Peaking in Team Sports - 2007 - USOC Olympic Coach E-magazine, Winter Issue

The 2007 - USOC Olympic Coach E-magazine, Winter Issue arrived recently in my inbox. The various articles focus on teams. A few stood out as having some relation to rowing:

For coaches and athletes: Peaking for Team sports.

For coaches in particular : You were Hired to: Win Now Oo Win Consistently.

Sport Psycology - Great Groups, Great Coaches

Physiology - What Every Coach Should Know about Energy Systems.

There is a lot of great information there for you. If you would like to see back issues or subscribe you can receive future e-magazines via email by going to their main page.

If you enjoyed this post or other information on the site, subscribe to the Rowing Science Newsletter for regular updates and exclusive insider information for subscribers only.

or subscribe to the RSS Feed

New Rowing Biomechanics Newsletters

Two new Rowing Biomechanics Newsletters have been released of late.

January 2007 Edition is a comment on Mechanical Modelling in Rowing. It is a more general comment although it makes reference to a talk at the British Coaching Conference 2007:

The next talk, “Physics of rowing”, was one on which we cannot fail to comment. The presenter had developed quite an interesting computer model of rowing and some gadgets. However, instead of explaining the model, he presented a mixture of trivial things...
It is perhaps most interesting that he points out that most models use variation in boat speed as a major reason for energy losses in rowing. He notes:
The main verbal expression of this erroneous theory is: “do not disturb (stop) the run of the boat at catch”. The consequences of this are a soft ineffective catch, and early opening the trunk and slow force increase, which we found is very important for effective drive (RBN 2004/01-2).
He also discusses a front loaded drive vs. a finish loaded drive, which the models suggest is better, but biomechanically does not make as much sense.

In the February Edition Dr. Kleshnev responds to comments about spread/span discussed in an earlier newsletter. This includes remarks by well known biomechanist Volkere Nolte and by Einar Gjessing of Norway, creator of the “Ergorow”.

If you enjoyed this post or other information on the site, subscribe to the Rowing Science Newsletter for regular updates and exclusive insider information for subscribers only.

or subscribe to the RSS Feed

American College of Sports Medicine Position Stands

An excellent source of information is the American College of Sports Medicine who are a professional organization representing not just sports doctors, but all professionals in the field of sport science from exercise physiologists, to biomechanists, nutritionists, psycologists and more.

Their "position statements" are professional recommendations based on research literature. All these statements are available in PDF form on their website.

Of particular interest are two released recently. On March 1st they released a paper on "Exertional Heat Illness during Training and Competition" and February 1 they released one titled "Exercise and Fluid Replacement." These summaries should represent the most up to date information in the field and should be near the top of the reading list for all coaches as well as interested athletes.

While the information is fairly technical in nature and not something you would read in an aticle off the magazine stand, you can be sure it is current and reported by experts.

If you enjoyed this post or other information on the site, subscribe to the Rowing Science Newsletter for regular updates and exclusive insider information for subscribers only.

or subscribe to the RSS Feed

Rowing Blogs - Weekend Reading Anyone?

It has been a pleasure seeing the growth in readership of this blog. Readers have come from across the globe with a wide range of interests. Over 250 of you have subscribed for our updates and more still visit each day.

Technorti.com is one of the best known Blog Directories. They list 168 blogs with rowing as one of their topics! Of course not many of those have rowing as thier main topic. Here are a few of the blogs that I have had the pleasure of reading over the past six months or so. If you have a chance please take a look at the work of other rowing bloggers:


If I have forgotten any, please leave a comment with this post so I can follow up!

If you enjoyed this post or other information on the site, subscribe to the Rowing Science Newsletter for regular updates and exclusive insider information for subscribers only.

or subscribe to the RSS Feed

Rowing Coaching Education - Rowperfect Resources

Thanks to Rebecca Caroe of Rowperfect (and her own blog) who sent me an email with references to several of their resources related to recent posts here. I would encourage you to go over and have a look. In the near future I may get a chance to expand on some of these resources but for now, a brief summary and an encouragement to take a look.

Resources from several Rowperfect seminars is provided including:

Information on Seat Racing by Duncan Holland

This relates to my posting of an excel sheet for use with a pair matrix, and our poll on selection.

He includes some important points:
  • It is a big assumption that a pair can select an eight!
  • Don't repeatedly test young people on the erg.
  • Fit the test to the training (and events) at the time - longer in winter, shorter in summer.
  • Seat racing assumes athletes have comparable fitness, skill, honesty and motivation.
Although just points from slides, his layout of how and why to use fours, rather than pairs of eights is well worth a read if you plan on doing any seat racing.

Training to Perform presented by Paul Thompson

British Rowing Technique presented by Rosie Mayglothling

Athlete Testing Protocols presented by Martin McElroy

This one relates to our most recent post on peak power as a valid sub-maximal test for evaluating athletes and athletes progress. This includes protocols for:
  • Sub Maximal
  • Strength Power
  • Step Test
  • Anaerobic Capacity
  • 1000m
  • 500m
There are some great resources there and excellent graphics to help demonstrate the testing protocol.

If you enjoyed this post or other information on the site, subscribe to the Rowing Science Newsletter for regular updates and exclusive insider information for subscribers only.

or subscribe to the RSS Feed

Peak Rowing Power Predicts 2000 m Erg Performance

The latest issue of The Rowing News contains an excellent article by Ed McNeely describing peak power and how to measure it on the erg. McNeely's article raises some intriguing points, but it also fails to mention one important factor - body mass - and how it affects this measure.

Peak Power is essentially the highest wattage obtained when setting the drag at 200 over 10 strokes. Others use slightly different protocols, but they all measure essentially the same thing. Refer to McNeely's article for a complete description of how to use it in your training.

McNeely mentions that several studies confirm that peak power is one of the best predictors of 2000 m erg preformance. This would seem somewhat counterintuitive. Rowing is 80% aerobic, while peak power is a measure of anaerobic performance - and mostly the ATP-CP system that works for only a few seconds. Yet McNeely is right.

One study found the correllation between peak power and 2000 m erg performance at r=0.92 p<0.0001.There are others that have found essentially the same result.

This is not isolated to rowing, and also holds for other aerobic sports, even ones where the athlete must carry his or her weight even more than in rowing. Similar findings have been reported for 15 years in cycling. this article from South Africa by several authors including Tim Noakes, who recently was a keynote speaker at the Rowing Canada Coaches Conference found a strong correlation between peak power and both VO2 MAX and a 20 km cycling time trial. Interestingly another cycling study found that peak power increased from 864W to 940W or almost 9% after ingesting a controlled amount of caffeine.

In rowing, researchers have seen a 1.2% improvement in 2 k erg time and a 2.7% increase in mean power with caffeine ingestion. The same researchers in another study saw similar results with most of the improvement coming in the first 500 m - perhaps suggesting the effect was largely anaerobic, as is peak power.

