New Rowing NGB

[Anon]

There seems to be an idea that there is a big population of rowers in this country that are great technicians yet get overlooked for national team opportunites because of their poor erg scores. This really doesn't make any sense. Call me naive, but aren't their multiple opportunities for these people to prove themselves every year? NSR's? I guess that doesn't count. Wait, Andy Liverman, Elliot Hovey, and Wes Peirmarini all were in selection for the quad after NSR 3 (I think it was 3, maybe 2). There are always ways around slow ergs, the system is set up that way. Matt Hughes did not have the fastest erg on the sculling side, but his skill kept him firmly in the selection group. And I doubt if he got there by pulling a 2k.
I'm also pretty sure I never called the technique of the 2x anything other than superior to the rest of the group (which I would hope is saying a lot, since there were some accomplished scullers in that group). Granted, I am grossly underqualified to evaluate their sculling technique, as I would be if I were to criticize their finishes. FYI, Tim McLaren coaches his crews to be relaxed and patient around the back end, a style that worked to some success for the Ginn and Free.

[caustic]

There seems to be an idea that there is a big population of rowers in this country that are great technicians yet get overlooked for national team opportunites because of their poor erg scores. This really doesn't make any sense. Call me naive, but aren't their multiple opportunities for these people to prove themselves every year? NSR's? I guess that doesn't count. Wait, Andy Liverman, Elliot Hovey, and Wes Peirmarini all were in selection for the quad after NSR 3 (I think it was 3, maybe 2). There are always ways around slow ergs, the system is set up that way. Matt Hughes did not have the fastest erg on the sculling side, but his skill kept him firmly in the selection group. And I doubt if he got there by pulling a 2k.
I'm also pretty sure I never called the technique of the 2x anything other than superior to the rest of the group (which I would hope is saying a lot, since there were some accomplished scullers in that group). Granted, I am grossly underqualified to evaluate their sculling technique, as I would be if I were to criticize their finishes. FYI, Tim McLaren coaches his crews to be relaxed and patient around the back end, a style that worked to some success for the Ginn and Free.

The question's not about how fast you can get in the US, but how fast you ARE compared to the rest of the world. If you want to win gold at the Olys in a sculling boat, you need more than just brute strength. The problem is that US scullers (not sweepers) just aren't clean enough, OR strong enough. All the strong guys learn sweep in college, and they stick with it to the NT. Moving to sculling from sweep is hard, and it's a big ego blow when you start out, because you're getting passed by old ladies on the water.

Are there technicians in the US? Yeah. Are they pretty good? Absolutely. A 6:05 erg as a sculler will get you a berth on the US team (provided you win at NSRs), but it's just going to get you embarrassed on the world circuit. If you're going to live off your technique, you have to have BEAUTIFUL technique, not just good enough. If you're technique's not PERFECT, then you gotta add some hammer.

It's hard to tie an erg score to a 1x race, because technique is so important to going fast. But that's already assuming your brought your hammer with you, not that you're going to find it on the water. However, seeing what the top ergs scores ARE for male scullers (sub 5:45), I don't think there are ANY US scullers in that playground. So, they better have phenominal technique, which they don't.

The topic's not about how we, personally, can become the #1 US sculler, or somesuch. The topic's about how we can make the #1 WORLD sculler a US sculler.


The Women lead the way - why aren't the guys doing the same thing?

[TurdFurguson]

Caustic, there are so many overstatements and generalities in your last post that I don't quite know how to respond. Your attempt to explain why the US hasn't won more medals relies on completely false statements.

But, I'll comment with this:

US Scullers CAN both be strong and clean, as shown by the Quad this year. They didn't win, but there are strong and clean guys in there. And they can compete.

Contrary to your statement that there are NO strong scullers in the US, Jame Schroder is both sub-5:45 and a good sculler.

How about we have a true focus on the factors at play in the United States rowing scene? That would go a long way towards establishing where the focus of the NGB needs to be. Instead of looking at raw data and facts, many people seem to want to prop up their established biases.

[caustic]

Caustic, there are so many overstatements and generalities in your last post that I don't quite know how to respond. Your attempt to explain why the US hasn't won more medals relies on completely false statements.

But, I'll comment with this:

US Scullers CAN both be strong and clean, as shown by the Quad this year. They didn't win, but there are strong and clean guys in there. And they can compete.

Contrary to your statement that there are NO strong scullers in the US, Jame Schroder is both sub-5:45 and a good sculler.

How about we have a true focus on the factors at play in the United States rowing scene? That would go a long way towards establishing where the focus of the NGB needs to be. Instead of looking at raw data and facts, many people seem to want to prop up their established biases.

