The weights vs cardio experiment
Discussion
pilchardthecat said:
GBDG said:
The "experiment" isn't really proving anything.
...There is no way to burn as many calories doing weights as there is doing cardio. ...
I mostly agree, other than to say it's proving what i thought to be profoundly obvious, and which you also seem to think of as a simple fact......but many people don't accept the statement above - and the internet is full of advice telling overweight/undertrained/unfit people to forget about cardio and do a 3x1hour/week weightlifiting regime, because it "burns more calories"...There is no way to burn as many calories doing weights as there is doing cardio. ...
HonestIago said:
....
There is a bunch of broscience out there about cardio hindering muscle gain etc but it is GARBAGE unless perhaps you are a 250lbs+ IFBB pro. When cutting you have to be slightly careful ie if fasted keep it to a moderate intensity and not for too long (say 1hr).
Interesting - this where my thoughts are heading. I'm thinking a 1 hour chest session on the weights followed by a 45 minute bike ride...... There is a bunch of broscience out there about cardio hindering muscle gain etc but it is GARBAGE unless perhaps you are a 250lbs+ IFBB pro. When cutting you have to be slightly careful ie if fasted keep it to a moderate intensity and not for too long (say 1hr).
HonestIago said:
Out of interest what does a chest session look like for you? 45mins on bike afterwards is great if you don't get bored!
This week i did- bench 4x8
- machine flys 3x10
- incline bench 4x7
- dumbell flys 4x8
- single dumbell front raise 3x10
I have some holiday to use up so i thought i'd take a few afternoons off and do some mega-cardio on top
I've got to that age now where i have almost limitless endurance for cardio. I'd probably start running marathons but i over-pronate and running hurts (despite various orthotics/shoes)GBDG said:
HonestIago said:
No offence but any reference to how sprinters "look" (assuming you mean olympic level) is null and void. At the top level they are all off their pecs on AAS, without exception.
Hmm... I don't know if that is true, and neither do you! Even if it were true, I've looked at the training sprinters do, and you're talking about taking some of the most genetically gifted athletes on earth, with an extremely high composition of twitch muscle fibre, putting them on strict perfect nutrition from their early teens, training them 6 days per week, several times per day.They also do loads of weight training and HIIT. And you don't think that they could achieve a physique like that naturally?
Usain Bolt has been running insanely fast times since he was 14/15. Most sprinters would have been selected to start training aged 12 - 15, and would only have been chosen based upon times of sub 11.5 seconds at those ages. Hell, the school record at my high school was around 11 seconds.
Sorry to drag thread off topic OP!
GBDG said:
pilchardthecat said:
This week i did
- bench 4x8
- machine flys 3x10
- incline bench 4x7
- dumbell flys 4x8
- single dumbell front raise 3x10
Front raises are a shoulder exercise :S- bench 4x8
- machine flys 3x10
- incline bench 4x7
- dumbell flys 4x8
- single dumbell front raise 3x10
pilchardthecat said:
HonestIago said:
Out of interest what does a chest session look like for you? 45mins on bike afterwards is great if you don't get bored!
This week i did- bench 4x8
- machine flys 3x10
- incline bench 4x7
- dumbell flys 4x8
- single dumbell front raise 3x10
I have some holiday to use up so i thought i'd take a few afternoons off and do some mega-cardio on top
I've got to that age now where i have almost limitless endurance for cardio. I'd probably start running marathons but i over-pronate and running hurts (despite various orthotics/shoes)Bench Press
2 sets (excluding warmups: one heavy then a back-down)
Incline Bench
as above
DB Flys (try on an incline its better
)2-3 sets to failure 10+ reps
Machine Flys
as above
If your intensity/work ethic is there that is PLENTY volume for chest. Sorry if that's unwelcome advice!
HonestIago said:
If your intensity/work ethic is there that is PLENTY volume for chest. Sorry if that's unwelcome advice!
all advice is welcome I am gradually moving towards the heavier/fewer reps approach, though it is difficult psychologically. Will it set me back doing 5 exercises per muscle group?
pilchardthecat said:
GBDG said:
The "experiment" isn't really proving anything.
...There is no way to burn as many calories doing weights as there is doing cardio. ...
