## 3 Results
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c} \hline \multirow{2}{*}{**Conditional Factors**} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**Male**} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**Female**} \\ \cline{2-7}  & **Mean** & \multirow{2}{*}{**95\% CI**} & \multirow{2}{*}{**2-km (\(r\))**} & **Mean** & \multirow{2}{*}{**95\% CI**} & \multirow{2}{*}{**2-km (\(r\))**} \\  & \(\pm\)**SD** & & & & \(\pm\)**SD** & & \\ \hline
**Anthropometry** & & & & & & \\ Height (cm) & 178.4 \(\pm\) 8.9 & 173.3–183.3 & 0.68 \({}^{\star}\) & 166.3 \(\pm\) 7.5 & 161.3–171.9 & 0.67 \\ Body mass (kg) & 77.3 \(\pm\) 7.9 & 72.8–82.0 & 0.83 \(\dagger\) & 59.9 \(\pm\) 8.3 & 54.8–65.5 & 0.66 \\ Body fat (\%) & 11.9 \(\pm\) 3.8 & 9.9–13.9 & \(-\)0.18 & 20.5 \(\pm\) 4.1 & 17.8–23.4 & 0.24 \\ BMI (kg/m\({}^{2}\)) & 24.3 \(\pm\) 1.7 & 23.3–25.2 & 0.25 & 21.7 \(\pm\) 2.6 & 20.0–23.6 & 0.28 \\ Body muscle & 64.5 \(\pm\) 7.1 & 60.1–68.4 & 0.81 \(\dagger\) & 45.9 \(\pm\) 4.8 & 42.9–49.0 & 0.94 \(\dagger\) \\ (kg) & & & & & & \\ \hline
**Jump tests** & & & & & & \\ H\({}_{\text{SJ}}\) (cm) & 35.6 \(\pm\) 6.1 & 32.8–39.3 & \(-\)0.17 & 25.2 \(\pm\) 1.5 & 24.2–26.2 & \(-\)0.72 \\ W\({}_{\text{SJ}}\) (W) & 3608.0 \(\pm\) 404.8 & 3382.9–3834.0 & 0.58 \({}^{\star}\) & 2184.2 \(\pm\) 314.9 & 1981.0–2399.8 & 0.57 \\ H\({}_{\text{CMJ}}\) (cm) & 38.0 \(\pm\) 5.1 & 35.7–41.2 & \(-\)0.23 & 26.4 \(\pm\) 1.5 & 25.6–27.6 & \(-\)0.60 \\ W\({}_{\text{CMJ}}\) (W) & 3744.1 \(\pm\) 377.3 & 3519.7–3948.8 & 0.70 \({}^{\star}\) & 2303.8 \(\pm\) 368.1 & 2087.6–2568.4 & 0.59 \\ H\({}_{\text{HJ}}\) (cm) & 29.4 \(\pm\) 4.4 & 27.3–32.1 & \(-\)0.14 & 18.5 \(\pm\) 3.4 & 16.3–21.0 & \(-\)0.58 \\ RI & 0.8 \(\pm\) 0.1 & 0.7–0.8 & 0.13 & 0.7 \(\pm\) 0.1 & 0.6–0.8 & \(-\)0.50 \\ EI & 2.4 \(\pm\) 2.8 & 0.8–3.6 & \(-\)0.03 & 1.5 \(\pm\) 1.2 & 0.7–2.4 & 0.14 \\ MchP (W/kg) & 19.5 \(\pm\) 3.5 & 17.7–21.7 & \(-\)0.06 & 13.4 \(\pm\) 1.3 & 12.6–14.3 & 0.01 \\ \hline
**Bench Pull test** & & & & & \\ MV (m-s\({}^{-1}\)) & 1.8 \(\pm\) 0.1 & 1.7–1.8 & 0.84 \(\dagger\) & 1.5 \(\pm\) 0.1 & 1.4–1.5 & 0.63 \\ MVV (m-s\({}^{-1}\)) & 1.8 \(\pm\) 0.1 & 1.8–1.9 & 0.87 \(\dagger\) & 1.5 \(\pm\) 0.1 & 1.4–1.6 & 0.67 \\ V\({}_{\text{max}}\) (m-s\({}^{-1}\)) & 2.5 \(\pm\) 0.2 & 2.4–2.6 & 0.79 \(\dagger\) & 2.0 \(\pm\) 0.2 & 1.9–2.1 & 0.65 \\ MF (N) & 141.3 \(\pm\) 1.8 & 140.4–124.3 & 0.34 & 91.6 \(\pm\) 0.4 & 91.4–91.9 & \(-\)0.39 \\ MPF (N) & 296.0 \(\pm\) 32.6 & 278.3–313.8 & 0.58 \({}^{\star}\) & 158.1 \(\pm\) 11.6 & 150.4–165.1 & 0.20 \\ F\({}_{\text{max}}\) (N) & 630.3 \(\pm\) 85.6 & 583.4–677.8 & 0.60 \({}^{\star}\) & 350.7 \(\pm\) 35.6 & 325.3–373.8 & 0.07 \\ MP (W) & 238.5 \(\pm\) 16.2 & 230.1–248.0 & 0.85 \(\dagger\) & 126.8 \(\pm\) 10.5 & 119.7–133.8 & 0.64 \\ MPP (W) & 445.8 \(\pm\) 72.6 & 407.8–487.8 & 0.71 \(\dagger\) & 200.6 \(\pm\) 24.5 & 185.4–218.6 & 0.55 \\ P\({}_{\text{max}}\) (W) & 626.7 \(\pm\) 93.7 & 573.7–67.7 & 0.73 \(\dagger\) & 271.9 \(\pm\) 33.9 & 250.2–295.2 & 0.79 \(\star\) \\ \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 1: Relationship of anthropometric and strength determinants with 2000 m rowing ergometer performance. The proportional allometric model relationships between rowing performance (W\({}_{2000\text{m}}\)) and determinants (anthropometric and BP) showed approximately linear associations, indicated by the exponent near unity. The only prediction equation showing power-function characteristics is the mean propulsive velocity for male rowers, which explained 76% of the variance. The proportional slopes of the rest of the predicting equations gave similar prediction power (R\({}^{2}\)) but with lower estimate errors. The same variables that explain most of the variance in the stepwise linear regression were the remaining predictor variables making a significant contribution to the proportional allometric model. The remaining predicting variables lead to models explaining less than half the variance of rowing performance, so they were excluded from the equations.