Rowing Science Reviews the Slater Paper

You may have read the abstract of " Influence of Nutrient Intake after Weigh-In on Lightweight Rowing Performance" and wondered just what exactly was going on there. Fortunately Rowing Science has provided a nice review of the paper along with some good comments. You may have noticed that the USRowing lightweight presentation referred to research done by G.J. Slater (slides 12 and 25), one of the authors (I believe) of this paper.



Rowing Science raises some important questions about how the subjects in the study lost weight and what that might mean to the results, as well as the suggestion that it be repeated with women since there could well be gender differences that would have an effect.



The conclusion:

So it is interesting work. Food for thought (pardon the pun). But carry on as normal - after weigh in replace fluids and take on some nutrients.

Technorati Tags: rowing

USRowing Convention

The USRowing annual convention begins tomorrow in Portland, Oregon. In addition to events and speakers of interest to all rowers, there are two events of particular interest to lightweight women. The first event is Saturday's meeting of the CRCA lightweight committee. I'm not sure what is on the agenda, but perhaps FITD can get a post meeting report.



The second event is Dr. Tim Hosea's presentation on lightweight weigh-ins. If you remember, Dr. Hosea heads up a team looking at weigh-ins and he will be reporting their findings. I've asked Dr. Hosea for his report after he presents it on Saturday. If he sends it to me (no response yet) I'll be sure to publish it's contents. Even if the effect isn't immediate, I expect that this report will be quite influential in how weigh-ins are handled in collegiate races.



Other meetings of interest are the NCAA/CRCA meeting and the ECAC/IRA meetings on Friday. I can't help but wonder if any lightweight issues will be discussed in the NCAA/CRCA meeting and if last year's botched IRA championship will be discussed in the ECAC/IRA meeting.





Technorati Tags: rowing

Typical Speculative Weight Story in Yale Daily News

A few weeks ago the Yale Daily News published a story entitled, Weight troubles athletes. This story is typical of the genre in that it discusses eating disorders among lightweight rowers (in this case men) without providing any statistics or even anecdotal evidence that this group of athletes experiences these disorders more frequently than the population at large. In fact, it fails to produce one member of the team with an eating disorder. One person quoted as an authority is a female heavyweight rower who claims to see male rowers who lose 30 pounds from summer to season. Obviously, that kind of rower is not a lightweight, but she offers no names and her claim isn't confirmed.

The weigh-in issue we've discussed here is touched upon by rowers, however, when the article states, "The 17 to 20 hours between weigh-in and a race give rowers a chance to hydrate and take in calories before the competition, team members said." Readers have pointed to this exact practice and have criticized these weigh-in rules saying that true lightweights should be capable of weighing-in just prior to a race without a loss of performance due to dehydration or lack of calories.

The usual three points to be made here:

- "Eating disorders" as defined in all studies I've seen with definitions is what a lay person would call "dieting." All college women do it.

- Whenever I've seen statistics for lightweight women rowers with "eating disorders" (using the expansive definition), the numbers show that they are no more likely to be affected than their peer group.

- Lightweight rowing should not be lumped with other allegedly "at-risk" sports because unlike those other sports, there is no incentive for rowers to drop to a weight below the minimum. In fact, rowers want to be as close as they can to the minimum because lower weight will mean a loss of power.

I get tired of reading these stories and I get tired of writing about these stories, but I don't feel it is proper to let them go unchallenged.

USRowing Medical Commission

You'll remember that the USRowing Board of Directors meeting minutes from 5 December contained this nugget of information:

The Medical Commission is creating procedures for safe weight loss for lightweights. The NCAA has procedures in place for wrestling. USRowing does not have a mechanism for mandating that athletes follow procedures as yet. The Medical Commission plans to write a recommendation paper regarding appropriate weight loss methods. Working on this paper will be Kris Carlson, Jo Hanafin, Larry Klekatzky, Tim Hosea, a representative from the NCAA, Paul Fuchs, Charlie Butt, Greg Hughes, and Andy Card. Bebe Bryans asked that a collegiate lightweight women's coach be added to the group. Questions to be answered: Who can be a lightweight? How do you monitor weight loss? What are appropriate weigh-in procedures? Pete Cipollone asked that coxswains be included in the group being addressed about weight loss.

