observed (semi) interesting stats

[p_b82]

Probably no interest to many, but every-now and again I dig into my stats just to feed my curiosity, and it would appear that I have settled very close to the "accepted" drive:recovery ratio without ever consciously trying to.

And it doesn't appear to make a difference whether I'm tootling along, or pressing on a bit.

V small sample of 4 rows this season at my min->max ratings so far.

averages across the session duration from the samples I took, rather than peak values.

Code: Select all

Stroke Rate|wmin|sec per stroke|m per stroke
20.9|6.7|2.9|10.6
24.0|6.8|2.5|9.7
29.4|8.4|2.0|9.0
39.6|10.7|1.5|8.0

I know it doesn't mean much in real terms, but I just found it interesting - I guess that's what 2.5M meters does over time, builds up that ability to be (sorta) consistent unconsciously.

[Dangerscouse]

I know it doesn't mean much in real terms, but I just found it interesting - I guess that's what 2.5M meters does over time, builds up that ability to be (sorta) consistent unconsciously.

Yeah, muscle memory is really important and only happens with repetition. I'd not be at all surprised if this improves even more over the next 2.5m metres

[iain]

Maybe just too early in the morning, but how do you derive drive/recovery ratios from work per stroke & distance per stroke? Assuming constant stroke (unlikely at R40!) drive time would be inversely proportional to pace, while constant ratio would give a constant M/Stroke (the logic behind PaulS's 10MPS training), or are there agreed deviations at different stroke rates?

[p_b82]

neither of those are relevant - just pulled them out at the same time (curious) to see them while I was digging around. (and to make sure nothing hugely anomalous got thrown up - like travelling further per stroke at r40 than r20 lol

It's more the time 3s for r20 1.5s for r40 - and I know I don't spend the same time pushing as in recovery so it implies that I've got the timing ratios about right.

[twcronin]

It's more the time 3s for r20 1.5s for r40 - and I know I don't spend the same time pushing as in recovery so it implies that I've got the timing ratios about right.

Aren't those 'sec per stroke' stats just 60/(Stroke rate)? In other words, just a different way of expressing stroke rate, without saying anything about drive or recovery time?

What is an accepted ratio for drive:recovery?

[Sakly]

It's more the time 3s for r20 1.5s for r40 - and I know I don't spend the same time pushing as in recovery so it implies that I've got the timing ratios about right.

Aren't those 'sec per stroke' stats just 60/(Stroke rate)? In other words, just a different way of expressing stroke rate, without saying anything about drive or recovery time?

What is an accepted ratio for drive:recovery?

Fully agree, no drive/recovery ratios visible here.
The ratio varies by rate, as drive phase does not change so much, but recovery does hugely.
On r20 it is probably 1:3, on r40 I assume it tends to be 1:1.

[JaapvanE]

On r20 it is probably 1:3, on r40 I assume it tends to be 1:1.

Not according to Luke Walton: https://youtu.be/iv9PVMUV6Dc

[Sakly]

On r20 it is probably 1:3, on r40 I assume it tends to be 1:1.

Not according to Luke Walton: https://youtu.be/iv9PVMUV6Dc

No quantified data, he's only counting some random "time".
He's not using the same kind of stroke in his "lazy r18" and stronger r28, so obviously this will affect the ratio as well. If I do the drive slower on lazy steady states, therefore it takes longer, of course ratio can be the same as on faster rates with shorter drive times.
With my post, I assumed the stroke does not change so much from steady state to 500m sprint on r40, as I want to train my stroke in steady states and don't do it slower. In this case ratio massively changes.

There is no right or wrong, both can work well. I fall more into the latter category, not changing my strokes much, so my ratio changes.

[p_b82]

I'm not fit enough / build far too much oxygen debt to keep the same Wmin I can churn on the short stuff. r19 for me is a struggle, r18 I have to think on every stroke to crawl back up the slide, not managed to go any slower without putting in a pause.
When I have to think in that fashion it stops being something relaxing - as much as an erg session can be....

So I'm in the "lazy" leg drive group on my lower effort stuff.

And yes while there's no empirical evidence in my time per stroke of the actual ratio (sorry that was my brain spinning without actually thinking) - as it's a single time value.

I just found it interesting that while I've never even thought about how long things take before now, my average stroke time at r40 is half that of r20 (and the inbetween rates also pretty much fit that correlation.)

[nick rockliff]

I always have drive time showing on Ergdata but it doesn't record it so you need to glance occasionally. My drive time doesn't change much and generally 0.66 ish.