Temporary_User

Im a 21 yr old male. I have a lil gut. Im happy with my whole body except this lil beer belly. I would say 1-2 inches.
Ive heard that for people that are overweight, the last few inches are always the hardest. I dont know if that applies to my situation though.
I dont really eat anything bad for me, but I am a bachelor so my diet isnt the healthiest.
With my job I cant really eat 3-5 good balanced meals a day. Today for instance I ate 1 bagel w/ strawberry jam on it, and around 4-5 small BBQ chicken thighs.
I did have some Ice tea, and sprite to drink aswell. which Isnt regular, but should be cut out.

So I normally will just eat 1 small breakfast and then a decent size meal as dinner with my current job. (ive been here just over 1month)

I really hate doing crunches, and dont. Im trying to force myself (did some today) but are there any specific exercises that I can do to help me with this?
I know there isnt any quick fixes, but if i could hear do such and such for the next blah blah and youll be set, that would be motivational.
thanks any input is greatly appreciated!

ASU2003

What kind of aerobic activity do you do? I try and do something resembling exercise for a while before getting on-line and watching TV at night.

It could just be water or skin. To 'cut' and get a six pack, you have to do every thing right it seems. I need to take the same advice, as I am in the same situation. I only have a little fat in my midsection, everywhere else there is none.

Here are my tips:
1. Eat less sodium.
2. Eat fewer carbohydrates, unless you are exercising a lot.
3. Do crunches, but it won't help you burn the fat there.
4. Make sure you eat breakfast, and a large lunch. Eat a smaller dinner.
5. Drink water
6. Exercise or swim more.
7. Read one of the many magazines for tips on how to get abs.
8. Be patient. It takes time.
9. Cut back on fat and fast food. This one is hard, because it is a lot more work for us single guys to eat healthy all the time.

soccerchamp76

The only way to lose that fat is to lose overall fat over your body. You can't spot reduce, and it just so happens that genetically, males store their fat around the abdomen predominantly.

Find your metabolism, eat less calories then your BMR (basal metabolism rate), and exercise daily. Swimming is great for an overall body workout, as is running. Be patient, and as your body fat % decreases, your abs will show.

__________________
Brian Griffin: Ah, if my memory serves me, this is the physics department.
Chris Griffin: That would explain all the gravity.

jorgelito

Generally speaking, what kind of regimen or timeline can one reasonbly expect?

HoneyB

Crunches do help shape your mid-section althoug the key to losing fat is by incorporating some cardio workouts in your routine. A low-moderate intensity workout like jogging for 30-45min 3 times a week should help a lot. Another type of cardio that is easy is jumping rope, apparently 10min of rope jumping should burn as many calories as jogging.
As for the crunches, they do help, the good thing about that is that you don't need 100 of them, as long as u do it correctly you only have to do about 20-30. An awesome and effective way to do so is simply lying on your back and lifting your legs up towards the ceiling (keeping them together), doing about 25 reps never touching the floor. It might be a little tedious but it works and doesn't take up too much time.
Diet is another key factor, at the very least make sure you drink at least 10-12 8 oz. glasses of water daily. keeping yourself hydrated is crucial and will help curb your appetite. If you have a stressful job and don't have time to eat well you can always keep a few fruits or nutritional bars on you so they are there to grab if you start to feel hungry and keep you somewhat satisfied until you get home and cook a good meal.
I hope this somewhat helps!

jmad

The simplest thing you can do is this: go for a hard run(whatever your physical shape allows) for about 30 minutes 3 to 5 times a week. You might not want to start out trying to run 6 minute miles or anything, but you need to push yourself. Do a few minutes of non-intense crunches before and after the run. This will help tone your midsection, but more impotantly, will make your side-aches hurt less or go away completely. Eat bananas on a daily basis if you have a problem with cramps(Potassium > muscle cramps).

Running is the best way to lose weight, because anyone can do it, and if you push yourself you don't have to do it every day. It also really helps curb your appetite, especially for junk food. After a long run, the only thing I can think of is cooking a healthy meal. The idea of eating a bag of Doritos after a run would probably make me vomit(I have a somewhat weak stomach tho!). Remember, don't try to run a marathon. Work your way up to a pace that you can't maintain for more than an hour, and keep at it for about 20 minutes.

thingstodo

Sounds like good advice to me.

A heart monitor - if you learn to use one right - will help you train your body to process fat more efficiently as fuel.

__________________
If you're wringing your hands you can't roll up your shirt sleeves.

Stangers have the best candy.

dlish

my mrs is a dietician and nutritionist, so i can tell you a little about reducing your weaight and eating healthy.

someone up there mentioned eating less sodium. sodium (salt) helps your body retain water. by reducing salt you reduce the water retention in your body. this si done by many bodybuilders just before competition so they can rip up bigtime. it works but its dangerous if taken to extremes.

for reducing that beer gut, its all about basic arithmetic really. your calorie intake should be less than your calories burnt for the day. by keeping that in mind, you will naturally start losing weight automaticaly, without a so-called 'diet'. your body will deplete slowly. the faster you take it off, the bigger the chances are of putting it back on.

if you do want to make a drastic change to your diet, the try cutting out carbs in your diet. try brown breads, cut down on your pastas, potatoes, breads and. increase your protein intake and increase your physcial activity. in a week you'll be able to tell the difference.

everyone has 'abs'. they are just a muscle that is always there. even obese people have abs. the best way to get 'abs' is to exercise it, it will grow and hence you'll be able to see it more.

depends how hard your really want to take it, but slow and steady is always best.

good luck. let us know how u go

__________________
An injustice anywhere, is an injustice everywhere

I always sign my facebook comments with ()()===========(}. Does that make me gay?
- Filthy

ASU2003

How long should this take?* It seems like I can never lose the last 3-5 pounds. Is it even possible? Maybe I have too many fat cells to completely have them all shrink and have my abs appear. I read this post: http://www.tfproject.org/tfp/showthread.php?t=105710 and understand a little more about fat.

