Thread: Is there such thing as too much cardio?

yes there is.

6 days of cardio is unnecessary and in many instances, counterproductive IMO.

Originally Posted by The13ig13adWolf

yes there is.

6 days of cardio is unnecessary and in many instances, counterproductive IMO.

It depends on what kind of cardio you're talking about.

Originally Posted by BigDyl

It depends on what kind of cardio you're talking about.

point taken

really.... can you explain what you mean when you say that?


cause after i do a cycle coming up im going to be going into a cardio phase starting mid february through the end of the summer

im not going to be trying to lose weight at all, only to build cardiovascular endurance and get as fast and strong as i can get....
after a few weeks of moderate running i would be picking it up running every day


is the SAME type of cardio bad? is that you mean? like going on the bike every week? would that let your body get used to that?

Originally Posted by Hlanderr

really.... can you explain what you mean when you say that?

how too much cardio can be counterproductive?

long periods of low-intensity SS cardio can convert some fast-twitch fibers to slow-twitch fibers. it can also overtrain the fast-twitch fibers.

compare a marathoner to a sprinter...

cause after i do a cycle coming up im going to be going into a cardio phase starting mid february through the end of the summer

what is a 'cardio phase'? no lifting???

im not going to be trying to lose weight at all, only to build cardiovascular endurance and get as fast and strong as i can get....
after a few weeks of moderate running i would be picking it up running every day

is the SAME type of cardio bad? is that you mean? like going on the bike every week? would that let your body get used to that?

HIIT/interval training has been shown to increase both aerobic and anaerobic capacity whereas endurance cardio only increases aerobic.

it's also more conducive to improving the muscle's ability to use fat.

varied cardio is good. SS isn't 'bad' per se. it has it's place. but IMO HIIT is superior. and yes, your body will adapt to it reletively quickly forcing you to increase duration in order to progress.

Originally Posted by BigDyl

It depends on what kind of cardio you're talking about.

Nope.

It depends on your goals.

Originally Posted by The13ig13adWolf

how too much cardio can be counterproductive?

long periods of low-intensity SS cardio can convert some fast-twitch fibers to slow-twitch fibers. it can also overtrain the fast-twitch fibers.

Fiber types don't directly convert. The type II fibers can show a shift in characteristics that lean towards type I and being more oxidative but they don't change or convert.


compare a marathoner to a sprinter...



what is a 'cardio phase'? no lifting???



HIIT/interval training has been shown to increase both aerobic and anaerobic capacity whereas endurance cardio only increases aerobic.

If it is HIT then you are working at a high intensity. That being said you are using glycolitic pathways for converting energy, not oxadative so no aerobic endurance will be worked. At higher intensities your heart rate is going to be beating to fast to use the oxadative pathway. You can target both if you do varied intervals but then you really can't call it HIT.


it's also more conducive to improving the muscle's ability to use fat.

I don't understand what you mean by that statment?


varied cardio is good. SS isn't 'bad' per se. it has it's place. but IMO HIIT is superior. and yes, your body will adapt to it reletively quickly forcing you to increase duration in order to progress.

A good mix of everything cardiovascular (aerobic) training, resistance training, aneerobic threshold training, etc...are good for overal fitness if that is your goal. If you goal is to be an endurance athlete then you have to be specific to what it is you are trying to accomplish.

Originally Posted by P-funk

no cardio. just flexability and movement training
cardio fucks with neurological pathways

I still don't get this one

Originally Posted by The Monkey Man

what are you confused about? It fucks with your neurological pathways. I don't know what your question is.

Originally Posted by P-funk

what are you confused about? It fucks with your neurological pathways. I don't know what your question is.

Oh, okay, now you added to it.


What don't you get?

Fiber types will change characteristics and down shit depending on your training.

Why don't strength athletes do lots of cardio? Because type II fibers change their characteristics and it will lead to a decrease in strength. They may do some cardio but they don't do a lot of cardio.


Why don't olympic weight lifters do moderate intensity repetition work? Because the Type IIb fibers will take on type IIa characteristics and increase their oxadative capacity a little bit leading to slower movements and less power.


Do you get it now?

Originally Posted by P-funk

Oh, okay, now you added to it.


What don't you get?

Fiber types will change characteristics and down shit depending on your training.

Why don't strength athletes do lots of cardio? Because type II fibers change their characteristics and it will lead to a decrease in strength. They may do some cardio but they don't do a lot of cardio.


Why don't olympic weight lifters do moderate intensity repetition work? Because the Type IIb fibers will take on type IIa characteristics and increase their oxadative capacity a little bit leading to slower movements and less power.


Do you get it now?

