Muscle Gain as a Lightweight

[mitchel674]

I'm a lightweight rower with a similar issue. At 6ft and 151lbs I look very thin. After rowing for 4 years, I've got strong looking quads, glutes and abs, but the rest of me looks thin. I've had colleagues, family members and even patients ask me if I've been sick or why I've lost weight. I like to eat healthy (mostly vegan), but putting 30-50km/week on the erg just keeps me very lean. My wife thinks I look great.

Pre-covid I was going to the gym twice weekly for some specific weight training focusing on my chest and upper body. This did produce modest muscle gains which were slowly lost once I stopped that program trained mostly on the erg.

It's tough being a lightweight!

I felt that pain, had the same comments.....and I then fell out that LWT wagon in an attempt to gain muscle and weight.....but even that is tough.

Will probably just let my body be what it wants to be with the mixture of rowing, skierg and weights that I do. If that gets me to LWT again then I may race.

Yes I read your post and thought our situations were very similar. The major difference is that you have really come along with your rowing times and I have stagnated.

I'm a lightweight rower with a similar issue. At 6ft and 151lbs I look very thin. After rowing for 4 years, I've got strong looking quads, glutes and abs, but the rest of me looks thin. I've had colleagues, family members and even patients ask me if I've been sick or why I've lost weight. I like to eat healthy (mostly vegan), but putting 30-50km/week on the erg just keeps me very lean. My wife thinks I look great.

Pre-covid I was going to the gym twice weekly for some specific weight training focusing on my chest and upper body. This did produce modest muscle gains which were slowly lost once I stopped that program trained mostly on the erg.

It's tough being a lightweight!

This is exactly what I meant by being ripped by not eating enough, in time your body adjusts and you look in fantastic shape. I was painfully thin in my childhood and teenage years. But I always did hundreds of press-ups and cycling so looked amazing in just shorts and vest . But it changed in winter when i just looked thin again in clothes lol
When I was 19 I started drinking lots of milk and put on a nice bit of weight, it was a lot of fat though. Trouble is being thin for so many years especially as a child it left me with quite a hang up through out my adult life and I probably only come to terms with it not that long ago.
People can say really bad things at times and it was normally my own relatives!! Who needs enemies when ones family will suffice

Family can be the toughest. My mother thinks I'm way too thin and constantly asks me if I'm sick. I'm a 57 year old physician!

[Tony Cook]

Family can be the toughest. My mother thinks I'm way too thin and constantly asks me if I'm sick. I'm a 57 year old physician!

That’s what mothers are for though. My dear old mum (RIP) worried that I was too thin if I got down to 110kg. She’d be very concerned if she could see me now hovering around 100kg.

[gouldilocks]

Family can be the toughest. My mother thinks I'm way too thin and constantly asks me if I'm sick. I'm a 57 year old physician!

That’s what mothers are for though. My dear old mum (RIP) worried that I was too thin if I got down to 110kg. She’d be very concerned if she could see me now hovering around 100kg.

My mother is the typical Jewish mother - she would give me huge helpings of food and insist on seconds, and then comment that I am getting fat!!!

Paul G

[p0rtsidesupreme]

Look at the link for ideas or google " weights for rowing"
https://rowingstronger.com/2016/12/19/t ... or-rowing/

Hi thanks for the link I was taking a look and I saw alot of weights based stuff, I may not have that much access to weights. Do you think its a worthy investment or are their other exercises I could do on my own which would do the job

[Dutch]

Look at the link for ideas or google " weights for rowing"
https://rowingstronger.com/2016/12/19/t ... or-rowing/

Hi thanks for the link I was taking a look and I saw alot of weights based stuff, I may not have that much access to weights. Do you think its a worthy investment or are their other exercises I could do on my own which would do the job

