes no difference, but that sort of clearance in
> a single translates to contact in rough water, or if boat
> slightly off balance.

I believe it is not necessary to mimic the vertical handle motion, as
seen in rowing, on an erg. A short flat horizontal path of the handle is
what a rower needs to get used to. Eliminating the vertical part around
the catch and release, on the erg, gives a rower a sense of shortness or
directness which can be tried to be copied in the boat. The close
movement of the handle and knees is different from the movement in the
boat only in the sense that in the boat the hands move lower. However it
is the same in the sense that the handle and the knees get very close.
This closeness is not a bad thing to try on the rowing machine. Also
this closeness is not a sign of bad technique.

>
>> scull. 4) If moving together with arms and seat just before the catch is
>> a problem in timing then it still does not explain why the arms should
>> be "finished"/prepared before the legs. Why not the other way around?

...

>
> I also know of rowers who are very good at
> picking up pressure at catch w/ lower body
> in spite of 'extra reach' of arms or body
> into the catch. They are very coordinated
> and athletic, for sure.
>

So maybe this simultaneous movement, if well coordinated, is more a sign
of excelence instead of bad technique?

[sully]

It can be. Got some examples in boats? Where this would
have the least impact I think is in a single, since you don't
have to coordinate a number of athletes' movements.

Yet in that full 2004 vid of the single final pretty much
everybody has a delay in their slide starting while
the hands and body move.

Indeed, this discussion was furthered with Charles'
video of the direct comparison between Tufte on the
erg and in the single where the recovery difference
is dramatic.

Just about any movement can be made to
feel smooth and relaxed with repetition.

>
> Also the part 'since the arms move before the slide starts' leads to a
> circular reasoning. You can't use this in as an argument to prove the
> very same thing.

But I did no such thing. My premise was that I TEACH this, and
the result of a constant handle speed plus a more sequential
body movement on the recovery is a slide that picks up speed
a bit on the recovery. I don't think I've ever coached anybody
to "accelerate the slide", but do slow their start.

>
>
>
> >> Further: 2) The interference may be a problem but it is not Tufte's
> >> problem. His arms move in a straight line. 3) no problem for single
>
> > my point is the generic difference between erg and single.
> > If your hands are clear of the knees by a tiny bit on the
> > erg, it makes no difference, but that sort of clearance in
> > a single translates to contact in rough water, or if boat
> > slightly off balance.
>
> I believe it is not necessary to mimic the vertical handle motion, as
> seen in rowing, on an erg. A short flat horizontal path of the handle is

Nor do I.

> what a rower needs to get used to. Eliminating the vertical part around
> the catch and release, on the erg, gives a rower a sense of shortness or
> directness which can be tried to be copied in the boat. The close

Not sure I understand this.

> movement of the handle and knees is different from the movement in the
> boat only in the sense that in the boat the hands move lower. However it
> is the same in the sense that the handle and the knees get very close.
> This closeness is not a bad thing to try on the rowing machine. Also
> this closeness is not a sign of bad technique.

I don't call it a bad thing. I'm pointing out that
the consequence of very small clearance between
the knees and handles will make sculling
more difficult to most, particularly in rough water
which happens to be a frequent race
and training condition. This will cause
the hands to tighten, not relax more.

Do you teach trying to get as close to the
knees as possible on the recovery?

>
>
>
> >> scull. 4) If moving together with arms and seat just before the catch is
> >> a problem in timing then it still does not explain why the arms should
> >> be "finished"/prepared before the legs. Why not the other way around?
>
> ...
>
>
>
> > I also know of rowers who are very good at
> > picking up pressure at catch w/ lower body
> > in spite of 'extra reach' of arms or body
> > into the catch.   They are very coordinated
> > and athletic, for sure.
>
> So maybe this simultaneous movement, if well coordinated, is more a sign
> of excelence instead of bad technique?

I know of many excellent athletes who've rowed
to great success rowing in ways that are
contrary to my teaching, including athletes
I've coached. This always causes me to
re-think what I teach, but apply reason to
what an "ideal" stroke should look like, and
also understand the notion that what feels
best to an outstanding athlete might well
be the most effective 'technique' for them.

