Data, classes and does it matter?

[webberg]

A while ago I tried to gather some data to ascertain whether the rather crude distinctions we presently use are useful, statistically significant or not helpful.

My theory is that a tall person of say 80kg (176 pounds) is likely to be "slower" than a person of the same height who is 100 kg (220 pounds).

That seems to me to be basic physics because after all we use a machine that measures energy input/output.

Rowing however is special because mass x lever length is not enough and we probably need to add VO2 max to that mix.

We also need to add technique.

We all know that the good technique we use when fresh and at the start of a row, tends to suffer as we tire. The difference between a good stroke, an average stroke and the one we do when reaching for a bottle of water or wiping away sweat can be significant. How significant? Well a lot more significant over 500m than over 10k.

There are a number of other soft factors. If you are lucky enough to have a machine at home are you inclined to go along "comfortable" whereas in the gym you might be looking to impress and therefore go a little harder?

Long story short, before I got to the end of defining the factors, it was obvious that a lot of what I needed was not available - at least not publicly.

However I'm hoping to have more time to row and ponder this again early next year.

What other factors should I be considering if I were to build a new classification system?

[Iain]

While not politically correct to say so sex matters as on average muscle mass is harder for ladies to build and so is on average a smaller proportion of their weight (not to say that there aren't smaller older ladies who can blow me away...) I refuse to go into race, but it did used to be assumed that average muscle mass varied between races.

Clearly there is a mental component. The discomfort I can endure definitely increases in the period after hard rows and varies between people and situations. I have yet to experience pain in races although have experienced paralysis of my legs and having to finish arms and body only, I put this down to higher endorphins. "Giving up" is much less likely in public, but so is flying and dying!

You mention VO2max. of course on erg this is total rather than the more commonly quoted amount per Kg. Surveys have shown that the best physical determinant of speed over 2k+ is watts generated at "threshold", although this has never been precisely defined for rowing, it is the point where we see a significant increase in lactate for a small increase in output. Unfortunately it varies depending on tiredness and so different protocols vary on the number but all track "fitness". However this includes elements seen in some of the other components. Also for shorter distances strength matters.

You don't mention "age". This will have an impact on threshold, but the amount of impact will depend upon lifestyle.

Environment plays a part (and I don't just mean inspiring music), many complain of dry atmosphere increasing times at races, while we all know that temperature and humidity effect us.

I remember reading a paper that quantified the physical contributions on average for serious rowers.

BAsically so many components best just to track individuals!

[webberg]

Agreed - so many variables.

We could throw in diet, known/unknown physical ailments (sore knee to hidden dangers), whether you've had a good day or a bad day.

The plan back when I first tinkered with this, was to produce a graph for each chosen distance (see below) which looked to demonstrate distribution of times based on a weight/age/height coefficient.

Distances would be grouped according to actual data rather than ranking distances/times.

I started (deliberately) with distances of between 2,200m and 4,000m. This group would capture many rowers who see the machine as casual rather than a principle piece of fitness kit.

Then 4,000 to 7,000: 7,000 to 10,000: 10,000 and above.

My view on the coefficient was that age is more important than height which is more important than weight. I also wanted to get away from the body mass index which I can't help but think is a form of tyranny.

So perhaps five year age groups (which C2 now have) with perhaps 25 to 30 being the peak score and a distribution falling away either side of that.

height is important. Somebody of 6' plus is a "better" rower than people like me (5'8" on a good day first thing in the morning). The idea is a valid comparison between groups so average height scores top and after that scores drop perhaps more steeply for taller people than shorter.

(Average height for men globally is 5' 7.5". However the UK is 5' 10". The USA 5' 9". Holland is 6')

Weight/mass being a function of age and height would be relatively less important.

The objective was to allow a 90kg, 5' 8" male of say 62 to compare his 5k time with a 100 kg, 6' male of 28 by applying a coefficient to their respective times.

We do se a ruder/cruder version in some forums but they tend to be simplistic age/weight calculations.

[Iain]

Nice idea, but even the same person will have different times on different days.

See https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8345353/ where for male rowers (all in their prime, so age not considered) determined Erg watts for 2k test averaged (height x 2.23 (in cm) - 140.31). Dubious about the results as the highest erg score recorded was only just sub 7' 2k! So based on this, an elite rower of your height in their prime,would be expected to have rowed 7:30 2k in their prime?! Showed that weight and muscle mass had much lower significance.

