Which one fogs,sprinting or running ?

[Deleted member 6400]

. for better health/looksmaxing benefits

 

[deer]

Why do you even care

 

[DutchPrettyBoy]

i dont understand this thread.

 

[Deleted member 3020]

Why do you even care

 

[Deleted member 6400]

Why do you even care

i wanna decide which one i do for better health/looksmaxing benefits

 

[TsarTsar444]

Swimming and cycling

 

[deer]

i wanna decide which one i do for better health/looksmaxing benefits

Swimming and cycling

 

[Deleted member 3020]

i wanna decide which one i do for better health/looksmaxing benefits

Swimming and cycling

 

[Deleted member 1707]

Mix both with good posture! Jog with closed mouth and sprint uphill

 

[Deleted member 6403]

short tem high intensity running boosts T

 

[sytyl]

you have a limited number of heartbeats

running = faster heart beat = faster death

 

[poloralf]

Sprint for looksmaxxing

 

[benchortable]

you have a limited number of heartbeats

running = faster heart beat = faster death

I love running

Also sprinting fogs all.

 

[benchortable]

Mix both with good posture! Jog with closed mouth and sprint uphill

Breathe in nose out mouth lol

 

[TsarTsar444]

Breathe in nose out mouth lol

Breathing through nose is difficult for me tbh, not enough space

 

[benchortable]

Breathing through nose is difficult for me tbh, not enough space

damn that sucks
hows your palate?

 

[TsarTsar444]

damn that sucks
hows your palate?

Very good, 11-12 teath showing when smiling, it's just that my stamina is utter shit, i get tired fast and struggle to breath on nose so do it on mouth

 

[benchortable]

Very good, 11-12 teath showing when smiling, it's just that my stamina is utter shit, i get tired fast and struggle to breath on nose so do it on mouth

too much cocaine?
many reasons for problems with nose breathing maybe deviated septum, most of them can be fixed

 

[TsarTsar444]

too much cocaine?
many reasons for problems with nose breathing maybe deviated septum, most of them can be fixed

I can breathe fine on nose when doing daily things, but when im hard cycling i start to breathe on my mouth

 

[ProAcktiv]

. for better health/looksmaxing benefits

Sprinting for burning fat (HIIT) and you can get it done quicker. 15-20 minutes of intense sprinting is enough.

 

[Lev Peshkov]

 

[jake_okok]

dont bother sprinting unless you're doing it for like boxing competition or anything its probably too harsh on your knees etc
I like running and its good for cardio but I think it's still risky for injuries, I think swimming/jumping rope/cycling are all good

 

[Deleted member 6400]

 

[Lev Peshkov]

View attachment 550930

How do I save this? Based puton saves the day again

 

[Deleted member 6400]

How do I save this? Based puton saves the day again

idk only by downloading it i think

 

[Lev Peshkov]

idk only by downloading it i think

I will. Give me a sec

 

[SkinjobCatastrophe]

Sprinting develops fast twitch muscle fibers and gives you lots of mass similar to lifting weights. When you say running I assume you mean long distance. That will not give you much extra mass but it will of course put you in better shape and burn excess fat. Just look at a sprinter and then look at a marathon runner and you can see the extreme versions of what those exercises do. For looksmaxing there isnt much point in either of these because most of the visible effects will be in your legs. You should just lift weights and not get fat by eating too much

 

[AlwaysHaveQuestions]

Sprinting. Fighting is anaerobic.

 

[ProAcktiv]

Sprinting develops fast twitch muscle fibers and gives you lots of mass similar to lifting weights. When you say running I assume you mean long distance. That will not give you much extra mass but it will of course put you in better shape and burn excess fat. Just look at a sprinter and then look at a marathon runner and you can see the extreme versions of what those exercises do. For looksmaxing there isnt much point in either of these because most of the visible effects will be in your legs. You should just lift weights and not get fat by eating too much

nah my G, sprinting is better for burning fat. HIIT is the most effective form of cardio and its quicker. But the rest is right.

 

[yorker12]

Whats up with people trying to find out what mogs what. Most of the time it is a little bit of both. Both of them do not achieve the same results and are done to achieve different things.

