|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Troutslayer
Joined: 03 Oct 2009
Location: Dark Side of the Moon
|
 Posted: Mon Oct 26, 2009 3:48 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| Quote: |
| 3 miles, 24 to 28 minutes, depending on the day. Sometimes 5 miles in 45 minutes if I am especially motivated that day. I run five or six days per week. |
Damm...that is good.
My beset time for three miles was 27 minutes and I've only done that a couple of times. I'm happy if i do it at 30 minutes. But, I also try to warm up for 5 minutes. I'm not good at jumping right into it....leaves me worse off in the middle of the run.
Good job!
slayer of trout |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
ddeubel
Joined: 20 Jul 2005
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 26, 2009 4:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Yes, congrats to anyone getting out there and doing something. Korea is great for the mountains (I have one right back of my place Gwanaksan) but be careful or you'll be hobbling like me right now with a busted ankle!
Here are some interesting tips for running on the treadmill.
http://www.nacoa.net/Marathon%20HQ/pdfs/making%20treadmill%20workouts%20more%20fun.pdf
Gippik,
We are speaking in generalities and I"m not at all against interval training. I know well about the + / - of interval training and speak from years of experience. However, people take it too far and now we have those 4 min. workout fitness clubs. LOL!
That said - yes, to run fast you need to run fast. But not everyday (maybe once/twice a week most). Also, with running we are talking about the simple view of fitness as the ability to oxygenate the muscles efficiently. Nothing else.
But not wanting to get into a long debate however I'd like to point out some things that I feel need comment.
1. People are talking about losing weight through exercise. I would advise this is a very poor way to lose weight. Weight loss is about calorie intake/restriction. Exercise gets you fit. You need less calories the fitter you get. So it isn't a good approach unless at the same time you restrict and keep limiting your calories. As you get fitter - you need to eat less (and smarter). Few do. they use a workout as a reason to eat. When I was running at the top of my sport - I was having to very carefully watch how much I ate. That's a fact most athletes live with.
2.
| Quote: |
| This will get you running faster and burning fat by kicking your metabolic system into gear. No joke. Too many studies to support it. |
You don't burn fat by running intervals. Nor will your body burn / use the fat resources on your body as energy post exercise unless you are in a calorie deficit. Interval training mostly teaches our bodies to use glycogen (sugars) as its primary fuel source. It is just way to simplistic to think - I run, I burn fat off my body. Doesn't work like that. I hate it when people work out and then run to the scales - omg!
3.
| Quote: |
| I'm pretty sure this wouldn't work well for me. I can stay above 170 bpm for one hour of running, so getting any real work out at 130 bpm I think I would have to run a marathon. I can probably get 150 bpm by walking... |
There is something wrong there. If you can run at 170 bpm for an hour - you are pretty damn fit. Your walking heart rate should be around 80-/90 bpm max. These numbers don't add up. Or if it is the case (or even close) - I'd have to say you are very very out of shape. The BEST indicator of fitness is how fast you recover, as indicated by how fast your heart rate drops when you decrease the load. Maybe you are an "animal" and can gut it out at 170bpm for 1 hour. However, if you walking h.r. is 150 - that just means you aren't fit at all - no matter the ability to run 1 hour.
I'll also ask -- who breaks a sweat faster and stronger. A very fit person or one not so fit? In fact, a very fit person will sweat sooner and more than any not so fit person.
Uknows1 - I'd spend the time (and getting motivated) by seeing yourself go further in 30 min every week at a low intensity. Measure it (treadmills are great at that). Same effort every day and you'll see how your body adapts and gets efficient. Once a week do intervals. throw on some light shoes and do short intervals just to teach your legs to have high turnover. Say 10x 300m with a very good recovery. That's all you have to do to reach your 2 mi. goal.
