I have a cardio question

NO I was actually being serious..I just thought that little guy was cute. I really was saying thanks for keeping me in line. Sorry it came across differently. :beating:
 
ugachick said:
NO I was actually being serious..I just thought that little guy was cute. I really was saying thanks for keeping me in line. Sorry it came across differently. :beating:
Click to expand...

Ahhh, ok. Sorry for the assumption.

What Corn and I were both trying to say to you, just to sum it up and leave the semantics out of it.....

Slow and steady wins the race. There is a continuum with regards to cardiovascular exercise and improvement.




Walking <-----------------------------------------------> Sprinting



In between exists a host of modes of exercise. You've got jogging, intervals, tempo runs, fartleks, HIIT, etc, etc.

The idea though, is to move up the ranks of intensity as you see and feel fit. Moving up the ranks too soon could very easily do more harm than good. It could lead to things such as overreaching too soon or even overtraining, which is bad.

That's why red flags went up when you said you were shooting for HIIT.
 
Ok now the lightbulb goes off in my head. That makes much more sense. Thanks for the better explanitation there.

Traci
 
maleficent said:
'high intensity' is totally relative to the person who's doing it... walking at 2.5 mph might be a huge effort for one person where was running at 4mph might be a walk in the park for someone else...
Click to expand...

Sure, but, if it was all that high of intensity, could you really keep it up for 2 minutes? Running at 4 mph might be balls to the wall 100% effort for somebody... but if it was, you shouldn't be able to keep it up for that long. I really wasn't trying to be demeaning at all, just that there's no reason to even consider using the term HIIT at this point.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top