Ideal Shape of the Forcre Curve

[Charles Carroll]

What follows is a conversation I had this morning with Google’s AI BARD. What is the ideal shape of a Force Curve, I asked. BARD’s reply: Bell-shaped. So I asked,

Is a bell-shaped force curve really the ideal force curve for rowing?

Bard answered, Yes, a bell-shaped force curve is generally considered to be the ideal force curve for rowing. This is because it indicates that the rower is applying force in a smooth and efficient manner, with the majority of the force being generated by the legs and then distributed through the back and arms. A bell-shaped force curve also shows that the rower is maintaining a good connection between the legs, back, and arms throughout the stroke.

Here are some of the benefits of a bell-shaped force curve:

It allows the rower to generate more power.
It helps to prevent injuries.
It makes the rowing stroke more efficient.
It can lead to faster times.
Of course, there are other factors that can affect the shape of a force curve, such as the rower's fitness level, the type of rowing machine being used, and the intensity of the workout. However, a bell-shaped force curve is generally a good indication that the rower is using good technique and is rowing in an efficient manner.

Here are some tips for achieving a bell-shaped force curve:

Make sure that you are using good rowing technique. This includes engaging your core, keeping your back straight, and using a smooth and continuous stroke.
Start the stroke with a strong leg drive. This will help to generate the power that you need to propel the boat forward.
Maintain a good connection between your legs, back, and arms throughout the stroke. This will help to ensure that the force is being applied in a smooth and efficient manner.
Experiment with different rowing intensities to see what works best for you. A bell-shaped force curve is possible at a variety of intensities, so find one that you can maintain comfortably.
With practice, you can learn to achieve a bell-shaped force curve and improve your rowing performance.


But good rowing technique should show peak force early in the stroke, shouldn't it?

Yes, that is correct. Good rowing technique should show peak force early in the stroke. This is because the legs are the strongest muscles in the body, and they are responsible for generating the majority of the power in the rowing stroke. The peak force should occur within the first 0.5 seconds of the stroke, and it should be followed by a smooth and continuous decrease in force as the stroke progresses.

A bell-shaped force curve is still ideal, but it is not always possible to achieve a perfect bell curve. In some cases, a rower may have a slightly earlier peak force, which is still considered to be good technique. However, if the peak force is too early, it can indicate that the rower is using too much force in the legs and not enough force in the back and arms. This can lead to injuries and inefficiencies in the rowing stroke.

Ultimately, the best way to determine whether your force curve is ideal is to consult with a rowing coach or a sports scientist. They can analyze your force curve and give you specific feedback on how to improve your technique.

Here are some additional tips for achieving a good force curve:

Make sure that you are using a full range of motion in the rowing stroke. This will help to ensure that you are using all of the muscles in your body effectively.
Keep your back straight throughout the stroke. This will help to protect your spine and ensure that you are using your muscles efficiently.
Engage your core throughout the stroke. This will help to stabilize your body and transfer power from your legs to the oar.
Practice regularly. The more you row, the better your force curve will become.
profile picture
But why should peak force be followed by a decrease in force as the stroke progresses? Why shouldn't a rower try to hold on to peak force as the stroke progresses?

There are a few reasons why peak force should be followed by a decrease in force as the stroke progresses.

Peak force is not sustainable. The legs are the strongest muscles in the body, but they can only generate peak force for a short period of time. If a rower tries to hold on to peak force for too long, they will eventually fatigue and their rowing stroke will become inefficient.
The back and arms need to contribute force as well. The back and arms are not as strong as the legs, but they can still generate a significant amount of force. If a rower tries to hold on to peak force, they will not be able to use their back and arms effectively. This will lead to inefficiencies in the rowing stroke and could even lead to injuries.
A smooth and continuous force curve is more efficient. When a rower applies force in a smooth and continuous manner, they are able to transfer more power to the oar. This is because the oar is able to move through the water more smoothly and efficiently.
In short, trying to hold on to peak force as the stroke progresses is not sustainable, inefficient, and could lead to injuries. A smooth and continuous decrease in force is the best way to ensure that the rower is using their muscles effectively and transferring power to the oar efficiently.

Here are some additional benefits of a smooth and continuous force curve:

It helps to prevent injuries.
It makes the rowing stroke more efficient.
It can lead to faster times.
If you are a rower, it is important to focus on developing a smooth and continuous force curve. This will help you to improve your rowing performance and prevent injuries.



