WRJC 2011 Rigging Survey

August 2011 Dorney Lake Analysis of data 24th November 2011

Key findings
Juniors compared with Adults (WRJC 2011 cf. WRC 2006)
Juniors gearing averages 1% lower than adults (3% in W4x) Juniors boat velocity averages 5% less than adults Juniors hand-foot velocity averages 4% slower (7% in W2x, 1% in M8x) JM ave. boat velocity has same relative % ergo scores, JW 2% slower

Gearing
Within sweep or scull classes gearing is only changed by 1-3% although class speed differences vary by up to 25% Sculls: faster crews used lighter gearing all classes except M1x Sweep: faster crews used lighter gearing only in M2-, M4+ and M8+

Hand foot velocities (muscle velocities)

All classes: faster crews had higher hand foot velocities all classes Only in M4x is hand foot velocity the same as M8+, in other classes it is up to 24% slower

Other findings (1)

Spans, spreads and inboards
reduced for faster boat classes so catch /sweep angles could be increased

Through the work

Increased for faster classes so catch angles can be increased W compress legs 3-4 cm more than M in all classes Lowest compression in 1x which are the slowest classes

Heights (sill to seat to heels..)

Bigger boat classes have greater heights. This reduces mechanical advantage in the drive but may increase stroke length for some athletes.

Stretcher angle and foot splay

A few coaches have increased the stretcher angle and others increased the foot splay it seems likely that the rest have accepted the manufacturers default settings

Other Findings (2)

Span/Spread and Gearing
No evidence of rigging to fit the individual athlete except in 1x Within boats and within classes all spans/spreads were within 3mm and all biomechanical gearing was the same (within 0.22%) Only exception AUS M4x spread 161.0 157.0 for biggest smallest athlete (using Purcer s rigging guide). However gearing was same.

Only rails and stretchers and swivel height adjusted to fit athletes
Distance through the work varies by 10%, Line of work to heels by 6% Swivel heights increased for taller athletes (all scull and 4 of 7 sweep classes)

Athletes heights (estimated from foot stretcher position)

Average height M = 6 3 , W = 6 2

Tallest athletes in class range from 7 to 6 4

Sweep angles (estimated from foot stretcher position)

For all scull classes (except M4x) faster crews used bigger sweep angles In only 3 of 4 of the sweep classes did faster crews use bigger sweep angles The tallest athletes have sweep angles which are up to 6o bigger than their class average but only 2o bigger than their crew mates.

Inferences on what coaches believe

The rig of all seats in crew boats should be the same except stretcher position / rails Gearing should be identical within crews
Only small differences appear to be errors

Gearing should not be adjusted for boat class speed as it is believed there is a wide range, 12%, of athlete muscle velocities for optimum power and metabolic efficiency over 2000m
Only in M4x is gearing reduced to allow hand - foot velocities to equal M8+ Hand foot velocities of other classes are at only 85% (M1x, M2-) and 76% (W1x) of M8+ Comparison with cycling: road racers change gear for every 9% change in speed ie. Optimal range is 4.5%
A 9% gear change in rowing requires reducing outboard by 15.6 cm sculling, 20.3 cm sweep, whilst keeping inboard and span the same A 24% gear change in rowing requires reducing outboard by 41.8 cm sculling, 54.5 cm sweep, whilst keeping inboard and span the same. This is the equivalent of changing gear 3 times in cycling

Juniors optimal muscle velocities are slower than adults (4%) In selecting pairs of athletes of same size in 2x, M2 Setting and measuring sweep angle for each athlete is either too difficult or not important and /or there is not an optimum sweep angle for each class

 The Measuring Team

Stephen Aitken Terence Chipchase Tom Copeland Rory Copus John Gill Helpers Bruce Grainger Bill Grant Julian Harrison

Sponsored by
Rosie Mayglothling

Measurements taken
The following were recorded to the nearest millimetre or tenth of a degree for each seat in the boat. Span and Arc position
Span for all sculling boats, Spread for all sweep boats Distance through the work of the front of the seat when set at front stops Line of work to the heels Line of work to toes Foot stretcher angle to nearest tenth of a degree using a digital pitch gauge.

Relative height data

Height of swivel above seat starboard, Height of swivel above seat port Seat below saxboard Heel below saxboard

Splay of feet
Distance between heels Distance between toes Shoe length Only one boat (GER W2-) had adjustable splay shoes Overall length of oar Oar outboard length Oar inboard length Blade length from collar to tip Blade height measured at maximum width

Oar Data

Measurements taken

Accuracy of measures
Although measuring to nearest millimetre the accuracy of some measures like line of work to heels, depth of heels, oar length will be less due to the measuring system of tapes and setsquares or the nature of the surfaces being measured Estimated accuracy of the measures
Span +/- 1.5mm Spread +/- 1.5mm Distance through work +/-5mm Line of work heels+/-10mm Line of work toes +/- 7mm Foot stretcher angle +/- 0.2 degrees Swivel above seat +/- 2mm both sides Seat below sax +/- 2mm Heel below sax +/- 5mm Heel distance cm +/- 5mm Toe distance cm +/- 5mm Shoe length cm +/- 5mm Overall oar length +/- 3mm Outboard +/- 3mm Inboard +/- 3mm Blade length +/- 3mm Blade height +/- 3mm