1 guy? That's all you can give me? The entire fate of US sculling rests on one guy?!?!?!


Come on turd! It's not about the potential of the squad, I'm talking about reality here. ONE GUY cannot win all the medals. ONE GUY?!?!

We're talking about winning sculling medals - not about being "competitive" or "good enough". We're talking about WINNING. That means that we need ALL of the guys in those boats like Schroder. ALL OF THEM. With extras in the wings.

The simple fact, in reality, is that we don't. Heck, look at NSRs, ever year (including this one an Oly year!). How many of those guys have sub 5:50 ergs? Or even sub 6:00? How many have more than 4 years just in a sculling BOAT, much less racing experience?


now, contrast that with the heavy sculling hitters - 10 YEARS in a scull. Who's bringing the knife to the gun fight here?

[Almostflipped]

I'm just a little curious Caustic, where is it that you are getting your erg score information from? Not just domestic, but international. You seem to be quite certain of what is needed and I'm just wondering how you know what other teams in particular are bringing to the race.

[caustic]

I'm just a little curious Caustic, where is it that you are getting your erg score information from? Not just domestic, but international. You seem to be quite certain of what is needed and I'm just wondering how you know what other teams in particular are bringing to the race.

Actually, I was the one asking. I don't actually know what their erg scores are, hence why I'm asking.

As for international, it's well known that Drysdale & Waddell are both sub 5:40. I think that, until Mahe's illness, it was a foregone conclusion that he would get gold. As an athlete training, I would hazard a guess that you'd want to know what the best guy was doing, so that you could know where you stand. But hey, I guess some folks like to shoot for 2nd place first.

As for local scores, the only data I can use to draw any conclusions from are those from the CRASH B champs. Currently, in the last 8 years, 3 men have come in at under 5:45. One was an American. This last year's results (2008), the lowest score on guys identified as "US National Team" was by Paul Daniels, coming in a 5:55.8. Roman Shor (if he's a US national) was the fastest US citizen, at 5:54.
2007 - 3 NT members are listed in the top 5, none under 5:45.
2006 - the same three as 2007, very close scores.
2005 - again, only 3, slower this year than in '06.
04 - two. Schroeder did get a 5:44.6, so he is currently the ONLY NT member to break 5:45 on record.
'03 - HOLY CRAP! Bunch of NTers showed up to play. And they're almost all between 5:50 and 6:00. And 99% of them are sweepers.

Seeing how the NT guys who've shown up have performed, it's rather logical to conclude that most USNT rowers have erg scores of between 5:58 and 5:52. PRs may be about 4-6 seconds lower, but very, very few are under 5:45 - one confirmed, and I would guess maybe 2 or 3 more.

Now, seeing as PTC didn't get the 2x or 1x berths in the NSR, either they didn't have enough scullers, or else they weren't fast enough. This leads me to believe that the rowers at PTC are overwhelmingly sweep oriented, and as such that means those hammers are NOT training in small boats.


So, the question again is, why are our best rowers NOT rowing in sculling boats? Also, seeing the results of the women this year (and that of the brits), why aren't we putting them in sculling boats, even for just training?

[LoreMaster1]

Okay, and in the last 4 years how many national teamers have even GONE to Crash-B's? (Answer: not a lot.) Outsiders looking in don't have access to information like that, and brief glimpses like erg sprints aren't nearly indicative of the team as a whole. How fast does Scott Gault go? How about Sam Stitt? Warren Anderson?

[ltwt1x]

If you want NT erg data check www.usrowing.com

[Almostflipped]

Roman Shor (if he's a US national

Former junior from PACRA, and currently at Penn.

[magyar]

But that's already assuming your brought your hammer with you, not that you're going to find it on the water. However, seeing what the top ergs scores ARE for male scullers (sub 5:45), I don't think there are ANY US scullers in that playground. So, they better have phenominal technique, which they don't.

The topic's not about how we, personally, can become the #1 US sculler, or somesuch. The topic's about how we can make the #1 WORLD sculler a US sculler.


The Women lead the way - why aren't the guys doing the same thing?

I don't see how your last sentence in any way supports what you say before that. The US women are not known for having the fastest erg times in the world, so in what way are they "leading".

[caustic]

I would hazard a guess that there are more openweight women on the NT who are under 6:50 and there are openweight men who are under 5:50. From the NT testing results, I wouldn't be that far off the mark with that guess.

They are "leading" in that they got sweepers to scull, and did a bunch of it. And while their ergs aren't #1, they're no ninnies. Based on USRowing's testing info, I would conclude that while we may not have the fastest erg movers bar none, they're certainly in the mix. Add some improved technique through sculling a lot to that hammer, and voila, you get medal winning boats.

