The Difference Between Lightweights and Heavyweights

In honor of Sprints and Dad Vails, which for some lightweights are the only regattas at which they compete alongside their much larger sisters, I'd like to present a musical and videographic presentation of just some of the differences between heavyweights and lightweights. Actually, this is a self-portrayal by the Yale heavies, and although no lightweights appear, or are mentioned, I think you'll notice how these women differ from the lean, mean rowing machines we'll see this weekend.

Those of you at Ivy League schools have no doubt seen this video already, since it found it's way to IvyGate. Nonetheless, it's definitely worth showing here. By the way, imagine if lightweights made a video like this. The NCAA (which does/doesn't govern lightweight rowing) would be beating it's collective breast, interventions would be scheduled for the obviously sick filmakers, and the crew would no doubt be disbanded. Psychologists, sociologists, bingeologists, and perhaps some mixologists would descend upon the campus to offer counseling. Dr. Phil would have a police escort to the boathouse.

Food seems to be a fixation for heavyweight women as we often see that it plays a central role in their lives. To quote one of my all time favorite heavyweights, "I love that we’re big women and proud of it and proud that we’re strong and we love to eat." Despite this food issue, I still hope the NCAA keeps the heavyweight championship, because I'm sure with conscientious coaches and dedicated health and training staff, good heavyweight programs can ensure that their rowers aren't doomed to a life of beer and Twinkies after college athletics end. Remember lightweights, as you hear your heavyweight sisters clip-clopping around the boathouse, be considerate of their moods and feelings, because they're near the precipice, and one wrong word could push them over the edge.

Anyway, back to the video. There is only one thing to say about this thing - scary. Very, very, very SCARY. I always thought Yale was an obvious place for lightweights to take hold. Perhaps I'm wrong. (Warning: Naughty words ahead.)




How long do you think it took them to grow those mustaches?

Comments

There have been some good comments posted over the last few days and I wanted to talk about the issues raised by two in particular. The first noted that most elite level lightweights come from heavyweight college programs (something I've noted before as well) and the second points to a rule allowing Ohio high school wrestlers two extra pounds at their next meet due to recent weather related practice cancellations. While perhaps not related at first glance, both deal with what one might call excessive weight-loss issues.

When it comes to elite US lightweights, I have an opinion and I'm certainly open to hearing others. I believe that few would be accepted into today's college lightweight programs. Many watch their weight fluctuate massively over the course of a year and because of the benefit of height in a leverage sport like rowing, the tallest women who can reach lightweight and still have the strength to row well, drop the weight. USRowing encourages this practice by allowing spring erg tests to be taken at 140 pounds, 15 pounds above the boat average weight limit. (Look at the heights and weights of these rowers - 3 are over 140 pounds.) If a lightweight rower walked into a college boathouse for an erg test weighing 140 pounds (ten pounds above the college limit), I would think she'd be sent immediately to the heavyweight pen. The reality, unfortunately, is that all countries' lightweights do this and for the US to take unilateral action would no doubt result in a less competitive team. All the safeguards implemented in college rowing would have the same positive effect in international rowing (year-long weigh-ins and certifications, hydration testing, etc.), but working on FISA for changes like this seems only slightly easier than rowing an erg on water. We have many excellent lightweights rowing in college, only to discover that at the elite level they are still undersized.

The wrestler story also points out an acceptance, and encouragement, of large weight fluctuations. The reader who posted this comment wonders why this is accepted with boys but viewed with alarm with women rowers. I think the answer is because women are more susceptible to eating disorders than men, although that certainly doesn't mean it's healthy for men. Lightweight women's rowing has this stigma that I think holds it back from mainstream (i.e. NCAA and therefore athletic director) acceptance. (Some coaches have told me that they don't believe this is true.) While I think we know women are more at risk than men, less clear to me is whether collegiate lightweight women rowers are more likely to suffer from eating disorders than their college attending age cohort, or even than heavyweights. I don't know the answer to this and would love to see research that settles the question. The idea, by the way, that women lightweights are more likely to have eating disorders than their classmates has become dogma in some circles. For that reason posts like this tread on dangerous ground (and one resulted in my favorite comment of all time, "You're an idiot.") but I'll never accept that it's wrong to ask for evidence. If there is a problem in college lightweight programs today, let's define it and address it. If there isn't, let's show it and help the rest of the rowing and athletic world move on. While there may be lots of issues at the elite level, I think college programs are trying their best to keep their rowers out of danger. We deserve to know if they have been successful.