But, I have a good diet, and am probably over exercising (bike 10 miles, run 2, swim .5) a few times a week. And I eat a healthy diet. I also do crunches, not very good one, or that many, or often enough. But I'll work on that.

In the past two months, I have seen progress. I have lost some of the extra weight I gained, but am I looking at another two months? Or will it be four? I probably just should be happy that I weigh what I do considering my lifestyle over the past 6 months (I did have a healthy diet over that time).

*This post is mainly for me to look back on in a few months too see how long it takes. Maintaining a healthy weight is a lot easier than loosing it or gaining muscle. I'll see how long it will take me, and won't stop until I have a six pack. It should be a fun experiment for the summer.

thingstodo

They say 2 lbs. a week is a good loss pace.

You may be overdoing it with your workout, which means that your body isn't as efficient as it could be processing fat for fuel. That's counterproductive to weight loss.

Check out the "So You Wanna' Lose Weight" thread in this forum...I placed a pretty long post on heart rate monitors...how to use them effectively. Since you are somewhat of a triathelete, you'll appreciate the Mark Allen stuff in there.

__________________
If you're wringing your hands you can't roll up your shirt sleeves.

Stangers have the best candy.

hannukah harry

if you really want your abs to show, you really need to do two things... build the muscles up (exercise) and get rid of the fat that's covering them (diet + exercise).

to build up your abs, you should be lifting weights (full body) and making sure that when you're doing lifts that don't involve your abs you keep them nice and tight and supporting your body. you should also do some sort of core development. crunches can be part of that, but a full core workout... it's benefits will be beyond just nice looking abs.

to get rid of the fat, your diet is essential. the people above seemed to do a pretty good job of covering that. but exercise (cardio) is also important. you should try for 30 minutes some days, but on non-lifting days do high intensity interval training (google it). the higher intensity cardio doesn't take as long and actually burns more calories (recovery included) than plain old cardio. also, you don't want to be pushing yourself really hard each day. professional runners don't, you shouldn't either. if you go 85% one day, the next day you should do 35%. hard day, light day. you really don't want to do two really hard days in a row.

hope that helps.

__________________
shabbat shalom, mother fucker! - the hebrew hammer

thingstodo

Actually, HIIT doesn't help you lose the fat, only the longer, slower low intensity stuff does that. (HIIT helps your heart.) You'll burn calories at a high rate but almost no fat. And if you use up all your sugar stores you'll leach fuel from muscles, which is why it is important to train your body to process fat for fuel.

HIIT is important as part of an overall cardio plan. It's really better to only do HIIT once per week and the low stuff the rest of the week.

__________________
If you're wringing your hands you can't roll up your shirt sleeves.

Stangers have the best candy.

hannukah harry

i'm sorry, but i and the acsm will have to disagree. you've got the two completely backwards. low intensity long time cardio will improve your cardiovascular system. HIIT will increase your anaerobic threshold, but will not do nearly as much for a full body cardiovascular improvement. and also, lower intensity cardio doesn't do as much to improve your cardio health. the acsm recommends that you work out somewhere in the 65 - 85% of your HRR in order to get the maximal benefits (my acsm guidelines book is at work, i'll double check it for the exact guidelines and post exactly what they say by the end of the weekend... if i don't forget to).

the slower you work out, the higher a % of the calories burned will come from fat. but with an increase in intensity, the calories burned shift towards more carbs than fat. here's the thing though... you'll burn more calories total working at a higher intensity. and even though those calories are coming from a higher % of carbs, lower % of fat, you'll still burn more calories from fat in the in the high intensity then you will from low intensity. the high intensitiy will also create more of a calorie deficit.

and to nitpick a bit,

you're body doesn't process fat better... exercise using a heart rate monitor (or working without one) will increase the ability of your body to bring energy molecules (fatty acids and glucose) to the exercising cells and remove waste products from them. exercising also increases the number of mitochondria in your cells and therefore increases the ability of your cells to utalize fatty acids and pyruvate as energy sources. the citric acid energy cycle doesn't become more effcient, it's just got more power plants.

i'll be a bit busy over the rest of the week, but i'll try to get back here by the end of the weekend, post some info for you about HIIT vs. low intensity cardio.

__________________
shabbat shalom, mother fucker! - the hebrew hammer

thingstodo

Well, I disagree.

You said:

"you're body doesn't process fat better... exercise using a heart rate monitor (or working without one) will increase the ability of your body to bring energy molecules (fatty acids and glucose) to the exercising cells and remove waste products from them. exercising also increases the number of mitochondria in your cells and therefore increases the ability of your cells to utalize fatty acids and pyruvate as energy sources. the citric acid energy cycle doesn't become more effcient, it's just got more power plants."

