150 Years of Rowing Faster!. Stephen Seiler PhD FACSM Faculty of Health and Sport Agder University College Kristiansand, Norway. Oxford-Cambridge Boat Race Winning Times 1845-2005. FISA Men’s championship 1x Winning Times 1894-2004. 25-30% increase in average velocity over 150 years

Chapter 10 The Jacksonian Era 1824–1845 - . key questions:. what characterized the rise of new political parties:

Autopsy-Equipment - The autopsy surgical instruments are used in post-mortem of a body and the autopsy parts include

non-radar separation 6-4-1 - Longitudinal. lead aircraft same speed or up to 22 knots faster:10 minutes or 20 dme miles..

Leap Year - . by john riggio, musick8 plank road publishing, inc. all rights reserved, used by permission vol. 14, no.

Flattener #6: Offshoring - . on december 11, 2001, china formally joined the world trade organization. ever since then,

Bigger, Better, Faster, More - . an introduction to super-scalability. but first…. the arms race. 1 eniac. 1 teletype.

150 Years of Rowing Faster! Stephen Seiler PhD FACSM Faculty of Health and Sport Agder University College Kristiansand, Norway

25-30% increase in average velocity over 150 years of competitive rowing What are the performance variables and how have they changed? How will future improvements be achieved?

Improved Training Increased Physical Dimensions Increase Propulsive Power Decrease Power Losses Decrease Drag Forces on Boat Aerobic Capacity Anaerobic Capacity Increase Propulsive Efficiency of oar/blade Maximal Strength Improve Technical Efficiency

”Evolutionary Constraints” • Race duration ~ 6-8 minutes • Weight supported activity • Oar geometry dictates relatively low cycle frequency and favors large stroke distance to accelerate boat • High water resistance decelerates boat rapidly between force impulses

These constraints result in: • High selection pressure for height and arm length • High selection pressure for absolute (weight independent) aerobic capacity • Significant selection pressure for muscular strength and anaerobic capacity

Ned Hanlan ca 1880 173cm 71kg Biglin Brothers ca 1865 180cm? 75-80kg? Ward Brothers ca 1865 185cm? 80+kg?

”Since the 19th century there have been clearly documented secular trends to increasing adult height in most European countries with current rates of 10-30mm/decade.” Cole, T.J. Secular Trends in Growth. Proceedings of the Nurition Society. 59, 317-324, 2000.

97th percentile for height in Dutch 21 year-olds Redrawn after data from Fredriks et al, in Cole, T.J. Secular Trends in Growth. Proceedings of the Nutrition Society. 59, 317-324, 2000.

Taller Population= Taller Elite Rowers Oxford Crew-2005 Average Height: 197cm Average bodyweight 98.3 kg

BUT, Metabolic rates of organisms scale with mass3/4. See: West, G.B et al A general model for the origin of allometric scaling laws in biology. Science 276 122-126, 1997. Scaling problems- Geometry or fractal filling volumes? Based on Geometric scaling: Strength and VO2max will increase in proportion to mass 2/3.

VO2 body mass scaling in elite rowers Relationship between maximal oxygen uptake and body mass for 117 Danish rowers (national team candidates) r = - 0.39 A key finding of this study was that VO2 scaled with body mass raised to the =.73 power, or close to the 0.75 value predicted by metabolic scaling From: Jensen, K., Johansen, L, Secher, N.H. Influence of body mass on maximal oxygen uptake: effect of sample size. Eur. J. Appl. Physiol. 84: 201-205, 2001.

Measuring Rowing Specific Physical Capacity Photo courtesy of Mathijs Hofmijster, Faculty of Human Movement Sciences, Free University Amsterdam, Netherlands

3. 1. 2. 4. 5. photos 1-4 from Miller, B. ”The development of rowing equipment” http://www.rowinghistory.net/equipment.htm

The Maximum of Human Power and its Fuel Crew average: From Observations on the Yale University Crew, Winner of the Olympic Championship, Paris, 1924 Height: 185 cm Weight: 82 kg Henderson, Y and Haggard, H.W. American J. Physiology. 72, 264-282, 1925

Estimated external work required at racing speed based on: 1. Boat pulling measurements 2. Work output on a rowing machine 3. Rowing ergometer VO2 measurements (but did not go to max) Estimated an external work requirement of ~6 Calories/min or (assuming 20% efficiency) 30 Calories/min energy expenditure. Equals ~ 6 Liter/min O2 cost Assumed 4 L/min VO2 max and 2 L/min anaerobic contribution during 6 min race. The ergometer of the day had to be redesigned to allow a quantification of work and power.

