Supplement Stack of a Gold Medalist Rower (Part I)

On What Means “Elite”

In my last athletic post I discussed some approaches to nutrition that I used to prepare for the 2024 Olympic Games, where our crew ultimately won gold in the Men’s 4-. In this post, I will discuss another important, and occasionally under-considered element of high performance sport: supplements.

This is a tricky topic. Supplements are not a silver bullet. Unless an athlete is already training at a very high level they are likely to see greater marginal gains from focusing on the basics – primarily fitness, technique, recovery, and nutrition – than from focusing on supplements. On the other hand, the scientific literature on supplement usage in elite athletes is extremely limited, and my personal anecdotal experience is that a significant fraction (~40%) of elite rowers dismiss supplementation out of hand, largely because of coaches and other support staff who see supplements as altogether too risky given concerns of contamination or mislabeling that can result in anti-doping action.

I say the literature is extremely limited because, although most of these supplements do have scientific literature with experiments performed on athletes, these athletes are typically, in my opinion, far below what I would consider “elite”. I consider an “elite” cardiovascular athlete anyone having a V0₂ max above 70 ml/kg/min. By the standard, most college rowers, and some Olympic rowers, are not elite. They are very good athletes, great athletes even, but not elite. Honestly, 70 is on the lower end of the elite range, with 75-80 ml/kg/min being more truly “elite”, and 80+ being world class.

By this metric very few, if any, publicly available studies examine supplement intervention of “elite” athletes. Almost all are interventions of only intermediate athletes, typically athletes early in their collegiate careers, often already removed from world-class tracks. When an athlete has already optimized their protocol such that they are somewhere near this 70ml/kg/min, even small effect sizes can have large impacts on comparative performance, something that is likely not accounted for in less well-trained athletes where changes in performance are far “noiser” and marginal gains can be made more easily in training, nutrition, or sleep. My personal experience, my mētis, suggests that the impact of supplements on athletes who are training at the highest level might be significantly underrated by those athletes training at the highest level.

In examining which supplements to use as part I generally used a risk reward framework, similar to Peter Attia’s:

1. What are the potential benefits of a given supplement?

2. What are its downsides?

3. How well can I measure its effects? (more on this in a moment)

Given my complete dedication to the singular goal of winning the Olympics, I was optimizing for any degree of marginal reward, even at a relatively high economic cost (though ultimatley, none of the interventions discussed here are that expensive), so long as I felt the short-term risk of negatively impacting my athletic performance was low.

Generally, when first trying these supplements I tried to introduce only one supplement at a time in order to isolate my perception of its effects, uniquely. As I will discuss, there were some instances where I perceived a clear effect that I assumed to be caused by the supplement. In other cases, I definitely perceived no such effect.

A Digression on the Epistemology of Subjective Expereience

But how was I able to perceive this and what about confounding variables?

Here I will offer a defense of my epistemological approach, which utilizes phenomenological claims as much as peer-reviewed publications. The lifestyle of the “elite” rower, whatever conceptions one may have from The Social Network, is rather monastic. As I trained for the Olympics I repeated approximately the same day for ~50 weeks of the year for, in my case, 5 years in a row (not including the 8 years of comparatively libertine training in high school and college). That day looks something like the following:

5:55 AM - Awake, Brush Teeth.

6:05 AM - Out door to practice.

6:15 AM - Arrive at practice. Eat light carb (banana or bar, typically). Warm-up stretch, focus on hamstrings, hips, and lats.

6:25 AM - Boating for a row.

6:35 AM - 8:15 AM - Rowing on the water. Target 20-24k.

8:20 - 8:40 AM - Off water, clean boats, protein shake + bar shower.

8:40 - 9:00 AM - Prepare for/commute to work (all of our 4- worked while training).

9:00 - 9:15 AM - Breakfast at work. Typically yogurt, granola, banana, honey. Coffee.

9:00 - 12:00 PM - Excel monke, Zooming, etc.

12:00PM - 12:30 PM - Lunch. Often yogurt again, or leftover protein + carb.

12:30 - 4:00 PM - More work. Typically nuts or bar as snack.

4:00 - 4:30 PM - Change and transit to practice #2.

4:30 - 6:45 PM - Practice. Either 90’ Erg (~25k) or Weights + 75’-90’ Erg (20-25k)

6:45 - 7:00 PM - To dinner.

7:00 - 7:45 PM - Typically health slop. Cava or Chipotle. Good banter if spirits are high.

7:45 - 8:00 PM - Return home

8:00 - 9:15 PM - Continue work.

9:15 - 10:00 PM - Prepare for bed. Read, consoom content. Lights off.

The occasional travel day would break up this pattern somewhat, but this was largely the norm. It is no exaggeration to say that over 300 of the 365 days per year looked very much like this. The remainder of days were the ~1-2 off-ish week per year or the 2-3 race weeks per year, which included a light taper (I think most crews taper too much). On weekends we did not work, and on Sunday we only trained once. Taking inspiration from Andrew Triggs-Hodge, I tried to take only 1 day off every 2 months for the year leading up to the Olympics. In that year I drank alcohol maybe 5 nights total.

This digression is intended to belabor the point that monastic consistency of habit breeds acute awareness of the body and mind. At every point in this daily cycle I had hundreds, if not thousands of reference points for how my body and mind had felt doing the same thing before. Taking my first strokes off the dock on a Monday morning I would typically feel energetic, although it could take ~15-20 minutes before my muscles really started to loosen up. Tuesday often felt better than Monday, especially at the beginning of the morning row, as my body would be more awake and warm. But by the time I reached Thursday or Friday, I would feel significantly more fatigue, even in those very first strokes. Subtle changes to the total number of minutes rowed in a week, to how much sleep I got the night before, or to changes in my nutrition were easily perceptible given the consistency of my habits. These indicators were not just phenomenological markers of the body, or vibes (which I absolutely insist are important), but were also heart rate data for each session, splits on the water, splits on the erg, tangible indicators of digestion, and time it takes to fall asleep on any given evening (typically very fast). The difference between a 145 vs 150 HR on a 90’ erg at a 1:49 will tell you a lot about your fatigue level (although temperature plays a huge impact here, and blood lactate is a better measure of training zones, which I came to intuitively know the difference between a 1 vs. 1.5 vs 2 mmol/L after enough step tests).

Put scientifically, I was controlling for the external variables in my daily routine so that the effects of the independent variables, in this case supplements, but also nutrition, hydration, sleep, and training, could be more easily identified.

Can the phenomenological experience of fatigue on a Tuesday morning steady state practice be quantified in peer review literature? In principle, of course it can, but it is extremely difficult and requires more nuance than a 10 point scale, and in practice I don’t believe any study has accurately quantified such measures in elite athletes (and I don’t really believe its possible for non-elite athletes to have the requisite degree of awareness to make meaningful claims here).

In this context, I will defend the usefulness of reporting my subjective experience of various supplements. I would encourage my more scientism-adjacent readers to suspend judgement on what it is possible for highly trained, highly attentive, elite athletes to “perceive”. I find this epistemology especially defensible, given the near complete lack of scientific research in “elite” athletes and the burning drive that I felt to optimize everything I could to maximize our chances of winning the Olympics.

The Supplements

By the time of our final in Paris, my supplement stack included the following, in perceived order of impact: sodium bicarbonate, creatine, caffeine, beta alanine, Albuterol (within WADA guidelines), Omega-3, Vitamin D, Iron, Hydroxymethylbutyrate (HMB), Diclofenac (Voltaren), Fluticasone (within WADA guidelines). I will also discuss Beta Ecdysterone, Resveratrol, and NMN, which no one in our boat used during or out of competition, but for which I believe there is moderate evidence for elite athlete experimentation and that I have used since retiring. Lastly, I will discuss Zinc and Melatonin as sleep supplements.

Creatine

Mechanism:

Creatine works by increasing the stores of phosphocreatine in muscle cells, thereby regenerating ATP more efficiently during very short, high-intensity efforts that utilize the ATP system. This delays fatigue and allows greater force output or additional repetitions before energy depletion.

Science:

• Kreider et al. (2017) - International Society of Sports Nutrition meta-analysis finds positive benefits of Creatine in athletes.

• Chwalbiñska-Moneta (2003) - N=16 rowers were measured before and after ingestion of 20g creatine monohydrate for 5 days vs placebo (rather outdated protocol). Measured performance of step test on 50W increments. Baseline V0₂ max of 61.9 ml/min/kg for placebo group and 61.0 for creatine group, which I would consider “intermediate” but rather far from “elite”. Study found “creatine supplementation improves endurance and anaerobic performance”.

Source Used:

• Thorne’s Creatine Monohydrate Powder.

Dosage/Cycle:

• 5g/day. Typically cycle for ~12 weeks on, ~1 week off. On cycle during racing.

Perceived Effects:

Within 1-2 days I felt immediate increase in power generation while erging. I specifically remember taking 30 firm (sub-1:45), low-rate, strokes towards the end of a ~90’ steady state session, immediately after starting creatine and the splits coming much easier than what I was used to (mind you, this was after 9 years of training and one Olympic Games). I personally did not experience much of the water retention and weight gain symptoms that some do. I would estimate I gained 1-2 pounds from water retention while on creatine, which would come off in a matter of days once I stopped the cycle. I also believe I experienced some small but significant effect in mental sharpness and clarity, but this was less strong of a perceived effect than the power, which I clearly perceived.

Overall:

My personal experience suggests any elite or intermediate athlete should supplement with Creatine. It’s worth noting that I gained significantly less weight than some athletes, who gain as much as 10-15lbs on a creatine cycle. Athletes with such weight gain should consider the tradeoffs of additional carrying weight in races.

Sodium Bicarbonate

Mechanism:

Sodium bicarbonate dissociates into sodium ions (Na+) and bicarbonate ions (HCO3-). The bicarbonate is a chemical base which increases the pH of blood. This neutralizes the effect of muscle acidosis caused by lactate production in the blood during anaerobic exertion.

Science:

• Grgic et al (2021) - Meta-analysis finding acute enhancement of “peak anaerobic power and anaerobic capacity”.

• Hobson et al (2013) - N=20 “club level” male rowers. 0.3g/kg bicarb or placebo for 2, 2000m Concept 2 tests, 48h apart. The average 2k time of completion was 6:52. For context my 2k PB was 5:51.3, and I was the slowest in my 4-. At 13 years old my 2k was 6:51. These were far from “elite” athletes. Also, maltodextrin was used as a placebo. For anyone who has ever ingested Sodium bicarbonate orally, you will understand how ridiculous this is. Still, this study still found statistically significant effects of improved performance (P = .004) in the 4th 500. This test setup is fairly average of what a typical supplement investigation looks like in “athletes” which I argue, may have very little bearing on “elite athletes”

Source:

Maurten Bicarb System (Uses gel and capsules to delay release of bicarb in stomach and limit negative effects on GI, I do highly recommend this system for both GI and release timing, although it’s expensive).

Dosage/cycle:

• ~0.3g/kg, ~90 minutes before race.

Perceived Effects:

Tremendous. Prior to taking bicarb I would experience extreme muscle acidosis in the last 10-15 strokes of a 2000m exertion, consistently. It’s not so much that my muscles became painful, as it is that I ceased to be able to move my muscles entirely. Getting myself up the slide became incredibly difficult, and on 2000m Concept 2 tests, my split would often go from ~1:25 with 250m to go to ~1:35 in the final 10 strokes. Admittedly, this was partly a pacing issue and partly a mental issue. With bicarb, I did not experience this. The end of the race was still hard, and I certainly would lose wattage in the last 5-10 strokes, but only minimally, and as the stroke seat I would be able to keep rating high and exert enough pressure to keep the rhythm.

Overall Recommendation:

Would recommend to rowers at college level and above. Make sure race day is not your first go with it however (see below).

Other:

One day, about 4 months before the Olympics, we had a step test and we decided, as a crew, to experiment with sodium bicarb for this (relatively) unimportant test. We didn’t have the Maurten system at the time so we decided to use standard Arm & Hammer baking soda. The only measuring device I had was the scoop from my creatine (above) - a 5g scoop of creatine. So I did the simple math: at .3g of baking soda per body weight kg, and weighing ~93kg, I would need ~30g of bicarb. 30g bicarb divided by a 5g scoop is 6 scoops. So 6 scoops is what I took. It tasted much worse than I remembered (dissolved in water), but I got it down. What I forgot to consider was the relative density of Arm & Hammer bicarb vs creatine monohydrate, which I later found was roughly ~2g/ml in sodium bicarb compared to ~.7g/ml in creatine. So I ingested ~.8g/kg of sodium bicarb. Needless to say, this did not make my stomach very happy, caused ~5 trips to the bathroom prior to the test, and somehow led to me starting the test with 2.1mmol/L of lactate (I guess from the bicarb?, I don’t really get this tbh). I finished the test ok, but it wasn’t my strongest.

Data from failed “NaHCO3 experiment”

To be Continued

… More to come in parts II and III. Caffeine, Beta Alanine, Albuterol, Omega-3, Vitamin D, Iron, Hydroxymethylbutyrate (HMB), Diclofenac (Voltaren), Fluticasone, Beta Ecdysterone, Resveratrol, and NMN. Subscribe to stay posted….