Sport Today

by **Kurt Somervil** » Sun, 09 Apr 1995 04:00:00

CRASH-B is considering changing the distance of the CRASH-B Sprints
World Indoor Rowing Championships to 2000 meters from 2500 meters.
Reasons for changing the distance include: (i) bringing the distance into
line with the standard outdoor distance (e.g., people relate better to a
2000m. race comprised of four 500m. segments); (ii) bringing the distance
into line with the distance most clubs, colleges, and national teams are
using for erg testing; (iii) making the races faster and perhaps closer,
enhancing spectator appeal; (iv) allowing the race organizers to run more
races during the same amount of time.

Reasons against changing the distance include: (i) tradition, tradition,
tradition! (e.g., CRASH-B has always been 2500 meters and people relate
the distance to the event); (ii) 2500 meters is an appropriate distance
for winter training because it is longer than the spring racing distance
of 2000 meters; (iii) 2500 meters is harder than 2000 meters and the
World Championships should be tougher; and (iv) CRASH-B is CRASH-B; why
should we change for anybody?

If CRASH-B changes the distance, it is likely that most other indoor
races will follow suit. What do you think? Should CRASH-B go to 2000
meters? Posted by Kurt Somerville, Pres. of CRASH-B on behalf of the
Board of Directors.
-

by **BilMcGow** » Sun, 09 Apr 1995 04:00:00

Kurt,
I thought we (CRASH-B board members) already decided on 2000m? I've
told a number of rowers and coaches that we voted on that at the
post-race meeting at La Groceria several weeks ago. Was that just a straw
vote, or was that for real? Please drop me a note on that. I'll wait for
your response before breathing another word about 2000m. But I will say
that those to whom I have mentioned it all agreed that 2000m was a great
idea. The CRASH-B date falls very close to some important national team
erg test date, close enough that CRASH-B results COULD be used, if the
distance was changed to 2000m. I think that's one thought that did not
come up during our last discussion on this issue. Changing it to 2000m
could lure more high school, collegiate, pre-elite and elite athletes who
want to use the event as a benchmark or as quantifiable data for their
respective coaches.
I'LL WAIT FOR YOUR RESPONSE! Thanks.....Bill McGowan

by **Daniel Marti** » Sun, 09 Apr 1995 04:00:00

Quote:

> If CRASH-B changes the distance, it is likely that most other indoor
> races will follow suit. What do you think? Should CRASH-B go to 2000
> meters? Posted by Kurt Somerville, Pres. of CRASH-B on behalf of the
> Board of Directors.
> -

I was wondering when this would happen. In a way I'll be glad if it
does. I have been avoiding some of the club erg races and Crash-B
races because I can not use them for submission to the National team
erg test which is 2000m. Since I live in a city with very few
lightweight men with national team aspirations sometimes I end up
doing my 2000m test alone, while clubs around me are holding races
over the traditional 2500m distance.

One of the problems I see with changing the distance, though, is
that the 2500m records will basically be forgotten. That is unless
these people are still around and can establish the records over
the 2000m distance too. I guess in this case the needs of the
many outweight the needs of the very few.

--
"The best way to predict our future is to create it"
- Stephen R. Covey
---------------------------------------------------------------

| Bell Northern Research | if you quote me for the purpose of|
| Ottawa, Ontario | flaming, I'll deny everything! :) |
---------------------------------------------------------------

by **Jay Feen** » Tue, 11 Apr 1995 04:00:00

Quote:

> CRASH-B is considering changing the distance of the CRASH-B Sprints
>World Indoor Rowing Championships to 2000 meters from 2500 meters.
>Reasons for changing the distance include: (i) bringing the distance into
>line with the standard outdoor distance (e.g., people relate better to a
>2000m. race comprised of four 500m. segments); (ii) bringing the distance
>into line with the distance most clubs, colleges, and national teams are
>using for erg testing; (iii) making the races faster and perhaps closer,
>enhancing spectator appeal; (iv) allowing the race organizers to run more
>races during the same amount of time.