1970s - VO2 max vs boat placement in international regatta Even if we assume 5 liter/min max for the dominant, champion 1924 crew, they would have been at the bottom of the international rankings 50 years later, as this team boat VO2 max data compiled by Secher demonstrates. From Secher NH. Rowing. Physiology of Sports (ed. Reilly et al) pp 259-286. 1971

193 cm, 92 kg 6.23 L/min VO2 cycling. Subject reached 6.1 to 6.4 L/min during repeated testing in different boats. Jackson, R.C. and N. H. Secher. The aerobic demands of rowing in two Olympic rowers. Med. Sci. Sports Exerc. 8(3): 168-170, 1976. This study was unique because 1) on water measurements were made of champion rowers and, 2) the authors of the paper WERE the Champion rowers (Niels Secher, Denmark and Roger Jackson, Canada) who went on to very successful sport science careers.

X ? ? ■ Aerobic Capacity Developments ? 7+ L/min Dr. Fred Hagerman Ohio University ? There is just not much data available prior to the late 60s, so the question marks emphasise that this is guessing. But that aerobic capacity has increased Is clear. Today, isolated 7 liter values VO2 max values have been recorded in several good laboratories for champion rowers.

”Typical World Class” XC skiers Allometrically equivalent rower? ? 6.3 L/min, 75 kg, 85 ml/kg/min 270 ml/kg0.73/min 7.5 L/min, 95kg, (do they exist?) 79 ml/kg/min, 270 ml/kg0.73/min

4% 2% How much of performance improvement is attributable to increased physical dimensions? • Based on W Cup results • from Lucerne over: • 3 years • 3 boat types • 1st 3 places Here I use present day differences in boat velocity for world class lightweight and heavyweight crews to demonstrate that the massive scale up in body size has not resulted in a proportional increase in boat speed, due to increased power losses associated with greater boat drag. The difference between these two weight classes today is about the same as the increase in body size observed over 150 years

Rise at 7 a.m: Run 100-200 yards as fast as possible About 5:30: Start for the river and row for the starting post and back Reckoning a half an hour in rowing to and half an hour from the starting point, and a quarter of an hour for the morning run- in all, say, one and a quarter hours.

US National Team trainingduring peak loading period 3 sessions/day 30+ hr/wk From US Women’s national team 1996

5.8 l.min-1 6.4 l.min-1 6.5 l.min-1 924 hrs.yr-1 966 hrs.yr-1 1128 hr.yr-1 Developments in training over last 3 decades Fiskerstrand A, Seiler KS Training and performance characteristics among Norwegian international rowers 1970-2001. Scand J Med Sci Sports. 2004 (5):303-10.

Developments in training over last 3 decades Fiskerstrand A, Seiler KS Training and performance characteristics among Norwegian international rowers 1970-2001. Scand J Med Sci Sports. 2004 (5):303-10.

1860s - ”Athletes Heart” debate begins • 1867- London surgeon F.C. Shey likened The Boat Race to cruelty to animals, warning that maximal effort for 20 minutes could lead to permanent injury. • 1873- John Morgan (physician and former Oxford crew captain) compared 251 former oarsmen with non-rowers -concluded that the rowers had lived 2 years longer! • Myocardial hypertrophy was key topic of debate, but tools for measurement (besides at autopsy) were not yet available. See: Park, R.J. High Protein Diets, ”Damaged Hearts and Rowing Men: antecendents of Modern Sports Medicine and Exercise Science, 1867-1928. Exercise and Sport Science Reviews, 25, 137-170, 1997. See also: Thompson P.D. Historical aspects of the Athletes Heart. MSSE 35(2), 364-370 2003.

Big-hearted Italian Rowers - 1980s • Of 947 elite Italian athletes tested, 16 had ventricular wall thicknesses exceeding normal criteria for cardiomyopathy. 15 of these 16 were rowers or canoeists (all international medalists). • Suggested that combination of pressure and volume loading on heart in rowing was unique, but adaptation was physiological and not pathological. from: Pelliccia A. et al. The upper limit of physiologic cardiac hypertrophy in highly trained elite athletes. New England J. Med. 324, 295-301, 1991.

elite rower These ultrasound images show the hypertrophied but geometrically similar heart of an elite Italian rower compared to the smaller heart of an untrained subject. untrained control From: Pelliccia et al. Global left ventricular shape is not altered as a consequence of physiologic remodelling in highly trained athletes. Am. J. Cardiol. 86(6), 700-702, 2000

Myocardial adaptation to heavy endurance training was shown to be reversed with detraining. The functional and morphological changes described as the ”Athlete’s Heart” are adaptive, not pathological. Pelliccia et al. Remodeling of Left Ventricular Hypertrophy in Elite Athletes After Long-Term Deconditioning Circulation. 105:944, 2002

Force production and strength in rowing • Ishiko used strain gauge dynamometers mounted on the oars of the silver medal winning 8+ from Tokyo 1964 to measure peak dynamic forces. • Values were of the magnitude 700-900 N based on the figures shown Photo from WEBA sport GMBH Ishiko, T. Application of telemetry to sport activities. Biomechanics. 1:138-146, 1967.

How Strong do Rowers need to be? 1971 - Secher calculated power to row at winning speed in 1972 championships = 450 watts (2749 kpm/min) ”In accordance with the force-velocity relationship a minimal (isometric) rowing strength of 53 ÷ 0.4 = 133 kp (1300N) will be essential.” From: Secher, N.H. Isometric rowing strength of experienced and inexperienced oarsmen. Med. Sci. Sports Exerc.7(4) 280-283, 1975.

