Page 2 of 2

Re: Low rated rowing

Posted: December 30th, 2016, 3:59 pm
by Edward4492
Last year a women sits down next to me, rows for 5 or 6 minutes with the calorie screen up, sees 500+ calories and with a big smile tells me,"Wow, I just burned 500 calories!".
When I informed her that was the "per hour" calorie burn rate and she had to divide by ten; and that it was more like 50 calories.....well, lets say she wasn't in the least bit happy.

Re: Low rated rowing

Posted: January 2nd, 2017, 1:44 pm
by teddyDK
Today i did my 2 x 12 UT1 r20 and normally its r24 and i still keep the same pace. Real good experience.

Re: Low rated rowing

Posted: January 2nd, 2017, 6:05 pm
by Carl Watts
teddyDK wrote:Today i did my 2 x 12 UT1 r20 and normally its r24 and i still keep the same pace. Real good experience.
Thats the whole point of low rating, your developing your power each stroke. The idea is after a bit more r20, you then rate up again to r24 and your pace is faster but your heartrate is the same as it used to be.

Re: Low rated rowing

Posted: January 8th, 2017, 7:13 pm
by bags
bisqeet wrote: unless theres a ctc event with 100 strokes -> best distance - i'm not sure how important this feature would be.
Yes and no. Imagine a 30r20. 19.5 and 20.4 both appear as rate 20, 585 v 612 strokes. That can be a massive difference in score and it's very easy to sit either end of that spectrum and not know it and then wonder why your scores are different for what feels like the same effort.

Granted it's a special case I guess but it would be a nice feature to have.

Re: Low rated rowing

Posted: January 9th, 2017, 2:21 am
by bisqeet
bags wrote:
bisqeet wrote: unless theres a ctc event with 100 strokes -> best distance - i'm not sure how important this feature would be.
Yes and no. Imagine a 30r20. 19.5 and 20.4 both appear as rate 20, 585 v 612 strokes. That can be a massive difference in score and it's very easy to sit either end of that spectrum and not know it and then wonder why your scores are different for what feels like the same effort.

Granted it's a special case I guess but it would be a nice feature to have.
And the difference in power per stroke is?
Probably equal to a gnats fact...

Re: Low rated rowing

Posted: January 9th, 2017, 2:39 am
by bags
bisqeet wrote:
And the difference in power per stroke is?
Probably equal to a gnats fact...
I'm sure it's not much but every little matters a bit..
I'm not as big into the numbers game as some on here. someone can answer you im sure. but from experience i can tell you that an extra 27 strokes makes all the difference.. if using the 30r20 for testing purposes its not ideal.

Re: Low rated rowing

Posted: January 9th, 2017, 3:25 am
by aussieluke
bags wrote:
bisqeet wrote:
And the difference in power per stroke is?
Probably equal to a gnats fact...
I'm sure it's not much but every little matters a bit..
I'm not as big into the numbers game as some on here. someone can answer you im sure. but from experience i can tell you that an extra 27 strokes makes all the difference.. if using the 30r20 for testing purposes its not ideal.
Just use ErgData with the stroke count showing

Re: Low rated rowing

Posted: January 9th, 2017, 5:38 am
by Carl Watts
bags wrote:
bisqeet wrote:
And the difference in power per stroke is?
Probably equal to a gnats fact...
I'm sure it's not much but every little matters a bit..
I'm not as big into the numbers game as some on here. someone can answer you im sure. but from experience i can tell you that an extra 27 strokes makes all the difference.. if using the 30r20 for testing purposes its not ideal.
The difference is actually massive, but there have been plenty of people banging on about the problem with the spm rounding down and C2 are not interested in fixing it.

ErgData now shows the number of strokes in your Logbook so this goes some way towards solving the problem.

RowPro shouldn't be far away now as well to start filling in what is a blank field. V5 has now been released and will move to it in May, unfortunately its now a 64 bit OS ONLY and all my PC's are on 32 bit.

Re: Low rated rowing

Posted: January 9th, 2017, 8:47 am
by bisqeet
Massive might not have been my word of choice, but I'm away from my computer, so I can't give you any data for comparison, but.
Work out the power average for a 30R20 @2:00 and compare it to a 30R21 @2:00...
What's the difference 0.2W/stroke (or the same as a gnats fact). Is just not that important for me.

Yes. The new row pro can export stroke count.
Yes. It is 64 bit.
I remember butting my first 64but computer in 1994 :)
(os/2 was the only os available though)

Maybe the next ctc will be ' furthest distance rowed in 1000 strokes, and then I will change my opinion :)

Re: Low rated rowing

Posted: January 9th, 2017, 7:26 pm
by Carl Watts
bisqeet wrote:Massive might not have been my word of choice, but I'm away from my computer, so I can't give you any data for comparison, but.
Work out the power average for a 30R20 @2:00 and compare it to a 30R21 @2:00...
What's the difference 0.2W/stroke (or the same as a gnats fact). Is just not that important for me.

Yes. The new row pro can export stroke count.
Yes. It is 64 bit.
I remember butting my first 64but computer in 1994 :)
(os/2 was the only os available though)

Maybe the next ctc will be ' furthest distance rowed in 1000 strokes, and then I will change my opinion :)
Better pull up your stats because 1 spm at that level is like a difference of 6 BPM average heartrate for me. The difference becomes massive the faster the pace. Try pulling 1:55 or faster. When it comes to trying a rate capped PB, you will notice the difference.

Your Wattage calculation is way out, I'm not going to post the power per stroke again, its here a couple of times already.

Windows x64 didn't come along until Windows XP and PC's made after about 2006 could run it. Put a copy of it on my Pentium 4 the other day, its a dog (tried it as a path to get to Windows 8 as I have an upgrade CD). Will be getting a copy of Window 10 x64 Home, its all you need to run RowPro V5.0 on a dedicated PC.