Erging (Indoor Rowing) Update

<[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

but expect no specific help to your swimming.<<

Well, I'm astonished at how there is objective, peer-review data on
running/cycling cross training effects (much less related than
rowing/swimming, in my opinion) but I can't find a single controlled
study on rowing/swimming cross training effects.

I saw some stuff by the Hagermans in the early 90s that claimed
little benefit to cross training, and pounded on specificity.
The rowing world did an about face, and CII benefitted big time.

I think it boils down to the level of athlete. If your female swimmer
is a 58 100, just getting stronger and staying fit may make her faster.
If she improves to say 53, or lower, I would expect
she would need more specific work to improve, though
time spent in the aerobic zone is always valuable for every level
athlete. I suppose that is mitigated by whether you believe your
swimmer can get to a 52-53 in her career as she matures.

I've never found the exercise physiology studies well designed anyway, there
seems to be mountains of variables in every one of them that are
unaccounted for.

"Martin Smith" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Mike Sullivan wrote:

snip

Quoted message said:

I think that's the reason. I'm trying to reach too far forwarsd, thinking
I will get a longer pull on the chain, but the chain actually goes slack
and hits the machine. At that point, I am hunched.

Next Time I'll concentrate on staying more upright.

The CII site is pretty good at showing the basics.

There's a little animation on it, see if you can look at that and compare
yourself in the mirror.

Gawd, I'd hate to try and explain my swimming to
you guys!

oh yuck.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I saw some stuff by the Hagermans in the early 90s that claimed

little benefit to cross training, and pounded on specificity.
The rowing world did an about face, and CII benefitted big time.<<

Well, the running/cycling studies I quoted did find that increasing
total training volume in well-trained but sub-elite runners by adding
in cycling did improve performance significantly. This was important,
as many runners can't add (more specific) running volume without
getting injured.

In the case of rowing and swimming, it is easier to add volume without
the sharp increase in injury that there is in running. So if one has
access to a pool every day and the time to drive to and from it, then I
don't doubt that the best way to improve swimming is simply to swim
more (or vice-versa, from the point of view of rowing). Now, in rowing
when the river/lake/bay is 15 miles away and there's ice on the water,
there is the erg. So it's an advantage. But in swimming one requires
a very formidable facility. If I'm a masters swimmer and can only make
three one hour sessions in a pool every week, then I'm going to have a
hard time improving. But if I've got a CII in my backyard (here in CA)
or in my basement or whereever, then I can hop on the thing whenever I
want and give myself a whole lot of benefit, in my opinion. So I'm not
talking about going from 3 swim workouts per week to only 1 per week
and adding two erg workouts, I'm talking more about keeping my 3 swims
and adding a half dozen ergs.

I'd be thrilled if there weren't a couple people here (on r.s.s.) who
were able to do just that and maybe let us all know. I think it would
be a valuable contribution to masters swimming to know if
pool-challenged swimmers couldn't compensate with something as
inexpensive as a run of the mill 12 speed bike (i.e. a $900 erg).

For example, Martin swims 5K per week. Maybe he could do a test set,
keep up his 5K per week in the pool while he's getting his top 10 world
ranking on the erg, and then repeat his swimming test set down the
road.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I've never found the exercise physiology studies well designed anyway, there

seems to be mountains of variables in every one of them that are
unaccounted for. <<

The studies I quoted were relatively straight forward. And the one I'm
proposing here is even more straight forward. People keep doing what
they are doing in the pool and add in some erg time. And see what
happens.

- Larry W

(Larry Weisenthal) said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I saw some stuff by the Hagermans in the early 90s that claimed

little benefit to cross training, and pounded on specificity.
The rowing world did an about face, and CII benefitted big time.<<

Well, the running/cycling studies I quoted did find that increasing
total training volume in well-trained but sub-elite runners by adding
in cycling did improve performance significantly. This was important,
as many runners can't add (more specific) running volume without
getting injured.

