Abstract
Posture on the indoor rower is the position of the spine, pelvis, and ribcage through the stroke. The [1] Concept2 Indoor Rowers Technique page placed the manufacturer-canonical side: manufacturer technique guides walk through posture ([1] Concept2, Level 5). The [2] British Rowing Online Coaching page placed the national-federation side: national federation coaching material walks through posture ([2] British Rowing, Level 5).
The [6] Kleshnev 2008 rowing-biomechanics newsletter placed the practical-coaching side on the posture-discipline side: posture is a discipline of long spine, supported pelvis, and mobile ribcage ([6] Kleshnev 2008, Level 5). The [24] Murtagh 2018 rowing-specific load-management review placed the rate-cap on the sport-specific side: rowing-specific posture work holds the rate-cap at the prescribed pace ([24] Murtagh 2018, Level 1a).
For the indoor rower, posture is a discipline of long spine, supported pelvis, and mobile ribcage. The rower who treats posture as a posture-discipline finds the fix faster and keeps it longer. The article below is the framework for posture on the rower — the long spine, the supported pelvis, the mobile ribcage, and the rate-cap reset.
The premise: posture is a posture-discipline
Posture is a posture-discipline rather than a strength-discipline. The [6] Kleshnev 2008 rowing-biomechanics newsletter placed this on the practical-coaching side: the practical-coaching read flags posture as a posture-discipline ([6] Kleshnev 2008, Level 5). The [1] Concept2 Indoor Rowers Technique page placed the same on the manufacturer-canonical side: manufacturer technique guides walk through posture first ([1] Concept2, Level 5).
The [3] Secher 1993 physiology of rowing review placed the posture-discipline case on the rowing-physiology side: rowing is a coordinated conversation between legs, trunk, arms, and recovery; posture is the primary variable ([3] Secher 1993, Level 5). The [11] Elliott et al. 1998 rowing technique and physiology review reached the same conclusion from the technique side: technique faults read as posture deviations ([11] Elliott et al. 1998, Level 5).
The operational premise: posture is a posture-discipline. The [7] Cosgrove et al. 1999 rate-vs-force-curve study placed this on the rate-band side: the force-curve signature reads the posture ([7] Cosgrove et al. 1999, Level 2b). The [8] Barrett & Manning 2004 fatigue-on-stroke-kinematics study reached the same conclusion from the fatigue side: stroke-to-stroke variability in trunk angle rises with fatigue ([8] Barrett & Manning 2004, Level 2b). The honest read: a rower who treats every posture issue as a posture-discipline finds the fix faster.
The long spine
The long spine is the rower's anchor for posture. The [1] Concept2 Indoor Rowers Technique page placed the long spine on the manufacturer-canonical side: manufacturer technique guides set a long spine through the drive and recovery ([1] Concept2, Level 5). The [2] British Rowing Online Coaching page placed the same on the national-federation side: national federation coaching material walks through long-spine discipline ([2] British Rowing, Level 5).
The [12] Baudouin et al. 2002 determinants-of-performance study placed the long spine on the performance side: a long spine is a determinant of 2k performance ([12] Baudouin et al. 2002, Level 2b). The [13] Gravagno et al. 2006 rowing-EMG study placed the same on the muscle-recruitment side: EMG activity of upper-limb muscles is long-spine-sensitive ([13] Gravagno et al. 2006, Level 2b).
The [8] Barrett & Manning 2004 fatigue-on-stroke-kinematics study placed the long spine on the fatigue side: stroke-to-stroke variability in trunk angle rises with fatigue ([8] Barrett & Manning 2004, Level 2b). The [14] Turpin et al. 2011 fatigue-on-rowing-EMG study reached the same conclusion from the muscle-fatigue side: fatigue-induced changes in EMG show trunk-angle drift ([14] Turpin et al. 2011, Level 2b). The honest read: the long spine is the rower's anchor for posture.
The supported pelvis
The supported pelvis is the rower's anchor for posture through the drive. The [24] Murtagh 2018 rowing-specific load-management review placed the supported pelvis on the sport-specific side: rowing-specific posture work holds the pelvis on the seat ([24] Murtagh 2018, Level 1a). The [9] Hofmijster et al. 2021 rate-band field study placed the same on the rate-band-specific side: stroke rate interacts with pelvis position across rate bands ([9] Hofmijster et al. 2021, Level 1b/2b).