Derived Data
Heights
Seat to heels Seat to toes Seat above heels Seat above ball of foot

Foot splay angle Gearing

FISA Gearing Pin Gearing Spoon Gearing

Velocities
Boat velocity Handle velocity (maximum) Handle foot velocity (maximum)

Derived Data definitions (1)

Seat to heels horizontal. Line of work to heels minus Distance through the work Seat to toes horizontal .Line of work to toes minus Distance through the work. Seat above heels vertical. Heels below saxboard minus seat below saxboard. Seat above ball of foot. This assumes that the shoes fit the athlete and the ball of foot is two thirds of the shoe length from the heel. This is calculated using the foot stretcher angle and the foot splay angle hence the complicated formula Foot splay angle. This is calculated from the shoes length and the difference between the distances between the heels and toes of the shoes. Handle overlap. This is the usual measure for sculls held horizontal at the orthogonal and for sweep it shows how much the oar handle crosses the boat centre line. Sill height difference L/R. This indicates whether the rig in sculling allows for Left hand over/ overlapping/behind right. In sweep it is less meaningful but it measures whether the average of starboard side sills is higher than the portside sills. FISA Gearing. This is the gearing measure designed by Carl Adam and used in the majority of rigging guides. It is nominally the outboard divided by the spread in sweep (or half the span in sculling). This survey uses the definition from the 2006 survey which is (outboard -2)/ spread for sweep and (outboard -2) / (half span) for scull. The -2 allows for the distance of the pin from the collar because the face of the swivel is about 4 cm wide.

Derived Data definitions (2)

Pin Gearing. This is the gearing measure normally used in biomechanical analyses. Its assumes the oar is a first order lever with the fulcrum at the pin and forces are applied at the centre of the handle and the centre of the spoon, the gearing being the outboard divided by the inboard. For scull the inboard is defined as measured inboard less 6 cm to middle of handle plus 2 cm as the centre of the pin is 2 cm beyond the collar. The outboard is measured outboard minus 2 cm and minus half the blade length. For sweep the formula is the same except that it is inboard less 15 cm, assuming that the centre of force is between the two hands 15 cm from the end of the handle. Spoon Gearing. This assumes the oar is a second order lever with the fulcrum at the centre of the spoon when it is locked in the water and forces are applied at the centre of the handle and to the pin as the boat is levered through the water. The gearing is the outboard divided by the oar overall length. The outboard is defined as the measured outboard minus half the length of the spoon minus 2 cm and the length overall as the measured length minus half the length of the spoon minus half the handle (6 cm for sculling, 15 cm for sweep). Boat velocity. This is calculated from the race times divided by 2000 m. Handle velocity. This is the velocity of the handle through the air at the orthogonal position of the oar(s). It calculated by dividing the boat velocity by the spoon gearing and assumes there is no blade slip through the water. Handle foot velocity. This is calculated by subtracting the boat velocity from the handle velocity. It gives the velocity of the hands relative to the feet at the orthogonal oar position, roughly the point of maximum hand speed, and maximum force and power. A lower velocity will feel like higher gearing and vice versa. Alternatively it can be calculated by dividing the boat velocity by the pin gearing.

Numbers of boats measured

Boat Class JM JW Total boats measured Total boats at regatta % measured Seats measured Data items recorded Total seats at regatta % measured Boat Class Did not measure 1x 23 18 41 46 89.1% 41 1148 46 89.1% 1x LAT, SUI 2x 25 19 44 50 88.0% 88 2464 100 88.0% 4x 21 16 37 41 90.2% 148 4144 164 90.2% 218 9 27 31 87.1% 54 1512 62 87.1% 417 11 28 29 96.6% 112 3136 116 96.6% 4CRO 4+ 9 0 9 10 90.0% 36 1008 40 90.0% 4+ SRB 8+ 7 3 10 10 100.0% 80 2240 80 100.0% 8+ Total 120 76 196 217 90.3% 559 15652 608 91.9% Total 16

Measured but sheet missing No Rack listed, not measured Total not measured Measured Twice Measured but did not race

CRO BLR, VEN 5

2x 4x 2GRE, USA, GER, NED, SRB, LTU, HUN, NED, GBR, NZL NOR GER GER GER

3 2

4 FRA GBR

21 1 1

Summary of Analyses by (1)

Spans and spreads Distances through the work Relative height data Stretcher angle Foot splay Oar data
dimensions and gearing and hand-foot velocities reducing outboard to increase muscle velocities to 8+ effect on race finish position

Juniors vs. Adults (WRC2006)

Hand-foot velocities and gearing

Race finish position compared with gearing and velocities

Summary of Analyses (2)

Variances
Do rigs fit the athlete Do coaches rig differently

Estimating Athlete height and sweep angles

Height by class Sweep angles by class Range of sweep angles Tallest athletes height and angles Variance of angles within crews Height and angle % variances by class Swivel heights and athlete heights