.
.
.
In regards to the second reason. It shouldn't be a consideration of the
change. 1. There were more 6000m tests then 2000m tests, why not change it to
6000m :-) 2. There have been suggestions to change national team tests back to
2500m, will you change them back?

My vote : keep them the same.

-Jay Feenan

by **r..** » Thu, 13 Apr 1995 04:00:00

writes:

Quote:

>> CRASH-B is considering changing the distance of the CRASH-B Sprints
>>World Indoor Rowing Championships to 2000 meters from 2500 meters.
>>Reasons for changing the distance include: (i) bringing the distance into
>>line with the standard outdoor distance (e.g., people relate better to a
>>2000m. race comprised of four 500m. segments); (ii) bringing the distance
>>into line with the distance most clubs, colleges, and national teams are
>>using for erg testing; (iii) making the races faster and perhaps closer,
>>enhancing spectator appeal; (iv) allowing the race organizers to run more
>>races during the same amount of time.

>..
>..
>..
>In regards to the second reason. It shouldn't be a consideration of the
>change. 1. There were more 6000m tests then 2000m tests, why not change it to
>6000m :-) 2. There have been suggestions to change national team tests back to
>2500m, will you change them back?

>My vote : keep them the same.

>-Jay Feenan

This is a debate that has been raging in Australia as well. Most clubs and
state teams wish to test over 2000m but the National Selectors have stuck to
2500m because it is "the international standard". A 2000m test is by far the
most sensible distance to test and race over as it is the ditance you are
actually racing over on the water. The extra 500m makes a significant
physiological difference to say nothing of the psychological factors. It would
make erg results all the more relevant to the on water world and erg racing far
more exciting to boot.
The distance of 2500m is only an arbitrary distance set way back in the dark
ages when the Concept II erg was little more than a mish mash of bike parts and
a very in-exact bike speedo. We should not stick to the 2500m distance just
because it is there - conservatism for the sake of it is never a reason not to
do something usefull.

My 0.02c worth

Richard Wraith
Mercantile Rowing Club
Melbourne, Australia

by **Laurel Lee Lacou** » Thu, 13 Apr 1995 04:00:00

Tradition rules this sport. I think that's one of the quirky things
(though annoying at times) that makes rowing what it is, and I love what
rowing is. Every ERG race I've been to has been 2500m, except for the
special categories. Training for them is not fun, 2500m is a harsh
distance. Still, it makes the 2000m erg tests fly by. I'm so used to
2500m that 2000m seems like nothing now. Personally, I need 2500m erg
races to train hard enough for the 2000's. Weak, I know, but that's okay.

Laurel
Emory Crew

by **Beth Maz** » Sat, 15 Apr 1995 04:00:00

As a rapidly approaching senior master, I can't say I'd be personally
dismayed if the distance changed to 2000m. Similarly, as a volunteer
for our local indoor regatta, I'd be happy with 2000m as it would allow
us to get more rowers on the monitored ergs without heats (i.e., especially
for our youth rowers).

On the other hand, if Jeannie Watson wants it to stay 2500m, I'm voting
with her! Jeannie rows with Community Rowing in Boston and set a new
world record for the 50-59 age group this year. We CRI folks have to
stick together :-).

Beth Mazur
MAYA Design Group

by **william_j_fall** » Sat, 15 Apr 1995 04:00:00

Quote:

>Tradition rules this sport. I think that's one of the quirky things
>(though annoying at times) that makes rowing what it is, and I love what
>rowing is. Every ERG race I've been to has been 2500m, except for the
>special categories. Training for them is not fun, 2500m is a harsh
>distance. Still, it makes the 2000m erg tests fly by. I'm so used to
>2500m that 2000m seems like nothing now. Personally, I need 2500m erg
>races to train hard enough for the 2000's. Weak, I know, but that's okay.

