Do you need a "leg day" if you do high resistance elliptical?

MikePfirrman

One more VERY important thing Bill, unless you're doing sprints on the rower, don't be like all those guys at the gym and put the Damper (not resistance) up to 10! For most guys, the Damper should be no higher than a 5 (and for women, probably a 3 or so). Only during brief sprints should the damper setting be higher. The Damper (what controls how it feels) is supposed to emulate how low your boat sinks in the water due to weight, so putting the Damper up all the way to 10 and then trying to do a longer row is like telling the machine you weigh 450 lbs. Each stroke will be more powerful, but you won't be able to sustain it very long at all. That's another huge reason people don't use the rower. You can check the "Drag Factor" on any machine under the "more" category. Press "more" and then "check Drag Factor". Depending on how dirty the machine is, it will vary. Most men use between a 100 and a 120 DF, depending on preference. More experienced rowers mostly use around 110 to 115 DF tops. You still have to generate the same power, just more strokes to get to the same distance. ErgData (an app for I Phones) allows you to see the lbs per stroke you are generating (both peak and average for each stroke). My "average" stroke is around 87 lbs per stroke (100 peak roughly). Do this 1200 times and tell me it's not a leg workout (my 12000m row 4 times a week at 10m per stroke)!

An easy way to think about rowing (and drag factor) would be to equate it to having to lift 2000 lbs. Would you try to do it with deadlifts of 400 lbs 5 times or would you try it at 100 lbs X 20? The drag factor is like this. Same amount of work, just a different way of breaking it down.

Keto_N_Iron

JDMac82

Your body only responds to the stress you place on it and repairs itself accordingly. If your not taxing the muscles they wont respond. I would encourage you to do leg day as well and focus on moderate weight and reps. Maybe, depending on what your schedule is, do the cardio in the am and then weights in the PM. Or maybe go to a 3/3 schedule. Meaning Weights 3 days a week and Cardio 3 days a week alternating between the two. This way you can achieve balance and strive for your desired fitness level and athletic look.

AnnPT77

MikePfirrman wrote: »

I used to think there were no cardio machines that could build up legs until I took up Indoor rowing seriously. I've packed on 20 lbs of muscle in the three years that I've been rowing. I went from 245 lbs down to 170 at my lowest and now I'm back up to 190 with the same BF I had when I was 170. I row tons (70K a week or so). I still lift (and do plyometrics) but mainly it's the rowing that builds the legs up. I did running, Spinning/Biking for years before that. Nothing close to rowing. My legs and lats, shoulders and back are pretty big now. Plus, I have a semi defined six pack at 53 (no other ab work). Look at pics of Olympic rowers (or even college ones) and compare them to other athletes. It works every major muscle except chest. Many of the world's best rowers don't even lift. A lot of Aussies and New Zealanders only row and they are huge (except the sunken chest!). I do it in part because I do Indoor racing, but also it's efficient as anything. 50 minutes of hard rowing and 150 pushups, 150 or so military presses and that's a great full body workout. I only do added leg workouts because I'm working to go from a local competitive rower to a Regionally competitive one (with the long term goal of racing at the World Indoors at 55 and placing in the top 10 for my age group).

Rowers now include guys like Connor McGregor and Hugh Jackman, among others. Most MMA fighters all now row indoor. There's a reason why most Cross Fit gyms have two pieces of cardio equipment - the Concept2 rower and an Assault Bike (Watts bike). The guy who trains special forces/Seals - former World class rower and he loves the rower for training our troops (he was University of MI womens' crew coach for years).

I'm not talking Orange Theory stuff either. I'm talking real rowing (either OTW or a Concept2). Those WaterRowers make great furniture, not great rowing machines.

Many/most collegiate/national team (a.k.a. Olympic) rowers lift. Heavy. Lots. At defined phases of the training cycle.

Rowing is swell. It can build muscle (built most of mine). But my local university rowing teams (men and women, nationally competitive school) weight train. (I've watched the women do it: Multiple plates like freight-train wheels, for legs, I swear. ) The women I know who are current and former US national team rowers weight lift(ed) aa part of the elite program. The coaching workshops I attended when getting USRowing coaching certification reinforced the idea that (successful) rowers weight train.

If nothing else, when your sport is all leg push/upper-body pull, you weight train for muscle balance and injury avoidance, if you're smart.

Do some rowers skip the weight room? Sure. And when they do, it shows up in articles about them, because it's unusual. But when you look at most elite rowers'physiques, you're looking at the results of huge volumes of rowing; some carefully designed, focused and efficient weight training programs; and some non-rowing cardio.

But rowing will build strength, and even mass - absolutely. Not as fast or as much as weight training focused on that objective, though.