Spans and Spreads

Spans (cm)

Spans and spreads and inboards reduced for faster boat classes so catch angles could be increased Outliers
GER M1x 164 cm
1st very tall athlete)

160.0

159.0 Span (cm) Scull 158.0 M1x M2x M4x M2M4M4+ M8+ M Ave 87 86 85 W1x W2x W4x W2W4W4+ W8+ W Ave

Spreads (cm)

IRE W1x 157 cm

2nd (short athlete)

Spread (cm)Sweep W1x W2x W4x W2W4W4+ W8+ W Ave M1x M2x M4x M2M4M4+ M8+ M Ave

84

Distances through the work &work distances the horizontal (1) Through
(cm)

Distances to heels and toes suggest M have longer legs / less compression than W W Sculls (W4x) use most compression Line of work to heels is roughly twice through the work

70.0 Line of Work Toes (cm) 60.0 Seat to toes Horizontal (cm) 50.0 Line of Work Heels (cm) 40.0 Distance Through Work (cm) Seat to heels Horizontal (cm)

30.0

20.0

10.0

0.0 W1x W2x W4x W2W4W8+ W Ave M1x M2x M4x M2M4+ M4M8+ M Ave

Distances through the work (2)

Through the work & seat to heels(cm)

Front of seat (distance) through the work shows slight increase with boat class speed to give bigger catch angles, especially W Seat to heels distance indicates compression at the catch e.g. less compression for 1x - which have slowest hand foot velocities see later

24.0 22.0 20.0 18.0 16.0 14.0 12.0 10.0 M1x M2x M4x M2M4+ M4M8+ M Ave W1x W2x W4x W2W4W8+ W Ave Seat to heels Horizontal (cm) Distance Through Work (cm)

Distances through the work (3)

W compress 2-4 cm more than men (seat to heels) W compress most in 2x & 4x and least in 1x M & W compress least in 1x due to less distance through the work and these are the slowest classes
Horizontal distances to show compression at the catch
40.0 35.0 30.0 25.0 22.9 20.0 15.0 10.0 5.0 0.0 W1x W2x W4x W2W4W8+ W Ave M1x M2x M4x M2M4+ M4M8+ M Ave Distance Through Work (cm) 19.9 19.4 19.7 20.5 19.1 19.1 19.4 18.7 18.1 17.1 17.0 16.6 15.9 14.9 Seat to heels Horizontal (cm) Line of Work - Heels (cm)

Relative Rig Height data

Sill heights on 1x and 2x are 4 5 cm lower than other boats and scull is lower than sweep to compensate for shorter outboard M swivel above seat average is 1 cm more than W, above heel 2.6 cm more The bigger boats allow more room to lower feet which might enable increased compression and sweep angle but this lowers mechanical advantage
40.0 35.0 30.0 25.0 20.0 15.0 10.0 5.0 0.0 M1x M2x M4x M2M4+ M4M8+ M Ave W1x W2x W4x W2W4W8+ W Ave Seat above ball of foot (cm) Average swivel above seat height (cm) Average Swivel above ball of foot (cm) Average Swivel above heel(cm)

Conclusion: sweep crews sacrifice mechanical advantage of being lower to the water in order to enable increased compression to increase the sweep angle closer to that of sculling

Stretcher angle
Foot stretcher angle does not vary much and does not seem to be set accurately as it varies across and within crews (42.5o 3o) A few coaches seem to have set a steeper angle
CAN W4- 46.8o GER 8+ 45.8o AZE M1x 47.0o GEO M1x 48.0o
Foot Stretcher Angle (deg)
44.0

43.5

43.0

42.5 Foot Stretcher Angle (deg)

42.0

41.5

41.0 M1x M2x M4x M2M4+ M4M8+ M W1x W2x W4x W2W4W8+ W

Foot data
M shoe length 2 cm longer than W Distance between toes increases with boat size Distance between heels increases with boat size Foot splay see next slide
Foot Data
35.0 30.0 Shoe Length (cm)

25.0

20.0

Toe distance (cm)

15.0 Heel distance (cm) Foot Splay angle (deg)

10.0

5.0

0.0 M1x M2x M4x M2M4+ M4M8+ M Ave W1x W2x W4x W2W4W8+ W Ave

Boat builders / coaches set feet wider in bigger boats but not as wide as they could and not as wide as on ergometers (20 cm)

 Average splay angle 5.7o for all classes shows slightly larger splay for the bigger boats Outliers:
POL M4x -0.2O Emp ITA M8+ 9.0O Fil BEL M2x 10.3O Fil CZE W4- 10.7O Fil NZL M1x 13.0O Fil CAN using Hudson
M4- 17.0o W4- 11.3o (7O 15O)

Foot Splay
Foot Splay angle (deg)
8.0 7.5 7.0 6.5 6.0 5.5 5.0 4.5 4.0 M1x M2x M4x M2M4+ M4M8+ M Ave W1x W2x W4x W2W4W8+ W Ave Foot Splay angle (deg)

Only adjustable splay GER W2Emp

Conclusion: Most Coaches accept what splay the manufacturer provides on foot plate, a few adjust to suit athlete. Hudson offer bigger splays. CAN thinks feet are important?

