all posts post new thread

Other/Mixed MAF Jump Rope?

Other strength modalities (e.g., Clubs), mixed strength modalities (e.g., combined kettlebell and barbell), other goals (flexibility)

offwidth

Level 9 Valued Member
The only real difference is a slight advantage to capillary density goes to LISS, and its not clear if that advantage decreases over time - some studies don't even back that up. Stroke volume, stroke pressure, hypertrophy, blood volume increase, mitochondrial density, aerobic enzyme improvement, fat mobilization, glucose mobilization etc etc are all roughly equal, with HIIT increasing mitochondrial density somewhat better in the region of type II fibers. They use different pathways to achieve 90% similar outcome. As you become more advanced, LISS confers more benefit, but still requires a lot of training time.


And again, if you want to run better, you absolutely have to run. There are examples of people using HIIT to do half marathons and under and do well enough. For a full marathon I don't think anybody uses it exclusively. I did read about one man who did so experimentally and his time was over 3 1/2 hours - he did finish though.
But at the end of the day almost all serious endurance folks do the majority (not all) of their yearly training using LED. Success leaves tracks.
(And marathons are pretty short in the world of locomotive endurance…:cool: )
 

North Coast Miller

Level 8 Valued Member
But at the end of the day almost all serious endurance folks do the majority (not all) of their yearly training using LED. Success leaves tracks.
(And marathons are pretty short in the world of locomotive endurance…:cool: )
This is very true at the upper competitive level.

But for 99% of folks who don't have the time to do LISS (or have bad knees, ankles, feet, etc) looking to improve cardio and/or lose fat, and/or compliment strength training, HIIT is going to be an equally valid or better choice.

Am surprised it isn't advocated more often here - plenty of studies have shown it is actually pretty gentle metabolically in terms of ROS and lactate load (surprisingly) for the response it triggers.
 

Anna C

Level 9 Valued Member
Team Leader Certified Instructor
Elite Certified Instructor
Sinister
But for 99% of folks who don't have the time to do LISS (or have bad knees, ankles, feet, etc) looking to improve cardio and/or lose fat, and/or compliment strength training, HIIT is going to be an equally valid or better choice.

Am surprised it isn't advocated more often here - plenty of studies have shown it is actually pretty gentle metabolically in terms of ROS and lactate load (surprisingly) for the response it triggers.

Pavel's "The Quick and the Dead" pages 7-33 makes the case for why it's not advocated more often here...

Not arguing with your point, just pointing out where the complete explanation lies in why it's not the StrongFirst preferred method.
 

North Coast Miller

Level 8 Valued Member
Pavel's "The Quick and the Dead" pages 7-33 makes the case for why it's not advocated more often here...

Not arguing with your point, just pointing out where the complete explanation lies in why it's not the StrongFirst preferred method.

I don't have a copy to reference....

Also, are we talking about real Tabata-esque HIIT or something closer to metcons/CF?

I've mentioned this before, but HIIT has probably been more closely studied than any other training strategy and no inherent defect has come to light.
 

BJJ Shawn

Level 6 Valued Member
I think I recommended it to you in another topic, but you could use tempo intervals.
Set the timer for 45s work, 15s break. During the first work interval jump rope at such a pace that you reach ~75% of your HR max. During the second work interval you can do some correctives/resilient/flexible steel drills/neck work. Do it for 20-60mins.
I had great success with improving my aerobic base with this method. I took it from The Jaggernaut Method yt channel.
Yeah, I do remember that and have watched that video a few times. One question I had watching is it if during the second interval where you're working other things, do you try to keep your HR up at the same level or not worry about it?

I think I am perpetually in program info overload, as I listed to too much info and can't do it all but want to. Some say more zone 2 is better, some say HIIT, some say never HIIT, some say intervals, etc. I'm sure they ALL fulfill a role, and sifting through them is difficult, but I just want to find something easy to improve my aerobic capacity on my off days so I think I need to just pick one and stick with it for a while.
 

Anna C

Level 9 Valued Member
Team Leader Certified Instructor
Elite Certified Instructor
Sinister
I don't have a copy to reference....

Also, are we talking about real Tabata-esque HIIT or something closer to metcons/CF?

I've mentioned this before, but HIIT has probably been more closely studied than any other training strategy and no inherent defect has come to light.

I suppose it depends on how you do either one... There is a lot of theory and reference in the book (The Quick and the Dead), making the case as to why short duration power training is superior. As we all know, the mainstream has a different message. The mainstream also doesn't know how awesome kettlebell training can be, so... I'd recommend getting the book and seeing if any of it resonates with you! Kindle and Audio book versions are less than $10.
 

