Wiggins on the Concept2 erg

[akelman]

To be clear, Wiggins is a world-class athlete, but he's only a club-class rower. I'm glad he's giving it a whirl; it's a great sport, and he's got time on his hands and competitive spirit to beat the band. But what he's accomplished so far isn't particularly noteworthy, except insofar as he has a certain amount of celebrity. Again, I'm not hating on him, but I'm not particularly impressed, is all.

[crankles]

Originally Posted by 572cv

hope that he experiences the joy of at least one really great day when everyone clicks and the boat rises out of the water and just flies. That happened for me a few times bitd; it was the best.

This....we use to call it 'boiling water'. That sound as the shell rises, planes out, and you hear the water bubbling under you. now, if I could only hold it together for 200+ perfect strokes.

[LegendRider]

Originally Posted by ducati2

Video...

http://www.cyclingweekly.com/news/la...onships-362204

His form looks poor and his body language is that of someone not at all giving 100% effort. The good news for him is there appears to be loads of room for improvement.

[happycampyer]

Originally Posted by ltwtsculler91

If a lot of us who used to row were training as much as he did, we'd probably be pretty close to his 2ks and likely a hell of a lot lighter than him. <snip>

^ Exactly.

In college, my racing weight was 149, and my PR on a C2 was in the 6:15 range (on land, we were tested on Gamut ergs, not C2s, and Gamuts were worse than C2s). The summer after my junior year, I rowed with the lightweight national team training/selection camp out of Vesper. I wasn't training for the team, I was just a fill-in. On a fluke, one morning I got to row in the two seat of one of Vesper's elite heavyweight straight fours, with three former Olympians. It was terrifying.

Having seen what it took to row at that level bitd, and being close to my school's rowing program today (the recruiting is so fierce that the top schools are barely even looking at kids in the US, especially the heavyweights), I think I have a pretty good perspective on Wiggin's performance. It's admirable, but not really impressive, all things considered. And as others have noted, there's no telling if he can actually move a boat. Judging by how his form fades by the end of the piece, It doesn't appear that he has the muscle memory to maintain his form in the final meters a 2K race.

[batman1425]

Originally Posted by happycampyer

we were tested on Gamut ergs, not C2s, and Gamuts were worse than C2s).

I only had the misfortune of having to use a Gamut a handful of times. We kept one around to do individual technique sessions in the winter because we didn't have tanks. I can't imagine testing on one of those things. I thought it was bad enough moving to the new Model D's which have a softer/slower catch engagement than I was used to with the model C's. Ever use an A and have one the cards let loose? That's a good way to keep everybody in the erg room on their toes.

[batman1425]

Originally Posted by crankles

This....we use to call it 'boiling water'. That sound as the shell rises, planes out, and you hear the water bubbling under you. now, if I could only hold it together for 200+ perfect strokes.

Really is a special moment, particularly in team boats when all of you are clicking. Happened a few times in my career but never in a race.

[Look585]

A question for the rowers out there:

How accurate are the results from this machine? Are they truly comparable across eras and environments? Is a 6:22 in London in 2017 comparable to a 6:22 in Miami in 1998?

Even the best cycling powermeters claim accuracy of about +/- 1%. For a 2000m event, that would be 20m. I'm guessing most 2k races on the water are closer than 20m...

[crankles]

well, I can't locate any numbers from concept2, but wouldn't the accuracy of an ergometer just be a function of the accuracy of the flywheel weight and rpm measurement? If that's the case, you could get pretty accurate.

edit: chain wear will effect efficiency too.

Originally Posted by Look585

A question for the rowers out there:

How accurate are the results from this machine? Are they truly comparable across eras and environments? Is a 6:22 in London in 2017 comparable to a 6:22 in Miami in 1998?

Even the best cycling powermeters claim accuracy of about +/- 1%. For a 2000m event, that would be 20m. I'm guessing most 2k races on the water are closer than 20m...

[CDM]

Originally Posted by FlashUNC

I mean, he's already proven to have the engine at an aerobic and anaerobic level.