But why should peak force be followed by a decrease in force as the stroke progresses? Why shouldn't a rower try to hold on to peak force as the stroke progresses?

There are a few reasons why peak force should be followed by a decrease in force as the stroke progresses.

Peak force is not sustainable. The legs are the strongest muscles in the body, but they can only generate peak force for a short period of time. If a rower tries to hold on to peak force for too long, they will eventually fatigue and their rowing stroke will become inefficient.
The back and arms need to contribute force as well. The back and arms are not as strong as the legs, but they can still generate a significant amount of force. If a rower tries to hold on to peak force, they will not be able to use their back and arms effectively. This will lead to inefficiencies in the rowing stroke and could even lead to injuries.
A smooth and continuous force curve is more efficient. When a rower applies force in a smooth and continuous manner, they are able to transfer more power to the oar. This is because the oar is able to move through the water more smoothly and efficiently.
In short, trying to hold on to peak force as the stroke progresses is not sustainable, inefficient, and could lead to injuries. A smooth and continuous decrease in force is the best way to ensure that the rower is using their muscles effectively and transferring power to the oar efficiently.

Here are some additional benefits of a smooth and continuous force curve:

It helps to prevent injuries.
It makes the rowing stroke more efficient.
It can lead to faster times.
If you are a rower, it is important to focus on developing a smooth and continuous force curve. This will help you to improve your rowing performance and prevent injuries.


But Kris Korzeniowski taught Charley Butt, "You don’t have to work so hard early in the stroke; it is more important to maintain pressure throughout its entirety." Doesn't this suggest that a rectangular shape for a force curve in rowing is superior to a bell shape?

Draft 1 That is an interesting quote from Kris Korzeniowski. It is true that a rectangular force curve would suggest that the rower is maintaining pressure throughout the entirety of the stroke. However, it is important to remember that a force curve is just one measure of rowing performance. There are other factors that can also affect performance, such as the rower's fitness level, the type of rowing machine being used, and the intensity of the workout.

In general, a bell-shaped force curve is considered to be ideal because it indicates that the rower is applying force in a smooth and efficient manner. However, there are some cases where a rectangular force curve may be beneficial. For example, if a rower is trying to maintain a high pace for a long period of time, a rectangular force curve may be more sustainable.

Ultimately, the best way to determine whether a bell-shaped or rectangular force curve is superior depends on the specific rower and their goals. If a rower is looking to improve their sprinting performance, a bell-shaped force curve may be the best option. However, if a rower is looking to maintain a high pace for a long period of time, a rectangular force curve may be more beneficial.

It is also important to note that the shape of a force curve can change over time as a rower's fitness level improves. As a rower becomes stronger, they may be able to generate more force early in the stroke, which would result in a more bell-shaped force curve.

If you are a rower, it is important to experiment with different force curves and see what works best for you. There is no one-size-fits-all answer, and the best force curve for you will depend on your individual goals and fitness level.


Draft 2 That is an interesting question. Kris Korzeniowski is a former Olympic rowing champion, so his advice is certainly worth considering. However, there is no one-size-fits-all answer to this question. The ideal force curve for a rower will vary depending on their individual strengths and weaknesses, as well as the type of rowing that they are doing.

In general, a bell-shaped force curve is considered to be ideal because it indicates that the rower is applying force in a smooth and efficient manner. However, a rectangular force curve may be more beneficial for rowers who are trying to maintain pressure throughout the entire stroke. This is because a rectangular force curve allows the rower to generate more power at the end of the stroke, which can be helpful in short-distance rowing events.

Ultimately, the best way to determine whether a bell-shaped or rectangular force curve is better for you is to experiment and see what works best for you. You can do this by tracking your force curve using a rowing machine or by working with a rowing coach.

Here are some additional factors that you may want to consider when determining the ideal force curve for you:

Your fitness level: If you are a beginner rower, you may want to focus on developing a smooth and continuous force curve. As you become more fit, you may be able to generate more power at the end of the stroke and benefit from a rectangular force curve.
The type of rowing that you are doing: If you are rowing in short-distance events, you may want to focus on generating more power at the end of the stroke. If you are rowing in long-distance events, you may want to focus on maintaining a smooth and continuous force curve.
Your individual strengths and weaknesses: If you are strong in your legs, you may be able to get away with a more rectangular force curve. If you are strong in your back and arms, you may need to focus on developing a more bell-shaped force curve.
With a little experimentation, you can find the ideal force curve for you and improve your rowing performance.


