Styleforum › Forums › Lifestyle › Health & Body › Running + Lifting
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Running + Lifting - Page 2

post #16 of 23
1/11/09 at 11:27am
Quote:
Originally Posted by James Bond View Post
Changing size is largely a function of diet. The drawback to high reps is that it's not enough weight to stress the muscle, which means little strength gain and no metabolic effect (fat burning).
No, it stresses through volume. The problem with volume it is has associated fatigue which takes time to recover from. If there's not enough recovery gains will stagnate...hence the infamous 'plateau'. The easiest workaround is to drop volume (reps and sets) and increase intensity (weight) while maintaining frequency (2x/week, etc.). And I have no idea what 'metabolic effect' or 'fat burning' you're talking about...it's not dependent upon intensity and if anything more reps will burn more fat because it's more work being done.
Reply
Reply
post #17 of 23
1/11/09 at 11:37am
Quote:
Originally Posted by NewYorkRanger View Post
What I asked was basically am I getting the same amount of general excercise or less. I'm asking if going to the gym for an hour is using the same energy, and accomplishing similar things (based on my goal to just stay healthy and fit) as it owuld if I were running for an hour. If you were able to understand beyond the words printed, your understanding of my question wouldn't have been defied. Maybe the Subject should have been

"Running(xy) = Running (x) + Lifting (y)?"

As per the comment re: the weights limiting my running, I've read in many running guides that a good way to improve your running time and distances is to incorporate a workout routine. Why has it done the opposite for me? Is it because the routine is more than what it should be?

The satisfaction part, what a bit more complex than you read it. Read between the lines...of course I know my satisfaction can't be answered by un named "morons" on a web forum, but based on their experiences (figuring a few here may be more knowledgeable than I am on the subject) should I be trying to run more?

Your query cannot be answered unless your doctor weigh the efficiency of your heart, weight, muscle density etc before and after your new regime.

The answer you seek depends ultimately on your goals. Whether you want to be damn cardio vascularly fit or have a mix of that and possess muscle mass. While a doctor can weigh all that for you, I dont see how it would necessarily satisfy you unless you are into it. I mean is having 5% body fat a big deal to you if you look reed thin?

As for training affecting running. Yes, I have trained my legs and improved my running before but my point is if your routine is taking too much away of your running time and increasing your muscle mass, then naturally you would not be as good in running as you were!
Reply
Reply
post #18 of 23
1/11/09 at 12:42pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by NewYorkRanger View Post
What I asked was basically am I getting the same amount of general excercise or less. I'm asking if going to the gym for an hour is using the same energy, and accomplishing similar things (based on my goal to just stay healthy and fit) as it owuld if I were running for an hour. If you were able to understand beyond the words printed, your understanding of my question wouldn't have been defied. Maybe the Subject should have been "Running(xy) = Running (x) + Lifting (y)?" As per the comment re: the weights limiting my running, I've read in many running guides that a good way to improve your running time and distances is to incorporate a workout routine. Why has it done the opposite for me? Is it because the routine is more than what it should be? The satisfaction part, what a bit more complex than you read it. Read between the lines...of course I know my satisfaction can't be answered by un named "morons" on a web forum, but based on their experiences (figuring a few here may be more knowledgeable than I am on the subject) should I be trying to run more?
You have serious mental issues with feeling a need to burn X amount of calories per week. Between your hip injury that seemed to drive you crazy and others posts you've made about needing to do X miles to maintain your weight I'd say you should learn to accept a change instead of worrying about an unimportant detail like how much you're working out per week. The human body is pretty adaptive to high calorie and low calorie balances. It's why diets stagnate ('metabolic slowdown' is the oft-used and oft-misunderstood term) and why people who eat four pizzas per day don't perpetually grow until they eat five pizzas and then six. In my experience serious weight training is for track athletes not for distance runners. Distance runners don't really require weight training because their sport is self-sufficient. Sprinters need a heavy load to propel themselves faster than the resistance their own body offers (you know, f=ma and all that -- they use weights to increase acceleration [a]). Distance runners don't need to do anything other than keep up a certain speed that they're already able to reach; it's more about efficiency. The crux of it all is this: what are you trying to do? Change your body shape (lower body fat, increase size of certain areas, etc.)? Decrease your half marathon time? Just stay 'healthy'?
Reply
Reply
post #19 of 23
1/11/09 at 2:44pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by why View Post
No, it stresses through volume. The problem with volume it is has associated fatigue which takes time to recover from. If there's not enough recovery gains will stagnate...hence the infamous 'plateau'. The easiest workaround is to drop volume (reps and sets) and increase intensity (weight) while maintaining frequency (2x/week, etc.).