In the case of rowing and swimming, it is easier to add volume without
the sharp increase in injury that there is in running. So if one has
access to a pool every day and the time to drive to and from it, then I
don't doubt that the best way to improve swimming is simply to swim
more (or vice-versa, from the point of view of rowing). Now, in rowing
when the river/lake/bay is 15 miles away and there's ice on the water,
there is the erg. So it's an advantage. But in swimming one requires
a very formidable facility. If I'm a masters swimmer and can only make
three one hour sessions in a pool every week, then I'm going to have a
hard time improving. But if I've got a CII in my backyard (here in CA)
or in my basement or whereever, then I can hop on the thing whenever I
want and give myself a whole lot of benefit, in my opinion. So I'm not
talking about going from 3 swim workouts per week to only 1 per week
and adding two erg workouts, I'm talking more about keeping my 3 swims
and adding a half dozen ergs.

I'd be thrilled if there weren't a couple people here (on r.s.s.) who
were able to do just that and maybe let us all know. I think it would
be a valuable contribution to masters swimming to know if
pool-challenged swimmers couldn't compensate with something as
inexpensive as a run of the mill 12 speed bike (i.e. a $900 erg).

For example, Martin swims 5K per week. Maybe he could do a test set,
keep up his 5K per week in the pool while he's getting his top 10 world
ranking on the erg, and then repeat his swimming test set down the
road.

I suppose I will improve now whatever I do in swimming and rowing,
because I have been doing only a little swimming and no rowing. I'm
bound to make improvements in swimming simply becasue I am so far below
my maximum training, and I suppose my technique can be improved a lot in
rowing.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I've never found the exercise physiology studies well designed anyway, there

seems to be mountains of variables in every one of them that are
unaccounted for. <<

The studies I quoted were relatively straight forward. And the one I'm
proposing here is even more straight forward. People keep doing what
they are doing in the pool and add in some erg time. And see what
happens.

- Larry W

Martin Smith said:

I went to a different branch of the club today. They have two Concept
2's, so I had to try one. I tried in haling on the pull instead of the
recovery. It worked but I kept slipping back to the other way, which
feels more natural, although it feels like i can't fill my lungs.

7:18.1 - I moved up to 32. Which raises another question: How much
variation is expected between machines?

I felt like I was working harder, which supports the faster time, but I
wouldn't expect to go almost 9 seconds faster the next day.

Today I went back to the first machine, where I did 726.9 using my
uninformed technique. The key point about that race, and the 718.1, is
that I split the 500s fairly even at around 1:50.

In today's race, as best I could, I used the technique described by Mike
Sullivan and illustrated in the video at the CII website. I managed a
7:15.0, which only moved me up three places in the order.

But that's not the whole story. This time, my first 500 was about 1:30.
I went out way to fast. The second 500 was good, too. Then everything
went to [censored], and I had to hang on as best I could. My lungs were raw at
the end. I'm still hacking three hours later.

But now I see there is some room for improvement, but I need training. I
suppose I will break the 2k into 4 x 500 and try to descend them, and
see how that goes. Maybe two sets of that two or three times a week.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

My lungs were raw at the end.<<

I remember you writing on another thread about difficulty achieving
your theoretical maximum heart rate. Do you have a cardio monitor?
Next time you feel this way, it would be interesting to see what your
heart rate is.

"Martin Smith" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Martin Smith wrote:

snip

Quoted message said:

In today's race, as best I could, I used the technique described by Mike
Sullivan and illustrated in the video at the CII website. I managed a
7:15.0, which only moved me up three places in the order.

But that's not the whole story. This time, my first 500 was about 1:30. I
went out way to fast. The second 500 was good, too. Then everything went
to [censored], and I had to hang on as best I could. My lungs were raw at the
end. I'm still hacking three hours later.

nice, I don't know your body type, size, fitness, but putting
out a 1:30 and being comfortable is pretty good.