 

[yorker12]

nah my G, sprinting is better for burning fat. HIIT is the most effective form of cardio and its quicker. But the rest is right.

The fuck you mean its better for burning fat?? I can run a 10k and burn around 1k kcal meanwhile to burn 1k kcal with anaerobic exercises in a single workout would be absurdly hard.

Also there is no difference between them in burning fat, just the intensity and calories burned. HIIT is not aerobic cardio, its anaerobic.

JFL fat greycels are at it again.

 

[Deleted member 6573]

Sprinting develops fast twitch muscle fibers and gives you lots of mass similar to lifting weights. When you say running I assume you mean long distance. That will not give you much extra mass but it will of course put you in better shape and burn excess fat. Just look at a sprinter and then look at a marathon runner and you can see the extreme versions of what those exercises do. For looksmaxing there isnt much point in either of these because most of the visible effects will be in your legs. You should just lift weights and not get fat by eating too much

sprinters do squats and deadlifts to develop muscle mass. they don't actually get buff from sprinting

 

[ProAcktiv]

The fuck you mean its better for burning fat?? I can run a 10k and burn around 1k kcal meanwhile to burn 1k kcal with anaerobic exercises in a single workout would be absurdly hard.

Also there is no difference between them in burning fat, just the intensity and calories burned. HIIT is not aerobic cardio, its anaerobic.

JFL fat greycels are at it again.

lmao relax with the fat greycel, i mog you in terms of fitness and size, i am certain of that. There have been many studies that have proven HIIT/ anaerobic exercises are more effective to burn calories, which in turn results in fat reduction. Only reason I said fat is because I am speaking colloquially.

Steady-State Cardio Vs. High-Intensity Interval Training

Discover why a blend of both high- and low-intensity exercise is the best system of cardiovascular training.

experiencelife.com

.

"Steady-state cardio is aerobic: It requires oxygen and is fueled mostly by stored fat. HIIT, by contrast, is anaerobic: The work intervals don’t rely exclusively on oxygen, and are fueled mostly by stored carbohydrates. (Counterintuitively, HIIT makes you breathe harder, and burns more fat, than steady-state cardio. More on that in a moment.)"

"“If you’re trying to lose fat, it’s pretty clear that HIIT is a more effective tool than long-distance cardio,” Robertson says. Physiologists have yet to develop a full explanation for why this is, but one reason may be the so-called afterburn effect, in which the metabolism remains elevated for hours — and sometimes even days — after an intense workout.

The how isn’t important for coaches like Robertson and Mike. They just know that when a client wants to lose fat fast, HIIT is one of the best tools. One 1994 study at Laval University in Quebec, Canada, found HIIT was nine times more effective for losing fat than steady-state cardio."

JFL at running 10k to burn calories. Who the fuck is going to run 10k everyday, that shit is a waste of time and boring af. You'll get better results doing sprinting for shorter amount of time

Humble yourself G lmao

 

[yorker12]

lmao relax with the fat greycel, i mog you in terms of fitness and size, i am certain of that. There have been many studies that have proven HIIT/ anaerobic exercises are more effective to burn calories, which in turn results in fat reduction. Only reason I said fat is because I am speaking colloquially.

Steady-State Cardio Vs. High-Intensity Interval Training

Discover why a blend of both high- and low-intensity exercise is the best system of cardiovascular training.

experiencelife.com

.

"Steady-state cardio is aerobic: It requires oxygen and is fueled mostly by stored fat. HIIT, by contrast, is anaerobic: The work intervals don’t rely exclusively on oxygen, and are fueled mostly by stored carbohydrates. (Counterintuitively, HIIT makes you breathe harder, and burns more fat, than steady-state cardio. More on that in a moment.)"

"“If you’re trying to lose fat, it’s pretty clear that HIIT is a more effective tool than long-distance cardio,” Robertson says. Physiologists have yet to develop a full explanation for why this is, but one reason may be the so-called afterburn effect, in which the metabolism remains elevated for hours — and sometimes even days — after an intense workout.

