Concept2 Articles on Damper and Drag Settings

[Mike Channin]

Probably one of the most common topics of indoor rowing discussions - drag factor and damper settings.
Here are some definitive articles from C2 themselves...

https://www.concept2.com/training/artic ... er-setting
Basics of how Damper and Drag Factor work and how to set them

https://www.concept2.com/blog/what-is-t ... ing-for-me
Discussion article

https://www.concept2.com/blog/the-dampe ... -olympians
TLDR: 112-140 with 2 quoted as saying Damper 10 is a recipe for injury

https://www.concept2.com/blog/debunking ... -intensity
Another explanation that Damper 10 is not the aim, and if 'the rower is "too easy" for you', it's because you're doing it wrong!

What about you? What are you using and why?

[Mike Channin]

Personally, I've always rowed High Drag.

I did weights before I rowed, and when I first used a Model B, I found it 'easier' to row hard on the 'high gear' cog.
On the Model C, this corresponded to high-end drag, and I guess I just stayed there. I'm not tall for a rower (180cm), so generating more power in less distance is one way to compensate for a relatively shorter stroke.
When I competed in person (2004-2006), I'd set up for 180 drag (which did cause some curious looks), but it seemed to work.
I've had to contend with some awful gym machines where max drag is ~130. I spent a period rowing at 130 in 2011/12 and did OK, but always felt a bit rushed, and was happier when I got back onto higher drag in the next gym. I like being able to squeeze on the power and feeling the fan spin up.
Over the years, I became a bit of an expert at cleaning dust out of fan cages armed with a trusty gym towel - again, gets you some funny looks
I'm currently rowing at (checks log) 171 on my veteran Model C (which is Damper 7) and quite happy with it, although part of me knows I should probably be rowing at lower drag to improve my technique...

[Iain]

Tumbleweed!

I have usually rowed between 115 & 120 being a weak lightweight. I only increase for sub 500m, but reduce to 105 for FM or longer TTs as I find the largest issue for these is usually leg muscle tiredness so increasing the rating and loading CV a little more that happens on lower DF.

Interestingly as Ian rows on a higher DF than me, I have upped by DF to 126 as we have agreed an intermediate 115 for the MM, 126 to 115 is the same proportion as 115 to 105.

I have found this tough and definitely have had more muscle stiffness, especially upper body. But hopefully this will increase muscular endurance that will be tested in the MM.

[Mike Channin]

So I tried one of the gentle sessions at a (slightly) lower drag to see what it felt like. It was only one Damper setting (156 vs usual 170).
It did feel very slightly lighter, but not too much different.
Afterwards I had a bit of soreness in the arms (probably from 'whipping in the finish' a bit more), and this maybe is because I usually rely on quite a hard drive early on, when the legs engage. Lowering the drag means I have less to push against there...

[Iain]

Interesting, I notice even 5 DF difference significantly altrough can adapt. i also feel that higher drag puts more load on upper body (incl arms) and less on legs due to longer time to get handle to speed. Also higher ratings make drag "feel" lower to me.

I do find that higher drag leads to quicker muscular fatigue. But this is from a weak lightweight!

[Mike Channin]

For me, I like to 'stand' on the footplate during the drive phase of the stroke, and feel that squeeze/surge as you accelerate the flywheel. For this, it makes sense to have a bit more drag, so that the flywheel slows down, so you have something to push against and can accelerate it again.

If I lower the drag too much, I find there isn't enough resistance to drive against, and I end up having to use other tricks to spin the flywheel (like exaggerating the arms). Now that does work, because the weaker body parts have less resistance to overcome, but it moves the emphasis away from the main drive. But I generally end up having to rate higher to compensate, which is theoretically less efficient overall (although there is definitely a rating sweet spot for efficiency when doing the long SS).

Would be interesting to see what the stroke power graphs look like...

I _do_ find that the 30R20, where you do a high power rating with a low rate puts a lot of stress on the muscles, and maybe moves that ahead of cardio as the limiting factor, but then, that's kind of the point for that session.

A lot of it is probably what you're used to.