[Mike Channin]

For me, the interesting question is 'what are you looking to achieve?'

I've done some research/analysis into 'normalising mechanisms' with the aim of allowing a more diverse set of rowers to compete on a normalised playing field, and it possibly addresses most of what you mention in your last post. It covers age, weight and gender. (Height is more tricky to get data on, and harder to quantify advantages).

I use a related set of mechanisms to generate reasonably accurate predictions, which I then use to guide my training. I've recently found the age-adjustment to be useful in my training - I'm (probably - never say never) not going to hit any new PBs these days, but it is showing that some of my current times are 'comparable' with pieces from the past, when seen through the lens of normalisation...

[Mike Channin]

And to answer Iain's point, yes, we do suffer variation in performance, and it would be useful to be able to understand what is causing it (and how to adjust our training goals).
Right now, it's generally hot and humid, and that definitely makes a noticeable difference to how I perform, but it would be sooo useful to know how much difference, so I can allow for it...

[Mike Channin]

Anyway got any useful insight into how much slower they are in the humid summer heat than in winter? And where does it hit first - on HR or in terms of perceived effort?

[Mike Channin]

*** tumbleweeds ***

I definitely struggle on anything of any distance when it is hot and humid. Sometimes I can see an elevated HR, and sometimes the HR doesn't look too bad, but I end up unable to continue anyway. Might be that these are two different failure modes...

[Iain]

I strongly believe that humidity and still air have a bigger impact than temperatures (at least in the 15 - 25 degree region). As I don't measure humidity I cannot quantify the difference. Also I am a major sweater so dehydration definitely plays a part, regularly losing 2kg on longer rows. On humid days this waits for me to mop it up afterwards, while on less humid days it does its job. BUt what I can achieve is largely determined by mental state so being less comfortable may make a mental rather than physical impact (at least in part). SO quantification is not possible.

I would also add allergies to the mix. Stan always claimed he slower in Autumn due to increased fungal spores. My performances are too inconsistent to be sure, but while I can control the asthma attacks, I think peak grass pollen season does have an effect, but whether it is increased resistance to fast breathing or broken sleep I cannot be certain. Going 95%+ regularly with only ego and boasting rights to keep us going is an imperfect measure of potential performance. I am sure that when I have needed more mental effort for everyday life my erging performance drops, so measuring the impact of individual factors is doomed to failure. However I would like to know how much those who manage consistent training "back-off" on weak days. One-off conversions to "grey training" or extra LSDs are fine, but during prolonged stress / tiredness / adverse conditions, I think the structure needs to be maintained as much as possible but targets adjusted down the appropriate amount. If anyone does this, please let me know how much?

[Ian Bee]

Anyway got any useful insight into how much slower they are in the humid summer heat than in winter? And where does it hit first - on HR or in terms of perceived effort?

Might not be useful insight, but the humidity played havoc with both peak HR and the speed at which this was reached for me, with the added spice that it all happened at appreciably lower pace.

In the end, from my perspective, I could only admit defeat for a few days and go with long duration, low intensity at whatever felt comfortable rate wise. A frustrating experience.

[Mike Channin]

Thanks for that, Iain - very much in line with my experience too.

Both Heat and Humidity will have obvious impacts on your ability to exercise at high-load, and you definitely end up limited by overheating in some cases. What I'm trying to figure out is if there is a clear way to tell that you overheated, other than failing at a much lower level than your recent form would suggest, and ideally a way to know it is coming and either modify the session, or just be better prepared.

High humidity ruins your ability to shed heat by sweating, and has the side effect you end up a saturated mess too.

I will usually drop about 2-3 kg in weight on a HM (depending on pace), and anything from 4-6 on a FM. The high end of this probably represents the limit of what you can do before performance becomes sharply limited by dehydration. I remember seeing this graphically the first time I did a FM, in the work gym. Even at a moderate pace, by the end, I had managed to overwhelm the air con, and all of the mirrors in that corner of the gym were running with condensation. I guess that 4kg is mainly fluid (about 90% I think) and it has to go 'somewhere'.

I put a dehumidifier in the rowing shed this year, and I think it's definitely helped. Or at least prevented the near 100% humidity you get otherwise from damaging everything else in there.