To me, that's efficiency since evrything is working smoother.

Here are a few links for you. I think Mark Allen is a pretty credible source. Lifetime Fitness has also done quite a bit of research on the subject.

http://www.duathlon.com/articles/1460

http://www.lifetimefitness.com/modul...ning_chart.pdf
See page two of the Lifetime chart. Anything above your AT makes your body use sugar for fuel, not fat. Endurance atheletes improve their endurance by training the fat processing system to eb more efficient.

__________________
If you're wringing your hands you can't roll up your shirt sleeves.

Stangers have the best candy.

Vincentt

HIIT
http://www.exrx.net/FatLoss/HIITvsET.html

The HIIT group lost over 3 times as much subcutanious fat as the ET group despite of only expending less than half as many calories.

HIIT is known for burning more fat even though it expends less calories.

__________________
.

thingstodo

Thanks for the file. It makes me realize that I guess we should define things the same way and that may be the issue I am creating.

I consider 89-90% of max to be the AT, or anearobic threshold (see the pdf file in my previous post). Below that and you're burning equal amount of fat and sugar until you get to 80% of max. Anything below 75% of max takes forever bu tis worth the time. Some training above 90% is good but isn't needed ever time you train - perhaps once a week if you're hitting cardio 4x/week.

Plus, I think 30 minutes isn't really enough when you count the warm up and cool down phases. Also, you'll need to spend a lot more time with the 75% and lower levels, probably 2:1 or more, to get the benefit. When I think endurance, I think a long time. When I think of the high stuff, it's more short bursts with perhaps 20% of the time - or about 10-12 minutes total in a 60 minute workout above 90%of max.

So, perhaps we are saying pretty much the same thing. I'm also very much into the heart numbers for the individual, which can vary greatly from person to person and by age.

__________________
If you're wringing your hands you can't roll up your shirt sleeves.

Stangers have the best candy.

hannukah harry

Yes, that is efficiency. I didn’t say it wasn’t. I said that your body does not process fat better, contradicting your statement that it does. Exercise makes your body work more efficiently. But it doesn’t “process fat better.” Let me make an analogy. If a widget company manages to produce 10% more widgets in March than in January is it because they spent February enlarging the plant and adding workers or did their January workers start to work more efficiently? If they enlarged the plant and got more workers, that’s not an increase in efficiency. If every worker in January made 10 widgets a day and all of the workers in March also made 10 widgets a day, then they must’ve added 10% more workers for the increase. The did not become 10% more efficient. End analogy. The transportation of the nutrients and waste products by the cardiovascular system does become more efficient.


After reading the Mark Allen link, I’d have to say he doesn’t really understand much about what he’s talking about. He’s a great athlete, but doesn’t seem to understand how the body works. That’s not really surprising though, there are a lot of myths about exercise floating about because a lot of bodybuilders, while they look like they’d know what they’re talking about, really don’t.

Right there is when you can stop reading. There is no single most valuable tool you can have for exercise. HRM’s are good because you can monitor and track how you’ve improved. After 6 months of running with one, you can see how much lower your HR is when you run 4 miles at an x mph pace. It can also help you in that there are days where you’re really pushing yourself while exercising but performing horribly. Is your heart rate just not up to where it should be? Is it a mental problem? Is it just “one of those days”? A HRM can help you figure that out. But you can also, generally, tell where you are by how difficult it feels. You don’t the good objective info about where your HR was and the average for the workout, etc., but it isn’t a necessary piece of equipment. Good shoes are 10x more important than a HR monitor. Proper nutrition is more important than a HR monitor.

Overtraining. If you read the rest of the article, no where does he mention that was the problem.

Eh. Your body is never in a “chemistry that only burns” carbs. If you hooked yourself up to a gas spirometer and did a maxVO2 test, you’d find that until you got to about 97-98% of your maxHR, you’d still be burning some fats. Mark Allen’s problem was that his workouts did much more towards making his heart stronger while not actually increasing the efficiency of his blood vessel network. It’s a lot like an airport increasing the number of flights it has coming in and out each day, but not building any extra hubs or runways. (It’s the same principle as when you lift weights and do high weight/low reps vs. low weight/high reps.)

This is the second or third time he’s said something in this article that makes me think he’s leaving details out. Mark Allen might know a bit about exercise physiology, might not, but he says some things that make me think he’s leaving info out. Like how did his buddy come up with the 155bpm? Did his friend put him on a treadmill and test his VO2? That’s probably my biggest problem with this article.

His body could utilize fat for fuel (or else he’d be dead), it just wasn’t trained to do it efficiently for long periods of time (ie. He did not train his body to more efficiently bring nutrients and waste to and from his exercising muscle cells. Depending on his entire exercise regimen, he may or may not have had a sufficient number of mitochondria to provide the energy he needed for endurance exercise). But I really dislike hyperbole like his statement that his body couldn’t utilize fat.

I have to temporarily call bullshit on his equation. At least in your link to the Lifetime Fitness chart, they mention it is only an estimate. Mark Allen doesn’t feel the need to. Also, the aneorbic/lactate threshold isn’t the spot where you can still burn fat as the main energy source. It’s the spot where the lactate buildup in your cells is greater than the export. It’s the point where your muscles can’t clear the lactate out of your cells fast enough and it starts to accumulate, making it more difficult for your muscles to function properly. Anyways, if you want to properly find your threshold, you can get a gas analysis (which if you notice on the Lifetime chart, it mentions that) or you can go based on a few days workouts and noting where your HR is when your run starts to get hard (when you “hit the wall”). Using an arbitrary formula won’t really tell you shit. I’d need to see how they got the formula that they use in order to consider changing my mind on that.