The how isn’t important for coaches like Robertson and Mike. They just know that when a client wants to lose fat fast, HIIT is one of the best tools. One 1994 study at Laval University in Quebec, Canada, found HIIT was nine times more effective for losing fat than steady-state cardio."

JFL at running 10k to burn calories. Who the fuck is going to run 10k everyday, that shit is a waste of time and boring af. You'll get better results doing sprinting for shorter amount of time

Humble yourself G lmao

You linked a study saying exactly what I said for fucks sake.

HIIT is anaerobic just like weightlifting. Yes its more effective in the sense that it burns more calories for the same amount of time spent, but I would want to see you keeping up the HIIT pace for an hour or more.

If you already do weightlifting or any other anaerobic exercise, adding HIIT on top is useless since you already get the "afterburn" from weightlifting.

Those physiologists say its better for losing weight fast for fat people who do not have the cardiovascular health to be able to keep up LISS for a longer period of time. The key here is intensity, if you can barely keep up a normal pace with a high HR, LISS sucks, if you can actually keep up the pace and intensity for a long period of time, LISS is better for pure caloric burn.

How slow do you run? A 10k is less than an hour of running, since when is a hour long workout long? I put on my headphones and listen to music/podcasts/audiobooks. Are you doing 30 min HIIT sessions or what?

where did you get that I am running every day?
You're right, who the fuck runs 10k every day?
I do 2 LISS sessions, 1 HIIT session and 4 rings workouts in a week.

You saying that cardiovascular health is a waste of time proves how fat you are.
Post pics or larp, I mog you in fitness and IQ.

 

[ProAcktiv]

"HIIT is anaerobic just like weightlifting. Yes its more effective in the sense that it burns more calories for the same amount of time spent, but I would want to see you keeping up the HIIT pace for an hour or more." You're downplaying how much more calories is burned for that same amount of time. " One 1994 study at Laval University in Quebec, Canada, found HIIT was nine times more effective for losing fat than steady-state cardio." I don't need to do HIIT for an hour. 15 minute sessions 3 times a week is better than a 10k run twice a week. And it will be easier to recover.

"If you already do weightlifting or any other anaerobic exercise, adding HIIT on top is useless since you already get the "afterburn" from weightlifting." Well, the OP's question was comparing between running and sprinting, not weightlifting. Plus, sprinting induces more calorie burn than weightlifting. https://livehealthy.chron.com/sprinting-vs-weight-lifting-5725.html - " A 155-pound person can burn 223 calories in 30 minutes with vigorous weight lifting, according to Harvard Health Publications. As for sprinting, a 2012 study conducted by researchers at Colorado State University found that sprinting for only two-and-a-half minutes per day results in over 200 calories burned." 2 and half minutes for 200 calories my guy (obviously just one study, but this demonstrates how good it is). Lmao keep running 10k for 1kcal, when I can just do sprinting for 15-20 minutes. Plus, sprinting is more sustainable, will be able to pump out more sessions in a week than 10k runs.

"Those physiologists say its better for losing weight fast for fat people who do not have the cardiovascular health to be able to keep up LISS for a longer period of time. The key here is intensity, if you can barely keep up a normal pace with a high HR, LISS sucks, if you can actually keep up the pace and intensity for a long period of time, LISS is better for pure caloric burn." Don't see where it says that? They say straight up say "Starting in the late ’90s, however, a number of studies, including one by Japanese researcher Izumi Tabata, who popularized the Tabata Protocol, suggested that short, intense interval workouts may produce results similar to longer, slower cardio workouts in a much quicker time period. Soon thereafter, Schuler and many other fitness journalists began touting the benefits of HIIT.Does HIIT live up to the hype? In some respects. “If you’re trying to lose fat, it’s pretty clear that HIIT is a more effective tool than long-distance cardio,” Robertson says. ??? I genuinely don't see where this is said. HIIT is prescribed for fully in shape athletes to burn fat, it ain't even for fatcels. Fatcels actually usually start with steady-state.