I personally would always go for weights. The two times I have made greatest progress with size/strength along with the drive to succeed at it when training on my own, was with a home gym. Metal weights are a great investment and will last a lifetime once you have them and they cost you nothing to maintain, unlike other hobbies.
You could get most of what you need for probably about £500 over time, if you buy wisely and have the room of course.
Your first initial outlay only needs to be up to about £100. You can always look for a multigym as well, I picked up a 8 yr old life fitness £1500 one for £100. It took me ages to transport it and set it up lol but it was well worth it.
I made my own squat frame but you can get really good ones on ebay for about £80 delivered, I sort of wish I had got one of them instead as they are more versatile.
A fold up bench is a good start, they save room and are good for a person weighting up to 100kg to bench upto about 100kg. You can make always make a safety frame out of wood to be able to rest the bar on should you not be able to press the bar up, if working out on your own.
You can even make a whole weights bench out of wood if needed, follow this link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wuKh9YGRdfE https://thediyplan.com/diy-workout-bench-press/
If you don't have much room, or dont want loads of equipment, just start with a dumbbell set and use them for high rep work. They can take plates up to 10 kg before they become awkward to use. Just google dumbbell workouts, you can do the whole body with them.
Press ups and pull ups will only get you so far, weights will be needed if you want power for rowing.
Here is a good article about a Cambridge rowing team workout: https://www.gq-magazine.co.uk/article/r ... ne-workout

[ukaserex]

...
I encourage folks who want to put on muscle mass to lift 3-4 times a week, and row on days you don't lift.

More common would be rowing hard 2-3 times/week and stacking 2 days of lifting on the same days as hard rowing. Then filling in one or two rest days and several long rows each week. This limits workouts with autonomic stress (like lifting/strength training and workouts done more than about 70-75% max heart rate) to a total of 2-3 per week and seems to be the pattern followed by most elite endurance athletes (rowing, cycling, running, skiing).

(The nutrition comments above also deserve emphasis. It is very hard to put on muscle mass when keeping to a zero weight gain diet.)

I don't know how common that approach would be. It may be the pattern followed by elite endurance athletes - but is that what we are to do? Pattern our behavior after people who are presumably being paid in some fashion for their performance? While I wouldn't ever tell anyone to not do that, I am not sure I would ever suggest it to anyone.

If exercise is a pill, we want the minimum effective dose, right? Then again, I suppose it does depend on one's goals.

[Tsnor]

...
I encourage folks who want to put on muscle mass to lift 3-4 times a week, and row on days you don't lift.

More common would be rowing hard 2-3 times/week and stacking 2 days of lifting on the same days as hard rowing. Then filling in one or two rest days and several long rows each week. This limits workouts with autonomic stress (like lifting/strength training and workouts done more than about 70-75% max heart rate) to a total of 2-3 per week and seems to be the pattern followed by most elite endurance athletes (rowing, cycling, running, skiing).

(The nutrition comments above also deserve emphasis. It is very hard to put on muscle mass when keeping to a zero weight gain diet.)

I don't know how common that approach would be. It may be the pattern followed by elite endurance athletes - but is that what we are to do? Pattern our behavior after people who are presumably being paid in some fashion for their performance? While I wouldn't ever tell anyone to not do that, I am not sure I would ever suggest it to anyone.

If exercise is a pill, we want the minimum effective dose, right? Then again, I suppose it does depend on one's goals.

Exercise is exactly like medicine. You can go with scientific evidence. You can go with what works for other people. You can work up your own approach. Just do it knowing which one is which when you choose to go forward.

Knowing the maximum effective dose is eye-opening. Training 7-10 hours a week it is very easy to do something that you think is great that actually hurts you. Knowing Minimum dose is good, but minimum dose is pretty intuitive. Science says 1. "doing no exercise is bad" 2."Exercising 4 hours/week or less do whatever you want". That's hard to get wrong. The maximum dose is counter-intuitive.

You raise an excellent point - does what work for elite athletes also work for masters, recreational athletes and coach potatoes. The science says yes. This is a heavily covered topic, in part because it's much easier to find rec athletes and coach potatoes willing to be part of a study that controls how you exercise. Most of what is know about elite athletes comes from looking at how they trained and mapping it to results.

