the cardio debate and a question

[erod13]

After reading the past few threads about cardio, mainly running, I have decided to give up the running for awhile, since I'm about 8lbs away from my goal of 175lbs and I read everything Mr. Someday, Baldie, and Old Sup had to say with running with facts to back it up. Once I reach my desired weight I will start my 1st ever bulk. My question is that 2 days a week I cannot make it to the gym. All I have @home to my disposal is a spin bike & speed rope. For cardio purposes of say 45 minutes, would intergrating these 2 things work? Maybe some type of Hiit training? I was thinking of maybe 10min spin, 5 min interval rope, 10 min spin etc... for 45 minutes. Any suggestions or advise appreciated.
Thanks
Ed

[rudai123]

I've been doing my version of HIIT which may work for you.
Try sprinting on the bike for 30 secs, then slow for 30 secs (or some derivation). Do this for 8 minutes.
Jump rope hard for 15 secs then slow 30 secs. Do this for 8 minutes.
Then repeat.

I try to not stay on any one cardio machine for more than 10 minutes to avoid muscle soreness the next day. Plus mixing it up makes it more engaging.
What I do at the gym is:
Treadmill Run at 10.4 for 3 minutes to get my heart pumping
Stairs Level 1 for 30 secs Level 20 for 30 secs for 8 minutes
Elliptical (w/o arms) Sprint for 15 secs rest for 30 secs 8 minutes
Stairmaster Level 1 for 30 secs Level 20 for 30 secs for 8 minutes
Then I puke my guts out

[erod13]

I appreciate it, will give it a try

[Mr. Someday]

I'd rather see a form of HIIT than flat out running. I always refer back to sprinters versus marathoners....look at the physiques of the two. One is doing HIIT, the other long distance endurance type cardio....which one are you trying to look like?

You can also just stick to the bike.....may be boring, but you may be better able to control your heart rate. I do intervals on the Stepmill, but during the offseason the higher intensity is a) not that high...like I go from a 6 to an 8 and b) is not that long...I'll do it for 3 minutes, but then do 6 minutes at the reduced level. Play around with it and see what works as well as what doesn't bore you to death.

[erod13]

Thanks for the advise Someday, do you also think I could do some HIIT with the speed rope
Ed

[Mr. Someday]

Thanks for the advise Someday, do you also think I could do some HIIT with the speed rope
Ed

If you can keep your heart rate within an acceptable range (and to me, the fat burning zone is 115-130), then knock yourself out. You might need to do some trial runs where you stop once in awhile and try and take your heart rate manually.

[erod13]

yeah, from all the running & cycling it takes a bit to get my heart rate up, but no matter the exercize I try to keep my heart rate between 120-130bpm

[luvdimtigers]

After reading the past few threads about cardio, mainly running, I have decided to give up the running for awhile, since I'm about 8lbs away from my goal of 175lbs and I read everything Mr. Someday, Baldie, and Old Sup had to say with running with facts to back it up. Once I reach my desired weight I will start my 1st ever bulk. My question is that 2 days a week I cannot make it to the gym. All I have @home to my disposal is a spin bike & speed rope. For cardio purposes of say 45 minutes, would intergrating these 2 things work? Maybe some type of Hiit training? I was thinking of maybe 10min spin, 5 min interval rope, 10 min spin etc... for 45 minutes. Any suggestions or advise appreciated.
Thanks
Ed

What do they say about running? I run 3 miles 3 or 4 times a week

[Minotaur]

What do they say about running? I run 3 miles 3 or 4 times a week

How's your overall progress been? A lot of people are completely anti-running, citing it being catabolic. But a couple of miles a couple of times a week isn't going to materially affect muscle gains imo.

[JRT6]

www.rosstraining.com has cardio and strength ideas must of us never think of.

[wubby]

I always refer back to sprinters versus marathoners....look at the physiques of the two. One is doing HIIT, the other long distance endurance type cardio....which one are you trying to look like?

The problem here is that you have reversed the reasoning. The type of running is not the main cause of the physique. The physique is built specifically to help facilitate better performance in that type of running. Sprinters tend to focus more on weight training to build muscle for explosive power, distance runners tend to not weight train as much, and if they do, it is usually more for endurance and physical therapy / muscle balance.

The only problem with distance running and building muscle is eating enough. I burn A LOT of calories when I am training for a distance race - couple that with eating enough to build muscle and most people vastly underestimate their caloric needs.

I agree that interval training is better than the slow jogs most people do for weight loss when incorporated with weight training - but one cannot infer that distance running will cause problems. If a person is interested in the benefits of distance running training - they can successfully do both.

