Would training 5 times a week at 30 minutes per session at 80% - 85% of max heart rate be less effective than replacing some of the 30 minute sessions with 45-60 minute sessions at 60-70% max heart rate?
There seem to be two scools of thought - "more (and slower) is better" vs "shorter and more intense is better". In addition, a weekly interval session (or maybe two?) seems beneficial.
One of my concerns is I dont want to over do cardio if it will consume the muscle mass Ive put on (both from cycling and weight training).
Would training 5 times a week at 30 minutes per session at 80% - 85% of max heart rate be less effective than replacing some of the 30 minute sessions with 45-60 minute sessions at 60-70% max heart rate?
Would training 5 times a week at 30 minutes per session at 80% - 85% of max heart rate be less effective than replacing some of the 30 minute sessions with 45-60 minute sessions at 60-70% max heart rate?
John Forrest Tomlinson <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...
Quoted message said:
On 23 Apr 2004 11:51:07 -0700, [email hidden]
(BHE) said:
Would training 5 times a week at 30 minutes per session at 80% - 85% of max heart rate be less effective than replacing some of the 30 minute sessions with 45-60 minute sessions at 60-70% max heart rate?
Effective for what event?
As a conditioning / training program, for fitness.
Can you replace longer lower intensity sessions with shorter more intense sessions?
John Forrest Tomlinson <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...
Quoted message said:
On 23 Apr 2004 11:51:07 -0700, [email hidden]
(BHE) said:
Would training 5 times a week at 30 minutes per session at 80% - 85% of max heart rate be less effective than replacing some of the 30 minute sessions with 45-60 minute sessions at 60-70% max heart rate?
Effective for what event?
As a conditioning / training program, for fitness.
Can you replace longer lower intensity sessions with shorter more intense sessions?
Those two types of training provide slightly different results so it would be helpful to hear more detail about what you actually want to accomplish.
No one seems to want to give you a straight answer. I'd say that regardless of what you are trying to accomplish, you should do both. The main way to improve fitness is to shock your system in some way. Going longer will build endurance, going shorter and harder will build power and speed. Pro's often spend days riding for seven hours at a very low level of intensity, while on other days, they have much shorter all out sessions. The best way to improve fitness is to mix it up.
Stan
"BHE" <[email hidden]> wrote in message "]news:[email hidden]...
Quoted message said:
Would training 5 times a week at 30 minutes per session at 80% - 85% of max heart rate be less effective than replacing some of the 30 minute sessions with 45-60 minute sessions at 60-70% max heart rate?
There seem to be two scools of thought - "more (and slower) is better" vs "shorter and more intense is better". In addition, a weekly interval session (or maybe two?) seems beneficial.
One of my concerns is I dont want to over do cardio if it will consume the muscle mass Ive put on (both from cycling and weight training).
No one seems to want to give you a straight answer. I'd say that regardless of what you are trying to accomplish, you should do both.
So he should just do training like this regardless of what he wants to accomplish? Could result in wasted training time and effort and lost opportunity too.
Okay Stan, give us a straight answer about what he'll accomplish by doing 45-50 minutes at 60-70% of MHR.
Quoted message said:
Pro's often spend days riding for seven hours at a very low level of intensity, while on other days, they have much shorter all out sessions.
What do the training methods of pros have to do with what BHE wants?
-WG
Quoted message said:
"BHE" <[email hidden]> wrote in message "]news:[email hidden]...
Quoted message said:
Would training 5 times a week at 30 minutes per session at 80% - 85% of max heart rate be less effective than replacing some of the 30 minute sessions with 45-60 minute sessions at 60-70% max heart rate?
There seem to be two scools of thought - "more (and slower) is better" vs "shorter and more intense is better". In addition, a weekly interval session (or maybe two?) seems beneficial.
One of my concerns is I dont want to over do cardio if it will consume the muscle mass Ive put on (both from cycling and weight training).
John Forrest Tomlinson <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...
Quoted message said:
On 23 Apr 2004 11:51:07 -0700, [email hidden]
(BHE) said:
Would training 5 times a week at 30 minutes per session at 80% - 85% of max heart rate be less effective than replacing some of the 30 minute sessions with 45-60 minute sessions at 60-70% max heart rate?
Effective for what event?
As a conditioning / training program, for fitness.
Then you're asking in the wrong newsgroup -- this one is about bike racing.
"StanSD" <[email hidden]> wrote in message "]news:[email hidden]...
Quoted message said:
No one seems to want to give you a straight answer. I'd say that
regardless
Quoted message said:
of what you are trying to accomplish, you should do both. The main way to improve fitness is to shock your system in some way. Going longer will build endurance, going shorter and harder will build power and speed.
Pro's
Quoted message said:
often spend days riding for seven hours at a very low level of intensity, while on other days, they have much shorter all out sessions. The best
way
Quoted message said:
to improve fitness is to mix it up.
Stan
"BHE" <[email hidden]> wrote in message "]news:[email hidden]...
Quoted message said:
Would training 5 times a week at 30 minutes per session at 80% - 85% of max heart rate be less effective than replacing some of the 30 minute sessions with 45-60 minute sessions at 60-70% max heart rate?
There seem to be two scools of thought - "more (and slower) is better" vs "shorter and more intense is better". In addition, a weekly interval session (or maybe two?) seems beneficial.
One of my concerns is I dont want to over do cardio if it will consume the muscle mass Ive put on (both from cycling and weight training).
The reason that no one seems to want to give him a straight answer is that he's posed his question in the wrong newsgroup.
"BHE" <[email hidden]> wrote in message "]news:[email hidden]...
Quoted message said:
As a conditioning / training program, for fitness.
Can you replace longer lower intensity sessions with shorter more intense
sessions?
I'll try and throw you a line. I think I hear you saying that you are interested in general fitness. If that is true, don't worry about intensity or time. Do what you can at a comfortable pace and don't try and compensate for a tight schedule by ramping up the effort.
In my opinion, most people fail to get into shape because they make it too difficult, don't rest enough and then become so miserable that only a fool wouldn't quit. Therefore, unless you're a fool, don't put yourself in that position.
Have fun and ride your bike. I hope it works as well for you as it does for me!