Draft3 That is an interesting point. Kris Korzeniowski is a legendary rower who won two Olympic gold medals, so his advice is certainly worth considering. However, it is important to note that he was talking about a specific type of rowing stroke, known as the "Swedish stroke." The Swedish stroke is characterized by a smooth and continuous force curve, with a relatively high peak force early in the stroke. This type of force curve is ideal for long-distance rowing, as it allows the rower to maintain a high level of power throughout the stroke.

However, for shorter rowing distances, such as a 2000 meter race, a bell-shaped force curve may be more beneficial. This is because the rower needs to generate a lot of power early in the stroke in order to get a good start. A bell-shaped force curve allows the rower to do this, while still maintaining a smooth and continuous stroke.

Ultimately, the best force curve for rowing depends on the specific type of rowing stroke that you are using and the distance that you are rowing. If you are rowing for a long distance, a rectangular force curve may be the best option. However, if you are rowing for a shorter distance, a bell-shaped force curve may be more beneficial.

It is also important to note that there is no one "perfect" force curve. The best force curve for you will depend on your individual body and rowing technique. The best way to determine what is best for you is to consult with a rowing coach or a sports scientist. They can analyze your force curve and give you specific feedback on how to improve your technique.

[Dick White]

It is most revealing that the AI bot gives the ultimate advice - talk to a real person.

dw

[James HS]

Post by Dick White
It is most revealing that the AI bot gives the ultimate advice - talk to a real person.
dw

There are some interesting bits in there - but bearing in mind that it is simply an internet statistical trawl - it will largely reward 'dogma' and if there is a paradigm shift, it is unlikely to reproduce the change unless it weights 'newer' thinking over 'old'.

For fun I thought I would ask about the "ideal" rowing blade depth - and here was the answer

"....The ideal blade depth in rowing is when the blade is fully submerged in the water, with only about 1 cm of the blade showing above the surface. This allows the blade to grip the water more effectively and generate more power. However, the exact blade depth will vary depending on the rower's technique, the type of oar, and the water conditions...."

So even in the one sentence it contradicts itself - "fully submerged" and 1cm showing above the surface are the two different 'camps' and it has combined them into one answer with an impossible solution.

It also says a deeper blade will "generate" more power - and we all know that blades don't make power themselves!

So it is great at presenting back to you the rubbish that is out there in the internet, in an apparently intelligible way - which is what I guess Human coaches have been doing for years :)


James

[carl]

Post by James HS

Post by Dick White
It is most revealing that the AI bot gives the ultimate advice - talk to a real person.
dw

There are some interesting bits in there - but bearing in mind that it is simply an internet statistical trawl - it will largely reward 'dogma' and if there is a paradigm shift, it is unlikely to reproduce the change unless it weights 'newer' thinking over 'old'.
For fun I thought I would ask about the "ideal" rowing blade depth - and here was the answer
"....The ideal blade depth in rowing is when the blade is fully submerged in the water, with only about 1 cm of the blade showing above the surface. This allows the blade to grip the water more effectively and generate more power. However, the exact blade depth will vary depending on the rower's technique, the type of oar, and the water conditions...."
So even in the one sentence it contradicts itself - "fully submerged" and 1cm showing above the surface are the two different 'camps' and it has combined them into one answer with an impossible solution.
It also says a deeper blade will "generate" more power - and we all know that blades don't make power themselves!
So it is great at presenting back to you the rubbish that is out there in the internet, in an apparently intelligible way - which is what I guess Human coaches have been doing for years :)
James

James -
That's a perfect exposition of what was going around inside my skull on
reading Charles's deliberate provocations (it's what Charles does so
very well, the cad!).

As we've always said, of things computery: "garbage in, garbage out".

That there are so many logical conflicts in those 2 sentences perfectly
sums up the collective ignorance of those who presume to tell us how to
row. Neither science, nor logic, gets a look-in! Yet foolish people
will cling to this new holy grail of AI, foolishly believing that doing
so will make them sound smart without their having the nous or industry
to be so.

Bullshit baffles brains!