DD
http://eflclassroom.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
PRagic
Joined: 24 Feb 2006
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 26, 2009 5:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| I was on a 4K, 6K, 8K, 10K three to four day rotation sched down on the river up until last week. Will be interested to see how this translates over onto the mill. Now that the semester has kicked into overdrive, not enough time to make it down to the path during the week. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
UknowsI
Joined: 16 Apr 2009
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 26, 2009 6:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| ddeubel wrote: |
However, if you walking h.r. is 150 - that just means you aren't fit at all - no matter the ability to run 1 hour.
|
I think it can be tough to get 150 bpm on flat ground, maybe it's possible with some serious speed-walking, but I'm not sure. But uphill it's no problem getting 150 bpm. I sometimes like walking uphill or walking in stairs because it's almost like running except that it's much less stress on your joints.
When it comes to the effectiveness of interval training I think we simply have to disagree. I believe interval training works well to increase my fitness.
Try google guerilla cardio. The first hit will give you this ( http://www.menshealth.co.uk/index.php/chatroom/topic/268402 from Guerrilla Cardio
MUSCLE MEDIA October 2001, pp 55-60
Senior Science Editor, David Kennedy ):
| Quote: |
| As to be expected, the moderate-intensity endurance-training group experienced a rather significant increase in VO2 peak (about 10 percent), but, also not surprisingly, this regimen had absolutely no effect on anaerobic capacity. On the other hand, the high-intensity interval-training group experienced a stunning 14 percent increase in VO2 peak and a 28 percent increase anaerobic capacity |
Which contradicts what you have been saying that interval training is no good for VO2 max, and other quotes like this:
| Quote: |
| Bearing in mind the scientific research and the real-world examples showing the high-intensity, short duration route as the most efficient and effective path to true and total fitness, not to mention fat loss, don�t you think it�s time to add Guerrilla Cardio to your training schedule? |
I don't do guerilla cardio, but to say that interval training gives little benefits to fat burn and VO2 max contradicts the opinion of many researchers out there, so I don't think you should discredit our opinions too lightly. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
BobbyOrr
Joined: 01 Jun 2009
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 26, 2009 7:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
It's pretty crazy to be arguing against interval training. I still recall reading many studies that supported it, but more importantly, I would recommend it to people simply because it is more functional and likely more enjoyable.
You have to run for a long time (1+ hours) get any significant training effect from running at a low-moderate pace. Your substrate usage is predominately fat at that intensity, but you're also not burning as much total energy. Higher intensity exercise shifts the substrate usage towards glycogen, but you're still burning fat (just not as much when viewed as a percentage). It's not at all true to say that that type of exercise doesn't effectively burn fat. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
neil537
Joined: 15 Jan 2009
Location: Incheon, South Korea
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 26, 2009 8:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
last year, when I was still a young lad, and the Hite/Cass hadn't got its claws into me yet, I used to do 5-10k 3 times a week on a treadmill, I used to be able to do 5k in under 25 mins (i think just under 23mins was my PB).
These days, I go running outside once or twice a week, an out and back route that is just under 6km. Including time for a quick rest stop at the halfway point, if I get the traffic lights (green men, so I don't have to wait) then my time is usually between 27/28 min. I def don't feel as fit as I did last year, I am putting it down to too many Mcdonalds and too much Korean lager.
I much prefer running outdoors to a treadmill, there is more to see and the surfaces are more varied to run on. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
The Gipkik
Joined: 30 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 26, 2009 10:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| ddeubel wrote: |
Gippik,
We are speaking in generalities and I"m not at all against interval training. I know well about the + / - of interval training and speak from years of experience. However, people take it too far and now we have those 4 min. workout fitness clubs. LOL! |
Yes, the fitness industry is a desperate animal. Check out the $14,000 exercise machine that can get you fit in 4 minutes--guaranteed!
| ddeubel wrote: |
1. People are talking about losing weight through exercise. I would advise this is a very poor way to lose weight. Weight loss is about calorie intake/restriction. Exercise gets you fit. You need less calories the fitter you get. So it isn't a good approach unless at the same time you restrict and keep limiting your calories. As you get fitter - you need to eat less (and smarter). Few do. they use a workout as a reason to eat. When I was running at the top of my sport - I was having to very carefully watch how much I ate. That's a fact most athletes live with. |
Sure, calorie intake/restriction is paramount, but if you don't engage your metabolic system through conditioning, this diet will eventually just be that a diet that people break. Exercise through resistance training plus a clean diet avoiding the processed foods, etc., will get you there a lot sooner and keep you there.
