MB Madaera
Lost 31.7 lbs fat
Built 11.7 lbs muscle


Chris Madaera
Built 9 lbs muscle


Keelan Parham
Lost 30 lbs fat
Built 4 lbs muscle


Bob Marchesello
Lost 23.55 lbs fat
Built 8.55 lbs muscle


Jeff Turner
Lost 25.5 lbs fat


Jeanenne Darden
Lost 26 lbs fat
Built 3 lbs muscle


Ted Tucker
Lost 41 lbs fat
Built 4 lbs muscle

 
 

Determine the Length of Your Workouts

Evaluate Your Progress

Keep Warm-Up in Perspective


ARCHIVES >>

"Doing more exercise with less intensity,"
Arthur Jones believes, "has all but
destroyed the actual great value
of weight training. Something
must be done . . . and quickly."
The New Bodybuilding for
Old-School Results supplies
MUCH of that "something."

 

This is one of 93 photos of Andy McCutcheon that are used in The New High-Intensity Training to illustrate the recommended exercises.

To find out more about McCutcheon and his training, click here.

 

Mission Statement

H.I.T. Acceptable Use Policy

Privacy Policy

Credits

LOG IN FORUM MAIN REGISTER SEARCH
Conditioning???
First | Prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | Next | Last
Author
Rating
Options

marcrph

North Carolina, USA

Arthur Jones, the inventor of Nautilus and MedX, said the following during an interview with Stephen Langer, MD on the show Medicine Man :



"...the lifting of weights is so much superior for the purpose of improving the cardiovascular condition of a human being that whatever is in second place is not even in the running, no pun intended. That is to say, running is a very poor, a very dangerous, a very slow, a very inefficient, a very nonproductive method for eventually producing a very limited, low order of cardiovascular benefit."

----------------------------

Is this really true......are the measurements for conditioning there. I believe that lifting weights in circuit style is a means of improving conditioning.....but no competitive athlete uses this as a sole means....false reasoning by Mr. Jones, or promotion? I'm not a big fan of running either.....but for testing purposes.....a run of a specified distance for testing purposes would seem like a very good test for conditioning. The U.S. Army thinks so!

Conditioning is very important....as important as strength......in one's life. This is a very important subject.
Open User Options Menu

marcrph

North Carolina, USA

HeavyHitter32 wrote:
I think much of it comes down to the SAID principle. Combining strength and endurance training via HIT circuit training will likely give results, but not maximize either.


Extremely important salient point. You are to be commended

It comes down to one's goals, but if trying to maximize one or the other, it will come down to different methods.


More wisdom coming from experience

I agree skill plays a factor in everything, but different energy system emphasis plays a larger factor. Strength training is largely fueled by glucose, hence the term "anaerobic." Conditioning, longer endurance, etc. (whatever you want to call it) relies more so on oxygen, hence, "aerobic." If you want to maximize or optimize, you can probably see the need to focus on one or the other - within the context of one's goals. In addition, it should be noted, both types of training have different adaptations/effects on the heart - plenty of research has indicated this for years.

I'm astounded by how many (or most!) in the HIT crowd who refuse to accept the science behind all of this and stay with a very narrow-mided, non-scientific, dogmatic view of training in general.




Extremely good post
Open User Options Menu

marcrph

North Carolina, USA

Continuous kettlebell swings done 3 times weekly for 20 minutes will surely surprise many with a conditioning effect.
Open User Options Menu

marcrph

North Carolina, USA

For sure......women absolutely adore kettlebell workouts.
Open User Options Menu

southbeach

marcrph wrote:
A decrease in one's average resting heart rate may be an indication of an improvement in conditioning.

The resting heart rate can be measured.



my resting HR is in the low 40's
Open User Options Menu

southbeach

marcrph wrote:
How long does it take your heart to return to it's resting heart rate or pre-exercise heart rate?