At the time I also wondered why no lightweight women's coach was in the group and wondered why the NCAA was included. Nonetheless, this is quite an impressive group.

I recently wrote to Dr. Tim Hosea and asked about the progress of the group, as well as why a lightweight women's coach was not included and why the NCAA was. Dr. Hosea was kind enough to write a brief response in which he said that the group was not prepared to comment now but would present its findings at the USRowing convention. I don't know whether those findings will become the "Law of the Water," but if not, they will certainly carry some weight. Dr. Hosea did take a look at FITD so he had a chance to read some of your thoughts on the subject.

The USRowing convention is scheduled for November 30th through December 2nd in Portland, Oregon. Looks like we may soon have the official word on the very issues we've all been discussing.

"Effective Weight Limit"

There's been a "healthy" discussion going on in response to my last weigh-in
post, and I'd like to address the notion of "effective weight limit" that I
mentioned there.

The weight activities we've all been discussing occur just above the lightweight weight limit (it's 130, of course, but if it were different the same activities would simply occur above the different limit). Because of the particular weigh-in protocol used in college racing certain weight games can be played, which means that the "natural weight" a rower can be and still row lightweight is above the 130 pound limit. This weight is what I call the effective weight limit. I have no idea what this effective weight limit currently is, but a reasonable guess is probably around 135. Some rowers drop from a higher weight, but I think 135 sounds more like the effective weight. You'll notice that this weight is dependent on what we all call a rower's "natural weight." I put that term in quotes because it is a hypothetical weight that means different things to different people.

What then, is the definition of "natural weight?" Is it the weight a person would weigh if she did no physical activity and ate whatever she wanted? If she did minimal physical activity and drank diet soda? Natural weight means different things to different groups of people. To the average person, it may be the first definition. To the average college athlete, I hope it's something else. To me, a rower's natural weight is what she would weigh given a program of moderate physical activity and healthy eating habits. Now I need to provide two more definitions - moderate physical activity and healthy eating habits. I define moderate as moderate for an athlete, not for the general population. This isn't walking for twenty minutes three times a week. If you are a college athlete, and particularly a college rower, by the time you graduate you should be committed to a lifetime of physical fitness, whether it means rowing, running, triathlons, cross-country skiing, or something else just as strenuous. You may not know it now, but you're in this for life. Given that physical fitness should be a way of life, it should also be part of the definition of natural weight. As for healthy eating habits, let me put down my bag of cheese curls and give it some thought. I'm the worst person to define that, but I would say it means eating the right things in the right quantity. (Uh-oh, I've just given myself an eating disorder, haven't I?)

Now that I have a healthy, physically fit (but not yet rowing fit) woman, who eats well, I'd still let her cut a few pounds to row lightweight. You can see by this definition that "natural weight" is almost impossible to determine, but I still think this is about right.

Changing the weight limit, of course, doesn't change the gap between the limit and the effective weight limit. Changing the weigh-in protocol, however, does. A requirement to make weight every day, for example, would shrink that gap substantially, while a requirement to make weight twice a year would widen it substantially. Those programs that put out boats of opportunity would prefer that the gap be zero, while the dedicated programs would prefer that it be as large as it can be while not endangering or weakening their athletes. Therein lies the tension.

While I think we could narrow that gap a bit more than it currently is, I also don't think it should be zero. I think it shouldn't be zero because women who are natural lightweights, by my definition or perhaps when they are a bit less fit, often find that with more intensive training they add some muscle weight which, due to density differences, is not offset by the loss of fat. This discussion would be greatly enhanced if we knew how large the gap could safely be, but I'm not qualified to offer an opinion on that.

Another question entirely is if 130 pounds is the proper weight limit. Perhaps we'll discuss that another day.

More on Weigh-Ins

About a month ago there was a bit of a row over a post on weigh-ins. The comments were passionate and well thought out. I made some comments myself, but a theme emerged which I thought valuable to pull out of the comments and onto the main page.

