a. Strength is directly correlated to muscle size.

b. Genetic differences (fast twitch percentage, length of muscles, tendon attachment, etc., etc.) account for differences in bulking up ("hypertrophy") more than the type of weight program. Any combination of high reps with low weight or low reps with high weight, multiple sets or few sets, will result in increased strength.

c. Given the preceding, the best way to develop strength is the one that is most efficient - the most muscle in the least time. Brzycki gives the following guidelines:

one set to failure for each exercise

each rep executed with good form - 2 seconds concentric - pause - 4 seconds eccentric2

weight load should bring inability to maintain form - "failure" - after 15-20 reps for the buttocks, 10-15 reps for the lower body, 6-12 reps for the upper torso.

only 1 to 3 minutes between sets

one hour maximum per session

at least two days between sessions to give time for glucose replenishment (no "split" workouts on consecutive days - Bompa & McNeely agree with this)

weights should be increased (5% increments) or reps should be increased to stay within time limits - methods are suggested for overcoming plateaus

d. Brzycki rejects "1RM" - the maximum weight for a single repetition - as a basis for weight setting in periodized programs. Bompa and McNeely use repeated evaluation of 1RM as the foundation for their strength programs. Brzycki has reasons:

research documents injuries caused by 1RM evaluation. Although given in another context, Brzycki's statement hits the mark - "the only way to ascertain tensile strength is when the structural capacity is surpassed. Then, of course, it is too late."

Brzycki's method makes 1RM irrelevant

Bompa himself notes that tendon/ligament strength develops more slowly than muscle strength, and insists on a preparatory buildup phase to precede serious weight work. Bompa's logical approach seems out of phase with use of 1RM to benchmark maximum strength at the start of a strength program.

e. Bompa is the father of periodization, and the periodization concept is embraced by McNeely and Carmichael. ("periodization" is roughly defined, by the writer, as planned cycles within cycles, of building and stabilization).

Carmichael provides the most authoritative endorsement, based on success designing programs to win the world's most arduous long-distance event - training Lance Armstrong for multiple victories in the Tour de France. Among the authors listed, Carmichael is the only one who deals with long-duration competition.

Brzycki rejects periodization because it isn't appropriate for athletes with extended seasons. This ignores sports where one or two events outweigh all the others. Reading Brzycki reminds that periodization and peaking are inseparable - periodization makes no sense, unless the periods lead to a peak at the time of a major competition.

f. Brzycki says that "strength training is general, but application of strength is specific" and "there are no sport-specific strength exercises". He says that "specific" means identical:

muscle

movement

speed

resistance

His extension of this is that:

"Strength training should NOT mimic sports skill, so as not to confuse or impair the intended movement path."

This is completely opposed to Bompa, who calls for a final strength training phase which emulates the speed and load of the intended sport.

g. Brzycki knocks any type of explosive strength training, as dangerous and ineffective. He does not believe in plyometrics. He cites much research to prove that slow (2 second concentric - pause - 4 second eccentric) movements are most effective.

h. Brzycki says that there is no significant difference between exercise on machines and exercise with free weights. Others prefer free weights, on the basis that free weights exercise stabilizing muscles as well as the target muscle(s).

Given a choice between Brzycki and the rest, the writer believes that some machines can be more effective than free weights (an example would be leg press vs squats) because greater loads can be moved without need for spotting and - if no spotter is available - with less risk of injury. Also, machines can line up the load direction, to avoid unwanted shear or compression forces.

h. Brzycki recognizes that athletes who are older or younger than the elite bracket are more susceptible to injury. He suggests lighter loads and more reps.

He points out that "extended time becomes a test of aerobic performance". For a sport as aerobic-intensive as rowing, this may not be all bad.

Brzycki suggests the same kind of adjustment - lighter loads, more reps - for athletes with a high percentage of slow-twitch fibers. This probably applies to most rowers.

• McGill calls for stabilizing the lumbar vertebrae (the ones below the ribs) in a "neutral position", i.e. not bowed forward or flexed back.
  
