Weight Training for Rowing

[hjs]

As for TO looking shredded at 9% I think, and I readily admit this is pure speculation, that the sheer size of his muscles may play a part in that. I would imagine the muscle size would cause what body fat he does have, to be stretched out over a greater surface area allowing him to look more shredded than a much lankier and muscularly smaller rower of the same body fat.

???? Bodyfat % is relative, the same percentage looks the same on every person. 9% on a 50 kg guy is 4.5 kg , on a 100kg guy is simply the double amount.

Older people tent to have more fat hidden around there organs, so the same 5 looks different on a 60 years old compered to a 20 year old. Less fat below the skin and more around the organs.
You often see older people with no fat on there legs for example, but with certainly no sixpack. There fat reserves are stored in the trunck.

[milkman21]

Wow, guys. We have some extremely impressive athletes here if you all have had accurately-measured BF's around 5% ... you all must have been shredded out of your minds, with veins and abs sticking out for the world to see. If you were that lean, then you don't look like anyone I've ever, EVER seen around. And I've competed with some of the best swimmers in the world, seen and met plenty of elite marathon runners and Ironman athletes, watched plenty of pro sports, Olympic sports, NCAA sports ...

So, good on you for being that lean.

[milkman21]

Top bodybuilders go to 2/4%.

Lowest I've heard of from a respectable source is 3%. Most are 4-5, from everything I've read, heard, and seen. I don't claim to be an authority here, but I'm fairly sure that even the top dogs don't get below 3%.

Your bodyfat % does not change in 12/24 hours, for a 100 kg man to gain 1% in bodyfat he should have a 9000 kcal surplus in a given periode. To eat that much above your basis energy need in 1 day is almost impossible and does not happen.

A couple of points:
(i) bodyfat % changes don't have to be integer changes; we're talking about a continuum here.
(ii) I think you might be underestimating the level of stress these guys put them self under for the competition. Most do go out and celebrate, and most eat a shload of calories afterwards. This is surprisingly common: http://asp.elitefts.com/qa/training-log ... 22&tid=126
(iii) Hormones plays a huge role in the way energy is partitioned, and in particular, the stress hormones have a major say in this. The body *really* hates being that lean, and will reject it if given the opportunity. That's what makes such inhuman weight gains possible in such a short time.

Bodybuilders are very good in manipulating there hydration. This makes the big changes in the last weel before there competition. Not the change in bodyfat, that happens mostly in a 12 weeks periode. Going from around 10 % to competion percentage.

True.

If you show up with 5% you wil not win.

Probably true, but not true for 4%. Coleman, Cutler, and Jackson have all been near 4%. Arnold was 5+% in his prime.

[bloomp]

Wow, guys. We have some extremely impressive athletes here if you all have had accurately-measured BF's around 5% ... you all must have been shredded out of your minds, with veins and abs sticking out for the world to see. If you were that lean, then you don't look like anyone I've ever, EVER seen around. And I've competed with some of the best swimmers in the world, seen and met plenty of elite marathon runners and Ironman athletes, watched plenty of pro sports, Olympic sports, NCAA sports ...

So, good on you for being that lean.

When my boat was trying to cut weight for Dad Vail, we got out BF% done. It was a handheld machine so I'm sure the accuracy is debateable. One guy was 4.3%, naturally. Another was 6%. I'm pretty sure by the race each had cut another .5% off. Me, I never got below 8%... My point is that some people are graced with VERY good numbers. The guy with 4.3% has two brothers that are the same - wrestlers/runners that have had 6packs since they were 10.

[macroth]

When I started rowing, after a couple years break from competitive xc skiing, I was 6'/170+, age 22. I spent the first year or so in the 167lb range and, hoping to row as a lightweight, and managed to weigh in one (1) day at 158 for a 1x head race. At that weight, my parents were a bit worried and said my hands looked skinny. Almost certainly 5%bf or less. I hadn't weighed so little since puberty.

Needless to say, I gave up on being a LW and our 2x rowed as a HW boat averaging 170lbs.