As someone (sorry, I’m typing this at work without an internet connection and forgot who posted it) showed in the link on HIIT, studies have shown that HIIT actually more fat loss than a slower paced long session of cardio. And the big reason? When you burn fat as your primary fuel in exercise, you’re working at level where you burn fewer calories total. It doesn’t matter if you exercise and burn 100 calories from fat or 100 calories from carbs, either way, you’ve burnt those calories and they’re gone. To lose weight you need a calorie deficeit. HIIT will cause a bigger one. So if you spend an hour a day running at a slower “fat burning” pace, you’ll end up losing less weight than if you mixed HIIT in there. Mark Allen’s biggest problem with his training was that he only worked as hard as he could. No professional athelete does that. They’ll have days where they work at 95% of their maxHR, and they’ll follow those days with working at 45% of their maxHR (actually, most probably use their HRR these days, it’s a better method). He was overtraining, which would make it so that his body could not recover fast enough to keep up with what he wanted to do, so he wasn’t able to adapt and get the benefits of his exercise. Slowing down is what helped him. A good exercise program, whether for training/competition or for weight loss/health should include both. I bet if he had trained that way from the beginning he would have found success in triathalons much sooner than he did.

Oh, and his “No Pain No Gain” credo is BS.

And… thingstodo, at the end of this post I’m responding to you said…

There are very few situations where your body does not burn both fat and sugers. When you sleep, you’re body is burning nearly 100% fat. When you’re just sitting on the couch watching TV, you’ll be burning a little more suger, but not much. When you’re working all out at your maxHR, you’ll hit 99-100% suger. Otherwise, there’s always some mix of what’s being burnt.

Now on to your second post…

This is just plain incorrect. Use the real definition, not your own. The more highly trained you are, the higher % of your maxHR you’ll be able to achieve and still be under your lactate threshold. Someone who’s very out of shape will have a much lower lactate threshold than a highly trained athlete. Exercise is never a matter of absolutes. It is always relative to the individual. Most people, including recreational altheletes, could not exercise above 80% of their maxHR for a very long time. Go to any gym in the country, I’d wager that maybe 40% would have a lactate threshold above 80% of their maxHR. The rest would probably find that 80% would tire them out really quickly. And then there’s all the people in this country who don’t work out…

warm-up and cool-down should always be considered separate from the actual exercise time. You need to spend about 20 – 30 minutes minimally to really get benefits out of a lower intensity cardio workout. The longer you work out, the better the benefits. But you don’t even need to do the workout all at one time. If you spend 30 minutes/day in your target HR range, even if it’s broken up into three 10 minutes sessions, you’ll end up getting benefits from it.


when you do the high endurance stuff, you don’t need to 10-12 minutes of a 60 minute workout. If you do 60 minutes total, you may very well end up overtraining (depends on your fitness level). A good interval training session could be done in 30 minutes.

Of course you have to wait to the end to say this! Hehe. My reading ahead might’ve helped…

Oh, and sorry about the length, I know I can be a bit long winded at times (especially when it’s a matter of something I know a lot about). And I’m bored at work, had to find something to do.

__________________
shabbat shalom, mother fucker! - the hebrew hammer

thingstodo

It would be interesting to know what you do for work that must contribute to you being such an expert on this topic. I mean, are you a trainer with proven results or a doctor or a college biology prof?

You made a pretty good attempt at debunking everything a proven athelete said, which is based on what some pretty darn good trainers out there in the world told him to do. I mean, he's won the toughest Iron Man six times but he wasn't able to make it until he got some quality outside assistance. And, I at least provided supporting documentation through someone like Allen and a major organization dedicated to fitness like Lifetime Fitness.

I'm not going to debate what you said here point-by-point. I know what a difference following these guidelines have made for me personally and for others that I have watched and discussed things with. You are certainly welcome to your opinion.

Harry...

I can't resist touching on a few points from your post.

you said...

I said that your body does not process fat better, contradicting your statement that it does. Exercise makes your body work more efficiently. But it doesn’t “process fat better.”

I said...

I disagree with what yuou said here and you've provided nothing but a widget analogy to support your point.

you said...

After reading the Mark Allen link, I’d have to say he doesn’t really understand much about what he’s talking about. He’s a great athlete, but doesn’t seem to understand how the body works. That’s not really surprising though, there are a lot of myths about exercise floating about because a lot of bodybuilders, while they look like they’d know what they’re talking about, really don’t.

I said...

Come on...he doesn't have the best trainers in the world around him so that he can win 6 Iron Mans?

you said...

Overtraining. If you read the rest of the article, no where does he mention that was the problem.

I said...

It's kind of tough to over train when you plan to ride a bike 100 miles, run 25+ and swim several more...all in one day. You've got to be able to do at least half of that in a training mode at some point to be able to do the whole thing.


you said...

Eh. Your body is never in a “chemistry that only burns” carbs. If you hooked yourself up to a gas spirometer and did a maxVO2 test, you’d find that until you got to about 97-98% of your maxHR, you’d still be burning some fats.