BJJ Shawn

Level 6 Valued Member
The only real difference is a slight advantage to capillary density goes to LISS, and its not clear if that advantage decreases over time - some studies don't even back that up. Stroke volume, stroke pressure, hypertrophy, blood volume increase, mitochondrial density, aerobic enzyme improvement, fat mobilization, glucose mobilization etc etc are all roughly equal, with HIIT increasing mitochondrial density somewhat better in the region of type II fibers. They use different pathways to achieve 90% similar outcome. As you become more advanced, LISS confers more benefit, but still requires a lot of training time.


And again, if you want to run better, you absolutely have to run. There are examples of people using HIIT to do half marathons and under and do well enough. For a full marathon I don't think anybody uses it exclusively. I did read about one man who did so experimentally and his time was over 3 1/2 hours - he did finish though.
I absolutely don't care about running better, lol. Information overload though is causing me to question everything so I thought I would just go the "easy route" and just do someting I don't have to think much about. That's turning out to be harder than I thought.
 

BJJ Shawn

Level 6 Valued Member
I suppose it depends on how you do either one... There is a lot of theory and reference in the book (The Quick and the Dead), making the case as to why short duration power training is superior. As we all know, the mainstream has a different message. The mainstream also doesn't know how awesome kettlebell training can be, so... I'd recommend getting the book and seeing if any of it resonates with you! Kindle and Audio book versions are less than $10.
I am currently doing Q&D 3 times a week (just started this week though) so I was just looking for something to add on my off days. I may be ignorant here, but isn't Q&D a HIIT protocol? You have very specific intervals of intense work, followed by specific intervals of rest. It's 100% power followed by 0% power in set intervals, isn't that was HIIT is all about? I think Pavel references more Metcons being a waste of time because they are just working hard for the sake of working hard and pushing the "tolerance" of lactic power instead of trying to work around it, no?
 

Anna C

Level 9 Valued Member
Team Leader Certified Instructor
Elite Certified Instructor
Sinister
for aerobic capacity?
I am currently doing Q&D 3 times a week (just started this week though) so I was just looking for something to add on my off days. I may be ignorant here, but isn't Q&D a HIIT protocol? You have very specific intervals of intense work, followed by specific intervals of rest. It's 100% power followed by 0% power in set intervals, isn't that was HIIT is all about? I think Pavel references more Metcons being a waste of time because they are just working hard for the sake of working hard and pushing the "tolerance" of lactic power instead of trying to work around it, no?
I don't know guys... TBH, I get lost in the semantics in these discussions because different people mean different things.
 

Antti

Level 9 Valued Member
But at the end of the day almost all serious endurance folks do the majority (not all) of their yearly training using LED. Success leaves tracks.
(And marathons are pretty short in the world of locomotive endurance…:cool: )

But is that really relevant or the right context?

If you have 20 hours a week to spend on your aerobic capacity, it is obvious you can't do HIIT for 20 hours. Maybe you can consistently do two hours of more intensive exercise a week. That means that the rest, and most, of the time, 18 hours, will be low intensity aerobic training.

Now, the follow up of course is what should we do when we only have two hours a week to spend on aerobic capacity. Still the same 9:1 ratio of the serious endurance folk? Or at what point does it change?

I would imagine, that the less time one can use, the better it's used intensely, and the more, the less intensely.ä, on average.
 

North Coast Miller

Level 8 Valued Member
Now, the follow up of course is what should we do when we only have two hours a week to spend on aerobic capacity.
Or less. For me, three sessions of HIIT at 15 minutes per is about it.

I recently thought I might have enough time to start running again, but that was before I was diagnosed with torn meniscus in my left knee, patellar tendonitis in my right, and about to start a new job. If I jump rope more than 5-10 minutes per day my heel spurs act up and it takes a lot of downtime to put them right. Winter coming on, riding bike is not an option and again, it takes a large commitment of time to improve aerobic fitness riding a bike - at least as much as running.

MAF with a small amount (80/20) of high intensity is definitely proven to provide maybe the ideal overall adaptive aerobic response. That said, I don't have the time or joint health to support it. Every time I include HIIT as an integral part of a training block instead of something I shoehorn in "when time allows" I get an adaptive response I can actually feel improving my aerobic and anaerobic capacity and inducing a relaxing effect on my downtime.

I know where SF stands on metcon-type training, but am not clear on how SF views textbook HIIT, so to be clear to the casual reader my endorsement may or may not align with what is recommended as best practices in the supporting literature and should be viewed in that light. I put it forth as a viable option for those who maybe do not have the time or physical bandwidth for MAF LISS. Done properly it generates a return that is way out of proportion to the time and effort put in.
 

offwidth

Level 9 Valued Member
But is that really relevant or the right context?

