The pace graph does not match the actual splits for Concept2 virtual rowing as shown in images. First from Concept2 logbook
I’m going to place this here rather than opening a new topic since it seems to fit.
Basically, it seems that something is getting messed up with the importing of workouts from the concept 2 logbook, at least for me, in particular with workouts where there are intervals of 30s-1 minute in length.
The pace is completely wrong, showing between 2:07 and 2:21 as the average for the intervals instead of between 1:42.7 and 1:44.1; though on the graph the plotted values seem about right.
The interval lengths are off as well: should be 45 seconds with 6 minutes rest, and I get 58-64s for the intervals and between 5:41 and 5:47 for the rest.
I’m happy to supply the raw files from the logbook if the team wants to check against them.
I ran into the same issue, without any resolution: Intervals.icu messes up fit lapdata - #10 by Jaap_van_Ekris
My solution is simple: the upcomming version of OpenRowingMonitor will be able to present all data by itself, without use of intervals.icu. RP3’s portal also allows uploads and it responds well to C2 data. But it is a paid portal (but these guys know how to handle rowing data very well).
Yes…
It’s a bit of a pity, and somewhat of a pita.
With the data from Concept 2 it is an absolute necessity for rowers to have the laps from ErgData or the PM monitors respected - otherwise a lot of sessions will lose their sense.
If I use “keep all laps”, or “use paired workout steps for laps” (??? a link to an explanation could have been placed here 
), the pace is much more accurate, but the “lap” or interval lengths are now 29 to 40 seconds long (instead of exactly 45).
I get the impression that when “use laps instead of detecting intervals” is selected, whatever algorithm that is used checks for a decay in power or something like that. If it’s this, it makes no sense, for a length of distance in running of cycling you don’t measure until the athlete has stopped, you stop measuring when they have passed an arbitary limit (finish line, end of interval, whatever), the platform shouldn’t reimagine something so fundamental that has been given to it, and that it has been told to use!
And there’s no point of paying to potentially have a greater
My thoughts exactly. The key issue is that a RowErg has pretty good data. With ORM on a RowErg we get to nanosecond and milimeter accuracy for any given boundary. As the real pace inside a stroke varies a lot, any attempt at interpolating these boundaries after the fact is a very sure miss. We see that with Strava, we see it here. It just messes up perfectly good data. Only thing they have to do is parse the fit file’s lap boundaries.
And whilst rowers might not be the biggest population, crossfitters and now those who do hyrox have quite sizeable numbers - I’d think they’re enough to make this something worth sorting out…at least I’d hope so!
I’ll take a look at ORM because I’d like to have records for force curves, for myself and for those at the club where I coach.
I use intervals.icu for walking, running, cycling and rowing. I want to see everything in one place so using another site is not for me. Just need the pace data fixed but it is only a minor irritant.