If anyone would like read (or watch) some gen education on training post or google. Adding 3-4 days of lifting to a rowing program would be an uncommon practice. For example, here is mayo clinics opinion on how often to lift weights. https://www.mayoclinic.org/healthy-life ... t-20046670

[Ombrax]

For example, here is mayo clinics opinion on how often to lift weights. https://www.mayoclinic.org/healthy-life ... t-20046670

Thanks for the link.

I realize there's no one way to lift that's 100% correct, and in general "do what works best for you" is always a good idea, but I think this was an interesting suggestion on the Mayo Clinic site:

"Aim to do a single set of each exercise"

I'm no expert, but I thought that most folks did more than just one set of whatever lift they happened to be doing.

Anyone else care to comment?

TIA

[Tsnor]

For example, here is mayo clinics opinion on how often to lift weights. https://www.mayoclinic.org/healthy-life ... t-20046670

Thanks for the link.

I realize there's no one way to lift that's 100% correct, and in general "do what works best for you" is always a good idea, but I think this was an interesting suggestion on the Mayo Clinic site:

"Aim to do a single set of each exercise"

I'm no expert, but I thought that most folks did more than just one set of whatever lift they happened to be doing.

Anyone else care to comment?

TIA

I was focused on number of days/week vs number of sets. Benefits of 1 vs more sets is unclear. I should have picked a better reference.

This review article says "In conclusion, multiple sets are associated with 40% greater hypertrophy-related ESs than 1 set, in both trained and untrained subjects." https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/20300012/ after reviewing 8 studies.

However big muscles (hypertrophy) are not necessary strong muscles. To get strong muscles commonly you cut reps and increase load compared to the workload you use to build large muscles.

Mayo clinic is consistent with the 1 set is enough message, here is another ref: https://www.mayoclinic.org/healthy-life ... le%20group. That doesn't make them right.

There are some studies supporting single set, however they are not conclusive. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/9777681/ "However, most of the studies that reported the results of training with single versus multiple sets do not substantiate this tenet. In fact, the preponderance of evidence suggests that for training durations of 4 to 25 weeks there is no significant difference in the increase in strength or hypertrophy as a result of training with single versus multiple sets. Because of the design limitations of these studies, conclusions concerning the efficacy of multiple sets should be tentative. "

I didn't see any refs showing worse results with multiple sets than a single set.

[Ombrax]

I don't do one-set exercises often, but when I do I've found that a benefits is that it's easier to figure out how many reps you need to do at a given weight. Since you want to go essentially to failure, whether you're doing one set or more than one, it's easier to get to that point with a single set. With, say, three, unless you want to have a different number of reps per set, you sort of have to guess beforehand on the number of reps, and depending on how you're feeling on a given day, you may be off.

[MartinSH4321]

...
There are some studies supporting single set, however they are not conclusive. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/9777681/ "However, most of the studies that reported the results of training with single versus multiple sets do not substantiate this tenet. In fact, the preponderance of evidence suggests that for training durations of 4 to 25 weeks there is no significant difference in the increase in strength or hypertrophy as a result of training with single versus multiple sets. Because of the design limitations of these studies, conclusions concerning the efficacy of multiple sets should be tentative. "

I didn't see any refs showing worse results with multiple sets than a single set.

No study, but there have been some bodybuilders who had success with single sets, the most famous is propably Mike Mentzer and his Heavy Duty program.
Years ago I had a similar training scheme for some time and it worked pretty good, there are some great advantages but also disadvantages.
Biggest advantage is training time. If training time is limited, you get a bigger bang for the buck (can't remember exactly, but I think I reduced my training time from 6x 60-90' to 3x 30-45' per week, so propably 25% training time for 90%+ of training effect).
Biggest disadvantage is to go to failure every set which is very taxing both mentally and physically, injury risk is higher, and only working for advanced lifters.