Cheers -
Carl

[James HS]

Post by carl

Post by James HS

Post by Dick White
It is most revealing that the AI bot gives the ultimate advice - talk to a real person.
dw

There are some interesting bits in there - but bearing in mind that it is simply an internet statistical trawl - it will largely reward 'dogma' and if there is a paradigm shift, it is unlikely to reproduce the change unless it weights 'newer' thinking over 'old'.
For fun I thought I would ask about the "ideal" rowing blade depth - and here was the answer
"....The ideal blade depth in rowing is when the blade is fully submerged in the water, with only about 1 cm of the blade showing above the surface. This allows the blade to grip the water more effectively and generate more power. However, the exact blade depth will vary depending on the rower's technique, the type of oar, and the water conditions...."
So even in the one sentence it contradicts itself - "fully submerged" and 1cm showing above the surface are the two different 'camps' and it has combined them into one answer with an impossible solution.
It also says a deeper blade will "generate" more power - and we all know that blades don't make power themselves!
So it is great at presenting back to you the rubbish that is out there in the internet, in an apparently intelligible way - which is what I guess Human coaches have been doing for years :)
James

James -
That's a perfect exposition of what was going around inside my skull on
reading Charles's deliberate provocations (it's what Charles does so
very well, the cad!).
As we've always said, of things computery: "garbage in, garbage out".
That there are so many logical conflicts in those 2 sentences perfectly
sums up the collective ignorance of those who presume to tell us how to
row. Neither science, nor logic, gets a look-in! Yet foolish people
will cling to this new holy grail of AI, foolishly believing that doing
so will make them sound smart without their having the nous or industry
to be so.
Bullshit baffles brains!
Cheers -
Carl
--
Carl Douglas Racing Shells -
Fine Small-Boats/AeRoWing Low-drag Riggers/Advanced Accessories
Write: Harris Boatyard, Laleham Reach, Chertsey KT16 8RP, UK
Find: tinyurl.com/2tqujf

Carl

I am as guilty of the next coach - but get insights into how it all works when I read your posts :)

The biggest one (ignoring slip for a moment) is the image of levering yourself past the blade locked in the water - which then leads to a conversations about how to lock and un lock it - and voila!

Then I try and translate that into a program at my club and get bemused looks from all levels!

When I actually apply science - that changes my mind (like warm-up being useful to performance, but cool down not so much, or the fact that DOMS slows down a trained rower's 2K by about 2-3 seconds, so keep training before 'tests' in season) - try changing it in an actual program and not get a crazy push-back to wanting to do the 'old way' (I tried to have bench pulls and leg press removed from our gym (as they are both useless and injurious) and replaced with more useful equipment (sliding bar weights cages to at least teach forom, or a hex bar for deadlifts and RDLS beacues they are safer in unsupervised gyms) and just got pushback because people 'like' the old stuff - nothing about efficacy! (and rib fractures ensued!!)

This medium is not yet dead - and is at least searchable - unlike the metaverse!!

James

[carl]

Post by James HS

Post by carl

Post by James HS

Post by Dick White
It is most revealing that the AI bot gives the ultimate advice - talk to a real person.
dw

There are some interesting bits in there - but bearing in mind that it is simply an internet statistical trawl - it will largely reward 'dogma' and if there is a paradigm shift, it is unlikely to reproduce the change unless it weights 'newer' thinking over 'old'.
For fun I thought I would ask about the "ideal" rowing blade depth - and here was the answer
"....The ideal blade depth in rowing is when the blade is fully submerged in the water, with only about 1 cm of the blade showing above the surface. This allows the blade to grip the water more effectively and generate more power. However, the exact blade depth will vary depending on the rower's technique, the type of oar, and the water conditions...."
So even in the one sentence it contradicts itself - "fully submerged" and 1cm showing above the surface are the two different 'camps' and it has combined them into one answer with an impossible solution.
It also says a deeper blade will "generate" more power - and we all know that blades don't make power themselves!
So it is great at presenting back to you the rubbish that is out there in the internet, in an apparently intelligible way - which is what I guess Human coaches have been doing for years :)
James

James -
That's a perfect exposition of what was going around inside my skull on
reading Charles's deliberate provocations (it's what Charles does so
very well, the cad!).
As we've always said, of things computery: "garbage in, garbage out".
That there are so many logical conflicts in those 2 sentences perfectly
sums up the collective ignorance of those who presume to tell us how to
row. Neither science, nor logic, gets a look-in! Yet foolish people
will cling to this new holy grail of AI, foolishly believing that doing
so will make them sound smart without their having the nous or industry
to be so.
Bullshit baffles brains!
Cheers -
Carl
--
Carl Douglas Racing Shells -
Fine Small-Boats/AeRoWing Low-drag Riggers/Advanced Accessories
Write: Harris Boatyard, Laleham Reach, Chertsey KT16 8RP, UK
Find: tinyurl.com/2tqujf