  
• stabilization comes from braced muscles in the abdomen, latissimus dorsi, and around the lower torso.
  
  
• McGill says "emphasize the hips". In fact, the gluteal muscles are the largest and most powerful in the body.
  
  In the writer's opinion, for efficiency as well as safety, the lower back should be stabilized in a neutral position, not bowed, and the muscles in the lower back should just connect, not pull. "Shooting the tail" i.e. driving with the quads before recruiting the glutes, flattens the lower back muscles and risks injury to the spine, as well as loss of efficiency.
  
  
• This suggests that strength training should emphasize the glutes and the ring of muscles around the lower torso, the glutes for moving the upper legs, and the muscles around the lower torso for stabilizing the spine.
  
  
• exercises employing the lower back muscles, like the "roman chair" and "superman" (otherwise described as "lower back extensions") are specifically rejected by McGill, because of excessive shear forces placed on the spine. He suggests alternatives such as the "bird dog", which are more benign, and then presents several progressions to more challenging back exercises.
  
  
• In correspondence after the preceding was written, McGill notes that rowers create "pulses" of force. The hip extension pulse requires a stiffened back for effective force transmission to the arm linkage, and this precedes the shoulder and arm pulse. He is working on a new book to expand the notion of "pulse" training. It should be worth reading.
  
  
• McGill also presents thoughts on designing interval training so that fatigued motor patterns are never allowed to corrupt perfection in form..
  

• Carmichael's method, on the bike, is to pedal hard in a high gear at low road speeds - described as "Stomps", "MuscleTension Intervals", and "Power Start" (all three terms are trademarked).
  
  
• similar resistance training in the boat - at least in a single - is easily done with a bungee cord wrapped around the hull, with the ends hooked over the feet3.
  
  
• the same effect can be accomplished on an erg with a damper set to "10" but the writer doesn't believe this is an alternative to the bungee on water.
  
  Unlike the bungee, the erg lacks any feel taking up the load. In a boat, the bungee dramatically punishes effort applied too soon, before the blades are loaded - the boat goes backwards. One champion master rower of the writer's acquaintance uses bungee rows specifically to train the blade loading sequence. In this respect, the bungee is "super specific", since it highlights a key skill. Strength training on the erg may lead to incorrect sequencing.
  

• strength is directly related to muscle cross-section
  
  
• muscle volume increases as the cube of the cross section
  
  
• muscle surface - where the cardio-vascular delivery system primarily resides - only increases as the square of the cross section
  
  
• without also increasing delivery capacity, bigger muscles are getting less O2 relative to their size, and will need to turn sooner to anaerobic energy sources. If aerobic capacity is trained to "max", bigger muscles mean less endurance.
  

• if muscle volume increases as the cube of the cross-section, and surface area increases only as the square of the cross-section, then muscle volume must decrease as the cube of the cross-section, and surface area must decrease only as the square of the cross-section
  
  
• so the short-term result of de-training muscles ("slenderizing"?) should be improved aerobic delivery, especially in a training program that simultaneously emphasizes aerobic efficiency.
  
  and...
  
  
• the literature is full of comments about mitochondrial dilution5 - what if de-training the muscles can result in mitochondrial concentration?
  
  
• if the preceding might be true, then slenderized muscles might get a double aerobic benefit for a period of days or weeks - both from the cardio-vascular delivery of O2 (more surface to volume) and from better conversion of O2 into energy (greater concentration of mitochondria).
  
  
• while the muscles might be weaker than they had been at max strength, their performance in long events, at AT and below, might be improved - power at anaerobic threshold might be closer to power at VO2max6.
  

a) gym work, combined with periodized aerobic erg training, until rowing starts on water.

b) then bungee rows on water until sprint racing (e.g. Masters' Nationals in August).

c) then no strength training, with extensive aerobic training, through the end of head racing.

d) no races during the two months between Masters Nationals and the Head of the Charles, effectively making two seasons with a strength program for the first, and a no strength "slenderizing" program for the second.