[oldsuperman]

If you can keep your heart rate within an acceptable range (and to me, the fat burning zone is 115-130), then knock yourself out. You might need to do some trial runs where you stop once in awhile and try and take your heart rate manually.

Someday is so right here. Can't tell you how many times I see fat people killing themselves on the cardio machines, and there I am along side them, loping along 110 to 120 BPM, a fast walk, or a barly sucking air on a bike or stepper.

If they ask me what to do, they just can't believe it when I explain the difference between "fat burning aerobic cardio for" and "an-aerobic" when the body is too stressed and will be to stressed and actually burn fat at a much slower rate! Yet, what do we know, huh, Someday! ed

[Mr. Someday]

The problem here is that you have reversed the reasoning. The type of running is not the main cause of the physique. The physique is built specifically to help facilitate better performance in that type of running. Sprinters tend to focus more on weight training to build muscle for explosive power, distance runners tend to not weight train as much, and if they do, it is usually more for endurance and physical therapy / muscle balance.

The only problem with distance running and building muscle is eating enough. I burn A LOT of calories when I am training for a distance race - couple that with eating enough to build muscle and most people vastly underestimate their caloric needs.

I agree that interval training is better than the slow jogs most people do for weight loss when incorporated with weight training - but one cannot infer that distance running will cause problems. If a person is interested in the benefits of distance running training - they can successfully do both.

I'm not trying to be a dick, but you're 6 ft. and 155#....the fact that you are "successfully doing both" with those stats proves my point.

[bgnb]

From Dr. Gabe Mirkin:

"... your legs drive your heart. Your heart does not drive your legs. Maximum heart rate depends on the strength of your legs, not the strength of your heart. When you contract your leg muscles, they squeeze against the blood vessels near them to pump blood from your leg veins toward your heart. When your leg muscles relax, your leg veins fill with blood. So your leg muscles pump increased amounts of blood toward your heart. This increased blood fills the heart and causes your heart to beat faster and with more force. This is called the Bainbridge reflex that doctors are taught in their first year of medical school. The stronger your legs are, the more blood they can pump, which causes your heart to beat faster."

So, based on this, what is 'cardio'? Stronger legs.

If you run 'distances' then you develop cardio but perhaps not
the maximum cardio potential ... no wonder joggers are dropping
dead from heart attacks, they're not increasing their cardio but
increasing their stress!

Ideally, you want to work 'legs' to increase your heart rate to
a fat-burning rate and do that for about 15 minutes ... which is
why I do 'step-ups' with increasing amounts of weight ... it takes
me about 15 minutes to do 300 step-ups (I go slow to keep my
pulse at 120/minute) and can change intensity by simply
switching weights rather than speeding-up the steps.

I started this on June 10th with 200 step-ups with no weight ...
and as of July 10th, my morning resting rate has dropped to 50 beats
per minute, my 'sitting in doctor's office' rate is 60 beats per
minute ... and my blood pressure has dropped from 145/95 to
126/84 ...

Oh yeah, 100 reps with 20lbs, 100 with 30lbs and 100 with 40 lbs!

[erod13]

Hey Mr Someday, and Old Sup:
I took your advise yesterday, and what I did was 10min on spin bike, kept heart rate around 155-125, got off and did intervals with the speed rope, where I would do 40 seconds at a normal clip with 30 sec all out sprint, rest 30 seconds and did again for 5 rotations, got back on the spin and did 30 sec all out with 2 min recovery peddaling for 2 min then repeated, then rope, then spin for a total of 45min, the only times I allowed my heart rate to go over 130, was during the sprint on the rope and the 30 seconds all out on the bike. Does this sound good? I built up a good sweat, and was tired after only 40 minutes.
Thanks
Ed

[oldsuperman]

I'm not trying to be a dick, but you're 6 ft. and 155#....the fact that you are "successfully doing both" with those stats proves my point.

If I really stand tall I'm 6' and was about and for about 14 wks under 4% BF at about 210 lbs. That's 45 lbs of lean mass more than wubby assuming his BF is under 4% which I doubt!

Right now I'm 219, and a good guess about 8% BF. RHR 56 BPM. BP 116/78. Age 53. Your certainly not being a dick Someday.

Not this time at least! LOL! ed

[wubby]

I'm not trying to be a dick, but you're 6 ft. and 155#....the fact that you are "successfully doing both" with those stats proves my point.

My point was to offer a different perspective. There are very few people here who have any experience in real distance running, and thus have extreme misconceptions based on things they have heard or read from others with the same misconceptions. I was pointing out that there is a big difference between lengthy, slow "cardio" sessions and real running training. There is also a big difference in the type of body that you need to excel at different types of running. People trying to excel will build the body that they need for that activity.

In the past I have never lifted weights with the intent of gaining size - I had no interest in it. I lifted weights to improve my distance running. In the last 9 months I have changed my goals and added some muscle. I think we would all agree that it takes time. I was 143 lbs when I started. The fact that I have not been doing it for as long as you and do not have the same goals as you does not negate the facts. Neither does your inability to come up with an argument other than resorting to "who ever is the biggest wins the argument"

[wubby]

If I really stand tall I'm 6' and was about and for about 14 wks under 4% BF at about 210 lbs. That's 45 lbs of lean mass more than wubby assuming his BF is under 4% which I doubt!

Right now I'm 219, and a good guess about 8% BF. RHR 56 BPM. BP 116/78. Age 53. Your certainly not being a dick Someday.

Not this time at least! LOL! ed

Again ... not sure how that has any bearing. We are all an experiment of one - different things work differently for different people. I offer an opinion that differs from yours with personal experience and acquaintances from a world different from yours (runners) to support my arguments. Yet you guys can't get past the "he's skinny so he must be an idiot".

I don't think that Someday was being a dick - just that he has a very weak argument against my questioning his logic.

[Mr. Someday]

In the past I have never lifted weights with the intent of gaining size - I had no interest in it. I lifted weights to improve my distance running. In the last 9 months I have changed my goals and added some muscle. I think we would all agree that it takes time. I was 143 lbs when I started. The fact that I have not been doing it for as long as you and do not have the same goals as you does not negate the facts. Neither does your inability to come up with an argument other than resorting to "who ever is the biggest wins the argument"

Point is...if you had the same goals, you'd be stunting your progress. Take it for what's it worth. So if you ever decide to make bb your passion, think twice about your form of cardio.

[rudai123]

I just like the endorphins that intense HIIT training gives. Takes me to my collegiate wrestling practices. Maybe my science is wrong, but if if I don't go all out for short burst, then I feel I'm leaving something on the table.

[EMISGOD]

The problem here is that you have reversed the reasoning. The type of running is not the main cause of the physique. The physique is built specifically to help facilitate better performance in that type of running. Sprinters tend to focus more on weight training to build muscle for explosive power, distance runners tend to not weight train as much, and if they do, it is usually more for endurance and physical therapy / muscle balance.

Actually, I would tend to disagree on this. Form follows function. Not too many marathon winners with a great deal of musculature and decent body tone. Carrying that much weight would be grossly counterproductive to that particular task.

The only problem with distance running and building muscle is eating enough. I burn A LOT of calories when I am training for a distance race - couple that with eating enough to build muscle and most people vastly underestimate their caloric needs.

For 99%+ of the people out there, this seems like an overreach of their bodies capability, regardless of caloric consumption. Possibly if they did nothing else but eat, train and sleep and even then, I'd have my doubts. Then again, it might be a good idea to define "distance" running...the one part I agree with you on is that there is no reason that someone can't have a bodybuilder's "build" and still have good cardiovascular conditioning...

Someday is so right here. Can't tell you how many times I see fat people killing themselves on the cardio machines, and there I am along side them, loping along 110 to 120 BPM, a fast walk, or a barly sucking air on a bike or stepper.

If they ask me what to do, they just can't believe it when I explain the difference between "fat burning aerobic cardio for" and "an-aerobic" when the body is too stressed and will be to stressed and actually burn fat at a much slower rate! Yet, what do we know, huh, Someday! ed

This is really amusing, particularly since every cardio machine I've seen in the last 10 years that has a heart rate sensor also has a key to describe which "zone" you're in, as well as wall charts describing which heart rate is best for which goal...

[user1531320510]

I thought the harder you can do cardio, the more calories you'll burn and the more fat you'll lose. That's probably too simplistic.

After about 5-10 minutes to warm up, I can keep my heart rate at about 130-140 for 45-60 minutes on the elliptical. This should be good enough to burn fat without having to worry about HIIT or any of that stuff, right?

So I've been doing 30 minutes of cardio after lifting weights on Monday, Tuesday, Thursday and Friday, and 60 minutes of cardio (no weights) on Wednesday, Saturday and Sunday.

Can a person who is trying to lose fat do too much cardio? And should any of this cardio be HIIT, or all stuff that puts me steadily in this 130-140 range for however long I do it?

One thing that I'm hating about this stuff is that it's incredibly easy to overthink it, especially if you spend any time at all on message boards where this stuff is debated nearly every single day.

Thanks for any help.

[wubby]

Actually, I would tend to disagree on this. Form follows function. Not too many marathon winners with a great deal of musculature and decent body tone. Carrying that much weight would be grossly counterproductive to that particular task.

Ummmmmm - this is agreeing, not disagreeing ... That is exactly what I said. I agree that a marathon winner does not want the extra muscle so they specifically avoid adding it. They intentionally build that body and maintain it that way. The marathon is not generally run to be won. The marathon is an experience. My objection is to the gross over generalization about "marathon runners".

For 99%+ of the people out there, this seems like an overreach of their bodies capability, regardless of caloric consumption. Possibly if they did nothing else but eat, train and sleep and even then, I'd have my doubts. Then again, it might be a good idea to define "distance" running...the one part I agree with you on is that there is no reason that someone can't have a bodybuilder's "build" and still have good cardiovascular conditioning...

You have to realize that most marathoners are not always in training. I run around 30 miles a week to maintain fitness and connective tissue in the off season. I ramp up to 60-70 miles a week for 5-6 months before a marathon. This is sufficient for me to be an "age-grouper" and sufficient for anyone to be a "marathoner". I don't think there is much point in discussing the elite marathoners here - you are going to find very few coming here asking questions - and if they do - they won't be looking at how to add mass. While I am running 70 miles a week I only find time to lift twice a week. I am certainly not going to try bulking during that, but I can cut and maintain. While running 30 miles a week I manage to lift weights up to 5 times a week depending on my routine. Running 30 miles a week requires me to eat less than an extra 500 calories a day - this is not much of a challenge.

This is all I am trying to say. Good cardiovascular conditioning and a long pleasant run are not orthogonal to building muscle. I have had many running partners with very good builds. I have seen many people in marathons and other long races who have even bigger builds. There are plenty of people who are just here because of a desire to build muscle. Many of us have no interest in being the biggest guy around. And I would go so far as to state that most will never compete in a BB competition. There are many people who love to run and lift weights and they do not have to give up one to pursue the other. Many people rationalize their dislike of running by claiming that it will destroy a persons chances to build muscle - someone has to help people see that.

[wubby]

Point is...if you had the same goals, you'd be stunting your progress. Take it for what's it worth. So if you ever decide to make bb your passion, think twice about your form of cardio.

I am sure that if I had the same goals for BB competition that any distraction from that goal could inhibit progress. I have quite enjoyed adding muscle for the last 9 months. My point is that we are not all looking to compete. Some of us love to lift, and also love to run. I like the new body that I have grown, and I still love to run. I plan to continue to do both and feel that someone needs to show the other side of the argument and let people realize that they can do both.

If running is inhibiting my growth I can never know for sure. Maybe I could have gained one or two more pounds without running - but at more cost that I am willing to pay.

We have not really discussed my "form" of cardio. I do quite enjoy interval training and do it often which is what I believe you are suggesting the OP do.. I just started this discussion based on the misconceptions of what a marathoner's body is. The term is used here as a derogatory statement, but just shows ignorance to what a marathoner is and demonstrates a misunderstanding of cause and effect.

[EMISGOD]

Ummmmmm - this is agreeing, not disagreeing ... That is exactly what I said. I agree that a marathon winner does not want the extra muscle so they specifically avoid adding it. They intentionally build that body and maintain it that way. The marathon is not generally run to be won. The marathon is an experience. My objection is to the gross over generalization about "marathon runners".

Yeah, sorry...I was thinking a bit ahead of myself.

You have to realize that most marathoners are not always in training. I run around 30 miles a week to maintain fitness and connective tissue in the off season. I ramp up to 60-70 miles a week for 5-6 months before a marathon. This is sufficient for me to be an "age-grouper" and sufficient for anyone to be a "marathoner". I don't think there is much point in discussing the elite marathoners here - you are going to find very few coming here asking questions - and if they do - they won't be looking at how to add mass. While I am running 70 miles a week I only find time to lift twice a week. I am certainly not going to try bulking during that, but I can cut and maintain. While running 30 miles a week I manage to lift weights up to 5 times a week depending on my routine. Running 30 miles a week requires me to eat less than an extra 500 calories a day - this is not much of a challenge.

This is all I am trying to say. Good cardiovascular conditioning and a long pleasant run are not orthogonal to building muscle. I have had many running partners with very good builds. I have seen many people in marathons and other long races who have even bigger builds. There are plenty of people who are just here because of a desire to build muscle. Many of us have no interest in being the biggest guy around. And I would go so far as to state that most will never compete in a BB competition. There are many people who love to run and lift weights and they do not have to give up one to pursue the other. Many people rationalize their dislike of running by claiming that it will destroy a persons chances to build muscle - someone has to help people see that.

30 miles/week doesn't strike me as "distance" running, particularly and I formerly followed the same style. Lift 4 times a week, then Cardio at the end and 2 days of straight Cardio and I probably hit 30 plenty of times. I suspect it probably somewhat slowed increases in strength, but it definitely did not stop them and the extra air power was definitely beneficial.

70 miles/week strikes me as definitely more distance-oriented, but if you're a marathoner first and a weight-lifter second, then you choose your sacrifices. I have yet to see a runner I would consider with particularly big muscles, though...

[oldsuperman]

I thought the harder you can do cardio, the more calories you'll burn and the more fat you'll lose. That's probably too simplistic.
Thanks for any help.

One thing you have to be careful about cardio machines are:

1: You can't rely on them at all for accuracy for HR. Take it yourself.

2: The calories they tell you are burning are also a guess and are way off.

Your right about burning calories, the more you work, and the longer you work, the more calories you burn. The problem is where are those calories you burn coming from? Fat, or muscle, or food you ingested earlier?

So, simply put, that is why it is important to keep the body at a HR that keeps the mind thinking the body is safe and secure. The brains job is to protect you and it will have the body burn muscle, organs and food first and store fat to protect itself if it feels it needs the stored energy for the future. If your body or emotions get stressed to the point you overwhelm it, it will do whatever it needs to do to keep it safe and secure, and store the fat.

Just my experience in maintaining years of built up muscle and shedding fat to a low a 3.3% BF needed for competition. Take it for what it's worth. ed

[joed]

...I have yet to see a runner I would consider with particularly big muscles, though...

(Emi, this is not directed at you in particular)
I guess I'm the only one here old enough to remember Peter Snell. Trained by Arthur Lydiard and a lynchpin of the mighty New Zealand Olympic team in the 60's, Snell was a holder of 8 world records and a 3-time gold medalist middle distance runner as well as a top notch marathon contender. Compared to everyone else, he was a bulky, muscular man whose power when running was legendary, especially when the finish line came into sight. Most competitors never saw the front of his thighs during a race. Scrawny he was not. The exception? Perhaps. Then again...

[oldsuperman]

Once I reach my desired weight I will start my 1st ever bulk. Ed

I am sure that if I had the same goals for BB competition that any distraction from that goal could inhibit progress. I have quite enjoyed adding muscle for the last 9 months. My point is that we are not all looking to compete. Some of us love to lift, and also love to run. I like the new body that I have grown, and I still love to run. I plan to continue to do both and feel that someone needs to show the other side of the argument and let people realize that they can do both.

If running is inhibiting my growth I can never know for sure. Maybe I could have gained one or two more pounds without running - but at more cost that I am willing to pay.

We have not really discussed my "form" of cardio. I do quite enjoy interval training and do it often which is what I believe you are suggesting the OP do.. I just started this discussion based on the misconceptions of what a marathoner's body is. The term is used here as a derogatory statement, but just shows ignorance to what a marathoner is and demonstrates a misunderstanding of cause and effect.

The point is about this thread, is about a man who is BBing for size! And yes, it is great you're happy and doing great gaining the size you want with your training, training the way you want! And you look great for your size as well. Hats off to you.

Yet the point is for erod13 to get optimum growth for muscle size, and strength, with the least amount of time, and stress on him, keep muscle mass, and then to bulk up, as he wants to do.

Your way will be the least effective way for him to reach his BBing goals! He has 8 lbs to lose, which is nothing, and then will begin a bulking up period. If he stresses the body out too much at this point, not only will he lose less fat timely, he may also burn muscle mass as well. Maybe I'm wrong, yet I have read and re-read the thread starter and his goals seem clear on this point.

I know nothing when it comes to marathon or triathlon, or any kind of running except that I hate it! You are an expert compared to me, obviously!

Yet, I do know about burning fat efficiently, quickly and maintaining it at a desired level as well!

I do know about building hard, lean muscle mass and maintaining and keep it growing!

And I do believe that hundreds, maybe thousands of other BBers that subscribe to the same basic principles of BBing have the history behind them to prove that what Someday, Baldie and I, Old Supe, who have practiced these basic principles know what we speak when it come to this topic.

Yet, that's just my opinion! ed

[oldsuperman]

(Emi, this is not directed at you in particular)
The exception? Perhaps. Then again...

Come on buddy! Those may be big legs for a runner, yet I'd still call em scrawny legs compared even to the average competitive BBer! ed

[EMISGOD]

Come on buddy! Those may be big legs for a runner, yet I'd still call em scrawny legs compared even to the average competitive BBer! ed

I'd have to agree.