Several readers felt that the USRowing weigh-in protocol (competitors must weigh in not more than two hours before their race) is healthier and more just (is that the right word?) than the collegiate practice of weighing in the day before. I'll quote one of my readers who makes this case:

Collegiate lightweights are pampered in regards to their status as lightweights. They are able to go thru the whole year heavy, and only weigh in the day before the race. They then have 24 hours to binge, and replenish themselves to 5+ pounds above race weight. This makes them totally unprepared and unable to perform well when they race on weigh-in day, since they are not physiologically trained to race at the target weight.

USRowing has its own problems with weight limits (such as allowing athletes to take spring erg tests at 15 pounds over the international weight limit) but I think this reader has a point. If weighing in the day of a race ruins your whole day, you need to either reconsider if you really are a lightweight or else find some healthy eating habits and some discipline and stop yo-yoing your weight. (Some context here - lightweight yo-yoing is more like 5 pound swings, not the larger swings associated with the rest of the heavier world.) As my reader notes, single day diets aren't particularly healthy.

Given the way weigh-ins are conducted (although they may weigh in a lot, rowers infrequently have to actually make weight during the fall and winter) it's interesting to consider how erg score rankings would look if rowers had to make weight, stepping from the scale to the erg, every time they tested. What, after all, is the point of testing athletes at 135 or 132 pounds, when they have to race at 130? Or perhaps that's the point - they don't have to race at 130! Coaches will want to replicate race day conditions and if an athlete races a day after binging, a coach wants to see what they pull on the erg a day after binging.

I'm beginning to believe that collegiate weigh-ins should mirror USRowing weigh-ins. The point isn't to drive down the "effective weight" of a lightweight, it's simply to create a healthy, even playing field for all competitors. (By the way, this notion of "effective weight" is also an interesting topic which I'll take up in a later post.) To be sure, we're talking about pretty small weight changes here, but athletes who are worried about having to weigh in on race day are the same athletes whose performance would suffer as a result.

Weigh-In Differences

A few days ago a reader asked why collegiate weigh-ins are different from USRowing (e.g. USRowing nationals) weigh-ins. Collegiate weigh-ins are typically the day before a race, with a certification requirement at IRAs. USRowing requires an athlete to weigh-in not more than two hours prior to each race (heat, semi, and final). In an attempt to get an answer to this question, I went to the font of all knowledge on such matters (collegiate, anyway), the lightweight committee of the CRCA.

As with many rowing practices, the true reason for the difference is a bit murky, but probably results largely from tradition. In addition, the collegiate practice was developed to help protect the health of the athlete as a single weigh-in prior to the regatta helps avoid race day dehydration issues. There is also the convenience factor of one weigh-in for regatta officials, coaches and rowers. (With a goal of growing the sport, convenience does play a part.) While not a USRowing practice, FISA (international) sets a single rower weight limit of about 130lbs, and a boat average limit of about 125 lbs. This kind of boat average weight limit is not used in college rowing because of the inherent danger of forcing a boat average five pounds below the individual average. This typically results in all members of a boat losing weight, even those well under 130 pounds, to allow athletes near 130 to compete.

It's tempting to want athletes to weigh in every day and let those near-weight rowers row dehydrated. If they are that close to the limit either they shouldn't be rowing lightweight or they should pay a price for not managing their weight as well as everyone else. If the penalty for dehydration was simply fatigue or a loss of strength, that might work. Unfortunately the penalty could be injury, or worse. The certification requirement at IRAs, however, is an attempt to weed out those rowers who really aren't lightweights by forcing them to weigh-in during the season.

There is one USRowing weight practice that I find to be particularly egregious. Elite lightweight rowers are allowed to weigh 140 pounds when they submit their April erg score. That is 15 pounds heavier than the boat average. Elite level lightweights actually have weight management plans that have them bulking up to 140 in the off season so they can max out the erg test, and then dropping weight for the racing season. This is obviously unhealthy and I don't understand why USRowing encourages it. Why not require lightweights to be at weight whenever testing, racing, or seat racing?

[Update: See comments - I get slapped around a bit on this one.]

