✓ Member
With no resistance? No.Originally Posted by David1982
Member
I mean sprinting/running down the street for 10 - 30's, not on a bike. I guess the answer is still no.
What about riding up a steep hill on a bicycle in 1st gear, then rolling back down and starting over? I have a very steep hill near my house.
✓ Member
Oh yea, regular sprints would work just fine. Up a hill would be even better. Sprints are brutal on recovery though, which is why they're not my go-to for strength athletes who don't need to run.
✓ Member
Wait, what??!! Then why do I have 1:30sec of easy air dyne after each sprint? I'd happily just sit on the bike if it was an option! :-)
✓ Member
Then you can rest, if you like, provided you sprint your ovaries off during the work interval.
✓ Member
Oh you're so funny!
But would sprinting them off make all of the inherent female hormonal training problems better or worse? Cuz that's all that matters.
✓ Member
Without dem ovaries, you'll be more like me, beard and all!
Member
In order to have an answer there probably needs to be a question.
Which energy system are you attempting to have your body adapt to?
While there is a continuum from 1RM strength to endurance exercise each area need to be developed for the most part of its own accord.
The mantra on this site is that 1RM strength has the most significant carry over to other strength types AND is the most easily developed.
VO2Max is trainable to about 20% improvement and generally takes about 3-5 years of training.
Lactate Threshold better termed functional threshold training or highest mean average power or pace you can maintain for one hour is going to be a percentage of V02Max and is also trainable.
We can talk about the fuel that we are burning and whether we are adapted to efficiently burn fat for very long endurance exercise or glycogen for moderate length glycogen.
There is a strong body of evidence that in order to run fast you not only have to run fast but you also have to run long in order to develop the slower energy systems fully to maximize the faster burning ones.
... In a short experiment of one with an untrained subject pretty much anything you do will result in significant adaption but if you are actually looking to put together a strong fit athlete/human being you need to attend to the breadth of the energy and muscle/skeletal systems.
It would have been nice if the modern north american athletic work being done was an improvement on Verkhoshansky and companies work rather than a disconnected bunch of stuff like Westside on one end and Crossfit on the other. No one wants to hear that it takes 3-5 years (more 5 than 3) of solid gpp to get a man or woman fit enough to begin effective athletic training.
We don't seem to be willing to enforce this physical training in our children so that by the time the finish puberty they are at this point and are either in life long maintenance of this fitness or have chosen to specialize in a sport.
Peaking, which is inherently what Michael Mosely is doing on a base of nothing will certainly result in a short term improvement but it's a dead end in terms of developing overall or athletic fitness.
✓ Member
This is not exactly true as stated. By getting stronger with sets of 5, which represents a nice blend of strength, hypertrophy, and conditioning stimulus, but mostly strength, your strength endurance will increase. It will, of course, be more specific to the exercise(s) you're doing but it will carry over nonetheless. The reverse is not true, in most cases, as sets of 15-20 don't do anything for absolute strength in a trained lifter.While there is a continuum from 1RM strength to endurance exercise each area need to be developed for the most part of its own accord.
Neither of these things are true. The "mantra" on this site is that training for strength, which sets of 5 are the primary stimulus (although 3's and singles are used at times), has the greatest carry over to all other physical attributes. It is not easy, but that's kind of part and parcel with things that work and are worthwhile.The mantra on this site is that 1RM strength has the most significant carry over to other strength types AND is the most easily developed.
It does not take nearly that long to improve VO2max with intelligent and consistent conditioning programming, but as you know, VO2max is modality specific and thus if you increase vo2max via mainly running (if you're a runner) but then test it on a bike, your vo2max measure will be blunted.VO2Max is trainable to about 20% improvement and generally takes about 3-5 years of training.
Lactate Threshold better termed functional threshold training or highest mean average power or pace you can maintain for one hour is going to be a percentage of V02Max and is also trainable.
Why does this matter outside of specificity for sport? We know PCR and the glycolytic system is what gets stressed in weight training and we're using some conditioning to augment our training + help us reach our strength goals. The dynamics of energy metabolism during exercise are of little importance for these goals. More importantly is what happens after exerciseWe can talk about the fuel that we are burning and whether we are adapted to efficiently burn fat for very long endurance exercise or glycogen for moderate length glycogen.
.There is a strong body of evidence that in order to run fast you not only have to run fast but you also have to run long in order to develop the slower energy systems fully to maximize the faster burning ones
The exact opposite of this is actually true unless we're talking about endurance athletes, which of course have to also run longer distances but not for the development of the energy systems per se', but to increase the efficiency in the movement, OR we're talking about someone who's completely detrained.
Agreed.... In a short experiment of one with an untrained subject pretty much anything you do will result in significant adaption but if you are actually looking to put together a strong fit athlete/human being you need to attend to the breadth of the energy and muscle/skeletal systems
Interesting theory. Seems to me that we let our kids specialize too earlyWe don't seem to be willing to enforce this physical training in our children so that by the time the finish puberty they are at this point and are either in life long maintenance of this fitness or have chosen to specialize in a sport.
How is he peaking? Where was the overreaching, the recovery, and the supercompensation? He did a few sessions of HIIT and some lipids improve which notoriously fluctuate day to day anyway, especially with different meals at night, sleep factors, etc. I agree with you that Mosley's plan isn't optimal for elite level athleticism, but I can't fault him for spreading the word about HIIT. The reason I'm being so critical of your post is that you typed up this block of text, which I felt like I had to approve because you spent so much time writing it. Then I had to spend so much time going through it and pointing out the flaws in your arguments so people don't think I agree with everything in here (some of it I do). At any rate, we both likely think Mosely could do a better job, we agree about GPP and we disagree about some other stuff.Peaking, which is inherently what Michael Mosely is doing on a base of nothing will certainly result in a short term improvement but it's a dead end in terms of developing overall or athletic fitness.
✓ Member
Okay, one more (really!): How many times per week? I'm of the opinion once is not enough, and three times may be too much for what otherwise is a strength program. I'm considering 2X per week, either after my squat/pull day, or on off days, and start with 4X30 sec sprints, probably on an elliptical. There'll be at least two full days of rest in between conditioning sessions.
If I want to work more on conditioning and less on strength, then I'd sprint 3X per week, and cut the lifting back. And do hill sprints sometimes instead of machines.
Sound reasonable?
Thank you!
Posting Permissions
