Wiggins on the Concept2 erg

[LegendRider]

For those of you familiar with rowing, what do you think of his performance?

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/wigg...championships/

His goal of 6:02 was in the ballpark of what I expected. His actual 6:22 was a major disappointment IMO.

[Burnette]

His package didn't arrive before the event.

[mcteague]

He says he thought he had a false start, backed off a bit, and then never really got back in gear. Of course, as a friend used to reply, “that’s what he would say”. Also, being good on the erg is not the same as good on the water.

Tim

[seanile]

considering his weight, that's very respectable

[cp43]

Originally Posted by mcteague

He says he thought he had a false start, backed off a bit, and then never really got back in gear. Of course, as a friend used to reply, “that’s what he would say”. Also, being good on the erg is not the same as good on the water.

Tim

Said another way, "Ergs don't float"

Chris

[Climb01742]

My daughter rows in college at a very high level and a cyclist' physique is very different than in elite crew. He clearly has the lungs but strength is key in crew. A small example: my daughter's team has plank holding contests that_begin_at holding one for 10 minutes. Her women's team's lifting workouts would humble many male pro athletes in a good many sports.

[happycampyer]

To put that time in perspective, 6:20ish is a 2K time that gets high school rowers recruited to top men's lightweight college programs. Their advantage over Wiggins is they already know how to row...

[Climb01742]

Originally Posted by happycampyer

To put that time in perspective, 6:20ish is a 2K time that gets high school rowers recruited to top men's lightweight college programs. Their advantage over Wiggins is they already know how to row...

Very true. Wiggo's time wouldn't get him on an Ivy or PAC 12 boat. And once on water, the rowing skill level would diverge enormously, particularly on a course like the Head of the Charles or in the wind.

[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.

[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.