This same reader notes that Ohio wrestlers are required to have hydration and body fat tests performed at the start of the season and wonders if something like this might be in store for rowers. Actually, I think that most (all?) separate varsity lightweight programs do this throughout the season. If the question is whether these kinds of tests may be instituted at race weigh-ins, there have been discussions about this. If you recall the presentation given by Tim Hosea at the USRowing convention, one of the recommendations was that lightweights only be certified as lightweights if their body fat reaches a certain percentage when at weight. I believe that hydration testing has been proposed for race weigh-ins. While I believe hydration testing is a critical part of health monitoring, I wonder what the effect would be on rowers' if they were subjected to a test at weigh-in that they could not perform before-hand for themselves. In other words, if you never know if you will be hydrated or not, will your reaction be to lose extra weight so you can put it back on with water before weigh-in to make sure you pass the hydration test?

Now let me try to head off nasty comments. I've said many times before that I'm not a doctor and these are only my opinions. I don't hesitate to express them, however, because if someone who is smarter or has more information can point out the error of my ways, my hope is that we all can learn something.

What Does BMI Tell Us?

In January the Raleigh-Durham News and Observer published an article on the Body Mass Index that suggested it is a poor measure for who's overweight, particularly among athletes:

The paradoxical problem with athletes is simple: Muscle mass weighs more than fat. In a calculation that relies simply on height and weight, the buff athlete will lose out.

This is something I've always believed (or did I just have the need to convince myself of it?), but back in June, The Daily Erg conducted an interview that suggested BMI wasn't such a bad measure after all. (By the way, the N&O article uses the fact that the offensive line of a certain university's football team are considered obese by their BMI as evidence of the index's lack of credibility. To that I say that the index suggests that the linemen are obese, not that they are weak, or slow, or can't walk up a flight of stairs. If you've ever seen a major college football lineman, the fact that he is obese is inescapable.)

The Daily Erg interviewed Dr. Tony de la Mare who "is doing research into the use of the BMI both for health and in comparison to athletic performance."

Dr. de la Mare presented BMIs from a variety of elite athletes and all of their numbers were in a similar range - for men typically 20-24 and for women typically 20-22. Even ice hockey players and rugby players who are more muscular were in the 26-28 range - still well below so-called obese levels. There would seem to be an ideal BMI for aerobic performance at least, with runners (20), mountain bikers (22), and X-C skiers (23) all in the same range.

Also, The Daily Erg did some calculations of his own and found that the women on the 1992 Olympic team averaged a BMI of around 23.

In my (hardly scientific) experience, the average lightweight female rower is about 5'6". At 5'6" and 130 pounds a rower has a BMI of 21.0. What do you know, smack dab in the middle of the elite athlete range! Some more fiddling with numbers shows us that about the tallest a lightweight should go is 5'10", which gives a BMI of 18.7 (18.5 is underweight). On the other end, a rower would have to be under five feet and weigh 130 to be labeled overweight (pretty doggone generous if you ask me).

So BMI may not be some super accurate measure of who is overweight, but it is a reasonable indicator, even for athletes. As The Daily Erg says when talking about national team athletes, "being in the ideal range is necessary for membership in this elite club, but it does not predict how you will perform once you get there." My point, however, is that for a typical lightweight, the weight limit brings them into a range for which they should be striving anyway. The typical lightweight woman is not being asked to destroy her health to row lightweight.

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

Weigh-in Presentation at the USRowing Convention

At the USRowing Convention in Portland a few weeks ago, Dr. Tim Hosea of the USRowing Medical Commission made a presentation on lightweights, weigh-ins, and weight loss. A year ago the Commission began working on a set of procedures for safe weight loss. The presentation took the form of a discussion, more than a specific recommendation, although guidelines were set out. Dr. Hosea was kind enough to send me the presentation (above) although without the benefit of hearing Dr. Hosea's presentation, some of the slides are a bit cryptic. With that caveat, here are a few highlights:

• The Commission sees a need for some "fairly specific" guidelines for weight loss.
  
  
• A lightweight female body fat percentage of 12.4% was shown, which appears to be an average of rowers at the Australian National Championships. This is an interesting number as it seems to fall in the "essential fat" range of some body fat percentage charts.
  
