New to rowing, please help

[Greg3]

I am doing rowing for the first time this spring, and I just got a Concept2 Model D rower. I am 15 and 6'2. I am pretty strong from working out with weights, but I have bad aerobic endurance Sad . I am doing rowing mainly because it will help me get into a good college, so I want to get my 2k down to as low as possible. What kind of erg workout would you recommend to improve my endurance and 2k score? thanks a lot.

[Greg3]

oh and also should I row on the erg in the morning or after weight training?

[Stefan]

oh and also should I row on the erg in the morning or after weight training?

If your focus is to lower the 2k time and you are already pretty strong. Than you should emphasis rowing over weights, ie. do rowing first even if it impairs your lifting.

At your age, your aerobic fitness will improv quickly with a nice mix of intervals and longer distances. Look at this plan for ideas:
http://www.concept2.co.uk/forum/viewtopic.php?t=5409

[Elamonta]

Best of luck to you...definitely seems like endurance training would help quite a bit. Longer rows (60 mins for example) would greatly benefit the endurance. I am currently building my aerobic base up also, as I am in the same boat (pardon the pun) when it comes to having strength but little endurance.

Good luck with the college selection also...don't forget that a strong education is important when picking preferences, just in case you don't become an Olympian haha.

[ufcrewguy]

I coach at the college level. The most important thing for you is DISTANCE, DISTANCE, AND DISTANCE. Just do a ton of meters. Don't get on the erg for less than 10,000 meter. Work your 10k, 15k, and hour pieces down. Do that for a couple of weeks and then 2k test after 3 weeks. Your time should drop. Then go back to the distance.

As far as your weight lifting question. I have my guys erg before lifting then run or bike for 45 min after. If you lift first your erg scores will be effected and you will be more likely to stop or give up. Another tip on weights, make sure you are doing low weight, high rep sets. Start with 15-20 reps at 60-50 percent of max. Rowing isn't like the other sports you have done, big, bulky muscle (the kind you build with low rep high weights) slows you down. Massive volume on the erg and in the weight room will take you where you want to go.

[Greg3]

I coach at the college level. The most important thing for you is DISTANCE, DISTANCE, AND DISTANCE. Just do a ton of meters. Don't get on the erg for less than 10,000 meter. Work your 10k, 15k, and hour pieces down. Do that for a couple of weeks and then 2k test after 3 weeks. Your time should drop. Then go back to the distance.

As far as your weight lifting question. I have my guys erg before lifting then run or bike for 45 min after. If you lift first your erg scores will be effected and you will be more likely to stop or give up. Another tip on weights, make sure you are doing low weight, high rep sets. Start with 15-20 reps at 60-50 percent of max. Rowing isn't like the other sports you have done, big, bulky muscle (the kind you build with low rep high weights) slows you down. Massive volume on the erg and in the weight room will take you where you want to go.

thanks a lot for the advice. I've been using the erg every day trying to row as much as I can and even when I row at a moderately slow pace i burned out before I even got to 5k. So I've been trying to increase my distance every day.

Unfortunately I am currently in a 5x5 workout program with a friend that uses low volume and high weight, so I can't really change that. Do you think it is absolutely necessary that I have a high volume workout, or if I just do high volume on the erg is that enough?

[ufcrewguy]

The distance on the erg is the most important part. To increase you distance try taking the rating down 2-3 spm for the next one and see if youcanget 1-2K further.

As far as the weights go, the problem with high weight workouts is that it builds bulky heavy muscle. This muscle increases weight, increase the amount of muscle that the heart has to supply blood to, and doesn't help you erg time as much as leaner, smaller muscles would. Doing your 5x5 IS going to help you get strong, bring you erg down, and help getting a girlfriend (I am assume that is one of the main goals of your lifting ). That being said when you get to a point that you erg score is not getting better you may want to alter your weight lifting regiment.

I'd be happy to help with any other questions you have.

[Nosmo]

ufcrewguy stated thing much more gently then I would have. You may not be helping your erg score at all with the weights you are doing. If you want low erg scores, concentrate on the rowing.

See this:
http://home.hia.no/~stephens/rowstre.htm

Check out the rest of that web site also. Lots of interesting stuff.

[Greg3]

ufcrewguy stated thing much more gently then I would have. You may not be helping your erg score at all with the weights you are doing. If you want low erg scores, concentrate on the rowing.

See this:
http://home.hia.no/~stephens/rowstre.htm

Check out the rest of that web site also. Lots of interesting stuff.

Thanks, that had a lot of helpful info

[philrow]

I've spent a lot of time in the past advocating in detail the use of weight-training. I will again disclaim that I advocate only from personal experience. So, I see weight training as very valuable.

I've used two forms of weight training. One was the once/twice weekly lifting with low-weights high-reps many sets integrated with lots of high- and low-intensity aerobic training. This produced very few results in terms of strength increases, although it did help increase tone and definition -- aspects not particularly directly valuable in rowing, although they probably indicate some benefits.

