Hello. I am a new C2 rower, have been at it since January 2009. I have put in 344,000 meters since January, did the March Madness, etc. I was a runner for many years, but am now unable to run. Found C2 rowing fit my exercise needs, but despite my meters logged I am gaining weight. I am tall, 5'10 female. I started at 150 pounds in January and now am up 5 pounds, even though I am really trying to lose via diet and erg-ing. I eat very well, get at least 50 g of protein. I do notice my muscles changing in my legs and butt, but no real change in fat layer on my thighs and lower abdomen.
Any ideas?
Thank you for your thoughts.
dacotah
Weight GAIN with Erg? Help!
There's a couple directions you may want to look for answers (as I will obviously not have any sure ones for you).
First, as you likely know, muscle weighs more than fat. Thus it's as important to mind the tape measure as the scales -- and also track body fat percentage if possible.
Equally important is nutrition. You're evidently paying attention to it already, having mentioned such. However, for weight loss, the idea is to take in 500-1,000 calories less each day than your body is utilizing. All else equal, you will then drop an average of 1-2 pounds per week.
Start by running a Web search on BMR (basic metabolic rate) to get started. Calculating that tells you about how many calories your body needs to make it through the day without any activity. You then add in the calories used for things like walking, plus those used in exercise. Track everything you consume, making sure you consume less than that sum, and you WILL lose weight.
Ultimately, in my humble opinion, it's more important to be fit than thin. If you want to take off a few pounds, that's great -- but mostly I believe you want to emphasize taking off body fat, and adding muscle (the C2 is a great way of doing so, along with perhaps some weight training or other strength work like bands). You may ultimately wind up weighing about the same, but your mirror will tell you a different story.
If you'd like, please feel free to contact me by e-mail for more specifics -- I went through the same experience of having to "learn to lose" last year, before I was able to succeed in my own fitness goals.
Best of luck to you in acheiving your own goals!
First, as you likely know, muscle weighs more than fat. Thus it's as important to mind the tape measure as the scales -- and also track body fat percentage if possible.
Equally important is nutrition. You're evidently paying attention to it already, having mentioned such. However, for weight loss, the idea is to take in 500-1,000 calories less each day than your body is utilizing. All else equal, you will then drop an average of 1-2 pounds per week.
Start by running a Web search on BMR (basic metabolic rate) to get started. Calculating that tells you about how many calories your body needs to make it through the day without any activity. You then add in the calories used for things like walking, plus those used in exercise. Track everything you consume, making sure you consume less than that sum, and you WILL lose weight.
Ultimately, in my humble opinion, it's more important to be fit than thin. If you want to take off a few pounds, that's great -- but mostly I believe you want to emphasize taking off body fat, and adding muscle (the C2 is a great way of doing so, along with perhaps some weight training or other strength work like bands). You may ultimately wind up weighing about the same, but your mirror will tell you a different story.
If you'd like, please feel free to contact me by e-mail for more specifics -- I went through the same experience of having to "learn to lose" last year, before I was able to succeed in my own fitness goals.
Best of luck to you in acheiving your own goals!
-
dacotah spurgeon
- Paddler
- Posts: 5
- Joined: April 19th, 2009, 5:09 pm
Hi BJMoose
Thank you for the thoughts. You've brought up some good points; I'll look into calculating my BMR, and recalculating my calories.
It's good to know I'm not the only one who is having to learn to loose. Funny-till I turned 40, I had no real trouble with losing/staying lean. (I'm 43 now) I'd venture to guess the age thing is starting to become a factor.
Thanks again!
dacotah
Thank you for the thoughts. You've brought up some good points; I'll look into calculating my BMR, and recalculating my calories.
It's good to know I'm not the only one who is having to learn to loose. Funny-till I turned 40, I had no real trouble with losing/staying lean. (I'm 43 now) I'd venture to guess the age thing is starting to become a factor.
Thanks again!
dacotah
I have typed this out a couple of different times. I’m sorry if this comes off as rude/critical but I just wanted to point out that it has been about 15 weeks since new years and with the meters you posted (344,000) that would mean you are doing about 22,000* meters a week. IMO you might want to think about upping your meters.
*If my math is off someone please correct me.