Force production and rowing strength Measured isometric force in 7 Olympic/world medalists, plus other rowers and non-rowers Average peak isometric force (mid-drive): 2000 N in medalists NO CORRELATION between ”rowing strength” and leg extension, back extension, elbow flexion, etc. From: Secher, N.H. Isometric rowing strength of experienced and inexperienced oarsmen. Med. Sci. Sports Exerc.7(4) 280-283, 1975.

Increase Total Propulsive Power Decrease Power Losses Decrease Drag Forces on Boat Aerobic Capacity Physical Dimensions ? Improved Training ? Anaerobic Capacity Increase Propulsive Efficiency of oar/blade Maximal Strength Improve Technical Efficiency

Decrease Power Losses Decrease Drag Forces on Boat Increase Propulsive Efficiency of oar/blade Improve Technical Efficiency

Boat Velocity – Oxygen Demand Relationship This figure shows that achieving a 10% increase in average boat velocity would require an impossibly large increase in aerobic capacity. This means that any revolutionary boat velocity increases in the future must be achieved by decreasing power losses (boat drag for example). Boat velocity range for Men’s and women’s 1x

Drag Forces on the Boat and Rower • Boat Surface Drag - 80% of hydrodynamic drag (depends on boat shape and total wetted surface area) • Wave drag contribution small - <10% of hydrodynamic drag • Air resistance – normally <10% of total drag, depends on cross-sectional area of rowers plus shell

In-rigged wherry typical of those used in racing prior to 1830 figures from Miller, B. ”The development of rowing equipment” http://www.rowinghistory.net/equipment.htm

All radical boat form improvements completed by 1856. • 1828-1841. Outrigger tried by • Brown and Emmet, and perfected • by Harry Clasper • Keel-less hull developed by William Pocock and Harry Clasper 1840-1845 • Thin-skin applied to keel-less frame • by Matt Taylor- 1855-56 • Transition to epoxy and carbon fiber • boats came in 1972. Boat weight of • 8+ reduced by 40kg photo and timeline from Miller, B. ”The development of rowing equipment” http://www.rowinghistory.net/equipment.htm

Effect of reduction in Boat Weight on boat velocity ΔV/V = -(1/6) Δ M/Mtotal Example: Reducing boat+oar weight from 32 to 16kg = 2.4% speed increase for 80 kg 19th century rower. V= boat velocity M = Mass ΔV= Change in Velocity ΔM= Change in Mass From: Dudhia, A Physics of Rowing. http://www-atm.physics.ox.ac.uk/rowing/physics/

To achieve a radical reduction in drag forces on current boats, they would have to be lifted out of the water!

To run this video, download it to the same directory from http://sportsci.org/2006/flyak.wmv (7.4 MB) Video of a hydrofoil kayak with two submerged wings. See http://www.foilkayak.com/

Decrease Power Losses Decrease Drag Forces on Boat Increase Propulsive Efficiency of oar/blade Improve Technical Efficiency

Oar movement translates rower power to boat velocity Boat Travel Figure from: Baudouin, A. & Hawkins D. A biomechanical review of factors affecting rowing performance. British J. Sports Med. 36: 396-402

The slide properly used is a decided advantage and gain of speed, and only objection to its use is its complication and almost impracticable requirement of skill and unison in the crew, rather than any positive defect in its mechanical theory. J.C. Babcock 1870 1876 Centennial Regatta, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. London Crew winning heat

From: Nolte, V. Die Effektivitat des ruderschlages. 1984 in: Nolte, V ed. Rowing Faster. Human Kinetics, 2005 Boat direction A common conception of the oar blade-water connection is that it is solid, but it is not. Water is moved by the blade. Energy is wasted in moving water instead of moving the boat as the blade “slips” through the water. Much or oar development is related to improving blade efficiency and decreasing this power loss. However, the improvement has been gradual, in part due to technological limitations in oar construction. Photo from www.concept2.com

E hydro = Power appliedrower – Power lossmoving water Power appliedrower Oar hydrodynamic efficiency- propelling the boat but not the water Power applied = Force Moment at the oar * oar angular velocity Oar power loss = blade drag force * blade velocity (slip) Affeld, K., Schichl, Ziemann, A. Assessment of rowing efficiency Int. J. Sports Med. 14 (suppl 1): S39-S41, 1993.

Oar Evolution Macon Blade- carbon fiber shaft 1977-1991 Macon blade-wooden shaft 1960-1977 Cleaver blade – ultra light carbon fiber shaft 1991- Square loomed scull 1847 ”Square” and ”Coffin” blades 1906

Big blades found to be 3% more hydrodynamically efficient compared to Macon blade ? Affeld, K., Schichl, Ziemann, A. Assessment of rowing efficiency Int. J. Sports Med. 14 (suppl 1): S39-S41, 1993.

Load More ...