A doc I know who never rowed, 56-60 years old, but is a
training animal (running and swimming) regularly spins
in the 6:40-50 range for the 2k tests and gets himself
invited to Crash-B. His technique is not exemplary,
but close enough. He moves to the erg in the winter when
running isn't as fun, and pool is closed.

I counseled him to mostly spin aerobically with monitor
off, and add a weight program, then do a 3-4 week
session of intervals before the indoor rowing competition.

Quoted message said:

But now I see there is some room for improvement, but I need training. I
suppose I will break the 2k into 4 x 500 and try to descend them, and see
how that goes. Maybe two sets of that two or three times a week.

Over the next month, a variety of interval work those 3 days a week
will garner some significant improvement. Like swimming, the best results
are gained with relatively even splits.

Expect to flatten out somewhat after that, and lose some enthusiasm...

:^)

Mike (I hate ergs, but they're a good tool).

(Larry Weisenthal) said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

My lungs were raw at the end.<<

I remember you writing on another thread about difficulty achieving
your theoretical maximum heart rate. Do you have a cardio monitor?
Next time you feel this way, it would be interesting to see what your
heart rate is.

Yes, thanks for reminding me. I won one in a drawing a couple years ago
and never tried it. Now I will.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I counseled him to mostly spin aerobically with monitor

off, and add a weight program, then do a 3-4 week
session of intervals before the indoor rowing competition. <<

This was the great debate of the '90s in swimming.

"Long slow distance" versus "quality."

Dave Salo of Irvine NOVA pioneered the concept in swimming that long
slow distance is mainly garbage and that virtually all training should
be of the "quality" (near/at/under) race pace.

Here's a nice article about (1) a late blooming swimmer of the type
discussed on another thread and (2) the Salo training philosophy.

http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3883/is_200202/ai_n9046675

I started erging in June, 2005, when I broke a rib in a surfing
accident (got clobbered by my brother's longboard) and couldn't swim at
all for a month. Couldn't rotate from side to side, but I could go
forward and back, so I spent a month erging. Since August, my training
consisted of first a 1200 meter swim (typically just 12 x 100),
followed immediately by a 5K LSD on the erg. This was 3X per week
(T,Th,Sun). Beginning Jan 1, I quit swimming for a month and just
erged 3X per week, but added in the Salo "quality" stuff. Typically 2K
warm up, 2 K of alternating sub 1:50 pace for 25 and then sub 2:15 for
250, followed by a 1K warm down. I did my first competition at the
Beach Sprints (Long Beach Rowing) the first week in Feb. Wanted to go
7:25, but only made 7:29. One week later, went to a second competition
in San Diego (San Diego "Indoor Rowing Classic"😉. Thought race was in
AM, but wasn't until 2:30 PM and I had to be back at my job for
Saturday afternoon; so I just pulled a time trial on my own. Again did
7:29 (which seems to be my limit right now). I turn 59 in April and
I'm 6' and 160 pounds.

Quoted message said:

From here on in, I'm only going to do "quality" type workouts (just for

the heck of it). Unfortunately, I got my very first injury in San
Diego. I was watching the college competitors and I noticed that they
all started out very fast for the first 20 seconds or so (presumably
burning off their creatine phosphate). So I went over an jumped on an
erg and (without warmup...dumb, dumb, dumb) pulled 10 strokes as fast
as I could, to see if I could get into the low 1:30s that I saw a
couple of the girls do (I'd never tried to go below 1:40). Well, I did
it, but also gave myself a case of biceps tendinitis, which is an
injury I've never had before. So I'm going to spend a month working on
my quads, mainly with cycling, and running. I've swum a couple of
times, but this brings on the long head biceps tendon pain also; so I'm
just going to let it rest and build it back slowly.

I'd love to get my own CII machine, but I need to bring my wife along
slowly on this. I'm on a short leash, toy-wise.

