Why Have Unverified Results On The Rankings?

[milansanremo]

Maybe someone can explain why unverified results can even be entered in the season rankings? I don't think I even have the possibility of having an unverified result?? Being that anyone can enter any "flavor" they like, don't most (like myself) view the unverified results worthless?
It's sorta (but not really) being called to report to doping control and not showing up.
Am I missing something?

Thanks

[Ruin Christmas]

Totally agree. I think it is because some people still have ancient PMs, but it is 2025.

By the way, I rowed 5 km today in 14:47 after bench pressing 600 lbs for 8, no make that 10 reps. Erging 370 km a day is really paying off!

[Dangerscouse]

As Burn says, it's due to really old monitors that don't have the option to verify the results. I am a bit surprised with how many there are, but C2 products are nearly indestructible so it's also not too surprising.

[JaapvanE]

I don't think I even have the possibility of having an unverified result??

There is. If you look at apps like EXR, they only use verified results on specific distances, and you explicitly have to choose for a verified result training, which will cost you the possibility of intervals (and thus a pace plan in the app) as C2 forbids it. Especially on long distances, this is extremely annoying.

RowsAndAll can upload to the logbook as well, but doesn't have a possibility to add a verification code in the first place. As their dataset is much better, I prefer them over the logbook data.

Being that anyone can enter any "flavor" they like, don't most (like myself) view the unverified results worthless?

Please realize: it is called the "C2 logbook". It a personal logbook where people enter results and do the ranking for themselves. I rank my workouts to keep track of my SB and PB. I don't care about my rankings with respect to others, as my training is 99.9% long distance steady state. Never looked at them to be honest, as you don't know what the conditions were of setting these times. So I think you are looking at this the wrong way.

If I want to know how fast I am, and actually race people, I'll join one of the many races in EXR. But, as the reigning indoor world champion and several former world champions also row there, prepare to be humiliated.

[MPx]

someone explain why unverified results can even be entered in the season rankings?

As Burn says, it's due to really old monitors that don't have the option to verify the results.

This has come up numerous times, but wont go away. For those of us who want to compare its really annoying - anyone can enter any old rubbish (although only a tiny minority do). In fact verification came in quite early in PMs - it was there in a PM2+ circa 25 years ago, not sure about before that. But the difference is that now with PM5 and Ergdata (or similar) each workout (can) get auto-uploaded to the logbook and is automatically verified. Prior to that, you had to hit a key sequence on the PM to get a verification code and uploads to the logbook were "manual" in the sense of connecting a cable to PM or using a card-reader (PM3/4) - which tended to mean updates were done in batches. Some of us used apps on laptops connected to the PM like RowPro which auto uploaded (verified). Without that, verification codes were all too much of a faff for regular training results and were only really used in competitions. Many ergers still use old PMs even PM1s on model Bs. For many many years C2 has REQUIRED verification codes against any result that claims a "record" - be that national/world/euro or whatever.

Most of us use the logbook to maintain our records - relatively few in the way JaapvanE describes:

Please realize: it is called the "C2 logbook". It a personal logbook where people enter results and do the ranking for themselves. I rank my workouts to keep track of my SB and PB. I don't care about my rankings with respect to others

I totally agree the record is the record and is personal. The ranking is something different - its a comparison table - its intended to let you see how you rate against others in the category you select. It obviously CAN be used just as a short cut to keep track of SB and PB results within a season but that is not its primary or intended function. Most people who "dont care" about how they rank against other people don't rank their results. Nearly all those that do rank their result then go on to look how good/bad it was against others.

For me its another great feature provided by C2 by way of incentive. For years now I've been on the decline, so chasing PBs not realistic. But maintaining a relative ranking position aganst my peers? Well that's just great. I can go for 95th percentile across the board and helps motivate to push a bit harder when I fall short. Gets very frustrating if the top two or three are unverified mistakes or wannabe times - makes a big impact on the overall positions. C2 will clear them if approached, but it takes time as they are very good at the due diligence bit and approach the "culprit" for verbal validation before taking any action. The other option of course is to tick the verified only box....but that tends to go the other way and ignore some perfectly valid scores.

[nick rockliff]

If you look now, nothing is verified prior to 2006 season. I can remember being asked by C2 to test the first software on the PM3 that included the push button sequence that Mike mentions.

Before that, if you did a time that would put you in the top 20 you had to prove it before it appeared.

As Mike mentioned, sessions done on Rowpro were in as verified but now they are not.

When I look at some of my ranked pieces from 2006 season, I'm just about the only verified entry

It's great as Mike says for comparing with your peers. It's easy to filter out the unverified entries anyway.

[Elizabeth]

My 30:00 piece from the 2025 season was unverified because I did it in a race that doesn't send results to C2, and I don't have a verification code. But it was publicly witnessed and is available on the ErgSprints website. I think I have some results from earlier years in the same boat.