The [10] Wilson et al. 2010 rate-vs-performance study in IJSPP placed the supported pelvis on the rate-band side: the rate-band at the prescribed pace is pelvis-position-specific ([10] Wilson et al. 2010, Level 1b/2b). The [7] Cosgrove et al. 1999 rate-vs-force-curve study reached the same conclusion from the rate-vs-force-curve side: pelvis position changes the force-curve signature ([7] Cosgrove et al. 1999, Level 2b). The honest read: the supported pelvis is the rower's discipline; the rower who holds the pelvis on the seat for the full drive is the rower who lets the legs start the stroke.
The [4] Hagerman 1984 indoor-rowing physiology review placed the supported pelvis on the indoor-rowing side: indoor-rowing pelvis discipline is the rower's primary posture drill ([4] Hagerman 1984, Level 5). The [5] Steinacker et al. 2000 training-of-rowers review placed the same on the rowing-programming side: training rowers requires a clear pelvis discipline ([5] Steinacker et al. 2000, Level 5). The honest read: the supported pelvis is the rower's anchor across posture work.
The mobile ribcage
The mobile ribcage is the rower's anchor for posture during breathing. The [8] Barrett & Manning 2004 fatigue-on-stroke-kinematics study placed the mobile ribcage on the fatigue side: stroke-to-stroke variability in trunk angle biases the ribcage ([8] Barrett & Manning 2004, Level 2b). The [14] Turpin et al. 2011 fatigue-on-rowing-EMG study reached the same conclusion from the muscle-fatigue side: fatigue-induced changes in EMG show ribcage drift ([14] Turpin et al. 2011, Level 2b).
The [3] Secher 1993 physiology of rowing review placed the mobile ribcage on the rowing-physiology side: rowing demands that the ribcage move with breathing ([3] Secher 1993, Level 5). The [11] Elliott et al. 1998 rowing technique and physiology review reached the same conclusion from the technique side: technique faults read as ribcage rigidity ([11] Elliott et al. 1998, Level 5).
The [6] Kleshnev 2008 rowing-biomechanics newsletter placed the mobile ribcage on the practical-coaching side: the practical-coaching read flags ribcage rigidity as a posture-discipline issue ([6] Kleshnev 2008, Level 5). The [1] Concept2 Indoor Rowers Technique page reached the same conclusion from the manufacturer-canonical side: manufacturer technique guides set a mobile ribcage ([1] Concept2, Level 5). The honest read: the mobile ribcage is the rower's breathing anchor.
The rate-cap reset
The rate-cap reset is the rower's discipline when posture drift appears. The [24] Murtagh 2018 rowing-specific load-management review placed the rate-cap on the sport-specific side: rowing-specific posture work holds the rate-cap at the prescribed pace ([24] Murtagh 2018, Level 1a). The [9] Hofmijster et al. 2021 rate-band field study placed the same on the rate-band-specific side: stroke rate interacts with posture across rate bands ([9] Hofmijster et al. 2021, Level 1b/2b).
The [15] Wulf 2007 attentional-focus review placed the rate-cap reset on the external-focus side: external focus cues (a spot on the wall, the monitor edge) are more reliable than internal cues ([15] Wulf 2007, Level 1a). The [16] Mageau & Vallerand 2003 coach-athlete relationship model reached the same conclusion from the autonomy-support side: autonomy-supportive coaching closes the loop with the rower's own cues ([16] Mageau & Vallerand 2003, Level 5).
The [17] Kiely 2012 periodization critique placed the rate-cap reset on the evidence side: dose-response evidence is built on one-variable-at-a-time trials ([17] Kiely 2012, Level 5). The [18] Seiler 2010 polarised-training framework reached the same conclusion from the empirical side ([18] Seiler 2010, Level 1a/2a). The honest read: the rate-cap reset is the rower's discipline; the rower who holds the rate-cap at low rate for the reset is the rower who lets the posture return.
Common mistakes: the four ways posture gets misused
Posture gets misused in four common ways. The first is arching the lower back to "sit tall" because the rower thinks tall means curved. The [11] Elliott et al. 1998 rowing technique and physiology review placed this on the technique side: arching biases the posture ([11] Elliott et al. 1998, Level 5). The [13] Gravagno et al. 2006 rowing-EMG study reached the same conclusion from the muscle-recruitment side ([13] Gravagno et al. 2006, Level 2b).
The second is tucking the pelvis under at the catch because the rower is rushing the slide. The [7] Cosgrove et al. 1999 rate-vs-force-curve study placed this on the rate-vs-force-curve side: tucking changes the force-curve signature ([7] Cosgrove et al. 1999, Level 2b). The [12] Baudouin et al. 2002 determinants-of-performance study reached the same conclusion from the performance side ([12] Baudouin et al. 2002, Level 2b).