I'm just blown away by Martin going sub 7:15 his first week on the
machine. I tried a 2 K by the end of my first month and it was right
around 8:00. I was actually feeling pretty good about my pair of
7:29s, but Martin certainly burst my bubble. Someone that likes sports
as much as me just ought to be good at something. I'm hoping that I
might end up like my Dad, just hang around long enough to be the last
guy standing.

- Larry

<[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I counseled him to mostly spin aerobically with monitor

off, and add a weight program, then do a 3-4 week
session of intervals before the indoor rowing competition. <<

This was the great debate of the '90s in swimming.

rowing, running, and cycling too.

Quoted message said:

"Long slow distance" versus "quality."

Dave Salo of Irvine NOVA pioneered the concept in swimming that long
slow distance is mainly garbage and that virtually all training should
be of the "quality" (near/at/under) race pace.

LSD ~= aerobic training however, big difference. There's also a big
difference as far as how much training time is available, and the
long term commitment of the athlete. The controls of how this
conclusion is made is iffy, as often somebody with enthusiasm for
a new method simply attracts better, more motivated athletes.

Before LSD pioneered by running coach Lydiard in the 50's
and 60's, most all training was race pace intervals. He showed
up to the 1960 Olys with Snell from NZ and the Aussies
and blew everyone away.

Effectiveness of the type of training an athlete does depends
upon their level, maturity, time available. A college age athlete
will respond much more effectively to race pace training,
than maybe an older athlete who is near the top already and
is looking to improve their VO efficiency.

US Rowing has adopted much of the race pace training
advocated, but teams from Britain, Germany, Eastern Europe,
Italy, and Aus/NZ who have a less intense, more mileage approach
are taking home the medals with more mature athletes.

But this isn't the debate at all. We were talking about a 56 and
older guy who wants to stay fit, perform well on the erg, and
enjoy his running and swimming.

The scoreboard is that he's getting older AND improving though
has declined the weight program. (He has added lots of abs, though - good!)

Quoted message said:

Here's a nice article about (1) a late blooming swimmer of the type
discussed on another thread and (2) the Salo training philosophy.

http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3883/is_200202/ai_n9046675

I started erging in June, 2005, when I broke a rib in a surfing
accident (got clobbered by my brother's longboard) and couldn't swim at
all for a month. Couldn't rotate from side to side, but I could go
forward and back, so I spent a month erging. Since August, my training
consisted of first a 1200 meter swim (typically just 12 x 100),
followed immediately by a 5K LSD on the erg. This was 3X per week
(T,Th,Sun). Beginning Jan 1, I quit swimming for a month and just
erged 3X per week, but added in the Salo "quality" stuff. Typically 2K
warm up, 2 K of alternating sub 1:50 pace for 25 and then sub 2:15 for
250, followed by a 1K warm down. I did my first competition at the
Beach Sprints (Long Beach Rowing) the first week in Feb. Wanted to go
7:25, but only made 7:29. One week later, went to a second competition
in San Diego (San Diego "Indoor Rowing Classic"😉. Thought race was in
AM, but wasn't until 2:30 PM and I had to be back at my job for
Saturday afternoon; so I just pulled a time trial on my own. Again did
7:29 (which seems to be my limit right now). I turn 59 in April and
I'm 6' and 160 pounds.

Quoted message said:

From here on in, I'm only going to do "quality" type workouts (just for

the heck of it). Unfortunately, I got my very first injury in San
Diego. I was watching the college competitors and I noticed that they
all started out very fast for the first 20 seconds or so (presumably
burning off their creatine phosphate). So I went over an jumped on an
erg and (without warmup...dumb, dumb, dumb) pulled 10 strokes as fast
as I could, to see if I could get into the low 1:30s that I saw a
couple of the girls do (I'd never tried to go below 1:40). Well, I did
it, but also gave myself a case of biceps tendinitis, which is an
injury I've never had before. So I'm going to spend a month working on
my quads, mainly with cycling, and running. I've swum a couple of
times, but this brings on the long head biceps tendon pain also; so I'm
just going to let it rest and build it back slowly.