[JaapvanE]

As Mike mentioned, sessions done on Rowpro were in as verified but now they are not.

There are requirements you have to meet before uploading results and mark them as verified.

I expect these requirements will be getting more strict: Concept2 only wants verified results on their platform, and developers are asked explicitly to retrieve the verification code for each session and send it along each session as well. As developer of OpenRowingMonitor our newest version (not public yet, for obvious reasons) can emulate a PM5 to the point where even ErgData is fooled. So we are working with all parties involved to prevent accidental uploads via direct or indirect channels.

Essentially, the only thing that stops people from uploading garbage is the verification code. The rest can easily be replicated. Aside OpenRowingMonitor there are open source emulators that simulate a PM5 for debugging purposses that can replay any session based on a tcx (which can be faked easily). And it is a cryptographically sane way to do it: have the PM5 sign the result. With that, there is no way to modify results in between.

Key thing is, there is a huge installed base of PM3's and PM4's that aren't capable of easy transfer of a 16 digit hexadecimal signature, as well as a huge landscape of apps, and Concept2 is manouvering carefully to move ahead without frustrating users.

[nick rockliff]

Just looking back and see that some sessions entered via Rowpro in 2011 which were verified back but are not now. Yet pieces entered via Rowpro in 2020 are still verified.

[Carl Watts]

Pretty sure I got C2 to put in a filter years ago, you just click that and take out all the Grifters.

The annoying thing is that when I last looked, C2 refuses to clean up the monthly Challenges and make them verified meters only and open up the Logbooks for the month of the Challenge. They could do so much more with them including adding the average pace for the meters because sitting on the Erg all day at 2:40 pace is not the same.

Still, don't really care now I have moved onto Zwift.

[JaapvanE]

Pretty sure I got C2 to put in a filter years ago, you just click that and take out all the Grifters.

Why the agression and name calling?

The annoying thing is that when I last looked, C2 refuses to clean up the monthly Challenges and make them verified meters only and open up the Logbooks for the month of the Challenge.

Not pissing off your user base is inportant. Changing the rules of the game shouldn't come as a surprise, nor should it exclude people because of the app they use. And some changes take a lot of time, both in codebase implementation and in testing. And some apps have different priorities than retrieving a verification code for every workout as it messes with their implementation (as many apps now support both C2 and non-C2 machines), but doesn't add any significant value to their users.

They could do so much more with them including adding the average pace for the meters because sitting on the Erg all day at 2:40 pace is not the same.

I know quite some people where rowing that pace is a challenge for them. No need to be so dissmissive about them.

[Ruin Christmas]

sitting on the Erg all day at 2:40 pace is not the same.

lol I do my steady state at 2:45. Not ashamed - I used to do it at 3:00. You should contact C2 again and have them unverify my meters.

[milansanremo]

I didn't intend on "opening up a can of worms"
Only curiosity.... Anyway....

Based on the replies...I can certainly see sides to this situation that I was previously ignorant to. It's more complicated than my initial take.

Would a satisfactory solution for both sides be to only allow verified results done through the C2 monitor itself or any app that can produce verified results for all rankings,records, etc.
Anyone may use their preferred rowing interface..software...app...etc for other activity.
Knowing this would remove all doubt in advance if you are competing on a platform which is unable to produce verified results.

[JaapvanE]

Would a satisfactory solution for both sides be to only allow verified results done through the C2 monitor itself or any app that can produce verified results for all rankings,records, etc.
Anyone may use their preferred rowing interface..software...app...etc for other activity.

You already can, simply filter the rankings on 'verified', or better 'race'.

Knowing this would remove all doubt in advance if you are competing on a platform which is unable to produce verified results.

You realise that you might think you are "competing", but the other guy might just be doing a relaxed steady state? You remind me of people boasting about being able to keep up with Ward Lemmeleijn for 1K, not realising he did a relaxed 3 hour steady state. As said, there are a number of reasons why people log and rank their training sessions totally unrelated to competing. You might be fooling yourself.

[Elizabeth]

Records already require verification. There are a lot of other loopholes, the two that I most frequently hear about are the questions of whether lightweights are lightweight and of PED testing, but they are verified pieces at least.

With meters challenges, the BikeErg presents a hurdle. The only way that I am aware of to get verified BikeErg meters is to do a ranked distance, which will prompt it to ask if you want to check calibration first, then you calibrate, then you do the ranked distance. If I program in 30k or 90:00 or "just ride" or anything other than a ranked distance, it will not ask for calibration and then not be verified. I don't know that C2 wants to present additional challenges to those users getting valid meters, the challenges seem to be more about inclusivity and challenging oneself than anything else?