Implications for You - and What McNeely Missed.

Peak Power is simple - perhaps for many even fun - to measure. Athletes don't seel the same pressure, or pain, that they do in a 2K erg test, yet the feedback it gives may be largely the same. We won't eliminate the need for 2K tests, but this may be a simle way to monitor training more regularily.

Train for power - McNeely describes how in his article and there are several other ways to include power training in your plan.

What he missed - the article I cited notes that the strong correlation between peak power and 2k erg times is true only when you consider lightweights and heavyweights separately so be cautious in how you use it to compare athletes. It would be better used to compare an individual athlete's progress in
training.

Don't forget our recent post on weight adjusting erg scores. First - the same formula cannot be used to adjust a measure of peak power. Second, well - weight matters. In fact the article that found the strong correlation with peak power also reported a significant correlation between body mass and 2 km erg performance!

Finally, remember that this information is derrived from studies on elite athletes. MCNeely points out that it may be a good measure because elite rowers are all so comparable aerobically and anaerobic measures may then be an important determining factor. I seriously doubt that this is true for club, masters or junior rowers.

That said, in my coaching experience it can be a useful measure with elite junior athletes, although whether peak power has the same correlation to 2K time in juniors I can't say. It would be interesting to have some coaches take both measures on their next round of testing and report the results here to our readers!

More Excel Examples for Rowing Coaches - Time Trials and Pair Matix Seat Racing

Since the last excel file I posted on doing weight adjusted erg scores proved to be our most read post to date I decided to post a couple of more example sheets for you. They are not necessarily ready to be used at a local event tomorrow, but they provide good examples of going beyond basic excel functionality to enhance your coaching. Athletes may well be interested too if only to gain a better understanding of some things coaches often talk about.

While I liked using ZoHo for posting the last online spreadsheet it didn't perfectly recreate my work in Excel and the next two examples are more complex. So, I have posted them to a free file sharing site called "4Shared.com." Please go there and download your own copies of these two examples. As always, feedback is most welcomed and if you find them useful I would love to hear from you. I am also happy to make some changes if you need anything different but aren't up to speed with Excel.

Pair Matrix.xls

This file allows for easy calculations used in a traditional "pair matrix" for seat racing. It is limited to 4 port rowers and 4 starboard rowers, but simply putting in the name of the athletes and the times for each trial will rank each athlete. Scroll to the right of the matrix to see the ordered ranking of athletes. Of course not everyone feels that crew selection in a pair is the best way to select a larger crew, but that is for another post.

Time Trial.xls

This is for using Excel to calculate times in a time trial or head race. It is far more detailed than a simple calculation of (finish time - start time) as it reports perecentages of gold standards and percentages of winning times, and it also ranks crews on a separate worksheet without the need for doing any sorting. It's probably well suited for a coach to use with several crews in his/her club, but would need a bit of work to run a whole head race. I hope that it does provide some useful examples.

Download the files at 4Shared.com

If you enjoyed this post or other information on the site, subscribe to the Rowing Science Newsletter for regular updates and exclusive insider information for subscribers only.

or subscribe to the RSS Feed

Interesting Study on Fight in the Dog

Thanks to JW Burk over at Fight in the Dog for this interesting link. It suggests that ancient rowers of Greek Triemes may have been as fit, or fitter than today's elite rowers. I expect there are a lot of holes you could poke in the assumptions and informtation sources used in the article but it still makes fun reading.

If you enjoyed this post or other information on the site, subscribe to the Rowing Science Newsletter for regular updates and exclusive insider information for subscribers only.

or subscribe to the RSS Feed

Rowing in the News

You may notice a newsreel in the header for the blog. Google has released this new tool recently. It will pull all news articles with rowing in them. I'm sure a few non-rowing articles will slip through but I hope this is an interesting and useful feature for you. Let me know what you think!

Archives - GPS in Rowing

Another look back into the archives for new readers today for our articles on using GPS in rowing. Some of these posts included good commentary by readers as well. Please add more if you have anything to add.

New Series - GPS in Rowing


GPS in Rowing the NK Position - Interview!

Volker Nolte Study - Impeller vs. GPS

In2Rowing adds GPS to cox box

Garmin Interview on GPS and Rowing


If you enjoyed this post or other information on the site, subscribe to the Rowing Science Newsletter for regular updates and exclusive insider information for subscribers only.

or subscribe to the RSS Feed

Crew Selection Poll Closed

Let's hope the results of this poll are indicative of common coaching - any comments?

When asked how you would select a novice crew, you responed as follows:

1. Combination of ergs and technique evaluation: 42 votes
2. Seat Racing: 16 votes
3. Weight Adjusted Erg Scores: 6 votes
4. Subjective evaluation of technique: 2 votes
5. Other: 1 vote
6. Raw Erg Scores: 0 votes

I would still guess that lots of coaches would use raw erg scores so this may be a comment on who reads this blog. Still it's encouraging to see how many people want to be as fair as possible.


If you enjoyed this post or other information on the site, subscribe to the Rowing Science Newsletter for regular updates and exclusive insider information for subscribers only.

or subscribe to the RSS Feed

Crew Selection Poll

To go with the last few posts, we present a poll on crew selection. You don't need to be a coach, just consider what you would do IF you were a coach. I indicated NOVICE just to make the decision a bit more interesting - in that technique would be somewhat more uniform and leaves a coach tempted to assume that they can mold the athlete. We'll say that this is a selection for a race within two months.

Please use the comments section and let us know your rationale.

Poll now closed see next post for results.



If you enjoyed this post or other information on the site, subscribe to the Rowing Science Newsletter for regular updates and exclusive insider information for subscribers only.

or subscribe to the RSS Feed

Spreadsheet Tool for Weight Adjusting Erg Scores

As I mentioned in the last post there may be a better way to weight adjust scores for a whole crew than to just enter each of them in the Concept 2 calculator. I use excel for many things and have posted a speadsheet using Zoho Sheet that you are free to use. It is far from perfect I'm sure, but by entering a mass (in kg only for now) a distance and an erg score you are provided with several bits of information. You can use it below or for a better and more powerful view click the link to save it on your own machine as an excel file. I tried using Google Spreadsheets for this but when saved in excel format many formulas were lost for some reason. Zoho is also imperfect - losing title formatting and inserting some extra rows - but it is a simple way to provide a file for downloading.




  • Split gives you the average 500 m split for the piece.
  • Watts the average watts for the piece.
  • P:W power to weight ratio as described in the last post.
  • Physics .167 is the weight adjusted erg score using a .167 exponent as described on the Physics of Rowing site.
  • Physics .222 is the weight adjusted erg score using a .167 exponent as described on the Physics of Rowing site.
  • And finally the C2 .22 is the scorce as calculated by Concept 2.

Feel free to use, or modify this as you see fit. I'm sure I have made a few errors and will not be bothered at all if you find any and report them to me. If you send me any fixes or improvements I will incorporate them on the sheet published so that others can use them too.