You have to be careful about what you term "LSD" and aerobic
training. You can take a walk on the erg at a 140 hr, where you'd need
hours and hours to derive aerobic benefit. If you are spending 2 solid
hours daily at 150-155 hr, you are changing your physiology but not
breaking down your body musculature so that you get injured.

It isn't either/or, interval training will give specific help over a month
to six week period, but the long term benefit will be marginal.

Also, important point!!! VERY IMPORTANT. Swimming is vastly
different than rowing and running in that you have to work much more
intensely to get the heart rate up, you are simply using generally smaller
muscles than the legs, and you aren't fighting gravity as much. Thus
swimmers can spend way more time training than runners or rowers
can, but it's much harder for them to get the aerobic benefit.

I look at the 'intervals' swum, and it's often to break up the work to keep
a hr of 150-160. LSD in swimming, where you do say 5000-7000
yards of constant swim is likely to keep an efficient swimmer at a 135-140
hr, barely an aerobic training effect.

Overlong(more than a couple months at most) intense interval work
will lead to staleness, and injury. Moderate!

And yes, Larry's early success is quite impressive! And Martin, you're
doing just fine. There are guys your age at one of the clubs I teach at
at your size who row 4 days a week, and are a bit younger that aren't
doing much faster ergs.

enjoy

Mike

"Mike Sullivan" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...
snip

Quoted message said:

And yes, Larry's early success is quite impressive! And Martin, you're

oops, got you confused named different poster.

runnswim, your doing fine!

I'd like to echo Pat's thoughts - this thread isn't nec what's called for
in the charter but it's (some of) the kind of writing that keeps me coming
back to rss. It's always nice to learn something new. if it's nearly in
topicish that's even better 😉

--Mike

A few thoughts posed rather personally as I have neither hard
data, experience or even a fair body of anecdotal evidence on the subject:

-Personally I'm a 'feel' swimmer. I was never a great trainer and couldn't
plug away after my stroke degraded. The relationship between my technical
performance and power output is most definitely not linear. The rowing
machine, and my bicycle and (to some extent) the weight room have been
tools for me to help improve fitness that aren't technically limited.

-I don't give a damn if my rowing form suffers or I don't erg so well
today. Mind you I haven't spent most of my life working towards better
performance on the erg either. I don't have half, I don't have a
_hundredth_, as much invested there as I do in the pool. As long as I'm
not hurting myself I can erg or cycle my HR on into some useful zone
whilst remaining pleasantly oblivious of my technical faults. I suspect
that if I played golf anything like I swam I'd have a large collection of
broken putters.

-It is much easier for me to monitor and self correct my form on the
rowing machine. Far fewer variables plus better visibility. When, one day,
I learn more about what good form looks like I'll be all set 😉

-Even if the efficiency of this cross training isn't great (though it
'feels' worth doing) it involves little or no impingement of the kind that
currently makes my free/back painful. I can erg enough to make it useful.

-I'm a butterflier, I like it and I swim a fair bit of my (small but fast)
volume 'fly. To help with shoulder stability I've swum a lot of my
recovery and fitness work backstroke. The rowing machine feels like a
fairly happy compromise.

-As mentioned I have a hard time differentiating feel for the stroke and
perceived effort. Watt counts on the machine help objectify and minimize
such problems.

--Mike

<[email hidden]> a écrit dans le message de
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

I'm just blown away by Martin going sub 7:15 his first week on the
machine. I tried a 2 K by the end of my first month and it was right
around 8:00. I was actually feeling pretty good about my pair of
7:29s, but Martin certainly burst my bubble.

Relax, Larry. I tried a third (and last) attempt yesterday on the C2,
pulling harder, but I couldn't do better than 7:50 (peaked at 95% of HRmax
this time). Could never do your 7:29!

