Don’t Rock the Boat: How Antiphase Crew Coordination Affects Rowing

Abstract

It is generally accepted that crew rowing requires perfect synchronization between the movements of the rowers. However, a long-standing and somewhat counterintuitive idea is that out-of-phase crew rowing might have benefits over in-phase (i.e., synchronous) rowing. In synchronous rowing, 5 to 6% of the power produced by the rower(s) is lost to velocity fluctuations of the shell within each rowing cycle. Theoretically, a possible way for crews to increase average boat velocity is to reduce these fluctuations by rowing in antiphase coordination, a strategy in which rowers perfectly alternate their movements. On the other hand, the framework of coordination dynamics explicates that antiphase coordination is less stable than in-phase coordination, which may impede performance gains. Therefore, we compared antiphase to in-phase crew rowing performance in an ergometer experiment. Nine pairs of rowers performed a two-minute maximum effort in-phase and antiphase trial at 36 strokes min−1 on two coupled free-floating ergometers that allowed for power losses to velocity fluctuations. Rower and ergometer kinetics and kinematics were measured during the trials. All nine pairs easily acquired antiphase rowing during the warm-up, while one pair’s coordination briefly switched to in-phase during the maximum effort trial. Although antiphase interpersonal coordination was indeed less accurate and more variable, power production was not negatively affected. Importantly, in antiphase rowing the decreased power loss to velocity fluctuations resulted in more useful power being transferred to the ergometer flywheels. These results imply that antiphase rowing may indeed improve performance, even without any experience with antiphase technique. Furthermore, it demonstrates that although perfectly synchronous coordination may be the most stable, it is not necessarily equated with the most efficient or optimal performance.

Informational constraints on spontaneous visuomotor entrainment

“…They could provide further understanding of gaze behaviors exhibited by people during interpersonal performances such as in dance, musical or sport activities (de Brouwer, de Poel, & Hofmijster, 2013; Kawase, 2014; Phillips-Silver & Keller, 2012; Sevdalis & Keller, 2011; Travassos, Araújo, Vilar, & McGarry, 2011). They could also be of particular interest in the understanding of interpersonal coordination during everyday social interactions, and in particular, the disorders occurring with certain mental illnesses.…”

Time for temporal team mental models: Expanding beyond “what” and “how” to incorporate “when”

“…Consistent with this rationale, Halbesleben, Novicevic, Harvey, and Buckley (2003) concluded that temporal complexity (the ability to understand time frames, tempo, synchronization, and sequence) is a competence that takes time to develop. Similarly, teams such as rowing crews (e.g., De Brouwer, De Poel, & Hofmijster, 2013), orchestras (e.g., Barrett, 1998), and professional sports teams (e.g., Rogers, 2009;Sando, 2008) report that getting into the "in sync" zone of coordination evolves over time. Therefore, the positive effect of temporal TMMs on team outcomes may become more pronounced later in a team's life cycle.…”

Rocking the boat: does perfect rowing crew synchronization reduce detrimental boat movements?

“…The variability of relative phase serves as an indicator of the consistency of crew coordination. 12,14,15 A small amount of variation in relative phase indicates a more stable coordination, which is more resilient to perturbations, 16,17 such as due to internal (eg, temporary loss of attention) or external (eg, turbulent water conditions) sources of noise.…”

“…In particular, at lower stroke rates, the stroke cycle deviates from perfect harmonicity. 14,15 Therefore, we also determined a discrete measure of relative phase based on point estimates of oar angle extrema near the catch and finish of the stroke, which was calculated for each full cycle as follows:…”