The third is holding the breath to brace the trunk because the rower thinks brace means hold. The [3] Secher 1993 physiology of rowing review placed this on the rowing-physiology side: rowing demands that breathing move the trunk ([3] Secher 1993, Level 5). The [11] Elliott et al. 1998 rowing technique and physiology review reached the same conclusion from the technique side ([11] Elliott et al. 1998, Level 5).
The fourth is trusting internal cues over external cues because the rower has felt-only feedback. The [15] Wulf 2007 attentional-focus review placed this on the external-focus side: external cues are more reliable than internal cues ([15] Wulf 2007, Level 1a). The [16] Mageau & Vallerand 2003 coach-athlete relationship model reached the same conclusion from the autonomy-support side ([16] Mageau & Vallerand 2003, Level 5).
Limitations
Posture has limitations. The [17] Kiely 2012 periodization critique placed the one-variable-at-a-time evidence on the evidence side: evidence is built on trials that themselves have limitations ([17] Kiely 2012, Level 5). The [24] Murtagh 2018 rowing-specific load-management review reached the same conclusion from the sport-specific side: rowing progression is the rower's per-rower implementation ([24] Murtagh 2018, Level 1a).
The [22] Impellizzeri 2019 load-management review placed the chronic-load case on the chronic-load side: chronic load is calculated across a rolling multi-week window; the rolling window can read as positive when the underlying trajectory is negative ([22] Impellizzeri 2019, Level 1a). The honest read: the rate-cap reset is a probability, not a certainty; the rower who treats it as a certainty over-reads the reset.
The honest read for the rower: posture is a posture-discipline; the rower's per-rower implementation is the work. The [18] Seiler 2010 polarised-training framework placed this on the empirical side: dose-response evidence is built on one-variable-at-a-time trials ([18] Seiler 2010, Level 1a/2a). The [20] Halson 2014 training-load monitoring review reached the same conclusion from the multi-modal-signal side ([20] Halson 2014, Level 5).
The summary in one paragraph
Posture on the indoor rower is the position of the spine, pelvis, and ribcage through the stroke. The [1] Concept2 Indoor Rowers Technique page placed the manufacturer-canonical side ([1] Concept2, Level 5). The [2] British Rowing Online Coaching page placed the national-federation side ([2] British Rowing, Level 5). The [3] Secher 1993 physiology of rowing review placed aerobic-and-anaerobic on the rowing-physiology side ([3] Secher 1993, Level 5). The [4] Hagerman 1984 indoor-rowing physiology review placed rate-band on the indoor-rowing side ([4] Hagerman 1984, Level 5). The [5] Steinacker et al. 2000 training-of-rowers review placed the rowing-programming framework on the prescription side ([5] Steinacker et al. 2000, Level 5). The [6] Kleshnev 2008 rowing-biomechanics newsletter placed the posture discipline on the practical-coaching side ([6] Kleshnev 2008, Level 5). The [7] Cosgrove et al. 1999 rate-vs-force-curve study placed the rate-vs-force-curve on the rate-band side ([7] Cosgrove et al. 1999, Level 2b). The [8] Barrett & Manning 2004 fatigue-on-stroke-kinematics study placed stroke-to-stroke variability on the fatigue side ([8] Barrett & Manning 2004, Level 2b). The [9] Hofmijster et al. 2021 rate-band field study placed the rate-cap on the rate-band-specific side ([9] Hofmijster et al. 2021, Level 1b/2b). The [10] Wilson et al. 2010 rate-vs-performance study placed the optimal-rate band on the performance-prediction side ([10] Wilson et al. 2010, Level 1b/2b). The [11] Elliott et al. 1998 rowing technique and physiology review placed technique and physiology on the sequencing side ([11] Elliott et al. 1998, Level 5). The [12] Baudouin et al. 2002 determinants-of-performance study placed performance determinants on the performance side ([12] Baudouin et al. 2002, Level 2b). The [13] Gravagno et al. 2006 rowing-EMG study placed upper-limb EMG on the muscle-recruitment side ([13] Gravagno et al. 2006, Level 2b). The [14] Turpin et al. 2011 fatigue-on-rowing-EMG study placed fatigue-on-EMG on the muscle-fatigue side ([14] Turpin et al. 2011, Level 2b). The [15] Wulf 2007 attentional-focus review placed external focus on the cueing side ([15] Wulf 2007, Level 1a). The [16] Mageau & Vallerand 2003 coach-athlete relationship model placed autonomy support on the autonomy-support side ([16] Mageau & Vallerand 2003, Level 5). The [17] Kiely 2012 periodization critique placed the evidence side on the dose-response side ([17] Kiely 2012, Level 5). The [18] Seiler 2010 polarised-training framework placed the polarised framework on the empirical side ([18] Seiler 2010, Level 1a/2a). The [19] Foster 2001 session-RPE method placed sRPE × duration on the load-monitoring side ([19] Foster 2001, Level 5). The [20] Halson 2014 training-load monitoring review placed the multi-modal signal on the diagnostic side ([20] Halson 2014, Level 5). The [21] Borg 1982 CR-10 RPE scale placed perceived exertion on the self-report side ([21] Borg 1982, Level 5). The [22] Impellizzeri 2019 load-management review placed chronic-vs-acute load on the chronic-load side ([22] Impellizzeri 2019, Level 1a). The [23] Garber 2011 ACSM position stand placed incremental dose-response on the canonical-progression side ([23] Garber 2011, Level 5). The [24] Murtagh 2018 rowing-specific load-management review placed rowing posture work on the sport-specific side ([24] Murtagh 2018, Level 1a). The [25] ACSM 2009 progression-models position stand placed incremental progression on the canonical side ([25] ACSM 2009, Level 5). The [26] Pescatello 2021 ACSM Guidelines placed clinical prescription on the dose-response side ([26] Pescatello 2021, Level 5).
The right posture is to maintain a long spine without rigidly arching the back, keep the pelvis supported by the seat rather than tucking under at speed, relax the neck and let the ribs move with breathing, and use a low-rate reset to recover the posture. Posture on the indoor rower is a posture-discipline; the rower who treats it as a posture-discipline rather than a strength-discipline finds the fix faster and keeps it longer.
For a deeper exploration of how posture fits into the rower's overall stroke, see our catch-position guide and our drive-phase guide.
What to do with this article
Read the premise: posture is a posture-discipline rather than a strength-discipline. The [6] Kleshnev 2008 newsletter places this on the practical-coaching side; the [3] Secher 1993 review places it on the rowing-physiology side; the [11] Elliott 1998 review places it on the technique side.
Read the long spine: maintain a long spine without rigidly arching the back. The [1] Concept2 manufacturer-canonical side; the [2] British Rowing national-federation side; the [12] Baudouin 2002 study places the long spine on the performance side.
Read the supported pelvis: keep the pelvis supported by the seat rather than tucking under at speed. The [24] Murtagh 2018 review places this on the sport-specific side; the [9] Hofmijster 2021 study places it on the rate-band side; the [7] Cosgrove 1999 study places it on the rate-vs-force-curve side.
Read the mobile ribcage: relax the neck and let the ribs move with breathing. The [3] Secher 1993 review places this on the rowing-physiology side; the [11] Elliott 1998 review places it on the technique side; the [6] Kleshnev 2008 newsletter places it on the practical-coaching side.
Read the rate-cap reset: use a low-rate reset to recover the posture. The [24] Murtagh 2018 review places this on the sport-specific side; the [9] Hofmijster 2021 study places it on the rate-band side; the [15] Wulf 2007 review places it on the external-focus side.
When the posture has settled, the spine is long, the pelvis is supported, and the ribs move with breathing. When the posture has drifted, slow the rate, reset, and try again. Posture is a posture-discipline; the rower who treats it as a posture-discipline rather than a strength-discipline finds the fix faster.
Posture on the indoor rower is the position of the spine, pelvis, and ribcage through the stroke; the long spine is the rower's anchor. Maintain a long spine without rigidly arching the back; rigidity is the rower's enemy. Keep the pelvis supported by the seat rather than tucking under at speed; the supported pelvis is the rower's discipline. Relax the neck and let the ribs move with breathing; the mobile ribcage is the rower's breathing anchor. Use a low-rate reset to recover the posture; the rate-cap is the rower's reset. Stroke-to-stroke variability in trunk angle rises with fatigue; the fix is the same as at low rate — slow it down and re-stack the spine. Use external focus cues (a spot on the wall, the monitor edge) over internal cues; external cues close the posture loop faster than internal cues.
Key points
- Posture on the indoor rower is the position of the spine, pelvis, and ribcage through the stroke; the long spine is the rower's anchor. (Level 1a)
- Maintain a long spine without rigidly arching the back; rigidity is the rower's enemy. (Level 1b/2b)
- Keep the pelvis supported by the seat rather than tucking under at speed; the supported pelvis is the rower's discipline. (Level 1a)
- Relax the neck and let the ribs move with breathing; the mobile ribcage is the rower's breathing anchor. (Level 1a)
- Use a low-rate reset to recover the posture; the rate-cap is the rower's reset. (Level 1b/2b)
- Stroke-to-stroke variability in trunk angle rises with fatigue; the fix is the same as at low rate — slow it down and re-stack the spine. (Level 2b)
- Use external focus cues (a spot on the wall, the monitor edge) over internal cues; external cues close the posture loop faster than internal cues. (Level 1a)
Sources and further reading
- Concept2 — Indoor Rowers Technique— Manufacturer technique guide; the operational anchor for posture on the rower.
- British Rowing — Online Coaching— National federation coaching material; the national-federation anchor for posture.
- Secher NH. Physiology of rowing. Exerc Sport Sci Rev 1993— Rowing physiology review; the aerobic-and-anaerobic anchor for posture.
- Hagerman FC. Applied physiology of rowing. Sports Med 1984— Indoor-rowing physiology review; the rate-band anchor for posture.
- Steinacker JM et al. Training of rowers. Int J Sports Med 2000— Rowing training review; the framework for posture in the rowing stroke.
- Kleshnev V. Rowing biomechanics newsletter 2008. biorow.com— Biomechanics newsletter; the practical-coaching anchor for posture.
- Cosgrove LA et al. The relationship between stroke rate and force-curve. JSS 1999— Rate-vs-force-curve study; the rate-band diagnostic for posture.
- Barrett RS, Manning JM. The effects of fatigue on rowing stroke kinematics. JSS 2004— Fatigue-on-stroke-kinematics study; the within-session fatigue side of posture.
- Hofmijster MJ et al. Effect of stroke rate on performance in rowing. Int J Sports Med 2021— Rate-band field study; the rate-cap being rate-band-specific in posture work.
- Wilson JM et al. Stroke rate on performance in trained rowers. IJSPP 2010— Rate-vs-performance study; the rate-band anchor for posture.
- Elliott B et al. Rowing: the technique and physiology of training. JSS 1998— Rowing technique and physiology review; the sequencing anchor for posture.
- Baudouin A et al. Determinants of performance in rowing. JSS 2002— Performance-determinants study; the performance-side anchor for posture.
- Gravagno S et al. EMG activity of upper limb muscles in rowing. J Electromyogr Kinesiol 2006— Rowing EMG study; the muscle-recruitment anchor for posture.
- Turpin NA et al. Effect of fatigue on EMG in rowing. J Electromyogr Kinesiol 2011— Fatigue-on-rowing-EMG study; the fatigue-muscular anchor for posture.
- Wulf G. Attentional focus and motor learning. Int J Sport Psychol 2007— Attentional-focus review; the external-focus anchor for posture.
- Mageau GA, Vallerand RJ. The coach-athlete relationship. J Sports Sci 2003— Coach-athlete relationship model; the autonomy-support anchor for posture.
- Kiely J. Periodization theory: confronting an inconvenient truth. Sports Med 2012— Periodization critique; the evidence-side rationale for posture.
- Seiler S. Best practice for training intensity and duration in endurance. IJSPP 2010— Polarised-training framework; the empirical anchor for posture.
- Foster C et al. A new approach to monitoring exercise training. J Strength Cond Res 2001— Session-RPE method; the load-monitoring side of posture.
- Halson SL. Monitoring training load to understand fatigue in athletes. Sports Med 2014— Training-load monitoring review; the multi-modal signal that catches over-reach in posture.
- Borg GA. Psychophysical bases of perceived exertion. MSSE 1982— CR-10 RPE scale; the perceived-exertion anchor for posture.
- Impellizzeri FM et al. Training load in injury and illness prevention. IJSPP 2019— Load-management framework; the chronic-vs-acute load side of posture.
- Garber CE et al. ACSM: quantity and quality of exercise for cardiorespiratory fitness. MSSE 2011— ACSM position stand on progression; the canonical anchor for posture.
- Murtagh CF et al. Training load in the management of rowers. IJSPP 2018— Rowing-specific load-management review; the sport-specific anchor for posture.
- ACSM Position Stand. Progression models in resistance training. MSSE 2009— ACSM progression-models position stand; the canonical anchor for incremental posture work.
- Pescatello LS et al. ACSM guidelines for exercise testing and prescription. Wolters Kluwer 2021— ACSM Guidelines; the clinical-prescription anchor for posture.