Dr. Michael Lauer, a cardiologist and the director of clinical research in cardiology at the Cleveland Clinic Foundation, found that people after exercise whose heart rates fell less than 12 beats within a minute had a fourfold increased risk of dying in the next six years compared with those whose heart rates dropped by 13 or more.

All you need is a stopwatch and a heart rate monitor......

Measurements.....does anybody now believe that this is not more important than someone's opinion of what constitutes aerobics?


Mine drops precipitously after cessation of the activity.
Open User Options Menu

southbeach

krazy kaju wrote:
southbeach wrote:
iflyboats wrote:
When I use that word I'm referring to the metabolic and cardiovascular aspect of training, but that's not definitive by any means. It's not a technical term.
i can run a 5K under 20..

who else here can say that?

no, one




I can. 5k in 20 minutes isn't very impressive.


that's (3) 6 1/2 minute miles.

i don't believe you.
Open User Options Menu

southbeach

sgb2112 wrote:
I am sure my joints are in better condition than those tri athletes or longer distance runners.


So, what did we learn from Karnazes? It confirmed the value of high-volume training for endurance athletes. I'm not talking about volume in terms of months, or even years, but decades. Karnazes's ultramarathon habit has, over the last 13 years, built up his bone-density, joints, and running muscles and blood transport system to the point where he can motor along forever at a 7:00- to 10:00-mile pace is only limited by his supply of food and fluids not muscle damage or joint pain.

The above is a quote from runnersworld
Open User Options Menu

SB2006

http://www.escardio.org/...-ventricle.aspx
Open User Options Menu

SB2006

http://yourlife.usatoday.com/...mage/51701106/1
Open User Options Menu

southbeach

southbeach wrote:
sgb2112 wrote:
I am sure my joints are in better condition than those tri athletes or longer distance runners.

So, what did we learn from Karnazes? It confirmed the value of high-volume training for endurance athletes. I'm not talking about volume in terms of months, or even years, but decades. Karnazes's ultramarathon habit has, over the last 13 years, built up his bone-density, joints, and running muscles and blood transport system to the point where he can motor along forever at a 7:00- to 10:00-mile pace is only limited by his supply of food and fluids not muscle damage or joint pain.

The above is a quote from runnersworld


The mods aren't allowing the link to this quote..

The article is very interesting..a great read about an exceptional endurance athlete and the effect on his physiology. Dean Karnazes ran a marathon every day for 50 straight days in a row. That's right 50 marathons in 50 days..one each day.

The article is titled "The Karnazes Effect..published 01/03/2007 in Runner's World.
Open User Options Menu

marcrph

North Carolina, USA

southbeach wrote:
marcrph wrote:
A decrease in one's average resting heart rate may be an indication of an improvement in conditioning.

The resting heart rate can be measured.


my resting HR is in the low 40's


Very good
Open User Options Menu

southbeach

marcrph wrote:
southbeach wrote:
marcrph wrote:
A decrease in one's average resting heart rate may be an indication of an improvement in conditioning.

The resting heart rate can be measured.


my resting HR is in the low 40's


Very good


Thanks. It's measured @36 more than several times.
Open User Options Menu

marcrph

North Carolina, USA

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/...pubmed/20300022
Open User Options Menu

Hitit

southbeach wrote:


Thanks. It's measured @36 more than several times.


You're such a freakin' lier.

Open User Options Menu

southbeach

Hitit wrote:
southbeach wrote:


Thanks. It's measured @36 more than several times.

You're such a freakin' lier.



To tell the truth i was shocked myself first measuring this low. i been in the 40's for quite some time but first time it measured 36 i was like "whoa! what a lean mean efficient machine!"

Not always this low but often enough i'm confident of the read.

Open User Options Menu

Hitit

southbeach wrote:
Hitit wrote:
southbeach wrote:


Thanks. It's measured @36 more than several times.

You're such a freakin' lier.



To tell the truth i was shocked myself first measuring this low. i been in the 40's for quite some time but first time it measured 36 i was like "whoa! what a lean mean efficient machine!"

Not always this low but often enough i'm confident of the read.



Ok Lance Armstrong. I know, maybe you don't know how to count past your fingers and toes two times and that's the best number you could count to.

Or, I guess you are a world class athlete with the genetics to excel in a sport (running you say) and you must have missed your Olympic calling....

Clown (I think you found the right calling).
Open User Options Menu

southbeach

Hitit wrote:
southbeach wrote:
Hitit wrote:
southbeach wrote:


Thanks. It's measured @36 more than several times.

You're such a freakin' lier.



To tell the truth i was shocked myself first measuring this low. i been in the 40's for quite some time but first time it measured 36 i was like "whoa! what a lean mean efficient machine!"

Not always this low but often enough i'm confident of the read.



Ok Lance Armstrong. I know, maybe you don't know how to count past your fingers and toes two times and that's the best number you could count to.

Or, I guess you are a world class athlete with the genetics to excel in a sport (running you say) and you must have missed your Olympic calling....

Clown (I think you found the right calling).


No, not at all..actually i believe my genetics suck for physical sport. Everything i've ever tried to do physically has been an uphill battle. But i'm stubborn, i just keep at it.

i can't explain it, and i have no obvious medical problem that might account for it.

Perhaps a low fat high plant diet coupled with lots high MET endurance training over decades? i dunno..my best guess :/
Open User Options Menu

Hitit

southbeach wrote:
Hitit wrote:
southbeach wrote:
Hitit wrote:
southbeach wrote:


Thanks. It's measured @36 more than several times.

You're such a freakin' lier.



To tell the truth i was shocked myself first measuring this low. i been in the 40's for quite some time but first time it measured 36 i was like "whoa! what a lean mean efficient machine!"

Not always this low but often enough i'm confident of the read.



Ok Lance Armstrong. I know, maybe you don't know how to count past your fingers and toes two times and that's the best number you could count to.

Or, I guess you are a world class athlete with the genetics to excel in a sport (running you say) and you must have missed your Olympic calling....

Clown (I think you found the right calling).

No, not at all..actually i believe my genetics suck for physical sport. Everything i've ever tried to do physically has been an uphill battle. But i'm stubborn, i just keep at it.

i can't explain it, and i have no obvious medical problem that might account for it.

Perhaps a low fat high plant diet coupled with lots high MET endurance training over decades? i dunno..my best guess :/


I suppose that diet also turns back the hands of time from you being in your 50's to now in your 30's.

Such a Clown....
Open User Options Menu

marcrph

North Carolina, USA

So we have:

1) anaerobic conditioning

2) aerobic conditioning

The S.A.I.D principle hints 1 & 2 are maximally trained separately.
Open User Options Menu

southbeach

marcrph wrote:
So we have:

1) anaerobic conditioning

2) aerobic conditioning

The S.A.I.D principle hints 1 & 2 are maximally trained separately.


Endurance or anaerobic is more oft than not scoffed at here..but name ONE pro BB that doesn't do it? don't even try because they ALL do it. :|

Open User Options Menu

db144

SB:

Bodybuilders train aerobically to burn calories not to build endurance. I guess you overlooked that obvious point.

d
Open User Options Menu

southbeach

db144 wrote:
SB:

Bodybuilders train aerobically to burn calories not to build endurance. I guess you overlooked that obvious point.

d



why does a pro need to burn off excess cals with "useless" aerobic activity..shouldn't a pro know how much he needs to eat??
Open User Options Menu

db144

SB:

Read Mentzer he makes it quite clear why he ran and used the stationary bike.

d
Open User Options Menu

southbeach

db144 wrote:
SB:

Read Mentzer he makes it quite clear why he ran and used the stationary bike.

d


another "go read so and so" or do a search of internet answer.

lol

get lost

Open User Options Menu
First | Previous | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | Next | Last
H.I.T. Acceptable Use Policy