*If my math is off someone please correct me.
It depends. She said since January. If that means the beginning of January, yes - about 15 weeks. If she meant since that month ended it would be less than 12. Nevertheless, I agree with you. Even 30,000 meters a week is not a lot of exercise. Less than three hours a week at a very moderate pace. Maybe about 1800 Calories a week. That's only a half a pound.Kevlar281 wrote:I have typed this out a couple of different times. I’m sorry if this comes off as rude/critical but I just wanted to point out that it has been about 15 weeks since new years and with the meters you posted (344,000) that would mean you are doing about 22,000* meters a week. IMO you might want to think about upping your meters.
*If my math is off someone please correct me.
Bob S.
DS
To lose fat by erging, you have to do a lot of mileage at quite high intensity; which will of course also keep you pretty fit, so is fine. The site below shows plans for both 2k racing and weightloss. To use the WL schedules, you need to watch your HR (as a percent of HR range from rest rate to maximum). If you don't have a HR monitor, sweat will do - there will be plenty at UT1 intensity - and you'll soon find your paces anyway.
http://www.concept2.co.uk/training/interactive.php
If you don't reach 70-80%HR range or the sweat levels, you may have a technique problem. Rowing is not as easy (technically) as you might think, but on the erg the main needs are to keep the weight well forward on your feet, during recovery, and pull a full length stroke from near the chainguard; both with the idea of using legs as much as possible. If it starts to feel like hard work, you're on the right track. Low drag (damper 2-3) can help pull a long quick stroke without heaving, and give you time for a slow relaxed recovery.
At your height and weight, you could expect to pull 100-130W (500m pace 2:20 to 2:30) for long distances, at ratings 20-26. A 30 minute session implies > 6000m.
To lose fat by erging, you have to do a lot of mileage at quite high intensity; which will of course also keep you pretty fit, so is fine. The site below shows plans for both 2k racing and weightloss. To use the WL schedules, you need to watch your HR (as a percent of HR range from rest rate to maximum). If you don't have a HR monitor, sweat will do - there will be plenty at UT1 intensity - and you'll soon find your paces anyway.
http://www.concept2.co.uk/training/interactive.php
If you don't reach 70-80%HR range or the sweat levels, you may have a technique problem. Rowing is not as easy (technically) as you might think, but on the erg the main needs are to keep the weight well forward on your feet, during recovery, and pull a full length stroke from near the chainguard; both with the idea of using legs as much as possible. If it starts to feel like hard work, you're on the right track. Low drag (damper 2-3) can help pull a long quick stroke without heaving, and give you time for a slow relaxed recovery.
At your height and weight, you could expect to pull 100-130W (500m pace 2:20 to 2:30) for long distances, at ratings 20-26. A 30 minute session implies > 6000m.
08-1940, 183cm, 83kg.
2024: stroke 5.5W-min@20-21. ½k 190W, 1k 145W, 2k 120W. Using Wods 4-5days/week. Fading fast.
2024: stroke 5.5W-min@20-21. ½k 190W, 1k 145W, 2k 120W. Using Wods 4-5days/week. Fading fast.
-
Citroen
- SpamTeam
- Posts: 8012
- Joined: March 16th, 2006, 3:28 pm
- Location: A small cave in deepest darkest Basingstoke, UK
http://www.concept2.co.uk/weightloss/interactive.php may be a better starting point. (1stone = 14lb so 155lb is 11st 1lb)jamesg wrote: http://www.concept2.co.uk/training/interactive.php
Hi dacotah spurgeon,
I'm always hesitant to add comments about weight lose, because there are so many factors involved, however, I'd also like to try to help, because I've been through a similar situation.
The best advice I can give is a book recommendation: Clarence Bass' "Lean For Life". He's actually written a book series on getting and maintaining a healthy lifestyle. I've been a fan of Bass for over a decade and was fit fat for too many years. His books really helped me change the way I looked at how I ate and trained.