YEP, I don't know why I was associating that to brain function -

Originally Posted by The Monkey Man

YEP, I don't know why I was associating that to brain function -

maybe because I said neurological?

If I had been doing Cardio lately...

I would have just proved the argument -

Originally Posted by P-funk

Fiber types don't directly convert. The type II fibers can show a shift in characteristics that lean towards type I and being more oxidative but they don't change or convert.

i worded that badly. rather than 'convert' i should have said 'convince', meaning take on slow twitch qualities. we're in agreement.

If it is HIT then you are working at a high intensity. That being said you are using glycolitic pathways for converting energy, not oxadative so no aerobic endurance will be worked. At higher intensities your heart rate is going to be beating to fast to use the oxadative pathway. You can target both if you do varied intervals but then you really can't call it HIT.

there are studies proving an increase in aerobic capacity, i'll have to dig them up. interval training increases aerobic capacity/VO2max more than endurance cardio. maximal O2 uptake, or VO2max, is regarded the best single measure of aerobic fitness.

I don't understand what you mean by that statment?

the more fit one becomes, the more likely they are to use fat as fuel for any given activity.

post training, you burn more fat. studies have shown that HIIT can elevate your metabolic rate significantly after the workout -- w/most calories coming from fat.

stolen from my coach:: "Fat/calorie burning is elevated afterwards to restore homeostasis (i.e. body temperature, catecholamines, hemoglobin, myoglobin, etc.).And it doesn't matter if you eat carbs right away either. This will not inhibit the oxidation of fat. In fact research actually shows that getting nutrients in immediately after HIIT will actually increase EPOC, reduces muscle protein catabolism, and increases recovery, all while having the wonderful benefit of not inhbiting lipolysis."

Originally Posted by P-funk

Nope.

It depends on your goals.

No, no really, there is a certain kind of cadio...

I'm planning on demonstrating this with BigBadWolf...

Originally Posted by The13ig13adWolf

i worded that badly. rather than 'convert' i should have said 'convince', meaning take on slow twitch qualities. we're in agreement.

okay

there are studies proving an increase in aerobic capacity, i'll have to dig them up. interval training increases aerobic capacity/VO2max more than endurance cardio. maximal O2 uptake, or VO2max, is regarded the best single measure of aerobic fitness.

Yes, studies will defenitly show an increase in VO2 max etc....I agree with that. However, you are missing the point I was trying to make. When you are working near VO2max levels you are working near maximum heart rate (in most cases). When you are working at Maximum heart rate you are working at a greater intensity. The intensity of an exercise will determine the metablic pathway it uses to convert energy. At higher intensities it is anerobic. At lower intensities it is aerobic. Just increasing your sprint speed, VO2max etc...Will not increase your endurance or aerobic capacity. It will increase your anerobic threshold (LA threshold) and capacity to work for shorter durations at higher intensities. For example a 100m sprinter wont be a good marathon runner. Why? Because he is not a trained aerobic athlete. See what I am saying?

the more fit one becomes, the more likely they are to use fat as fuel for any given activity.

The more fit one becomes the more fuel they will burn as their metabloic rate increases. Whether that is from glucose or FFAs is not up to the person to choose. It is up to their body to decide. A persons effeciency to burn calories is all that is important and an increase in muscle mass will do that.


post training, you burn more fat. studies have shown that HIIT can elevate your metabolic rate significantly after the workout -- w/most calories coming from fat.

Yes, oxygen debt or EPOC is the term. You are right. This happens because of the increase in oxygen uptake (to fuel the oxygen debt). It is your bodies response to trying to repair tissue and recover from training. FFAs are oxadized in the presence of oxygen.


stolen from my coach:: "Fat/calorie burning is elevated afterwards to restore homeostasis (i.e. body temperature, catecholamines, hemoglobin, myoglobin, etc.).And it doesn't matter if you eat carbs right away either. This will not inhibit the oxidation of fat. In fact research actually shows that getting nutrients in immediately after HIIT will actually increase EPOC, reduces muscle protein catabolism, and increases recovery, all while having the wonderful benefit of not inhbiting lipolysis."

good stuff though. I see what you are getting at. Still thought, the amount of cardio is dependant on the persons individual goals.

Also, one of the most important things for an elite aerobic athlete (tri-athlete, marathon runner, etc..) is that they become effecient at using free fatty acids (FFAs) you fuel. Why they may have less muscle mass or a higher BF% then a sprinter, they do use a higher percentage of their energy from stored fat. That is why they have a higher BF% (even though they are mostly skinny). Their bodies effeciency to use its reserves properly are important in their sport cause once the glycogen goes....it goes and if you aren't effecient at breaking down triglycerides you are shit otta luck.