  
• The NCAA is quite familiar with wrestling and wrestlers' weight loss practices, and seems to paint lightweight rowing with the same brush. While there is much to be learned from the wrestling experience (as this presentation points out), in terms of practices and appropriate institutional control I think rowing is much better.
  
  
• The presentation states that female "rowers [are] more prone to disturbing eating practices and weight control methods than males." Since females in the general population are more prone to eating disorders than males, it's not clear what this tells us.
  
  
• A convincing case is made for the dangers of dehydration.
  
  
• There is a discussion of performance degradation with rapid weight loss.
  
  
• Some suggestions are made about how to preselect lightweights based on body fat percentages at weight and the importance of avoiding large differences between in-season and off-season weight.
  
  
• Princeton's Managed Weight Certification Program is presented.
  
  

Although the top lightweight programs seem to do a pretty good job of policing their athletes' weight loss practices, I think there would be some real benefits to having USRowing guidelines in place. First is perhaps the most obvious - those programs without dedicated lightweight programs and little expertise in weight loss practices will have guidelines to follow. A secondary benefit, however, relates to the NCAA. Governing bodies exist to enforce rules, therefore nothing pleases them more than to have rules to enforce. A set of rules for lightweights will show the NCAA that the sport is safe and under control, and rules developed by rowers will be much better than those that might be developed by an NCAA committee. The guidelines would be another tool to use to continue chipping away at the NCAA bias against lightweights.


Technorati Tags: rowing

Lightweights and Weight Reduction

It seems pretty clear that everyone who reads FITD understands that losing weight over a long period of time is better than losing weight over a short period. "Better," however, can mean a lot of things. When we talk about better here, most people seem to include healthier and with less risk of harm during competition. We also intuitively believe that fast weight loss hurts performance, although I, for one, have not seen any proof of that. Well, I can stop looking. Here is a 1994 study from the UK which documents the difference in performance in elite British lightweight women when one group lost weight over 2 months and another lost weight over 4 months. The results show "that the longer weight-reduction period was associated with significantly improved VO2max (p < 0.01), Tvent (p < 0.005), PP (p < 0.05) and KF (p < 0.05)."* In the 2 month group, meanwhile, "Tvent (p < 0.02) and KF (p < 0.02) decreased." The link only goes to an abstract so I can't see details like how much weight was lost in each group, but it is stated to be 6-7% of body weight (seems like quite a bit to me). What this means then, is that if your first race is in March and you have some weight to lose, you should already be on your way down.

* Maximal oxygen intake (VO2max), respiratory anaerobic threshold (Tvent), upper body anaerobic peak power (PP), and knee flexor (KF)

Technorati Tags: rowing

It Keeps Getting Better

More news today about the benefits of being a lightweight: "Want to live to a healthy 85? Stay trim." In this case staying trim means a Body Mass Index below 25. For a 5'6" woman to hit a 25 BMI she'd have to pork all the way up to 155, so this isn't exactly limited to lightweights. (On the other hand, at 130 a 5'6" woman has a BMI of 21, right in the middle of the 18 to 24 normal range.)

It's really a combination of nine risk factors that determine your chances of living to a ripe old age. Here they are with my guess as to how lightweight rowers should stack up:

Overweight - Hardly

High blood glucose levels - Fitness should help here

High triglyceride levels - Fitness should help here

High blood pressure - Fitness should help here

Low grip strength - Uh, all you do is grip an oar all day

Smoking - Good grief, I hope not

Not graduating from high school - Been there, done that

Being unmarried - Really? (Certain of you should ignore this one, and you know who you are)

Consuming three or more alcoholic drinks daily - Just as soon as you graduate... No wait! You're dry during the season!

Lightweights in the News

There was a nice article in The Columbian about a pacific Lutheran lightweight rower. There were a couple of interesting points in this article. The first was that PLU practices at 4am! Classes must start awfully early at PLU (if this is correct). The second point is the discussion of cutting weight. The rower, Shayna Horracks, laughs about how hard it was for her to drop weight to 130 pounds, and says that her normal weight is 132. In fact, she cut to 126.6, probably as a result of the Head of the Charles practice of averaging. One hundred thirty two is a pretty normal weight for a lightweight rower (as well as a pretty normal weight for 5'7" woman), but no doubt she had a bit of a struggle to get to 126. I'm sure she had teammates closer to the 138 HOCR limit. This is why there is no averaging in collegiate events, because it makes everyone cut weight, even those athletes who are natural lightweights.