I said...

Well...they do hook you up at Lifetime and the AT is that point, not 98%. Some fat is very different from mostly sugar.


you said...

This is the second or third time he’s said something in this article that makes me think he’s leaving details out. Mark Allen might know a bit about exercise physiology, might not, but he says some things that make me think he’s leaving info out. Like how did his buddy come up with the 155bpm? Did his friend put him on a treadmill and test his VO2? That’s probably my biggest problem with this article.

I said...

Of course his buddy (aka trainer) tested him. That's what world class athletes do for crying out loud. Do you know who this guy is? He is the Lance of Triathalons.

you said...

Anyways, if you want to properly find your threshold, you can get a gas analysis (which if you notice on the Lifetime chart, it mentions that) or you can go based on a few days workouts and noting where your HR is when your run starts to get hard (when you “hit the wall”).

I said...

Dude...I read the chart...I'm the one that sent it to you! And by the way, my AT is 30 bpm higher (and I've been able to move it up 5 bpm over the past year) than the estimate version, which they say is just a guideline to get started.

you said...

As someone (sorry, I’m typing this at work without an internet connection and forgot who posted it) showed in the link on HIIT, studies have shown that HIIT actually more fat loss than a slower paced long session of cardio.

I said...

That comparison actually compared 30 minute sessions for both, not a longer and a shorter session.

you said...

This is just plain incorrect. Use the real definition, not your own. The more highly trained you are, the higher % of your maxHR you’ll be able to achieve and still be under your lactate threshold.

I said...

I did use the real definition...look at the chart and do the math. The more in shape you are the higher your max, so it's all the math of percentages. And I'm very clear on the fact that everyone is different. That's why there is a chart with lot's of different numbers.

you said...

when you do the high endurance stuff, you don’t need to 10-12 minutes of a 60 minute workout. If you do 60 minutes total, you may very well end up overtraining (depends on your fitness level). A good interval training session could be done in 30 minutes.

I said...

So you ass-umed that I meant 60 minutes working out and that didn't include a warm up and cool down. I consider 10 minutes warm up and 5 cool down, with more stretching folling the 60 minute session.

Again, I've provided supporting documentation from a world class athlete who has access to the best trainers in the world and a major fitness group with other top folks in their fields. You've provided only your opinions - where is your credibility? If I sound a little miffed it's because of what I say in this paragraph.

I didn't want to do this debate but I couldn't let some of the things you said go without comment. If there are typos it's because I'm not planning to proof this thing.

Now I'm finished and heading off for a two hour bike ride. I'll probably stay under my AT for most of it.

__________________
If you're wringing your hands you can't roll up your shirt sleeves.

Stangers have the best candy.

level five

Wow Wow wow. my first time here after registration and I run into a cool discussion like this one!! everyone presents some great information. i have to agree with things to do since i work out a lot. plus hannukah harry, he is right in that you did not include sourced material. much evidence has been presented and is out there for these heart rate monitors and that kind of training. i know many people that use them over anything else in their bag of tricks. i personally think that the right clothes like cool max makes a big difference in how you feel, even over shoes.

my first post--woot woot!!

hannukah harry

off topic, i cleaned up your formatting, makes it easier to read. could you use the quote format in the future? it really does make going through this a lot easier.

if you'd really like to play the credential game... i've got a bachelors in exercise science, i'm an ace certified personal trainer (ace = american council on exercise) and run a corporate fitness center. i also have minor experience in cardiac rehab, orthotics/prothetics (even if i can't spell them right), physical therapy and exercise physiology.

mark allen's being a "prove athelete" doesn't mean he knows jack or shit. it means he done did good. have you ever known a good athelete who never trains or practices and still performs very well? look at most body builders. if you go by a lot of what they do, adn what they tell you, you'll end up with a lot of misinformation and half-truths. if i have the right genetics, i could lift with horrible form and too much weight and with the wrong number of sets, reps, and choices of lifts and still get a massive physique. mark allen trained really damn hard and dumb and still out performed what most people could do. it wasn't until he started training smart that made him a champion. and if you read his page, he's generally wrong about how the body works, etc. so i'll go over this one more time for you. by the way, a link to a pdf from a gym is hardly documentation. especially when a) it says that his formula (which he claims is the way to do it) is the least accurate of the three methods of determining your lactate threshold and b) is far from a scientific backing.

uhm... you just did basically go point-by-point. and i didn't say that his heart rate training program wouldn't work, it will. there's a smarter way then his (the method he gives in the last 1 or 2 paragraphs), but it'lld efinatly work. you are also welcome to your opinoins, but the part we've been debating hasn't really been opinion, it's been fact...

the widget analogy was in reference to my previos post (the last part of post #13). i was trying to make an analogy about how the cell makes energy that hopefully you would understand. appearantly, i failed in that. it is possible that i may have taken you too literally when you said "A heart monitor - if you learn to use one right - will help you train your body to process fat more efficiently as fuel. (#12)" but based on the previous posts, i don't think so... if we are just arguing semantics, then i apologize. anyways, let me start over with how fat is processed for energy and why training with (or without a HR monitor) does not make your body more efficient at processing fat as fuel.