[Dutch]

I currently use the 1 set approach in all but deadlift. I squat 1 set of 20 and use 12 to 15 reps on all other exercises. I do a warm up set of half the weight and half the reps I am about to lift.
I don't go to failure or do forced reps or negatives. I always leave a little in reserve. The one set approach has been about for 100 years.
Most of the studies done for people adding more muscle mass is done on newbies normally.
Body building muscle is a lot of sarcoplasmic fluid which contribute zilch to strength but you will look good in shorts and tight t-shirt.
When I drop off 1 set approach I switch to 3x6-8 reps, another basic routine that has been about since around 1938 and Peary Rader and Iron man magazine.
Back in the 1980s and 90s, 3x8 was followed by nearly every gym goer ever and the weights being lifted back then were phenomenal. Nearly every built guy was benching 3 plates aside. In todays money that is 140kgs. Bodybuilders were strong. When I see people train today they are weak as kittens and banging loads of gear (steroids). Young stick insects doing 4 different exercises for biceps thinking they are training for strength.
People should read "Physical training simplified" by Mark berry, published in 1930. Everything that exists today is in the book, every rep scheme and strength routine ever published comes from this era. Even back then, pumping up the muscle was not new. The Milo barbell company in 1902, later to become York weights company in 1932 sold lots of literature for different weights routines. Again all similar and strongmen of that era make todays strongmen look silly. Strongmen back then only had milk as there go to, today even local gym goers are banging 2000mg a week of gear.
The commercial rubbish I see posted today is absolute tripe and it has been the same since the 1960s.
Every decade a book is published that becomes the go to for home trainers. 1980s, was super squats 1990s was heavy duty and Brawn. All focused on abbreviated, low set training and were taken from routines similar in the 50s then the 30s and back further.
All these books have one thing in common, they are published for average weight trainers, generally non steroid users and were highly successful in sales to back it up. The routines originate from the pre steroid era of pre 1940.
Try it, if is suits you, use it, if not, nothing lost. But you will learn what your body responds to and have confidence in your own intuition.

[Mike Caviston]

Biggest disadvantage is to go to failure every set which is very taxing both mentally and physically, injury risk is higher, and only working for advanced lifters.

“Going to failure” simply means performing as many reps as possible with proper form. It doesn’t require Herculean effort or going to total physical exhaustion. It generally requires 8-12 reps (though it could be more or less), until phosphagen stores are depleted. These are replaced quickly. The last couple reps should be challenging, and I suppose you could say mentally and physically taxing – but less so than 5 or 6 sets of each exercise! Injury risk is, if anything, less than for multiple set workouts. Single sets to concentric failure are entirely appropriate for novice lifters, though more advanced formats can eventually be used (drop sets, forced reps, forced negatives).

[MartinSH4321]

Biggest disadvantage is to go to failure every set which is very taxing both mentally and physically, injury risk is higher, and only working for advanced lifters.

“Going to failure” simply means performing as many reps as possible with proper form. It doesn’t require Herculean effort or going to total physical exhaustion. It generally requires 8-12 reps (though it could be more or less), until phosphagen stores are depleted. These are replaced quickly. The last couple reps should be challenging, and I suppose you could say mentally and physically taxing – but less so than 5 or 6 sets of each exercise! Injury risk is, if anything, less than for multiple set workouts. Single sets to concentric failure are entirely appropriate for novice lifters, though more advanced formats can eventually be used (drop sets, forced reps, forced negatives).

I didn't mean that total physical exhaustion is needed and your definition of going to failure is right. But as far as I know when novices can't do another rep is has different reasons than for advanced lifters who have done this movement thousands of time and can hold proper form even under great stress/pain etc.
@ Injury risk: It's propably lower for novice lifters, but not for advanced lifters I think, at least Mike Mentzer and myself experienced this. With normal multiple set trainings I only train to failure one or two times per exercise at the end of a meso cycle, not 1-2x each week.

[chrisT]

The weight doesn't matter much, but if it's too light, it's a lot harder to get a good set in. Go look up Muscle Mind Connection. When you do a set where you're doing full range of motion and completely focusing on your muscle contracting, you're going to grow a lot more than someone struggling to do half reps. But yeah, 8-12 is the correct rep range to grow. I don't know about anyone else, but I'm struggling madly to get that last rep in. A 'slight' struggle won't do it for me.