How slow do you run? A 10k is less than an hour of running, since when is a hour long workout long? I put on my headphones and listen to music/podcasts/audiobooks. Are you doing 30 min HIIT sessions or what? I don't do runs tbh. The one time I ran a 10k (literally only once in my life), I got 49 something minutes (professionally timed). Again, I don't need to do 30min HIIT sessions to match a 10k run in terms of caloric burn.

You saying that cardiovascular health is a waste of time proves how fat you are.
Your cardiovascular health is improved by sprinting. "Just six HIIT workouts performed over two or three weeks, each lasting just a few minutes, produced measurable improvements in key markers of cardiovascular health, a 2012 study published in the Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research found." There are some insignificant elements of cardiovascular health that aren't targeted by sprinting. Lmao but stop acting like this actually risks anything significant about your cardiovascular health, your cardiovascular health will be more than fine if you sprint rather than do 10k. There are many top-tier strength athletes who don't do cardio to the extent of a 10k run.

Post pics or larp, I mog you in fitness and IQ.
I ain't posting pics on this forum, at least not yet. idk your idea of fitness, if it's a 10k run, then you may beat me, but I am a strength athlete anyway lmao. I focus on strength and athleticism (speed and vertical). In terms of IQ, it depends, you may know more about cardio, I know far more about athleticism. I don't know the extent of your knowledge about strength training, but I am quite knowledgable when it comes to that. Either way, my goal is not to prove who is the better athlete, you just made laugh calling me a fatcel, when you have no idea who I am or what I do. I will be waiting for a response tomorrow, since I'm going to sleep. Deuces

 

[Chadlitecel]

both are good. But humans are the best species in long distance running

 

[ProAcktiv]

. for better health/looksmaxing benefits

Truth of the matter is, one is not going to be significantly different than the other. if you like jogging and seeing the scenery as you exercise, then stick to that. If you wanna get your workout done quicker, but intensely, then do sprinting. What I will say is, if you only do sprinting, you won't be as good at running long distances. What I would do is what yorker12 did, 2 sessions of jogging (doesn't have to be 10k, 5k is good), and 1 HIIT session.

 

[Deleted member 2658]

. for better health/looksmaxing benefits

Sprinting mogs Running to oblivion for guys.
Sprinting can increase DHT levels and T-levels if it's enough high intensity.

 

[Xander578]

Whatever you prefer doing op.

 

[yorker12]

"HIIT is anaerobic just like weightlifting. Yes its more effective in the sense that it burns more calories for the same amount of time spent, but I would want to see you keeping up the HIIT pace for an hour or more." You're downplaying how much more calories is burned for that same amount of time. " One 1994 study at Laval University in Quebec, Canada, found HIIT was nine times more effective for losing fat than steady-state cardio." I don't need to do HIIT for an hour. 15 minute sessions 3 times a week is better than a 10k run twice a week. And it will be easier to recover.

"If you already do weightlifting or any other anaerobic exercise, adding HIIT on top is useless since you already get the "afterburn" from weightlifting." Well, the OP's question was comparing between running and sprinting, not weightlifting. Plus, sprinting induces more calorie burn than weightlifting. https://livehealthy.chron.com/sprinting-vs-weight-lifting-5725.html - " A 155-pound person can burn 223 calories in 30 minutes with vigorous weight lifting, according to Harvard Health Publications. As for sprinting, a 2012 study conducted by researchers at Colorado State University found that sprinting for only two-and-a-half minutes per day results in over 200 calories burned." 2 and half minutes for 200 calories my guy (obviously just one study, but this demonstrates how good it is). Lmao keep running 10k for 1kcal, when I can just do sprinting for 15-20 minutes. Plus, sprinting is more sustainable, will be able to pump out more sessions in a week than 10k runs.

