I do want to say that world best times usually mean a tailwind, and a tailwind means you need to output less Watts in order to move the boat. These 6 second differences are set with a tailwind, races with headwinds will have a lot more difference between light- and heavyweight classes.
I’d love to see a body weight/speed graph, to present roughly where that efficient sweet spot might be. I think it would vary from person to person, but it would be amazing data to have
Once you are moving, your ultimate speed is limited by viscosity of water and the way that the hull shape minimises the effects. Speed/watts is not linear. You can row at 1/2 or even 2/3 of race speed in your sleep. When I was J16 our boathouse had a special scull that used to belong to a National Squad lady and it was only 24cm wide, compared to the usual 30cm wide that every other fine scull was. I'm sure that it was faster than the rest because it disturbed the water less, but you had to be under 65kg (maybe 75kg if you had excellent balance in smooth water) to use it.
What do you think could become of the Irish Lightweight pair's plans to go heavyweight? Might be a good case study to follow in the next few years to add to this (Since they're both quite small in terms of height)
As a lightweight sculler, this was fascinating. I am a bit surprised, however, that you did not discuss the affect of body weight on boat resistance. More body weight = greater hull displacement = greater resistance, as Karapana pointed out. So for a heavier sculler to go faster, they have to compensate (have greater power or efficiency) to overcome the increased hull resistance. Another point is that increasing body weight with lean muscle would help lightweights to go faster, to a point. Beyond that point cardiovascular limits will start to take over.
So the standard concept 2 2k ergometer test is not a good test to compare rowers of different weight's ability to go fast in a boat? What about after the concept 2 weight adjustment calculator?
Henley Royal Regatta 1999 - Danish Lightweights come and race in Men's 4- against the British 4- (Cracknell, Redgrave, Foster, Pinsent) and lost by 1/2 length. In 2000 they returned and were clearly frustrated from the previous year. At half way the Danes were 1/2 length up. The GBR 4- had to row through them up the enclosures with Pinsent actually having to pull hard. The Danes gave away 4 stone (25 kgs) per man yet were so close to beating them. Being 'heavy weight' is an excuse to be lazy. A lot to be learnt from the approach to training and racing by lightweights.
Had the pleasure of watching the danish lwt 4 race Redgrave and Pinsents 4 at henley in '99. There was only about a length difference between them at the finish if I remember correctly.
you also have to account for the fact that tailwinds are more advantageous towards lightweight crews than heavyweight crews, since wind has more effect on a lighter load. So you'll actually see bigger time gaps on normal wind conditions between lightweights and heavyweights, and even bigger on a headwind
if you leave a rock out in the wind, and then leave a paper ball, you'll notice that the wind has a much bigger effect on the paper ball. The same goes for lightweight and heavyweight crews, but in a much smaller degree of course.
In my opninion there still is a place for lightweight, because there a people, who just can't generate as much force. I know that there are many people who are not the tallest, but row at a very high level. Anyway I as a lightweight rower know many people who just can't be as strong and would be smashed in a race with the heavies. Anyway they also don't have to lose a lot of weight to row lightweight. I think lightweight rowing makes our sport more accessible to many people (also for me) ,but however I think coaches should not force people to row lightweight, if they just not have the body composition for it.
Very interesting perspective, as someone who is a high school rower at 5’10” or (180 cm) it is tough to compete with guys who are 190-200 cm, but training against or with them will only make you a faster lightweight!
I used to row aged 18.Weight 147 pounds. My puddles were the same size in a pair as guys 20/30 pounds heavier. I chose rock climbing, instead of trying for national light weight crews. In climbing, your failure is down to you, not the rest of the crew or cox. I never got scull coaching so never thought about that option.
LW .....if put to compete with the massive HW....would have to overcome an important but not impossible mind challenging barrier.....they would have to work on that .....amongst other factors you have mentioned....
So to start a discussion: The idea of letting light weight classes go in competitions would be a good decision? One could argue that it is an artificial and obsolete classification for rowing. Imagine high jump competition with two classes: short men with a limit of 1,70m and open class. Same goes for shot-put. I guess there is a heavy advantage for tall athletes. Do we really need a weight restricted class in rowing? Does it make our sport more interesting? It may be to the disadvantage for some countries with less average tall inhabitants but so is biathlon for countries without snow. I would love to hear some other opinions.
Tragically; thanks to the IOC and FISA, lwt events are being cut from the Olympics. This is political. Prior to this new initiative to remove lightweights from the Olympics, (first added to Olympics in 1996) the sport of rowing had a great global appeal as many countries and cultures who had not previously been succesful in rowing were now fielding very competitive and sucessfull teams. Once Lwt events are dropped from Olympic programs, funding usually stops at the national level, the events are gutted and the athletes leave the sport. It dies, this is what is now happening, directly as a result of what FISA and the IOC has done to Lwt rowing. That Lwts were ever able to achieve times so close to hwt times, is a testament to the competitiveness and skill of the lwt athletes.