Martin's performance is remarkable, but I suspect it's a result of his
natural gift and aerobic training / step machine, not swimming. This doesn't
prove anything on the benefit of rowing for swimming. And conversely my bad
performance doesn't prove anything, because I had to reduce my swim training
to 1hr/week for the last 2 years.

However, I can imagine that the C2 is a good test for general condition.
Micheal, you should do the 2km test on the C2. We may endly now if you have
a condition problem (lungs? heart? cancer?...) or a technique problem. Or
you could post a video of your swimming. I can host your file on my server
if this is a problem for you to put a few megs online, just drop me a
private e-mail.

-- Olivier

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Watt counts on the machine help objectify and minimize

such problems. <<

Just curious. I do my machine (erg/cycle) stuff in a very large sports
club. There are usually a couple dozen people cranking out 100-200
watts on the various machines. Seems like a way to reduce foreign (e.g.
Canadian) fossil fuel dependence. Have you ever heard of some storage
battery for health clubs (or homes) which can capture and store all of
these otherwise "wasted" watts?

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I am getting a ton of info from the posts on this subject. It is something I

had never thought of doing, but I am starting to get interested--even
intrigued. thanks, everybody! <<

Pat, If you get a chance to do this, I'd be interested in whether or
not you can erg without pain to your post-surgical shoulder. There's
much less of an overhead component; therefore certainly less
impingement. The Concept II B/C handles are straight across, which
does produce a little bit of internal rotation (exacerbates rotator
cuff impingement). The newer Concept II D machines have a bit of a "V"
in the handle, which maintains more external and neutral rotation,
which decreases impingement and is even better for shoulders. I'm
pretty sure that Concept II makes the handles more or less straight
across to mimic a rowing oar; but for a swimmer who wanted to cross
train, it would be more shoulder friendly to have a deep V shape, to
keep the thumbs well forward of the pinky. Maybe for the Concept II E
model, they can have an interchangeable handle system.

I told you earlier that my first close look on these machines came when
I learned that US National Team Coach Dave Salo used one for training
an injured swimmer. Then my older daughter (a distance swimmer)
substituted erging for 1/3 of her swimming for a whole season (to deal
with a chronically injured shoulder) and she actually dropped her PR
for the 1000 and swam right on her bests for the 500/1650.

So I think that erging can help swimmers not only from the standpoint
of adding training volume when they don't have access to a pool, but to
add and/or maintain training volume when they are coping with shoulder
pain.

- Larry W

Mike Sullivan said:

<[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

>I counseled him to mostly spin aerobically with monitor

off, and add a weight program, then do a 3-4 week
session of intervals before the indoor rowing competition. <<

This was the great debate of the '90s in swimming.

rowing, running, and cycling too.

Quoted message said:

"Long slow distance" versus "quality."

Dave Salo of Irvine NOVA pioneered the concept in swimming that long
slow distance is mainly garbage and that virtually all training should
be of the "quality" (near/at/under) race pace.

LSD ~= aerobic training however, big difference. There's also a big
difference as far as how much training time is available, and the
long term commitment of the athlete. The controls of how this
conclusion is made is iffy, as often somebody with enthusiasm for
a new method simply attracts better, more motivated athletes.

Before LSD pioneered by running coach Lydiard in the 50's
and 60's, most all training was race pace intervals. He showed
up to the 1960 Olys with Snell from NZ and the Aussies
and blew everyone away.

Effectiveness of the type of training an athlete does depends
upon their level, maturity, time available. A college age athlete
will respond much more effectively to race pace training,
than maybe an older athlete who is near the top already and
is looking to improve their VO efficiency.

US Rowing has adopted much of the race pace training
advocated, but teams from Britain, Germany, Eastern Europe,
Italy, and Aus/NZ who have a less intense, more mileage approach
are taking home the medals with more mature athletes.