"Those physiologists say its better for losing weight fast for fat people who do not have the cardiovascular health to be able to keep up LISS for a longer period of time. The key here is intensity, if you can barely keep up a normal pace with a high HR, LISS sucks, if you can actually keep up the pace and intensity for a long period of time, LISS is better for pure caloric burn." Don't see where it says that? They say straight up say "Starting in the late ’90s, however, a number of studies, including one by Japanese researcher Izumi Tabata, who popularized the Tabata Protocol, suggested that short, intense interval workouts may produce results similar to longer, slower cardio workouts in a much quicker time period. Soon thereafter, Schuler and many other fitness journalists began touting the benefits of HIIT.Does HIIT live up to the hype? In some respects. “If you’re trying to lose fat, it’s pretty clear that HIIT is a more effective tool than long-distance cardio,” Robertson says. ??? I genuinely don't see where this is said. HIIT is prescribed for fully in shape athletes to burn fat, it ain't even for fatcels. Fatcels actually usually start with steady-state.

How slow do you run? A 10k is less than an hour of running, since when is a hour long workout long? I put on my headphones and listen to music/podcasts/audiobooks. Are you doing 30 min HIIT sessions or what? I don't do runs tbh. The one time I ran a 10k (literally only once in my life), I got 49 something minutes (professionally timed). Again, I don't need to do 30min HIIT sessions to match a 10k run in terms of caloric burn.

You saying that cardiovascular health is a waste of time proves how fat you are.
Your cardiovascular health is improved by sprinting. "Just six HIIT workouts performed over two or three weeks, each lasting just a few minutes, produced measurable improvements in key markers of cardiovascular health, a 2012 study published in the Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research found." There are some insignificant elements of cardiovascular health that aren't targeted by sprinting. Lmao but stop acting like this actually risks anything significant about your cardiovascular health, your cardiovascular health will be more than fine if you sprint rather than do 10k. There are many top-tier strength athletes who don't do cardio to the extent of a 10k run.

Post pics or larp, I mog you in fitness and IQ.
I ain't posting pics on this forum, at least not yet. idk your idea of fitness, if it's a 10k run, then you may beat me, but I am a strength athlete anyway lmao. I focus on strength and athleticism (speed and vertical). In terms of IQ, it depends, you may know more about cardio, I know far more about athleticism. I don't know the extent of your knowledge about strength training, but I am quite knowledgable when it comes to that. Either way, my goal is not to prove who is the better athlete, you just made laugh calling me a fatcel, when you have no idea who I am or what I do. I will be waiting for a response tomorrow, since I'm going to sleep. Deuces

You're taking this way too seriously and personally, but i like it D

Since you're bringing the big boy guns out with studies, i'm going to join you.

The problem with those studies which are talking about weight loss are made with fat/obese people,
Most of the studies i found are made with obese fat women, comparatively not a lot of studies in healthy adults.

The thread is about health/looksmaxxing not weight loss, https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4657417/ here it shows in untrained individuals get mostly similar results from HIIT and LISS, but HIIT enjoyment decreased over time.

Now on to your points, the 1994 Quebec study, which can be found here https://www.semanticscholar.org/pap...neau/b00329d5fbe18289720964125d1912c0e0dcfcbb shows that the total energy cost of the LISS program was 120MJ, whereas the HIIT program was 58MJ, but apparently the HITT program reduced subcutaneous adiposity more than the LISS program. Now the suspicious part is the graphs, after the program, the LISS group lost on average 0,5kg of bodymass whereas the HIIT group lost 0,1kg.

Then again bodyweight is not an indicator of BF%, but this is interesting, gonna read up a bit more about this, thanks. But again, the benefits of HIIT would be minimized if you also do weightlifting.


" Lmao keep running 10k for 1kcal "
https://www.health.harvard.edu/diet...-30-minutes-of-leisure-and-routine-activities it shows that in 30min you burn this amount of calories for 125 155 an 185 person respectively

Aerobics: high impact

210

260

311

meanwhile low impact aerobics burn this much:

Aerobics: low impact

165

205

244

Very similar either way, imo a slow run is more sustainable, don't need to run 10k every time. Sprinting is hard on the knees, so is running. You shouldn't do either if you're too overweight, cause you will fuck up your knees.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3841058/, heres the Colorado study, from what i get, the effects are similar as what you get from high intensity weightlifting. But 2,5min of sprints are hard, might as well do the full workout. In the sense of doing only one, not both, yeah sure, sprinting is better for caloric burn per minute spent. I still think you need both.


