is it possible to bulk AND tone my abs simultaneously?

[Wrangell]

OK, so ' 80% Vox2 vs 170% v02 max ' instead of ' 70% Vox2 vs 170% v02 max ' ...it might yield some difference in result ...though I suspect not much.

how can you say this,the point of HIIT is to get into the anearobic area,so if your at 80% which is the anearobic area,and you stay in that for 45mins surely thats better than staying in it for short bursts.

70% V02 Max should put you at about 82% MHR for a training heartrate

80% V02 Max should put you at about 88% MHR for training heartrate.

I always assumed the aerobic heartrate zone was somewhere below 80% MHR, and that the anaerobic was somwhere around 80%+++++ MHR. But that's jut me. Where do you assume ( i.e re %MHR ) anaerobic training kicks in ?

Both 70% and 80% V02 max would seem to equate to an anaerobic training level of exertion, so that's why I said I wouldn't expect too much difference between teh 2. The difference beween the % of fat vs glycogen used at 82% vs 88% shouldn't be a huge magnitude of difference, but then again, i'd just be guessing.

 

[stroutman81]

Relevant to the topic at hand, here is a 3 part article by Alan Aragon..... someone whom I truly respect in this industry.

 

[buzz]

70% V02 Max should put you at about 82% MHR for a training heartrate

80% V02 Max should put you at about 88% MHR for training heartrate.

I always assumed the aerobic heartrate zone was somewhere below 80% MHR, and that the anaerobic was somwhere around 80%+++++ MHR. But that's jut me. Where do you assume ( i.e re %MHR ) anaerobic training kicks in ?

Both 70% and 80% V02 max would seem to equate to an anaerobic training level of exertion, so that's why I said I wouldn't expect too much difference between teh 2. The difference beween the % of fat vs glycogen used at 82% vs 88% shouldn't be a huge magnitude of difference, but then again, i'd just be guessing.

The Anaerobic Zone - 80% to 90%
Training in this zone will develop your lactic acid system. In this zone, your individual anaerobic threshold is found - sometimes referred to the point of deflection (POD). During these heart rates, the amount of fat being utilised as the main source of energy is greatly reduced and glycogen stored in the muscle is predominantly used. One of the by-products of burning this glycogen is lactic acid. There is a point at which the body can no longer remove the lactic acid from the working muscles quickly enough. This is your anaerobic threshold or POD. Through the correct training, it is possible to delay the POD by being able to increase your ability to deal with the lactic acid for a longer period of time or by pushing the POD higher.

which is from here

 

[buzz]

Relevant to the topic at hand, here is a 3 part article by Alan Aragon..... someone whom I truly respect in this industry.

as i have said a few times now i am not saying low intensity ss-cardio is better than HIIT,but IMO high intensity ss- cardio is.

 

[stroutman81]

as i have said a few times now i am not saying low intensity ss-cardio is better than HIIT,but IMO high intensity ss- cardio is.

Not sure why you are stating this. It wasn't in refute to anything you've been saying. Just a professional's take, whom I highly respect, on the topic at hand.

Calm yourself mate.

 

[mike79]

i say , no

 

[Wrangell]

The Anaerobic Zone - 80% to 90%


Training in this zone will develop your lactic acid system. In this zone, your individual anaerobic threshold is found - sometimes referred to the point of deflection (POD). During these heart rates, the amount of fat being utilised as the main source of energy is greatly reduced and glycogen stored in the muscle is predominantly used. One of the by-products of burning this glycogen is lactic acid. There is a point at which the body can no longer remove the lactic acid from the working muscles quickly enough. This is your anaerobic threshold or POD. Through the correct training, it is possible to delay the POD by being able to increase your ability to deal with the lactic acid for a longer period of time or by pushing the POD higher.

which is from here

Good. You agree with me - the ' Anaerobic Zone ' is 80%+++++++ MHR.

This is why I said I didn't think going from 70% V02 MAX TO 80% VO2 MAX......which is about 82% MHR - 88% MHR ......would yield any significant differences in results since both are relatively close in terms of anaerobic capacity.

But, if you think 80%+ MHR represents high intensity, then I suppose what you could then do is compare someone running at say 85%+/- MHR till they burn 300 calories during exercise and compare them to someone who burns 300 calories doing HIIT during exercise and see who loses more fat overall.

 

[matt182]

If someone has a specific Vo2 Max im curious as to how someone can perform at a level of 170 of vo2 max. hmmmm

 

[danny1]

this shyyyyt is bananas

 

[Chillen]

It has been amusing and educational. Through all this, only one thing matters, and I DONT CARE WHAT YOU ARGUE which is better, if the diet is crap the REST IS CRAP, and will not make a significant difference one way or the other. One can eat crap, and still lose weight (deficit as king). Lose fat (other tissue)= deficit...(even if you try to tweak the middle ground)..no matter what. Maximize this, maximize that, this is better, that is better, in the end, calorie is KING. If you eat 5,000c and need 3,000 all this arguement is for NOT. Everything BLEEDS off deficit or surplus (on the other end).

 

[buzz]

If someone has a specific Vo2 Max im curious as to how someone can perform at a level of 170 of vo2 max. hmmmm

A second group followed a high-intensity interval program. Seven students, also young and physically active, exercised five days per week using a training program similar to the Japanese speed skaters. After a 10-minute warm-up, the subjects did seven to eight sets of 20 seconds at 170% of V02max, with a 10 second rest between each bout. Pedaling speed was 90-rpm and sets were terminated when rpms dropped below 85. When subjects could complete more than 9 sets, exercise intensity was increased by 11 watts. The training protocol was altered one day per week. On that day, the students exercised for 30 minutes at 70% of V02max before doing 4 sets of 20 second intervals at 170% of V02max. This latter session was not continued to exhaustion. Again, V02max and anaerobic capacity was determined before, during and after the training.

from here

 

[buzz]

Not sure why you are stating this. It wasn't in refute to anything you've been saying. Just a professional's take, whom I highly respect, on the topic at hand.

Calm yourself mate.

1 wasnt getting annoyed mate
its just that this article you posted was about low-intensity-cardio which i wasnt recomending i am

 

[matt182]

A second group followed a high-intensity interval program. Seven students, also young and physically active, exercised five days per week using a training program similar to the Japanese speed skaters. After a 10-minute warm-up, the subjects did seven to eight sets of 20 seconds at 170% of V02max, with a 10 second rest between each bout. Pedaling speed was 90-rpm and sets were terminated when rpms dropped below 85. When subjects could complete more than 9 sets, exercise intensity was increased by 11 watts. The training protocol was altered one day per week. On that day, the students exercised for 30 minutes at 70% of V02max before doing 4 sets of 20 second intervals at 170% of V02max. This latter session was not continued to exhaustion. Again, V02max and anaerobic capacity was determined before, during and after the training.

from here

Well considering vo2 max is a measure of your maximum output i dont see how its possible overide it. owell