I remember in the boat that starts and low speed were my favourite, as it was easier to get maximum work into the water. At full racing speed, it gets quite hard to get good work in, because the water is already whipping past at quite a rate, and you have to be faster on the stroke. In an eight, you do still get a really impressive surge as you (the crew) power on the stroke and lift and hurl the boat forwards (technically not actually lifting as that probably means your angle is wrong, but you feel the acceleration as if you're lifting the boat against the drag of the water. This is particularly noticeable at long race pace, where the rating isn't as high as flat out ramming speed for the bumps, and its more a case of slogging away. I used to love a good puddle, and watching it go down the river as a little demonstration of the effort you just expended...

[Iain]

For me, I like to 'stand' on the footplate during the drive phase of the stroke, and feel that squeeze/surge as you accelerate the flywheel. For this, it makes sense to have a bit more drag, so that the flywheel slows down, so you have something to push against and can accelerate it again.

If I lower the drag too much, I find there isn't enough resistance to drive against, and I end up having to use other tricks to spin the flywheel (like exaggerating the arms). Now that does work, because the weaker body parts have less resistance to overcome, but it moves the emphasis away from the main drive. But I generally end up having to rate higher to compensate, which is theoretically less efficient overall (although there is definitely a rating sweet spot for efficiency when doing the long SS).

Would be interesting to see what the stroke power graphs look like...

I _do_ find that the 30R20, where you do a high power rating with a low rate puts a lot of stress on the muscles, and maybe moves that ahead of cardio as the limiting factor, but then, that's kind of the point for that session.

A lot of it is probably what you're used to.

I remember in the boat that starts and low speed were my favourite, as it was easier to get maximum work into the water. At full racing speed, it gets quite hard to get good work in, because the water is already whipping past at quite a rate, and you have to be faster on the stroke. In an eight, you do still get a really impressive surge as you (the crew) power on the stroke and lift and hurl the boat forwards (technically not actually lifting as that probably means your angle is wrong, but you feel the acceleration as if you're lifting the boat against the drag of the water. This is particularly noticeable at long race pace, where the rating isn't as high as flat out ramming speed for the bumps, and its more a case of slogging away. I used to love a good puddle, and watching it go down the river as a little demonstration of the effort you just expended...

No expert, but I think the purists would say that good technique allows a fast stroke that will produce as much power at a similar drag to a running boat. HIgh drag will compensate for a sluggish catch. Re OTW, the bows are lifted when the crew drives, one reason why it pays to have lighter crew members in the bows.

[Mike Channin]

I'm pretty sure my erg 'technique' has ruined my OTW stroke by now, should I ever be lucky enough to get back into a racing boat again...

[paulgould]

My favourite topic - very much a case of different strokes for different folks.
My preference is for the extreme end of the scale.
Pretty much all my rowing in the past 12 or so years has been at a df of 300-380.
As I will never be rowing OTW( being short and heavy I would be a massive liability to any crew ), and my medical issues preventing me from racing or going for PB's, I use the erg as a fitness tool and I find the high df, slow pull approach works for me, and despite popular theory, I have yet to pick up an injury with this approach.

Paul G

[William]

My preference is for the extreme end of the scale.
Pretty much all my rowing in the past 12 or so years has been at a df of 300-380.

Paul G

A DF of 300-380 seems more than extreme! The maximum DF I can get from my erg is about 200 after it's just been cleaned. Can you confirm you really mean 300-380? I guess it's possible if you remove the mesh / grille completely but I can't imagine anyone actually doing that.

[William]

Drag Factor is an endlessly fascinating topic. One thing that has struck me over the years is the amazing range of Drag Factores used - anything from 80-200 (or even 380 as mentioned in the previous post).
These are a few of my observations:
1. Newbies in the gym always set the damper setting to 10 (which is exactly what I did at first on the assumption it was a good way of building up strength).
2. Most personal trainers outside the rowing fraternity advise a damper setting of 7-8 (without giving a rationale).
3. Elite males usually use a DF of 120-125. Seldom more than 130.
4. Elite females usually use a DF of 100-110.
5. Rob Wadell (NZ once world record holder at 5:36) reportedly used 95 for his 2K WR at 34 spm and seldom went over 110 in his training.
6. Large males with a strength background such as power lifting or rugby often favour a DF well over 130.
7. Older rowers probably benefit by lowering their DF from when they were in their prime.
8. I used to race at a DF of 130-140 but these days I'm more comfortable in the 105-115 range.