More on Weight Loss

Several people have posted comments on my previous post, and a few themes have emerged. First, of course, is a general condemnation of losing a lot of weight immediately prior to a race. Not only is this dangerous but it also degrades performance. Second, is a recognition that coaches have a responsibility to the health of their rowers and should not allow such a practice. Some have suggested that moving weigh-in day will only encourage greater weight loss because now rowers have a day more to rehydrate and eat. One reader pointed out this specific problem at IRAs. Another reader noted the inconclusiveness of the "adequate hydration" presumption.

Needless to say, I agree that this kind of quick weight loss behavior is irresponsible and that coaches are the first line of defense against it. Real lightweight programs have responsible coaches who don't allow it. As for the IRAs, I think the in-season weigh-in requirement is intended to guard against quick weight loss just for that regatta. I think that new rule is a good one.

If we're going to have a lightweight category, we have to have a weight limit and whatever that limit is, there will be people right there. I don't think it's a problem for a natural 133 or even a 135 pounder to drop a few pounds to row lightweight. The problem comes in really knowing what is natural. If a girl arrives at school at 135 does that mean it's her natural weight or that she just forced off five pounds last summer? It's a judgment call and that's where you need experienced, responsible coaches. There will always be some weight loss and weight monitoring in the sport, it's inevitable. It's when it goes from weight loss to weight abuse that it becomes a problem. Oddly, USRowing doesn't help.

Although not exactly on point, over the winter a spate of articles and studies came out discussing women's sports and eating disorders and I posted on some of them. For what it's worth, those posts have some more thoughts on weight and rowing. The posts were "Should the Weight Limit be Raised?" and "Dropping Dangerously" and "Tis' the Season?" (some statistics here) and "Make...It...Stop...".

Weigh-In Update

I received clarification on the question I had below as to whether you must race lightweight if possible to get your weigh-in certifications. The answer is that a weigh-in before a lightweight race is preferred, but if a rower is racing heavyweight or not enough races are available then a weigh-in certified by school staff will suffice. So, if the UCF rowers I mentioned below race as heavies all season, they can still race as lightweights at IRAs as long as they follow the 3 weigh-ins, after April 1st, one week apart, protocol.

2006 IRA Weigh-In Procedures Announced

The weigh-in procedures for the 2006 IRA Women's Lightweight National Championship have been announced. There are two primary changes from past years:

- Weigh-ins will be held the day before the first day of racing

- Each rower will need documentation of three prior weigh-ins from spring races.

Another key part of the procedure continuing from previous years is that a rower weighing over 132 pounds at the first weigh-in may not race, and a rower over 130 but under 132 may make two more attempts to make weight within one hour.

So, as some of you have wondered, you will hear "Paperz pleez," at IRAs. (Actually, the documentation of your weigh-ins will be sent along with the entry.) What you won't hear, at least not yet, is, "Fill ze bottle, pleez." There will be no hydration test.

To provide a little bit more detail, let me quote from the weigh-in principles:

To participate in the IRA National Championship, each MEMBER of a lightweight women's crew entry will be required to submit documentation of weigh-in on at least three different race dates between April 1 and the IRA entry due date, in that given year.

Weigh-in records, presented as documentation for the IRA entry, must be spaced at least 1-week apart; where there is a scheduling hardship (lack of enough April race-dates), a weigh-in record alone for a crew or athlete, will suffice.

That last statement leaves a question or two in my mind. A few posts ago I noted that the UCF heavyweight boat that raced Michigan contained at least two rowers listed as lightweights on the school's roster. If these women race all season as heavyweights, can they be weighed-in three times by the school medical staff during the season, complete the necessary documentation, and race for UCF as lightweights come IRAs? I'm not sure if the purpose of the rule is to ensure that real lightweights are racing or that real lightweights who raced as lightweights whenever possible are racing. I've asked for clarification on this so if I get it I'll post it. [Update: See post above.]