I mostly agree, other than to say it's proving what i thought to be profoundly obvious, and which you also seem to think of as a simple fact......but many people don't accept the statement above - and the internet is full of advice telling overweight/undertrained/unfit people to forget about cardio and do a 3x1hour/week weightlifiting regime, because it "burns more calories"...There is no way to burn as many calories doing weights as there is doing cardio. ...
HonestIago said:
....
There is a bunch of broscience out there about cardio hindering muscle gain etc but it is GARBAGE unless perhaps you are a 250lbs+ IFBB pro. When cutting you have to be slightly careful ie if fasted keep it to a moderate intensity and not for too long (say 1hr).
Interesting - this where my thoughts are heading. I'm thinking a 1 hour chest session on the weights followed by a 45 minute bike ride...... There is a bunch of broscience out there about cardio hindering muscle gain etc but it is GARBAGE unless perhaps you are a 250lbs+ IFBB pro. When cutting you have to be slightly careful ie if fasted keep it to a moderate intensity and not for too long (say 1hr).
As for the broscience, well its quite simple really if you continue to train and exhaust the body you're not going to be able to feed it what would help growth.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC212916...
article said:
Thus Esmark et al [16] investigated the timing of protein intake after exercise on muscle hypertrophy and strength. This study used a milk and soy protein supplement (containing 10 g protein (from skimmed milk and soybean), 7 g carbohydrate and 3.3 g lipid) instead of an amino acid mixture. Although protein synthesis was not calculated in this study, measurements of hypertrophy were made. As previously noted, muscular hypertrophy is the result of net protein synthesis. The results of the Esmark study indicated that skeletal muscle hypertrophy was significantly increased after resistance training when a protein supplement was taken. The findings also suggested that when the supplement was taken immediately after the training versus two hours later the hypertrophic response was greater. In the most recent study by Tipton and collegues, [17] they evaluated the effects of casein and whey protein ingestion on protein balance after resistance training. Twenty three subjects consumed one of three drinks 1 hour after a bout of leg extensions. Subjects consumed either placebo, 20 g of casein protein, or 20 g of whey protein. The results indicated that ingestion of whey or casein protein after a bout of resistance exercise increases net muscle protein synthesis. In a recent review Rennie and collegues [18] concluded that there is no doubt that increasing amino acid concentrations by intravenous infusion, meal feeding, or ingestion of free amino acids increases muscle protein synthesis. They also concluded that in the post exercise period increased availability of amino acids enhances muscle protein synthesis. These studies have clearly defined three things. First, resistance training decreases the net negative protein balance. By increasing protein synthesis at a greater rate than protein degradation, resistance training decreases net negative protein balance. Second, these findings suggest that resistance training decreases net negative protein balance regardless of fed or fasting state. Finally, amino acid or protein supplementation enhances protein synthesis and suppresses degradation, resulting in net protein synthesis. Recent studies have highlighted the importance of consuming different nutrients in varying quantities before or after resistance training. While a detailed breakdown of these considerations are beyond the scope of this review, the interested reader is encouraged to read the following articles that focus specifically on these considerations
Cardio can be done but doing an hour of cardio after a heavy weights session isn't a good idea for the above reasons. From what I can see it seems you are confused about what you are trying to achieve, most folk have to gain some fat to also gain some muscle, now I'm not saying you've got to balloon but trying to lose weight whilst gaining muscle isn't likely to get you anything other than disappointment.
For most comes the realisation you will need to gain some element of fat to gain muscle if you are not chemically enhanced otherwise gaining muscle may either be a exceptionally slow process if you do actually achieve anything at all.
Ordinary_Chap said:
Cardio can be done but doing an hour of cardio after a heavy weights session isn't a good idea for the above reasons.
From what I can see it seems you are confused about what you are trying to achieve, most folk have to gain some fat to also gain some muscle, now I'm not saying you've got to balloon but trying to lose weight whilst gaining muscle isn't likely to get you anything other than disappointment.
For most comes the realisation you will need to gain some element of fat to gain muscle if you are not chemically enhanced otherwise gaining muscle may either be a exceptionally slow process if you do actually achieve anything at all.
Interesting....From what I can see it seems you are confused about what you are trying to achieve, most folk have to gain some fat to also gain some muscle, now I'm not saying you've got to balloon but trying to lose weight whilst gaining muscle isn't likely to get you anything other than disappointment.