When I get back to rowing (I'm off until end of April on doctor's orders) I shall try and do some time trials at different DFs to see if there is an optimum for me.
The optimum DF may relate to the percentage of drive time in each stroke. The larger the percentage, the lower the DF for the same output. This may well be relevant to doing low rate pieces eg 30@20 spm.

[strider77]

William,

Some very helpful stats I had no idea Rob Waddell rowed at such a low DF.

I guess it's to do with the speed at which you can accelerare the wheel and if the resistance is low it's easier and it also helps if you're 6'9" !

Regarding Paul Gould's DF range of 300-380 he does in fact take the cage off

[William]

Alan.
Thanks. Yes the data on DF/damper settings is fascinating.
Ah. I imagined that Paul must in fact remove the cage.
I'm coming to the conclusion that the only rule about DF is that there are no rules!
As you suggest, anatomy is possibly the crucial factor. Short rowers need higher DF to compensate for lack of leverage.
Average height of male elite rowers is 1.90-1.95 m and 1.80-1.85 for elite females.
It's likely that such factors as muscle composition, technique and other physiological variables are relevant.
As a medical person, I remain concerned that using a DF that's too high can lead to injury.
I have never tried scientifically to assess my optimum DF by recording data at different DFs but it's on my to do list. I'd be interested to know if any other FS have done this and if so, what they discovered.

[Iain]

Great discussion. I believe that higher DF shifts more of the load to later in the stroke for me at least. It has been said often that rowing with good form with warm muscles does not lead to injury. I am not sure whether research on the injury risk from repetitive exercise confirms this (over to William and others better qualified). However I think most if not all deviate from good form when pressing on TTs and tiring, so I think an injury risk remains. That said, whether Paul with better technique and huge upper body strength is more at risk at 380 than I am at 120 I do not know.

Interestingly for my build up to my recent ultra I sequentially upped my DF from 115 to 128 for all training. I have also upped to 120 when fitter. Anatomically I have very short legs so William's comments probably support me rowing at a higher DF than the average for people my age. However I am weak relative to CV fitness particularly in my arms so feel I get less from high DF than many. I row everything between 1 and 30k at the same DF as changing it changes the stroke and I think it is important to practice at the DF I will use for the TTs I am aiming at. I do lower it for long rows (typically 105-110 for FM). I have not done a systematic study of effect of DF on my pace. Such a study presupposes that we are equally rested for the trials and that our performance has largely plateaued as otherwise repeated maximal performances should produce gains irrespective of DF. My performance has seesawed since 2010 so I have not felt I met these criteria. There was discussion recently (sorry, can't remember where) that OTW rowing was like starting with a very high DF that reduced as the boat gets to pace at the start. I didn't query this, but was unconvinced that this was different from the erg where the first couple of strokes are like rowing at high DF.

One aspect easily overlooked (and perhaps less relevant to most of you who will have a much better technique than me) is that high DF is more forgiving of many technical weaknesses. Achieving the acceleration of the flywheel Rob Waddle must have achieved to set his 2k WR with a smooth efficient stroke would require perfection that most could never emulate.

I think the key difference of changing the DF is the speed of the flywheel at the catch. Higher DF means we need to go slower to "catch" the flywheel and start doing measured work, while the initial acceleration will have less work until the flywheel is accelerated to a speed closer to its average. That is why there is relatively less work from the legs. This in turn together with an increased effort required to maintain the flywheel speed (as I think we are only rewarded for accelerating it) explains greater work from back and arms. That is my understanding, would love to be corrected if I am wrong or there are alternative views.

Finally in this random selection of thoughts (sorry) I have used much higher DF at relatively low rates for short bursts as "strength" sessions. I know weights or other bodyweight exercises are better, but I struggle to get motivated to do these so add occassional erg sessions I hope will make up for some of the lack. Interested whether others think there is any merit to these.