Reliable Peak Power Assessment During Concentric and Flexion-Extension-Cycle Based Rowing Strokes using a Non-Modified Rowing Ergometer

Abstract

Accurate assessment of peak rowing power is crucial for rowing-specific performance testing. Therefore, within and between day reliability of a non-modified rowing ergometer was examined. 52 trained male rowers (21.0 ± 2.9 years; 1.89 ± 0.05 m; 83.2 ± 8.2 kg; 2,000-m ergometer Time Trial mean power: 369 ± 57 W) performed (two times 4) isolated concentric rowing strokes (DRIVE) and single flexion–extension cycle (FEC-type) rowing strokes (SLIDE-DRIVE) on two separate days (1 week apart). Good to excellent intraclass correlation coefficients (0.94 ≤ ICC ≤ 1.00), low standard error of measurement (≤ 2.7%), low coefficient of variation (≤ 4.9%), and suitable level of agreements (≤ 30W) for DRIVE and SLIDE-DRIVE indicated a high level of (within and between day) reliability. In addition, SLIDE-DRIVE (423 ± 157 W) revealed remarkably higher rowing power (p ≤ 0.001; ηp2 = 0.601; SMD = 0.34) compared to DRIVE (370 ± 154 W). The non-modified rowing ergometer is considered to be a reliable tool for the peak power assessment during isolated concentric contraction and FEC-type rowing strokes. Notably higher power outputs (compared to an isolated concentric contraction) during FEC rowing may refer to an underlying stretch shortening cycle.

Test–retest reliability of ski‐specific aerobic, sprint, and neuromuscular performance tests in highly trained cross‐country skiers

“…Potential explanations for the higher reliability in that study compared to the present findings include (1) the less complex technical demands of using the rollerboard (only the upper body contributes substantially during the pulling phase), (2) the repetitive character of the protocol (four repetitions vs. one), (3) the more difficult standardization process in the present study (sled height, ramp incline, and roller skis), and (4) differences in the signal processing thresholds. Data from a comparable one‐repetition peak power test on a rowing ergometer comprising a flexion‐extension rowing stroke exhibited slightly better test–retest reliability, with CV = 4.9% and ICC = 0.97, 43 compared to the present UB‐ST for skiers. Although the relative reliability observed for the ski‐specific explosive upper‐body strength and power measured during the UB‐ST could be categorized as excellent (ICC >0.90), the absolute reliability measures (CV = 4.4–7.8%) might be too low to implement this test for elite skiers.…”