Practicing outdoors

[gogy]

Guys I need your help, I wanna improve my core body strength, but I can't afford to practice in gym or fitness, so I do all of my workouts outside, running, cycling for stamina, and on bars I do pull ups, and dips, there is one place 1.5km away infront of school, with outdoor equipment. My flat is too smal to practice inside, so I would like you to give me some exercises or training schedule for my strength workouts. I got very skiny in last 30 days, due to too much cardio workouts :S :S :S

[ZRX38]

check this thread

https://www.gymnasticbodies.com/forum/topic/1532-killroy-70-beginner-template/

 

check foundation 1 

https://zp130.infusionsoft.com/app/storeFront/showProductDetail?productId=2

 

hope this helps

[Connor Davies]

For "core" strength, a combination of back lever and front lever training should suffice.

 

Get a backpack, fill it with sand, do pullups and dips.  If you want more grip work, hang a towel off the bar.

 

If pullups get too boring, try learning skin-the-cat for high reps.  If dips get too boring, try learning press-to-handstand.

 

Try some pistols.

 

If you want to get faster and more explosive, clapping pushup progressions all the way to the triple clap, ninja tucks and muscle ups would probably be the best you can do.  Oh, and sprinting intervals.  Preferably uphill.

 

I really wish someone had told me about all of this good stuff back when I was starting out.  I wanted the best bodyweight stuff I could find, but I just kept plugging away at the gym, on machines no less, getting nowhere.  Don't listen to anyone tell you that you wont get strong, or that you can't do something.

 

And stop doing cardio.  Strength training causes architectural changes in the body that will last a lifetime.  Cardio is mostly metabolic and will go as quickly as it comes.  If you're stronger, everything is easier.

[Klaudius Petrulis]

The only people who should train cardio are people who need it for their sport or activity.

[Daniel Burnham]

Depends on what you mean by cardio doesn't it?  Low level cardio like hiking riding a bike even walking are good for the cardiovascular system and even increase recovery if done properly.  

 

Also HIIT like interval training is pretty darn good at keeping people healthy and promotes a lot of good hormone production. I know this isn't cardio per se but take a look at the metabolic affects after doing this style work and think about why you breath so hard.

 

Just don't lump everything cardio under long duration medium intensity.

 

I really dont know of too many sports that wouldn't need the above.  Powerlifting maybe but I would think even they would benefit.

[Connor Davies]

Don't get me wrong, cardio is fantastically good for health.  I just don't think it should get as much time and attention as strength training.  Like I said, strength training stays with you for the rest of your life.  Cardio tends not to, unless your an elite triathlete, ultra marathon runner ect...  There's something to be said for ventricular hypertrophy, but most people aren't going to cause those kind of adaptations.

[Klaudius Petrulis]

Sorry I should've specified what I meant by train.

Most people would benefit from occasional hiit and the like, but not from the consistent cardio 5x a week which is widely promoted as a cureall for weight and heart health. That stuff is mostly diet related.

I define training as something you want to improve over a period of time. Messing around with hiit or jumping rope once in a while isn't training to me. I used to train cardio but realised it was for no good reason in particular. Made me tired for my real training.

[Colin Macdonald]

Interestingly, there are those in the medical community who are of the opinion that the health benefits of cardio follow a U curve. People who do excessive cardio lose almost all of the protective benefits that cardio can provide against heart attacks.

 

 

I'm of the opinion that the only real benefit of steady state cardio is to get better at steady state cardio.

[Larry Roseman]

Interestingly, there are those in the medical community who are of the opinion that the health benefits of cardio follow a U curve. People who do excessive cardio lose almost all of the protective benefits that cardio can provide against heart attacks.

 

I'm of the opinion that the only real benefit of steady state cardio is to get better at steady state cardio.

 

Thanks for your post and video!

 

I agree with you that you can improve your performance with proper training, and this applies to all sports. 

 

But what do you mean "the only real benefit"? The whole video discussed a major benefit of steady state -  a longer life - when not taken to the extreme.  But really there are tons more benefits, such as emotional well being, stress reduction, weight control, bodyfat reduction, improved recovery, lowered blood pressure, heart rate, arterial stiffness and a healthy glow But of course anything can be taken to extreme.  There are other ways to achieve each of these - but they are real benefits nonetheless. There really isn't anything but steady state that offers all these benefits (and more) together, in my opinion.

 

But no one is forced to do something they don't like or want to. The report of Coach Sommer running 20 miles and lifting 500 pounds obviously indicates that gymnastics can impart great conditioning and strength when performed at a high level for many, many years.  However, I don't believe the average 5 hours a week trainee can count on becoming as conditioned from GST alone. Though it may be enough for general health support.

 

What I am curious about is the study that showed that running at faster than a 7:30 / mile pace was counter to health. It's a known fact that excessive training reduces immune function, and better runners are more likely to over train than average enthusiasts. So I'm wondering if that was involved but I would need to know more about the study he is quoting.

 

That said,  gymnastic and flexibility training also impart important health benefits that steady state and intervals can't (not to mention just being strong) and none of the methods are incompatible with each other when each is performed correctly, and with consideration to proper nutrition and recovery.

 

 

Edit:

http://www.runnersworld.com/running-tips/qa-potential-adverse-effects-endurance-exercise-authors

http://www.runnersworld.com/running-tips/second-thoughts-too-much-running

There were controversial adjustments made to the data in the referenced study that bear on the healthiness conclusions.

[Colin Macdonald]

I should be more clear when making provocative statements. 

 

I meant to say that I've found that when comparing a strength training program and a cardio training program, strength training (in the right way) provides all of the benefits and more of cardio without any of the (potential) negative aspects. I've found all those benefits (and more) that you've listed by doing GST and strength training in general. And I've found that I have a good capacity to run, despite never really training for it specifically (similar to coach Sommer's experience).

 

And for things like weight loss, resistance training can be potentially much more beneficial by mitigating the loss of lean body mass that a pure cardio approach tends to impact negatively. The resulting loss of LBM means a dieter is much more likely to suffer from rebound weight gain when they get back to eating more normally do to a greatly reduced base metabolic rate. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10204826

 

I'm familiar with the criticisms of  the statistics from the studies, which as I understand mostly relate to the application of Cox Regression theory. But since I don't know what the hell this means: 

or it's application in statistical analysis, I don't really feel qualified to comment one way or the other. 

[Larry Roseman]

To each their own! I also do resistance work obviously. About 50/50 lately. Cardio does not cause one to lose lean mass; cardio without strength training and proper recovery and nutrition may. Too much high intensity strength work,

circuits or crossfit-type work also may. GST as prescribed here should not.

 

Apparently a lot of the benefit of steady-state cardio  comes from the body fat reduction, and the study eliminated this benefit in its analysis of longer/faster distance runners, which isn't realistic. Though, I agree if your weight is under control and only do strength work there's less of a need for cardio .

 

I personally NEED active recovery from strength work and moderate SS cardio does the trick.

brings fresh life to my fatigued muscles. Not the only way of course, but it recommended by (name drop) Coach Sommer!

 

Intervals also have their place too though they are not for recovery and need recovery considerations too - lately been doing both types of cardio.

[Colin Macdonald]

I was only really commenting on the ineffectiveness of cardio as a dieting tool, I didn't mean to suggest that any amount of cardio will cause your muscles to waste away. That kind of nonsense is reserved for body building bros who are obsessed with their 'gainz'. 

 

Cox regression is mentioned in another Runner's World criticism here: http://www.runnersworld.com/health/too-much-running-myth-rises-again

 

What it actually adjusts for is BMI, not body fat. BMI is a terrible indicator of body fat levels, especially among fit people with more muscle mass.

 

Running will certainly make you feel better, but it's role as a recovery tool is still a debated topic.

 

But as you said, to each their own. I still try to run once a week and spend a few minutes on my rowing machine every morning before my GST training. I think some steady state cardio belongs in everyone's workout plan, and I think the study is primarily looking at potential risk at the extreme end of the spectrum. It may be wrong, but I always give a good hard look at new ideas that challenge norms and long held assumptions.

[Larry Roseman]

I do agree during dieting not to do heavy cardio, and to keep the strength training going.

Strength training volume can be reduced but intensity should be kept up; low intensity cardio is best then, like walking a few miles. 

 

Nowadays I only eat less if I'm going to a buffet, so I can eat more later - or after a vacation.

 

I met Alex from sweatscience at a running fair. Sharp cookie. Super fast runner back in the day, held some records. Me, just recreational. No hard goals, just to keep improving my mile/5K time. No danger of excess.

5 miles is about my longest training run. My recovery runs are maybe 20-30 minutes at around 5-6 mph.

 

Strength work I used to find boring before finding GB/GST. Made a huge difference to my physique. Core and shoulder strength improved the most. Now I do enjoy all aspects of strength training more.  

 

People do tend to do what they are good at and enjoy!

 

Yours in Fitness,

FIN

 

PS. Just saying it's a nice tag line, not that I am the ultimate!

[Philip Chubb]

I have to agree on the negatives of cardio. Energy systems work as a place, but not where most people put it.

[Joshua Naterman]

The only people who should train cardio are people who need it for their sport or activity.

Absolutely not. It was pretty hard for me to not be profusely profane in this response.

 

If you have a heart, you need cardio.

 

Anything that raises your heart rate due to increased exertion is technically cardio, but you want your heart rate to stay elevated.

 

Doing too much for too long will increase free radical damage excessively, but we're talking about crazy stuff like marathons (at a championship pace) and to a greater extent ultra-marathon races.

 

All of this is heavily dependent on your diet compositon (lots of veggies, anyone?) as well as macronutrient breakdown and overall calorie count (compared to what you burn).

 

 

You definitely do NOT want to eat less AND exercise more. This is the classic mistake that so many people make. You want a deficit, but when you exercise a lot you are actually going to be eating MORE in order to maintain a 400-500 kcal deficit. You will see better fat loss this way as well.

 

Whether you choose to do intervals or steady state stuff is up to you and your goals, but here are some facts for you:

 

As you get older, your blood vessels naturally lose their compliance, and tend to get narrower. Cardio work of ANY kind does a LOT to keep this in check.

 

The heart is more interesting, because it too becomes less compliant with age. However, HIIT type training does not enlarge the ventricular volume (though it DOES thicken the heart wall due to increased cardiac muscle mass), because the heart has to beat too fast to allow for maximal ventricular filling. A relatively steady state, at a fairly moderate pace (a relative 6-7 on a 0-10 effort scale, or 130-140 BPM-ish), for 30+ minutes is required to get significant increases in ventricular volume.

 

The advantages of this, when looking at aging, is that if you do this as a young person and then maintain it, you will have a heart that has to do less work as you get older, because it can pump more blood per beat. It's pretty easy to maintain this adaptation, and doing so will benefit you in old age.

 

We don't care about this when we're young, because we are thinking about right NOW. Later on, you can't make the same gains. You can make gains, but not to the same degree, and that means one less roadblock between you and disease.

 

Of course this also matters for performance, because a larger ventricular volume (from steady state) PLUS a stronger heart (from interval training) is ideal.

 

 

 

 

 

If you are training for several hours per day, especially skill work, you are probably getting a bit more cardio than you realize, which may be a part of why you don't think you need it: You're already getting it, and haven't thought of it that way.

 

Even so, structured training is the only way to 100% for sure get the benefits. There's no data, that I am aware of, on people like Alex Chubb who are literally physically active all day long. I'm willing to bet that he's one of the healthiest people here because of it, but most people don't have that option (due to job requirements).

 

It's easy to say that anyone can choose to be the kind of fitness professional that Alex is, but in reality that's not realistic for more than a small number of people, because if everyone was a trainer then no one would be supporting the industries that generate our national income (medical stuff, industry, technology, etc) and our money would all go to other countries, which would leave us without the money to pay people like Alex, which would then make all the trainers poor and starving, just like everyone else, and then we'd be screwed.

 

I say that to pre-empt the statement that "anyone can do what Alex does if they want to" because any one person absolutely can, but it's not realistic to think that this somehow applies to the population at large.

 

The biggest changes we can make are using human-powered transportation, but in many places that too is unrealistic, which leaves us with structured cardio work for the vast majority of people.

[Connor Davies]

Very good post Slizz.  I have to say I have a negative view on cardio in large amounts because I absolutely hate doing it.  Take jogging.  From pistols I have a high leg strength, so my natural inclination is to run WAY faster than my lungs can keep up with, burning me out pretty quick.  Going slow, I just get bored.  I've just cherry picked a lot of good quotes by respected authors to back up my lazyness...

 

I have a question for you (directed at Slizzardman, but open to anyone.)  What about lung capacity?  Is there some kind of vascular hypertrophy that occurs?  I know say, pullovers and bridges can both expand the ribcage, but do the actual lungs change size, does diaphragm increase in strength, or anything else?  I know that the smaller air sacs in the base of the lungs get cleared out and activated, but what kind of chemical changes occur?

 

Obviously as your cardio/lungs improve you get more oxygen with each breath, but how much of this is chemical and how much is... bigger?

 

Huh, I'm completely out of my depth here.  Any swimmers in the house?

[Colin Macdonald]

If you are training for several hours per day, especially skill work, you are probably getting a bit more cardio than you realize, which may be a part of why you don't think you need it: You're already getting it, and haven't thought of it that way.

 

Which is really the best way to focus your time. As I've said, strength training done the right way can easily provide cardiovascular benefit. You just need to make sure you keep the pace up. I remain hopeful that once I complete Foundation 4 that I'll be able to go for a 20 mile run on moment's whim like coach. 

 

 

I have a question for you (directed at Slizzardman, but open to anyone.)  What about lung capacity?  Is there some kind of vascular hypertrophy that occurs?  I know say, pullovers and bridges can both expand the ribcage, but do the actual lungs change size, does diaphragm increase in strength, or anything else?  I know that the smaller air sacs in the base of the lungs get cleared out and activated, but what kind of chemical changes occur?

I don't believe that oxygen absorption is strictly tied to lung volume. My understanding is that different people will absorb more or less oxygen when inhaling an equivalent amount of air, but I don't have any hard numbers.

[Klaudius Petrulis]

If you are training for several hours per day, especially skill work, you are probably getting a bit more cardio than you realize, which may be a part of why you don't think you need it: You're already getting it, and haven't thought of it that way.

This is true.

 

Your post is right on the money. There are some sticking points about structural damage from long term running/jogging but I should have clarified my definitions of train and cardio.

[Philip Chubb]

If you are training for several hours per day, especially skill work, you are probably getting a bit more cardio than you realize, which may be a part of why you don't think you need it: You're already getting it, and haven't thought of it that way.

 

 

There it is. Get in more movement each day and you can use better tools than things like jogging. I like to do floreio, MMA, ect. I think there are much better ways to spend the time and still get those benefits.

[Hernandez C]

So, I get my cardio from walking to school, its about 30 to 35 minutes everyday from monday to friday at more or less fast pace, and the ocassional sprinting or soccer playing on weekends, would you say thats enough to keep my heart healthy? xD I just dont like jogging or biking and dont really have much free time for cardio

[Colin Macdonald]

So, I get my cardio from walking to school, its about 30 to 35 minutes everyday from monday to friday at more or less fast pace, and the ocassional sprinting or soccer playing on weekends, would you say thats enough to keep my heart healthy? xD I just dont like jogging or biking and dont really have much free time for cardio

You don't need to be a marathon runner to have a healthy heart. As far as activity goes I'd say you're doing fine (hopefully you're following some sort of GST as well). As long as you're regularly active (an hour a day of vigorous activity is good, plus mild/moderate activity throughout the day), focus on more on your diet. Keep your body fat low and don't eat a lot of excessive calories and keep your triglycerides low.

 

Cholesterol and heart health is a hugely controversial issue. But from my research your best bet is to avoid most seed oils/poly-saturated fats (like corn/canola, etc) and replace them with saturated fats. This is probably the exact opposite of everything you've ever heard. But the problem in a nutshell is that poly-saturated fats are extremely unstable and prone to oxidization, and it's these oxidized fat particles that cause damage and arteriosclerosis that leads to heart attacks.

 

 

Some info on cholesterol:

http://www.marksdailyapple.com/forum/thread4723.html

 

More info on oxidized LDL: 

http://wholehealthsource.blogspot.it/2009/07/diet-heart-hypothesis-oxidized-ldl-part.html

http://wholehealthsource.blogspot.it/2009/08/diet-heart-hypothesis-oxidized-ldl-part.html

 

More info on cholesterol:

http://www.marksdailyapple.com/cholesterol/#axzz2P0CNRnhp

 

A look at various dietary fats:

http://wellnessmama.com/2193/why-you-should-never-eat-vegetable-oil-or-margarine/