Carl
I am as guilty of the next coach - but get insights into how it all works when I read your posts :)
The biggest one (ignoring slip for a moment) is the image of levering yourself past the blade locked in the water - which then leads to a conversations about how to lock and un lock it - and voila!
Then I try and translate that into a program at my club and get bemused looks from all levels!
When I actually apply science - that changes my mind (like warm-up being useful to performance, but cool down not so much, or the fact that DOMS slows down a trained rower's 2K by about 2-3 seconds, so keep training before 'tests' in season) - try changing it in an actual program and not get a crazy push-back to wanting to do the 'old way' (I tried to have bench pulls and leg press removed from our gym (as they are both useless and injurious) and replaced with more useful equipment (sliding bar weights cages to at least teach forom, or a hex bar for deadlifts and RDLS beacues they are safer in unsupervised gyms) and just got pushback because people 'like' the old stuff - nothing about efficacy! (and rib fractures ensued!!)
This medium is not yet dead - and is at least searchable - unlike the metaverse!!
James

James, I can't disagree - except with your comment re warm-downs, where
there appears to be growing evidence (I'm told by folk far more
knowledgeable than me) that the older competitors do have a real need
for proper on-water warm-downs. Otherwise, which of us has not done
ourselves some degree of injury on apparatus & ergs through poor
technique, personal stupidity (guilty as charged!) & the fact that some
bits of kit & how they are used can take us too far beyond the range of
actions directly relevant to the rowing stroke. We can be very strong
in some departments directly used by rowers but then apply that same
can-do mentality to exercises for which rowing has not prepared us.

Cheers -
Carl

[James HS]

Post by carl

Post by James HS

Post by carl

Post by James HS

Post by Dick White
It is most revealing that the AI bot gives the ultimate advice - talk to a real person.
dw

There are some interesting bits in there - but bearing in mind that it is simply an internet statistical trawl - it will largely reward 'dogma' and if there is a paradigm shift, it is unlikely to reproduce the change unless it weights 'newer' thinking over 'old'.
For fun I thought I would ask about the "ideal" rowing blade depth - and here was the answer
"....The ideal blade depth in rowing is when the blade is fully submerged in the water, with only about 1 cm of the blade showing above the surface. This allows the blade to grip the water more effectively and generate more power. However, the exact blade depth will vary depending on the rower's technique, the type of oar, and the water conditions...."
So even in the one sentence it contradicts itself - "fully submerged" and 1cm showing above the surface are the two different 'camps' and it has combined them into one answer with an impossible solution.
It also says a deeper blade will "generate" more power - and we all know that blades don't make power themselves!
So it is great at presenting back to you the rubbish that is out there in the internet, in an apparently intelligible way - which is what I guess Human coaches have been doing for years :)
James

James -
That's a perfect exposition of what was going around inside my skull on
reading Charles's deliberate provocations (it's what Charles does so
very well, the cad!).
As we've always said, of things computery: "garbage in, garbage out".
That there are so many logical conflicts in those 2 sentences perfectly
sums up the collective ignorance of those who presume to tell us how to
row. Neither science, nor logic, gets a look-in! Yet foolish people
will cling to this new holy grail of AI, foolishly believing that doing
so will make them sound smart without their having the nous or industry
to be so.
Bullshit baffles brains!
Cheers -
Carl
--
Carl Douglas Racing Shells -
Fine Small-Boats/AeRoWing Low-drag Riggers/Advanced Accessories
Write: Harris Boatyard, Laleham Reach, Chertsey KT16 8RP, UK
Find: tinyurl.com/2tqujf