Why not? Glad he's finding something else that interests him to pursue.

I should have posted this instead of my earlier comment.!

[ducati2]

I start using the Concept 2 this time of year when rides are a little more few and far between. I just did a warm up and four 2000 meter efforts with a little rest in between each effort. Let’s just say my 2000 meter times were greater than 6:22! These machines are low impact and can really help your riding muscle groups and point out where we, as cyclists, are weak.

[LegendRider]

I know this way too broad of a question, but for those who did or can row below 6:30 on the erg, how good of a cyclist are you? Seems like that's easily Cat 2 equivalent talent.

[ducati2]

6:00 minutes for 2000 meters takes about 500 watts of average power. That’s pretty fierce.

[happycampyer]

Originally Posted by LegendRider

I know this way too broad of a question, but for those who did or can row below 6:30 on the erg, how good of a cyclist are you? Seems like that's easily Cat 2 equivalent talent.

Imo, it's kind of hard to equate the two. I'm not sure what cycling event poses the same physiological demands as rowing a 2km race, maybe a track event? Is there a track event that lasts ~6 minutes? It's sort of like running 2 miles—it's not a sprint, but it's not purely an endurance distance either.

And btw, it's not easy by any stretch to row a 6:20. That's basically a 1:35/500m pace. The thing is, going from 1:35 to 1:30 might not sound like a big deal, but it feels like it's exponentially harder to shave seconds off. For someone to pull a 5:48 is crushing it. My bet is the guy who did that is 6'3"+.

As far as how accurate machines are one to the next, I've always wondered about that. Supposedly, the C2s self-calibrate using a drag factor, which differs from machine to machine at the same damper setting, and even on the same machine over its life (due to dust accumulation in the fan housing, etc.). Ironically, as crude as they were, the Gamut ergs were probably more accurate from one to the next, since they had a giant flywheel and a brake that was adjusted by putting weight in a basket to set the drag. But Gamut ergs were like medieval torture devices compared to C2s. From what I understand, the RowPerfect machines are more accurate than the C2s, but they also cost more than twice as much.

[Louis]

Originally Posted by happycampyer

And btw, it's not easy by any stretch to row a 6:20. That's basically a 1:35/500m pace. The thing is, going from 1:35 to 1:30 might not sound like a big deal, but it feels like it's exponentially harder to shave seconds off.

Heck, for me going from a 2:00 to a 1:45 pace for any distance over, say, 500m, is a massive difference. I can't imagine rowing at a 1:35 pace - I'm just as likely to be riding the bike up a 20% grade at 10 mph.

[Louis]

Originally Posted by Look585

A question for the rowers out there:

How accurate are the results from this machine? Are they truly comparable across eras and environments? Is a 6:22 in London in 2017 comparable to a 6:22 in Miami in 1998?

Even the best cycling powermeters claim accuracy of about +/- 1%. For a 2000m event, that would be 20m. I'm guessing most 2k races on the water are closer than 20m...

I don't have any specific numbers (and I doubt C2 would release them) but they're supposedly very consistent. For example, they're self-calibrating in a manner that a power meter on a bike can't achieve: They can figure out what damping of the wheel is by measuring how they spin down (something super-easy to do very accurately) which then allows them to calculate how much work you're doing, and based on that how "fast" you're going and the equivalent otw (on the water) speed. When it comes to erg racing the actual erg-to-otw speed doesn't really matter, since your just comparing one erg to another, so the accuracy of that calibration is no big deal.

As long as nothing really nutty is going on (e.g. really bad bearings on the seat or a horrible chain) I bet most ergs are pretty consistent, and since all competitions are held on brand-new ergs, age or wear and tear shouldn't be an issue.

Finally (because I was thinking of this very subject the other day) if one really wanted to compare the consistency of one erg to itself or to others you could build a test rig with a load cell to measure the force your test machine applies at the handle (repeatedly over time as your test machine simulates the motion of the human's hands). Using that and a few other test parameters you could compare the power and work your machine is applying to the erg to what the erg itself reports. That would be a fun project for a college engineering class.