You are here: Home > For rowing training > Fair comparision of rowers of different weight > Weight correction

    At last, learn good rowing technique off water     Synchronise your crew     Mitigate injury risk     Are all heart monitors the same?     A fair comparision of rowers of different weight     Fixed vs dynamic rowing machines     Physics behind the Rowperfect advantage

 

 

 


Rowperfect at the Sydney Olympic Games:

12 crews and scullers we know of - there may be others who are keeping it quiet!

GOLD: M8+, M2-, ML4- (selected on Rowperfect, training not known) M1x (stopped use early in 2000)
SILVER: ML4-
BRONZE: M4-, M8+
Finalists: South African M2-, F2-, ML4-
 

    Weight correction in Rowperfect software


Recently I did another check to test the validity of my calculation method also for conversion of boat speeds from one boat type to another.

As you know, the weight adjustment factor that the Rowperfect software uses is related to the relation between the variation in displacement of a certain boat type and its variation in wetted surface area. In the calculations the ratio of wetted surface area's of a given boat type at different displacements is approximated considering the boat as a semi-cylinder of a given length. To further validate this approximation I made a comparison between a coxed and a coxless pair with the same calculation procedure, and comparing the outcome to actual results. Input data were:

  • for 2- : length 10.30 m, weight boat 27 kgs, weight oars2,5 kg each.
  • for 2+ : length 11 m, weight 32 kgs, weight oars 2,5 kg each, weight cox 55kgs.

In Luzern at the World championships 2001 racing conditions were very stable. The coxed and the coxless pair were both won by Cracknell and Pinsent in very tight races. The times they rowed in these two races were: 6.49,33 for the coxed pair and 6.27,57 for the coxless pair respectively. In their coxed pair race, Pinsent and Cracknell visibly eased-up a couple of strokes before the finish, which I estimate, may have slowed them down by one or two seconds. Assuming their weight at average 100 kgs each, the weight corrected speed ratio between the coxless and the coxed pair, for this crew, I calculated from the above input at 1,0505. From this one can make the following comparison, using the time of the coxed pair as a base, and calculating the theoretical time of the coxless boat, based on wetted area/ weight correction factor as used in Rowperfect.

Base   

Actual   

Calculated   

Actual   

Difference Calculated at

2+

2+

2-

2-

2 secs

Even without the "easing up” correction, I think this is as close as one would wish, and demonstrates clearly the validity of the "wetted surface “based weight correction factor. With the "easing up" correction of 2 seconds to bring the time for the coxed pair to 6.47.3 this would result in a calculated time for the coxless pair of 6.27,75 which is dead on the spot.

Comparison of rowing machines today - fixed vs dynamic

Home| For rowing training| Learn good technique off-water| Synchronise  your crew| mitigate injury risk| Tissue  adaption| Are all heart monitors the same?| Fair comparision of rowers  of different weight| Weight  correction| Fixed vs dynamic  rowing machines| Physics behind the  Rowperfect advantage| Verification  of Rowperfect| Innovative training tool| Dynamic  simulation| General fitness & other sports| Why rowing?| Which rowing machine?| Mitigate injury  & fatigue| Do you  undertrain?| Our dynamics in a nutshell| Improve your balance| Cross  education| Bilateral  deficit| Interface  options| Rowperfect  for Windows| Mark IV Touch Screen| About us| History of Rowperfect| International Contacts| Ordering  & shipping| Dimensions| Contact us| Site map| Links| Testimonials  & Articles| Articles & Press| Prominent  Users| Test it  yourself| For Rowperfect  owners|

Rowperfect
acn 069 577 626

Tel: + 61 (02) 9939 9777

Fax: +61 (02) 9939 5572

Mob: 0417 782 655

Email

Rowperfect ©2006. All rights reserved worldwide.