1. your heart pumps oxygenated blood through your arteries into your capallaries where the oxygen and glucose, fatty acids and nutrients in the blood are transported into cells. from the cells, waste products of the metabolic pathways are dumped into the blood which is then passed into the veins which are then filted, put through the lungs to get reoxygenated and sent back trhough your circulatory system.

2. fat and pyruvate (by-product of glycolysis) are turned into energy in the mitochondria (powerplant) of cells. they are turned into atp through the krebs/citric acid cycle. they are not burned anywehre else in the cell except the mitochondria.

now, you can not make the krebs cycle more efficient. it's impossible. in a widget factory, you can make the production line more efficient by combining two tasks into one, removing redundant steps, etc. you can not do that in the krebs cycle. it is what it is and that's all that it is. you skip a step and from that point on the molecules in the cycle don't yeild any energy. you can not make your body more effiecient as processing fat as a fuel. through cardio exercise, you can make it so that there are more blood vessels that come and go from your muscles so that more blood (and therefore more O2 and nutrients) can get to and from the cells. with exercise you can increase the number of mitochondria in your cells. that does not make it more efficient. otherwise a factory could just a 2nd widget line and claim that the new output of the two lines is more efficient. it's not. its that you've got more people (mitochondria) doing the work. that's not efficiency. the transportation of O2 and nutrients/waste will be more efficient because they'll be able to get into and out of teh cell more easily.

does that help? if not then someone else will have to explain it, because i can't think of another way to describe efficiency.



did barry bonds surpass ruth's homerun count because of good trainers or steroids? yes mark allen had good trainers. otherwise he'd still be stuck at his idiotic "no pain no gain" workout full time. if he wants to post about things he doesn't seem to quite understand, he should let the trainers do it for him.

it's very easy to overtrain when you're planning on riding 100 miles, run 25+ and swim several more. our bodies are not very good at staying uninjured when putting that much strain on them. most marathon runners do not run a full marathon each day, each week. most will maybe do a full practice marathon every 2-4 weeks. they train hard one day and then light the next to give their body time to recover. that's why his "no pain no gain" training didn't work for him. he worked himself so hard that at some point his body just did not have the time to fully recover and adapt to his workouts. and he was only training one energy system. by mixing them up, you can recover from the previous days workout and see good results. that part of what his trainers had him doing.


no, if they hook a normal person up at lifetime, the normal persons LT will be less than 80% their maxHR. A trained athelete will have a LT in the 80-90% maxHR range. most people do not. everyone has the ability to get theirs up there, but that takes lots and lots of training, which most people don't do.


did he? we weren't told that. according to his story, his buddy just told him to work at a much slower pace. and then we're given an equation that's an estimation of your lactate threshold. now, i'd assume also that his trainers did test him, but i'm very curious as to why he leaves out what seems to be rather important details.

good for you (no sarcasm). but doesn't that tell you how that chart isn't quite right? just like you can't say that someone who weights 240lbs is obese (they could be michael jordan), you can't use a little chart like that as more than a mere guideline. and that estimation does not take into account nearly as much for it to be worth a whole lot in my opinion. you know those little charts on treadmills and what not that tell you whether or not you're in the "fat burning zone" or "cardio zone"? those aren't worth a whole lot.

not really. they both started at 30min but then the endurance group ended up doing 45min sessions while the HIIT group stayed at a duratoin of 30min. but what i really meant was "why bother running for 60 minutes when you can get the same fatloss from a shorter exercise session?" why spend 60 minutes on a treadmill when you can spend 30 doing HIIT? Hell, since the subjects lost 3 times more bodyfat doing HIIT, one could extrapolate that they could do 1/3 of the time that the endurance people did and still lose the same amount of fat as the endurance people.

no, you didn't. to quote you, in post #16, "I consider 89-90% of max to be the AT, or anearobic threshold (see the pdf file in my previous post). Below that and you're burning equal amount of fat and sugar until you get to 80% of max." that is wrong. it doesn't matter what you consider to be the AT. each persons is different. for a highly trained athelete, they'll have an AT at 89-90% of their maxHR. but the lactate threshold isn't defined by a heart rate. it is defined by the inflection point on a graph where the lactic acid being generated is greater than that being removed. until that point, you are removing the lactic acid at a rate equal to or greater than it is being created. it is not based on a specific heart rate or percent of your maxHR. you can improve your LT by training around the HR that corresponds to that inflection point.

warm-up, cool down and stretching are not part of the "workout." when someone talks about doing 60 minutes on the bike, they don't generally mean from the time they get on to the time they get off, they mean the time working in their target HR zone. and fyi, 1) cool down is a lot more important than the warmup, 2) stretching after working out isn't that important (unless you're participating in a sport that requires lots of flexibility).

a chart from a health club and an article from an athelete is not supporting documentation.

warning: you might want to use IE to look at these sources. i was having problems doing it with

firefox.

on stretching (to preempt responses)


is that enough citing for you? if not, i'll do more...







heya... welcome! you're right i didn't include sourced material. but i didn't think some of the basics (like how a cell makes energy) needed sources. and i'm still gonna let you google that one, even though i explained it for you (general you, not you you). now don't get me wrong, i'm a fan of HR monitors, i have and use one. and if you're training for competition, they're an important tool to have. but they aren't absolutely necessary. a good pair of shoes are. get crappy shoes and you'll be getting nice little stress injuries soon enough. proper clothing is also important. on a warm day you need to be wearing clothes that don't overheat you and on cold days you need clothes that will keep you warm but also wick away the sweat.

