Towards a more objective time standard in competitive rowing

Abstract

Rowing needs a standardized Gold Medal Standard (GMS) to clearly compare performance across boat classes in competition. Here, we report a method to factor out environmental effects, developing a fairer GMS for individual rowing events. We used results from World Rowing Championships and Olympics Games (2005–2016) to calculate the difference between the fastest winning time of the day and other event winning times on the same day. From this, we calculated a prognostic GMS time for each event via repeated k-fold cross-validation linear regression. Then, we compared these values with the 10-year average winning time and the World Best Time (WBT). We repeated this process to develop prognostic podium standard (PS) times. The prognostic GMS times (RMSE = 9.47; R 2 = 0.875) were universally slower than the WBT (current GMS) by 6.2 s on average but faster than the 10-year average by 12.3 s. The prognostic PS times (RMSE = 10.5; R 2 = 897) were also slower than the WBT but faster than the 10-year average, by 12.2 and 6.3 s respectively. Our time-difference prediction model based on historical data generates non-outlier prognostic times. With the utilization of relative time difference, this approach promises a selection standard independent of environmental conditions, easily applicable across different sports.

Demarcation of Intensity From 3 to 5 Zones Aids in Understanding Physiological Performance Progression in Highly Trained Under-23 Rowing Athletes

“…The difference between each subject's prognostic speed and the average of the top 3 prognostic speeds was determined. This method is common practice in rowing to attempt to account for the impact of weather, and it is similar to the recently published approach by Kimmins and Tsai (15). The process resulted in the metric termed delta speed (equation 1).…”

Quantifying on-water performance in rowing: A perspective on current challenges and future directions

“…The use of relative times to index performance is widely reported as common practice in rowing ( 5 – 7 ). Specifically, WBT for each boat class ( Table 1 ) are used to provide a fixed benchmark from which to index a percentage of relative speed, often termed a “prognostic” or “gold standard” speed ( 1 ).…”

“…One such method recently proposed by Kimmins and Tsai ( 5 ) involves a further layer of relativity applied within each competitive event in attempt to control for event-specific factors such as the venue, weather conditions, and the strength of the competing field. The winning time of each boat class was reported as a margin from the fastest winning time on that day of competition (most often the Men's Coxed Eight).…”

“…The winning time of each boat class was reported as a margin from the fastest winning time on that day of competition (most often the Men's Coxed Eight). These margins were calculated from all finals contested at Olympic Games and World Championships between 2005 and 2016 and fed into a linear regression model to generate adjusted prognostic times [see Kimmins and Tsai ( 5 ) for methods]. One key assumption in this approach is the stability of weather conditions within a 2 h window in which these events are usually all held.…”

“…While this method of scaling allows greater access to performance assessment in training, more variable environmental conditions are often encountered in a training vs. competition environment (i.e., water flow, non-buoyed course) which may make interpretation of results difficult. Targeted training sessions at a more controlled venue (i.e., buoyed course), or a session design that involves repeated efforts with and against the prevailing conditions (i.e., into the wind/flow, against the wind/flow) are some methods that may help to mitigate any additional sources of variability.Like the approach of Kimmins and Tsai ( 5 ), coaches and practitioners often look to relative performance to scale athletes within each individual session. This also helps give context to the environmental conditions; however, an obvious limitation is the quality of athlete in the training environment (in addition to the reliability of their performances).…”