This Isn't Baseball

One of my least favorite excuses from athletes is, "I'm better on the water," and that always comes after winter training ends and some athletes have excelled and others are wishing that it were November 1st again. 

In rowing, we get into an argument about whether or not ergs float. They don't, but they do tell us something about the athlete. Specifically, I view erg results as letting me know how physically fit you are and how mentally tough you are. 

The argument of ergs floating is one that predicts a big erg score should help build a fast lineup. Alas, erg scores are not the measure of whether a crew is fast on the water or not. Boat speed is. And boat speed comes from boat movement. An erg, whether it is a classic C2, or an RP3, or the hilariously awful Oartec erg that takes up double the amount of space as two of the aforementioned machines, is static. It doesn't move regardless of whether we call them static or dynamic. Sit on an RP3 as long as you want, I'll see you in the same place tomorrow barring an earthquake. 

The argument that ergs don't float focuses on boat speed and boat movement, but as I believe with analytics, you cannot simply dump everything into this argument. Yes, speed on the water is what we'd like, but speed on the water is relative. A novice crew in June is going to be faster on the water than a novice crew in September, but the June crew will still, likely, get crushed or mogged as my athletes like to say, by an experienced crew. Yes, the experienced crew will have better technical prowess, in theory, but they also have the experience of training. 

One of the issues I have with the outdated analytical debate in sports is that naysayers always choose singular instances where those employing analytics, failed. A prime example of this is looking at the Minnesota Vikings who hired what naysayers called an accountant to be their GM. Were some of the moves made by the now fired GM not great moves? Sure, but whether you are an analytics buff or old school "Body image" nonsense, GMs will make shrewd moves and bonehead moves. They point to failure as proof analytics don't work while we have generations of proof that show the five cores most sports scouts operated with, rarely pan out either. Hundreds of millions of dollars are being spent by NFL franchises right now trying to glean the best, most worthwhile information about athletes for the upcoming draft and with all that money and science and experience, the draft, most drafts are still no better than a coin flip, analytics or old school be damned. 

I do not subscribe to ergs floating. Crossfitters love to claim they row, but if I put most of them into a wherry, they'd sink before they left the boathouse. Big numbers don't impress me as much as they do others. When I recruited as an assistant in college and as a head coach, I talked with athletes about the erg scores. Yes, I did want to see them and evaluate them, but I also wanted footage of them rowing and racing because I and my assistant believed and still believe that there's more to evaluate than simply choosing fast erg scores. 

An example, we were looking at an athlete with a fairly solid score. A good score for us. The issue? At an historically slow program, they were firmly sat in the third boat. Thank you very much, good luck, we're moving on. Third boat at a slow program means the erg score shows fitness, not an ability or understanding of P:W ratios or boat speed. 

I say all that to say this: Rowing is not baseball or any other sport where it's common to have specialized athletes. Bottom of the 9th, two on, no outs, 1 run lead, I need to use my bullpen. This pitcher is great against lefties, this one against righties, this one against both but who have pull power, etc. I can churn through a rotation to secure a victory. In basketball I need a 3 point specialist. Whatever the case, in most other sports, being good in a specific area may work fine.

In rowing? Better on the water means you aren't fit either physically, mentally or both. Physical fitness plays a large role in mental fitness because you're confident in your abilities. We're not talking the deeper issues of sports psych, just general ideas. 

Ultimately, you may move a boat better than you can erg, but again for me as a coach, I won't dump everything or most everything into one basket or another. In order to be considered for a lineup, you have to be viable both technically and physically. I don't want a hammer - all physical, no ability - or a feather - float, no bite. You must be both or you find yourself outside the shop. 

Better on the water simply means I didn't try and I'm hoping that the myth of weight adjustment will save me. It won't and what's more, a lack of effort on land not only shows a lack of ability on the water, but also a lack of commitment and mental fortitude. 

You need all of those if you're going to be in a fast shell.