Nick you guys have to say which one. And make it clear.s-execute wrote:It's taken a little while to get registered on here to post a reply but with Dougie's help, it has finally been done. I'm Nick, I represent the Sprint Group. Our chosen challenge was going to be the two currently recognised sprint distances (100m and one minute) and the recently discontinued one (300m). The rower can perform these at any time of the month, as in order to sprint optimally one has to be fully recovered. That is, you decide when you do the distances. You can perform all three one after the other or weeks apart.
The crucial difference is that the time must be recorded as per 500m not the actual time. For example, if you row 16.0 for the 100m, this equates to 1.20.0 for the 500m. This will give each distance equal weight and will not unfairly penalise the short distances.
We have given due consideration to the opinions on here about a 500/400/300/200/100. We would be amenable to a 400/300/200/100 instead of a 100/300/1 minute. The 500m is too long to be a sprint. However, we would insist on each distance being recorded as per 500m, so as to give them equal weight. That is, the time entered would effectively be for 2k. For example, if the rower recorded the following times :
100m = 16.0 (1.20/500)
200m = 33.0 (1.22.5/500)
300m = 51.0 (1.25/500)
400 = 1.12.0 (1.30.0/500)
The totals of 1.20, 122.5, 1.25 and 1.30 therefore equal a time of 5.37.5 for the challenge. We don't really mind whether it is a 400/300/200/100 or a 100/300/1 minute. Feel free to vote/discuss !
I understand now, its 4 STANDALONE PIECES, rowed within the month, and its about the AVERAGEV 500 time, NOT real time.
Maybe the 100/300/1min option will be best. With 2 ranking pieces, although 300/1min could be very close for a lot of people.
Here the 1/2/3/4 option is better.
250 instead of 300?
But again YOU guys are the team, you decide.