I've also used, and in fact just finished a phase of, a program of utilizing just lifting to build muscle and strength largely specific to rowing, and nearly eliminating aerobic endurance exercise. This produced great increases in strength and some increases in mass. Right now, I am a bit over 165lbs. As I lose fat necessarily gained with increased mass through increased aerobic endurance training and lose some muscle mass through reduced use (e.g., my biceps will probably decrease in mass as I'm no longer regularly doing 40-45lbs dumbbell curls, which is fine because the biceps' role in rowing is minimal), I will be at weight for lightweight rowing, and will have the (ideally) maximum lean mass. while still making that weight.

However, you mention a regular 5x5 program. That won't be effective. Or, at least, it won't be as effective as a strength-training weightlifting program could and should be. Unique variations in lifts and sets/reps/weight/general approaches will make sure that muscle get a great deal of stimulation.

This all leads to a very important question. You state that you want to lower your 2k, but what are your other goals or limitations? If you're 6'2 130lbs and plan to row flyweight or lightweight, then you can very well stand to put on a ton of muscle. If you're rowing heavyweight, then of course you can put on even more. That isn't to say that you necessarily should, but rather, that it is an option.

As far as the weights go, the problem with high weight workouts is that it builds bulky heavy muscle... That being said when you get to a point that you erg score is not getting better you may want to alter your weight lifting regiment.

You're obviously in a better position to talk about training, but I'm going to have to disagree with you. What is muscle? Well, most our "muscle mass" has nothing to do with the actual fibers that constitute what might be considered "muscle." I believe some ~70% of muscle mass is composed of water, mitochondria, capillaries, and nutrient stores -- pretty much exactly what aerobic endurance training seeks to augment. With muscle strength-training to hypertrophy, leading to increased mass, there are indeed increased levels of interstitial fluids, mitochondria development (which become more prone to burning fat as training progresses), capillarization, and size of nutrient stores. Bigger trained muscles mean bigger potential for exertion. Indeed, this does also mean that there is more muscle to which blood must be supplied. But, after that muscle is gained, I imagine with continued training that stroke volume would adjust. Back some year ago, when I started rowing, I started putting on a ton of weight and I lost what little unnecessary fat I had. Yet, that gain of some 30lbs of muscle did not hinder my rowing performance, but I'm sure enhanced it.

But, I do agree with changing the lifting regiment, and even doing so immediately, as mentioned above.

Now, remember my earlier disclaimer. :-p

Good luck,
Phil

[ufcrewguy]

One was the once/twice weekly lifting with low-weights high-reps many sets integrated with lots of high- and low-intensity aerobic training. This produced very few results in terms of strength increases, although it did help increase tone and definition -- aspects not particularly directly valuable in rowing, although they probably indicate some benefits.

This is what I have my team do. Low weight high rep workouts and a TON of milage (high-and low-intensity aerobic training). When we move into the spring we begin to up the weight a lower the rep. I think our disagreement stemed from the fact that I am working to make an eight fast on the water and you are talking about stregnth and erg times. To me a 3-4 second drop in a 2k score is not worth 15 pounds of bulk muscle that we have to carry down the race course.

[philrow]

Low-weight high-rep is basically equivalent to low-distance high-intensity. If the point is not to gain strength and size, then it is probably better to do rowing specific high-resistance work than it is to do weights.

I erg and I strength-train to get faster in a boat. I gain muscle and cut fat to get faster in a boat, and most likely in a single scull this spring. Is it not muscle that moves a boat? I would hardly consider the basis for propulsion to be some superfluous mass. I would imagine, hypothetically, that given all other factors equal, a boat full of 6'2 165lb lightweights would move a boat faster than a boat full of 6'2 146lb lightweights if the difference in weight were accounted for in muscle mass.

When I talk about doing serious weightlifting for strength and mass, I think that it should be considered in an appropriate context. First, all "bulk" should be eliminated. From that point on, most mass gains will be muscle mass. Another "bulk elimination" should take place after gaining the desired amount of muscle. Gaining a great deal of mass for a marginal increase in strength does not seem appropriate. However, for rowers, especially those who are quite light and can stand to put on some muscle, there is much improvement to be gained. I hardly doubt that 15lbs of appropriately-placed muscle (legs, some back and shoulders) would produce only 3-4 seconds improvement on a 2k. I've mentioned on this forum before that I spent this summer almost exclusively lifting weights. My first 2k back, I pulled 15 seconds faster. That is, I cut my time by over 15 seconds due purely to increases in strength and mass, accounting for a necessary decrease in aerobic endurance. I just finished another such phase last week, and I set a 5k PB today.

Again, my point is not that heavy lifting is great and wonderful for everyone and is the secret to rowing. Rather, I claim only that it worked wonders for me, and hence I can recommend it where appropriate. And, it may be appropriate for this other young rower.