MikePfirrman

Depends on which country. Many of the Australians and New Zealanders don't. In the US they do. You certainly can but many don't. It's not that unusual.

http://row-360.com/natural-born-winners/

These guys are in a class by themselves. "I can honestly say I haven't lifted a weight in four years...". This from the best pair, by far, for many years. The Aussies and the New Zealanders historically have not lifted much and have been among the most successful in the world.

Can you lift? Yes, I do. But many don't. It is very uncommon in the US but the US historically has not been a great rowing nation. I'm in an Indoor Rowing "club" with many, many of the current World record holders from all over the world. Many don't lift at all. The current Masters (OTW) at my age (over 50) four team -- none of them lift (Australian). I know the Australian Indoor record holder over 65, shattered the record. Also, does not lift. The outdoor Olympic coaches just asked him to come in to study him and how he's kept such an incredible Vo2 max into his 60s.

Overall, to be highly competitive, I've seen that taller rowers don't need to lift all that much. Shorter ones certainly do. They need to make up that power somewhere.

Don't get me wrong, I'm all for leg day, but the OP was asking if Elliptical would build muscles. I simply said that rowing would be a much better alternative and that even many top, world-class rowers don't lift (mostly in a few select, but very successful countries).

AnnPT77

MikePfirrman wrote: »

Depends on which country. Many of the Australians and New Zealanders don't. In the US they do. You certainly can but many don't. It's not that unusual.

http://row-360.com/natural-born-winners/

These guys are in a class by themselves. "I can honestly say I haven't lifted a weight in four years...". This from the best pair, by far, for many years. The Aussies and the New Zealanders historically have not lifted much and have been among the most successful in the world.

Can you lift? Yes, I do. But many don't. It is very uncommon in the US but the US historically has not been a great rowing nation. I'm in an Indoor Rowing "club" with many, many of the current World record holders from all over the world. Many don't lift at all. The current Masters (OTW) at my age (over 50) four team -- none of them lift (Australian). I know the Australian Indoor record holder over 65, shattered the record. Also, does not lift. The outdoor Olympic coaches just asked him to come in to study him and how he's kept such an incredible Vo2 max into his 60s.

Overall, to be highly competitive, I've seen that taller rowers don't need to lift all that much. Shorter ones certainly do. They need to make up that power somewhere.

Don't get me wrong, I'm all for leg day, but the OP was asking if Elliptical would build muscles. I simply said that rowing would be a much better alternative and that even many top, world-class rowers don't lift (mostly in a few select, but very successful countries).

LOL. Yup, Australia and New Zealand produce great rowers, in numbers disproportionate to their population. Go, AUS and NZL! And some, maybe even many (though I'm a skeptic) rowers don't lift.

For an excellent cardio workout that also builds muscle, rowing is a good pick, possibly the best pick. It's a monster number of reps, with load.

In this category, I'd recommend it, as you do. (Like I said, it built most of any muscle I have . . . though I'm a l'il ol lady and don't do your 70K a week. Well, I did this week, but that's an exception. 30-50K OTW weekly, in season, is my niche, mostly).

If the objective is muscle mass or strength increase per se, rowing isn't the best pick; weight training is.

IOW, I hear (and share) your enthusiasm, but you may be overselling the sport. Telling people to look at rowers' bodies in general - beautiful though they are - because rowing alone built those bodies? Oversell.

And dissing Orange Theory as an aside? Unnecessary. Their objectives are not your objectives.

Rowing is pretty great, though.

Noreenmarie1234

I never do legs only elliptical on resistance and biking and have killer thighs and calves. People ask me if I lift/squat all the time. The elliptical I use has incline as well and I put it on maximum resistance.

benchismybff

Remember, squats are THE BEST exercise for burning calories. Always squat.

Unknown

This content has been removed.

benchismybff

JerSchmare wrote: »

benchismybff wrote: »

Remember, squats are THE BEST exercise for burning calories. Always squat.

Not everyone can squat.

Body weight squats, hack squats, ect. There are ways to get the work in, if you want to.

TavistockToad

benchismybff wrote: »

Remember, squats are THE BEST exercise for burning calories. Always squat.

best for burning calories? how so?

benchismybff

TavistockToad wrote: »

benchismybff wrote: »

Remember, squats are THE BEST exercise for burning calories. Always squat.

best for burning calories? how so?

Short term, cardio will burn more calories than squats. And HIIT will far exceed anything else, but HIIT has some carryover into lifting, so it's better than basic cardio. Cardio will burn calories while you workout, then you're done. Weight lifting will burn calories during rest periods, and for hours after the workout. So, if you want higher counts during workout, yes, Cardio/HIIT is the way to go, but Squats/Lifting in general are going to be better than standard cardio for long term caloric burn.

