I can see that routine working for the person who is already close to where they want to be. I have adopted something similar, with a wee bit more frequency. I have been pleasantly surprised over the last 6 months or so.I do contend that a person just starting out with substantial weight to lose and muscle to build would not see enough benefits early on, like the first six months, to have the motivation to continue. At least not without a really, and I mean really clean diet.
Interesting video: the 5-minute HIT workout
- Thread starter Frederick Foresight
- Start date
Good question. I think a suitable diet is critical, in additional to a solid and intense RT workout routine. Apart from that, some HIIT and being otherwise reasonably active. In my opinion, doing more RT than is required to optimize muscle response in order to get more cut is equivalent to using the exhaust from a vacuum cleaner to dry your hair. Sure it can work, but is that the best way to go about it? You unnecessarily risk overuse injuries and potentially reduce muscle recovery just to burn more calories. I'm not convinced that the trade-off is worth it.
I agree that someone just starting out would initially require more volume and frequency, if only because he cannot muster the kind of intensity required to really go all out (and will therefore recover more quickly). That kind of focused effort takes some training and getting used to.
Keep in mind that, as I noted earlier, I don't do quite the minimalist volume of the guy in the video or the very low frequency of the Bastionhead fellow. I guess we all have to draw our own line somewhere and then go from there. But the overriding idea is that conventional gym wisdom and muscle magazine broscience overstate the need for frequency and volume. To paraphrase Doug McGuff, who wrote Body by Science, exercise is generally overprescribed.
How about changing it up. All I am concerned about now is not losing , slipping , eroding in any way. Higher intensity can disrupt an acclimated system periodically as can long duration/ high volume. I attempt to evaluate , sense what I have recently allowed to slip a bit and shock the system to wake it up. i can tell if successful by my bodies systems reactions to the workout up to a day or two afterward. This is much easier for an older fellow to do where as a young man
can run through brick walls.
can run through brick walls.
I think high intensity should be at the core of a workout program rather than just an occasional change-up. Don't mistakenly believe that if your intensity is moderate that you are working all of your muscle fibers moderately. The reason is that muscle fiber activation is either go or no-go; zero or 100%.
Although there are two principal types of muscle fiber, slow twitch and fast twitch, there are 3 categories of fast twitch. Each type is activated when sufficient demand is placed on the muscle. Therefore, less than full intensity may not activate (zero) the highest category of fast twitch. And the thing to remember is that, as we get older, it is the fast twitch muscle fibers that are the first to go. So if you believe in the premise of "use it or lose it," then high intensity training should be at the core of any routine.
Last edited:
Thanks for an excellent post. Intuitively I know you are right and you have the science to back it. I wiil be increasing my intensity and the frequency of higher intensity workouts so as not to lose strength and the faster fibers.Gradually and safely of course.
i do rest between sets to manage heart rate. Would you suggest the old (220-age) * .8 ish?
i tend to push this into the 140-160 range with 160 being at 100% of max rate.
i would guess the man in the video was at 140 - 160 at/near end of workout.
I truly enjoy getting cardio from weights at a higher volume/low intensity despite the adage to
add cardio seperately. Always hated this and knees cant handle it.
Anyways, thanks.
i do rest between sets to manage heart rate. Would you suggest the old (220-age) * .8 ish?
i tend to push this into the 140-160 range with 160 being at 100% of max rate.
i would guess the man in the video was at 140 - 160 at/near end of workout.
I truly enjoy getting cardio from weights at a higher volume/low intensity despite the adage to
add cardio seperately. Always hated this and knees cant handle it.
Anyways, thanks.
To be candid, I don't know. I just go to the limit when I work out, be it HIT or HIIT. And I ask my doctor each year at the time of my annual physical if there is any reason that I should not continue to do so. I remember eyeing my heart rate on a treadmill monitor years ago when I did steady-state cardio, but I no longer do that kind of cardio. All I do now is brief stints of all-out effort in both lifting and cardio. That and brisk walks from time to time. So you would do well to ask someone more informed that I am on the matter.
I also rest between sets principally because I don't want the weak link to be aerobic during anaerobic exercise. I have my HIIT for that.