Hey guys so i'm making a point of training more cardio because i'm trying for a more lean/muscular build as opposed to just making muscle gains. However i'm still trying to strike a balance between weight training and cardio- what ratio do you guys use?, i'm 6,1 roundabouts and around 85 kilograms, right now trying to build muscle without getting too bulky.
TL;DR - working very hard for short periods of time > fannying about on the cross trainer for 45 minutes. If it feels good, you're not working hard enough.
Yep I wouldn't bother with long steady state cardio for helping you lean out and get better conditioned, it's not like it's been used for decades by bodybuilders to do exactly that very thing......:bang:
That's why all the beginners programs for cardio based/endurance sports say "Just do some HIIT" right? Do you wanna explain why Its a bad idea in a bit more detail Icefield?
And it was used incorrectly for decades by bodybuilders. The scientific merits of HIIT over moderate intensity cardio when it comes to fat loss are well documented and it has been shown repeatedly that long moderate intensity cardio sessions destroy strength gains. If you are trying to get stronger and are spending hours on the treadmill - you are doing it wrong. If you are trying to reduce fat and are spending hours on the treadmill - you are doing it wrong.
Not this tired old argument again I thought the likes of Lyle McDonald had put this to rest :bang: http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/fat-loss/stead-state-versus-intervals-finally-a-conclusion.html/ Bodybuilders,guys who are paid to lean out do it wrong and have been for decades..really that's the same argument that the interval guys trotted out saying boxers were wrong doing steady state cardio then wondered why all their mma fighters gassed in the first round on an interval only protocol As for cardio negatively affecting strength that's simply not true want to know how powerlifters cut weight and what they do for cardio? Go look up Alex viada and the hydrid athletes he trains What does negatively effect strength work is hard interval work, hence why it's better to do steady state cardio most of the time, it's easier to recover from, allows you to do other training works Greg nuckels is a good source on all things strength http://strengtheory.com/2014/03/03/cardio-and-lifting-cardio-wont-hugely-impact-your-gains-in-the-short-run-and-may-be-beneficial-for-strength-and-size-in-the-long-run/
Well without a sound base you will never be able to work hard enough at enough of a pace and intensity and duration to make the intervals actually effective. Not to mention most interval studies so that after 6+8 weeks benefits start to drop off, which is why most athletes cycle intervals in and out of training but include a form of steady state work all year round
If by tired and old, you mean the outcome of substantive research into exercise science over the past 10 years. Yeah. And Lyle McDonald is an amateur. Here's a primer written by a professional, with actual citations. http://www.bodybuilding.com/fun/ask-the-muscle-prof-best-cardio-for-preserving-mass.html You can do your own literature search from there if you want...
I personally found steady state cardio in the form of roadwork incredibly good for maintaining weight and for my athletic performance in training. It helped my recovery rate, output, mental strength and made my legs feel stronger for longer on the Thai pads. I really notice the difference now that I don't have time to fit roadwork into my schedule. My rather fence sitting argument would be to do both (HIIT and steady state) and as far as I can see a lot of coaches recommend the same. Oh yeah, and if you really care about losing fat... Eat for it.
Unless you are training for strength, in which case, the steady state will heavily compromise your gains.
What sort of times/distances are we talking for it to be impactful? I have to confess maximal strength was not a training goal of mine and still isn't so I have no experience to draw from regarding that.
I'm not against HIIT in any way, the problem is when people are told just to do HIIT and especially beginners who might not have the strength, flexibility, basic cardio etc etc. It needs to be carried out correctly and also cycled as Icefield mentioned. HIIT has a time and place and should be part of your training not all your training...unless you're doing a long distance endurance sport where you probably just won't bother at all (but that's another argument for a different forum).
Love to hear that too as greg knuckols is an elite powerlifter arguing for steady cardio work and is one of the best researchers in the strength field. And he isn't alone Not to mention I've trained for and competed in powerlifting, had the pleasure of watching nermous Commonwealth champs train and those that do cardio all do a form of steady state work...
Study methodologies vary but the lit review from the article I posted above states that athletes requiring maximal power or rate of force development should not include endurance training in their programmes alongside strength training. Athletes requiring maximal strength and hypertrophy should keep to cardio that closely mimics sport specific movements and not perform long run endurance work >20 minutes more than 3 times per week. It does also state: "For individuals who are seeking to gain only small to moderate amounts of muscle and strength, while losing large amounts of body fat, it may be advantageous to select running as their modality of exercise because this resulted in the largest ES declines in fat mass, with smaller increases in hypertrophy and strength. However, these individuals should still include higher intensity exercise during their program, because this appears to result in the greatest declines in fat mass when combined chronically with resistance exercise" So, if you're going to do steady state for fat loss - run, but do intervals as well.