But your point seems to be to go out and
emulate whatever a champion is doing?

[Tinus]

Some rowers take a lot extra effort on the erg moving their hands up and
down. It slows them down and this behaviour is carried over to the
technique in the boat. In the boat one would like to teach a rapid catch
and release. The rower should sense a rapid connection. The connection
on the erg, which does not require a catch action of the blade in the
water, can be made quickly. This feeling can be used as a feedback on
the water. If the rower feels a certain directness on the erg then this
feeling can be used on the water.
Few rowers however get this feeling on the erg. For many it is sadly
because they move their hands vertically. This can be improved very
easily. A delayed connection with the handle causes a high acceleration
of the body before the handle resistance is felt. This causes a high
impact on the back at the moment when the connection is made and it is
one of those reasons why people believe ergs cause more injuries than
boats.

>> movement of the handle and knees is different from the movement in the
>> boat only in the sense that in the boat the hands move lower. However it
>> is the same in the sense that the handle and the knees get very close.
>> This closeness is not a bad thing to try on the rowing machine. Also
>> this closeness is not a sign of bad technique.
>
> I don't call it a bad thing. I'm pointing out that
> the consequence of very small clearance between
> the knees and handles will make sculling
> more difficult to most, particularly in rough water
> which happens to be a frequent race
> and training condition. This will cause
> the hands to tighten, not relax more.
>
> Do you teach trying to get as close to the
> knees as possible on the recovery?

I don't teach it explicitly but I do use it as a marker. Ideally the
upper body and lower body should start the recovery together. The
recovery speed of upper body and lower body should be such that the
handle passes the knees just in time. A little bit of extra clearance is
useful especially in the boat.
This is also what you see in the boat. Indeed it seems as if the seat is
taking a pause around the release. However, this is mainly before the
release during the last part of the drive. The seat starts to move
pretty close to the moment when the arms start to stretch.

[Tinus]

On 02/01/2012 11:49 PM, Tinus wrote:
>> I don't call it a bad thing. I'm pointing out that
>> the consequence of very small clearance between
>> the knees and handles will make sculling
>> more difficult to most, particularly in rough water
>> which happens to be a frequent race
>> and training condition. This will cause
>> the hands to tighten, not relax more.
>>
>> Do you teach trying to get as close to the
>> knees as possible on the recovery?
>
> I don't teach it explicitly but I do use it as a marker. Ideally the
> upper body and lower body should start the recovery together. The
> recovery speed of upper body and lower body should be such that the
> handle passes the knees just in time. A little bit of extra clearance is
> useful especially in the boat.
> This is also what you see in the boat. Indeed it seems as if the seat is
> taking a pause around the release. However, this is mainly before the
> release during the last part of the drive. The seat starts to move
> pretty close to the moment when the arms start to stretch.

A good example is the video of the European Championships M1x final with
a slow motion at the end of 1st place Griskonis.

[Charles Carroll]

> The last few strokes of a 2k race are not the
> best place to see how a sculler rows over
> the entire race, Tufte does finish his strokes
> in the body of the piece - at this point of the
> race he's cutting the finish a bit to be able
> to throw more strokes in.

Hi Mike,

Oh I just knew it! I just knew it! I knew you were going to see right away
that as Tufte sprints the last 500m he shortens up while raising his
rating. It was a safe bet, too, you would spot that he was sacrificing his
finishes. So I found the following quote from Volker Nolte yesterday and
thought it might amuse you. It is from “The Sport of Rowing,” p. 2467.

“Biomechanics will tell you that if you must shorten up anywhere, you
should shorten up the finish because the catch is way more important than
the finish. All of my studies and studies done all around the world show
that the catch is more important than the finish.” (Nolte, RCA Coaches’
Conference, 2005)

And Peter’s comment:

“The studies to which Volker was referring apparently did not include the
studies carried out by the GDR in the 1970s.

“Or by Charles Courtney in 1900.”

Cordially,

Charles

[Charles Carroll]

Tinus,

If I am understanding Mike correctly, he is saying that instead of having
his rowers use a concurrent motion on the recovery, what he teaches “… is

constant handle speed, but since the arms body move before the slide
starts, the result is a slide that rolls a bit faster later in the recovery

than initially.”