Phil

[ufcrewguy]

Is it not muscle that moves a boat? I would hardly consider the basis for propulsion to be some superfluous mass. I would imagine, hypothetically, that given all other factors equal, a boat full of 6'2 165lb lightweights would move a boat faster than a boat full of 6'2 146lb lightweights if the difference in weight were accounted for in muscle mass.

Your scarcasm aside, by that theory why doesn't the national team have guys that are 270-290 that are build like brick walls rather than the tall lean athletes ranging 220-240. Would the big guys not be faster by your theory. Have you discovered the way for the US to dominate the 2008 Olympics? Probably not. Massive amount of bulky muscle at some point slows the boat. You being a lightweight rower do not have to worry about getting near this point. But I guarantee that you coach would think twice before putting a 270+ pounder in your heavy boat no matter what his erg time.

[philrow]

Nothing I said was sarcastic. Muscle does move a boat, and I would not consider it to be something that needs to be "carried" down the course -- it does the carrying.

Notice, "Again, my point is not that heavy lifting is great and wonderful for everyone and is the secret to rowing. Rather, I claim only that it worked wonders for me, and hence I can recommend it where appropriate. And, it may be appropriate for this other young rower." Rather, "Have you discovered the way for the US to dominate the 2008 Olympics?" would be sarcasm.

I agree, muscle mass at some point slows the boat. And you are exactly right, as a lightweight, I don't need to worry about slowing a boat down with excess mass. That's why I maximize the amount of force I can generate with the most muscle I can carry while eliminating as much dead weight as possible, and that's what most rowers should do. Indeed, you will also notice that most heavyweight rowers, e.g. at elite clubs and national teams, do not weigh 170lbs, or 180lbs, and sometimes not even 190lbs. Look at the rosters for the Boat Race boats. The A boats are always heavier than the alternative boats. The average weight for the Oxford blue boat in '07 was 207lbs, and nearly 217lbs in the Cambridge blue boat. Both B boats were well under 200lbs. You seem to ignore that much of my last post -- "I think that it should be considered in an appropriate context," "However, for rowers, especially those who are quite light and can stand to put on some muscle, there is much improvement to be gained," etc.

I don't establish any theory. And in fact, I disclaim everything, as I will quote again: "Again, my point is not that heavy lifting is great and wonderful for everyone and is the secret to rowing. Rather, I claim only that it worked wonders for me, and hence I can recommend it where appropriate. And, it may be appropriate for this other young rower." I also did it twice before. I also stated, "You're obviously in a better position to talk about training, but I'm going to have to disagree with you," despite that I have also been appointed as a coach. We're both coaches, then, with different notions of training. Additionally, if "UF" stands for University of Florida, then we come from different "schools" of rowing altogether and so differences in training are inevitable. So, I'm not sure where the hostility is coming from, but I'm not here to get in a fight. I posted to offer advice to this young rower, just as you did. You criticized his method altogether, while I offered advice for alterations still in support of weight training from successful personal experience. That's fine. I did not post to try to convince you or anybody that my idea of weight lifting is supreme. I'm passionate about training and have done extensive research into the physiology involved. Based on that research, I've made these claims. What you say does not necessarily correlate to that research and my experience, which means absolutely nothing, so I've offered objections -- yet you're still going to coach a certain way, and I'm going to train and coach a certain way. Again, your straw man hostility is inexplicable. I don't see a problem here.

Phil

[Elamonta]

Although I am not included in this intense conversation, I feel I can add a sentence or two from my own experiences. Also being a lightweight rower, I cannot specificly comment on the bulk vs. lean argument, but I have noticed a few trends within my team.

To some extent, rowing requires maximizing what potential one could have while still keeping in mind that a heavier boat will take more force to race down the course. An eight full of lightweight men will weigh less than an eight of substantially heavier men (obviously). For that reason, a weight adjustment calculator exists which explains this very thought process also. An eight full of lightweights who average a 6:40 2k time would (assuming perfection of course/talent/balance) race OTW at a 5:53.6. In order for a heavyweight eight (assuming a 185lb avg) to pull the same time (approx.) the men in the boat would have to average a 6:25 2k on the erg.

At some point endurance lifting should be reevaluated so that the rowers do still increase in strength also. Our team here does 2 sessions a week of circuit lifting (sets of 45sec on 15sec off) and one day of heavy lifting...it keeps out guys/girls at lightweight or close, and as a result we are usually in fairly good shape for our size. We sadly do not have any "bulky" rowers anymore as we had one rower who weighed 210 pounds and pulled a 7:10ish 2k on the erg. Over the summer he lost 50 pounds and is now one of us lightweights...and still pulling near a 7:10-15 2k. Our team has always been small but we emphasize heavy lifting in the fall (as phil alludes to) and in the spring we do more circuit lifting (as ufcrew alludes to).

I am pretty sure reading over this post that it had very little to do with your debate, but I guess a little discourse on weight would never hurt. If the lifting is not rowing-specific than any pounds put on due to it are not helping the erg times. Adding 5 pounds to the weight adjustment calculator but barely adjusting the erg score hurts the "potential" time...which obviously isn't the goal.

Have fun.