Oar data (cm)

400.0 Overall Oar Length (cm) 350.0

300.0

Oar Outboard Length (cm)

250.0 Oar Inboard Length (cm) 200.0 Blade Length (cm)

150.0

100.0

Blade Height (cm)

50.0 Handle Overlap (cm) 0.0 M1x M2x M4x M2M4+ M4M8+ M Ave W1x W2x W4x W2W4W8+ W Ave

All scull and all sweep classes look very similar so lets look at % differences within class

Scull classes average Oar data % comparison with M4x (1)

101% Overall Oar Length (cm)

100% Oar Outboard Length (cm)

99% Oar Inboard Length (cm)

98% W1x W2x W4x M1x M2x M4x

Compared with M4x

Overall and outboard is reduced slightly for slower boats Inboard is increased slightly for slower boats So gearing is reduced but not in proportion to speed reduction

Scull classes Oar data % comparison with M4x (2)

104% 103%

102%

101% Handle Overlap (cm) 100%

99%

Blade Length (cm)

98% Blade Height (cm)

97%

96% W1x W2x W4x M1x M2x M4x

Compared with M4x

Handle overlap increases for M1x and M2x, reduces for W1x (by 3 cm) Blade length and height change slightly (0.5 cm)

Sweep classes Oar data % comparison with M8+

102%

Oar Inboard Length (cm) 101%

100% Overall Oar Length (cm)

99%

Oar Outboard Length (cm) 98% W2W4W8+ M2M4+ M4M8+

Compared with M8+

Overall and outboard is reduced slightly for slower boats Inboard is increased slightly for slower boats So gearing is reduced but not in proportion to speed reduction

Sweep classes Oar data % comparison with M8+

102%

Handle Overlap (cm) 101%

100% Blade Length (cm)

99%

Blade Height (cm) 98% W2W4W8+ M2M4+ M4M8+

Compared with M8+

Handle overlap increases slightly for most slower boats except reduces for W8+ and W2- cm) Blade length and height change slightly (0.5 cm)

Scull classes Gearing comparison with M4x

1.05

There is a very significant difference in boat speed between classes e.g. W1x is 75% of M4x Pin gearing is only reduced by 1% for slower classes Thus hand foot velocities of slower classes are much slower e.g. W1x is 76% of M4x

0.95 FISA Gearing 0.9 Pin Gearing Boat Velocity (m/s) Hand - foot velocity (m/s)

0.85

0.8

0.75

0.7 W1x W2x W4x M1x M2x M4x

Conclusion: coaches believe there is a wide range ( 12%) of muscle velocities for maximum power and metabolic efficiency over 2000m

Sweep classes Gearing comparison with M8+

1.05

There is a very significant difference in boat speed between classes e.g. W1x is 77% of M4x Pin gearing is only reduced by 3% for slower classes Thus hand foot velocities of slower classes are much slower e.g. W1x is 80% of M4x

1 FISA Gearing 0.95 Pin Gearing 0.9

0.85

Boat Velocity (m/s)

0.8 Hand - foot velocity (m/s) 0.75

0.7 W2- W4- W8+ M2- M4+ M4- M8+

Conclusion: coaches believe there is a wide range ( 10%) of muscle velocities for maximum power and metabolic efficiency over 2000m

All classes Gearing and velocities comparison with M8+

1.05 1

0.95

0.9

Pin Gearing Hand - foot velocity (m/s) Boat Velocity (m/s)

0.85

0.8

0.75

0.7

0.65

0.6 W1x W2x W4x W2W4W8+ M1x M2x M4x M2M4+ M4M8+

Only in M4x is gearing reduced to allow hand - foot velocities to equal M8+ Hand foot velocities of other classes are at only 85% (M1x, M2-) and 76% (W1x) of M8+

How can hand-foot velocities of slower boats classes be increased to that of 8+?
Assume inboard and span/spread is fixed to keep same sweep angles All Outboards must be reduced to match 8+ velocities
Except 4x
Required outboard lenghts for same hand-foot velocities as M8+ & W8+
270.0 250.0 230.0 210.0 190.0 170.0 150.0 M1x M4x M4+ M8+ Oar Outboard Length (cm) required outboard (cm)

Reductions in range 14 34 cm see next slide Assumes 8+ and 4x have optimal muscle velocities

How much shortening and what it means

This shortening (14 34 cm) of the oars40.0 is many times greater than using one or two clams which only change gearing by35.0 about 1% 30.0 It is also greater than the that available 25.0 on current adjustable looms (5 or 10 20.0 cm) 15.0 The shortened oars would mean
All classes have same hand-foot velocities 5.0 All classes have same drive time and 0.0 similar stroke rates If 8+ are using optimal muscle velocities then slower classes also using optimal velocities should go faster as delivering more power so oars might not need to be shortened the full amounts
10.0