Originally Posted by bookstar

hello,

I am wondering if there is such thing as too much cardio? This is what I do every week.
Monday: Day off
Tuesday: weight train (morning), jog on treadmill (evening)
Wednesday: Jog on treadmill (morning)
Thursday: Weight train (morning), jog on treadmill (evening)
Friday: Jog on treadmill (morning)
Saturday: Weight train (morning), jog on treadmill (evening)
Sunday: Jog on treadmill (morning or evening)

I jog on the treadmill for about 20-30 minutes per time, 6 times a week.

Thanks for your help!

Depends on your goals.....................for a marathon runner your cardio workout would be a joke.

List your goals.

Originally Posted by P-funk

Yes, studies will defenitly show an increase in VO2 max etc....I agree with that. However, you are missing the point I was trying to make. When you are working near VO2max levels you are working near maximum heart rate (in most cases). When you are working at Maximum heart rate you are working at a greater intensity. The intensity of an exercise will determine the metablic pathway it uses to convert energy. At higher intensities it is anerobic. At lower intensities it is aerobic. Just increasing your sprint speed, VO2max etc...Will not increase your endurance or aerobic capacity. It will increase your anerobic threshold (LA threshold) and capacity to work for shorter durations at higher intensities. For example a 100m sprinter wont be a good marathon runner. Why? Because he is not a trained aerobic athlete. See what I am saying?

i understand what you're saying and you make a valid point. however, HIIT is only one form of interval training and i was referring to HIIT as well as additional forms. ie. 400m sprints, etc.

The more fit one becomes the more fuel they will burn as their metabloic rate increases. Whether that is from glucose or FFAs is not up to the person to choose. It is up to their body to decide. A persons effeciency to burn calories is all that is important and an increase in muscle mass will do that.

if an increase in muscle mass enhances efficiency to burn calories then that is a result of an individual choice, no?

Yes, oxygen debt or EPOC is the term. You are right. This happens because of the increase in oxygen uptake (to fuel the oxygen debt). It is your bodies response to trying to repair tissue and recover from training. FFAs are oxadized in the presence of oxygen.

exactly, which significantly enhances the number of calories burned.

good stuff though. I see what you are getting at. Still though, the amount of cardio is dependant on the persons individual goals.

i agree. but with that said, overtraining is still a possibility.

Also, one of the most important things for an elite aerobic athlete (tri-athlete, marathon runner, etc..) is that they become effecient at using free fatty acids (FFAs) you fuel. Why they may have less muscle mass or a higher BF% then a sprinter, they do use a higher percentage of their energy from stored fat. That is why they have a higher BF% (even though they are mostly skinny). Their bodies effeciency to use its reserves properly are important in their sport cause once the glycogen goes....it goes and if you aren't effecient at breaking down triglycerides you are shit otta luck.

nice post.

Originally Posted by P-funk

Also, one of the most important things for an elite aerobic athlete (tri-athlete, marathon runner, etc..) is that they become effecient at using free fatty acids (FFAs) you fuel. Why they may have less muscle mass or a higher BF% then a sprinter, they do use a higher percentage of their energy from stored fat. That is why they have a higher BF% (even though they are mostly skinny). Their bodies effeciency to use its reserves properly are important in their sport cause once the glycogen goes....it goes and if you aren't effecient at breaking down triglycerides you are shit otta luck.

I think that is what she was saying.


I wonder which fuel is preferred when BMR is increased via exercise. My thought would be fat since it is the preferred energy source during rest, but aI have never seen anything showing this to be the case.

Originally Posted by BigDyl

No, no really, there is a certain kind of cadio...

I'm planning on demonstrating this with BigBadWolf...

Per. Vert.

Thank you everyone for your comments! That will help!

The13ig13adWolf, I saw your photo gallery. You look awesome! How long have you been working out? Have you always looked that way?

Anyway, once I get into shape I want to post some picture in my gallery. I just have some facial shots of myself right now. Hopefully I will have full body shots in the near future!

Originally Posted by bookstar

The13ig13adWolf, I saw your photo gallery. You look awesome! How long have you been working out? Have you always looked that way?

thanks. i actually used to be a short, fat, boy....snip snip here, snip snip there and voila...

started training 2 weeks ago.

Originally Posted by The13ig13adWolf

thanks. i actually used to be a short, fat, boy....snip snip here, snip snip there and voila...

started training 2 weeks ago.

Originally Posted by The Monkey Man

no good?

Originally Posted by The13ig13adWolf

no good?

Ummm...

I call BS -

Originally Posted by The13ig13adWolf

no good?

And I call she edited that post as to not get flamed.. (not the specific one I quoted, but the original one MM replied to)