all posts post new thread

Kettlebell Heart Health: HIIT or A+A?

Status
Closed Thread. (Continue Discussion of This Topic by Starting a New Thread.)
Steve Freides said:
the benefits of MAF training for your heart.
Click to expand...

MAF is not just a number on the device; it is a training methodology designed to target slow twitch fibers using little glucose to improve both health and performance. I am afraid that this forum uses the term with little of the original meaning at this point.

If by the above you mean that the total acid load of the session will be lower than otherwise, you are correct. But you can't use "MAF" with intense KB work, in the literal meaning of the approach. A+A or S&S does not and can not equal MAF, even if the number on your device says so.

I hope this makes sense, Steve.
 
Denny Phillips said:
"Don't apply MAF to strength training."

Sound advice, Kettlebelephant. My reason for doing so stems from the results rendered from S&S plus another gem I found on this site. A link from one of the A+A threads had a workout posted by Pavel in the comments that was expressly designed to use MAF principles; perform a single KB clean followed by a press and ending with a front squat then park the bell until heart rate allows for doing the same on the opposite side. It has worked famously. I should mention that my main goal is to reduce body fat. Since starting S&S and later adding that mini tri-set I went from 6'6" 258 lbs to 235 lbs and am well within reach of my 225 lb goal weight. I wanted lean down because chins and pull-ups were an issue. I also prefer the lower impact on my lower body as compared to running.

Thanks for your submission. You all have given me a wealth of information.
Click to expand...
Maybe my answer needed a bit more explanation :)
If you apply the MAF HR (180-age) to your training as a guideline to determine the amount of rest you need between sets then that's ok, but don't expect to experience the benefits associated with MAF.

From my understanding (and @aciampa or @mprevost please tell me if I'm wrong) MAF only works with exercises that require 50%+ of your muscles, are highly repetitive (think of thousands of steps during a run vs. maybe 100 reps in a bodyweight circuit) and require very little to no tension.
This is only the case with walking, running, swimming, rowing, biking and things like the eliptical.

Btw the clean-press-squat from this article? Strength Aerobics: A Powerful Alternative to HIIT
 
aciampa said:
MAF is not just a number on the device; it is a training methodology designed to target slow twitch fibers using little glucose to improve both health and performance. I am afraid that this forum uses the term with little of the original meaning at this point.

If by the above you mean that the total acid load of the session will be lower than otherwise, you are correct. But you can't use "MAF" with intense KB work, in the literal meaning of the approach. A+A or S&S does not and can not equal MAF, even if the number on your device says so.

I hope this makes sense, Steve.
Click to expand...
Al, thank you for the explanation. You're right in that we have used "MAF" as meaning a specific heart rate zone around here. I will try to be brief as I frame what I think are the right questions to ask.

The OP asked about "heart health" and "creating positive heart adaptations." The implicit assumption is that "conditioning" training - be is HIIT, A+A, or LSD - is good for heart health. Our question might be framed as: What heart-specific adaptations one might expect from each of the three modalities being discussed, either individually or in some combination? In particular, the OP mentions being short on time, so let's figure that into our discussion as well, e.g., let's say you only have 10 minutes, or 20 minutes, a few days each week - how might that effect your choice of conditioning/heart training?

A slightly broader perspective might result in a "3 x 2" question: What might each of these three training modalities do for as both heart-health tools and as training methods to improve other aspects of fitness?

-S-
 
That's the article, thank you.

There are certainly dangers in mixing or misinterpreting training schemes and I don't doubt that I lack the intimate knowledge of MAF, but I do know that MAF-type training responses seem to be taking place and my body composition is changing for the better. Of course, the cleaner eating has am lot to do with that. My MAF test times continue to improve, but I am doing activities that better fit the MAF sniff test. Thanks so much.
 
Steve Freides said:
Al, thank you for the explanation. You're right in that we have used "MAF" as meaning a specific heart rate zone around here. I will try to be brief as I frame what I think are the right questions to ask.

The OP asked about "heart health" and "creating positive heart adaptations." The implicit assumption is that "conditioning" training - be is HIIT, A+A, or LSD - is good for heart health. Our question might be framed as: What heart-specific adaptations one might expect from each of the three modalities being discussed, either individually or in some combination? In particular, the OP mentions being short on time, so let's figure that into our discussion as well, e.g., let's say you only have 10 minutes, or 20 minutes, a few days each week - how might that effect your choice of conditioning/heart training?

A slightly broader perspective might result in a "3 x 2" question: What might each of these three training modalities do for as both heart-health tools and as training methods to improve other aspects of fitness?

-S-
Click to expand...

Steve, answering your question from a health education perspective: the best thing someone short on time can do for their heart health is to stay out of its way; i.e., good nutrition, stress management, no smoking, minimize alcohol, etc. These are things that require no additional time.

My basic exercise prescription for "regular folk" is to: walk a lot; and, pick up heavy-ish objects and move them... like bags of topsoil, or other things in your yard/garage that you can load with.

If you're irregular (like most of us here) and you truly only have 10 minutes, do some swings or snatches and park far from your destination to get some walking in... like your daily shopping walks, Steve.

We sometimes fail to remember that strength training in a health context need only be some form of random structural loading to prevent muscle and bone wasting, and keep one capable.
 
To add what Al mentions about stress management etc. I have to mention Dan John's Intervention.
He talks about the difference between health and fitness and how to define each term.
No smoking, wearing a setbelt and getting the people around you to learn first aid are improving your health.
He also talks about how health also covers proper organ functions etc.
His words are your kidney has to kidney good, your liver has to liver good and stuff like that :D
There's an example of him saving a highschool girl via the heimlich maneuver. He said her kidneys were kidneying, her liver livering, her heart beating, but still her health would have suffered (->death!) if he wouldn't be there to perform the heimlich maneuver.
The above mentioned things like wearing a setbelt are far more important for your health than any physical training. The rest is about fitness.
 
@aciampa, where the discussion gets interesting for me is when we start talking about being better than just healthy.

Our OP says his focus is strength training, and I like that. A separate conversation, this, but if you presented me the choice of only strength training and not walking, or only walking and not strength training, I would choose strength training.

But our OP has framed the question differently. He's asking, if he's already committed to strength training, and he's got 10 more minutes a few days a week, which of HIIT, A + A, and LSD, would you choose to make an overall improvement to what your condition would be without any of those?

-S-
 
Steve Freides said:
But our OP has framed the question differently. He's asking, if he's already committed to strength training, and he's got 10 more minutes a few days a week, which of HIIT, A + A, and LSD, would you choose to make an overall improvement to what your condition would be without any of those?
Click to expand...

In the context of doctoral studies (higher stress)? Mostly A+A; as much LSD that fits; and a peppering of HIIT.
 
aciampa said:
In the context of doctoral studies (higher stress)? Mostly A+A; as much LSD that fits; and a peppering of HIIT.
Click to expand...
I didn't mean to frame it as high stress necessarily (although it probably will be) but more from a time efficiency stand point since I will be much busier than now when I start grad school. Thank you for your answer and thank you @Steve Freides for clarifying my original question.

On a more relaxed schedule (such as the state I am currently in) I will gladly include 2-3 sessions of LSD, but I am just trying to get an idea of how to integrate cardiovascular training into a significantly busier and more unpredictable schedule given that my preference is strength training and kettlebell ballistics. I am thinking along the lines of a program minimum and a program maximum specifically for cardiovascular health (I am always strength training so I don't need to "worry" about that).

So currently I am on more of a "maximum" given my amount of free time, but I am planning for the minimum in the case that this program really is as time intensive as the students tell me. I know S&S is an obvious answer for the minimum, but according to what you have said, Al, there is no substitute for LSD.

Based off what I have learned, in addition to my strength training, I will do some A+A swings/snatches for sure, and will add in easy running as my schedule accommodates. Thanks again for the perspectives and feedback. The minds at SF deliver and do not disappoint. Feel free to give me any further feedback if you see necessary.
 
@NoahMarek, you could also consider some of the programs in our blog. There have been several "have it all" kinds of programs published over the last few years. Perhaps someone can provide a link to some of them.

-S-
 
After pondering the comments of Kettlebelephant it occurs to me that the issue of tension is one that I need to factor more into my thinking. I can try to rationalize my current training based solely on results attained thus far, but over the long haul I believe it would benefit me to take a hard look at my fascination with how much one can accomplish in 15-30 minutes with a kettlebell. Economy is one thing, but the big picture might reveal something missing in the equation.
 
Yeah lots of different takeaway options in there from the various experts. One thing to keep in mind is that they are mostly discussing performance athletes, at least until the later part. The recommendations may be a little different for generally being healthy and getting the most out of your training time.

One point I got from it is that the 20% (or whatever percent) hard efforts should be HARD. Like, burning lungs, as hard as you can go, really hard intervals or whatever the structure is. It's been a while since I've incorporated any of that.
 
Denny Phillips said:
After pondering the comments of Kettlebelephant it occurs to me that the issue of tension is one that I need to factor more into my thinking. I can try to rationalize my current training based solely on results attained thus far, but over the long haul I believe it would benefit me to take a hard look at my fascination with how much one can accomplish in 15-30 minutes with a kettlebell. Economy is one thing, but the big picture might reveal something missing in the equation.
Click to expand...
Denny... did I read correctly earlier that your goal is fat loss? While discussing the various merits of different training modalities and such is important; The time spent in the grocery store and kitchen might be more important. (Apologies for hijacking the OP's thread)
 
Anna C said:
One point I got from it is that the 20% (or whatever percent) hard efforts should be HARD. Like, burning lungs, as hard as you can go, really hard intervals or whatever the structure is. It's been a while since I've incorpora
Click to expand...

That's the issue isn't it? Always been my downfall, literally my Achilles heel. I see great performance gains with intensity but there is that fine line, always with me and I've always crossed it and 'pop' . I'm a happier bunny sitting back a bit and keeping the intensity very short, on the safer side.
 
offwidth-

You are correct. That is my goal for now and it has gone well. I have embraced the philosophy of Dan John and Josh Hillis that food shopping and meal prep count as a workout. With my goal weight in sight I am pondering a training shift. I realize that my comment about not letting results govern my training seems counterintuitive.
 
Anna C said:
One point I got from it is that the 20% (or whatever percent) hard efforts should be HARD. Like, burning lungs, as hard as you can go, really hard intervals or whatever the structure is. It's been a while since I've incorporated any of that.
Click to expand...
Since Andrew Read is one of the people on that podcast I'll share one thing about the 80/20 rule that he mentions in his book Run Strong. This also relates to HIIT.

He writes that most people think only about the 20sec work/10sec rest intervals when they talk about the Tabata protocol.
What people miss is that the test subjects performed 10min of warm-up at 70% of MaxHR before the 4min protocol. On top of that they did an additional sixth day per week where they performed an easy 30min session at 70% MaxHR.
If you look at the whole week the subjects did 85% of their training at low intensities vs. only 15% at high intensities.
 
Status
Closed Thread. (Continue Discussion of This Topic by Starting a New Thread.)
Back
Top Bottom