On another topic, a reader noted the story about the USC men adding lightweights to the program and wondered if the women will be next. This would be great if it happened, but I think it is not too likely. First of all there is the Football Theorem at work (average weight of the women's crew is proportional to the prominence of a school's football program), coupled with the natural reticence of women's varsity coaches to consider lightweights. The most interesting thing about the men's story is the attitude of the men's coach toward the lightweights. After saying that he is adding lightweights to increase the opportunities for students to row, he says that "a person can develop athletically quite dramatically from one year to the next. Someone who is a lightweight this year can turn into quite a decent heavyweight oarsman next year.” In addition, the lightweights are racing in the "sub-varsity" category, whatever that is. Doesn't quite sound like an unequivocal commitment to lightweights to me.

Meanwhile, Wisconsin continues to tout the achievements of its women's lightweights. A story in the Wisconsin State Journal discusses the high caliber of Wisconsin athletics, pointing to the lightweights as national champions and examples of athletic excellence. Wisconsin really does a great job of giving its lightweights recognition and setting them up as models for other Wisconsin teams to follow. (Of course, it helps when you've won three national championships in a row!)

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.

Lightweights Fight Global Warming!

Always on the leading edge of cool, lightweight rowers were recognized on Wednesday for their contributions to the fight against global warming. A recently published study adds weight to lightweight claims that heavyweights should be taxed, with the proceeds used for anti-warming and anti-obesity programs. Certain members of the rowing community have long speculated that Title IX heavyweights were behind the US government's rejection of the Kyoto Protocol. With the release of this study, however, anonymous sources have begun to speculate about the existence of a surreptitious Axis of Warming comprised of the CRCA, the NCAA, and the US government who may have joined forces to engineer the rejection of Kyoto.

The Key to Keeping Lost Pounds Off is...

...daily weighing! It seems a study has just been published in the New England Journal of Medicine in which successful female dieters were separated into a control group and two intervention groups. Women in the intervention groups were given advice either face-to-face or online while the control simply received a mailing four times a year. It turns out that daily weighing by the intervention groups was key, as long as the weight information was used to make changes in eating habits. (Daily weighing alone did nothing.)

To lightweights experienced in weight management this may seem like an obvious result, but for many people nothing is more natural than avoiding scales at all costs. My favorite part of the study, however, is learning that "Women who remained within three pounds of their starting weight after the weekly check-in fell into the "green zone," and received encouraging phone messages and green rewards, such as mint gum." Maybe those of you who are having a bit of weight trouble could ask your coach to give you encouraging phone messages when you hit weight. Better yet, maybe even a surprise piece of mint gum slipped into your foot stretcher before the next day's row!

Next, before everyone leaves for Boston, we'll take a quick look at the light eight and light four races at the Chuck.

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.

Another Reason to be Glad You're a Lightweight

Researchers from the Mount Sinai School of Medicine in New York City will publish a study in the November issue of the Journal of Alzheimer's Disease which suggests that cutting calories may halt or even reverse the symptoms of Alzheimer's.

Say, maybe that's why there's not a lightweight event at NCAAs - the heavyweights forgot!

HOCR Weight Limit

I was surprised to notice that the weight limit for lightweight fours and eights at the HOCR is listed as: "Women: rowers’ weights average not over 130 lbs., none over 138 lbs." One hundred thirty eight pounds! That's quite a bit above the sprint season average of 130. Just as an example, if you have four rowers at 125 (not uncommon), you can have three at 138 and one at just under 130. That's really quite a different boat than one you'll see in the spring. Some of the crews racing here may never appear as a lightweight boat during the sprint season for just that reason. I suspect, however, that most of the serious lightweight programs will ask their rowers to be at 130. Rowing at 138 doesn't give you much of a feel for how you can row in the spring.

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.]

Yo, Philadelphia! How About It?