__________________
shabbat shalom, mother fucker! - the hebrew hammer

level five

you are one weird character with way too much time on your hands. after reading all you wrote here i had to see what else you had out there. i can see you must think you're an expert on everything with all you are involved in. you must have fun trying to trash other people.

go with the flow man or you'll be one burnt out hebrew hammer.

hannukah harry

eh. took the bait, tasted salty.

__________________
shabbat shalom, mother fucker! - the hebrew hammer

thingstodo

I am quite confident that what I have written here is accurate and works. I've seen the results on members of the gym I use.

Moreover, I have experienced the results myself, both in percent of body fat reduction and overall endurance. Both of these improvements came with no change in my diet since I was already maintaining a healthy diet of organics with no refined foods, trans fats or high fructose. And I didn't change the amount I food I eat either. It was all in my workout routine.

The interesting thing is that my weight decrease was very minimal while body fat went down significantly. I'm 50; it becomes more difficult to maintain muscle mass as you get older but that wasn't a problem either.

Temporary user... you now have an array of methods from which to chose. Some old school and some more cutting edge. You decide which is which. Let us know what you learn!

__________________
If you're wringing your hands you can't roll up your shirt sleeves.

Stangers have the best candy.

thingstodo

I ran across some material at the gym a few days ago. I'll share both items with you now, along with links.

http://www.active.com/story.cfm?story_id=12408

Aerobic base training: Going slower to get faster
By Matt Russ
For Active.com
November 08, 2005

One of the hardest concepts for an athlete to understand and implement is base training. It's counterintuitive to run or bike slowly in order to gain performance later in the season.
It's also very difficult to take a step back from the intense training you were doing a few weeks ago, and bring the speed and pace way down. But if you have the discipline to train aerobically for a period of time, when everyone else is still hammering away, it will pay you dividends down the road.
First and foremost you need a break. I prescribe a three- to four-week transition phase at the end of each season and immediately follow it with base training. Transition is a time to rest and recover both physically and mentally.

We don't take total time off because the fitness loss takes too long to make up. Instead I give my athletes maximum flexibility with their training, plenty of rest, and let them leave the heart rate monitor at home. This gives them a few weeks to refocus before we begin structured base training.
You can't train hard year round without taking regular periods of reduced volume and intensity. If you do, you'll find yourself burned out, over trained and perhaps injured. You'll also find your performance degrading rather than improving. Most athletes build base in the fall and winter when there aren't a lot of races. If one of my athletes wants to race during base we call it a "C" fun/training race and don't set any performance goals.
Physiology of base training
There are two basic energy systems you use when training: anaerobic and aerobic. Unfortunately, you can't build both your aerobic and anaerobic systems at the same time very well. The idea behind base training is to train your aerobic energy system specifically and solely.
Why is this important? The more work you perform aerobically, or in the presence of oxygen, the more efficient you are. Prolonged aerobic training produces muscular adaptations that improve oxygen transport to the muscles, reduces the rate of lactate formation, improves the rate of lactate removal and increases energy production and utilization. These adaptations occur slowly over time.
Fat is a primary fuel source for the aerobic energy system. Over the course of a base period your body learns to break down and utilize fat as an energy source more efficiently. As an added bonus, this adaptation helps post-exercise fat metabolism as well.
This is an important factor, especially for long-distance athletes. The fat we have in our bodies could provide enough energy to perform many distance events back to back, whereas muscle glycogen depletion can occur in as little as one hour. The less muscle glycogen you utilize, the more efficient you are. Contrary to the aerobic system, the anaerobic system consumes carbohydrate rapidly and the byproduct is lactic acid.
Other adaptations of aerobic training include increased stroke volume of the heart, capillary density and mitochondrial density. Stroke volume increase simply means that your heart pumps more blood per beat. Mitochondria are structures within muscle cells that produce energy from fat and carbohydrate oxidation. Think of them as tiny batteries for muscle contractions.