If you need the original excel file, send me a note and I'll get a copy to you.

If you do find this at all useful or informative please drop me an email to let me know, please!

If you enjoyed this post or other information on the site, subscribe to the Rowing Science Newsletter for regular updates and exclusive insider information for subscribers only.

or subscribe to the RSS Feed

Weight Adjusted Erg Scores - Find the Hidden Gem in Your Crew


With so many athletes having just completed, or possibly on their way to, an indoor competition this month the idea of adjusting erg scores for weight comes to mind. Many a smaller rower has wondered how their erg compares to the bigger athlete "pound-for-pound" so to speak.

Indeed, a browse across the web will find more than a few casual articles suggesting coaches are beginning to use this as a selection tool. It would obviously be a point of great debate, but several coaches are using it even as as a primary method of crew selection, especially for longer head races.

What is it? How is it measured?

The most well-known source of information is the Concept 2 web site, where an online calculator is provided to adjust erg scores. They describe their calculator as "a controlled, measurable way to compare their athlete's potential." This is a better way of putting it - potential - rather than pure ability which would take into account skill on the water.

This calculator works for any distance, but lets look at a 2K race. One athlete (Jimmy) is big and powerful and at 220 lbs. finishes in 6:10. Another (Kenny) is a lightweight, also with a very strong score of 6:20 but at only 155 lb.

Jimmy 220 lb. 6:10
Kenny 155 lb. 6:20

Assuming equal erg scores - who do you want in your boat?

Run them through the calculator and you get the following adjusted scores:

Jimmy 5:53.6
Kenny 5:35.9

The calculator says Kenny should be the faster rower, by a good margin. But what does it mean? Concept 2 says this score represents "how fast you would be able to go in an eight-oared shell if all eight rowers had the same adjusted score as you!" Wow - gimme 8 Kenny's any day!

There is a complicated formula behind this, also reported on the C2 website:

wf=[body weight in pounds/270] ^ .222

In plain english:

weight factor adjustment = (your body weight in pounds, divided by 270) raised to the power of .222

So essentially, you calculate an "adjustment factor" using this formula, and then you multiply your time by it.

For the individual it is much easier to use the online calculator. For coaches looking at many scores, there might be a better way - more on that in a subsequent post.

The same formula is reported on wikipedia in their section on the indoor rower, but without reference. I assume the author of that article borrowed the formula from C2.

Where does this come from?

There is no explanation that I have seen on the C2 site as to how their formula was derrived although they do note that the 270 in it used to be 170 and the adjustment was intended to better reflect performance in an eight. If anyone knows more, please leave it in the comments section.

Another great source for this topic is The Physics of Rowing site. It is an amazing resource for those looking for detailed answers to all their questions.

Many people have heard of the "power to weight ratio" suggesting that your power (in Watts - though an erg split is proportional to this) can be simply divided by your weight (typically in kg) to adjust erg scores. The Physics of Rowing site points out that we usually use the "cube root" of weight - or weight to the power of 1/3. The site doesn't explain why this is, but one can assume that since rowing is not a weight bearing sport and because all of your mass does not translate into increased drag on the shell then your mass cannot directly be used. To put it another way your power:weight ratio does not change directly with any increase in weight because that same increase in weight does not slow you down proportionally. If you double your mass you won't double the drag on the shell - it will only go up by some portion of the increase in your mass.

Ccalculating just a power:weight ratio for our friends in the example above would be done as follows:

First convert their average split from time into watts (there is an excellent explanation in the C2 Training Guide on page 225) but is essentially 2.8 / pace^3 where pace is time in seconds divided by distance. The resulting average wattages for their pieces then would be:

Jimmy = 442W
Kenny = 408W

Divide each by the cube root of their masses to get:

Jimmy = 95.3 W / kg^(1/3)
Kenny = 98.8 W / kg^(1/3)

Kenny has a better power:weight ratio but it does not appear quite as dramatic a difference between them as the C2 formula reports. Using just power:weght and not understanding what it means one might not see clearly the difference between these two athletes. Note that if the units are suitably large this 3.6 W / kg^(1/3) difference may well be very big, but most people wouldn't see it and it converys no information about the effect in a shell.

The Physics of Rowing article goes on to try and evaluate the effect of excess weight on performance on the water. It ends up derriving a formula that deals with the rowers mass in addition to excess deadweight (cox (sorry coxies), oars, cox box etc.) that has to be distributed amongst the rowers - which it pegs at 15 kg per rower - and uses an exponent that takes into account how drag is affected by extra weight. The more weight you add to a shell, the more the wetted surface area increases. But they suggest that this works differently depending on the size of the shell. In the end they end up with a formula that looks like this:

F = (90 / (mass (kg) +15))^0.167

The "factor" that this calculates needs to be divided into the erg score - unlike the C2 formula which is a multiplier. Of course you could just calculate the inverse of this factor(1 / F) and then it becomes a multiplier.

Note that this uses a power of 0.167 which is based on assumptions about wetted surface area in a larger crew boat. The 0.222 used by Concept 2 would come from assumptions linked to a single, where an individuals weight has a larger contribution to the change in wetted surface area. This is how the Physics of Rowing site describes it - but C2 report their formula is for an eight...so who is right? I can't say, but does it really matter?

Let's apply this formula - we see these adjusted scores:

Jimmy: 6:30.7
Kenny: 6:15.7

It still reports Kenny as faster, although not as dramatically. I would wager that if they are decent rowers the C2 formula reports better numbers for an eight.

Why the differences in these three comparisons (we could make it four by changing the exponent in the Physics of Rowing formula, but it makes only a small difference)?

First, all three are just mathmatical models. Appropriate assumptions based on known information is used to compile a formula that is hoped to predict something. These assumptions are based on something but they are just that - assumptions. There is a reason for the 0.167 exponent, for example, but it can't be said to be exact in every case. Not all shells have the same drag in the water or respond to excess mass in exactly the same way. The extra weight carried was also given an assumed value - but is 15 kg per rower correct - no, of course it can't be in all crews and all boats.

The variation in these formulae is to be expected, they are simply different models. Some may be closer to the truth than others, but we would only know for sure through controlled experiements to test the models. In any case the fact that there is variability points out clearly that we cannot rely on any one measure as a "gold standard."

So - to sum it all up - What should you use as a coach?

ASSUMING equal technique:
  1. These formulae strongly suggest that simply picking a crew based on raw erg scores would be a serious error - I hope nobody is doing this anymore???
  2. The fact that the formulae are not perefect models suggests that simply using one of these formulae to pick a crew would also be a mistake - better than a raw score probably, but a mistake.
  3. I would recommend using one or all of these to adjust erg scores to give you a truer picture of your athletes. Doing so might open your eyes up to an athlete with more (or indeed, less) potential than you realized.
  4. DO NOT overemphasize the weight adjusted score. The potential health implications of athletes trying to better their score simply by losing weight cannot be ignored. Point out that for a lighter athlete, losing one pound changes the score by about half a second and there is no way that amount can be a factor in crew selection.
  5. Test on the water! In the end, that's what it really is about isn't it?
A thought for on-water testing:

The Physics of Rowing information suggests that erg scores adjust somewhat less for an eight. There is an additional change in adjustment if you modify the amount of deadweight. If this model is correct it might have implcations for seat racing. Some coaches believe that the pair matrix is the fairest way to select an eight...but is it possible that a larger athlete is penalized more in a pair, perhaps losing in the seat racing when they would indeed have made the eight faster?

If you enjoyed this post or other information on the site, subscribe to the Rowing Science Newsletter for regular updates and exclusive insider information for subscribers only.

or subscribe to the RSS Feed

Pacing for Races - Guest Post by Mike Caviston

As promised, we have the pleasure of presenting a guest post today. Mike Caviston has been sharing his research on pacing in rowing and other sports on the Concept II message board for some time now. He was kind enough to agree to putting this post together for our readers. Thank you Mike!

I asked Mike to introduce himself, and while he covers most of it, I think he does so modestly. He doesn't mention below his three CRASH-B wins, his 1988 World Record for lightweights or his 2002 6:18.2 World Record for the 40-49 lightweights which still stands. I'm sure I've missed a few things but suffice it to say Mike isn't just reporting scientific theory - he has lived his research and the results speak for themselves!
__________________

My name is Mike Caviston and I have long had an interest in the physiology of training and racing for many sports but especially rowing. I have a master’s degree in Kinesiology from the University of Michigan, where I have been a Lecturer since 1994, primarily teaching
courses in Exercise Physiology and Sports Biomechanics. I compete in indoor rowing (40+LW category) and for more than 20 years have been involved off and on as a coach with the U of M’s men’s and/or woman’s rowing programs. My last stint was as conditioning coach for the
women’s team from 2000-2004, when I designed a training program called the Wolverine Plan (details at http://www.concept2.com/forums/wolverine_plan.htm).

To achieve peak performance during any race (certainly a 2000m rowing race) requires optimal pacing, though this is often overlooked by coaches. Neither is the topic especially well covered in the scientific literature. A few published studies tend to confirm my belief that even or negative pacing results in the fastest times for events that last in the range of 5-10’ (as opposed to the all-out start approach favored almost universally by rowers, where the opening 500m is the fastest segment of the race); results from other studies aren’t so clear. Frustratingly, the designs of several experiments on pacing don’t accurately reflect real racing conditions. I decided to search for results that included split data from elite competitions (Olympic and World Championship finals) and do my own analyses. I found sporadic results for events from running, swimming, cycling, and speed skating, as well as ample results for rowing. I also analyzed results for indoor rowing from the CRASH-Bs. My general approach was to compare “winners” (top half of the field) to “losers” (bottom half) on the basis of pacing, focusing on the speed of the first segment of the race (e.g., first 500m of a 2K rowing race) expressed as a percent of final speed. Overwhelmingly, I found that for all sports the faster, more successful athletes started more slowly (relative to their final times) than their less successful competitors. Complete data and more details can be found in a discussion on the Concet2 web site’s Training Forum.

Here is a quick summary of some of my major findings and conclusions:

• As illustrated by data from indoor rowing, the faster the start (relative to final average pace), the worse the overall performance. Starting extremely fast results in what is commonly referred to as a “fly-and-die”, but starting even a little faster than the final average pace results in suboptimal performance. The data shows a clear negative correlation between start % and final time. My recommendation is to start at a pace 1-2% slower than what is estimated as actual capability for the race, and to slowly and gradually build intensity to the finish.
• What has been shown to be true for indoor rowing surely applies to rowing on the water. Classic OTW strategy involves a fast start, cruising the middle, and sprinting at the end. Analyses of indoor results show this strategy to be less effective than simple negative splits (each successive portion of the race as fast as or faster than the one before). Since so few crews have raced with a negative-split strategy, it is difficult to show with much statistical weight that negative splits are more effective, but there is still evidence that in international competition negative splits are at least as effective, and possibly more effective, than the traditional fast-slow-slow-fast race breakdown. As with indoor rowing, the outdoor rowing data reveals a clear trend that faster starts (% of final pace) result in poorer performance.
• In addition to very clear evidence that all-out starts are not optimal for racing the 2K distance, there is evidence (less conclusive) that all-out starts are not advisable for shorter races either (i.e., 1000m or less).

If you enjoyed this post or other information on the site, subscribe to the Rowing Science Newsletter for regular updates and exclusive insider information for subscribers only.

or subscribe to the RSS Feed

Xeno Posts on Harry Mahon's Technique

Do have a look at this post over on Xeno's blog - a great read on technique from a legendary coach.

If you enjoyed this post or other information on the site, subscribe to the Rowing Science Newsletter for regular updates and exclusive insider information for subscribers only.

or subscribe to the RSS Feed

Wednesday Links

Some interesting links from around the web today:


Danish lwt junior breaks world record

You might have seen this, but I had to post it. Absolutely amazing. What an amazing aerobic system.

Fight in the Dog on Static vs Dynamic Ergs

There continues to be much discussion around the web on static vs. dynamic ergs. This summarizes one view and links to others. One thing that does stand out to me is the concern that too many athletes and coaches set their C2s on too heavy a damper setting. I was once told that Derek Porter (CAN) occasionally trained with a towel over the flywheel to lower the resistance to virtually nil. Can't substantiate that but it is interesting.

HBS Cases: When Good Teams Go Bad

The Harvard Business School is famous for the case study method in their courses. They have adapted a true rowing story for a case study on teamwork in the workplace.

Drew Ginn's Blog

I've become a fan recently of Drew's work. Here are his two most recent posts:

Podcast interview with Chris O'Brien , head rowing coach at the Victorian Institute of Sport and Coach of the Australia Mens Pair.

Drew's unique perspective on preparing for a 6km test


Spilling the Beans Coffee Pros and Cons

I think we've published more than enough recently on caffeine and exercise so I won't comment - but there is a good deal of material in this article from MSN Health.


via Revolution HEalth Research from Dr. Aditya Bardia of the Mayo Clinic College of Medicine in Rochester, Minnesota and colleagues. Research showing exercise has a significant role to play in preventing breast cancer.

Highlights:

"Getting plenty of recreational activity may reduce women's risk of developing breast cancer after menopause, and exercise appears to have the most powerful preventive effect on the most aggressive type of tumor."

"Overall, the researchers found, the most active women had a 14 percent lower risk of breast cancer, while their risk of developing tumors carrying estrogen receptors only was 33 percent lower."
Exercise Has No Impact on Knee Osteoarthritis

Many athletes turn to rowing when their knees prevent them from running any longer. But what if you are worried that rowing might impact developing arthritis?

If you enjoyed this post or other information on the site, subscribe to the Rowing Science Newsletter for regular updates and exclusive insider information for subscribers only.

or subscribe to the RSS Feed

Rowing Science Archives - The Interviews

Many of you are new to the Rowing Science Site and have missed several interesting posts. One highlight has been the kindness of several people to do interviews with us exclusively for our readers. If you didn't see them the first time, consider taking a look at some of these which have been amongst our most popular posts:

Dr. Stephen Seiler Weighs in on Lance Armstrong as a Rower

Interview with Dr. Valery Kleshnev of the Biomechanics Newsletter

Exclusive Interview with Concept 2 about the Model E Ergometer

Garmin Interview about GPS and Rowing

Interview with Rowing Physiologist Dr. Fred Hagerman

New Site for Rowers - Ergscores.com - Interview with Jeff Wagner


Interview with Peter Dreissigacker Podcast - actually from powertwenty.com

More on 8 Second Intervals for Fat Loss

The "Oartec" Is it a better Erg?

If you enjoyed this post or other information on the site, subscribe to the Rowing Science Newsletter for regular updates and exclusive insider information for subscribers only.

or subscribe to the RSS Feed

The "Oartec" Is it a better Erg?


Years ago rowers had a dryland option for sweeping that didn't require an expensive tank to be installed. Along came the Concept Ergometer and the world made a move to a (near) standard indoor trainer - apologies to RowPerfect -(see Xeno's blog for more) and others who struggle to build a better erg. Today we enjoy fairly easy comparisons physically between athletes around the world, but one of the major criticisms of these machines is the inability to train proper technique.

It was interesting to come upon the "OarTec" the other day which seemed to be trying to add proper sculling and sweeping technique to a machine that otherwise bears a resemblance to the Concept II machine. I got in touch with the developer, Matt Roach, and he kindly offered to answer a few questions. He has also promised to send me some photos and video of the Oartec in action so stay tuned for more.

_______

Matt Roach of Oartec in Australia has kindly agreed to an interview for Rowing Science. In addition to developing hte OarTec, Matt is a former Australian International who now coaches at the Sydney Grammer School in Australia. Matt, thanks for doing this. I have to admit, I only recently learned of the Oartec...how long have you been in business? How did you get started?

The Oartec was launched in Australia in January 07 so we are right at the beginning of introducing this new and unique rowing machine to the rowing market. Our office and main factory is located in Sydney, Australia.

I started by working through some ideas and concepts with a fellow coaching colleague in his garage. Early prototypes were built using a combination of available rowing boat parts such as oars, riggers, seats and feet and rowing machine parts such as flywheels and seat rails. I then teamed up with an industrial designer and engineer to solve some of the design issues and to evolve the Oartec into what it is today.

Can you tell us a little about the simulator? The similarities, and the differences from the Concept II seem quite apparent in the photos. Do you see it as a replacement for the CII, or an addition?

The Oartec has been designed primarily for rowing clubs, schools, universities and elite rowing programs as a training tool to help rowers improve and practice correct rowing technique. Coaches can use this machine to teach beginners the rowing basics, demonstrate a preferred style of rowing, or help with the identification of individual faults and the process of correcting them. As a training substitute we believe that the Oartec adds better value to indoor rowing training by accurately replicating the actual rowing strokes of sweep and sculling.

We see the Oartec complimenting any rowing program and happily sitting alongside the Concept 2 in the boathouse. The Oartec has been specifically designed to be a rowing simulator as opposed to just another ergometer and is therefore a very different machine to the Concept 2 in design, capabilities and benefits. Ultimately it will be up to the rowers and coaches to determine how best to utilize the Oartec for their training and coaching needs and we can only hope that the Oartec becomes as an essential piece of rowing equipment as the Concept 2.

Is there any way to describe the feeling on your simulator, for those used to other ergs?

We worked very hard to make the Oartec feel as smooth and comfortable to row as possible. It was important to get a good feel at the catch with a quick pick up and a strong finish at the end of the stroke. To achieve this we tested a number of different flywheel types experimenting with blade size and shapes, overall weight and housings to get the right feel and range of adjustable resistance that suits both sweep and sculling.

Feedback from all that have rowed it, from Olympians to beginners, say that it has a natural and realistic feel and doesn’t feel much different to real rowing. The resistance is consistent throughout the stroke and responds well to the application of power or rate.
Assuming you see it as replacing many of the CII functions - how do you as a coach justify replacing the CIIs in your boathouse when so many programs select athletes based on this almost universal tool? Even if you have an amazing product - how will you fight the near-monopoly of CII?

As a coach you are always on the lookout for new coaching techniques or equipment that can help make your crews go faster on the water, or that can make training more effective and enjoyable. Our aim is to provide an indoor rowing machine with the capability to simulate the actual rowing strokes of sweep and sculling for the benefit of rowing programs worldwide. It is not our claim to be a replacement for the Concept 2 or to necessarily be in the gyms or general fitness market, but more so for the Oartec to be used as an effective tool to help rowers and coaches in their pursuit of better rowing.

Obviously, as the C2 is so well established as the worldwide testing benchmark for rowers, there would have to be a very convincing argument to change the status quo. We believe the Oartec has the potential to have a role in the selection of athletes because of the ability to evaluate sweep and sculling technical performance as well as the score, but one mountain at a time.

How is it fitting into your school program? Are you seeing technique benefits?

The Oartec is used regularly across all age groups and crew levels in the school program. In Australia, the first two seasons of school rowing are in sculling boats (quads) and the Oartec is great to use to teach the beginners the sculling basics such as the coordination of the crossover, hand grips and feathering as well as introducing the rowing terminology before they get on the water for the first time. We found this greatly reduces the time it takes to grasp the complexities of sculling in a crew boat and makes the job of coaching beginners how to row a little easier. In the third season they switch to sweep rowing and we use the machine to teach the principles of sweep technique and to help determine the rower’s preferred or natural side.

The main use for the Oartec in our program is for coaching and improving technique where changes can be made and understood almost immediately. The coach can get straight to the problem and quickly show where improvements are necessary. The design of the Oartec gives direct access to the rower from any angle and allows the coach to use a hands on approach to reposition or isolate the rower’s movements without hindering the stroke. We also use video cameras to show live footage to the rower by connecting the camera to a television and placing in front of the machine for instant feedback and visual references.

The Oartec has now become a vital piece of equipment in our rowing program and the benefits are now being seen in better rowing and coaching techniques.

The proper sculling technique looks like a real bonus. Can you address concerns people might have about injuries from even more asymmetrical sweeping now that you have brought it onto dry land?

In Australia, the first two years of sculling at school level is to allow the symmetrical development of the body at a young age in response to arguments that rowing sweep too early promotes unbalanced muscle development and is the possible cause of future complications such as back injuries and poor flexibility. This argument is now widely accepted although many still have concerns about rowing the same sweep side for consecutive seasons thereafter.