FITD was fortunate to get a mention in the latest issue of the Schuylkill Navy newsletter, so some of you are Philadelphians coming here for the first time. I have a question for you: Where are all of your lightweight programs? Philadelphia, arguably the center of rowing in the United States, does not have one dedicated lightweight women's rowing program. Villanova (which now rows outside of the city) won the national championship in 1998 but now only rows lightweight boats of opportunity. St. Joseph's occasionally puts out lightweight boats, which can be quite competitive, but doesn't race the category consistently. Think of all the college programs on the Schuylkill - Bryn Mawr, LaSalle, Drexel, Penn, Temple, and Haverford, in addition to Villanova and St. Joe's - and not one lightweight program.

Lightweights do row in Philadelphia, as evidenced by the current national team LW2x out of Penn AC and last year's national team LW4x out of Vesper, not to mention the lightweights at Undine Barge. Lightweights row there in high school too - Archbishop Prendergast and Mount St. Joseph's are two examples. Boston, though, has the MIT and Radcliffe lights and Washington DC has the Georgetown lights. Even San Francisco has lightweight women - Stanford and Cal. Why aren't there any in Phialdelphia?

Penn seems to be the prime school to start a lightweight women's program. They have lightweight men so they understand the value of lightweight rowing, and those lightweight men are the most successful program in the boathouse. Why not lightweight women? They would have plenty of nearby competition, including Ivy League competition. Penn is one of largest Ivies so they have a great recruiting base. Everything is in place for the launch of a successful program, even a new coach who just may be bringing some new thinking to the team.

Maybe the city is still scarred from being named the nation's most obese a year or two ago. Maybe in Philadelphia there are no lightweights because, well, there are no lightweights.

Naaah. C'mon Philadelphia, just do it!

Colleges Advocate Disordered Eating?

Longtime readers of FITD know that one of my pet peeves is the unfounded claim that an inordinate number of female lightweight rowers have eating disorders. None of the studies I've seen on the subject (not an exhaustive survey by any means) have offered real evidence of this claim. Typically, after the authors fail to find evidence of eating disorders, they find evidence of "disordered eating" and wrap up their study by saying that it makes intuitive sense for female lightweight rowers to be at risk so they must be. The catch is the definition of disordered eating which includes limiting caloric intake or limiting certain foods. Don't all college age women exhibit disordered eating then?

With the arrival of the "Back to School" season comes the first of many "Freshman 15" articles. The author begins by talking to students and nutritionists who worry about overeating as they begin college. Then an odd thing happens. By the time the article ends, we're told we need to worry that "students have more opportunity to compare themselves with each other because they spend so much time together" and that "super-fit bodies that saturate TV shows and commercials can exacerbate such problems." The first link given at the end of the article is to Duke's Eating Disorders Program. It turns out that the real problem isn't gaining 15 pounds, but trying to lose it later. At the University of Missouri, we're told, "students are trained to make presentations to their peers ... on eating healthy, handling stress, exercising and generally leading a healthy lifestyle." Gee, that sounds like they want to turn everyone into a lightweight rower, doesn't it?

The more "experts" make it seem like everyone has an eating disorder, the less likely it is that the appropriate resources will be focused on those who actually need help. This does a disservice to all concerned.

(Disclaimer: I'm not a doctor and this isn't medical advice. I can, however, read.)

Summer Rowing

Now that the summer is here, it begs the question of what are college lightweights doing? Cross training, rowing, or nothing? No doubt we'll see some college lightweights racing at summer regattas, including nationals and Canadian Henley. Rowers with international aspirations will view the summer as an important part of their rowing career because it is a chance to test themselves against intermediate and senior lightweights who also have the same aspirations. Of course, it's also the time to learn (or continue to learn) sculling because the only international lightweight events for women are sculling events.

Thinking about national team lightweights raises another question - how many national team lightweights were lightweight rowers in college? While I don't know for sure, it seems to me that most weren't, or at least didn't compete as lightweights. For all of the worry at the collegiate level about lightweights and weight issues, at the international level extreme weight loss is almost encouraged. USRowing allows lightweights to weigh 140 pounds for the April erg test, 15 pounds over the international weight limit. Why are these large weight fluctuations allowed and what good does it do anybody to test at 140 pounds?

I also wonder if lightweight collegiate coaches encourage national team aspirations, or at least make known the opportunities, as much as heavyweight coaches. There is, however, at least one collegiate lightweight on the national squad. Hannah Moore lists her most memorable sporting achievement as "winning the varsity lightweight eight title for Villanova at the IRA Championships." Remember that? It was 1998. Villanova now rows lightweight boats of opportunity and hasn't been heard from since.

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...".