Weird challenges?

[jcross485]

Has anyone toyed with the idea of challenges that exist in other endurance sports and trying to complete them on the erg?

I’m most familiar with running myself; a couple that come to mind -

Goggins 4 x 4 x 48. Run 4 miles every 4 hours for 48 hours. On the erg, it would be 6438 meters every 4 hours for 48 hours, or a little over 77k.

Last man/woman standing backyard ultras. Essentially at the top of every hour, competitors set out on a 4.15mi loop. The quicker you finish, the more rest you have, but no matter what you’re starting again at the top of the hour. People are eliminated either when they drop out or they don’t finish the prior lap by the top of the hour when the next one starts. On the erg, it would be 6679m every hour until you drop or don’t finish.

Obviously the last man/woman standing is more extreme and intense and would also require numerous people to join in order to compete, but trying the 4 x 4 x 48 on an erg seems like it would work on the individual level.

Thoughts, ideas, other types of challenges?

[Elizabeth]

The challenges that have hit my radar are more erg-specific, and less focused on endurance.

The big dawgs were doing one back in early March that was a sub-7 2k in as few strokes as possible; I think one guy hit r12-13. I could probably do r25-26 so I adapted it to hit a sub-8 2k in as few strokes as possible, and was (barely) able to get one at r14.

There are some people who go for OCD screens, where the meters/time/rate on each split are exactly the same. There was also a brief time in late March where people were trying to get as close to 100% on dart game scores as possible.

ErgZone has a 1:00r20 challenge this month that a decent number of people are participating in - 189 so far.

[Tony Cook]

I did a 7,500m in 30 mins, start every 2 hours for 24 hours -so 90,000m total last year.
It was a team challenge event with 4 per team rowing 30 mins each in rotation. The 7,500 was my personal target - everyone was asked to aim for at least 5k, it was organised by a CrossFit gym so not many rowers.

[jcross485]

The challenges that have hit my radar are more erg-specific, and less focused on endurance.

The big dawgs were doing one back in early March that was a sub-7 2k in as few strokes as possible; I think one guy hit r12-13. I could probably do r25-26 so I adapted it to hit a sub-8 2k in as few strokes as possible, and was (barely) able to get one at r14.

There are some people who go for OCD screens, where the meters/time/rate on each split are exactly the same. There was also a brief time in late March where people were trying to get as close to 100% on dart game scores as possible.

ErgZone has a 1:00r20 challenge this month that a decent number of people are participating in - 189 so far.

Some of those are interesting and might play a bit more into my wheelhouse, coming from a strength background. With that though, the endurance stuff seems to intrigue me more as its not my normal comfort zone.

I did a 7,500m in 30 mins, start every 2 hours for 24 hours -so 90,000m total last year.
It was a team challenge event with 4 per team rowing 30 mins each in rotation. The 7,500 was my personal target - everyone was asked to aim for at least 5k, it was organised by a CrossFit gym so not many rowers.

This sounds brutal - more stress on the muscular and cardiovascular systems but a bit less of the sleep deprivation aspect than something over 48 hours. This gives me some ideas for sure.

[jcross485]

Digging through the 4 x 4 x 48 stuff, it seems like 4 miles (in meters) might not necessarily be enough on the erg when it comes to volume. I think 8k might be more appropriate; essentially, 11 rounds of 8k every 4 hours with the last being 12k to make it an even 100k.

My wife and kids have a trip planned to visit her extended family out of state over the summer and I am not able to get away from work for it as we have two other trips planned that I am taking time for; during the trip she and the kids take while I'm home, maybe I can knock out one of these challenges as I don't want my own personal endeavors to encroach on them and our family time.

[Elizabeth]

Digging through the 4 x 4 x 48 stuff, it seems like 4 miles (in meters) might not necessarily be enough on the erg when it comes to volume. I think 8k might be more appropriate; essentially, 11 rounds of 8k every 4 hours with the last being 12k to make it an even 100k.

Yeah, I am faster on the erg than running. For whatever it's worth, I've seen some CrossFit stuff that lists 400m run and 500m row as equivalents, and using that scaling, 8k row would track pretty closely with 4mi run. My 2k row time and 1600m run time are not at all the same, so big grain of salt, but a lot of the details behind these challenges are arbitrary anyway, right?

[jcross485]

Yeah, I am faster on the erg than running. For whatever it's worth, I've seen some CrossFit stuff that lists 400m run and 500m row as equivalents, and using that scaling, 8k row would track pretty closely with 4mi run. My 2k row time and 1600m run time are not at all the same, so big grain of salt, but a lot of the details behind these challenges are arbitrary anyway, right?

Interesting on the scaling, but I would think its highly individual.

I don't know world record times off the top of my head but I would venture to guess a higher percentage of runners would go under 5:00 in the mile than rowers would go under 6:00 in the 2k. Same with a 6:00 mile running and a 7:00 2k in rowing. Enormous amounts of people running marathons at sub-6:00/mi pace; while the number of people rowing a marathon is nowhere near those running, how many are rowing at sub-1:45/500 pace?

