Real-Time Feedback on Mechanical Power Output: Facilitating Crew Rowers’ Compliance With Prescribed Training Intensity

Lintmeijer, Lotte L.; Soest, A. J. “Knoek” van; Robbers, Freek S; Hofmijster, Mathijs J.; Beek, Peter J.

doi:10.1123/ijspp.2018-0128

Cited by 13 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Coordination changes over the early stages of the pull could have been affected by a change in rowing task demands at different SRs (McGregor et al, 2004), or the need to generate increased force to accelerate the ergometer-system to overcome inertia at the catch and produce higher SRs (Martin & Bernfield, 1980). This is consistent with the work of Lintmeijer et al (2019), who demonstrated that power output feedback aided crew rowers in meeting power output targets, but differences in consistency of power output improvements were apparent between rowing intensities.…”

Section: Effects Of Exercise Intensity On Biofeedback Responsesupporting

confidence: 71%

“…Despite initial performance enhancements, Schaffert et al (2011) reported that immediately after acoustic biofeedback on boat velocity was turned off, no significant differences from baseline measures were apparent, and although Sigrist et al (2013) improved oar trajectories during delayed retention tests, the effects were reduced for visual as compared to acoustic and haptic biofeedback modalities. Many rowing biofeedback studies neglect to test this dependency concern (e.g., Anderson et al, 2005;Gorman et al, 2019;Lintmeijer et al, 2019). Consequently, the efficacy of such interventions beyond immediate task acquisition, and the practical implications of biofeedback for performance, remain uncertain.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The effects of concurrent biomechanical biofeedback on rowing performance at different stroke rates

Gorman

Willmott

Mullineaux

2021

Journal of Sports Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aims of this study were to assess the effects of stroke rate (SR) on the ability of trained rowers to: a) comply with concurrent biomechanical biofeedback on knee-back-elbow joint sequencing; and b) transfer any changes to competition-intensity conditions (maximal rowing task). Following a fiveminute maximal rowing task (Baseline), 30 trained rowers were randomised to four groups. Two groups rowed at high SRs (90% maximum SR with biofeedback (BFb 90 ) or control), while others rowed at low SRs (60% maximum SR with biofeedback (BFb 60 ) or control) for 3 sessions. All rowers then completed another maximal rowing task (Transfer). Rowers complied with the biofeedback at both SRs, which promoted coordinative changes to knee-elbow motions during the pull. During Transfer, control rowers did not improve whereas those receiving biofeedback covered significantly greater distances (increase from Baseline: BFb 60 = 6 ± 5%; BFb 90 = 5 ± 4%; p < 0.05). However, movement adaptations were temporally different between SRs and were better maintained into Transfer by those that rowed at higher rates. This indicated biofeedback specificity, as transference of modified movement patterns appeared better when acquisition and transfer conditions were similar. These findings have practical implications for assimilating biofeedback into training programmes.

show abstract

Section: Effects Of Exercise Intensity On Biofeedback Responsesupporting

confidence: 71%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The effects of concurrent biomechanical biofeedback on rowing performance at different stroke rates

Gorman

Willmott

Mullineaux

2021

Journal of Sports Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This feedback can be promotion (positive) or change oriented (negative), and the effects of which depend on delivery method (Deci, Koestner, & Ryan, 1999). Results showed the majority of coaches and performance staff thought players could be affected in a positive manner by seeing training data (Figure 1) whilst also suggesting players may change future behaviour following both concurrent and post-session feedback (Table 5), which has previously been observed in rowing (Lintmeijer, Knoek van Soest, Robbers, Hofmijster & Beek, 2019) and weightlifting (Wealey et al, 2019). Furthermore, the data in Table 5 and Figure 1 support previous research from performance analysis where youth soccer players and rugby players reported video analysis as a useful reflection and learning tool to identify and improve on weaknesses (Francis & Jones, 2014).…”

Section: Players Perspectives Of Feedbackmentioning

confidence: 70%

Feedback of GPS training data within professional English soccer: a comparison of decision making and perceptions between coaches, players and performance staff

Nosek

Brownlee

Drust

et al. 2020

Science and Medicine in Football

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Rowing instrumentation systems provide a comprehensive measure of performance given their ability to assess both technical and physical components of rowing performance and enable instantaneous quantitative feedback to the rower ( Lintmeijer et al, 2019 ; Holt et al, 2020 ). Instantaneous feedback of power output has been shown to improve training intensity adherence by 65% in rowers compared to boat velocity, stroke rate, and coach feedback alone ( Lintmeijer et al, 2019 ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Concurrent Validity of Power From Three On-Water Rowing Instrumentation Systems and a Concept2 Ergometer

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose: Instrumentation systems are increasingly used in rowing to measure training intensity and performance but have not been validated for measures of power. In this study, the concurrent validity of Peach PowerLine (six units), Nielsen-Kellerman EmPower (five units), Weba OarPowerMeter (three units), Concept2 model D ergometer (one unit), and a custom-built reference instrumentation system (Reference System; one unit) were investigated.Methods: Eight female and seven male rowers [age, 21 ± 2.5 years; rowing experience, 7.1 ± 2.6 years, mean ± standard deviation (SD)] performed a 30-s maximal test and a 7 × 4-min incremental test once per week for 5 weeks. Power per stroke was extracted concurrently from the Reference System (via chain force and velocity), the Concept2 itself, Weba (oar shaft-based), and either Peach or EmPower (oarlock-based). Differences from the Reference System in the mean (representing potential error) and the stroke-to-stroke variability (represented by its SD) of power per stroke for each stage and device, and between-unit differences, were estimated using general linear mixed modeling and interpreted using rejection of non-substantial and substantial hypotheses.Results: Potential error in mean power was decisively substantial for all devices (Concept2, –11 to –15%; Peach, −7.9 to −17%; EmPower, −32 to −48%; and Weba, −7.9 to −16%). Between-unit differences (as SD) in mean power lacked statistical precision but were substantial and consistent across stages (Peach, ∼5%; EmPower, ∼7%; and Weba, ∼2%). Most differences from the Reference System in stroke-to-stroke variability of power were possibly or likely trivial or small for Peach (−3.0 to −16%), and likely or decisively substantial for EmPower (9.7–57%), and mostly decisively substantial for Weba (61–139%) and the Concept2 (−28 to 177%).Conclusion: Potential negative error in mean power was evident for all devices and units, particularly EmPower. Stroke-to-stroke variation in power showed a lack of measurement sensitivity (apparent smoothing) that was minor for Peach but larger for the Concept2, whereas EmPower and Weba added random error. Peach is therefore recommended for measurement of mean and stroke power.

show abstract

Real-Time Feedback on Mechanical Power Output: Facilitating Crew Rowers’ Compliance With Prescribed Training Intensity

Cited by 13 publications

References 19 publications

The effects of concurrent biomechanical biofeedback on rowing performance at different stroke rates

The effects of concurrent biomechanical biofeedback on rowing performance at different stroke rates

Feedback of GPS training data within professional English soccer: a comparison of decision making and perceptions between coaches, players and performance staff

Concurrent Validity of Power From Three On-Water Rowing Instrumentation Systems and a Concept2 Ergometer

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About