30 minutes at cadence 20, test for GB team
Zbigniew A.
on Concept machine at cadence 20 for 30 minutes. I'd love to hear more, how
exactly this test is made, what are the typical results, and so on. When
and how often this test is made?
Can anyone say more details?
--
Yours Virtually, Zibi from Oslo
KC
> I was told that one of the test for selection to a GB rowing team is rowing
> on Concept machine at cadence 20 for 30 minutes. I'd love to hear more, how
> exactly this test is made, what are the typical results, and so on. When
> and how often this test is made?
> Can anyone say more details?
>
I would guess that for elite heavy men scores around or slightly over
6km would be expected, being that open rate 6km tests usually result in
times around 19mins (+/-) for elite heavy men, and in my experience lots
of hwt guys do their 6km tests at SR in the mid/high 20's or so.
-KC
Rob Collings
> I was told that one of the test for selection to a GB rowing team is rowing
> on Concept machine at cadence 20 for 30 minutes. I'd love to hear more, how
> exactly this test is made, what are the typical results, and so on. When
> and how often this test is made?
> Can anyone say more details?
It's made exactly as it says - sit down and row for 30 minutes at a
rating of 20. I don't know about the seniors, but the programme for
the juniors last year had this down roughly every 3 weeks and your
best score to date was submitted with every 2k/5k test. I think the
best junior men aim for around 8500m. I think I read the senior men
doing 9000m ish.
I find it quite a good erg to do for monitoring because it's
sufficiently submaximal that it doesn't interfere with your other
training much. I'm told that it's a good predictor for 2k performance,
but I don't see that. I never quite managed to break 8k, yet my
doubles partner (who I could beat by a margin over 2k) managed about
200m more than me.
Rob.
Pete
I think that's more a test-your-progress session every couple of
weeks. Scores - lightweights probably 8750m-ish, heavies over 9000.
Pete
Zbigniew A.
> It's made exactly as it says - sit down and row for 30 minutes at a
> rating of 20.
What I would like to know more precisely, how the 20 cadence is observed, is
it "once you row 21 you're out" or is it aiming at "average 20", or else?
And what's about drag factor settings?
--
Virtually Yours, Zibi
Stelph
No idea what the GB squad do but my squad do 30mins at rate 20, and
for a benchmark it seems to be if you are getting around 6:10-6:20 you
should be able to do 1:43-1:45 average split.
How the test is done? Well, you get on the erg for 30mins and pul as
hard as you can! Basically I think its uspposed to be a very good test
of endurance and mental toughness
anto...@aol.com
by all accounts it was a big day when pincent broke the 1.40 barrier.
not many do.
kc
REALLY? I've gone 20-flat for 6k, and I'm no Pinsent. Granted going
20:00 is not *breaking* 1:40, but close. It's quite common here in the
US for top college rowers (hwt men that is) let alone elites to go
sub-20 on a 6km test. If that was a "big day" for British rowing, then
I wonder how they do so well internationally...
-KC
kc
^^^^^^^ forgot about the fixed rate at sr20. That would be obviously
much tougher.
-KC
kc
YIKES. I must need some sleep or coffee or something. I also just
realized that I mis-read the OP. I thought it was a 20 minute test at
SR20. 1:40 for 30 minutes at SR20 is very impressive.
-KC
Charles Carroll
It just knocks my socks off!
Charles
wmar...@gmail.com
I hope they'd get a LOT farther than 6 km that in 30 minutes... That
would mean I could beat them in a 30 minute test, and if you're
looking for something to laugh at, sit me on a C2 for 30 minutes at
stroke rate 20.
Are you thinking 20 minutes at cadence 30? Then they'd be getting
somewhere around 6 km.
W
W
Christopher Kerr
I'm not in the GB squad but this is how it's done at Cambridge:
You normally have several people lined up, rowing in time with each other.
Sticking to 20 is easy (unless everyone else is rowing at 21, in which case
it is really offputting to switch from in-phase to antiphase and back once
a minute). The rate limit is based on average rate - watching a dozen erg
screens for 30 minutes to see if the rate ever goes above 20 is a bit much
to ask of a coach. If you end up averaging 21, you feel a bit silly, but
ultimately it doesn't really matter because (a) you'll be doing another one
in two weeks anyway and (b) it's more like a "high pressure training piece"
than a test.
Set the drag factor to whatever you want - it will probably be higher than
for a free rate test. I'd use 130 (cf 120 for a 2K test).
Chris
anthony...@hotmail.com
That's a 2' 30" split. A bit modest don't you think?
aj
Peter Ford
Um... the other round. 30 minutes at rate 20, not 20 minutes at rate
30. So somewhere around 9km for the top end, I believe.
mruscoe
It was a big day because it was at altitude.
See the last 1/3 of this video - http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=yO2RZX7CtrU
ben
Presumably you mean 8 km and "well over"
Zbigniew A.