[bubbles in the tub]

I really love this stuff.

"the M2x was OK for technique. I wouldn't call them awesome. they were good, and obviously better than all the other US 2xs. But on the world stage? They're not smooth enough. Their finishes need to be longer AND speedier."

I seem to remember similar posts coming from similar authors several weeks ago that lauded Tim McLaren and his athletes as the example to follow in the US. But now they're just "OK" instead of the bright beacon of light? Why are we bagging on our guys? That Matt Hughes is also pretty weak right? Back to back 2Ks under 6:00 with 5 minutes of rest? That sounds like he's just a little technician. I seem to remember the Lucerne commentator lauding the "incredible erg power of the US4x."

They're currently taking applications for three USRowing coaching positions. For any and all RI quarterbacks, it's your chance to make sure the boys have some speedy long finishes.
.

[LightwDude]

As for international, it's well known that Drysdale & Waddell are both sub 5:40.

Drysdale's best is around 5:41, the same score some American rowers have achieved and very close to that of some of the scullers. It is an incredible score, enough to win three world championships and an Olympic bronze while being sick. Nevertheless, it is annoying that you use (your own) speculation as solid evidence to justify your criticism of the American Sculling Team.

Second, erg scores are not absolute values; they give coaches a data point. They demonstrate that a rowers has improved x with y training. Or that a rower is at point x at a certain time in a program. So for example, putting other factors aside (technique, mental toughness, etc.) a coach will prefer a 200 lb rower that has only done low intensity work that has a score of 5:50 over a 230lb who has a score of 5:45 who is fully peaked.

[caustic]

I really love this stuff.

"the M2x was OK for technique. I wouldn't call them awesome. they were good, and obviously better than all the other US 2xs. But on the world stage? They're not smooth enough. Their finishes need to be longer AND speedier."

I seem to remember similar posts coming from similar authors several weeks ago that lauded Tim McLaren and his athletes as the example to follow in the US. But now they're just "OK" instead of the bright beacon of light? Why are we bagging on our guys? That Matt Hughes is also pretty weak right? Back to back 2Ks under 6:00 with 5 minutes of rest? That sounds like he's just a little technician. I seem to remember the Lucerne commentator lauding the "incredible erg power of the US4x."

They're currently taking applications for three USRowing coaching positions. For any and all RI quarterbacks, it's your chance to make sure the boys have some speedy long finishes.
.

Any quotes you are mentioning don't have my name after them. Tim's made some good progress, I'll give him that. But his athletes are, obviously, NOT gold medal caliber - yet.

And as I was saying - if he's pulling those kinds of ergs and NOT making it to the finals, then that means technique's suffering greatly. In the elite arena, a 6:00 erg is entry level. As I said before, it's pretty logical to state that most NT guys are in the 5:55 to 5:50 range. But the MEDAL WINNING scullers are possessing BOTH perfect - PERFECT - technique, and in the low 5:40s.


LightwDude - I remember reading on Row2k last winter that Mahe got a 5:39 - I could be wrong, however. As for American rowers reaching 5:41- I can find no record of it anywhere. If you've got a link, I'd like to take a gander. The lowest score I was able to find for ANY American rower, in the last 8 years, was 5:44.6. That's by scouring the NTT results & as many indoor competition results for the last 5 years on Row2k that I could find.

You may call it speculation, but I can only draw conclusions with the data I have access to. If I can't find a record of a score that low by an American rower, then I can't conclude that American rowers are hitting those scores. The simple fact is that NONE of the men's scullers came home with medals. Only the quad made it to the final! And this is the best we can offer on an OLYMPIC year?!
Erg scores are not absolute values, I will agree. But one would assume that in an Olympic year, an athlete would be at his or her most fit status. As such, we should be seeing PRs left and right during an Oly year.
Finally, to bring it back to my original statement - it's not that we don't have the power - we've got that. The question is why aren't these guys sculling? Or, conversely, why aren't more US scullers pulling 5:50s or lower?

Seeing where US talent is isn't hard - you can just look at the indoor rowing competitions, National Team Testing results, and Concept 2's website to garner enough data to make reasonable conclusions. The conclusion *I* come to is that the number of US guys who are both strong ergers AND excellent oarsmen is few.

[GDI]

I'm not sure how to return this thread to a highminded discussion of a New Rowing NGB. Right now it just seems to be at the gutter level of most message boards where Caustic sits in for the typical anonymous critics who ramble on as if they are experts - whether NASCAR, NFL, Premier League, or the Georgia-Russia Conflict. I suspect the degredation of discussion is why Greg Doyle left.

That said, I still miss RegularJesus and his defense of magic brownies for rowers.