Carl
I am as guilty of the next coach - but get insights into how it all works when I read your posts :)
The biggest one (ignoring slip for a moment) is the image of levering yourself past the blade locked in the water - which then leads to a conversations about how to lock and un lock it - and voila!
Then I try and translate that into a program at my club and get bemused looks from all levels!
When I actually apply science - that changes my mind (like warm-up being useful to performance, but cool down not so much, or the fact that DOMS slows down a trained rower's 2K by about 2-3 seconds, so keep training before 'tests' in season) - try changing it in an actual program and not get a crazy push-back to wanting to do the 'old way' (I tried to have bench pulls and leg press removed from our gym (as they are both useless and injurious) and replaced with more useful equipment (sliding bar weights cages to at least teach forom, or a hex bar for deadlifts and RDLS beacues they are safer in unsupervised gyms) and just got pushback because people 'like' the old stuff - nothing about efficacy! (and rib fractures ensued!!)
This medium is not yet dead - and is at least searchable - unlike the metaverse!!
James

James, I can't disagree - except with your comment re warm-downs, where
there appears to be growing evidence (I'm told by folk far more
knowledgeable than me) that the older competitors do have a real need
for proper on-water warm-downs. Otherwise, which of us has not done
ourselves some degree of injury on apparatus & ergs through poor
technique, personal stupidity (guilty as charged!) & the fact that some
bits of kit & how they are used can take us too far beyond the range of
actions directly relevant to the rowing stroke. We can be very strong
in some departments directly used by rowers but then apply that same
can-do mentality to exercises for which rowing has not prepared us.
Cheers -
Carl
--
Carl Douglas Racing Shells -
Fine Small-Boats/AeRoWing Low-drag Riggers/Advanced Accessories
Write: Harris Boatyard, Laleham Reach, Chertsey KT16 8RP, UK
Find: tinyurl.com/2tqujf

Carl
You make a good point about efficacy of cool down in masters - I was looking at it purely for land based exercises where I used to ask for a 3K warm up (proven efficacy in the literature) and dynamic stretching (again proven) and muscle activation (ditto) and I used to add at the end of the 'work' a cool down (12-15 minutes plus) and a stretch out (static stretches) which took about 20 minutes at the end of a session.

Papers I read (with some credibility behind them) still backed the efficacy of stretching on future performance, but found that the cool down had no contribution to the future performance outcome.

This was counter to most of my previous awareness, but I think was repeated in several learned papers - and I tend to adopt 'science' and so could shave 15 minutes off a training session for athletes.

But I will delve further and see if there are any more specific studies that relate to masters athletes.

On the water we tend to have a 'cool down' period as landing on our steps is inevitably a bit complicated - but I have never thought too heavily about it and should!!

James

[carl]

Post by James HS

Post by carl

Post by James HS

Post by carl

Post by James HS

Post by Dick White
It is most revealing that the AI bot gives the ultimate advice - talk to a real person.
dw

There are some interesting bits in there - but bearing in mind that it is simply an internet statistical trawl - it will largely reward 'dogma' and if there is a paradigm shift, it is unlikely to reproduce the change unless it weights 'newer' thinking over 'old'.
For fun I thought I would ask about the "ideal" rowing blade depth - and here was the answer
"....The ideal blade depth in rowing is when the blade is fully submerged in the water, with only about 1 cm of the blade showing above the surface. This allows the blade to grip the water more effectively and generate more power. However, the exact blade depth will vary depending on the rower's technique, the type of oar, and the water conditions...."
So even in the one sentence it contradicts itself - "fully submerged" and 1cm showing above the surface are the two different 'camps' and it has combined them into one answer with an impossible solution.
It also says a deeper blade will "generate" more power - and we all know that blades don't make power themselves!
So it is great at presenting back to you the rubbish that is out there in the internet, in an apparently intelligible way - which is what I guess Human coaches have been doing for years :)
James

James -
That's a perfect exposition of what was going around inside my skull on
reading Charles's deliberate provocations (it's what Charles does so
very well, the cad!).
As we've always said, of things computery: "garbage in, garbage out".
That there are so many logical conflicts in those 2 sentences perfectly
sums up the collective ignorance of those who presume to tell us how to
row. Neither science, nor logic, gets a look-in! Yet foolish people
will cling to this new holy grail of AI, foolishly believing that doing
so will make them sound smart without their having the nous or industry
to be so.
Bullshit baffles brains!
Cheers -
Carl
--
Carl Douglas Racing Shells -
Fine Small-Boats/AeRoWing Low-drag Riggers/Advanced Accessories
Write: Harris Boatyard, Laleham Reach, Chertsey KT16 8RP, UK
Find: tinyurl.com/2tqujf