HIIT is going to be the best, if we're getting technical though, which is why something like crossfit can have a short workout and burn so much. Because you're hitting both, basically.

Squats are generally viewed as the exercise that uses more of the full body engagement than any other standard lift, so it works the body more. Your heart rate is up more, ect.

So, maybe I misspoke on just saying burning calories, but meant more long term burn.

TavistockToad

benchismybff wrote: »

TavistockToad wrote: »

benchismybff wrote: »

Remember, squats are THE BEST exercise for burning calories. Always squat.

best for burning calories? how so?

Short term, cardio will burn more calories than squats. And HIIT will far exceed anything else, but HIIT has some carryover into lifting, so it's better than basic cardio. Cardio will burn calories while you workout, then you're done. Weight lifting will burn calories during rest periods, and for hours after the workout. So, if you want higher counts during workout, yes, Cardio/HIIT is the way to go, but Squats/Lifting in general are going to be better than standard cardio for long term caloric burn.

HIIT is going to be the best, if we're getting technical though, which is why something like crossfit can have a short workout and burn so much. Because you're hitting both, basically.

Squats are generally viewed as the exercise that uses more of the full body engagement than any other standard lift, so it works the body more. Your heart rate is up more, ect.

So, maybe I misspoke on just saying burning calories, but meant more long term burn.

i thought the 'afterburn' effect of lifting was about 3 extra calories an hour... hardly worth the hype?

benchismybff

TavistockToad wrote: »

benchismybff wrote: »

TavistockToad wrote: »

benchismybff wrote: »

Remember, squats are THE BEST exercise for burning calories. Always squat.

best for burning calories? how so?

Short term, cardio will burn more calories than squats. And HIIT will far exceed anything else, but HIIT has some carryover into lifting, so it's better than basic cardio. Cardio will burn calories while you workout, then you're done. Weight lifting will burn calories during rest periods, and for hours after the workout. So, if you want higher counts during workout, yes, Cardio/HIIT is the way to go, but Squats/Lifting in general are going to be better than standard cardio for long term caloric burn.

HIIT is going to be the best, if we're getting technical though, which is why something like crossfit can have a short workout and burn so much. Because you're hitting both, basically.

Squats are generally viewed as the exercise that uses more of the full body engagement than any other standard lift, so it works the body more. Your heart rate is up more, ect.

So, maybe I misspoke on just saying burning calories, but meant more long term burn.

i thought the 'afterburn' effect of lifting was about 3 extra calories an hour... hardly worth the hype?

Haven't heard that number. Generally it's stated that the EPOC for high intensity workouts (which, the higher intensity, the better, which is why HIIT and lifting will be far higher than straight cardio) can add between 8-15% of the total energy cost. So, if you burn 1000 calories in an hour, you'd add on roughly 80-150 calories more during the rest period after you're done working out.

So, take a happy low medium and say you workout 4 times per week. That's 400 extra calories during that time. Is it a lot? No. But it's not a small number either.

Heavy resistance training will have the greater EPOC affect over circuit training and/or general aerobic training. Not to knock them, any exercise is better than no exercise, but leg workouts are great, because you get better calorie burn, that extra 'afterburn'.

joelrivard

You don't need a leg day. There are no strict rules here.
However you mentioned athletic look as a motivation, there isn't anything more athletic looking than having well built legs. I'm not talking about huge bodybuilder legs either.

Guys in the gym who look in shape but have skinny legs do not look remotely close to as athletic to say an Olympic sprinter type physique where you get a nice sweep in the thighs and strong shapely calves.

There is always one guy in the gym who has really shapely legs (and wears spandex cuz he knows...) and even if his upper body is less developed than other guys I think he looks way better. More athletic. So with looks being a motivation I would say - there is nothing wrong with skinny legs - but if you're walking around thinking you look "good" because your upper body is nice and toned up but you got those "never trained" legs going on, you might not be looking as good as you hope.

The bigger you get the more the skinny legs stand out. It's almost better to be skinny all over.

I have skinny calves and I train them ever time I lift. Super-high reps, long descending sets. That's the only way they grow (fast twitch fiber can handle it) and the only way they started looking bigger.

sijomial

benchismybff wrote: »

Remember, squats are THE BEST exercise for burning calories. Always squat.

What is it about squats that makes people say such daft things about them? They are an exercise (a good one) not a religion!

Pretty sure cycling beats squats for calorie burns....


Rough estimate 144,500 cals burned cycling so far this year (289 hours).

Strength training is a hard to estimate but low calorie burn activity and no EPOC isn't going to elevate it anywhere near close to even moderate intensity cardio.
Not that either strength training or cardio should be all about calories anyway but please keep it real.