| ddeubel wrote: |
2 You don't burn fat by running intervals. Nor will your body burn / use the fat resources on your body as energy post exercise unless you are in a calorie deficit. Interval training mostly teaches our bodies to use glycogen (sugars) as its primary fuel source. It is just way to simplistic to think - I run, I burn fat off my body. Doesn't work like that. I hate it when people work out and then run to the scales - omg! |
Now, let's not get apoplectic here. Of course you don't burn fat while you're exercising. We're looking for the afterburn, what happens after exercise and how long it lasts. That end result is losing weight and getting toned. I like to think about it this way: you don't go and measure the amount of muscle you've gained after a workout just as you don't measure the amount of fat lost or weight lost after a workout. Now, that's ridiculous.
And this topic has been debated to death in so many forums. It isn't a productive use of time. Just go here if you feel the need to debate this--and I know you don't. http://forum.bodybuilding.com/showthread.php?p=37970851 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
grandpa
Joined: 19 Oct 2009
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 26, 2009 11:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| It depends what's on the television. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
BobbyOrr
Joined: 01 Jun 2009
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 27, 2009 12:42 am Post subject: |
|
|
| The Gipkik wrote: |
| Of course you don't burn fat while you're exercising. |
You do burn fat during exercise. Exercise causes adipose tissue to release fatty acids into the blood which muscle uptakes and oxidizes for energy. This process requires oxygen and therefore cannot support high intensity exercise, which uses glycogen and phosphocreatine.
Exercising at a moderate rate for a long time will burn tons of fat, since the body will run out of glycogen and be forced to primarily burn fat. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
VanIslander
Joined: 18 Aug 2003
Location: Geoje, Hadong, Tongyeong,... now in a small coastal island town outside Gyeongsangnamdo!
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 27, 2009 1:14 am Post subject: |
|
|
| drkalbi wrote: |
| about 12 inches |
shorter than you think
GO GERBILS GO! 
| grandpa wrote: |
| It depends what's on the television |
grandpa, take up gardening if hiking is too much for you
| BobbyOrr wrote: |
| Exercising at a moderate rate for a long time will burn tons of fat |
That explains Stephane Richer's career.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gopher
Joined: 04 Jun 2005
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 27, 2009 1:26 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Ddeubel: you run (or used to run) close to a six-minute mile, no? We are close to the same age. How did you run at that pace? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ddeubel
Joined: 20 Jul 2005
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 27, 2009 3:23 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| Ddeubel: you run (or used to run) close to a six-minute mile, no? We are close to the same age. How did you run at that pace? |
Gopher - do you mean 1 mile or many miles? I've run 5min even miles for 10+ miles and my best 1 mile is 4.17 I ran a masters mile at the age of 42 in 4:29. However, I was only really good as a long distance guy. I ran for Canada as an ultramarathoner many years, met lots of people around the world. Still hold a world treadmill record and was the first to really set the standard for the 24 hour treadmill record about 5 years ago.
So I speak from experience and a lot of reading/coaching. I know how to do interval training and my own body has been an experiment.
How do you run that fast? Hard to explain.
Been running since I was 13 - every day, not missing but a handful throughout the years. So consistency is the number one thing. Two. Physiology. We can't get past the things we are born with. Like I'll never or never did beat many Kenyans, others had to work with what they were given (but there is a significant amount of wiggle room - more so as you go longer and longer in distance). Three - ego. Just focus and not wanting anything else. I grew up as a runner in the golden age of white guys running - nowadays, it is pitiful and the culture just doesn't want to work hard. I watched the Chicago marathon a few weeks ago and 30 years ago, if you were running 2:30 - you'd be in a big crowd. Today, you are a lone wolf, nobody for miles....
