Acute Weight Manipulation — Applied Strongman

Disclaimer: This article is intended to be educational in nature, and in no way prescriptive. We recommend all athletes discuss intention of engaging in weight loss practices with your healthcare provider.

Jump Ahead to the Practical Guide to Acute Weight Loss (AWM)

Jump Ahead to the Practical Guide to Sweating Methods

What is Acute Weight Management?

Acute Weight Manipulation (AWM) practices are very common in weight class sports, and the practices for “making weight” vary greatly. We define AWM as the temporary reduction in body mass (BM) to compete in a weight class lower than one’s usual weight. This approach is to gain an actual or perceived advantage under the assumption that athletes with more mass will generally perform better than the athletes with less mass in strength sports. Whether this is always the case is debatable, as it is theorized that more muscle mass will provide more strength potential in advanced athletes, since a greater variety of factors contribute to strength development in beginner and intermediate athletes like neural adaptations and skill acquisition (1).

The goal of this article is to help coaches and athletes sort out the noise across the internet and gym lore so that they can approach weight cutting in the healthiest and safest ways possible. There are a lot of legitimate dangers with some of the processes of AWM, like intentional dehydration or electrolyte manipulations. Both of those factors if done incorrectly can lead to severe illness and even death. In a survey on competitive powerlifters, 83% of men and 90.2% of women(2) participated in AWM for their contest. Among those athletes were High, Medium, and low “caliber” athletes Lightweight, Middleweight, and Heavyweight. It is worth nothing that this survey was on powerlifters who were also trying to achieve the best possible Wilks score. The magnitude (amount of total mass lost) using AWM increased as the caliber of athlete went up. I.E. More advanced athletes cut more.

Why might more advanced athletes lose more than intermediate and beginner athletes? One possible scenario is that more advanced athletes might have more total muscle mass and therefore larger compartments of water to draw from. Another possibility is that the more elite athletes are digging a little bit deeper for their AWM in order to make weight with more “on the line”.

What makes AWM different from a traditional weight loss regimen is that all of the weight lost for AWM is intended to be temporary and recoverable within a short period. This essentially means that there is no fat or muscle tissue loss. This temporary BM reduction comes from the reduction in body water and transient gut contents. Reduction in body water is usually accomplished via water restriction and sweating, while the gut mass reduction is commonly done through low residue diets or laxatives. AWM practices usually start about a week to a few days before a contest weigh-in. Many athletes consider the AWM to be complete at weigh-in and then just consume salty beverages and consume a lot of food as quickly as possible. For the most part that works alright, though the athlete would benefit from a more controlled and intentional recovery post weigh-in.

What are the risks associated with AWM?

The dangers involved with AWM are primarily related to electrolyte imbalance and temperature control. Some of the greatest risks come from utilizing pharmaceutical grade diuretics that fully bypass the body’s regulatory processes and will continue their dehydration past safe levels if used improperly. Potassium imbalances are a major concern with diuretics or AWM and can be lethal. Temperature control is also a health risk with increasing levels of dehydration. Due to the common use of saunas, hot baths, and wearing layered clothing while exercising, the changes in temperature control ability of the body becomes more important. Lastly, one of the most common practices in AWM includes “water loading” which is a process of consuming much more water than the athlete usually would for a number of days. Water loading with too high of volume and too quickly can lead to a dangerous condition known as Hyponatremia.

Before thinking about AWM, first consider the age of the athlete. While anyone who’s known a wrestler in high school probably understands that teenagers and adolescents may participate in weight restriction to make their weight class. Despite this fact adolescents and young adults should participate in AWM or weight restriction as little as possible or not at all due to the concern for the dangers of AWM in younger athletes(3). Children and young adults are not only physically less efficient in temperature regulation, but are undergoing important physical and mental development and should instead focus on technique, performance, and healthy relationships with food and body image. Turning these younger athletes into healthy adults is more important than making a specific weight class.

Considerations for Athletes

1. Health and Wellbeing: AWM should ideally be practiced only by healthy adults who have a positive body image and relationship with food. If you are a coach, you need to consider this portion seriously. Know that you are going to keep your athletes healthy and not take your athletes through a process that will leave them with lasting issues or exacerbate existing ones. If you are an athlete considering AWM, let this be one of your first considerations.