I think this three weigh-in rule is a good rule. Lightweight rowing is for lightweights and is not for midweights or heavyweights who are able to suck down to 130 for a national championship race. It certainly changes things, however, if the requirement is that you have to race lightweight, not just be lightweight, during the season. I can think of pros and cons to a rule like that, but I'll hold off thinking more about it until I hear more. I make fun of the documentation aspect of the new rule because documentation means bureaucracy and bureaucracy exists to be mocked. Nonetheless, I do think this is a good thing.

Maybe the best aspect of these new rules is that the lightweight coaches took the time to consider and develop them. It shows organization. I don't mean that lightweight coaches haven't done much for the sport in the past, but I've always thought they should be more organized and more vocal. It looks like the organization part is coming, and I hope they're working on the vocal part. Heck, maybe someday Rowing News will even discover that more than two schools race lightweight!

Weigh-In Rumors

Some readers have written asking about rumors they've heard concerning new weigh-in procedures. Specifically, there are questions about a possible hydration test and about the possibility that anyone racing as a lightweight at IRAs will have to weigh in throughout the year even if rowing heavyweight. I've looked into this and the only thing I can report now is that they are still just rumors. The CRCA has told me that the "lightweight committee has made NO recommendation regarding a hydration test -- or a requirement of such." I assume, however, that this doesn't preclude them from making such a recommendation at a later time. Some of the top programs, however, have instituted these tests on their own. Although I think this test can be extra sensitive, using it within a program is a good move. We must be able to trust coaches and trainers with their own athletes. If a coach can't be trusted in this regard she or he should be fired. The hydration test, when used by coaches, trainers, and physicians who know their rowers and understand the sport can only be a good thing. As FITD readers know, I'm not so sure about using it at weigh-ins.

I've also been told that the CRCA has "come up with some revised weigh-in recommendations that will be adopted at the IRA this year." These recommendations have not been communicated to coaches yet so they obviously won't be released to me. As soon as I get them I'll post them so if you don't hear anything from your coaches you can look here.

This idea of weighing-in even if racing heavyweight is a curious one. On the one hand I understand it - rowers shouldn't be losing a ton of weight just before IRAs to try to go out and win a gold medal. That's dangerous and not fair to true lightweights. On the other hand, how would it be policed? Would you need a document certifying that you've made weight all year? What if you missed weight one weekend? I can see it now, the first words from the scale attendant's mouth will be, "Paperz pleeze." A few years ago, when Wisconsin blew the field away by 12 seconds at IRAs, there was a rumor going around that about half the boat was heavyweights who dropped down just for the race. I tried to check this rumor out at the time and as far as I could tell it was false. [Update: See the comments on this post for confirmation that this rumor IS false.] I also think the rumor was a bit insulting. If Wisco was racing 2 heavy eights and a heavy four at NCAAs (and assuming those girls wouldn't be messing around with their weight) that means that the 21st through 24th best rowers on Wisco's heavyweight crew simply had to drop to lightweight to win an IRA gold. Sorry, as much as heavyweights want to believe that can happen, it can't, and certainly not when racing Princeton, Radcliffe, et. al.

Sorry for going on here, but the upshot is, keep checking this site and I'll let you know as soon as I have solid information.

New Weigh-In Procedure?

A reader wrote in a comment to the CRCA post that the CRCA lightweight committee is re-evaluating weigh-ins and is advocating that part of the weigh-in procedure will be a urinalysis. This test would measure hydration. I discussed these tests before and noted that it is very easy to turn up as dehydrated. My guess (and that's all it is) is that if you or I were tested right now we'd both show up as dehydrated. The problem is that the only way to ensure you pass this test is to overhydrate. Even a rower whose natural weight is 130 pounds, just the kind of woman you'd want rowing lightweight, can't risk overhydrating before a weigh-in. Does this mean she's taking risks with her health? Of course not. It means she weighs 130 and can't afford to be bloated with water before a weigh-in. This procedure may actually result in rowers losing weight to 125 so they can fill up with 5 pounds of water before weighing-in.

Trying to get a handle on weight control issues is a good thing. The problem is that no test or rule will ever really work. The only thing that works is having responsible coaches in focused lightweight programs working with good trainers. As this reader noted, serious lightweight programs have trainers and team doctors who weigh rowers away from coaches to make sure weight control is being handled properly.