Strength testing and training of rowers
Brief maximal-strength tests are reliable and track 2000-m ergometer time (r −0.54 to −0.68); strength training helped time trials in practice but not to statistical significance, and the best loading emphasis for racing is still unclear
Key Findings
Testing: maximal strength and power tests of leg extension (e.g. leg press) and arm pulling (e.g. prone bench pull) were highly reliable (ICC 0.82–0.99) and showed elite rowers to be significantly stronger than less competitive peers, partly through greater lean body mass (r = 0.57–0.63 with strength).
1RM leg press, isokinetic leg-extension peak force and leg-press peak power were moderately to strongly associated with 2000-m ergometer time (r = −0.54 to −0.68). Repetition (strength-endurance) tests at a fixed % of maximum or a set load were less reliable and more time-consuming; only leg-press repetition tests correlated with 2000-m time (e.g. r = −0.67), and they mainly reflect training experience and slow-twitch proportion.
Muscle-balance ratios (e.g. hamstring:quadriceps <45%, knee-extensor:elbow-flexor about 4.2:1) appeared useful in assessing low-back-pain or rib-injury history.
Training: concurrent endurance training may be counterproductive to strength development over the short term (<12 weeks), so prioritise strength within the training sequence, particularly in the non-competition phase (e.g. 2–6 sets × 4–12 repetitions, three sessions a week). Maximal strength was sustained with infrequent (one or two sessions a week) but intense (73–79% of maximum) sessions; whether maximal strength, endurance or power should be emphasised for the competition phase was unclear.
Positive ergometer time-trial benefits of clinical and practical significance were reported with strength training, but without statistical significance, mainly because long-term controlled designs were lacking.
Practical Application
This review found brief maximal-strength tests (leg press, prone bench pull) reliable and correlated with 2000-m erg time (r −0.54 to −0.68), while high-rep strength-endurance tests were less reliable and mostly reflected training history. Standardise one or two maximal-strength tests to monitor a rower across the season rather than repetition tests.
Put the strength emphasis in the non-competition phase — the reviewed prescription is 2–6 sets × 4–12 reps, three sessions a week — because concurrent endurance training can blunt strength gains over blocks shorter than 12 weeks; in season, one or two intense sessions (73–79% of maximum) maintained strength.
Expect practical, not proven, gains: strength training improved erg time trials to a clinically meaningful degree in the reviewed studies, but not significantly. Whether heavy, endurance or power emphasis transfers best to racing was unresolved here; do not present heavy-low-rep as the demonstrated winner (REF-640 is the trial evidence on not-to-failure loading in rowers).
Limitations
Narrative review of heterogeneous, mostly small and short studies; correlations are cross-sectional; no quality long-term controlled trials at the time; optimal load and volume individualise with rowing load and lifting history.
How this entry was checked and changed
Content correction 2026-09-27
Title/lead "heavier high-load, low-rep training transfers better than high-rep lifting" -> not supported: the abstract says it was unclear whether maximal strength, endurance or power should be emphasised; what it does say is that repetition tests were less reliable than brief maximal tests.Rewritten around the abstract's testing reliability, correlations with 2000-m time, prescription (2–6 × 4–12, 3/week; maintenance at 1–2 sessions at 73–79%) and the "practically but not statistically significant" benefit.
Type corrected from "systematic/narrative" to narrative review.