Required reduction in outboard (cm)

Required reduction in outboard (cm)

M1x M2x M4x M2M4+ M4M8+ M Ave

Currently slower classes have longer drive time and lower stroke rates see next slide

W1x W2x W4x W2W4W8+ W Ave

Current stroke rates and boat speeds

Average stroke rates for different classes from championships 2000, 2002 & 2004* There is a strong correlation between stroke rate and boat velocity because gearing is almost the same Athletes in smaller classes are being prevented from optimal performance because their gearing is too high *Kleshnev RBN 2005 02
42.0 40.0 38.0 36.0 34.0 32.0 30.0 M1x M2x M4x M2M4M8+ M Ave W1x W2x W4x W2W8+ W Ave Stroke rate

Stroke rate

Boat Velocity (m/s) vs Stroke rate for different classes

7.0 6.0 5.0 4.0 3.0 2.0 1.0 0.0 32.0 34.0 36.0 38.0 40.0 42.0 Linear (Boat Velocity (m/s) ) Boat Velocity (m/s) y = 0.2234x - 3.6368 R = 0.7904

Juniors (2011) vs. adults (2006) - velocities and gearing

6.00 5.50 5.00 4.50 4.00 3.50 3.00 2.50 2.00

Adult Boat velocity (m/s) (2006 WRC data all boats) Juniors Boat Velocity (m/s)

Adult Pin Gearing (2006 WRC data all boats) Juniors Pin gearing

Adult Hand-foot velocity (m/s) (2006 WRC data all boats) Juniors Hand - foot velocity (m/s)

1.50 M1x M2x M4x M2M4- M8+ Ave M W1x W2x W4x W2- W8+ Ave W

Juniors have slower boats and foot-hand velocities and slightly lower pin gearing its clearer plotted as % of adult

Juniors vs. adults as % of velocities and gearing

102.0% 100.0%

Juniors pin gearing as % of adult at WRC 2006 Juniors' Hand - Foot velocity as % of adult at WRC 2006 Junior Ergometer velocity WIRC 2010 as % of adult (1-6 places) Juniors boat velocity as % of adult at WRC 2006
M1x M2x M4x M2M4- M8+ Ave M W1x W2x W4x W2- W8+ Ave W

98.0%

96.0%

94.0%

92.0%

90.0%

Juniors gearing averages 1% lower than adults (3% in W4x) Juniors boat velocity averages 5% less than adults Juniors hand-foot velocity averages 4% slower (7% in W2x, 1% in M8x) JM average boat velocity % same as ergo, JW 2% slower

Questions: do coaches believe juniors optimal muscle velocities are slower than adults? Would juniors go faster if gearing was reduced 3-4% lower to increase muscle velocities? On a bicycle the juniors would probably change down a gear to increase foot velocity

Men's Hand - Foot velocities all classes vs. Finish position

2.8 2.7

M1x M2x M4x M2M4-

2.6

2.5

M4+
2.4 y = -0.0099x + 2.6565 R = 0.4937 y = -0.0047x + 2.405 R = 0.3398 y = -0.0079x + 2.4421 R = 0.7193 y = -0.0102x + 2.4379 R = 0.7116 y = -0.0047x + 2.2358 R = 0.4621 y = -0.0065x + 2.215 R = 0.5998 y = -0.0256x + 2.6238 R = 0.6371 y = -0.0195x + 2.3737 R = 0.6637 1.8 0 5 10 15 20 25 30

M8+ Ave Linear (M1x) Linear (M2x) Linear (M4x) Linear (M2-) Linear (M4-) Linear (M4+) Linear (M8+) Linear (Ave)

2.3

2.2

2.1

1.9

Finish position

Faster crews had faster hand foot velocities in all men s classes due to boat going faster - and lighter gearing? Good correlation.

Pin Gearing all Sculling classes vs. Finish position

2.25

2.2

2.15

y = 0.0027x + 2.074 R = 0.2172 y = 0.0016x + 2.0765 R = 0.0457

M1x M2x M4x W1x W2x W4x Ave Linear (M1x) Linear (M2x) Linear (M4x) Linear (W1x) Linear (W2x) Linear (W4x) Linear (Ave)

2.1

2.05

y = 0.0026x + 2.0498 R = 0.107 y = 0.0014x + 2.0588 R = 0.1594 y = 0.0001x + 2.0773 R = 0.0026 y = 0.0002x + 2.0706 R = 0.0083 y = -0.0005x + 2.0746 R = 0.0228

2 0 5 10 15 20 25 30

Finish position

Faster men s crews used lighter gearing in all classes except for M1x poor correlation

Women's Hand - Foot velocities all classes vs. Finish position

2.60

W1x W2x W4x W2W4W8+

2.50

2.40

Ave Linear (W1x) Linear (W2x) Linear (W4x) Linear (W2-) Linear (W4-) Linear (W8+) Linear (Ave)
y = -0.0006x + 2.0181 R = 0.0027 y = -0.0113x + 2.2384 R = 0.5328 y = -0.0125x + 2.2234 R = 0.7164 y = -0.0153x + 2.238 R = 0.5582 y = -0.0259x + 2.3796 R = 0.9951 y = -0.0111x + 2.0468 R = 0.6411 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20

2.30

2.20

y = -0.0146x + 2.4751 R = 0.8503

2.10

2.00

1.90

1.80

Finish Position

Faster crews had faster hand foot velocities in all women s classes due to boat going faster - and lighter gearing? Good correlation.