I really think overall, we have to note the difference between anaerobic and aerobic fitness. The first (which Uknows refers to in his figures) is about "without oxygen". It is the fitness to have a burst and operate in oxygen debt. Great if you want a career as a pickpocket but not very useful and beneficial in every day living (unless you run the 800m - the most demanding anaerobic race IMO). The second is aerobic fitness (read some Costill , from Ball State - he is the best physiologist on sport bar none and also one who fully understands the benefits of training at a low rate - as do the Kenyans/Ethiopians). Fitness we use all the time, doing things "with oxygen". This fitness benefits you every moment of your living day. It makes you walk at ease, it makes you use hardly any energy (and thus, the body does less other tasks) to do a lot of things. This fitness translates to a low resting heart rate. When I was running lots - I had a resting heart rate of about 33bpm (even once had a nurse freak out over it ). It is this fitness we should aim for unless we are wanting to be highly competitive in middle distance sports or have some other specific goal.
One thing forever boggling me is the myth that we believe that at first - exercise should be "difficult" and "stressful". Later on, it gets easier. It should be the other way around. At first as we adapt, it should be done easily and incrementally increased. As we get used to the stress - we can handle more stress and then it should get harder, then we should push ourselves more. But not the reverse.
Okay, sorry for the long diatribe. But that is the background. We each run our own race. I've always believed that . The only sane advice I've ever heard about running is "never hesitate to put your shoes on - once the shoes are on, the rest will happen". Now 47, I'm slowing down but still feel that running is the most basic, most natural of any sport. Glad I am part of it....
DD
http://eflclassroom.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ddeubel
Joined: 20 Jul 2005
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 27, 2009 3:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
The Gipkik wrote:
Of course you don't burn fat while you're exercising. |
| Quote: |
Bobby Orr wrote:
You do burn fat during exercise. Exercise causes adipose tissue to release fatty acids into the blood which muscle uptakes and oxidizes for energy. This process requires oxygen and therefore cannot support high intensity exercise, which uses glycogen and phosphocreatine.
Exercising at a moderate rate for a long time will burn tons of fat, since the body will run out of glycogen and be forced to primarily burn fat. |
Bobby, you must have been doing some studying after hanging up the skates. Full marks to you.
DD
http://eflclassroom.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
The Gipkik
Joined: 30 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 27, 2009 4:44 am Post subject: |
|
|
| BobbyOrr wrote: |
You do burn fat during exercise. Exercise causes adipose tissue to release fatty acids into the blood which muscle uptakes and oxidizes for energy. This process requires oxygen and therefore cannot support high intensity exercise, which uses glycogen and phosphocreatine.
Exercising at a moderate rate for a long time will burn tons of fat, since the body will run out of glycogen and be forced to primarily burn fat. |
Yes, you are right. As I said in my first post. Some people have a problem with the idea of fat being burned during exercise like some people despise the concept of a fat burning zone. The zone is fiction, but thanks for the reminder.
That said, although moderate exercise does metabolize fat while you're exercising, this seems to stop when the exercise is done. On top of that, moderate exercise tends to consume muscle and not only fat. You end up looking like a spindly marathoner rather than a sprinter. Different strokes, I guess.
Long distance running takes a lot of time. I ran distance for years, but lost little weight until I started HIIT. Doing it twice or three times a week on off strength exercising days works. That made a huge difference, so I'm a believer. I just feel a lot better, stronger, faster and my joints are thanking me, too. All I can say is give it a try. Hill sprints too. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
UknowsI
Joined: 16 Apr 2009
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 27, 2009 6:09 am Post subject: |
|
|
| To ddeubel. You obviously have way way more experience on this field than I do, so I am sure what you are saying works well, but I also think you've had more time to invest in exercise than most of us. But I have a few questions. Do you seldom have high intensity work outs or do you combine low intensity with high intensity work outs? And what was your overall workout amount for a week? I am going to keep on with the exercise program I currently use since I'm happy with my progress, but I might be tempted to put in one low intensity work out a week. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