This is where the versatility of the Oartec can be best utilized. The fact that you can practice sweep rowing by yourself and not need a crew is a huge bonus. The Oartec can be used to compensate for the lack of time on the opposite side and because it is stable and comfortable to row, it is easier to build competence, confidence and strength on the other side. At the same time, rowers can also improve their chances for selection by becoming proficient on both sweep sides, and even better still, use the sculling to develop skills, symmetrical strength, coordination and flexibility.
Is it available in North America yet? or anywhere outside Australia? If so, how would someone get one?

We will be expanding our distribution network to North America, UK and Europe soon but in the meantime will ship direct to the customer from Australia on an individual basis. We plan to be exhibiting at some major European and North American regattas throughout the year. If people are interested to purchase or would like some more information they can contact me at info@oartec.com.au

Thank you for taking the time for our readers Matt. We all look forward to seeing more of the OarTec.

If you enjoyed this post or other information on the site, subscribe to the Rowing Science Newsletter for regular updates and exclusive insider information for subscribers only.

or subscribe to the RSS Feed

More on 8 Second Intervals for Fat Loss

A few days ago I posted about the newspaper article out about studies underway in Australia on using intervals - of only 8 seconds in duration - for maximum fat loss. I contacted one of the authors of the study for more information and he sent along the following. As you can see from the protocol the newspaper headline does make it seem a bit too good to be true...the real workout is 8 seconds high intensity, followed by 12 seconds virtually resting...repeated 60 times. This would be a very intense workout indeed! Any volunteers to give it a go on the erg and send us your comments?

____

Below is a summary and overview of the 8-second fat loss study, the FEM trial, and the Optimal Fat Loss program at UNSW

Steve Boutcher PhD, FACSM

Director of Fat Loss Laboratory, Faculty of Medicine, UNSW 28/1/2007


1. 8-second fat loss study. Forty five women aged 20 years with a BMI of 23.5 kg/m2 were randomly assigned to a high intensity intermittent exercise (HIIE) condition, a steady state exercise (SSE) condition, or a control condition. Body fat was assessed by DEXA, pre and post after the 15 week program. Blood was taken before and after to examine possible changes in cholesterol, HDL, LDL, triglycerides, insulin, c-reactive protein, glucose, adiponectin, leptin, and cortisol. The HIIE program consisted of an 8-second sprint immediately followed by 12 seconds as slow as possible pedaling. Women performed this continuously so that they completed 60 sprints in the 20-minute exercise bout. There were three exercise sessions per week; 45 overall. Women started the HIIE condition for only 5 minutes the first week and then built up the number of minutes and intensity of sprint. Intensity was assessed through a maximal oxygen uptake test performed previously so that the workload at an respiratory exchange ratio (RER) of .93 was used for each individual woman. This equated to about 90% of flat out sprinting for most women. All women were completing the 20 minutes of HIIE within 6 sessions (2 weeks). Most women performed at a pedaling rate of 100-120 at a resistance of .5 to 1 kg. The SSE consisted of three 40-minute continuous stationary bike exercise at 60% of peak oxygen uptake. Both conditions had a 5-minute warm-up and a 5-minute cool-down. RESULTS: SSE women increased body fat slightly by .5 kg whereas HIIE lost 2.5 kg. The women who lost the least fat in the HIIE group were the leanest with an average BMI of below 20 kg/m2. When these women were removed average fat lost for the rest of the women was 3.9 kg. Two women in the group lost between 8-9 kg of fat. The fat loss in the HIIE was disproportionate with the women losing more fat off their legs than their arms. HIIE women also lost significant fat from their abdomen which suggests that this type of exercise may be particularly successful with men. HIIE women decreased fasting insulin by 31% and SSE women by 8%. Both exercise groups increased their aerobic fitness; the SSE by 19%, and surprisingly, the HIIE group by 26%. Blood lipids did not change (all were normal at pretest) and we haven’t finished analyzing other blood variables yet. In summary, HIIE women lost about three times more fat doing about half the exercise. HIIE also had a dramatic effect on fasting insulin levels. This research was one study in Gail Trapp’s PhD program recently completed at UNSW. If you are considering trying this type of program it would be beneficial to touch bases with an accredited EP (Exercise Physiologist) to check out your suitability. You should also check it out with your GP if you have any risk factors (e.g., on any medication) or health problems.


Co-researchers in the fat loss research program are: Gail Trapp: PhD UNSW; Sarah Dien: PhD candidate UNSW; Professor Don Chisholm: Garvan Institute; Judy Freund: St Vincents Hospital


2. The FEM Trial: HIIE is only one important component of an optimal fat loss program. In three weeks time we are starting the FEM trial which represents Fish oils, Exercise, and a Mediterranean diet. We believe this combination will have a significantly greater effect on fat loss and metabolic stability than HIIE alone. One hundred women will undertake a 12-week program consisting of supervised HIIE, fish oil supplement, and a Mediterranean diet at UNSW. We plan to start another FEM trial later this year focusing on obese children. Thus, the plan is to undertake a 12-week “kickstart” program to normalize women’s body weight and metabolism in as brief a time as possible. This is Phase 1 of the optimal fat loss program. Phase II of the program will be continuation of the diet and fish oil with the HIIE and other exercises being home based. If you are female and aged between 18 and 30 years and have a BMI of over 25 kg/m2 you may be eligible for this trial. If interested contact Sarah Dien who is the FEM trial coordinator:

office phone: 02 9385 8710; email: sarah.dien@unsw.student.edu.au


3. Optimal fat loss program at UNSW: based on our research we conduct optimal fat loss programs in the Lifestyle Clinic at UNSW. We believe that the optimal fat loss should be based around lifestyle change and the FEM components described above plus other components such as stress management and resistance exercise. The most important aspect of our approach is that there is no one perfect exercise or diet program for everyone. Thus, each fat loss program is personalized. This program offers a variety of options and clients can come under MediCare and certain private health funds. Clients can carry out supervised HIIE in the Clinic if they so choose. To find out more about the Clinic check out: www.lifestyleclinic.edu.au. To make an appointment ring: 02 9385 3352. If you have problems you can email me: s.boutcher@unsw.edu.au