Carl
I am as guilty of the next coach - but get insights into how it all works when I read your posts :)
The biggest one (ignoring slip for a moment) is the image of levering yourself past the blade locked in the water - which then leads to a conversations about how to lock and un lock it - and voila!
Then I try and translate that into a program at my club and get bemused looks from all levels!
When I actually apply science - that changes my mind (like warm-up being useful to performance, but cool down not so much, or the fact that DOMS slows down a trained rower's 2K by about 2-3 seconds, so keep training before 'tests' in season) - try changing it in an actual program and not get a crazy push-back to wanting to do the 'old way' (I tried to have bench pulls and leg press removed from our gym (as they are both useless and injurious) and replaced with more useful equipment (sliding bar weights cages to at least teach forom, or a hex bar for deadlifts and RDLS beacues they are safer in unsupervised gyms) and just got pushback because people 'like' the old stuff - nothing about efficacy! (and rib fractures ensued!!)
This medium is not yet dead - and is at least searchable - unlike the metaverse!!
James

James, I can't disagree - except with your comment re warm-downs, where
there appears to be growing evidence (I'm told by folk far more
knowledgeable than me) that the older competitors do have a real need
for proper on-water warm-downs. Otherwise, which of us has not done
ourselves some degree of injury on apparatus & ergs through poor
technique, personal stupidity (guilty as charged!) & the fact that some
bits of kit & how they are used can take us too far beyond the range of
actions directly relevant to the rowing stroke. We can be very strong
in some departments directly used by rowers but then apply that same
can-do mentality to exercises for which rowing has not prepared us.
Cheers -
Carl
--
Carl Douglas Racing Shells -
Fine Small-Boats/AeRoWing Low-drag Riggers/Advanced Accessories
Write: Harris Boatyard, Laleham Reach, Chertsey KT16 8RP, UK
Find: tinyurl.com/2tqujf

Carl
You make a good point about efficacy of cool down in masters - I was looking at it purely for land based exercises where I used to ask for a 3K warm up (proven efficacy in the literature) and dynamic stretching (again proven) and muscle activation (ditto) and I used to add at the end of the 'work' a cool down (12-15 minutes plus) and a stretch out (static stretches) which took about 20 minutes at the end of a session.
Papers I read (with some credibility behind them) still backed the efficacy of stretching on future performance, but found that the cool down had no contribution to the future performance outcome.
This was counter to most of my previous awareness, but I think was repeated in several learned papers - and I tend to adopt 'science' and so could shave 15 minutes off a training session for athletes.
But I will delve further and see if there are any more specific studies that relate to masters athletes.
On the water we tend to have a 'cool down' period as landing on our steps is inevitably a bit complicated - but I have never thought too heavily about it and should!!
James

James -
I think you may know Kosta Kolimechkov? It was he who recently directed
my attention to the desirability, specifically for older rowers, of
ample warm-downs.

Club rowing now being so dependent upon the "masters" bunch of rowers
(how can one be a novice "master"?), it would be a shame to have them
damaged, if that's what could happen, by unduly limiting their scope for
active warm-downs (as opposed to them hanging around awaiting landing
space).

Cheers -
Carl

[James HS]

Post by carl

Post by James HS

Post by carl

Post by James HS

Post by carl

Post by James HS

Post by Dick White
It is most revealing that the AI bot gives the ultimate advice - talk to a real person.
dw

There are some interesting bits in there - but bearing in mind that it is simply an internet statistical trawl - it will largely reward 'dogma' and if there is a paradigm shift, it is unlikely to reproduce the change unless it weights 'newer' thinking over 'old'.
For fun I thought I would ask about the "ideal" rowing blade depth - and here was the answer
"....The ideal blade depth in rowing is when the blade is fully submerged in the water, with only about 1 cm of the blade showing above the surface. This allows the blade to grip the water more effectively and generate more power. However, the exact blade depth will vary depending on the rower's technique, the type of oar, and the water conditions...."
So even in the one sentence it contradicts itself - "fully submerged" and 1cm showing above the surface are the two different 'camps' and it has combined them into one answer with an impossible solution.
It also says a deeper blade will "generate" more power - and we all know that blades don't make power themselves!
So it is great at presenting back to you the rubbish that is out there in the internet, in an apparently intelligible way - which is what I guess Human coaches have been doing for years :)
James

