Search Results

You are looking at 1 - 3 of 3 items for :

  • "2000-m rowing ergometry" x
  • All content x
Clear All
Restricted access

Thomas I. Gee, Duncan N. French, Karl C. Gibbon, and Kevin G. Thompson

Purpose:

This study investigated the pacing strategy adopted and the consistency of performance and related physiological parameters across three 2000-m rowing-ergometer tests.

Methods:

Fourteen male well-trained rowers took part in the study. Each participant performed three 2000-m rowing-ergometer tests interspersed by 3–7 d. Throughout the trials, respiratory exchange and heart rate were recorded and power output and stroke rate were analyzed over each 500 m of the test. At the completion of the trial, assessments of blood lactate and rating of perceived exertion were measured.

Results:

Ergometer performance was unchanged across the 3 trials; however, pacing strategy changed from trial 1, which featured a higher starting power output and more progressive decrease in power, to trials 2 and 3, which were characterized by a more conservative start and an end spurt with increased power output during the final 500 m. Mean typical error (TE; %) across the three 2000-m trials was 2.4%, and variability was low to moderate for all assessed physiological variables (TE range = 1.4−5.1%) with the exception of peak lactate (TE = 11.5%).

Conclusions:

Performance and physiological responses during 2000-m rowing ergometry were found to be consistent over 3 trials. The variations observed in pacing strategy between trial 1 and trials 2 and 3 suggest that a habituation trial is required before an intervention study and that participants move from a positive to a reverse-J-shaped strategy, which may partly explain conflicting reports in the pacing strategy exhibited during 2000-m rowing-ergometer trials.

Restricted access

Trent W. Lawton, John B. Cronin, and Michael R. McGuigan

Purpose:

There is no common theory on criteria to appropriately select crew rowers in pursuit of small performance gains. The purpose of this study was to establish whether anthropometry, rowing ergometry, or lower body strength were suitable criteria to identify differences between selected and nonselected sculling crews.

Method:

Twelve elite women performed a 2000-m ergometer time trial and a 5-repetition leg-press dynamometer test, were anthropometrically profiled, and participated in on-water national crew seat-racing trials. Log-transformed data were analyzed to compare percent (± SD) and standardized differences in group means (ES; ±90% confidence interval [CI]) between selected and nonselected oarswomen, with adjustments for body mass where appropriate.

Results:

Selected crew boats were 4.60% ± 0.02% faster and won by an average margin of 13.5 ± 0.7 s over 1500 m. There were no differences between crews on average in height, arm span, seated height, body mass, or 8-site skinfold sum (body fat). Difference in 2000-m ergometer times were also trivial (ES = 0.2, 90%CI = −0.6 to 1.1, P = .63); however, selected crews had moderately greater leg-press strength (ES = 1.1, 90%CI = 0.3−1.9, P = .03).

Conclusion:

Selected oarswomen with comparable anthropometry and 2000-m ergometer ability had greater lower body strength. Coaches of elite oarswomen might consider leg strength as part of crew-selection criteria, given acceptable on-water boatmanship and attainment of 2000-m ergometer benchmarks.

Restricted access

. Coutts * 1 2013 8 1 62 69 10.1123/ijspp.8.1.62 Consistency of Pacing and Metabolic Responses During 2000-m Rowing Ergometry Thomas I. Gee * Duncan N. French * Karl C. Gibbon * Kevin G. Thompson * 1 2013 8 1 70 76 10.1123/ijspp.8.1.70 Improvement of 800-m Running Performance With Prior High