all posts post new thread

Other/Mixed Heart hypertrophy - is it desirable?

Other strength modalities (e.g., Clubs), mixed strength modalities (e.g., combined kettlebell and barbell), other goals (flexibility)
Status
Closed Thread. (Continue Discussion of This Topic by Starting a New Thread.)

John Kowalski

Level 2 Valued Member
"Prolonged training at maximal stroke volume is, figuratively speaking, “stretching exercise” for the heart. Muscles pump the blood, and the heart get stretched by the increased flow. As the consequence the heart dilates. It is possible to double its size, and 30-40% is almost a guarantee. That’s what is meant by coaches when they say “building the base”; it is, in fact, stretching of the heart.

D-type hypertrophy is stimulated by the work at heart rates close to maximal – 180.min and higher. Again, a little reminder of physiology. The heart is the muscle and therefore needs the blood in order to contract. The blood is delivered to it mostly during diastole, or relaxation phase. When working at maximal heart rate, the heart does not fully relax, and the blood supply is impaired to some degree.

What follows is the accumulation of acidic substances leading to acidosis which, in turn, stimulates growth of the heart muscle. This is typical interval training, the rave of the fitness crowd in recent years. The problem starts when this kind of training is done too often. If the heart does not relax, its blood supply is impaired, the delivery of oxygen becomes inadequate and anaerobic glycolysis starts.

As the resulting lactic acid is produced and leads to the acidosis inside the cell. If it lasts long enough, some cellular structures die. And if it lasts some more, the whole myocardiocytes – heart muscle cells – can die. This is microinfarction. If the training of this intensity is repeated again and again, more cells die and are replaced with the connective tissue which, in turn, is poorly distensible and does not properly conduct electric impulses necessary for adequate cardiac contraction. Apparently this has been confirmed by autopsies of athletes who suddenly died during physical activity.

That is why it is important to first build the base – dilate the heart – and only then increase intensity. Working at heart rates close to maximal must be introduced gradually and done infrequently, especially at the early stages of training."
~Selouyanov

Full article: http://rugbystrengthcoach.com/steady-state-cardio-rugby-co…/

There are studies claiming that weight training is good for the cardiovascular system, but it's due to the peripheral adaptations, but how about the central adaptations of the heart? Is that left ventricle dilating adaptation from continous training even desirable for regular folks? I was always curious why training doesn't lower my resting hr - it's usually somewhere around 70 bpm - same as my relatives who never workout. There are also coaches like Joel Jamieson who preach "cardiac output" workouts, keeping the hr around 130-150 for 20+ minutes to decrease the rhr. I was wondering if this pursuit is even worthwile.
 
Most endurance athletes accumulate about 80% of their workload as easy/aerobic base training. Only 20% is higher intensity and most of that is zone 4 (a bit higher than lactate threshold) and not max heart rate.

I believe you are overthinking this a bit. A simple message that most would agree with:
1. You should not do max heart rate training if you are deconditioned.
2. You should not do max heart rate training often (once per week on the high end, during a peaking phase)
3. You really don't ever need to train to max heart rate if you are not training for performance in middle distance racing events.
4. If you train sensibly, the cardiovascular adaptations are almost certainly going to be beneficial.

I can usually see a drop in my resting heart rate from as little as one threshold interval session (zone 4 or 10K race pace) even if I have been doing plenty of easy, zone 2 work. Zone 4 intervals are a powerful stimulus to improve stroke volume. But you don't need much zone 4 volume.

If I am weight training only, no running (this is rare, but I am there now due to a back injury), my resting heart rate is 62 or so. If I am running, even just easy stuff, my resting heart rate is mid 50s. A couple of interval sessions and my resting heart rate will be in the low 50s, even upper 40s if I really relax.

When you say that your HR is 70s with training, are you referring to weight training only?
 
@John Kowalski, desirable in the pursuit of what goal?

-S-
Well, if these claims are true, then increasing the amount of blood pumped by a single beat of the heart could be beneficial for everyone. Even if I only strength train it could increase the recovery rate etc. But my goal is to feel more energetic throughout the day.
 
I meant rhr. I'm now sitting at my pc, the rhr is 76. I strength train and ride my bike to the grocery store :)

Strength training is not going to do much to lower your resting heart rate. Resting HR is not an important goal though. It is a loose indicator of heart conditioning but not an end in and of itself.
 
@mprevost

I have an idea and a question...
After reading, thinking and discussing here on the forum, I think I have decided to believe that most of the real strength training of the heart happens in the rest periods of interval training. Especially if running is your method of ”pulse-raising”. During the work phase (the interval) you work up an oxygen debt and oxygen need in the muscles and during the resting phase you have to keep pumping the blood but you have no help from the muscles to pump the blood back so the heart has to do all the work. If you are standing still that is.

And here’s a question: Could it be that the way you rest between intervals affect how your heart responds to training. E.g… If you do 15/15-intervals where you move around during the rest periods and thereby use the venous pump to bring blood back from the extremities to the heart you get one effect and if you stand still during rest you get another since the heart has to work so much harder to press the blood all the way around the whole system without the help from the venous pump. Could it be that if you move around during rest you increase the hearts stroke volume but if you stand still you also increase the thickness of the walls? Something like that. That would mean that heart muscle hypertrophy would be affected by how you rest.

Ok. This is just something I have been thinking about and maybe this is common knowledge but I have had a hard time finding anything about this on the web. I am just curious…
 
"Could it be that if you move around during rest you increase the hearts stroke volume but if you stand still you also increase the thickness of the walls? Something like that. That would mean that heart muscle hypertrophy would be affected by how you rest."

No, I don't think it would make much difference. The increased peripheral resistance your heart encounters during a rep, especially if you hold your breath, creates a pressure overload that increases wall thickness. This is happening during a rep, not during the rest period. During the rest period, there is less pressure overload, and more volume overload as the heart rate stays elevated to supply blood to the working muscles to recover. You can enhance the volume overload (which is endurance training) by continuing to move vigorously between sets. This is simply circuit training. The primary reason to manipulate rest interval length is to change the skeletal muscle stimulus, not the heart muscle stimulus.
 
Status
Closed Thread. (Continue Discussion of This Topic by Starting a New Thread.)
Back
Top Bottom