4. barriers to fat loss: will you lose fat if you carry out a program as described above? Maybe, however, not all individuals will lose fat. Losing fat is not simply brought about by eating less and exercising more. We know this combination is not particularly successful. The design of fat loss programs should be based on an in-depth examination of many individual factors that may hinder or prevent the body from burning fat. For example, birth weight, muscle fibre type, mitochondrial inefficiency, inflammation status, free radical status, adipocyte and muscle cell insulin resistance, resting metabolic rate, virus history, quality of sleep, amount of daily stress, ethnicity, weight cycling history, and many more factors effect our ability to lose fat. These factors should be assessed by qualified individuals. Also many of the “facts” we hear about weight loss are myths. For example, the evidence is overwhelming that starvation diets make people fat and obese. They also bring about more lifestyle diseases such as heart disease. Another myth is that eating fat makes you fat or eating a low fat diet makes you thin. In our Mediterranean diet, clients typically will eat more fat and more calories. However, the “fats” are good fats called monounsaturated and polyunsaturated fats which are found in fish and nuts. The most important message is to eat a lot of unprocessed foods such as fruits and vegetables. Don’t worry about having to learn to read food labels but eat foods that don’t have a label! In general, these foods contain a variety of “phytonutrients” which directly or indirectly turn on fat burning in fat cells. The data supporting the ability of the Mediterranean diet to lose weight and reduce heart and other disease is extremely strong. So people should not starve themselves but should eat unprocessed foods that excite fat burning. Processed foods, in general, produce the opposite effect by turning on fat storage. They also make many cells operate inefficiently resulting in overweight and problems such as high cholesterol levels. Fat loss programs are best done under the supervision of a team of professionals so that clients do not waste energy and money carrying out programs that will not work because their bodies have been programmed to store fat rather than to burn fat. Thus, we believe the key to fat loss is to adopt a way of life that allows your cells to burn fat.


5. more information in this area: our articles on sprinting fat loss are currently under journal review. When published they will be displayed on our website. Hopefully, within a month. The only other article, to our knowledge, directly on intermittent sprinting and fat loss is:

Tremblay, A. et al. (1994). Impact of exercise intensity on body fatness and skeletal muscle metabolism. Metabolism, 43, 814-818.

A really good book about metabolism and fat loss is:

Hyman, M. (2006). Ultra-metabolism. Schwartz Publishing. ISBN: 978 1 86395 318 4

“The key to fat loss is to adopt a lifestyle that allows fat cells to function as they were designed”

Good luck:

Steve Boutcher PhD, FACSM

If you enjoyed this post or other information on the site, subscribe to the Rowing Science Newsletter for regular updates and exclusive insider information for subscribers only.

or subscribe to the RSS Feed

New Reader Poll!

It's been far too long since we presented a poll. We'd like you to share more about yourselves, the readers, with each other. Who are you? Please participate.


If you enjoyed this post or other information on the site, subscribe to the Rowing Science Newsletter for regular updates and exclusive insider information for subscribers only.

or subscribe to the RSS Feed

Posting for 2K

Well, Xeno beat me to it! Last week I set in motion plans for a posting on pacing for 2000m - it is that time for year for ergattas after all. Well, today Xeno posted on the very subject. I'm a firm beliver in gathering information for as many places as you can so do go read his post.

What had I planned? Well, there is a great deal on the subject at the Concept II forums. Do have a look! When I did, I noted that Mike Caviston had already done an impressive amount of research on the subject. I couldn't imagine doing anything close to what Mike did, so I invited him to do a guest post for us and he has agreed! I hope that we can have this soon, but until then, give Mike's work a good read.

If you enjoyed this post or other information on the site, subscribe to the Rowing Science Newsletter for regular updates and exclusive insider information for subscribers only.

or subscribe to the RSS Feed

BMI and Rowing

There was a post today over at Row2K of an article from a newspaper about the BMI or Body Mass Index. It mentioned rowing only briefly, referring to the GB 4+. The article was skewed to the viewpoint that the BMI is not a useful measure for athletes. That had generally always been my belief. Last year though, I had an opportunity to look at it differently and presented it in this post. I calculated BMIs for US National Team Rowers and a Cambridge University Men's Crew. In both cases BMIs were normal, in contrast to the article posted today.

For more information see my post and wikipedia.

Note that the article points out several athletes as "overweight" according to BMI, but the GB rowers just squeek into this definition. Of all the athletes mentioned in the article, only two came in as obese - aside from the entire offensive line of a university football team - and who would question their status?


If you enjoyed this post or other information on the site, subscribe to the Rowing Science Newsletter for regular updates and exclusive insider information for subscribers only.

or subscribe to the RSS Feed

Recovery Faster in the Morning

So if you ever wondered why rowers so often train in the morning, here's another good reason. No, I'm sure this isn't why we train early. But perhaps this bit of knowledge justifies it somewhat more. A post over at the SportSci Blog reports on a study that has shown muscles may recover faster after morning workouts than evening workouts.

If you enjoyed this post or other information on the site, subscribe to the Rowing Science Newsletter for regular updates and exclusive insider information for subscribers only.

or subscribe to the RSS Feed

New Study on Athlete's Hearts

Hot on the heels of my latest post about Xeno's heart I came across this, just out today, and referrign to an article to be published in the European Heart Journal. Research on Dutch and Belgian endurance athletes suggesting structural changes that may lead to Ventricular Arrythmia. It is an interesting read - but clearly the researchers feel that there is a long way to go before they understand what is happening.

I should also point out that Ventricular and Atrial (Xeno's experience) Fibrillation are quite different. The atria help fill the ventricles - an atrium in fibrillation is NOT as serious as a ventricle...ventricles in fibrillation are absolutely life threatening - your heart no longer pumps blood!

If you enjoyed this post or other information on the site, subscribe to the Rowing Science Newsletter for regular updates and exclusive insider information for subscribers only.

or subscribe to the RSS Feed

Best Wishes to Xeno

Xeno Muller is a friend of Rowing Science and we'd like to wish him well and a speedy recovery. Check out his post on Xeno's most recent brush with Atrial Fibrillation - he's fine and wants others in his proverbial shoes to feel they have company - and what company it is!

For the record - Xeno points out all his troubles occur when he is NOT exercising - so keep those ergs out folks!

If you enjoyed this post or other information on the site, subscribe to the Rowing Science Newsletter for regular updates and exclusive insider information for subscribers only.

or subscribe to the RSS Feed

Sport Science Blog

We're not the only blog with an interest in Sport Science. The SportSci blog is far more general in direction, looking at all sports, and a bit more technical. For those with a keen interest in the topic though, I'd recommend having a look. For the rest of you, I will keep my eye one it and link to it when something that might interest our readers comes up. Today they posted on some Australian technology that will be used for research in rowing.

If you enjoyed this post or other information on the site, subscribe to the Rowing Science Newsletter for regular updates and exclusive insider information for subscribers only.

or subscribe to the RSS Feed

8 Seconds...reference anyone?

OK, over on that other rowing site we all frequent they linked to a newspaper article on 8-second intervals being the key to weight loss.

I'd like to be able to comment on this study, but the article has no reference to a published scientific paper. I have not been able to find one. If anyone out there has found a reference, would you please leave it in the comments section for all of us? If you have read the article - what do you think?

One of the researchers has a web site. He notes ongoing research in this field but does not list it amongst his publications. I have a feeling that the newspaper is taking liberties with his work and exaggerating things a bit...legitimate scientific work is taking on an air of "too good to be true" in the press I think.

