Size And Conditioning

Hi Adpowah, glad someone was actually listening :)

All your points are well taken. I have actually been doing more SS than HST, being 55 now. I have SSv3 and PPv3, hang out on Rippetoe's forum a good bit, so know where you are coming from. I disagree with Rip on a few minor points, but overall SS is quite solid.

My main point is that any activity trains the metabolism in a very specific way and carry over is far less than 100%. Sure, treadmill in the winter is better for your running than doing nothing, as the transfer is high, as opposed to say, sky diving. My attempt was to get the OP to not be surprised when performance drops going back to running outdoors.

My Vo2Max example was just a data point of all the many metabolic adaptations that occur.

In my own case: former (many years ago!) LSU special teams / db. Power cleans had about zero transfer to firing off the line. It is too skill based. However, good old squats have huge transfer due to hypertrophy and a good bit of hip drive carry over. LSU had a good S&C program back in the day, as compared to all the functional nonsense D1 and Pros are doing today. It did help my speed and strength, 40 yd got down to 4.35 in 1 year. But my mile time did not change that much, basic SAID ;)

I should have initially explained my LISS stance better. I also do LISS in the form of walking and yard work. Of course they help with recovery and all, but my point was, if you switch activities you will notice a loss in performance as the skill component as well as the metabolism are different. Maffetone et al using the 220 minus your age for LISS seems to be a good rule of thumb. But, realize that the changes in metabolism from LISS are happening in the muscles, not your internal organs.

HTH
 
mickc1965 said:
How are you calculating your max heart rate, reason I ask is if you use the 220 minus your age it does not work for me.

For me I had to calculate my max heart rate from a heart rate monitor by running as fast as I can for 3 minutes at an even pace, then jog for 3 minutes and repeat the max run again taking my max heart rate during the 2nd run. Then you subtract your resting heart rate from your max rate to find a working heart rate so when I was running regularly a few years ago my max heart rate was just over 190 (from memory) and my resting was just under 50 so let's just say 190 and 50 which gives me my working heart rate of 140 then you take a percentage (use your 55%) which would be 77 and add your resting heart rate back in gives a figure of 127 if we used the 220 less your age (I was 48) gives me a max of 172 x 55% = 95 bpm which would mean I could not even walk at that %
Click to expand...

U wot? Give me the dumb down version now pls.

I work at around 100 bpm right now since being at around 110 bpm proved too hard on recovery. So it's really LISS
 
The dumb down version is 220 less your age = max heart rate but was just saying that calculation doesn't work for me as that equates to a very slow walking pace for me.
 
Mick, where does the 55% come from? For me that would be 82 which is much too low to be of any benefit. In fact, my wife, who is the same age as me and has low blood pressure, has a resting heart rate of 90 BPM. According to that formula, she is at a max rate while sitting and watching TV. Personally I use 80% which gives me a max sustainable rate of 120. My resting rate is under 60. I do not believe that there is any formula that fits the whole population, which I think is your point.
 
Old and Grey said:
Mick, where does the 55% come from? For me that would be 82 which is much too low to be of any benefit. In fact, my wife, who is the same age as me and has low blood pressure, has a resting heart rate of 90 BPM. According to that formula, she is at a max rate while sitting and watching TV. Personally I use 80% which gives me a max sustainable rate of 120. My resting rate is under 60. I do not believe that there is any formula that fits the whole population, which I think is your point.
Click to expand...
The 55% came from post #18 from mojo77 and you are correct about a single formula not fitting the whole population. I was just trying to explain how to do a calculation based on each individual's working heart rate based on their own max and resting heart rates.
 
Doubling you resting heart rate probably is as good a generic formula as any. However, no formula works for everyone and that includes bodybuilding programs. Adhere to the basic known hypertrophy requirements and then individualize the program...and that takes time and is ever changing.
 
Interesting stuff... There is definitely something going on when you start getting up there in weight. I tried out that FFMI calculator (not sure how much faith to put in it), but I am at around the 24 mark. They say that this is the very upper limits for a natural. Again, not sure what to think of this. Anyway... For me, when I get up around the size and weight I am now I notice that it is easier to get a bit more puffed out than usual. There has to be something in this I reckon. I am thinking that Jester is on the money and cardio is needed. How much cardio, the jury is out for me on this. Following HST and the myo-reps system, I feel that there is a cardio component to this as well.
It kind of does your head in... When you get big with muscle, you just do not expect to get puffed. You look good in the mirror, appear to be in good shape and taking good care of yourself, but then you get a bit puffed out if you do a sudden sprint or walk a long distance at a fast pace etc. Maybe the body is under load carrying weight and it cannot differentiate between fat weight and muscle weight? I am not sure...
 
Last edited:
adpowah said:
How do you calculate your body fat @Renky?
Click to expand...

VERY roughly with no exact science. I have only ever operated on ball park figures as I have never wanted to get ultra low body fat. I have been in the game a while and do know what 20%, 15%, 10% etc all look like, so I tend to go by a near enough is good enough philosophy regarding this.
I am treating the FFMI measurement loosely. It has been interesting to play with the calculator with varying weight and body fat levels. No matter what I put in, I consistently seem to be around the 24 mark.
 
@Renky yeah, I do the same. I usually do the navy formula to test because I am too lazy to buy calipers and learn to use them. It put me at 25-27% (electrical impedance puts me more in the lower 20s, neither of which are too accurate) which puts my FFMI at like 23ish. I had a long thing typed but frankly it came down to I think FFMI is a bit of shenanigans particularly if you are willing to be 15%+ body fat, anyways I really enjoyed these two articles on the subject:
http://strengtheory.com/your-drug-free-muscle-and-strength-potential-part-1/
http://strengtheory.com/your-drug-free-muscle-and-strength-potential-part-2/
 
WRT doing cardio...

My experience lately has seemed to suggest to me that adding in moderate cardio can somewhat improve mass gains. After coming to this conclusion, I then luckily found an article by Lyle to reaffirm my new beliefs. I enjoyed the article quite a bit, mostly because he gave the green light to what I had been doing anyway. It's always nice to have your thoughts justified by someone else. He did write the article something like seven years ago, so I probably read it way back then, forgot about it, then summoned up some forgotten bits of it to come to the conclusion that cardio was improving my gains. Either way, I'll most likely continue to include cardio even during mass gaining phases from now on.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Lol
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top