Tradition may rule rowing but it certainly doesn't rule CRASH-B.
If they could go and change what the letters CRASH-B stand for
they can certainly change the distance.

by **roger hob** » Tue, 18 Apr 1995 04:00:00

way to go beth!!! so how is three rivers going?

roger hobby
brandeis ltwts, and STILL at cri... coxing jeannie again

by **Evan Coo** » Tue, 18 Apr 1995 04:00:00

Must have missed the beginning of this thread, but isn't there a reason for
the 2500 choice? When I was an erg-hound back in the early 80's, I would have
KILLED for a 2000 m distance. I would have won most of my CRASH-style meets.
With my physiology (long on brute power, short on slow-twitch endurance), I'd
generally be way out in fron at (say) 1500, and then (basically) try to hang
on. At the 2000 m mark, I'd usually be ahead, only to get caught by the tall
lean types in the last 500.

When I first started up (I was actually at the first few CrASH-B regattas),
2500 m was touted as "most reflective" of the energy expended in a true single
sculls race.

Just curious as to why there is talk of shortening the distance. What next,
CRASH-B 500 m dashes (I'll be back out of retirement if they come!) :-)

_///_ +--------------------------------------+
-. .- | Evan G. Cooch |
( L ) \//// | Department of Biological Sciences |
--(\=/)-- ( ) | Simon Fraser University |
/ \ / / | Burnaby, British Columbia V5A 1S6 |

I / +--------------------------------------+
I / http://darwin.mbb.sfu.ca/wildberg/cooch.html

by **Fast Gu** » Fri, 28 Apr 1995 04:00:00

Quote:

> writes:

> >> CRASH-B is considering changing the distance of the CRASH-B Sprints
> >>World Indoor Rowing Championships to 2000 meters from 2500 meters.
> >>Reasons for changing the distance include: (i) bringing the distance into
> >>line with the standard outdoor distance (e.g., people relate better to a
> >>2000m. race comprised of four 500m. segments); (ii) bringing the distance
> >>into line with the distance most clubs, colleges, and national teams are
> >>using for erg testing; (iii) making the races faster and perhaps closer,
> >>enhancing spectator appeal; (iv) allowing the race organizers to run more
> >>races during the same amount of time.

> >..
> >..
> >..
> >In regards to the second reason. It shouldn't be a consideration of the
> >change. 1. There were more 6000m tests then 2000m tests, why not change it to
> >6000m :-) 2. There have been suggestions to change national team tests back to
> >2500m, will you change them back?

> >My vote : keep them the same.

> >-Jay Feenan

> This is a debate that has been raging in Australia as well. Most clubs and
> state teams wish to test over 2000m but the National Selectors have stuck to
> 2500m because it is "the international standard". A 2000m test is by far the
> most sensible distance to test and race over as it is the ditance you are
> actually racing over on the water. The extra 500m makes a significant
> physiological difference to say nothing of the psychological factors. It would
> make erg results all the more relevant to the on water world and erg racing far
> more exciting to boot.
> The distance of 2500m is only an arbitrary distance set way back in the dark
> ages when the Concept II erg was little more than a mish mash of bike parts and
> a very in-exact bike speedo. We should not stick to the 2500m distance just
> because it is there - conservatism for the sake of it is never a reason not to
> do something usefull.

> My 0.02c worth

> Richard Wraith
> Mercantile Rowing Club
> Melbourne, Australia

Sport Today

CRASH-B: 2500 m. or 2000 m. ?

CRASH-B: 2500 m. or 2000 m. ?

CRASH-B: 2500 m. or 2000 m. ?

CRASH-B: 2500 m. or 2000 m. ?

CRASH-B: 2500 m. or 2000 m. ?

CRASH-B: 2500 m. or 2000 m. ?

CRASH-B: 2500 m. or 2000 m. ?

CRASH-B: 2500 m. or 2000 m. ?

CRASH-B: 2500 m. or 2000 m. ?

CRASH-B: 2500 m. or 2000 m. ?

CRASH-B: 2500 m. or 2000 m. ?

CRASH-B: 2500 m. or 2000 m. ?