But this isn't the debate at all. We were talking about a 56 and
older guy who wants to stay fit, perform well on the erg, and
enjoy his running and swimming.

The scoreboard is that he's getting older AND improving though
has declined the weight program. (He has added lots of abs, though - good!)

I think LSD has a place, though. I suspect that I did as well as I did
on these initial CII races because I have spent the last several years
doing step machine workouts, eliptical walker workouts, spinning
classes, and aerobics classes. The step machine is the most aerobic of
all of these, and it only gets me up near 150 right at the end of the
hour I spend on the machine. Most of the hour I'm between 120 and 140.

But my legs are now stronger than they ever were when I was a young man,
and. like you said, rowing is mostly legs.

Additional comments about the physiologies of rowing vs. swimming.

About the comment that rowing is "mostly legs:"

This is no doubt true, but it's also misleading. The total mass of the
quadriceps is vastly greater than the combined masses of lats,
posterior deltoids, and biceps, so it stands to reason the greater
pecentage of total power output (and oxygen consumption) will be lower
body.

e.g. here's a pretty nifty study:

http://www.unm.edu/~lkravitz/Research%20Abstrs/rowing.html

Basically, the authors used a rowing apparatus which allowed the test
subject to use lower body only versus both upper plus lower body. The
subjects rowed submaximally. On average, the VO2 at a given cadence was
25% higher with upper plus lower body than with lower body alone.

Also (a point I've been making for many years on this newsgroup), the
lower body has a markedly greater proportion of Type I fibers than does
the upper body, e.g.

http://home.hia.no/~stephens/skiphysi.htm

(it's the reason why swimmers need to train such insanely large
volumes, to convert Type IIB fibers into Type IIA and Type I fibers).

So this is another reason why _competitive_ rowers would rely more on
the lower body for sustained power generation. But the difference
between a winner and a loser may well be in the 25% contributed by the
upper body.

I think that one of the reasons why swimmers can achieve so much early
success in rowing is that they've achieved a lot of the very difficult
to achieve fiber type conversions in their upper bodies, and it's
relatively easier to train the lower body. Teleologically, the upper
body in humans evolved for "anaerobic" type activities, while the lower
body evolved for aerobic ambulation. So someone from a swimming
background has already achieved the harder to achieve part of the upper
plus lower body training task.

Anyway, from the point of view of cross training, one can intentionally
choose to isolate more the upper body work, so the fact that
_competitive_ rowing is "mostly legs" needn't detract from the value of
a rowing machine for cross training.

- Larry W

On Sat, 18 Feb 2006 10:03:25 -0800, [email hidden] (Larry Weisenthal)

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Watt counts on the machine help objectify and minimize

such problems. <<

Just curious. I do my machine (erg/cycle) stuff in a very large sports
club. There are usually a couple dozen people cranking out 100-200
watts on the various machines. Seems like a way to reduce foreign (e.g.
Canadian) fossil fuel dependence. Have you ever heard of some storage
battery for health clubs (or homes) which can capture and store all of
these otherwise "wasted" watts?

I haven't but, well, being not only a Canadian but an Albertan...... 🙂

--Mike

Quoted message said:

I think that one of the reasons why swimmers can achieve so much early
success in rowing is that they've achieved a lot of the very difficult
to achieve fiber type conversions in their upper bodies, and it's
relatively easier to train the lower body. Teleologically, the upper
body in humans evolved for "anaerobic" type activities, while the lower
body evolved for aerobic ambulation. So someone from a swimming
background has already achieved the harder to achieve part of the upper
plus lower body training task.

Anyway, from the point of view of cross training, one can intentionally
choose to isolate more the upper body work, so the fact that
_competitive_ rowing is "mostly legs" needn't detract from the value of
a rowing machine for cross training.

- Larry W

IIRC, Martin is also a cyclist. I am, too. I use swimming for the upper body
workout, but my legs are like iron from the cycling.

Pat in TX

Quoted message said: