does it make sense that Alactic + Aerobic would burn more calories?

Jason B.

Level 1 Valued Member
My workouts consist of Swings, Pull-ups, Push-ups, Leg Raises and Squats. Having read several articles on anti-glycolitic training here, I decided to make all my lifts heavier and drop them below 20 seconds per set, taking long breaks to ensure that I'm not feeling any exertion.

My workouts basically went from 45 minutes to 90 minutes, so I'm working out for longer even though I'm sure I'm doing less actual work.

However, I feel really hungry during my workouts now and I never felt that doing the same workout with slightly lighter lifts in a glycolytic range.

Does this make sense to anyone? Or am I wired funny?
 

Marc

Level 6 Valued Member
From the exercises you listed the swings is the only one I'd do in an A+A fashion. The others I'd treat as strength training.
 

Bret S.

Level 6 Valued Member
Certified Instructor
No claims of expert status here but I'll say this, the feeling you're having is probably more related to food intake pre-training. I train fasted most of the time and don't get hungry unless the prior days food intake was insufficient, this leaves me feeling flat, in which case I'll eat something.
Calorie burning comparisons are not useful in this equation IMO, that said I do get hungry after doing LED work at times. I don't believe the driver of hunger sensation is related to calorie burn rates in this case.
 

Jason B.

Level 1 Valued Member
Hello,

@Jason B.
Welcome to SF !

I am not an expert, however, AA training is supposed to burn fat instead of carbs. 1g of fat is 9cals whereas 1g of carbs is only 4cals. So for the same training duration, it can make sense that AA training burns more calories.

How many calories are in one gram of fat, carbohydrate, or protein? | Food and Nutrition Information Center| NAL | USDA

Kind regards,

Pet'
That's an interesting idea! I ran a bunch of possible explanations through my head, but never once pondered the fuel source. I don't know if you're right or not, but the entire thing feels damn peculiar to me since I feel like the workout is much less effort than it used to be.

Thank you for the warm welcome! When i was trying to learn more about anti-glycolytic and calisthenic training I was searching these forums for informative threads and frequently saw people tagging you in to provide knowledge.
 

Jason B.

Level 1 Valued Member
From the exercises you listed the swings is the only one I'd do in an A+A fashion. The others I'd treat as strength training.
TBH, I the only difference I can tell between A+A and alactic strength training is the rest times.

I'm really enjoying the sensation of training without lingering soreness and feeling refreshed.
 

Jason B.

Level 1 Valued Member
No claims of expert status here but I'll say this, the feeling you're having is probably more related to food intake pre-training. I train fasted most of the time and don't get hungry unless the prior days food intake was insufficient, this leaves me feeling flat, in which case I'll eat something.
Calorie burning comparisons are not useful in this equation IMO, that said I do get hungry after doing LED work at times. I don't believe the driver of hunger sensation is related to calorie burn rates in this case.
I think you're right that hunger isn't related to calorie burn rates, but my food intake hasn't really changed.

I wonder if it's as simple as the fact that I've now got lots of rest time to stand around and notice what I'm feeling instead of rushing from set to set.
 

Anna C

Level 9 Valued Member
Elite Certified Instructor
I am not an expert, however, AA training is supposed to burn fat instead of carbs. 1g of fat is 9cals whereas 1g of carbs is only 4cals. So for the same training duration, it can make sense that AA training burns more calories.
Your logic doesn't add up there, @pet'. You get the same unit of energy - the amount required to raise the temperature of one gram of water by one degree Celsius at a pressure of one atmosphere - from 1 calorie of anything. Just because 1 gram of a macronutrient supplies more calories, doesn't mean you're burning calories any faster when you use it.

My workouts basically went from 45 minutes to 90 minutes, so I'm working out for longer even though I'm sure I'm doing less actual work.

However, I feel really hungry during my workouts now and I never felt that doing the same workout with slightly lighter lifts in a glycolytic range.
Maybe the higher intensity was providing some appetite suppression. Might try fueling up a bit prior to training, or at least adequately the night before if you like to train fasted in the morning.

Are you sure about the "less actual work"? Like if you added up all the reps and/or reps x weight, you're moving less?

From the exercises you listed the swings is the only one I'd do in an A+A fashion. The others I'd treat as strength training.
I would agree with this, although pull-ups and push-ups are sometimes used in Strong Endurance (AGT) protocols that aren't specifically A+A.
 

Marc

Level 6 Valued Member
@Anna C Using push ups and pull ups as part of a conditioning programme is perfectly fine, assuming solid tecnique and an appropriatly high rep count.
 

Bret S.

Level 6 Valued Member
Certified Instructor
it's as simple as the fact that I've now got lots of rest time to stand around and notice what I'm feeling instead of rushing from set to set.
Maybe the higher intensity was providing some appetite suppression. Might try fueling up a bit prior to training, or at least adequately the night before if you like to train fasted in the morning.
Yes and yes I believe..
 

Jason B.

Level 1 Valued Member
Are you sure about the "less actual work"? Like if you added up all the reps and/or reps x weight, you're moving less?
No, I could be totally wrong about that. It's hard to calculate the load of leverage positions. I'm just guessing based on the experience I had calculating barbell tonnages where lower weights and higher reps would get you much higher totals than higher weights and lower reps.
 

Bret S.

Level 6 Valued Member
Certified Instructor
TBH, I the only difference I can tell between A+A and alactic strength training is the rest times.
A+A is strength training, but it requires movements like snatches or swings, the ballistic movements are best.
The other grind type movements like presses and pullups can be done in the spirit of A&A, and that can certainly help with recovery. I do all my work either 'true' A+A or 'like' A+A.
Heavy snatching will make you stronger overall.
 

North Coast Miller

Level 7 Valued Member
However, I feel really hungry during my workouts now and I never felt that doing the same workout with slightly lighter lifts in a glycolytic range.
It might just be as you suspect you have more time to gauge how you feel while training. The other aspect is how much slightly lighter your glycolytic loads were. If they were a lot lighter I could see a difference showing up.

It might also be that more glycolytic work mobilizes your body in ways that suppress hunger - increased outflow of blood to the periphery, different enzymatic emphasis at the cellular level. This I suspect is the real answer.

When I dial back the intensity/duration of my work and train more alactic, I generally have to consume fewer calories - the EPOC effect is less. But I don't get hungry till I stop training.
 

Bret S.

Level 6 Valued Member
Certified Instructor
No, I could be totally wrong about that. It's hard to calculate the load of leverage positions. I'm just guessing based on the experience I had calculating barbell tonnages where lower weights and higher reps would get you much higher totals than higher weights and lower reps.
Snatching a 16k bell for 16 reps/minute for 40 minutes doing VWC totals 22,400 lbs of weight lifted overhead in a session, that doesn't include the eccentric loads which could more than double the total weight, which I don't include..
That works out to be 560 lbs/minute lifted overhead. This equates roughly to snatching a little over 10 reps/minute with a 24k bell for 40 mins. totaling well over 400 snatches with the heavier bell.
I think this would be tough to match with a barbell overhead snatch or C&J, doable but tough either way.
Seems with lower loads with higher reps you can increase density a bit more easily.. I do know that VWC kicked my butt, especially when the weather got hot.
 

Anna C

Level 9 Valued Member
Elite Certified Instructor
Snatching a 16k bell for 16 reps/minute for 40 minutes doing VWC totals 22,400 lbs of weight lifted overhead in a session, that doesn't include the eccentric loads which could more than double the total weight, which I don't include..
That works out to be 560 lbs/minute lifted overhead. This equates roughly to snatching a little over 10 reps/minute with a 24k bell for 40 mins. totaling well over 400 snatches with the heavier bell.
That's sort of what I was getting at with this thread: How much force is a bicycle pedal stroke?

So I can produce 10.8 lbs of force 9,450 times on a bike ride for 102,060 pounds of force production, and 150-300 lbs of force (let's average to 200 lbs) to squat and deadlift 50x in a session for 10,000 pounds of force production. Maybe not accurate or valid for anything, but interesting to think about.
I think what it gets down to is "meaningful work for increasing strength and/or power".

In the OP's example, and examples I see so often in the gym, people are generating a lot of force by doing a lot of reps, but none of the reps are meaningfully difficult or done with precision or good form. Therefore they get no adaptation or increased strength, power, or skill.

In the VWC example and the bike example, same thing -- it's about increasing cardio and endurance, but doesn't make you stronger, as in pure strength. (That part could be argued, for a novice or for the untrained... but that's another subject).
 

Bret S.

Level 6 Valued Member
Certified Instructor
In the VWC example and the bike example, same thing -- it's about increasing cardio and endurance, but doesn't make you stronger, as in pure strength. (That part could be argued, for a novice or for the untrained... but that's another subject).
An interesting thing I noticed, VWC did make me stronger and more durable overall, I was amazed at how I felt from doing it.
Another comparable movement is rowing, the more rowing I do the stronger I feel overall, I think I average 1500 to 1600 strokes in an hour. It seems some movements have an overall cumulative effect on overall strength. Maybe there's a sweet spot regarding load and reps? Also the fact that snatching and rowing have a full body involvement component to them, this may be a significant contributor.
 

Anna C

Level 9 Valued Member
Elite Certified Instructor
An interesting thing I noticed, VWC did make me stronger and more durable overall, I was amazed at how I felt from doing it.
Another comparable movement is rowing, the more rowing I do the stronger I feel overall, I think I average 1500 to 1600 strokes in an hour. It seems some movements have an overall cumulative effect on overall strength. Maybe there's a sweet spot regarding load and reps? Also the fact that snatching and rowing have a full body involvement component to them, this may be a significant contributor.
I would argue that what you describe isn't "stronger" or increasing "overall strength." We explored this a while back in this thread:

Current thoughts on exercise theory
Current thoughts on exercise theory

Worth defining here, because after all, what is "StrongFirst"? What sort of "Strong" are we talking about needing to be?

Strength is the ability to produce force against resistance. If, through your training, you can produce a greater maximal force than before, you have become stronger.
 

Bret S.

Level 6 Valued Member
Certified Instructor
I would argue that what you describe isn't "stronger" or increasing "overall strength." We explored this a while back in this thread:

Current thoughts on exercise theory
Current thoughts on exercise theory

Worth defining here, because after all, what is "StrongFirst"? What sort of "Strong" are we talking about needing to be?

Strength is the ability to produce force against resistance. If, through your training, you can produce a greater maximal force than before, you have become stronger.
A couple of examples, my getup max went from 40k to 44k without training it, 1hsw power/weight increased also..
Honestly my shoulders felt bulletproofed which was my goal, to prepare me for A+A snatching.

So it was a very positive experience as a stepping stone, not that I would expect much more strength improvements after a point..
 

North Coast Miller

Level 7 Valued Member
Strength is the ability to produce force against resistance. If, through your training, you can produce a greater maximal force than before, you have become stronger.
Very interesting topic. Strength, upon closer examination can be very specific to how it is trained. I recall several studies that compared high %RM to low %RM done to failure. The lighter load done to failure equaled the muscle growth of the heavier loading, the heavier loading increased RM by a significant amount, but isometric force was comparable between the two groups.

Is tempting to say "I increased my max loading on exercise X therefore I am stronger" but on some other exercise you might very well have gotten weaker or showed zero improvement.

I have to agree that some forms of strength training have more carryover - when doing my offset weighted pole exercises I nearly doubled my 1arm press AMRAP without doing any pressing. I believe exercises that force the core to activate to attempt the lift, and exercises that improve reflexive shoulder socket integrity/tension have the greatest potential to carry-over, but even these are largely specific.
 
Top Bottom