Here is my own success story on his website, if you are interested in reading it.
http://www.cbass.com/success_stories11.htm
On another note, in terms of kilos lost, I have only lost 3kgs since November 2008, yet my appearance has changed significantly, which supports the good point BJMoose made. I use a tape measure, to measure my waist, stomach and thighs every week (I measured other areas before too, but they are no longer a concern, so I've stopped measuring them). I also weigh myself every day just to know the pattern of my weight fluctuations each week. In addition to that, I use a Tanita weighing scale, which gives me my fat percent. We bought it over a decade ago, so it's paid for itself over and over again!
In terms of training, I started out rowing twice a week (at the end of October 2008), and shortly changed to 3 times a week, which I did up until this week. I now plan to row 4 times a week, but my 4th row is a very easy row to replace a regular walk. So my total meters so far are only 338,406 and yet I have had excellent results. I'm no expert, but I rarely think the answer is to train more. I think it's more about training more effectively, looking into your diet and getting to know your body better - which all takes time and is a constant learning process.
In terms of fit fat, Bass has a good article on his web site on this. Recent research shows that being fit but fat is not good enough. Fit and lean is best for an optimal healthy lifestyle. Plus, if YOU don't like what you see in the mirror, then work to change it via good diet habits and training, etc. - no matter what other people say. I don't know how many times I've heard people comment on that "I should be happy with how I look now". In my opinion, there is always room for improvement. It's not an obsession, but a healthy challenge. We need challenges, otherwise we just resort back to the old, bad habits.
Good Luck, Deborah
I'm always hesitant to add comments about weight lose, because there are so many factors involved, however, I'd also like to try to help, because I've been through a similar situation.
The best advice I can give is a book recommendation: Clarence Bass' "Lean For Life". He's actually written a book series on getting and maintaining a healthy lifestyle. I've been a fan of Bass for over a decade and was fit fat for too many years. His books really helped me change the way I looked at how I ate and trained.
Here is my own success story on his website, if you are interested in reading it.
http://www.cbass.com/success_stories11.htm
On another note, in terms of kilos lost, I have only lost 3kgs since November 2008, yet my appearance has changed significantly, which supports the good point BJMoose made. I use a tape measure, to measure my waist, stomach and thighs every week (I measured other areas before too, but they are no longer a concern, so I've stopped measuring them). I also weigh myself every day just to know the pattern of my weight fluctuations each week. In addition to that, I use a Tanita weighing scale, which gives me my fat percent. We bought it over a decade ago, so it's paid for itself over and over again!
In terms of training, I started out rowing twice a week (at the end of October 2008), and shortly changed to 3 times a week, which I did up until this week. I now plan to row 4 times a week, but my 4th row is a very easy row to replace a regular walk. So my total meters so far are only 338,406 and yet I have had excellent results. I'm no expert, but I rarely think the answer is to train more. I think it's more about training more effectively, looking into your diet and getting to know your body better - which all takes time and is a constant learning process.
In terms of fit fat, Bass has a good article on his web site on this. Recent research shows that being fit but fat is not good enough. Fit and lean is best for an optimal healthy lifestyle. Plus, if YOU don't like what you see in the mirror, then work to change it via good diet habits and training, etc. - no matter what other people say. I don't know how many times I've heard people comment on that "I should be happy with how I look now". In my opinion, there is always room for improvement. It's not an obsession, but a healthy challenge. We need challenges, otherwise we just resort back to the old, bad habits.
Good Luck, Deborah
I beg to differ. Age is but a number. Again, I'll refer to Clarence Bass (www.cbass.com), because he is a wonderful example of how we don't have to accept the misguided opinion that we must decay with age. Clarence Bass looked better in his 50's and 60's than most people look in their 30's! Not to mention how he looks at 70 something.Funny-till I turned 40, I had no real trouble with losing/staying lean. (I'm 43 now) I'd venture to guess the age thing is starting to become a factor.
Deborah, 37 years young
Misguided? Hardly. I have no doubt but that CB in his 50s and 60s was in better shape than most people in their 30s, but how did he compare with himself in his 30s? We are programmed to die and that program starts at conception. With good health habits, including exercise, proper diet, and getting enough sleep, we can keep the decline down to a slow gallop, but life does not give us the option to reverse it.Deewen wrote:
I beg to differ. Age is but a number. Again, I'll refer to Clarence Bass (www.cbass.com), because he is a wonderful example of how we don't have to accept the misguided opinion that we must decay with age. Clarence Bass looked better in his 50's and 60's than most people look in their 30's! Not to mention how he looks at 70 something.