>> by all accounts it was a big day when pincent broke the 1.40 barrier.
>> not many do.
>
>
> It was a big day because it was at altitude.
>
>
> See the last 1/3 of this video - http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=yO2RZX7CtrU
There are visible just last few strokes of this attempt. What strikes me, is
the way this guy rows, he is leaning waaaaay baaaack and pulling the handle
close to his throat. Perhaps it makes sense when trying to score a good
result it this particular test, but what has it to do with rowing?
--
Yours Virtually, Zibi
Charles Carroll
Zibi,
I wonder if anyone will be tempted to answer your question by maintaining
that leaning dangerously far back at the finish and pulling the erg handle
all the way up your trunk to where it is underneath the chin will result in
a better erg score!
If anyone does answer your question this way, I hope they will say why.
I have never understood why poor technique on an erg produces a better score
than a sound, safe technique that would move a boat fast.
Cordially,
Charles
Charles Carroll
Could you get away with such poor technique on a Rowperfect or a C2 on
slides?
Zbigniew A.
>> . . . what has it to do with rowing?
>
>
> Zibi,
>
> I wonder if anyone will be tempted to answer your question by maintaining
> that leaning dangerously far back at the finish and pulling the erg handle
> all the way up your trunk to where it is underneath the chin will result
> in a better erg score!
>
> If anyone does answer your question this way, I hope they will say why.
In this particular test the cadence is limited -- you row over 20, like 21
for instace, and you fail the test. So, having fixed number of strokes,
namely 600 (20 x 30 minutes) the only way to get a better score is to make
every stroke as "big" as possible. Or else, even as big as impossible
(foobar).
That's why in this limited cadence test this tactic, of strokes waaaaay
exaggerated, pays back.
I am not saying that this guy has a bad technique in general. Apparently he
must be an excellent rower. I just can't understand why they push him to
f@#$ up his rowing for such a test, which IMHO fails to make sense when
done this way.
--
Yours Virtually, Zibi
Christopher Kerr
I don't know about leaning "dangerously far back", but it does seem obvious
that, if you are being forced to row at a suboptimal rating, you will go
faster by rowing slightly longer (and slightly harder i.e. with higher drag
factor) than would be optimal if you were rowing at a higher rating.
The reason that rowing longer makes you able to produce more power (i.e.
faster on an erg) is that your handle speed is faster (for a fixed rating),
and since power = force * speed, you produce more power.
The other way of looking at it is: If there is no rate cap, you can go
faster by cutting off the ends of the stroke (where you are relatively
weak) so that you can rate higher, and thus pass through the middle of the
stroke (where you are strongest and can do the most work) more frequently.
If you have a rate cap, you can no longer gain this advantage, so there is
no point in not rowing longer.
It may be that Matthew Pinsent was rowing longer than he should have, and
could have gone faster by rowing shorter. However, I daresay that Matthew
Pinsent knows an awful lot more about Matthew Pinsent's physiology than
either of us do, so I'm going to defer to his judgement on this one.
Chris
Pete
wrote:
> Opps! Just thought of a second question.
>
> Could you get away with such poor technique on a Rowperfect or a C2 on
> slides?
Yes, it's not even hard.
Rig your single to finish not too far back (i.e. properly), or go
rowing on calm water, and you'll find you can row that way in your
single too. Of course, anyone following will probably be very unhappy
at the amount of wash coming off your single as you bounce it along.
Pete
with practice at the get-ahead-and-wash-down game
KC
> Charles Carroll wrote:
>
>>> . . . what has it to do with rowing?
>>
>> Zibi,
>>
>> I wonder if anyone will be tempted to answer your question by maintaining
>> that leaning dangerously far back at the finish and pulling the erg handle
>> all the way up your trunk to where it is underneath the chin will result
>> in a better erg score!
>>
>> If anyone does answer your question this way, I hope they will say why.
>>
>> I have never understood why poor technique on an erg produces a better
>> score than a sound, safe technique that would move a boat fast.
>>
>> Cordially,
>>
>> Charles
>
> I don't know about leaning "dangerously far back", but it does seem obvious
> that, if you are being forced to row at a suboptimal rating, you will go
> faster by rowing slightly longer (and slightly harder i.e. with higher drag
> factor) than would be optimal if you were rowing at a higher rating.
>
> The reason that rowing longer makes you able to produce more power (i.e.
> faster on an erg) is that your handle speed is faster (for a fixed rating),
> and since power = force * speed, you produce more power.
Close, but not quite. Power is indeed force * velocity, but it's also
Work/time or (force * distance) / time. The "time" aspect to consider
here should be for a full stroke cycle, thus handle velocity during the
drive isn't as important as the distance over which the force is
applied. Indeed, the handle velocity doesn't change much anyway, no
matter what you do, so the best way to do more work is by rowing a
longer stroke, or pulling harder (which will speed up the handle a tiny
bit, but not much). If there's a rate limit, then you'll have to hurry
the recovery a bit to keep your rate up, but rowing extra long usually
won't make you exceed your target rate.