And I have no idea what 'metabolic effect' or 'fat burning' you're talking about...it's not dependent upon intensity and if anything more reps will burn more fat because it's more work being done.

So if you curled a can of peas 1000x, that would stress the muscle? Not in any appreciable way that would lead to strength or muscle gain. It will tire your arm, but you're not tearing muscle fibers.

Fat burning is ALWAYS dependent on intensity. The higher your intensity, the higher your EPOC.
Reply
Reply
post #20 of 23
1/11/09 at 4:56pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by James Bond View Post
So if you curled a can of peas 1000x, that would stress the muscle? Not in any appreciable way that would lead to strength or muscle gain. It will tire your arm, but you're not tearing muscle fibers.
I'm not going to get too specific with the analogy (it's faulty but I'll work with you). Anyway, that's the exact opposite of what I said. And this whole 'tearing muscle fibers' deal is pretty silly. It's called microtrauma and any kind of movement creates it.
Quote:
Fat burning is ALWAYS dependent on intensity. The higher your intensity, the higher your EPOC.
It's not dependent on intensity...there's a ton of other variables. (By the way, intensity in regards to weight training means resistance. I'm not using a layman's definition here.) As for EPOC: it's dependent on intensity and duration. Running 16mph for 10 seconds will generate less EPOC than 16mph for 60 seconds. You can play with both variables (intensity [I proxied velocity] and duration) but it's ultimately pretty meaningless anyway since EPOC factors in so little. For a good 95%+ of people it just comes down to calories burned. If you run faster you get more work done in a shorter time frame. Go slower and it's roughly the same amount of work for a longer duration. Marathon runners and other endurance athletes (sprinters too I guess if they decide to go ketogenic for some dumb reason) will have issues with carbohydrate depletion but for most people it's not a big deal. Stop looking so much into it.
Reply
Reply
post #21 of 23
1/11/09 at 5:22pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by why View Post
You have serious mental issues with feeling a need to burn X amount of calories per week. Between your hip injury that seemed to drive you crazy and others posts you've made about needing to do X miles to maintain your weight I'd say you should learn to accept a change instead of worrying about an unimportant detail like how much you're working out per week.


Is there really a ned to be a dick? It seems nearly every thread comes to this on this forum.

You say accept a change...I'd like not to if I have a chance, unless you'd like to finance a new wardrobe for me? Thats why I asked.

The previous post you refer to was a glute strain...it fuckin hurt, and I wanted it not to...I guess that means I have mental issues...at least what I don't have is the time/concern to go back and reference peoples posts on an internet fashion forum...so I got that going for me.
Reply
Reply
post #22 of 23
1/11/09 at 5:40pm
How's that being a dick? You're worried about inconsequential things and I told you to basically enjoy your life and don't sweat the small stuff.

If you didn't notice I honestly tried to help. I came into this thread hoping you'd responded with goals and instead I got rebuffed.

Anyway, nobody will be able to help you until you answer this:

Quote:
Originally Posted by why
The crux of it all is this: what are you trying to do? Change your body shape (lower body fat, increase size of certain areas, etc.)? Decrease your half marathon time? Just stay 'healthy'?
Reply
Reply
post #23 of 23
1/13/09 at 3:09pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by greg_atlanta View Post
If you can run 10 miles a day, I don't think your body is built to "fill out" by lifting weights. Are you skinny because you run, or do you run because you're skinny? I think the latter.
How much filling out are you referring to? Im by no means a monster but I do have my fair share of muscle at 190-195 @ 6' and run races from 5k to 1/2 marathons pretty much 2 weekends a month, 9 months a year. Im sure if I was looking to be a monster this may affect things but with a proper diet, which is probably 60-70% of gaining mass with 30-40% being dedicated to the actual resistance exercises. 10 miles burns around 1750-1850 cals (give or take a few hundred depending on the person's metabolic rate) so if thats planned into the diet I dont see it detracting too much. Maybe an experiment is in order?
Reply
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Health & Body
Styleforum › Forums › Lifestyle › Health & Body › Running + Lifting