For most comes the realisation you will need to gain some element of fat to gain muscle if you are not chemically enhanced otherwise gaining muscle may either be a exceptionally slow process if you do actually achieve anything at all.
"Recent studies have highlighted the importance of consuming different nutrients in varying quantities before or after resistance training."
Can't one simply drink the shake 30 minutes prior to training? and thus negate the negative effect to which you refer?
Or what if i chomp a protein bar and then hop on the bike?
I take your point though, i guess it is the holy grail
If you train like a long distance runner at some point you will end up looking like one, i.e very little muscle mass "skinny fat"
Wouldnt do more than 2-3 exercises per body part per session; obv not working them hard enoungh for example chest would be something like;
bench press 4 x 6-8 reps
incline db press 4 x 10 - 12 reps
flys 4 x 10 -12 reps
focus on full range of motion and a good tempo
Wouldnt do more than 2-3 exercises per body part per session; obv not working them hard enoungh for example chest would be something like;
bench press 4 x 6-8 reps
incline db press 4 x 10 - 12 reps
flys 4 x 10 -12 reps
focus on full range of motion and a good tempo
pilchardthecat said:
Ordinary_Chap said:
Cardio can be done but doing an hour of cardio after a heavy weights session isn't a good idea for the above reasons.
From what I can see it seems you are confused about what you are trying to achieve, most folk have to gain some fat to also gain some muscle, now I'm not saying you've got to balloon but trying to lose weight whilst gaining muscle isn't likely to get you anything other than disappointment.
For most comes the realisation you will need to gain some element of fat to gain muscle if you are not chemically enhanced otherwise gaining muscle may either be a exceptionally slow process if you do actually achieve anything at all.
Interesting....From what I can see it seems you are confused about what you are trying to achieve, most folk have to gain some fat to also gain some muscle, now I'm not saying you've got to balloon but trying to lose weight whilst gaining muscle isn't likely to get you anything other than disappointment.
For most comes the realisation you will need to gain some element of fat to gain muscle if you are not chemically enhanced otherwise gaining muscle may either be a exceptionally slow process if you do actually achieve anything at all.
"Recent studies have highlighted the importance of consuming different nutrients in varying quantities before or after resistance training."
Can't one simply drink the shake 30 minutes prior to training? and thus negate the negative effect to which you refer?
Or what if i chomp a protein bar and then hop on the bike?
I take your point though, i guess it is the holy grail
Most folk (not all but most) can only do one thing effectively and thats either grow and often gain some element of fat or lose fat and shrink to some degree.
It sounds like you're trying to do both at the same time.
Personally I'd focus on your diet as opposed to trying to do lots of long cardio sessions if fat becomes a problem although I personally don't worry about a small amount of fat when I'm trying to grow.
The only effective way I've ever seen folk short cut this process is using steriods, hgh, peps, insulin etc.
Chaz9950 said:
Now, I don't want to shoot you down in flames, but....
If you could put on 3.2lbs in one month, in a year you could conceivably be competing on an amateur bodybuilding stage.
But that's actually seemingly possible, right, if you're committed enough? The chap below, at over 40, entered a US STATE bodybuilding comp after six months training from a fairly modest starting point, though it would appear with massive effort...If you could put on 3.2lbs in one month, in a year you could conceivably be competing on an amateur bodybuilding stage.
Edited by Chaz9950 on Thursday 17th May 23:33
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kuygZX3HKSQ
I know nothing about such things but this chap's efforts certainly surprised me...
Halb said:
Ordinary_Chap said:
After as there has always been a lot more research to show that is most effective with a carb spike.
Ta OC. Do you have a preference between casein or whey?Casein is good before bed as its slowly digested and can help recovery during sleep.
SunDiver said:
But that's actually seemingly possible, right, if you're committed enough? The chap below, at over 40, entered a US STATE bodybuilding comp after six months training from a fairly modest starting point, though it would appear with massive effort...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kuygZX3HKSQ
That doesn't look natural to me, not in 6 months. Where the hell did those lats come from!http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kuygZX3HKSQ
HonestIago said:
I agree they are very genetically gifted but AAS can be the difference between a 9.7 and a 10sec 100m. People are very naive about how widespread drugs are in sport. The testing is a joke and can easily be subverted, this is why I have zero interest in the forthcoming Olympics. I wish they would just forget testing the athletes and stop feeding the public a pack of lies. Dwayne Chambers is a case in point; he has been vilified as a "cheat" by the press yet the only difference is he got caught. I do not believe for a nanosecond that Usain Bolt is natural but that's just my opinion of course.