Regular endurance training can double these structures.1 By increasing capillary density we can effectively transport more blood to the working muscles. The process of building capillaries occurs gradually. Because high-stress training breaks down capillaries, base training is best for allowing the slow growth of capillaries.
Base progression
There should be progression during base season as with any other training period. I normally prescribe 12-16 weeks of base training. This will vary with the athlete's fitness level, and the type of event they will be peaking for. Over the course of base, I progress from the low end of the aerobic energy system and gradually proceed in steps to the high end. The heart rate zones I use fall into the 71- to 90-percent range of lactate threshold or 61 to 80 percent of max heart rate.
I also incorporate specific strength training at an aerobic level. This entails different types of low-cadence cycling and slow hill running or even walking. These workouts also increase in volume throughout base. Base training is an excellent time to work on form and economy as well. As intensities increase later in the season, it's harder to concentrate on form.
By establishing good economy habits early in the season, the you'll carry them forward. It's also important to incorporate drills and technique work when you're training at low intensity to keep boredom at bay. Base training doesn't mean you'll never move fast. Run strides, foot speed drills and fast pedal work can all be integrated. Towards the end of base, I start power work but use brief durations and full recovery between efforts.
How does this transfer into performance gain?
Let me give you a hypothetical example. Suppose athlete Sam runs a seven-minute mile at lactate threshold. His fastest aerobic pace, or aerobic threshold, is an eight-minute mile. We start off Sam's base training at the low end aerobic zones at which he runs a nine-minute mile and he begrudgingly complies. Over the course of his 12-week base program the above mentioned adaptations occur.
At the end of his base season he runs a 7:30-minute mile -- aerobically. This is the "base" for Sam to build on for the rest of his season. Improving on the previous season is now more obtainable with proper training. If Sam's race is an Ironman, in which the aerobic energy system is used predominantly, this improvement in aerobic speed is crucial.
Now the hard part ...
The hard part of base training is having the discipline to train at these low intensities. It may mean running very slowly or even walking. It may mean separating from your training group in order to pursue your individual goals. It also means avoiding the contest of egos that group training often turns into.
If you can find a training partner with similar goals and fitness level you may be able to train with them, but more often I see base work go awry. Even spending short amounts of time above your aerobic zone degrades the workout.
The area between the top of the aerobic threshold and anaerobic threshold is somewhat of a no-man's-land of fitness. It's a mix of aerobic and anaerobic states. For the amount of effort the athlete puts forth, not a whole lot of fitness is produced. It doesn't train the aerobic or anaerobic energy system to a high degree.
This area does have its place in training; it's just not in base season. Unfortunately this area is where I find a lot of athletes spending the majority of their seasons, which retards aerobic development. The athlete's heart rate shoots up to this zone with little power or speed being produced when it gets there.
Another issue is having accurate zones. I regularly performance test my athletes in order to ensure their zones are correct and to confirm their training. After performing many of these tests, and comparing them to race data, I get a very clear estimate of lactate threshold. I use a percentage of LTHR to determine individual zones.
I also recommend validation through clinical testing. I have witnessed athletes using zones that are several years old. Assuming fitness has improved over this time, their zones would no longer be accurate and they may have spent an entire base season training the wrong energy system.
You have to let your anaerobic system atrophy during base. This means you'll lose some of your anaerobic endurance and the ability to sustain speed near lactate threshold. Expect to lose some top end coming out of base, but this is what you're going to spend the rest of your season working on. It often takes several seasons to see the result of sound base training if you're a novice athlete. Be patient, it's a slow process that can't be rushed, but the sooner you get started the faster you'll be.
Reference
Holloszy, J. Biochemical adaptations in muscle. Journal of Biological Chemistry 242: 2278-2282, 167.
Matt Russ has coached and trained athletes for over 10 years around the country and internationally. He currently holds licenses by USAT, USATF, and is an Expert level USAC coach. Matt has coached athletes for CTS (Carmichael Training Systems), and has been certified by Joe Friel's Ultrafit Association. Visit www.thesportfactory.com for more info.

I would think this guy has some credibility since he works for the same company that trained Lance.

Here's one more regardingfat:

http://www.thesportfactory.com/factsonfat.shtml

A Few Facts on Fat
by coach Matt Russ

Fat is the enemy right? If you are trying to achieve a more effective power to weight ratio body fat is the ballast you want to drop, however, during endurance training and events fat is the fuel source you want to utilize the most. Endurance sport efficiency is largely dependant upon access and utilization of fat as a fuel source. Working at an intensity that results in the highest fat oxidation (Fatmax) is the key to success in long endurance events.

• Working at intensities higher intensities above Fatmax are costly in terms of carbohydrate usage. Not only does fat utilization decrease but carbohydrate calorie contribution increases dramatically. Typical Fatmax is 35-40 grams per hour.
• Carbohydrate has less than half the energy per gram as fat. This means you use twice the carbohydrate calories to equal the cost of one gram of fat.
• When carbohydrate stores are depleted in the body the amount of energy you can produce is significantly reduced.
• A typical athlete will have enough energy stored in body fat to perform several marathons back to back.
• Even though you may burn hundreds of calories in carbohydrate per hour you can only take in a limited amount, usually 60-80g per hour on the bike or 240-320 calories. The harder you are working the harder it will be to take consume calories.
• Fast twitch muscle fibers utilize more carbohydrate than slow twitch fibers. This means higher cadences and less pedal forces will utilize more slow twitch fibers and fat as a fuel source.

So, that extra spare tire you are carrying is actually good then? Sorry, body fat is not metabolically active, does not directly contribute to speed, may hinder cooling, increases aerodynamic drag, and indirectly increases VO2 max if you were to compare yourself at a lower body fat percentage. Even if you are as low as 5% body fat you have plenty for your event. But being aerobically efficient and utilizing fat stores for events such as road races or long course triathlon is very important. These events are as much about conserving energy as utilizing it. Utilizing fat optimally will depend on you knowing your energy sources, at what intensity they are utilized at, and how to pace yourself appropriately.

References
Peak Performance Cycling; number 224: 1-4

__________________
If you're wringing your hands you can't roll up your shirt sleeves.

Stangers have the best candy.

newtx

Lots of good info here. I only know that that watching what you eat and walking/running 2+ miles a day isn't working for me.

thingstodo

Maybe you need to give it some time? Adding lifting to the mix can increase lean muscle mass and also boost your metabolism after you work out.

Also, it can be amazing what you eat if you keep a food log. I tried that once a learned a lot.

__________________
If you're wringing your hands you can't roll up your shirt sleeves.

Stangers have the best candy.