Contraindications

History of Eating Disorders: Those who have been diagnosed, or believe that have had, or currently have an eating disorder are recommended to avoid AWM especially on their own. An exception might be if they were being guided by their mental health or nutrition professional who believe they are in a place with their recovery where AWM would not be damaging mentally or physically.
Medical Conditions and Medications: AWM requires various levels of dehydration and manipulation of bodily processes. There are a number of conditions and medications that may make these practices more unsafe for the athlete, and can lead to permanent damage or worse if attempted. If you have any medical conditions, it is always advisable to discuss with your doctor or healthcare provider if they foresee any complications with your current medical status.

2. Competitive Level: is the next most important consideration. The concept of AWM is driven by the competitive edge it gives an athlete. If there is nothing to be gained by making a lower weight, don’t bother. AWM might be useful for athletes vying for a podium, working toward an invite to a larger show, or competing at a high level stage. For athletes who are competing to do their best, have fun, or challenge themselves, it’s best simply roll into a contest at whatever you might weigh and compete at that weight class. Compared to powerlifting or weightlifting, Strongman does require you to lift a specific weight that you can’t scale to your body size. If the athlete wants to compete in a weight class that they won't “zero” events, that could also be a reasonable time to do an AWM, though in most cases competing in a novice class or using traditional weight loss to get them into the lower weight class may be better.

**Questions to ask before attempting AWM:**

Will AWM increase your chances for a podium spot you otherwise would not achieve?
WiIl AWM provide you an invite to a more prestigious show that you plan on attending?
Are you competing at a show you qualified for in a specific weight class?
Are you trying to avoid multiple “Zero” events at a strongman contest?
Are your competitive goals worth a non-zero risk of health complications?

If the answer to any of those questions is not a definitive “yes”, the athlete may be better off competing at their current bodyweight and avoiding unnecessary stresses and potential dangers of AWM.

3. Proximity to the Weight Class: There are limitations to how much BM an athlete can safely lose in order to make a weight class. Studies on AWM have various numbers for the total BM that can be reduced safely for an AWM. Those range from 3-8% total body mass. Admittedly these studies are limited by safety guidelines and oversight. It may be that these numbers could be driven a little bit higher, however we will not make that recommendation anywhere within this article. While it may be theoretically possible, it is far better to stay within the established safe limits so if you need to lose more than 8% of your weight for an upcoming competition, you should consider not cutting weight.

4. Body Composition: There isn’t a significant amount of available research directly on AWM, body composition and magnitudes of weight loss. It is reasonable to expect that total lean body mass plays a role in size and amount of water compartments for an athlete to pull from. It is generally understood that fat tissue stores a lower percentage of water than muscle tissues. For example, say there are two athletes at 100kg, Athlete A has a body fat percentage of 10%, while Athlete B has 30%. Athlete A has more lean mass at the same body weight and therefore has more body water that can be removed. Ultimately it seems that the following are likely.

Larger athletes will get more form an AWM than smaller athletes.
Leaner Athletes will get more from AWM than less lean athletes of similar weights.
Larger and Leaner athletes will see the highest %BM reductions from AWM than their counterparts.

5. Biological Sex:

Females may have different responses than males

Biological sex likely plays a role in water retention due to hormone levels at the different phases of Menstruation. Whether these effects are a direct result of the menstrual phase itself, or simply the specific hormone balances during those phases are unclear. For example we don't know whether a biological female whose hormones vary due to menstruation/genetic factors will have similar results of trans women who have hormonal interventions. The same may be true for biological females who are using androgenic and anabolic steroids (AAS) for performance. Research on biological females and AWM or water retention is severely lacking in the field currently. Furthermore, research on trans women or women on AAS is essentially nonexistent at this time.(4)(5)(6)

The magnitude of body mass reduced in an AWM for female athletes is usually somewhat less than that of male athletes. Several factors may be in play, but it seems it may be differences in lean body mass, or perhaps skeletal muscle mass specifically that determine the ease and magnitude of body water reduction through AWM. It may be that a male and female athlete controlled for lean body mass, would have a similar weight reduction by dehydration. For this reason, we believe that female athletes who carry a large amount of skeletal muscle may find that they will have greater reductions in BM from AWM protocols.

Hormones and Menstrual Phases:

Females may be at higher risk of heat issues during dehydration during the Luteal Phase (13). Resting and exercising body temperature set points increase by 0.3-0.5 degrees C (convert temp). Extra care to ensure that the athlete is using sweating methods appropriately to prevent heat illness when using an AWM Practice. It was once believed that women were at a higher risk of hyponatremia during exercise, though the evidence currently has this up for debate. It may still be wise to use slightly more careful procedures with AWM with a female athlete for the first attempt. Current evidence suggests that body size and composition, fitness status, and exercise duration may be more important factors for hyponatremia than sex differences. Some Oral Contraceptive (OC) medications may lead to higher than usual mechanisms for fluid retention when the body recognizes a mild state of dehydration. Additionally OC may have a higher thirst response through the same mechanisms.

Despite this information, more research is needed on the subject before Menstrual Phase specific recommendations for AWM approaches can be made. While sex hormones will interact with water retention, dehydration, temperature control, and rehydration. Biologically female athletes (using oral contraceptives or not) may want to start with a less aggressive AWM until familiar with how they react to the protocols, while also paying special attention to heat focused sweating methods when watching for signs of heat illness.

AWM Methods and Processes

At this point we get to the nitty gritty of the AWM process. For the practical guide for athletes and coaches, please click HERE to skip ahead.

Difference between AWM and a traditional weight loss.

An athlete hoping to make weight for a specific class can achieve this goal through either of two methods, or a combination; traditional weight loss and AWM. Traditional weight loss includes calorie restriction over time to reduce body fat and to a smaller degree lean tissue. Muscle loss is usually considered an undesirable outcome for athletes, but not always. We will be referring to the fat tissue loss primarily here.

The most common approach for an athlete above a weight class is to use a traditional weight loss well in advance of their contest. They may take that weight loss all the way until their daily weight is underneath the weight limit for their contest or sport. Alternatively they take this approach until they are within range of using an AWM the last week in order to finish the process off. This approach is less than ideal as it will result in a more difficult than expected AWM because the athlete is likely already partially glycogen depleted and carrying less total body water as a starting point. When utilizing traditional weight loss plan to be finished at about 4 weeks out. This will allow enough time for the athlete or coach to gauge where their new body weight is when returned to a non-dieted state. At this point the cut can either continue if needed given the extra time remaining, or the athlete can spend time at this weight adjusting to new levers, feel of supportive equipment etc.

Structure of an AWM

The main components of an AWM are: Gut Mass Reduction, Water Restriction, Sweating, and Recovery.

Gut Mass Reduction

Gut mass reduction is an often overlooked aspect of an AWM. Those who are familiar with it usually understand it in the form of taking bowel prep formulas (laxatives) to clear out the body of gut mass. This approach is almost always unnecessary. The alternative approach is using a low residue diet (also known as a low fiber diet) for the days before a contest. This is a passive process that reduces body mass but without recovery cost.

Laxatives such as magnesium citrate are readily available and can be found at a local pharmacy. Some athletes also gain similar effects by consuming foods with very high sugar alcohol components in excess like sugar-free candies or MCT oil for those not acclimated to them. We have no intention of going into detail of how to use latter methods as they are less reliable and should be avoided when there are reliable and safer methods. The main benefit athletes find when using laxatives to reduce gut mass is the process is fairly quick with results that can be seen in less than one day. This allows the athlete or coach to avoid a week's worth of careful planning or food tapering, as well as having the potential of a quick result when a plan changes. A proper bowel preparation approach should be able to yield about 1-2% body mass reduction(7).

There are some drawbacks to bowel preparation formulas however. When the laxative is doing its work, it may be very difficult to do other tasks such as work, get things done, or leave the house. The athlete will not be able to exercise or do any of the active sweating processes, and electrolyte balance and unintended water loss is also very likely to occur. The key here is it is unintended, as all of the water manipulations during an AWM should be intentional and planned. With unreliable water loss we begin to lose control of the process and endanger the athlete.

“All of the water manipulations during an AWM should be intentional and planned.”

Low residue diets will produce an identical body mass reduction of 1-2% but through a much slower process. The transit times of foods vary between person to person but it is generally between 2-7 days(7). The athlete or coach should always err toward the longer portion of this window until they have a reliable history of how long it takes to achieve the 1-2% loss. This process primarily works through reducing the fiber content of food significantly and shifting the diet towards foods that are highly digestible. This usually takes the form of eating processed, simple foods while avoiding changes in sodium. A sample food list will be provided in the practical guide section but below are some commonly eaten favorites.

Screen Shot 2022-07-29 at 9.25.34 AM.png

Screen Shot 2022-07-29 at 9.25.57 AM.png

Screen Shot 2022-07-29 at 9.29.13 AM.png

Screen Shot 2022-07-29 at 9.36.55 AM.png

Screen Shot 2022-07-29 at 10.43.48 AM.png

The primary advantage is that the athlete can maintain a neutral caloric state throughout the process. If the athlete can make weight without the need to deplete glycogen (through caloric restriction) they will have less recovery cost after weigh-in. Unlike with a bowel preparation formula, the athlete will have adequate fuel and ability to leave the bathroom to continue to train, work, live, or do active sweating practices for dehydration. Some athletes find this method particularly enjoyable as the food selection usually tends toward very palatable foods rich in simple carbs and high in fat. There are downsides to this method as well. The highly processed and easily digestible nature of the food selection means that satiety will be much lower. The athlete may find that they aren’t full for very long. While some athletes enjoy the reprieve to eat highly palatable foods traditionally labeled as “unhealthy” many find these food selections to be difficult when used to a controlled and intentional diet rich in fiber, vegetables, and minimally processed foods. Lastly, the process is not very fast, for some people this can take up to a week, though results vary.

“It's important for the athlete and coach to understand daily habits or do trial runs during training before relying on any single method for weigh-in.”

Regardless of the method taken to reduce gut mass, the process is an invaluable tool for an AWM since there is virtually no recovery cost. Returning to a normal state afterwards is usually done by progressively re-introducing normal food items to the diet the following day. Some athletes may be within range of their weight cut simply by utilizing this method, yielding better results than the “I’ll just fast for the last couple days” approach. Athletes with chronically high fiber, high vegetable, and high fruit diets will benefit the most from this method. If an athlete already consumes primarily highly processed foods they may get far less weight reduction. So it's important for the athlete and coach to understand daily habits or do trial runs during training before relying on any single method for weigh-in.

Water Intake Manipulation

Water intake manipulation is the meat and potatoes of any AWM practice because body water can be manipulated to a great extent. This practice usually consists of limiting water intake for hours/days prior to weigh-in. Hydration status and dehydration have a fairly deep pool of research regarding their effect on power and strength expression, cardiovascular performance, and more. We can draw from much of that research to make decisions about the recovery methods and priorities post weigh-in. One survey found that 92% of athletes participate in some form of water restriction for weight in(2). Of those athletes, 83% used water loading. This practice is widely used but poorly understood by most, which is unfortunate due to the potential danger of hyponatremia.

Water Loading

The green spheres represent ADH, since it has to bond to receptors, leading to a cascade of events that close aquaporins (water channels), there is a lag time between when you stop drinking water, and your body stops draining as much out. (Kidney Intl).

Water loading is the process of increasing fluid intake significantly over the course of a few days, before restricting water, hopefully resulting in a greater loss of body water than restriction alone. The mechanisms for which water loading works remains unclear, though some theorize an acute suppression in ADH (Vasopressin) hormone. This hormone is released when water intake is low, telling your body to hold on to its water for conservation. When water intake is high this hormone is reduced in the body leading to increased water loss. However, some water loading studies have found that when water is loaded vasopressin actually rebounded. One possible explanation is that aquaporins (water channels) may remain up or down regulated for several days following changes in ADH. After several days of water loading, these aquaporins may be down regulated via low levels of ADH so once water is re-introduced, ADH spikes, but delayed re-opening of these channels results in less water re-absorption. This is demonstrated only in rat models at this time, however, due to the the observations that ADH rebounds at the reintroduction of water, and that Reale et al did see an affect from water loading, there is little reason to expect this mechanism may not be applicable to humans as well (8,9).

Reale et al. Studied a group of male athletes who all had some experience with weight restriction for sport weigh-in (8). Those with experience using water loading were distributed evenly among the groups. Each athlete was on a very mild caloric deficit, had a sodium intake of 630 mg per 500 calories, and 10-13g fiber for the study. The participants were divided into a water loading (WL) group and a control group. The water loading group had a 3 day loading period, after which all participants were under water restriction.

The water loading protocol was as follows: days 1 through 3 were a water intake of 100mL/kg BM (1.5oz/lb). This water volume was divided equally across hour targets. Day four, water consumption was reduced to 15mL/kg BM (0.23oz/lb). On day 5 there was no water consumed until data collection. In the study, the water loading group lost 3.2% BM, while the control group lost 2.4% BM. The magnitude is not particularly large, but it is a practical increase and every bit counts.

Screen Shot 2022-07-20 at 5.02.55 PM.png

Screen+Shot+2022-07-20+at+5.03.17+PM.jpg

The composition of the water should be predominantly plain water, bottled, tap, well, are all fine. Trace minerals and ions will not effect the water loading, though the athlete should avoid sports drinks, electrolyte fortified beverages, and increased dietary sodium. Diet beverages low in sodium and coffee/tea also contribute to your fluid target.

Water Restriction

Water manipulation can be accomplished via water restriction only, but we will also discuss some minor electrolyte (sodium only) manipulation. Some athletes may find that the water loading process simply is not compatible with their lifestyle. The increased rate of urination can be extremely disruptive to athletes who do not have the luxury of that many trips to the bathroom. For those athletes, you can simply just restrict water and sweat for similar though smaller, reliable results.

Sodium manipulations should be minimal. If you have a naturally high sodium intake due to having a lot of salty foods, such as prepared foods from restaurants or ready-to-eat foods from grocery stores, it might be prudent to make an intention to seek out foods with less salt during your last days of AWM. Do not eliminate salt from your diet, but it can be a mistake to accidentally increase your sodium intake by selecting saltier foods when changing nutrition for the low residue diet portion of the AWM. For example, foods on the “low residue” list are often of the processed variety high in salt, or might be low in flavor leading to the use of potentially high sodium sauces and seasonings.

Small sips of water and sucking on ice cubes are a favorite way to help make fluid restriction bearable

Interestingly there is very little direct evidence that reductions in dietary sodium reduce body mass in healthy adults. Most research on dietary sodium intakes don't take body mass measurements in a way that can be used directly for our purposes. Even though the research is mostly on individuals with high blood pressure we will be working under the assumption that it will generalize to healthy individuals, and therefore worth considering for an AWM process. Nearly any nutrition coach for strength or physique athletes has seen an athlete make food selections extremely high in salt for a meal or day, and notice a significantly higher weight for a few days before the athlete has a period of frequent urination and then return to average body mass measures.

Water restriction would follow the same protocols as above (15mL/kg or 0.23oz/Lbs) for consumption per day during the restriction phase. The restriction phase should only be as long as is needed in order to reach the BM goal desired. This time is usually one full day followed by the morning through weigh-in the next day. It is during this water restriction that the athlete and/or coach will determine what amounts of sweating protocols will be needed to achieve the desired BM within the time limits. The safety of this process is the same as those within the water load portion, as the control group for the study was also within critical ranges and considered a safe process.

Sweating

Much of the sweating and dehydration information comes from either heat acclimation research, or research on the performance effects of dehydration on athletes. Neither of which look directly at the relationship of how much body mass an athlete can lose safely to make weight. Processes for dehydration fall under two categories. Active sweating, where the athlete is exercising in some manner to elicit a sweat response, or passive sweating, where sweating is a result of heat stress of some sort. Both of these methods are reliable and effective but come with their own considerations. For the sweating guide, click HERE

Heat Acclimation

Let’s first review the sweat response and heat acclimation. One important aspect of the sweat response is that it can be “trained” so to speak, as athletes can adapt to warm environments by existing in or exercising within that environment(10). Heat acclimation refers to: sweat initiation at lower temperatures, increased sweat rate, and dilution of sweat to preserve electrolytes(11). About 75% of the adaptations to heat acclimation can be achieved within 4-6 days. This is very likely a graded response of some sort, so the number of and length of exercise bouts with heat and humidity may determine the speed at which those adaptations arrive. We advise that athletes who plan to partake in a significant amount of the sweating applications for an AWM take time during the week before their AWM protocols to develop some level of adaptation to heat in order to maximize the efficiency of their sweating practices.

Heat acclimation increases sweating rate and if fluid replacement is not proportionately increased, greater dehydration will occur, especially in humid environments.

While the above quote is a warning for athletes, it's a good description of the intentional weight reductions for athletes regarding the adaptation where the sweat glands produce more dilute sweat in order to preserve electrolytes. Athletes can leverage this adaptation in order to maximize their weight reduction through water loss, while also limiting the electrolyte loss sometimes seen. Athletes with higher levels of cardiovascular fitness seem to have a faster and greater adaptation to heat(10). Heat acclimation is much more effective for athletes using active sweating methods than for those that will be using mostly passive sweating methods. It is not a requirement for an athlete to intentionally adapt to heat in order to have a good AWM protocol, but it is recommended.

Active Sweating

The stationary bike is a favorite for water cutting

Active sweating is when an individual is sweating in response to heat and exercise. Active sweating methods include low-intensity exercise or light resistance training in warm clothes, a sauna suit, or simply a hot environment. This method is a little more effective for weight reduction due to the compartments from which it draws, as well as the magnitude of sweating being somewhat higher. Active sweating tends to release water from extracellular compartments compared to passive sweating methods(9) possibly reducing recovery demand or performance loss from dehydration. It is important to use this method only if the athlete is already used to that particular mode of exercise. We have seen athletes do excessive cycling as a sweating strategy, only to find their knees and quads to be sore for the contest since they had not normally been running. So any active sweating practices should either include adding heat to their existing workouts (even a deload) or prepare for active sweating by adding in LISS sessions several weeks earlier. Active sweating should be added to any existing workouts within the athlete’s schedule. Active sweating can also be used at an actual weigh-in due to having missed weigh-in the first try. At this point the athlete must decide between an increased recovery demand in order to make weight, compared to performance in a higher weight class and cutting losses.

Passive Sweating

Passive sweating methods simply refer to sweating where exercise is not a primary or significant aspect of the sweating. Most often athletes use saunas, hot baths, or being outdoors in the summer as a passive sweating technique. Athletes can also wear sweatsuits and/or sauna suits in order to use their own body heat when saunas or baths are unavailable.

Health Concerns When Utilizing Heat

One of the many negatives associated with dehydration is a reduction in temperature control. Temperature regulation is one of the first systems that is affected by dehydration. Athletes that are using sweating methods using heat should pay special attention to heat illness signs. More information can be found Here (12)

Spitting - Honorable Mention

Production of and spitting of saliva is another common and worthwhile tool for those looking to lose a tiny amount of extra body mass for a weigh-in. This is traditionally accomplished thought the use of a lozenge or chewing gum. When these are held in or chewed in the mouth, it elicits a salivary response. The athlete then repeatedly spits the produced saliva out. This technique will only produce a small amount of weight loss, but can be the difference for some athletes.

Glycogen Depletion

Depleting glycogen is the process by which the athlete reduces carbohydrate intake over the course of 2-5 days. The athlete should remain at maintenance calories, bring carbohydrates down to 30-50g, and make up the difference with calories from fat and from protein. Glycogen depletion will work best if the athlete is doing some light exercise sessions during depletion.

Glycogen recovery takes about 24 hours, but it could take longer if it is fully depleted (13). For this reason glycogen depletion should be a tertiary approach to AWM. For athletes competing the same day as weigh-in, Glycogen depletion should be considered a last choice approach. Complete recovery from depletion would take nearly the entire contest. Partial recovery for the first few events is doable. For athletes with a 12+ hour weigh-in, Glycogen Depletion is much more viable, though we still recommend using it only for athletes that have a very large weight reduction.

Recovery from AWM

Levels of Dehydration and the Effect on Performance.

To understanding the role of recovery on an AWM, we must first recognize the levels of dehydration and what performance is affected. These understandings will help the coach or athlete determine how much to push, and how much recovery time is necessary for a particular weigh-in and contest design. The table below will describe the potential effects on performance at specific ranges of dehydration.

The figure to the left from data in (14), (15), (16) shows the observations of performance effects on various types of performance across dehydration levels. It seems that in most cases, endurance seems to be the aspect of performance that takes the most consistent hit across all dehydration levels at or above 2%. Since sample size dramatically drops as the level of dehydration goes up, we cannot be as confident that at 5% and above we’re going to see 100% chance of performance detriment for endurance. However, until we have more research at those levels of dehydration we should still consider that 5% should be a functional top end for contests with an endurance component, with the ideal level of recovery post weigh-in bringing the athlete to at least 2% dehydration or less. As a side note, research suggests mild dehydration may result in some women feeling an increase in RPE and a perception of reduced recovery between events.

Rehydration Guidelines

Same Day Weigh-in

This is the process from which the athlete recovers from their dehydrated state as rapidly as possible (or as necessary) to perform within reasonable expectations. For weigh-ins on the same day, the goal is essentially returning to 2% dehydration or less. When the weigh-in for the athlete is more than 12 hours before competing, full recovery from dehydration protocols should be complete.

Immediately after making weight, the athlete should consume a mixture of water and electrolytes. While just water is fine, we do expect that some electrolyte loss happened during the sweating and water loading processes, so it might be wise to have an electrolyte drink available for the immediately post weight drink. If you’re adding electrolytes Reale(7) recommends >1.15g/L sodium and <5g/L carbohydrate content. For ease, simply consuming a Pedialyte (or equivalent), or a sports drink will be perfectly reasonable at this time. If the athlete is using a pedialyte powder, or similar product, always mix the powder to manufacturer directions. Concentrating the powder more may lead to osmotic diarrhea, a very unpleasant and counterproductive situation.

For those who are competing within a few hours of making weight, they should consume between 20-30oz (600-900mL) of fluid as described above. The initial rehydration drink should be consumed about as quickly as possible without causing an upset stomach. The initial drink should also stretch the stomach slightly, meaning it should feel fairly filling, in order to signal for gastric emptying. Once consumed, the athlete should then focus on drinking about 150% of the total water lost throughout the remainder of the time available at convenience. It is important to remember that the rehydration goal is to return the body to <2% dehydration. While there aren’t any measured performance detriments due to “hyperhydration” that we’re aware of, it is wise to avoid over-hydrating and the associated risks outlined earlier.

Methods such as IV rehydration are fully unnecessary for all but nearly lethal levels of dehydration or for unconscious individuals. Rehydration using intravenous (IV) fluids is also becoming increasingly common among athletes who participate in weight cuts. Though many assume this form of rehydration must be faster and more effective than oral rehydration, current evidence of this is lacking. It is even suggested that oral rehydration may have benefits to performance over IVs, due to stimulation of downstream effects in the body that are bypassed when fluids are taken intravenously (17). The human body is incredibly efficient with rehydration when presented with liquid and electrolytes. The use of IV may be necessary for individuals who used pharmaceutical grade diuretics to achieve rapid dehydration but little evidence exists for this practice.

12+hr Weigh-in

For 12+hour weigh-in, a common mistake athletes make is to be unfocused in their recovery, but the process should be essentially identical to that of a <12 hour weigh-in, as the quicker the athlete replenishes their body the better. The goal should be to weigh the same as before AWM, and no more if possible. . Complete recovery for glycogen and dehydration lands comfortably in less than 12 hours. For athletes who use non-pharma methods for AWM, the protocols are very simple. The athlete should consume approximately 150% of the water lost during AWM between making weight and going to bed. 150% is so that the athlete is able to restore fluid lost, and have enough spare fluid for the kidneys to excrete while balancing electrolytes. This fluid can be in the form of electrolyte drinks (such as Pedialyte) or low carbohydrate sports drinks (such as Gatorade), or simply in the form of water, sodas, etc. with meals.

Hyperhydration

Over-hydrating and loading too much sodium can cause a significant amount of water retention. As mentioned earlier, we’re not aware of any research on “hyperhydration” and performance, but the bloating from that may cause issues with supportive equipment fit vital equipment like belts, overly frequent bathroom breaks, etc.

Glycogen Recovery (If Glycogen Depletion was utilized)

While glycogen depletion is a tertiary approach, some athletes will find that they need to drop more weight than would be desired with water and gut manipulation alone. Recovery from glycogen depletion is very important.

For a 12+hour weigh-in, the best process would be to eat 7-10g/kg (3.5-5g/lbs) between making weight and bed. For most, it would be advisable to consume 30-50% of that in a single meal closer to weigh-in. Composition of those carbohydrates should be relatively low fiber as to prevent GI upset for competition, and should include relatively high sodium and potassium content foods such as potatoes, bananas, orange juice, tomatoes.

General Post Weigh-In food Selection:

Beyond the topics discussed for recovery above, we begin to delve into the realm of contest day nutrition. We have an article written by Greg Here. The article provides a thorough discussion on that topic.

The Practical Guide:

Caloric Intake Regardless of Weigh-in Timing:

Caloric Intake should remain at maintenance. For most instances there is not a need to cut calories during this week despite it being fairly common. AWM should be based on reducing weight that can be immediately recovered and minimally impact performance. For this reason we suggest that any fat loss be accomplished several weeks prior to beginning an AWM protocol. Glycogen depletion is a tertiary approach that can be used by dropping carbohydrate intake to minimal levels (similar to those of ketosis) and replacing the calories from carbohydrates with calories from fat and protein. Any athlete using glycogen depletion should understand that of the AWM practices described, glycogen has the slowest recovery time and should really only be used for >12 hour weigh-ins.