Pin Gearing all Sweep classes vs. Finish position

2.350

M2M4-

y = 0.0054x + 2.233 R = 0.2465 2.300 y = 0.0002x + 2.263 R = 0.0003 2.250 y = -0.0005x + 2.2323 R = 0.0176 y = -0.0014x + 2.2563 R = 0.1154 y = 0.0014x + 2.1944 R = 0.0759 y = -0.0003x + 2.221 R = 0.0026

M4+ M8+ W2W4W8+ Ave Linear (M2-) Linear (M4-) Linear (M4+)

2.200

2.150

y = -0.0029x + 2.2056 R = 0.0229

Linear (M8+) Linear (W2-)

2.100 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20

Linear (W4-) Linear (Ave)

Finish position

Faster women s crews used lighter gearing only in M2-, M4+ and M8+ - poor correlation

Are rigs adjusted to fit the athlete?

Variances within crews - one standard deviation
Spread/span and swivel above seat variances are within a few mm all classes Inboard variance is within 1mm all classes Line of work to heels variance of 2.25 cm average suggests that athlete s leg lengths within crews vary by 2.25 cm on average, least in M2x & W2x This suggests crew members height variance is 4.5 cm (2x2.25)
Conclusions:
Variances (one SD) within boat by classes (cm)
3

2.5 Distance Through Work (cm) 2 Line of Work - Heels (cm) Swivel above seat (cm) starb'd Span (cm) Scull 1 Spread (cm)Sweep 0.5 Oar Inboard Length (cm) W2x W4x W2W4W8+ W Ave Ave M2x M4x M2M4+ M4M8+ M Ave

1.5

Majority of coaches rig all seats in crew boats the same except stretcher position / rails In 2x and M2- coaches tend to match athletes by size Pin gearing is identical within crews except where setting errors have been made

Do different coaches set different rigs?

Variances across boats one standard deviation
Variances (one SD) across boats by class

Spread/span are within 1 cm variance all classes except 1x Inboard is within 1 cm variance all classes except W1x &W2x Line of work to heels / seat to heels suggests average athlete s leg lengths per crew vary by 3 cm on average, most in smaller boats, least in 8+ Conclusions:

6.0

5.0

4.0

Seat to heels Horizontal (cm) Line of Work Heels (cm) Span (cm) Scull

3.0

2.0 Spread (cm)Sweep 1.0 Oar Inboard Length (cm)

0.0 W1x W2x W4x W2W4W8+ W Ave Ave M1x M2x M4x M2M4+ M4M8+ M Ave

Different coaches set almost identical rigs to each other Only in 1x is the span and inboard adjusted a little for the athlete

Estimating athlete height and sweep angles

The height of the athletes was not measured but an estimate of height can be made as follows:
Assume that an athlete who is 183 cm tall will set Line of work to heels (Lowh) at 33 cm in both scull and sweep. Assume athletes leg length is half their height. So athlete s height = 183 + (Lowh - 33) x 2. This gives athletes ranging from 7 to less than 6 see next slide.

Stroke length can be calculated from Kleshnev s formula

Stroke length cm = (height/100*0.297865 + 1.08387)*100

Sweep sweep angle (rad) = stroke length / (inboard-15+2) Scull sweep angle (rad) = stroke length / (inboard -6+2) Sweep angle in crew boats is based on Lowh for crew
This estimation system gives reasonable results for most crews. However it does assume that stretchers have been set to give the same finish angles in all seats in all sculling classes (e.g. The 1.5 hand widths at finish) and in all seats in all sweep classes (e.g. Outside hand on handle next to side of torso). All analysis that follows depends on these assumptions!

Athlete s average heights by class

Estimated average athlete height (cm)
194.00 192.00 190.00 188.00 186.00 Estimated average athlete height (cm) 184.00 182.00 180.00 178.00 M1x M2x M4x M2- M4- M4+M8+ M Ave W1x W2x W4x W2- W4- W8+ W Ave Ave

Heights for M look reasonable with tallest athletes in M1x Heights for W show scullers are shorter than sweep and W2x tallest Average height M is 6 2.8 , tallest is M1x 6 3.6 Average height W is 6 2.2 , tallest is W2- 6 3.2

Estimated sweep angles scull classes (1)

M1x Estimated sweep angle (deg)
115 114 113 112 111 110 109 108 107 0 10 20 30 y = -0.0205x + 112.09 R = 0.0095 Linear (Estimated sweep angle (deg)) Estimated sweep angle (deg) 116.0 115.0 114.0 113.0 112.0 111.0 110.0 109.0 108.0 107.0 106.0 0 5