My gut tells me that rowing scales more quickly if that makes sense. The difference between 1:45/500 and 2:15/500 is much, much greater than a 3:30/km and 4:30/km in running. I have a hard time imagining rowing at 2:45/500 pace (if you are not including break times) whereas 5:30/km in running is pretty normal.

Agree with your point on the challenges being arbitrary, 100%. I was listening to a podcast on my trip home last night re. sport and individual competition and the topic of "your why" came up. At the end of the day, none of this really matters so truly understanding the why is important to keep going.

[Yankeerunner]

The comparison between running times and erging times is quite fluid. I'd guess that for most fit people (neither overweight not anorexic) their running times would be faster when they were younger and slower as they aged.

As an example of one, in my prime as a runner I could race a 5K in the low 15:00 range. We didn't have many 5Ks then, but I did 3-mile track races at 14:42 when training for marathons. That's just about world class on the erg, even though I was considered merely 'good' among local runners at that distance. World class 5K runners were doing 13:20s, and 3-milers at low 13:00 at that time. I didn't erg then, but most assuredly wouldn't have been anywhere close to low 15:00s. Running much faster than erging.

I took up erging at 52, and hit my peak at age 57. My 5K topped out at 18:22, and by then I was having trouble breaking 20:00 for a running 5K. Presently I can erg in the 21:00s, but can only run in the 28:00s. Running much slower than erging. Where the tipping point might lie, I don't know. But something happens with our physiology, probably from the beating that the body takes from running, that slows down our running faster than it does our erging.

[jcross485]

The comparison between running times and erging times is quite fluid. I'd guess that for most fit people (neither overweight not anorexic) their running times would be faster when they were younger and slower as they aged.

As an example of one, in my prime as a runner I could race a 5K in the low 15:00 range. We didn't have many 5Ks then, but I did 3-mile track races at 14:42 when training for marathons. That's just about world class on the erg, even though I was considered merely 'good' among local runners at that distance. World class 5K runners were doing 13:20s, and 3-milers at low 13:00 at that time. I didn't erg then, but most assuredly wouldn't have been anywhere close to low 15:00s. Running much faster than erging.

I took up erging at 52, and hit my peak at age 57. My 5K topped out at 18:22, and by then I was having trouble breaking 20:00 for a running 5K. Presently I can erg in the 21:00s, but can only run in the 28:00s. Running much slower than erging. Where the tipping point might lie, I don't know. But something happens with our physiology, probably from the beating that the body takes from running, that slows down our running faster than it does our erging.

I agree that, especially for me, running is faster than erging at this point (just turned 38).

I would hypothesize that, with running being more of a speed endurance sport and rowing being more of a power endurance sport, running performance will drop off earlier in life (provided training starts early and you don't pick it up late) as speed is one of the first qualities to deteriorate with age. Running cadences are generally 180 +/- whereas erging stroke rate is considerably lower, making running more speed and fast twitch dominant no matter the distance.

[btlifter]

It's not that running is fasrer or slower than erging.

It's that the difference between a fast and a slow run is lightyears larger than the difference between a fast and slow erg. Maybe by an order of magnitude.

The fastest runners will always run faster than the fastest ergers, at every distance. But a mediocre erger will be a bit, or a lot, faster than a mediocre runner... at every distance.

[jcross485]

It's not that running is fasrer or slower than erging.

It's that the difference between a fast and a slow run is lightyears larger than the difference between a fast and slow erg. Maybe by an order of magnitude.

The fastest runners will always run faster than the fastest ergers, at every distance. But a mediocre erger will be a bit, or a lot, faster than a mediocre runner... at every distance.

Concise and very well stated...thank you very much!

[Emmseegee]

I actually searched the word Goggins to see if anyone else had tried this challenge on the rower. I’m considering doing this at home. Think I would stick to the 6500m tho as that repeatedly over 48 hours would be enough of a challenge for me.

Has anyone toyed with the idea of challenges that exist in other endurance sports and trying to complete them on the erg?

I’m most familiar with running myself; a couple that come to mind -

Goggins 4 x 4 x 48. Run 4 miles every 4 hours for 48 hours. On the erg, it would be 6438 meters every 4 hours for 48 hours, or a little over 77k.

Last man/woman standing backyard ultras. Essentially at the top of every hour, competitors set out on a 4.15mi loop. The quicker you finish, the more rest you have, but no matter what you’re starting again at the top of the hour. People are eliminated either when they drop out or they don’t finish the prior lap by the top of the hour when the next one starts. On the erg, it would be 6679m every hour until you drop or don’t finish.

Obviously the last man/woman standing is more extreme and intense and would also require numerous people to join in order to compete, but trying the 4 x 4 x 48 on an erg seems like it would work on the individual level.

Thoughts, ideas, other types of challenges?