I have to say that I am trying to take the recovery as Mike describes it.

Let me see if I can be slightly more detailed. In my experiments with
sculling at low pressure what what seems to be work best for me is a
segmented recovery – i.e. arms/body/slide.

I am finding that it is more important to be smooth and relaxed than it is
to be fast.

I am also finding that as each of the first two movements end, blending the
next movement into them works best, that is, just milliseconds before I
finish sending the arms away, I begin the forward bend of the body.

And lastly I find that getting most of the forward angle before I begin the
slide is quite helpful. There are two reasons for this:

First, it lowers my center of gravity and moves it further sternwards. This
actually takes weight off the seat.

And second, getting most of my forward angle before beginning the slide
helps me use my heels to draw the shell underneath me.

I would like to stress that I am not in any way promoting this as the best
way to take the recovery. I am only saying that at the moment it seems to
be working very well for me.

Also I am curious. You are much more versed in the physics of rowing than
I. How do you take your recovery?

Cordially,

Charles

[Charles Carroll]

> I believe it is not necessary to mimic the vertical handle motion, as
> seen in rowing, on an erg. A short flat horizontal path of the handle is
> what a rower needs to get used to. Eliminating the vertical part around
> the catch and release, on the erg, gives a rower a sense of shortness or
> directness which can be tried to be copied in the boat. The close
> movement of the handle and knees is different from the movement in the
> boat only in the sense that in the boat the hands move lower. However it
> is the same in the sense that the handle and the knees get very close.
> This closeness is not a bad thing to try on the rowing machine. Also this
> closeness is not a sign of bad technique.

Tinus,

This I don’t understand at all.

Why would eliminating the vertical part around the catch and release on the
erg give a rower a sense of shortness or directness which can be copied in
the boat

What do you mean by “shortness or directness?”

Cordially,

Charles

[Tinus]

Maybe this video might clarify.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9ifGNmUi92M

With the three girls in black in the front you can see that their arms
are more or less parallel with the chain while they are pulling. However
just before the catch the arms are not parallel. Even though they had
their arms stretched early they were not prepared.

This is more dramatic with the girl in white behind Ursula. She has a
clear change in the arm/chain alignment _during_ the leg push. You can
also notice a shock motion in the arms. This is due to the delay of
preparation in the upper body. A lot energy is stored into the body when
the legs push while no connection is made. This energy is all unleashed
on the arms at once when the connection is made.

Ursula is later with extending her arms. But, she does have this direct
connection. Having your arms extended way before the catch is not
important. What matters is that they are extended _at_ the catch.


The video also clarifies one of the other aspects. The girls in black
show the sequential arms,trunk,leg recover. Ursula does it more all at
once. Ursula may seem to be moving, like Olaf, wrong and everything
together. But, she moves much more smoothly compared to the others. The
girls in black have a very fast movement of the arms and a high speed on
the slide. I believe the contrast with Ursula is very strong and clear.


Another point is clarified in the video. Instead of the recovery order
arms/trunk/legs Ursula is doing it slightly (but just a tiny bit)
different. Her shoulders and head are already moving towards catch while
her arms are still pulling. So the order is trunk before arms. The
reason for this type of motion is the requirement to both move the
handle backwards (in order to apply power during the stroke) and
accelerate the body forwards (in order to make a new stroke). Blending
the trunk acceleration for recovery with the arm pull for the finish of
the drive makes a very short and efficient turn point. If executed well
then the lost stroke length is made up for by a higher stroke rate.
To answer a question in another post. This is also how I try to recover
in the boat. I try to make the trunk start before the arms and I try to
move as synchronous as possible although not completely because I need
clearance between knees and handles. This requires a slightly faster
start with the arms and trunk which is also useful in the drag on the
boat which is improved when the momentum difference between rower and
boat is relatively less in the beginning of the recovery.

[A. Dumas]

On 03/02/2012 03:49, Tinus wrote:
> [snip]

You probably seem like the perfect coach to second year rowers.