W1x Estimated sweep angle (deg)

Estimated sweep angle (deg)

y = -0.0498x + 112.2 R = 0.0149

Linear (Estimated sweep angle (deg))

10

15

20

M2x Estimated sweep angle (deg)

116 115 114 113 112 111 110 109 108 0 5 10 y = -0.0662x + 112.62 R = 0.0656 15 20 25 Estimate d sweep angle (deg) Linear (Estimate d sweep angle (deg)) 112.5 112.0 111.5 111.0 110.5 110.0 109.5 109.0 108.5 108.0 107.5 0

W2x Estimated sweep angle (deg)

y = -0.0066x + 110.32 R = 0.0004

Estimated sweep angle (deg) Linear (Estimated sweep angle (deg))

10 Finish Position

15

20

Finish Position

Estimated sweep angles scull classes (2)

M4x Estimated sweep angle (deg)
119.0 118.0 117.0 116.0 115.0 114.0 113.0 112.0 111.0 110.0 0 5 10 15 y = 0.0844x + 111.73 R = 0.0764 113.0 112.0 111.0 110.0 109.0 108.0 107.0 106.0 105.0 104.0 103.0 0 5

W4x Estimated sweep angle (deg)

y = -0.159x + 108.17 R = 0.142

Estimated sweep angle (deg)

Estimated sweep angle (deg) Linear (Estimated sweep angle (deg))

20

25

Finish Position

Linear (Estimated sweep angle (deg))

10 Finish Position

15

20

For all scull classes (except M4x) faster crews used bigger sweep angles

Estimated sweep angles sweep classes (1)

M2- Estimated sweep angle (deg)
95.0 94.0 93.0 92.0 91.0 90.0 89.0 88.0 0 5 10 15 20 y = 0.0689x + 90.785 R = 0.0859 Estimated sweep angle (deg) Linear (Estimated sweep angle (deg)) 94.5 94.0 93.5 93.0 92.5 92.0 91.5 91.0 90.5 90.0 0 2 4 6 8 10 y = 0.233x + 90.458 R = 0.2597 Linear (Estimate d sweep angle (deg)) Estimate d sweep angle (deg)

W2- Estimated sweep angle (deg)

M4- Estimated sweep angle (deg)

94.0 93.5 93.0 92.5 92.0 91.5 91.0 90.5 90.0 89.5 89.0 88.5 0 93.5 93.0 92.5 y = -0.0785x + 93.028 R = 0.1146 Estimated sweep angle (deg) Linear (Estimated sweep angle (deg)) 92.0 91.5 91.0 90.5 90.0 0

W4- Estimated sweep angle (deg)

Estimated sweep angle (deg) y = -0.2343x + 93.209 R = 0.5891 Linear (Estimated sweep angle (deg))

10 Finish position

15

20

10

15

Finish position

Estimated sweep angles sweep classes (2)

M8+ Estimated sweep angle (deg)
95.0 94.0 93.0 92.0 91.0 90.0 2 4 Finish position 6 8 y = -0.1643x + 93.605 R = 0.0764 Estimated sweep angle (deg) Linear (Estimated sweep angle (deg)) 94.5 94.0 93.5 93.0 92.5 92.0 91.5 0 1 2 3 4 Estimated sweep angle (deg) Linear (Estimated sweep angle (deg)) y = 1.0134x + 90.972 R = 0.9865

W8+ Estimated sweep angle (deg)

M4+ Estimated sweep angle (deg)

In only 3 of 4 of the sweep classes did faster crews use bigger sweep angles

92.6 92.4 92.2 92.0 91.8 91.6 91.4 91.2 91.0 0 2 4

y = 0.144x + 91.026 R = 0.7968 Estimated sweep angle (deg) Linear (Estimated sweep angle (deg)) 6 8 10

Finish Position

Range of estimated sweep angles

Sweep angles range and variance
9.0

The difference between the maximum and minimum sweep angle found in each class

8.0 7.0 6.0 5.0 4.0 3.0 2.0 1.0 W1x W2x W4x W2W4W8+ Ave W Ave M1x M2x M4x M2M4M4+ M8+ Ave M sweep angle 2 standard deviations (deg) Sweep angles range (deg)

Suggests coaches don t agree on what is the optimum sweep angle for each class or that it is important

Tallest Athletes in each Class

Tallest athletes have bigger sweep angles than average for class - see next slide for detail
Tallest Athlete in each class
240.0 220.0 200.0 180.0 160.0 140.0 120.0 100.0 80.0 M1x M2x M4x M2M4+ M4M8+ M Ave W1x W2x W4x W2W4W8+ W Ave Estimated athlete height (cm)

Estimated stroke lenght (cm)

Estimated sweep angle (deg)

Estimated average sweep angle for class (deg)

Tallest Athletes height and angle

Tallest athletes in class range from 7 to 6 4 Their potential sweep angles can be up to 6o bigger than the class average However taller athletes tend to be in taller crews so their angles are typically only 2o bigger than crew average see next slide. As outboards in crews are all the same it is likely tall athletes reduce their stroke length to match the rest of the crew or they pull through harder to achieve the same time in the water for a bigger sweep.
Tallest Athlete height (ft) and extra sweep angle
8.00 7.00 6.00 5.00 4.00 3.00 2.00 1.00 M1x M2x M4x M2M4+ M4M8+ M Ave W1x W2x W4x W2W4W8+ W Ave Estimated difference tallest average angle (deg)

Estimated height (ft)

Within crews how do athletes heights and sweep angles vary?