James -
That's a perfect exposition of what was going around inside my skull on
reading Charles's deliberate provocations (it's what Charles does so
very well, the cad!).
As we've always said, of things computery: "garbage in, garbage out".
That there are so many logical conflicts in those 2 sentences perfectly
sums up the collective ignorance of those who presume to tell us how to
row. Neither science, nor logic, gets a look-in! Yet foolish people
will cling to this new holy grail of AI, foolishly believing that doing
so will make them sound smart without their having the nous or industry
to be so.
Bullshit baffles brains!
Cheers -
Carl
--
Carl Douglas Racing Shells -
Fine Small-Boats/AeRoWing Low-drag Riggers/Advanced Accessories
Write: Harris Boatyard, Laleham Reach, Chertsey KT16 8RP, UK
Find: tinyurl.com/2tqujf

Carl
I am as guilty of the next coach - but get insights into how it all works when I read your posts :)
The biggest one (ignoring slip for a moment) is the image of levering yourself past the blade locked in the water - which then leads to a conversations about how to lock and un lock it - and voila!
Then I try and translate that into a program at my club and get bemused looks from all levels!
When I actually apply science - that changes my mind (like warm-up being useful to performance, but cool down not so much, or the fact that DOMS slows down a trained rower's 2K by about 2-3 seconds, so keep training before 'tests' in season) - try changing it in an actual program and not get a crazy push-back to wanting to do the 'old way' (I tried to have bench pulls and leg press removed from our gym (as they are both useless and injurious) and replaced with more useful equipment (sliding bar weights cages to at least teach forom, or a hex bar for deadlifts and RDLS beacues they are safer in unsupervised gyms) and just got pushback because people 'like' the old stuff - nothing about efficacy! (and rib fractures ensued!!)
This medium is not yet dead - and is at least searchable - unlike the metaverse!!
James

James, I can't disagree - except with your comment re warm-downs, where
there appears to be growing evidence (I'm told by folk far more
knowledgeable than me) that the older competitors do have a real need
for proper on-water warm-downs. Otherwise, which of us has not done
ourselves some degree of injury on apparatus & ergs through poor
technique, personal stupidity (guilty as charged!) & the fact that some
bits of kit & how they are used can take us too far beyond the range of
actions directly relevant to the rowing stroke. We can be very strong
in some departments directly used by rowers but then apply that same
can-do mentality to exercises for which rowing has not prepared us.
Cheers -
Carl
--
Carl Douglas Racing Shells -
Fine Small-Boats/AeRoWing Low-drag Riggers/Advanced Accessories
Write: Harris Boatyard, Laleham Reach, Chertsey KT16 8RP, UK
Find: tinyurl.com/2tqujf

Carl
You make a good point about efficacy of cool down in masters - I was looking at it purely for land based exercises where I used to ask for a 3K warm up (proven efficacy in the literature) and dynamic stretching (again proven) and muscle activation (ditto) and I used to add at the end of the 'work' a cool down (12-15 minutes plus) and a stretch out (static stretches) which took about 20 minutes at the end of a session.
Papers I read (with some credibility behind them) still backed the efficacy of stretching on future performance, but found that the cool down had no contribution to the future performance outcome.
This was counter to most of my previous awareness, but I think was repeated in several learned papers - and I tend to adopt 'science' and so could shave 15 minutes off a training session for athletes.
But I will delve further and see if there are any more specific studies that relate to masters athletes.
On the water we tend to have a 'cool down' period as landing on our steps is inevitably a bit complicated - but I have never thought too heavily about it and should!!
James

James -
I think you may know Kosta Kolimechkov? It was he who recently directed
my attention to the desirability, specifically for older rowers, of
ample warm-downs.
Club rowing now being so dependent upon the "masters" bunch of rowers
(how can one be a novice "master"?), it would be a shame to have them
damaged, if that's what could happen, by unduly limiting their scope for
active warm-downs (as opposed to them hanging around awaiting landing
space).
Cheers -
Carl
--
Carl Douglas Racing Shells -
Fine Small-Boats/AeRoWing Low-drag Riggers/Advanced Accessories
Write: Harris Boatyard, Laleham Reach, Chertsey KT16 8RP, UK
Find: tinyurl.com/2tqujf

Carl,

It was Kosta who converted me from a poor sweeper into someone who loves sculling!!

I respect his opinion - so will be delving deeper - esp the differences between land and water, and the differences between 'masters' and others, and then my particular interest, the differences between Masters men and women. - Most studies are done on 20ish years old US male college students for 3-6 weeks periods of study, so I will seek some proper research and re-evaluate :)

James