Keep in mind that I've always sucked OTW and that I saw men shorter/taller/heavier/lighter than me, depending on the case, row better and faster, including on the erg (I pulled 6:30 at the time, give or take, with a PB of 6:26)

My point is that you should concentrate on doing what it takes to row faster. This includes better form, more strength, more endurance, etc. Let your weight go where it may. I don't think you should sacrifice effective training just to make weight.

[ThatMoos3Guy]

Wow, guys. We have some extremely impressive athletes here if you all have had accurately-measured BF's around 5% ... you all must have been shredded out of your minds, with veins and abs sticking out for the world to see. If you were that lean, then you don't look like anyone I've ever, EVER seen around. And I've competed with some of the best swimmers in the world, seen and met plenty of elite marathon runners and Ironman athletes, watched plenty of pro sports, Olympic sports, NCAA sports ...

So, good on you for being that lean.

Honestly, BF% has very little to do with athleticism and a lot more to do with diet and genetics. I'm obviously not an elite athlete, but I do have an incredibly fast metabolism; I'll eat 3700 calories a day for a week and lose weight. Add in a lot of aerobic work and I lose a lot of fat. I don't believe that I had a body fat of 4% (I was more cut than usual, but not mindbogglingly so), but I do believe that it was around 6% by the middle of race season.

This site: http://www.brianmac.co.uk/fatcent.htm gives an estimated range of body fat for different sports.

Sport Male Female
Baseball 12-15% 12-18%
Basketball 6-12% 20-27%
Canoe/Kayak 6-12% 10-16%
Cycling 5-15% 15-20%
Field & Ice Hockey 8-15% 12-18%
Gymnastics 5-12% 10-16%
Rowing 6-14% 12-18%
Swimming 9-12% 14-24%
Tennis 12-16% 16-24%
Track - Runners 8-10% 12-20%
Track - Jumpers 7-12% 10-18%
Track - Throwers 14-20% 20-28%
Triathlon 5-12% 10-15%
Volleyball 11-14% 16-25%

A similar one can be looked at here: http://www.gainingweight.info/images/bo ... hletes.bmp

Elite athletes are skinny dudes!

[hjs]

Wow, guys. We have some extremely impressive athletes here if you all have had accurately-measured BF's around 5% ... you all must have been shredded out of your minds, with veins and abs sticking out for the world to see. If you were that lean, then you don't look like anyone I've ever, EVER seen around. And I've competed with some of the best swimmers in the world, seen and met plenty of elite marathon runners and Ironman athletes, watched plenty of pro sports, Olympic sports, NCAA sports ...

So, good on you for being that lean.

I am 10/11 % fat age 43 and by far not a top athlete, I am talking about topathletes not guys like us who just train a bit for fun and health.

I think the problem is also a bit the place you life, whenever I am in the us I am amased how fat the average man in the street is and although Europa is certainly following that bad example, there is a big difference still.

[hjs]

Top bodybuilders go to 2/4%.

Lowest I've heard of from a respectable source is 3%. Most are 4-5, from everything I've read, heard, and seen. I don't claim to be an authority here, but I'm fairly sure that even the top dogs don't get below 3%.

Your bodyfat % does not change in 12/24 hours, for a 100 kg man to gain 1% in bodyfat he should have a 9000 kcal surplus in a given periode. To eat that much above your basis energy need in 1 day is almost impossible and does not happen.

A couple of points:
(i) bodyfat % changes don't have to be integer changes; we're talking about a continuum here.
(ii) I think you might be underestimating the level of stress these guys put them self under for the competition. Most do go out and celebrate, and most eat a shload of calories afterwards. This is surprisingly common: http://asp.elitefts.com/qa/training-log ... 22&tid=126
(iii) Hormones plays a huge role in the way energy is partitioned, and in particular, the stress hormones have a major say in this. The body *really* hates being that lean, and will reject it if given the opportunity. That's what makes such inhuman weight gains possible in such a short time.

Bodybuilders are very good in manipulating there hydration. This makes the big changes in the last weel before there competition. Not the change in bodyfat, that happens mostly in a 12 weeks periode. Going from around 10 % to competion percentage.

True.

If you show up with 5% you wil not win.