Within boat athlete s heights vary by 5 cm (or 10 cm 95th percentile) Stroke lengths only vary by 1.4 cm (or 2.8 cm for 95th percentile) So sweep angles within boats only vary by 1o (or 2o for 95th percentile) which would be hard to detect. However shorter athletes will be compressing more at catch and have more lie back at finish than their taller crew mates to achieve this.
Variances (one SD) within boat by class (cm)
6

4 Estimated athlete height (cm) Estimated stroke length (cm) 2 Estimated sweep angle (deg)

0 M2x M4x M2M4+ M4M8+ M Ave W2x W4x W2W4W8+ W Ave Ave

Height and angle % variances by boat class

Average crew sizes vary most in M8+, M1x & W1x, least in M4+ Sweep angle varies most in W1x, least in M4+
% Variances (one SD) across crew averages
8.0% 7.0% 6.0% 5.0% 4.0% 3.0% 2.0% 1.0% 0.0% M1x M2x M4x M2M4+ M4M8+ M Ave W1x W2x W4x W2W4W8+ W Ave Ave Estimated athlete height (cm) Estimated stroke lenght (cm) Estimated sweep angle (deg)

Swivel and Athlete heights sculls

M1x Swivel and athlete height (cm)
230.0 210.0 190.0 170.0 150.0 14.0 15.0 16.0 17.0 18.0 19.0 y = 0.9308x + 176.55 R = 0.019 205.0 200.0 195.0 190.0 185.0 180.0 175.0 170.0 165.0 13.0 14.0 15.0

W1x swivel & athlete height (cm)

y = 0.7375x + 174.6 R = 0.0086

16.0

17.0

18.0

M2x swivel & athlete height (cm)

205 200 195 190 185 180 15 16 17 y = 1.126x + 169.86 R = 0.0437

W2x swivel & athlete height (cm)

195.0 190.0 185.0 180.0 175.0 170.0 14.0 15.0 16.0 17.0 18.0 19.0 20.0 21.0 y = 0.1463x + 181.04 R = 0.0017

18

19

20

21

Swivel and Athlete heights sculls

M4x swivel & athlete height (cm)
205.0 200.0 195.0 190.0 185.0 180.0 16.5 17.0 17.5 18.0 18.5 19.0 19.5 20.0 y = 1.7839x + 157.77 R = 0.1187

W4x swivel & athlete height (cm)

195.0 190.0 185.0 180.0 175.0 170.0 165.0 160.0 155.0 150.0 15.5 16.0 16.5 17.0 17.5 18.0 18.5 19.0 y = 1.1075x + 163.85 R = 0.0288

All scull classes show small increase in swivel height for taller crews
i.e. average port sill height compared with estimated average crew height

Swivel and Athlete heights sweep

M2- swivel & athlete height (cm)
200.0 190.0 180.0 170.0 160.0 150.0 15.0 16.0 17.0 18.0 19.0 y = -1.4564x + 213.77 R = 0.055 210.0 200.0 190.0 180.0 170.0 160.0 150.0 14.0 14.5 15.0 15.5 16.0 16.5 17.0 17.5 y = 0.3326x + 185.98 R = 0.0021

W2- swivel & athlete height (cm)

M4- swivel & athlete height (cm)

200.0 195.0 190.0 185.0 180.0 175.0 170.0 165.0 160.0 155.0 150.0 15.5 16.0 16.5 17.0 205.0 y = 2.164x + 152.59 R = 0.0585 200.0 195.0 190.0 185.0 180.0 175.0 17.5 18.0 18.5 19.0

W4- swivel & athlete height (cm)

y = 0.6101x + 179.49 R = 0.0093

14.0

15.0

16.0

17.0

18.0

19.0

Swivel and Athlete heights sweep

M4+ swivel & athlete height (cm)
196.0 194.0 192.0 190.0 188.0 186.0 184.0 16.0 16.5 17.0 17.5 18.0 18.5 y = 1.5962x + 161.66 R = 0.111 205.0 200.0 195.0 190.0 185.0 180.0 175.0 17.0 17.5 18.0 18.5 19.0 19.5 y = -3.3511x + 250.93 R = 0.0652

M8+ swivel & athlete height (cm)

Only W2-, M4-, W4- & M4+ show increase in swivel height for taller crews

W8+ swivel & athlete height (cm)

196.0 194.0 192.0 190.0 188.0 186.0 184.0 182.0 15.0 15.5 16.0 16.5 17.0 17.5 y = -2.2042x + 225.61 R = 0.1214