Keep in mind these comments are for erging. There are lots of things
you can do on the erg that won't hurt your score, and might help it,
that would totally ruin your boat speed on the water.
There are also lots of erg hammers out there who can't move boats as
well as their scores would indicate. This was one reason I originally
wasn't too crazy about Teti when he came to the helm of the US team.
His selection process was very biased toward erg scores. He seems to
have done well enough though. :-) I suppose the logic is: maybe ergs
don't float, but you gotta have the erg score AND the technique to row
at the gold medal level, so might as well weed out those who don't have
the erg score. Still not sure I agree with that logic, though.
-KC
aaron.aar...@gmail.com
1) The 30 mins @ r20 test is a fairly common one in UK rowing, especially during winter training programmes. It's basically to see how far you can row in a given time at a given rate. My club (Agecroft) routinely did one in September to establish a basic fitness benchmark and assign rowers to squads. It would then be repeated periodically (usually every second month) up until HORR (March). Not only did it help coaches see who was responding to the training load (ie - who was getting faster), it was a good training piece in its own right. Intense enough to effect physiological change, especially in combination with the rest of the winter training regimen, it didn't ruin rowers for other training, racing, and rowing (as some tests can). Our capping was strict. If you went up to 21, you got a warning. If you did it again, you had to stop the piece and drop out, taking it again later. It is, after all, a measurement of your ability to produce power consistently over a set period of time at a set rate. Upping the tempo even by 1spm skews the result.
2) 9k plus for this test might now be standard in international and exceptional club oarsmen. Sport moves on, and what was groundbreaking in one era simply becomes standard in another. However, when he set the marker of 9007 metres for 30 mins @ r20 (capped) in 2004, MP was the leading athlete in the GB rowing squad. He was one of the most successful and medalled oarsmen in the world in an international squad that is, at the time of writing, arguably the most successful of the last three decades. While he acknowledges that at the time a few of his colleagues could break 9k for this test at sea level, Pinsent took the test 2000 metres above sea level, where there was an average of 7% less oxygen in the air – oxygen being the only fuel available for the muscles. As he points out, no-one (at least in the GB squad at that time) had gone above 9k before in that situation. Pinsent also did his 30 minute piece following a morning session of a 3 x 24 station weight-training circuit, with a minute on each station (so, 72 minutes in total, with a certain number of reps to be completed each minute). What is an impressive enough achievement becomes even more so when considered in these contexts.
3) 'I have never understood why poor technique on an erg produces a better
score than a sound, safe technique that would move a boat fast'.
It doesn't. But there is poor technique, and poor technique. I don't think that anyone, including Matt himself, would suggest that he was a particularly 'pretty' rower. But I don't think that anyone would dare argue that he wasn't an exceptionally effective one. Four Olympic Golds, a hatful of World Champs, and God knows how many other medals and benchmarks suggest otherwise. Looking at past and present footage of the GB camp erg training and on the water indicates that there isn't necessarily a correlation between the stroke profile that is being used on the erg, especially for pieces that are, essentially, physiological and mental tests, and the ability to row well on the water. This also seems to be the case looking at other international squads. An exaggerated draw or backswing might happen on an erg (especially on capped pieces) to try and get as much as possible out of each stroke, but it doesn't necessarily mean that this is what you'd see on the water. Rather than 'poor technique' it is more accurate to think of it as effective, real-world technique. Of course, we would perhaps coach that a rower's stroke profiles on the erg should be as close to a rower's stroke profile in a boat and vice versa because you want to ingrain effective neural and muscular patterns at a deep fundamental level. But these guys are internationals: at a very basic level, they live and die by their scores. If you can't pull the benchmark times, you aren't going to be given the chance to get in a boat and show how neat and effective you are. In and out of a boat, it's pretty clear that MP ticked all the boxes.
4) In case anyone is wondering about my credentials, my PB for this test is 8460 metres in 30 mins @ r 20. So, a 1 47 average. I was a middle-of-the-road club rower for my club, Agecroft. MP's record is safe from me.
Interesting discussion to stumble across,
best,
AJ
Henry Law
> I don't often get involved in internet forums - largely because such debates can spiral off endlessly. However, just a few thoughts
alumnus, since moved on to lower things ..). I don't have anything to
add (I know nothing of the things you're discussing), but I wanted to
encourage you to keep posting and reading here.
This group has debates, to be sure, but they don't often run off-topic.
And there is great knowledge here, from which I hope you'll profit. Oh
look, here comes a Knowledgable Person right now ...
--
Henry Law Manchester, England