Rowing for weight loss question

[ahooton]

90 lbs is a stunning achievement!

Thanks, it’s truly been life changing

Wholeheartedly echo this sentiment. Very well done!

[Dangerscouse]

I have lost 90lbs (from 245lbs down to 155lbs) since January 2023, and I would attribute a large part of my success to being consistent with the erg. As you say, it’s all down to keeping your “calories in” < “calories out”. Eating less than you burn.

That said, as long as you are tracking accurately and controlling your intake (use a food scale!) then spending time on the rower really really absolutely DOES help boost the “calories out” bit. If I do an hour of steady state at 2:30ish splits I will burn approx 650 calories according to the PM. That number may or may not be totally and completely accurate, but I have a year + worth of data now, and let me tell you, it tracks pretty closely with my calories/weight trend data. It’s not *that* far off.

You can do it. Being consistent and putting the time in is what matters most.

That is an excellent achievement

There is definitely a difference in metabolism, as some people have 'hungrier' gut microbiome that extract more calories from food than others do, nevermind the metabolic 'cost' of more muscle.

[Ombrax]

I’m not sure where you got that 300 for just being alive number and maybe it’s true.

It's from information C2 provides on the web site. For example, see the links below for more details:

https://www.concept2.com/training/calorie-calculator

https://www.concept2.com/blog/counting-calories

[fancyoats]

I’m not sure where you got that 300 for just being alive number and maybe it’s true.

It's from information C2 provides on the web site. For example, see the links below for more details:

https://www.concept2.com/training/calorie-calculator

https://www.concept2.com/blog/counting-calories

So I just plugged in my numbers (155lbs for an hour workout at 650cal/hr) into your first link, and got an adjusted calorie burn of 620cal/hr, which is only a delta of 5%. Like I said - not *that* far off.

I see that the formulas posted do use the number 300 as some sort of offset:

True Calories/hour burned = Calories on the PM - 300 + (1.714 * weight)

However, I would still dispute that “300cal just for being alive” bit. If one burns 300cal/hr just for being alive, then one has a BMR of 7200, which is way way WAY on the long tail of a normal distribution. It can’t be 300 just for being alive. I do not know how or why the 300 is used in the calculation but I would not draw the conclusion you did.

[fancyoats]

I see that the formulas posted do use the number 300 as some sort of offset:

True Calories/hour burned = Calories on the PM - 300 + (1.714 * weight)

However, I would still dispute that “300cal just for being alive” bit. If one burns 300cal/hr just for being alive, then one has a BMR of 7200, which is way way WAY on the long tail of a normal distribution. It can’t be 300 just for being alive. I do not know how or why the 300 is used in the calculation but I would not draw the conclusion you did.

Ok so it seems like that 300 is basically based on the (1.714 x weight) for a 175lb person
1.714 x 175 = 299.95

So if you were 175lb, the cal/hr from the pm would be essentially accurate.

true cal/hr = cal/hr on the Pm - 300 + 299.95

Based on this formula, if you weigh more you burn more, if you weigh less you burn less.

[RWAGR]

less scientifically, “300 calories for being alive” must surely be nonsense as we don’t burn 300 calories an hour when not on the rower and that would mean that inactive people would burn 7200 calories a day and we would have much less of an obesity problem in society.

In any case, I still can’t get over 90 lbs in 17 months. It’s epic and inspiring and good for you for sticking to it fancy oats! Have you now hit your goal weight and entered a maintenance phase?

[Sakly]

I have lost 90lbs (from 245lbs down to 155lbs) since January 2023

Wow, I kind of over-read this. That's an amazing result! Well done!

Regarding the 300kcal topic: you cannot compare your metabolic rate at rest with that on the rower, when your body has a heart rate of at least 70% or more. As everybody has a different metabolic efficiency, it stays an estimate. Best way is to put more energy into the machine, so the part of estimated calories gets smaller overall

[JaapvanE]

less scientifically, “300 calories for being alive” must surely be nonsense as we don’t burn 300 calories an hour when not on the rower and that would mean that inactive people would burn 7200 calories a day and we would have much less of an obesity problem in society.

According to Anu Dudhia from Oxford University, which quotes John Williams from C2 (one of the designers of the RowErg):

The 300 kC/hour has always been our best approximation for keeping alive and awake and going through the rowing motion at a reasonable stroke rate on an erg with the flywheel removed. This was arrived at from internal experiments and observations, data from Fritz Hagerman and studies done at Ball State.

There is something to say about correcting this 300kC/hour for weight and strokerate. However, the 25% efficiency is also quite a crude assumption, so in the end it is just an approximation, nothing more.

[Ombrax]

However, the 25% efficiency is also quite a crude assumption, so in the end it is just an approximation, nothing more.

In C2's defense, I've seen that number elsewhere on the web, so it isn't just something they invented. (not that you accused them of that)

[JaapvanE]

In C2's defense, I've seen that number elsewhere on the web, so it isn't just something they invented. (not that you accused them of that)

I agree that it is quite a general assumption found in many sports indeed. However, unlike cycling and other aerobic sports, technique is quite an important element determining the efficiency of the rowing stroke. So my problem is that for new rowers the 25% might result in a conservative estimate of the calories burned (i.e. too low), while for high performing athletes it might be too high. But it is an indication which might help people controll their effort, and to be honest, I wouldn't know of any better assumption either.

[p_b82]

I just bought a rowing machine and would like to lose some belly fat. I'm 45, 6'2" tall and 230lbs. I'm naturally thin but over the last yr or so my stomach has started to expand from a 36" waist to a 40".

I was in a similar position as you when I got the erg - I'm slightly taller, and didn't have quite the same extra padding, but in my first year I lost 10lbs. My weight has stabilised at around 192lbs +/- a few ever since; I have a more muscle, improved posture & fewer lower back issues.
I've not changed my diet at all in this time period.

I only row 3x a week on average, my shortest sessions equate to about 5k total (shorter and faster paced) and longest one was a Marathon (longer & slower).
I personally have found that I can comfortably sustain a pace of ~90% mhr for an hour, and so try to incorporate at least one 12-15k session a week at that pace/effort. This has got faster as my fitness has improved.
I found when I tried to just keep my HR low and ticking over, I wasn't getting the same benefits - but I do have a "higher reving" Hr compared to many.

I have lost 90lbs (from 245lbs down to 155lbs) since January 2023, and I would attribute a large part of my success to being consistent with the erg. As you say, it’s all down to keeping your “calories in” < “calories out”. Eating less than you burn.

You can do it. Being consistent and putting the time in is what matters most.

Congrats - that's a huge change!

[iain]

less scientifically, “300 calories for being alive” must surely be nonsense as we don’t burn 300 calories an hour when not on the rower and that would mean that inactive people would burn 7200 calories a day and we would have much less of an obesity problem in society.

According to Anu Dudhia from Oxford University, which quotes John Williams from C2 (one of the designers of the RowErg):

The 300 kC/hour has always been our best approximation for keeping alive and awake and going through the rowing motion at a reasonable stroke rate on an erg with the flywheel removed. This was arrived at from internal experiments and observations, data from Fritz Hagerman and studies done at Ball State.

There is something to say about correcting this 300kC/hour for weight and strokerate. However, the 25% efficiency is also quite a crude assumption, so in the end it is just an approximation, nothing more.

Of the 300 about 75 is what you would use at rest and the remainder is the energy used in the unproductive parts of the rowing (the recovery and moving your own body weight back and forward). The latter broadly increases with the cube of the stroke rate, so low rates use far less, while it is broadly proportional to the rowers weight. The difference is more pronounced at low paces where the 300 can make up half the calories.

More importantly this under estimates calories used in more intense sessions due to the calories repairing and building new tissues. BUt what matters is the loss of body fat. Many of us do not wish to go to the extremes of cutting all fat & carbs (if that is possible without resorting to all nutrition coming from protein powders). BUt moderation is called for in these.

Best of luck.

[AndyNewland]

Rowing will make a difference but its 80% diet.

My advice - download MyFitnessPal, track what you eat and find out what how many calories you really take in and what your macro split looks like. Amend calorific intake accordingly and increase protein intake to 1g per pound of bodyweight.

Andy

[jamesg]

From what I've read you need a good 45 minutes of rowing daily to start losing weight. I understand calorie deficits, but having never rowed before I'm just not sure what numbers I should aiming for (time, strokes, split, etc).

Rowing will get you fit if you stay at 1.5 to 2W/kg target weight. That power is low enough to let you do quite a lot every day.

At I'm 45, 6'2" you'd have a target weight around 80kg, so need to work at 120 to 160Watts.

How you do it depends on your technique, which must involve mainly the legs, but low aerobic rates will be the norm. How much you can do depends on your state of fitness, which will change fast.