Deborah, 37 years young :)
Bob S.
Reverse it, no - but as you said, slow down the decline. I'd add, significantly. I reacted to the original post's notion that just because we get old we are supposed to accept a swift decline - that's just part of aging. I disagree. Of course we are programmed to die, but it doesn't mean that you can't be healthy, fit and active so that you can have a good quality life along the way. At 37, I can run around and play with my girls without gasping for breath. I'd expect nothing less. I want to do the same thing with my grand children. I don't see anything wrong in that notion. Seeing healthy, active people in their "old age" is a wonderful thing. Our bodies are meant to be used and taken care of, they can do amazing things.With good health habits, including exercise, proper diet, and getting enough sleep, we can keep the decline down to a slow gallop, but life does not give us the option to reverse it.
CB had a couple of pages in his latest book, "Great Expectations", which I have read, dedicated to a theory taken from a book called, "Younger Next Year: A Guide to Living Like 50 Until You're 80 and Beyond" by Chris Crowley and Henry S Lodge, MD. It was an interesting read. My friend, has read the actual book and really thought it all made sense. The book includes a theory that I already knew, but only to a certain extent. The theory is based on the body's natural balance. It says:
"Nature balances growth with decay by setting your body up with an innate tendency toward decay." The signal is weak at first and grows a little stronger every year... Between 45 and 55 our bodies switch into a "default to decay" mode...Nature's purpose is simple and brutal: to provide for the next generation. Food was scarce and needed for the childrearing and productive members of the group. In the absence of signals to grow, your body and brain decay and you age.
Exercise has always been the most powerful signal we can send that life is good, that it is spring and time to grow. Sedentary living, so common in modern times, is the most important signal for decay.
The books explains how exercise simulates what our ancestors did - hunting, foraging and flight from danger by the way it adapts the body to use oxygen and muscles, etc. more efficiently. CB explains it in more detail than I have time to write, right now - but it all makes perfect sense to me.
I get signals from my body that it is in growth mode when I exercise consistently, varying intensity and eat foods that agree with my body. I have more energy, look vital and feel energetic - but when I have periods without exercise (or stray from my healthy diet), those feelings subside.
Deborah
I believe that we are in basic agreement. It is true enough that we must decline, but that is no excuse to avoid taking those measures - like regular exercise - that help to keep the rate of decline down to a minimum.Deewen wrote: Reverse it, no - but as you said, slow down the decline. I'd add, significantly. I reacted to the original post's notion that just because we get old we are supposed to accept a swift decline - that's just part of aging. I disagree. Of course we are programmed to die, but it doesn't mean that you can't be healthy, fit and active so that you can have a good quality life along the way.
Deborah
I was pleased to read today (the Amesbury erg marathon thread) that a half a dozen kids (ranging in age from 42 to 70) in the Boston area did an erg marathon earlier today and only two of the six beat my own PB that I set a couple of years ago at 82.
Bob S.
Kids?I was pleased to read today (the Amesbury erg marathon thread) that a half a dozen kids (ranging in age from 42 to 70) in the Boston area did an erg marathon earlier today and only two of the six beat my own PB that I set a couple of years ago at 82.
Well, I'm very impressed! You're obviously very fit and are another shining example of how training adds quality to life. My husband wasn't too amused though. He's 42 and would probably not be able to keep up with the "other kids" that did the marathon. He's working on it though and my comments on your level of fitness has given him incentive
Deborah said;
[quoteExercise has always been the most powerful signal we can send that life is good, that it is spring and time to grow. Sedentary living, so common in modern times, is the most important signal for decay. [/quote]
I don't remember who said it, but one of my favorite quotes has always been, "If there is such a thing as a fountain of youth it is exercise."
[quoteExercise has always been the most powerful signal we can send that life is good, that it is spring and time to grow. Sedentary living, so common in modern times, is the most important signal for decay. [/quote]
I don't remember who said it, but one of my favorite quotes has always been, "If there is such a thing as a fountain of youth it is exercise."
69 - 270lbs - PB (Classified for reasons of embarressment)