Sorry to drag thread off topic OP!
Why? Out of interest, any real evidence?Sorry to drag thread off topic OP!
Of course it is your opinion, but the genetic roulette is often very much under-played, possibly in this sub-fora more than others. The real world gives us some very odd examples for some even odder reasons.
DukeDickson said:
HonestIago said:
I agree they are very genetically gifted but AAS can be the difference between a 9.7 and a 10sec 100m. People are very naive about how widespread drugs are in sport. The testing is a joke and can easily be subverted, this is why I have zero interest in the forthcoming Olympics. I wish they would just forget testing the athletes and stop feeding the public a pack of lies. Dwayne Chambers is a case in point; he has been vilified as a "cheat" by the press yet the only difference is he got caught. I do not believe for a nanosecond that Usain Bolt is natural but that's just my opinion of course.
Sorry to drag thread off topic OP!
Why? Out of interest, any real evidence?Sorry to drag thread off topic OP!
Of course it is your opinion, but the genetic roulette is often very much under-played, possibly in this sub-fora more than others. The real world gives us some very odd examples for some even odder reasons.
Another prime example in sport is rugby at both top club and international level. Yes professionalisation has made the sport more competitive and there is a greater incentive for players to be bigger/stronger/faster, but does anyone really believe its all down to them just adding more weight training to the players' schedules?! Notice all the much leaner/athletic forwards these days still coming in at 110kg+ ...and the backs who weigh 90-100kg or more even and still run 100m in 11s. Stats like these are not uncommon at the top level and and I have no idea why the general public don't question the supposed "testing" process more. Welsh winger George North (google him) is a particularly good example; 20 years old and physically looks like a freak of nature with just a couple of years of weight training...if people want to believe that's not drug-assisted then fair play to them, but its naive in the extreme.
Obviously rugby is just one other example, but its one I'm more interested in so have paid a bit more attention. Athletics is equally bad for it I have no doubt.
HonestIago said:
DukeDickson said:
HonestIago said:
I agree they are very genetically gifted but AAS can be the difference between a 9.7 and a 10sec 100m. People are very naive about how widespread drugs are in sport. The testing is a joke and can easily be subverted, this is why I have zero interest in the forthcoming Olympics. I wish they would just forget testing the athletes and stop feeding the public a pack of lies. Dwayne Chambers is a case in point; he has been vilified as a "cheat" by the press yet the only difference is he got caught. I do not believe for a nanosecond that Usain Bolt is natural but that's just my opinion of course.
Sorry to drag thread off topic OP!
Why? Out of interest, any real evidence?Sorry to drag thread off topic OP!
Of course it is your opinion, but the genetic roulette is often very much under-played, possibly in this sub-fora more than others. The real world gives us some very odd examples for some even odder reasons.
Another prime example in sport is rugby at both top club and international level. Yes professionalisation has made the sport more competitive and there is a greater incentive for players to be bigger/stronger/faster, but does anyone really believe its all down to them just adding more weight training to the players' schedules?! Notice all the much leaner/athletic forwards these days still coming in at 110kg+ ...and the backs who weigh 90-100kg or more even and still run 100m in 11s. Stats like these are not uncommon at the top level and and I have no idea why the general public don't question the supposed "testing" process more. Welsh winger George North (google him) is a particularly good example; 20 years old and physically looks like a freak of nature with just a couple of years of weight training...if people want to believe that's not drug-assisted then fair play to them, but its naive in the extreme.
Obviously rugby is just one other example, but its one I'm more interested in so have paid a bit more attention. Athletics is equally bad for it I have no doubt.
Drugs are extraordinarily common among top athletes.
Want an extra 20-30% to win the competition you strive for? Or how about funding the career you have by winning or being in the top 5 and thus getting lucrative sponsorship deals?
Gassing Station | Health Matters | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff