Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Backpack Hunting Stair stepper at gym

No wonder you're in such good shape. You can't ever sit down in that country.

Great to see people excited about mountain hunting and getting in shape for it. The new hunters in our group are always astonished how physically fit you need to be to really enjoy elk hunting. Everyone thinks they are in shape until they strap on 20lbs. of gear and a rifle at 10,000 feet and have to walk miles of uneven slopes.

I crave physical exercise for a lot of reasons, but tailor my workouts in the middle and end of summer towards more hunting related routines. I'll set the treadmill at 15% and run/walk it for an 60 minutes. Best is 3.76 miles and 2946' elevation gain in those 60 minutes at 15%. I also run, swim, and do weights. As long as I can keep it interesting I'll exercise. If it feels like a chore or routine, then I lose interest.

I started training for a 5K run and gun biathlon in March and placed 2nd out 60 guys last weekend. Was stoked. Thinking about doing a 10K biathlon now. The 5K wasn't bad, but 10k could be brutal. Running with 17lbs. of gear (rifle/pistol/ammo) has been great exercise and it's fun. Something new.

Huge pet peeve of mine are the Stairmaster leaners... Gripping the handrails, bent over the display taking all the weight off their legs. They come to the gym to get a workout, but probably got more legitimate exercise walking to and from their car. Not to mention the strain they put on their back.

Laffin....

Those are just sotols. Bust right through them...

As a bonus, found a nice matching set of coues sheds in the mid 80's range...

LOL, I don't know whether I'm excited about training. I'm more excited about the hiking/hunting part of it, that's what I think about when I'm in the gym.

Knowing that the hunting will be much better if I'm in shape is a great motivator. The satisfaction I get from going farther and hunting harder than guys half my age is an even better motivator.

Yes, hiking hills with a weighted backpack is excellent work - both ways too.

[/color][color:#000000]Some tidbits on aerobic vs anaerobic work and effects.



https://www.uphillathlete.com/what-is-it-that-enables-endurance/

You know what endurance is, right? “The ability to maintain a high rate of work output for long durations” or some variation on this definition.

What is it that enables endurance? Stated another way: What is it that powers the muscle contractions that propel you for hours of a climb or race? The answer can be stated in 3 letters: ATP. The molecule ATP provides the energy for movement and is the product of metabolic processes in the muscles. Training for endurance is simply an organized method to enhance your metabolism, or, in other words, to increase your muscles’ rate of ATP production.

Metabolism itself can be described simply as the process whereby the energy in the food you eat is used to construct ATP molecules which are broken down to fuel muscle contractions (among many other cellular functions) before the post-metabolic component molecules are reassembled into fresh ATP molecules.
ATP: Adenosine Triphosphate

If any one molecule can be singled out for its life giving force, ATP is it. It truly is what allows life to be. ATP is a short-term energy storage molecule used by every cell in your body. The energy released when ATP’s chemical bonds are broken is what powers the functions of cellular life.

Most important for athletes, this energy is used to power muscular contractions, hence, movement. To avoid running out of ATP you might expect that we need a huge reservoir of the stuff. We woud, IF our cells didn’t have their own recycling plants built right inside each one. Because of this efficient recycling process we neither need, nor do we have, much of a store of ATP. Instead, after its bonds are broken and the energy released for our muscles to use, ATP is resynthesized from its component parts. This recombination of ATP requires energy that is supplied by food you eat. The faster your muscles can resynthesize ATP, the more work you’ll be able to do in a given time. This is the goal of all endurance training: To make you go faster for longer. For this reason we’ll look at endurance as a direct result of metabolism.
Fuels for Energy: Metabolism and ATP

We utilize 2 distinct metabolic pathways for the production of ATP. The first is known as the anaerobic pathway because it does not require oxygen to proceed. It can only utilize glucose as a fuel source so is also termed anaerobic glycolysis. Glucose derives from the carbohydrates in your diet. The second pathway requires oxygen so it is known as aerobic metabolism. It can utilize fats, sugars and proteins as a fuel sources, also from the food you eat.
more ATP >>>> more power

Note that what follows is a very simplified explanation of a very complex series of processes and is not meant as a rigorous look at either ATP production or metabolism. It is meant to serve as primer for a basic understanding.


The Aerobic System

As long as the demand for ATP is low enough the bulk of the energy will be supplied via the aerobic pathway. It is so named because the chemical reactions require oxygen to proceed. Fuel for aerobic metabolism can come from fats, sugars and protein.The aerobic system is rate limited in its production of ATP so can only fully meet the energy demands of relatively low intensity exercise. In fact, one of the principle intensity markers is the capacity of the aerobic system to provide the bulk of the ATP needed. Exercise scientists call this the Aerobic Threshold (AeT). When that aerobic capacity is exceeded the anaerobic system begins to contribute to the overall demands for ATP. Since the aerobic path can utilize all different fuel sources (carbohydrate, fat, and protein) and the body’s store of fats is many times that of sugar storage, aerobic fat metabolism will dominate as a the fuel of choice in well endurance trained athletes especially in events lasting over 2 hours.
…aerobic fat metabolism will dominate as a the fuel of choice in well endurance trained athletes especially in events lasting over 2 hours.

This last sentence is of particular importance and will be discussed and dissected in numerous other ways.
The Anaerobic System

As mentioned above: When aerobic metabolism can no longer meet the ATP demands of the muscles anaerobic metabolism (glycolysis) jumps in to make up the shortfall in ATP. Anaerobic metabolism does not require oxygen (hence the name) but it can only utilize sugars for fuel. Once past the aforementioned AeT the anaerobic ATP contribution will climb exponentially along with the intensity of the exercise. This is the high power metabolic pathway and is what fuels those impressive feats of speed especially in events lasting less than 2 hours. Its output is limited by the athlete’s anaerobic capacity.

This process has a drawback that makes the anaerobic output self-limiting for endurance events (defined as anything over 2 minutes). That limiter is the production of lactate (which is a byproduct of anaerobic glycolysis). Lactate production rises at an ever-accelerating rate along with intensity. On the ascending scale of intensity one’s Maximum Lactate Steady State is crossed (MLSS for short, is also known by several additional names, listed as a footnote*) after which the duration of exercise will be reduced to a few minutes at most due to fatigue. All endurance athletes have experienced the fatigue that comes on when the pace is too fast for too long. The only option is to slow down.

This form of fatigue is due to a reduction in ATP output by that very same anaerobic pathway. That drop in ATP production is a prompted by the accumulation of hydrogen ions along with the lactate in the blood.
The Metabolic Key to Unlocking More Endurance

For short to medium length events (2 minutes to 2 hours) endurance athletes are most limited in their endurance by the ability to deal with this type of fatigue. If you can reduce the accumulation of lactate and the hydrogen ions you will be able to delay the onset of this fatigue.

It turns out that you can’t do much to lessen lactate production since it correlates with the higher power glycolysis. However, the rate at which lactate can be removed from working muscle is a highly trainable quality. Hence : The rate at which lactate can be taken up by the muscles as fuel is what determines your endurance. Lactate (being a form of sugar) can be utilized by the skeletal muscles, the heart and the liver for energy. This point (as measured by speed or power or heart rate) where lactate production exceeds removal has been shown in multiple studies to correlate very closely to endurance performance.

How do you improve that lactate removal rate? Counter intuitively as it turns out. The greatest reservoir for the lactate that high power output is producing is in the lowly, aerobically powered, slow twitch muscle fibers. For these fibers, lactate is a preferred fuel. The more massive your slow twitch muscle fiber’s aerobic capacity, the more lactate that can be removed.

You have no doubt heard the various terms of adulation heaped on great endurance athletes: “So and so has a great aerobic base” or “She has a really big motor”. Well now you know what that refers to from a muscular and metabolic standpoint. Here is the counterintuitive rub: To improve your higher intensity endurance you must first make sure you have maximized the aerobic capacity of those unsexy, low intensity, low power slow twitch fibers.

It’s not as simple as only doing tons of long, easy distance though. But, this foundation is required to build that big motor. Once the aerobic capacity is maximized for a training cycle, then high intensity work can be utilized to it’s fullest to make the greatest gains in endurance.

[color:#FFFFFF][/color]

Another article by Scott Johnson on training.

https://www.outsideonline.com/2270151/what-everyone-gets-wrong-about-endurance-training?utm_source=Uphill+Athlete+Early+Access+Invite&utm_campaign=b314bdbbf2-Ice+climbing%3A+grip+and+lock+off+%28NL%29&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_11e251c307-b314bdbbf2-131444573&mc_cid=b314bdbbf2&mc_eid=47bfa24709

"Over the past 15 years, there has been an explosion in fitness fads promoting all sorts of dubious concepts. Perhaps the worst of all is the idea that shorter, high-intensity interval training (HIIT) can substitute for traditional long-duration aerobic base work in endurance athletes who are looking to maximize their performance.

To be clear, though many of this idea’s proponents have emerged from CrossFit, I’m not singling out that community. CrossFit can be an effective and transformational approach to working out for some athletes. My beef is with a few of its misguided adherents, some of whom claim that their HIIT programs offer new breakthroughs in training that allow athletes of all stripes to achieve the same results with less training time. Others even go so far as to say that putting in the long hours of endurance work is bad for you. To make matters even worse, much of the popular press—Outside occasionally included—seems to promote these programs.

After more than 40 years as an endurance athlete and coach, it pains me to see people latch onto these fads. I want to clear a few things up.

The first thing to get straight is that high-intensity-focused fitness programs such as CrossFit and P90X bring nothing new to the theory or methodology of training for endurance sports. Coaches have long known about the benefits of HIIT. But the proponents of these shortcuts frequently make claims that simply can’t be backed up. Though research is often cited, it’s important to remember that these studies shouldn’t be taken out of context or extrapolated to infer performance gains.

Often, the HIIT fitness studies that get promoted are short term, use untrained or moderately trained subjects, and often use VO2max for the measure of improvement in the subjects. Several fundamental flaws exist here. First, VO2max is known as a first-wave response to exercise, meaning the adaptations responsible for its initial improvement occur very quickly when one begins an exercise program. Poorly trained individuals will naturally see a big gain in VO2max in short-term studies, although the improvements taper off dramatically after a few months of regular endurance exercise. If a steady diet of HIIT is consumed for too long, an athlete can even get less aerobically fit and see a decline in VO2max.

More important, performance in endurance sports is not well predicted by VO2max. I have coached world-class cross-country skiers with rather mundane VO2max numbers who have stood on World Cup and world championship podiums. I’ve also coached cross-country skiers with extraordinarily high VO2max numbers who, though racing at the Olympic and World Cup level, are not especially competitive. Bear in mind that cross-country skiing is the sport with the highest demands on the aerobic system. Endurance correlates much better with maximal sustained work rate. Sports scientists have several names for this: lactate threshold, anaerobic threshold, critical power/speed. The takeaway: You don’t necessarily need to improve your VO2max to improve your endurance performance. Finally, these studies present the average improvement for the study group. Some subjects may have have shown a decrease in VO2max, but if the average shows an improvement, the study is held up as proof of the efficacy of the training protocols being studied.

The real world of endurance training is much more complex. It is messier than a limited lab study, but with enough data points, it can lead in the right direction. Through a trial-and-error process spanning many decades and literally millions of test subjects (that is, athletes), coaches and competitors have tried myriad training methodologies, rejecting the failures and modifying and refining the successes until we have a very good idea of how to get better.

Now is a good time to reiterate that I’m referring to athletes looking to improve their endurance—someone training for, say, a marathon, gravel grinder, or ski-mo race, not someone simply trying to get some exercise for the health benefits.

If HIIT were the only thing required to become a successful endurance athlete, you could be sure all the pros would be on board. After all, these athletes are looking for every advantage they can get, and their paychecks and careers hinge on their performance every time they step up to the starting line. But instead of doubling down on HIIT, the elite ranks of runners, cyclists, cross-country skiers, rowers, and swimmers do just the opposite. In 2010, a meta-analysis by Norwegian researchers examined the actual distribution of training intensity used by elite athletes across the full spectrum of endurance sports. The conclusion: The best in the world complete about 80 percent of their training volume at low intensity, 7 to 8 percent at moderate intensity, and about 12 to 13 percent at high intensity.

The 80/20 approach, as it’s called, can seem counterintuitive. Most people think they need to train hard all the time if they want to get faster. In reality, however, training slower will make you faster. The reasons come down to physiology. The sustainable duration of high-intensity work mainly depends on the aerobic capacity of your slow-twitch (ST) muscles. The more aerobically adapted your ST fibers are, the greater the intensity you can maintain for a longer duration.

That’s because the fast-twitch (FT) muscles that provide the power and speed of high-intensity work produce byproducts, some of which, when accumulated, will slow and eventually stop those very same FT fibers. You know this as fatigue and sense it as slowing down. But the ST fibers take up and utilize some of those byproducts as fuel, lessening their accumulation and hence the onset of fatigue. The greater the capacity of the ST fibers to remove these byproducts, the higher the intensity you can sustain for longer durations. Sprinkle in some higher-intensity sessions (key word: some) and you can lower the rate of production of these fatigue-associated metabolites from the FT fibers.

The hitch is that training the aerobic qualities of these ST fibers is best accomplished by a high volume of long-duration, low- to moderate-intensity exercise. For many, the intensity should be so low that it doesn’t feel like a workout at all.

Successful training for endurance sports is highly nuanced. Athletes do require some HIIT in their programs, but they need a tiny fraction of what is being proposed by many in the fitness industry. The endurance athlete will use HIIT as a supplement to—not a replacement for—the aerobic base work that makes up the foundation of their fitness.

It may not be very sexy training, but it is what works. It has been proven on millions of starting lines, and it forms the foundation of every world-class endurance athlete’s training program. Professional endurance athletes don’t follow fads. They train by well-understood principles developed over more than 100 years.

Folks should stop looking for a shortcut to fitness.

Scott Johnston is a former NCAA Division 1 swimmer and World Cup cross-country ski racer. In 1981, he made the first alpine-style ascent of Ama Dablam. He has coached World Cup cross-country skiers, elite ultrarunners, U.S. Navy SEALs, and record-breaking alpinist Steve House. Johnston currently teaches and coaches at UphillAthlete.com.

The personal experience of world class alpinist Mark Twight and founder of Gym Jones in Salt Lake city.

TNSTAAFL

There's No Such Thing As A Free Lunch

BY MARK TWIGHT

Periodically people write us to ask specific questions about endurance. While others may be more expert in this area (after all I do have a coach for my own sporting interests), I answer based on the 20-year period I spent climbing mountains, as well as more recent experiences with ski mountaineering racing and bike racing. Which makes my answers true for me. They are not true for all. With that caveat out of the way, every now and then someone asks about the “free lunch” method of improving endurance performance and I usually refer them here.


According to our definition endurance begins at 90 minutes, the point when fueling, hydration, thermal regulation and a host of other factors take on a greater influence than during shorter efforts.

One or two queries have insisted – as I once did – that combining predominantly short-duration, high-intensity work (circuits and gym stuff) with an over-distance effort once every 10-14 days, and a couple of medium-distance time trial type efforts is “very effective” and that great endurance may be developed. First, I take issue with the definition of endurance, and second, I usually ask what they mean by “great” because so far I haven’t seen such a program manifest meaningful results. On top of that, I have been around great, and trained and climbed with great so I know what it looks like. No great athletes became so by taking shortcuts. Finally, I actually tried the method they describe, and not just for three months, or six, or even 12. Did it work? To answer yes I would have to change my definitions of “endurance,” and “great,” as well as “power,” and “speed.” But I won’t, so I answer NO.

I’ll treat this topic with more care in the near future but for now I’d like to post a couple of conversations with, and notes about some truly great athletes and coaches, as well as quotes pulled from various sources to describe why intensity cannot replace volume when it comes to endurance performance.

During my infatuation with “free lunch” method of improving endurance I argued it to a friend and former National Nordic Ski Team member with the fervor of a born again fanatic. Being a friend he was nice enough to listen, and even tolerated the spittle. Eventually he countered by writing, “I still stick by the tried and tested methods I have described. Not because I know so much but because I have seen them work, and work well for many years on both myself and many, many others. They have produced world champions and top national results.”


2002 Ski Mountaineering World Champion Stephane Brosse during the 2005 Powderkeg, http://www.nutri-site.com/interview-entrainement--stephane-brosse-sport--2--27.html (interview in French that includes an outline of weekly training volume)
He was nice enough to treat me with kid gloves when he stated, “To say that one anecdotal experience convinces you that your way is better seems hasty. It seems unlikely that all these great athletes have been wrong in their approach and that you have stumbled on some secret training method yet to be discovered. Because, if your way could give the best results then the best athletes would have adopted it; especially if it could be done in less time.”

When I opined that so-called “elite athletes” were finishing well in endurance events on a diet of 20-minute workouts and less-than-800m runs he replied, “I have seen this phenomenon many times in younger skiers but also in Masters racers who, because they didn't have much time to train, did a majority of their training in Zone 3 and 4. Basically they were looking for a shortcut to fitness. In every case that I have personally seen or been involved in coaching; when these skiers (from ages 20-50) went to a more conventional Zone 1-2 regime followed by well timed and administered Zone 3-4 workouts their results improved.”

It’s tough to argue with experience earned on the national and international level. But I did. I went down my path as far as I could take it. I trained short then raced long. I wasn’t fast. I didn’t recover well. I didn’t progress from year to year. Surely I was doing something wrong because the program itself couldn’t be flawed. So I tried harder. When that didn’t work I tweaked and changed (tried the over-distance effort once every 10-14 days thing), and modified and tested and continued racing to the same [bleep] results. When I tired of that I began looking at the definitions, and the general sameness of the intensities, and I discussed the causes of fatigue and my lack of power with various coaches, trainers, and thinkers.

My XC ski friend clued me in to the relationship between volume and recovery. “In XC skiing the shortest normal man's race (before the advent of the sprint format) is 40 minutes going up to 2+ hours. A World Cup (WC) skier will compete in 40 races in a season (not all WC events). My biggest year was 45, which included 8-50km races. We were racing 3-days a week, sometimes 4. A big base seemed to be what allowed us to recover quickly from one effort and be sort of rested for the next. Note: there was not training during competition phase only race and rest so volume would drop a lot. At least that was the theory we were sold on and practiced, and all the big guns seemed to prove. Hence a big training volume for a WC skier would be 800-1000 hours/year. This included hard training too but probably 90% time-wise in Zone 1-2. My guess is that Alpinism is closer to XC skiing than it is to swimming or rowing in terms of duration and need to recover quickly.” I had used examples of rowing and swimming and sprint triathlon results to bolster my position on the subject of high intensity training. Then I read this:

“Back in the early and mid 60s the German’s training approach ... (placed, ed.) ... a greater emphasis on high intensity intervals. What they found was that, to a great extent they did reach high performance levels with this training program. But, they were not seeing progressive improvement from year to year among their elite athletes. Every year they came up to the same level, fell back down in the off-season, and repeated the process the next season. Then they changed the composition of the training to higher volume, lower intensity (fewer killer intervals at max speed) and the long term progress began to occur.”
Stephen Seiler

I realized how badly I’d swallowed the hook, and how hard I had hit the ceiling of anaerobic development, at the expense of other capacities. So I read on.

“In an endurance workout lactate content must not rise too high … if it does then lactate tolerance is trained instead of endurance capacity … Intensive workouts going together with high lactate values may be damaging to endurance capacity … Endurance capacity may deteriorate by this kind of training.”
Peter G.J.M. Janssen

“The acidosis, caused by high lactate values in the muscles, damages the aerobic enzymes system … the acidosis is the cause of the deterioration of aerobic endurance capacity.”
Peter G.J.M. Janssen

“Overloading this training intensity ... prevents the body from developing the aerobic base. Rowers can even fall so far behind that they have to start developing the aerobic base from the beginning. It can take weeks or even months to correct such overloading.”
Wolfgang Fritsch

“In the end, excessive anaerobic training pulls down your VO2 max, and you can't even run the slow stuff very well.”
Ron Daws

"Anaerobic training raises your respiratory quotient. This means your percentage of energy derived from sugar increases and fat burning decreases. In time, this may force more anaerobic metabolism and less aerobic function."
Philip Maffetone

“During short maximal exercise fat mobilization and utilization is inhibited by lactate production and acidity; even low lactate concentration (3-4 mmol/L) has diminished FFA concentration in the blood.”
Heikki Rusko


Lean muscle, economic movement, and high-tech machinery during the 2007 Rothaus Regio-Tour

“Because oxygen transport (at low intensity) is not a limiting factor, the muscles in question can be more easily overloaded by the duration of the training session to increase their oxidative capacity and fat utilization.”
Heikki Rusko

“During the 1950s and 1960s, the top runners’ training heavily emphasized intervals. But the interval-trained champions were soundly trounced when Arthur Lydiard’s runners came on the scene. Peter Snell, Ron Clarke, and Murray Halberg did just 6-8 weeks of speedwork, after laying in a 12-week base of pure aerobic endurance running. Runners who’ve done tremendous volumes of speedwork — like Emil Zatopek and Bill “Mad Dog” Scobey — couldn’t match the times of the endurance-trained Lydiard athletes.”
George Beinhorn

“Everybody thinks a four-minute mile is terrific, but it is only four one-minute quarter miles. Practically any athlete can run one one-minute quarter; but few have the stamina to run four of them in a row. How do you give them the necessary stamina? By making them run and run and run some more, until they don’t even think in terms of miles. There is no psychological magic and no pain barrier involved. It is merely a process of gradual conditioning.”
Arthur Lydiard

“Zatopek is a good example of the failure of sole reliance on repetition training. As a national coach, he can tap the whole potential of Czechoslovakia. But where were his men at the Rome Olympics? They didn’t win a thing. Yet most coaches still will not believe my system is the right one. One result is that a good many fine prospects have been ruined by excessive speed work and by trying for quick results." (emphasis added)
Arthur Lydiard


Finding holes in the fitness

"Perhaps the most important part of your body, the one most responsive to training and most important for competition, is the nervous system ... One unique ability of the nervous system is its capacity to learn ... Each workout is a small part of a memory stored in the brain ... If we train indiscriminately, that is recorded. If we over train, that too is recorded. But if we train effectively, we maintain that memory too. The nervous system remembers everything it experiences, so be careful what you put into it. Sometimes a long process of ‘re-training’ is necessary, especially in those who have abused their body through improper training.”
Philip Maffetone

My best climbing performances happened during the years when I averaged between 800 and 1000 hours of training volume annually.

By the end of June 2008 Steve House had already done over 600 hours of training volume in preparation for a visit to the 5th highest mountain in the world later this year.

During the eight weeks prior to setting the record on the Grand Traverse in the Tetons (6hrs 49min) Rolando Garibotti hiked and climbed and ran 125,000 feet of elevation gain. The final week of his preparatory program, which included the actual record-setting traverse, totaled 31,700’ of vertical gain. Of course, he covered many, many miles as well.

A professional cyclist logs between 20,000 and 25,000 miles per year.

Why is such specificity and volume necessary? If mere fitness were the dominant contributor to success in a sport then the fittest would also be the best. But over and over I have seen incredibly fit athletes – by all measures and testing – lose to less fit athletes who have better technical (neurological) skills. It happens in climbing all of the time. It happens in jiu-jitsu. It surely happens running, cycling and Nordic skiing. Great technique differentiates athletes at the highest level; most top tier athletes share similar degrees of fitness. This being the case, technical training must take precedent, which begs the questions, how much conditioning is appropriate to one’s sport? How strong is strong enough? How transferable is one’s “artificial” training? If the answer to the latter is “not very,” meaning significant re-education is required then sport-specific training is preferable because the brain and central nervous system must continually learn and refine specific motor skills. Achieving fitness at the expense of skill is a waste of time and resources so using “cross-training” as the primary means of improving sport performance is a dead end. That said it’s a fine approach to basic conditioning, and a useful supplement, or diversion in the off-season for active athletes. Of course, one can improve endurance performance by, for example, increasing strength and muscle contractility but this is a single characteristic of endurance fitness and speed, and like anaerobic metabolism, finite. It’s easy to pick a particular aspect of the whole and make it one’s shtick. And it’s a trap. I’ve fallen into it, as have others: we have ignored the diverse characteristics of specific fitness to our detriment.

My love affair with short duration, high intensity “cross-training” efforts to the exclusion of other forms of training ended with counseling and efforts to overhaul the method itself. Finally, when that failed, I had to rehabilitate my own fitness. I did it by building a solid foundation on low-intensity, long-duration efforts, and tempered the base with a variety of high intensity work to improve particular characteristics: specific strength, MVO2, LT, movement economy, etc. There is an order to follow (Matveyev, Bompa, Lydiard, Daniels, Kraemer, Fleck, Friel, Ferrari, among others – take your pick) and methods of building small peaks along the way toward a season-ending monster peak. It’s not random. It’s not whatever-the-[bleep]. It’s planned and executed and tested and modified along the way because there is no such thing as a shortcut or a free lunch, and no way to evade hard, intelligent work.

If what you’re doing now isn’t working get off your ass and do something different.

I've read this whole thing plus did a few Google-fu searches and think this is correct - no free lunch and HIIT only goes so far.

For me personally, I did the whole gym/bodybuilding workouts for 20+ years to the exclusion of slow twitch fibers thinking more muscle was the answer. And got my butt kicked on longer distances. I simply didn't have enough muscular endurance. In the past couple years, I've been experimenting with lower intensity/longer sessions. Its working. I have more muscular endurance now than at any point in my life - and I'm 54. I've incorporated more 'training' but lower intensity - jog 11-12 min/miles for 5 miles, do 1 hour of lower intensity cardio (elliptical/bike/stair climber for 20 mins each), 3-4-5 miles with my backpack. I also sprinkle in some higher intensity work but backed off the killer HITT stuff a bit because my knees and hips were starting to hurt. I think the single biggest help for me has been the slow jogging. I normally jog for an hour. Once in a while I'll do a 9.5/10 min per mile session but mostly its 11 or 11 plus change. I have to concentrate to keep it between 11 and 12 min/miles because my natural pace is faster than that.

I also think hiking with my day pack (16-18 lbs depending on water) helps alot. We did 18 miles on Saturday with 2700 feet of climb to start. We try to stop every 5-6 miles for a significant break (more than 5 mins). I find when I'm climbing I hit a wall at about 5 miles and start to get calf/foot cramps and fatigue. I think its because I'm out of glucose. On climbs, I've been stopping at 4 miles for a carb/electrolyte hit (jelly/honey packs and 8-10 oz of gatorade work well). This has worked well. Of course we could slow down, carry less weight, or stop more............ Or not. <G>

There is the role and benefit of HIIT. It is not the foundation of an overall fitness program, however it does have a place in making a better program. None can go full tilt every day, and the older one gets the more max effort must be tempered and watched to avoid burnout or injury. However that doesn't mean there isn't a place for HIIT.

Also HITT is individual based. Young healthy and in you prime? HITT will have a different definition vs middle age vs middle age with a bad knee, etc. However at some point, all need to push themselves beyond the easy gym day, not only maintain, but to improve.

Live long enough and you crash. No one wins the race.



HIIT vs Continuous Endurance Training: Battle of the Aerobic Titans
Micah Zuhl, Ph.D. and Len Kravitz, Ph.D.

Introduction
The fitness industry is currently experiencing a surge of interest and growth in high intensity interval training (HIIT). This method of training involves repeated bouts of high intensity efforts that range from 5 seconds to 8 minutes followed by recovery periods of varying lengths of time. Billat (2001) points out that as early as 1912 Hannes Kolehmainen, famous Finish Olympic long-distance runner, was employing interval training in his workouts. As the knowledge of HIIT increased, exercise scientists demonstrated that this type of exercise not only provides performance benefits for athletes and improves the health of recreational exercisers, but it may also be a suitable alternative to endurance training, or continuous aerobic exercise. To improve cardiovascular fitness the belief has always been to increase the volume of exercise, whether it's longer runs, bike rides, or extended time on an aerobic machine (e.g., stairstepper, elliptical, cycle, treadmill). The breadth of current research has revealed that HIIT improves numerous physiological parameters, often in less time when measured against high volume continuous exercise (Daussin et al., 2008). Therefore, the purpose of this article is to discuss and compare the cardiovascular, skeletal muscle, and metabolic adaptations to HIIT versus continuous endurance exercise. Continuous aerobic training is defined as exercise (e.g., running, cycling, swimming, etc.) lasting greater than 20 minutes and held at steady intensity during the entire bout. Additionally, research examples of HIIT and continuous endurance training workouts are included in this article.

Cardiovascular Physiology 101: Basic Reponses and Adaptations of Aerobic Training
Before comparing HIIT and continuous endurance training, a brief review of the cardiovascular responses and adaptations to chronic aerobic exercise is warranted, because it is central to both programs. During aerobic exercise the performance of the heart is based on heart rate, the amount of blood pumped per beat (stroke volume), and heart contractility, or the forcefulness of each heart contraction. Combined, these variables increase blood flow and oxygen supply to meet the demands of the exercising muscles. The contraction of the skeletal muscle also increases venous blood flow return to the heart, which increases ventricle blood filling (called the preload). This boosted preload contributes to the heart's enhanced stroke volume during exercise, which is a major determinant of aerobic performance (Joyner and Coyle, 2008).

Heart muscle structure adaptations are common with progressively increasing amounts of endurance training. These adaptations include thickening of the heart muscle and increased left ventricle size, which contribute to improved heart function during exercise. Consistent bouts of endurance exercise such as 30-60 minutes of continuous running or cycling performed 3-7 days per week leads to several other cardiovascular adaptations including the following:
1. Increased cardiac muscle mass
2. Increased stroke volume
3. Increased disposal of metabolic wastes
4. Increased oxidative enzymes and efficiency
5. Faster diffusion rates of oxygen and fuel into muscle
6. Increased left ventricle dilation and chamber volume
7. Increased carbohydrate sparing (thus greater use for fat as fuel)
8. Increase in mitochondria (energy factory of cell)
9. Increase in cell regulatory mechanisms of metabolism
10. Increased fat oxidation
11. Increased expression of fatigue-resistance slow twitch muscle fibers
(Joyner and Coyle, 2008; Pavlik, Major, Varga-Pintér, Jeserich, & Kneffel, 2010)

HIIT vs. Continuous Endurance Exercise: Cardiovascular Adaptations
Recent work shows that the cardiovascular adaptations to HIIT are similar to and in some cases superior to those of continuous endurance training (Helgerud et al., 2007; Wisløff, Ellingsen, & Kemi, 2009). Helgerud et al. showed that 4 repetitions of 4-minute runs at 90-95% of heart rate max (HRmax) followed by 3 minutes of active recovery at 70% HRmax performed 3 days per week for 8 weeks resulted in a 10% greater improvement in stroke volume when compared to a long, slow distance training group. Additional research by Slordahl et al. (2004) demonstrated that high intensity aerobic training at 90-95% of maximal oxygen consumption (VO2max) increased left ventricle heart mass by 12% and cardiac contractility by 13%, which is comparable to cardiovascular changes observed in continuous aerobic exercise.

Maximal oxygen consumption (VO2max) is considered the uppermost ability of the body to consume, distribute and utilize oxygen for energy production. It is commonly called maximal aerobic capacity and is a good predictor of exercise performance. Improvements in cardiovascular function will increase one's VO2max. Some research suggests that VO2max improvements with HIIT are superior to those with endurance training. Daussin et al. (2007) measured VO2max responses among men and women who participated in an 8-week HIIT and a continuous cardiovascular training program. VO2max increases were higher with the HIIT program (15%) as compared to the continuous aerobic training (9%). Improving cardiovascular function and increasing VO2max are major goals of patients that suffer from cardiovascular disease. For this reason some cardiac rehabilitation centers are beginning to include interval training sessions with heart disease patients (Bartels, Bourne, & Dwyer, 2010). Results show similar improvements as traditional low intensity exercise, but in a shorter time and fewer sessions.

HIIT vs. Continuous Endurance Exercise: Skeletal Muscle Adaptations
Increased mitochondria (the energy factory of the cell) size and number is becoming a hallmark adaptation to HIIT (Gibala, 2009). This is referred to as an increase in mitochondria density, and has been thought for many years to only occur from chronic endurance training. Mitochondria use oxygen to manufacture ATP (the energy molecule of the cell) at high levels through the breakdown of carbohydrates and fat during aerobic exercise. With increased mitochondrial density there is more energy available for the working muscles to produce greater force, and for a longer period of time (i.e., such as running longer at a higher intensity). In a 6-week training study, Burgomaster et al. (2008) showed similar increases in oxidative enzyme levels (proteins in mitochondria that accelerate biological reactions to liberate ATP) among subjects who performed a HITT program with four to six 30-second maximal cycling sprints (followed by 4.5 minute recovery bouts) on 3 days/week and subjects who completed 40-60 minutes of continuous endurance of steady cycling at 65% VO2max on 5 days/week. An increase in these mitochondrial oxidative enzymes leads to more effective fat and carbohydrate breakdown for fuel. Related work performed by MacDougall et al. (1998) demonstrated increased skeletal muscle oxidative enzyme levels of citrate synthase (36%), malate dehydrogenase (29%), and succinate dehydrogenase (65%) among healthy male undergraduate students engaging in 7 weeks of HIIT cycling sprints. Three days per week the subjects performed between four to ten 30-second maximal cycling sprints followed by a four-minute recovery. The higher levels of mitochondrial enzymes seen among the subjects led to improved skeletal muscle metabolic function.

There has been a spike of current research explaining the complex molecular pathways that lead to increased mitochondrial density. HIIT can lead to analogous physiological changes that are observed in traditional endurance training, yet this is accomplished through different message signaling pathways.

Molecular Biology Focus Paragraphy. Signaling Pathways of Continuous Endurance Training and HIIT
Source: Laursen 2010. In this model calcium-calmodulin kinase (CaMK) and adenosine monophosphate kinase (AMPK) are signaling pathways that activate peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor-g coactivator-1alpha (PGC-1 alpha). PGC-1alpha is like a “master switch'' that is believed to be involved in promoting the development of the skeletal muscle functions shown. High-volume training appears more likely to operate through the CaMK pathway and high-intensity training appears more likely to signal via the AMPK pathway.

HIIT vs. Continuous Endurance Exercise: Metabolic Adaptations
Increasing mitochondrial density can be considered a skeletal muscle and metabolic adaptation. One focal point of interest for metabolic adaptations is with the metabolism of fat for fuel during exercise. Because of the nature of high intensity exercise, the effectiveness of this type of training for fat burning has been examined closely. Perry et al. (2008) showed that fat oxidation, or fat burning was significantly higher and carbohydrate oxidation (burning) significantly lower after 6 weeks of interval training. Similarly, but in as little as two weeks Talanian et al. (2007) showed a significant shift in fatty acid oxidation with HIIT. In their research review, Horowitz and Klein (2000) summarize that an increase in fatty acid oxidation is a noteworthy adaptation observed with continuous endurance exercise.

Another metabolic benefit of HIIT training is the increase in post-exercise energy expenditure referred to as Excess Post-exercise Oxygen Consumption (E.P.O.C.). Following an exercise session, oxygen consumption (and thus caloric expenditure) remains elevated as the working muscle cells restore physiological and metabolic factors in the cell to pre-exercise levels. This translates into higher and longer post-exercise caloric expenditure. In their review article, LaForgia, Withers, & Gore (2006) note that exercise intensity studies indicate higher E.P.O.C. values with HIIT training as compared to continuous aerobic training.

Final Verdict: And the Winner of the Battle of the Aerobic Titans is…
The major goals of most endurance exercise programs are to improve cardiovascular, metabolic, and skeletal muscle function in the body. For years continuous aerobic exercise has been the chosen method to achieve these goals. However, research shows that HIIT leads to similar and in some cases better improvements in shorter periods of time with some physiological markers. Incorporating HIIT (at the appropriate level of intensity and frequency) into a client's cardiovascular training allows exercise enthusiasts to reach their goals in a very time efficient manner. And, since both HIIT and continuous aerobic exercise programs improve all of these meaningful physiological and metabolic functions of the human body, incorporating a balance of both programs for clients in their training is clearly the 'win win' approach for successful cardiovascular exercise improvement and performance. GO HIIT and GO Endurance!

Yea right, and then we get glutes, grabbing, ogling, bumping and of course, "being perved on" and you want us to fall for that line. Ohhhhhh yea, it's all about the hiking and hunt.

I can't help it if women find me irresistible. You sound jealous.

With my luxurious mane, I find it difficult to be jealous of old bald guys.

Then you're on the wrong elliptical.

T,

Most of the resistance change in ellipticals will come from the handles and will be felt in the arms. The foot pedal will for the most part only increase or shorten stride length.

There is a place for ellipticals, but they don’t compare to the Stairmaster for leg work.

I don't disagree on that. But we have a few types of elliptical machines at the YMCA. Some are great and some offer almost no resistance. I use the arms for about 50% of the time. I also go backwards, but for about 5 min or so. Not long periods of time. I do plan to work the stair climber into the mix. My hips is what bugs me when I'm on a treadmill or running.

Old bald guys? I thought you were the president of that club.

Did a few leg machines and some core work today. There were a few old bald guys there, and some young bald guys too. They were circling the throng of ogling women like satellite bulls during the rut. They knew better than to mess with the herd bull.

Well....once again....

Anyway, think again. I don't meet the membership requirements. All my own, in case you are thinking again....

Dude. You take pictures of your hair?? Don't tell me, you use a blow dryer too. Dontcha.

And you call yourself a herd bull. Give me a break.