For all of you doing cardio right before or immediately after,...

[ntrllftr]

Originally Posted by Rogerthat

Cmon Carl, I read your posts and know you are more intelligent than that.

To be honest....

I was serious. I am curious as to how you based your opinion.

.

[stayfit2008]

Originally Posted by Old-Time-Lifter

Rogerthat is just trying to stir the pot for reactions. He even pm'ed me to tell me this.

Stirring the pot for reactions............... I thought that was commonly known as a TROLL

Don't feed the troll..........

I don't believe it,..I think he knows he backed himself in a corner and is relying on that excuse as a cop out,..Like I said before,..takes alot fo a man to concede,...but a coward to make excuses.

[mavrick77]

Originally Posted by stayfit2008

when you do cardio you basically have 2 possible energy pathways your body can use:
Glycogen (Anaerobic Glycolysis) and/or Fat (Aerobic)

Because glycogen is easier and provides more energy, the the body will use it if it can.

So if you do cardio first, you can deplete glycogen stores.

Now, when lifting weights your body basically has only 1 energy source available...
Glycogen, due to the insufficiency of time/oxygen to power the aerobic pathway.

If all the glycogen has been depleted prior to lifting, the body must access a secondary source for producing its own glycogen...

It can do this by catabolizing (breaking down) muscle (gluconeogenesis.)

After stimulating this catabolic environment, which requires catabolic hormones to be released...the body does not immediately return to an anabolic state.

In fact training in the gym is also potentially catabolic, this combination will inevitably lead to a severe catabolic state...

This is undesirable if the goal is to maximize anabolism (muscle gains) and minimize catabolism (muscle destruction).

I have given people this exact explanation for timming of their cardio and guess what? they still do cardio before....people are gonna do what they wanna do, if they can't see it, then it isnt true.... ESPECIALLY WOMEN, who tend to prioritize cardio over weights....ughh so stupid (not all women, just 99% of the ones at my gym)

[stayfit2008]

Originally Posted by mavrick77

I have given people this exact explanation for timming of their cardio and guess what? they still do cardio before....people are gonna do what they wanna do, if they can't see it, then it isnt true.... ESPECIALLY WOMEN, who tend to prioritize cardio over weights....ughh so stupid (not all women, just 99% of the ones at my gym)

It's what works best for me and the people who chose to take on the recommendations.

[Arlecchino]

Deleted a great many posts. No discussion of AAS at all.

No personal attacks.

Thank you.

[-=Spitfire=-]

Well the thing is, even when I do a 30 minute cardio session before I lift - I still have energy to lift. But no, I do agree with you. I used to do just 5 to 10 minutes of slow cardio on treadmill for warm ups before I lifted... but when I started my high intensity cutting phase a month ago. I stepped up my cardio as well. What I have done is I did it BEFORE I lifted. Then about a week ago I split my hour long cardio session into 30/30 mins. I kind of always doubted it too, because I was aware that there's some muscle loss that will happen if I do so. But I'm on a 31 Day Cardio challenge, which you can see in the Losing Fat Log section - so I figured I might as well finish this and go back to low intensity cardio AFTER the lift.

[popmoon]

Originally Posted by mavrick77

I have given people this exact explanation for timming of their cardio and guess what? they still do cardio before....people are gonna do what they wanna do, if they can't see it, then it isnt true.... ESPECIALLY WOMEN, who tend to prioritize cardio over weights....ughh so stupid (not all women, just 99% of the ones at my gym)

Good Advice ..I found this out the month of July ..l was too caught up in dropping the lbs/Fat , so felt i must get the cardio in first , i couldnt figure out why i had no energy to start lifting heavy again(just did cardio for July) and realized it must be the Cardio taxing me ..i switched up the 1ST of August and lift first than do my Jog/run.. within two weeks i improved greatly on my cardio also by doing this .JME ...

[...Kennedy]

Just read the thread... lots of good information within, thanks for sharing tips, fellows. Opposing views make for great debates and ultimately help us n00bs figure out how to achieve our goals.

[ntrllftr]

Originally Posted by Rogerthat

Are you telling me that average lifter can follow the routines of hardcore bb'er magazines?

YES! Then again what is an "average lifter"?
I consider myself an average lifter and have taken some of those routines and actually added to them during a workout. Using weight that I can handle of course.

Originally Posted by Rogerthat

OK, gear doesn't help shed fat, retain muscle and speed recovery.

Still when catabolism happens there is nothing that can stop or block it.
So, retaining and enhancing recovery may be helped with certain "supplements"; it still does not resolve the problem as what the initial post refers to.

.

[plmb1]

Originally Posted by ntrllftr

YES! Then again what is an "average lifter"?
I consider myself an average lifter and have taken some of those routines and actually added to them during a workout. Using weight that I can handle of course.



Still when catabolism happens there is nothing that can stop or block it.
So, retaining and enhancing recovery may be helped with certain "supplements"; it still does not resolve the problem as what the initial post refers to.

.

Carl........your not the average lifter and you know it.....

[Do_Somethin]

If, after lifting, you feel like you have enough energy to do cardio at a level you feel you can for a length of time until you don't feel like you should (not can) continue then would it be all right? This based on the assumption that you had an effective workout of about an hour and did for you what was a reasonable intensity (reasonable being an individual concept) for that hour.

Thoughts?

[stayfit2008]

Originally Posted by Do_Somethin

If, after lifting, you feel like you have enough energy to do cardio at a level you feel you can for a length of time until you don't feel like you should (not can) continue then would it be all right? This based on the assumption that you had an effective workout of about an hour and did for you what was a reasonable intensity (reasonable being an individual concept) for that hour.

Thoughts?

I don't recommend it.

[dbx]

Originally Posted by Do_Somethin

If, after lifting, you feel like you have enough energy to do cardio at a level you feel you can for a length of time until you don't feel like you should (not can) continue then would it be all right? This based on the assumption that you had an effective workout of about an hour and did for you what was a reasonable intensity (reasonable being an individual concept) for that hour.

Thoughts?

Absolutely. It's a prime time if your purpose is to burn fat. If it is for pure cardio health, I'd wait and do it separately.

[ntrllftr]

Originally Posted by dbx

Absolutely. It's a prime time if your purpose is to burn fat. If it is for pure cardio health, I'd wait and do it separately.

I C wut U did there. perfect oportunity huh?

I do agree that cardio after but Joe was unclear as to what he meant about.....

"for a length of time until you don't feel like you should (not can) continue"

If you are talking longer than 40 minutes, I would say thats too long.

[Do_Somethin]

Originally Posted by ntrllftr

I C wut U did there. perfect oportunity huh?

I do agree that cardio after but Joe was unclear as to what he meant about.....

"for a length of time until you don't feel like you should (not can) continue"

If you are talking longer than 40 minutes, I would say thats too long.

I meant a time that while you still felt you had the energy to continue past the time you decided to stop but you stopped before the point of exhaustion. You were spent but not wiped out meaning that you "could" continue but elected not to.
I would say that your point about the 40 would be accurate. I don't feel as though I can do anymore than maybe 20 - 30 depending on the day. Did close to 20 on my last leg day on the elliptical at a moderate intensity and that was very close to it for me that day.

I'm also going to have to go with dbx's position on this now to. And yes it hurts!

[shlape]

You'll have to forgive me but mine is an inquisitive mind. Tell me about a piece of string and I'll want to know the exact measurements almost down to the micrometre.

With that said, In this thread I've heard discussion about intensity, duration and when the cardio is done, but my interest lies more in the intensity. If, for example, you would argue 40mins of cardio is too much, my question would be what level of intensity are you refering to?. To elaborate, two people on a running machine. One is at a constant pace maintaining 60% MHR the other at 85%. In addition for this example, imagine both are biologically identical and genetically cursed to be soft and spongy in the midsection. Can you now say they're both going to suffer the same grim effects of cortisol secretion?

I'm no guru on the topic of cardio length/intensity, but I find without it I'd turn into dough-boy without any advantage to muscle increase. This is not an assumption but a tried and tested thing for my body. Adding this variable to the equation, what are your comments?

[stayfit2008]

Originally Posted by shlape

You'll have to forgive me but mine is an inquisitive mind. Tell me about a piece of string and I'll want to know the exact measurements almost down to the micrometre.

With that said, In this thread I've heard discussion about intensity, duration and when the cardio is done, but my interest lies more in the intensity. If, for example, you would argue 40mins of cardio is too much, my question would be what level of intensity are you refering to?. To elaborate, two people on a running machine. One is at a constant pace maintaining 60% MHR the other at 85%. In addition for this example, imagine both are biologically identical and genetically cursed to be soft and spongy in the midsection. Can you now say they're both going to suffer the same grim effects of cortisol secretion?

I'm no guru on the topic of cardio length/intensity, but I find without it I'd turn into dough-boy without any advantage to muscle increase. This is not an assumption but a tried and tested thing for my body. Adding this variable to the equation, what are your comments?

My method is more geared to contest prep. But I found it works well in general.

[dbx]

Originally Posted by ntrllftr

If you are talking longer than 40 minutes, I would say thats too long.

And I would agree! Geez, I was gone all day. This thread turned into the pile of dung that I knew it would; full of definitives and leaving out the vast details that have to be discussed in order not mislead those who don't know better. This is why I sarcastically, yet seriously, remarked about glycogen. I see a MOD added some very good perspective and reffing though, as well as some other good input other added. Unfortunately, simple statements and good intentions can be more harmful to new people here than not at times. Let the members start sifting! Or the games begin! Or something like that.....

[stayfit2008]

Originally Posted by dbx

And I would agree! Geez, I was gone all day. This thread turned into the pile of dung that I knew it would; full of definitives and leaving out the vast details that have to be discussed in order not mislead those who don't know better. This is why I sarcastically, yet seriously, remarked about glycogen. I see a MOD added some very good perspective and reffing though, as well as some other good input other added. Unfortunately, simple statements and good intentions can be more harmful to new people here than not at times. Let the members start sifting! Or the games begin! Or something like that.....

Why talk in riddles and innuendos? Why not come right out and say clearly what you want to? What are you afraid of?

The threads I post in here you end up in some way with silly disturbing remarks. Whats wrong with you? I read some of your threads and you can really be a pretty decent guy? But for some reason you made it a quest to be tumultuous and disrespectful,..Understand the meaning of Open Discussion. Are you inferring that I am not open to other opinions? If you have more knowledge about bodybuilding please post your findings,..in the mean time don't criticise my experience with certain methods I find that work well. My desire is not to hide the knowledge I become privied to. I prefer to share what I have learned,..You constantly injecting your silly disturbing comments are just juvenile and unpretentious.

Now ask me to provide these comments by you,..no problem retrieving them and pasting them here,..Shall we go there?

[stayfit2008]

night all

[dbx]

Originally Posted by stayfit2008

Why talk in riddles and innuendos? Why not come right out and say clearly what you want to? What are you afraid of?

LOL. OK, you asked; I'm saying that you're a shameless self-promoting individual who has entered one or two contests and thinks he's got it all figured out. Yet....many or your threads and posts reveal that you haven't a clue as to what you try so hard to bring to bear as fact. You know, like like this post you just made, where you avoided answering the guy's question, probably because you have no idea of what he's asking; http://forum.bodybuilding.com/showpo...&postcount=107

But that's just one of dozens of examples that you've left behind. And lastly, like Rogerthat stated earlier, it is all too transparent to many here that you'll stop at nothing to make others think you have a clue, all in order to try to profit from it here by exploiting others who don't know that you have no clue. Dude, you even recently created threads that try to talk up PT's...and then go start another in Advanced asking all the ways you can make money for doing this (BBing). Let me be clear; I don't fault anyone for wanting to make a few bucks for doing something their good at. You're just...not. I'm sure you'll get where you want to go and I wish you luck. But until you're able to skip cut/paste from one time read articles, and until you can successfully articulate a complex concept...maybe you should slow down a minute. Just a thought. Is this more clear?

[Old-Time-Lifter]

[OutOfStep]

Originally Posted by dbx

LOL. OK, you asked; I'm saying that you're a shameless self-promoting individual who has entered one or two contests and thinks he's got it all figured out. Yet....many or your threads and posts reveal that you haven't a clue as to what you try so hard to bring to bear as fact. You know, like like this post you just made, where you avoided answering the guy's question, probably because you have no idea of what he's asking; http://forum.bodybuilding.com/showpo...&postcount=107

But that's just one of dozens of examples that you've left behind. And lastly, like Rogerthat stated earlier, it is all too transparent to many here that you'll stop at nothing to make others think you have a clue, all in order to try to profit from it here by exploiting others who don't know that you have no clue. Dude, you even recently created threads that try to talk up PT's...and then go start another in Advanced asking all the ways you can make money for doing this (BBing). Let me be clear; I don't fault anyone for wanting to make a few bucks for doing something their good at. You're just...not. I'm sure you'll get where you want to go and I wish you luck. But until you're able to skip cut/paste from one time read articles, and until you can successfully articulate a complex concept...maybe you should slow down a minute. Just a thought. Is this more clear?

[mavrick77]

Originally Posted by shlape

You'll have to forgive me but mine is an inquisitive mind. Tell me about a piece of string and I'll want to know the exact measurements almost down to the micrometre.

With that said, In this thread I've heard discussion about intensity, duration and when the cardio is done, but my interest lies more in the intensity. If, for example, you would argue 40mins of cardio is too much, my question would be what level of intensity are you refering to?. To elaborate, two people on a running machine. One is at a constant pace maintaining 60% MHR the other at 85%. In addition for this example, imagine both are biologically identical and genetically cursed to be soft and spongy in the midsection. Can you now say they're both going to suffer the same grim effects of cortisol secretion?

I'm no guru on the topic of cardio length/intensity, but I find without it I'd turn into dough-boy without any advantage to muscle increase. This is not an assumption but a tried and tested thing for my body. Adding this variable to the equation, what are your comments?

when it comes to dieting for me, I measure cardio by calories....... some will argue low intensity burns more body fat, while high intensity burns more muscle/fat..... I think no matter how you slice it, its neglegible from someone who has done both. FOR MY body, cardio is a muscle killer, before workouts, and even if done properly after workouts.

that being said, if person one burned 40 calories by walking, they would have to walk twice as LONG, NOT FAR, as the person who burned 40 calories running. so you could in essence measure intensity by a calorie/time equation. LOL, getting all mathmatic and stuff.

[immuno]

Since this thread has gotten so much attn, I might as well selfishly ask a question pertaining to me, and benefit from the accumulated knowledge here.

Query #1: How much fat-burning difference is there really if a guy;

1. Rides a mtn bike for 60 min in the morning before breakfast vs
2. Rides a mtn bike for 60 min in the evening
(assuming both scenarios are non-weight days)


Query #2: Said guy isn't going to burn muscle if he keeps the ride at or under an hour in each case, correct? (assuming a good pace around 15-19 mph)

[Arlecchino]

This thread has potential. Please do not engage in OT crap or personal attacks.


Thanks.

[Arlecchino]

Originally Posted by immuno

Since this thread has gotten so much attn, I might as well selfishly ask a question pertaining to me, and benefit from the accumulated knowledge here.

Query #1: How much fat-burning difference is there really if a guy;

1. Rides a mtn bike for 60 min in the morning before breakfast vs
2. Rides a mtn bike for 60 min in the evening
(assuming both scenarios are non-weight days)


Query #2: Said guy isn't going to burn muscle if he keeps the ride at or under an hour in each case, correct? (assuming a good pace around 15-19 mph)

1. The caloric expenditure for the same exercises performed at the same intensity for the same duration is the same.

2. Depends on the rest of your diet and training volume.

[shlape]

Originally Posted by mavrick77

when it comes to dieting for me, I measure cardio by calories...

Sounds very similar to what I've been trying, but I'll run it past you to see that it's not getting lost in interpretation. I take in 3500 cals/day, and each workout I will use up no more than 500 cals (with the help of a heart rate monitor). That's the weights first, and finish up with cardio at about 80% MHR for the time left, which is approx. 10-15mins. Sounds extreme I know, but it keeps it all interesting for me. I'm trying to eliminate as much guess work as is possible, without going completely insane. I'm not insane, but I have driven past his house a few times.

[gbg]

I will never understand why things become so complicated, there is no this way is the best way.
What works for one individual does not mean it will work for all, as already pointed out there are many variables.
I'm not even a noobie and reading some of these threads confuses the **** out of me.

[ms_mac]

Originally Posted by gbg

I will never understand why things become so complicated, there is no this way is the best way.
What works for one individual does not mean it will work for all, as already pointed out there are many variables.
I'm not even a noobie and reading some of these threads confuses the **** out of me.

x2 on this - still can't figure out what Stayfit is trying to tell us......is it better to do cardio right after weights or seperate them by a few hours? As for me, I have been splitting my cardio up - half pre and half post - 25 min each session. To seperate them, for me, is just not an option. I have a 2 hour window in the EARLY morning for my gym time. After that its family, work, etc...