Probably true, but not true for 4%. Coleman, Cutler, and Jackson have all been near 4%. Arnold was 5+% in his prime.

I agree fo the most although I am talking more about natural BB, the pro's is a total different picture, If you see what some guys do with all kinds off "help" is unbelieveble. But then again every now and then one of them drops dead age 40 orso

[TomR]

I agree fo the most although I am talking more about natural BB, the pro's is a total different picture, If you see what some guys do with all kinds off "help" is unbelieveble.

The pros are as natural as a porn star's ta-tas. Their drug-induced 4% bodyfat doesn't have a whole lot in common with a ltwt oarsmen trying to make weight.

[hjs]

I agree fo the most although I am talking more about natural BB, the pro's is a total different picture, If you see what some guys do with all kinds off "help" is unbelieveble.

The pros are as natural as a porn star's ta-tas. Their drug-induced 4% bodyfat doesn't have a whole lot in common with a ltwt oarsmen trying to make weight.

indeed.

[milkman21]

I really, really don't think you guys appreciate what 4% bodyfat looks like. Or 10%, for that matter. Close your fist, and pinch the back of your hand. That's about how much subcutaneous fat you'd have everywhere on your body if you're 4-5% BF. BF% is a number that is so frequently misread and misquoted that it's practically meaningless at this point, and this is why everyone and their mother claims to be measured at sub-10% BF.

Your body maintains a minimum level of fat mass, regardless of your total muscular size. To get down to these single-digit numbers, you need to not only have little extra fat mass, but also a decent amount of extra lean mass to drive that number down.

Someone who is 5% BF or under is absolutely shredded, and carries a considerable amount of lean mass. A very ripped cover model for Men's Health (or something similar) is at 7-9% or so, as is Terrell Owens in that picture I showed you. How many people do you ever see that are that lean? Not many. How many people do you see that are leaner? Few, if any.

[hjs]

http://www.poshfitness.com/images/aussies.JPG

5% look

[sheehc]

No point arguing an unimportant point that we will not see eye to eye on. Underlying hypothesis remains, that a 167lb athlete can be a lightweight rower. However I would like to point out three items:

I'm fairly sure that even the top dogs don't get below 3%.

I'd agree, below that would absolutely eat into visceral fat that would have consequences.

And I've competed with some of the best swimmers in the world,

My understanding is swimmer's deliberately attempt to maintain a somewhat higher body fat for flotation purposes. Swimming isn't something I particularly follow though, so I could be wrong.

A very ripped cover model for Men's Health (or something similar) is at 7-9%

A friend of mine used to be involved in creating those pictures, and I do mean creating. Some of those pictures are real, and some are frankenstein compilations. In the instances that you are looking at real humans, they have often been helped significantly by lighting, makeup, dehydration, and graphic editing. So the comparison of body fat numbers to a model's physical appearance needs to be taken with a grain of salt.

[Steelhead]

Let's just be clear that drinking 1/2 or 1 gallon of milk doesn't preclude eating plenty of good food as well. 2400 calories is certainly not enough for an athlete looking to gain weight. You still have to eat your 3+ full meals a day.

Nothing against coconut milk, but it doesn't provide nearly enough protein and carbs. In any event, the gallon of milk a day is just a cheap (college student?), simple guideline. The main thing is to eat a lot, more than you think necessary. Again, this is based on the assumption that strength and weight gain is the main goal.

DanMartin,
Overhead squats are a great exercise, but cannot be done at any significant weight in many weight-room settings. They also suck for building muscle mass.

When I was in my 20s trying to "bulk up," I drank at least a gallon of milk a day -- it really does make you "bulk up," that is, get fat. I recommend using the Ninth Edition, Nutrition for Health, Fitness & Sport vis-a-vis what to eat, how to eat, and how much protein is really necessary to gain a pound of muscle, etc. This university textbook cites to all the research, etc.

As for weight training for rowing, here are some interesting links: http://home.hia.no/~stephens/rowstre.htm
http://home.hia.no/~stephens/woodslet.htm and http://www.wellness.ma/sports-fitness/r ... aining.htm as examples of what information is available.