If you have 20 hours a week to spend on your aerobic capacity, it is obvious you can't do HIIT for 20 hours. Maybe you can consistently do two hours of more intensive exercise a week. That means that the rest, and most, of the time, 18 hours, will be low intensity aerobic training.

Now, the follow up of course is what should we do when we only have two hours a week to spend on aerobic capacity. Still the same 9:1 ratio of the serious endurance folk? Or at what point does it change?

I would imagine, that the less time one can use, the better it's used intensely, and the more, the less intensely.ä, on average.
I do see your point, but I always look at things through the lenses of a serious endurance guy. And besides the science doesn‘t care whether a person is one or not.
And you probably noticed that I said ‘majority (not all) of their training’. Hey fellas, I got nothing against HIIT; it’s an important and needed tool. I would not be able to rely on it alone as a training tool however,
 

pet'

Level 8 Valued Member
Hello,

A "minimalist" approach and its energy pathways could be something like:
A. long run (30-40+ minutes) -> LISS style of running
B. tempo run -> There are plenty of formats: 30"-30", n x distance (4 x 400m, etc...)
C. sprint repeats -> Something close to A+A

1 session of each. It requires proper running technique though.

If one wants to keep progressing, more long runs are necessary. Usually, 80% of the training volume has to feel "easy"

Kind regards,

Pet'
 

Anna C

Level 9 Valued Member
Team Leader Certified Instructor
Elite Certified Instructor
Sinister
Since the discussion has gone to the best method for aerobic development, it would be relevant to go back to the goals and objectives.

We don't actually know that his OP's goal is to get the most aerobic development, or to minimize the time doing it. We just have:

I can't seem to use a jump rope and keep my heart rate from skyrocketing. I am trying to find a quiet way to get some LISS training on my non strength days without leaving my house when it's raining

To which there were a lot of great suggestions on page 1.

To me, the most relevant things when choosing aerobic exercise activities and methods are A) what does someone like to do, and B) what physical qualities and/or outcomes are most desired to develop.

And, with aerobic exercise, I'm usually thinking in terms of slow twitch muscle fiber development, so I'm spending the majority of the time keeping the intensity of force production low to moderate, for LISS, which I think is the best way to develop the aerobic system. However, I also let A) and B) trump the "best" way, if there's something I like more, or will give an effective shortcut to the desired outcome.
 

Antti

Level 9 Valued Member
Since the discussion has gone to the best method for aerobic development, it would be relevant to go back to the goals and objectives.

We don't actually know that his OP's goal is to get the most aerobic development, or to minimize the time doing it. We just have:



To which there were a lot of great suggestions on page 1.

To me, the most relevant things when choosing aerobic exercise activities and methods are A) what does someone like to do, and B) what physical qualities and/or outcomes are most desired to develop.

And, with aerobic exercise, I'm usually thinking in terms of slow twitch muscle fiber development, so I'm spending the majority of the time keeping the intensity of force production low to moderate, for LISS, which I think is the best way to develop the aerobic system. However, I also let A) and B) trump the "best" way, if there's something I like more, or will give an effective shortcut to the desired outcome.

I understand your reasoning and I agree that we really need context in discussions like this. Come to think of it, we always need more context in threads. Like said, it depends.

As an interesting point about context and differing viewpoints, I only see cardiovascular conditioning as a question of the development of our heart and lungs. I consider any peripheral muscle adaptations along with it as secondary and in cases unwanted.
 

Anna C

Level 9 Valued Member
Team Leader Certified Instructor
Elite Certified Instructor
Sinister
As an interesting point about context and differing viewpoints, I only see cardiovascular conditioning as a question of the development of our heart and lungs. I consider any peripheral muscle adaptations along with it as secondary and in cases unwanted.

Yes, I think that's where discussions about aerobic development / cardio / conditioning usually veer off in different directions. It's such a powerful form of exercise that brings SO MANY benefits, both health and performance! And the great thing is, whichever of these benefits you consciously seek, you get ALL of them as part of the package. Then it gets to nuance -- some types do better at some things, other types better at other things. And everything has a cost in terms of time spent, effort, recovery, and sometimes equipment. So the cost vs. benefit equation can be worked in an infinite number of ways.
 

Boris Bachmann

Level 7 Valued Member
Now, the follow up of course is what should we do when we only have two hours a week to spend on aerobic capacity. Still the same 9:1 ratio of the serious endurance folk? Or at what point does it change?

I would imagine, that the less time one can use, the better it's used intensely, and the more, the less intensely.ä, on average.
This is problem w. our (this forum's) consistent bias towards a 'minimalist' approach of course.

I would imagine that if you are starting at 'zero' (out of shape but not sick), really just about any approach is going to lead to gains.
 
Top Bottom