If you enjoyed this post or other information on the site, subscribe to the Rowing Science Newsletter for regular updates and exclusive insider information for subscribers only.

or subscribe to the RSS Feed

Health and Fitness Links for Wednesday

New York Times Article on Herbal Supplements - not as safe as most people assume

New York Times - Free the Mind to Reduce Injuries
- Reducing stree may help reduce injuries

Washington Post - Evidence is Thin on Multivitamins
- No evidence taking a multivitamin helps, though no reccomendation yet to stop either.

40 Amazing Facts about Sleep from "One Man's Blog"

Workin While You Workout
from Yahoo Health

If you enjoyed this post or other information on the site, subscribe to the Rowing Science Newsletter for regular updates and exclusive insider information for subscribers only.

or subscribe to the RSS Feed

Water Intoxication

The recent news of a tragic death in a radio contest by drinking too much water was a shock to many. In the summer we posted on the dangers of excess water - Hyponatremia. This might be a good time to review it, even if it's too chilly to be overdrinking while training!

If you enjoyed this post or other information on the site, subscribe to the Rowing Science Newsletter for regular updates and exclusive insider information for subscribers only.

or subscribe to the RSS Feed

Another new Rowing Biomechanics Newsletter

Another Rowing Biomechanics Newsletter has been released. In it Dr. Kleshnev discusses gearing and the FISA rigging survey from the World Championships.

As with all the newsletters this requires a careful read but here are a few interesting highlights to look for:

  • The definition of gearing for the survey as span/outboard does not give a true gearing which should really be inboard/outboard only and "should not depend
  • on lateral position of the centre of oar rotation."
  • Half of the pairs had different spans between seats, usually with stroke having a wider span to help deal with the differences in torques at the catch.
  • Narrowing the spread by 2 cm - to many coaches a big change - makes only a 0.5 degree catch angle change. Changing inboard is slightly more effecive. But there is more to this story as well when you take into account changes in overlap and resulting movement of the foot stretcher.
  • His conclusion "the reason of exaggerated importance of the spread/span for gearing still remains unknown to us. We greatly appreciate if you can sand [sic] us your thoughts, opinions or references."
If you enjoyed this post or other information on the site, subscribe to the Rowing Science Newsletter for regular updates and exclusive insider information for subscribers only.

or subscribe to the RSS Feed

More on Caffeine and Training

Another recent study fromthe University of Georgia and published in the Journal of Pain looked at caffeine's ability to help recuperate from training. CBS News reports on the study:

a new study suggests drinking the equivalent of two cups before exercise may reduce post-workout muscle pain by nearly 50 percent. Researchers say that's more muscle pain relief than commonly found with pain relievers like aspirin.

If you enjoyed this post or other information on the site, subscribe to the Rowing Science Newsletter for regular updates and exclusive insider information for subscribers only.

or subscribe to the RSS Feed

Human Growth Hormone - Poor Choice

I am happy that performance-enhancing drugs are not a significant part of the rowing culture. I like to think that is because rowers are the finest people out there (I do believe this!) but I'm sure for a few it has something to do with the low reward (financial at least) sport and the high cost of these drugs. Whatever the reason, I am glad that it is this way, as I am not one of those who believe in making them legal just to level the playing field. It can't ever become a competition about who is willing to risk their health the most or who can spend the most money. It can't ever get away from the true spirit of sport and competition.

Still, articles on performance enhancing drugs remain fascinating for many reasons. I recently stumbled upon one article from years ago in Outside magazine where writer Stuart Stevens decided that he couldn't report on hearsay and found a doctor who precribes drugs for athletes to see what it really is like to be on a program while training for an elite event. It is an interesting read and even more reassuring that although he saw huge benfits competitively, in the end he felt that he would not continue to take them even if he could.

In the article the drugs are administered by a doctor running an (increasingly popular) anti-aging clinic. Apparently taking Human Growth Hormone is becoming popular amongst people trying to stave off father time. It was interesting then to see a recent report of a study from Stanford Univeristy in medPage Today that this is a poor choice to make! Apparently the use of HGH is incresing rapidly, although it is not approved as an anti-aging medication and can cost as much as $1000 per month. The article notes:

This study suggests that there is no evidence that the compound has any beneficial effect on aging, but clear evidence that it increases the risk of several adverse effects

The conclusion, the researchers said, is that growth hormone in otherwise healthy older people is associated with small changes in body composition but no alteration in clinically relevant outcomes, such as bone density, cholesterol and lipids, and maximal oxygen consumption.


Other reports on the study can be found in Forbe's Magazine and Scientific American.


If you enjoyed this post or other information on the site, subscribe to the Rowing Science Newsletter for regular updates and exclusive insider information for subscribers only.

or subscribe to the RSS Feed

November Rowing Biomechanics Newsletter

Another rowing biomechanics newsletter has come out since our last link to Dr. Kleshnev's site.

For those new to the site check out our interview with Dr. Kleshnev, creator of this excellent resource.

The latest issue deals with a rigging survey from the last World Championships. The article is probably worthy of a longer post when I get a chance but the most interesting point is that in several events, including the M8+ and W8+ and M2- there was "quite a high negative correlation" between gearing and final placing in the regatta. In other words crews rowing with a heavier rig tended to place higher in the competition. These correlations don't look like the sort that a scientist would see as "statistically significant" but they do seem to reveal something. And after all - usually there is no "statisticaly" significant difference between 1st and 4th place - but ask the athletes how significant the difference is! Trends such as this are important for sport scientists to keep on top of as they do tell us something and can lead to new research and recommendations for athletes.

Does this mean go out and change you rig to a heavier load? No - not at all. Just be aware and consider the implications. How does this information relate to your crew's fitness, strength and technique? The style you row could also affect how you choose to rig. Of course there are exceptions to a "correlation"- Dr. Kleshnev's graph shows that the crew with the heaviest load in the M8+ finsihed in 7th place so a correlation is not a rule. Also, correlations do not imply causation necessarily. All that is needed is something that affects both rig and placing to be in play. For example, bigger stronger athletes might go faster and also choose to use a heavier rig and their results would make it look like the heavy rig made them go fast, rather than their strength and fitness.

If you enjoyed this post or other information on the site, subscribe to the Rowing Science Newsletter for regular updates and exclusive insider information for subscribers only.

or subscribe to the RSS Feed

More Links for Sunday

Keeping your Resolutions from the Washington Post

Indoor exercise DVDs from the Washington Post - I wonder if they know about Xeno's DVD Workouts for rowers?

Magical or Overrated? A Food Additive in a Swirl
from the NY Times about an Omega-3

Harnessing the Energy of Exercise from Wired Magazine - Sounds like something that is perfect for an erg!

If you enjoyed this post or other information on the site, subscribe to the Rowing Science Newsletter for regular updates and exclusive insider information for subscribers only.

or subscribe to the RSS Feed