If you've ever done the Tabata protocol, you would know those workouts are not fun, its at least 7min of pure agony, which is why I don't do the protocol, the problem with tabata protocol is to keep up the intensity, the whole trick is 7min of total maximal output, i am sure most people on here could not take it. I had to do tabata for rowing physical check up and with the hr and oxygen monitors you will be surprised how much you can push yourself and not die lmao.

49 min for a 10k is respectable, but if you're saying you only did it once, your hr was probably through the roof, you should keep it under 160 for LISS. And if you see the graphs above, caloric burn is similar to high impact aerobics and low impact aerobics, but generally speaking, 1km is a bit under 100kcal, so theoretically I burn around 700-1k in a 10k run, heres a calculation from casian

Again, the cardiovascular health study you're citing is the same one from above https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4657417/, It was in untrained individuals and the LISS group had the same improvements in health markers as the HIIT group.

Also you're talking like a 10k run is big deal, if you have done any running regularly for a couple of months, 10k can become a regular workout, but I am not a runner, so I reserve 10k runs for when I am extra energetic or want to cut down bodyfat %

I went from obese to pretty fit, so i have read a shittone about fitness in strength and cardio, but the thing that bugs me is you're quoting a fitness blog article which quotes a study, so you're basically interpreting the results through the blogs authors interpretation.

It's true, I have no idea who or what you are, a lot of fitness advice on the internet is given by unhealthy people, you seem like you know where to find sources, if you quit reading others interpretations of studies and read them yourself, youll be gucci )

Respect for rebutting and providing at least some sources.

All in all, do both and you will be in a better spot than doing nothing.

 

[AutisticBeaner]

short tem high intensity running boosts T

 

[ProAcktiv]

You're taking this way too seriously and personally, but i like it D

Since you're bringing the big boy guns out with studies, i'm going to join you.

The problem with those studies which are talking about weight loss are made with fat/obese people,
Most of the studies i found are made with obese fat women, comparatively not a lot of studies in healthy adults.

The thread is about health/looksmaxxing not weight loss, https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4657417/ here it shows in untrained individuals get mostly similar results from HIIT and LISS, but HIIT enjoyment decreased over time.

Now on to your points, the 1994 Quebec study, which can be found here https://www.semanticscholar.org/pap...neau/b00329d5fbe18289720964125d1912c0e0dcfcbb shows that the total energy cost of the LISS program was 120MJ, whereas the HIIT program was 58MJ, but apparently the HITT program reduced subcutaneous adiposity more than the LISS program. Now the suspicious part is the graphs, after the program, the LISS group lost on average 0,5kg of bodymass whereas the HIIT group lost 0,1kg. View attachment 552221
Then again bodyweight is not an indicator of BF%, but this is interesting, gonna read up a bit more about this, thanks. But again, the benefits of HIIT would be minimized if you also do weightlifting.


" Lmao keep running 10k for 1kcal "
https://www.health.harvard.edu/diet...-30-minutes-of-leisure-and-routine-activities it shows that in 30min you burn this amount of calories for 125 155 an 185 person respectively

Aerobics: high impact

210

260

311

meanwhile low impact aerobics burn this much:

Aerobics: low impact

165

205

244

Very similar either way, imo a slow run is more sustainable, don't need to run 10k every time. Sprinting is hard on the knees, so is running. You shouldn't do either if you're too overweight, cause you will fuck up your knees.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3841058/, heres the Colorado study, from what i get, the effects are similar as what you get from high intensity weightlifting. But 2,5min of sprints are hard, might as well do the full workout. In the sense of doing only one, not both, yeah sure, sprinting is better for caloric burn per minute spent. I still think you need both.


If you've ever done the Tabata protocol, you would know those workouts are not fun, its at least 7min of pure agony, which is why I don't do the protocol, the problem with tabata protocol is to keep up the intensity, the whole trick is 7min of total maximal output, i am sure most people on here could not take it. I had to do tabata for rowing physical check up and with the hr and oxygen monitors you will be surprised how much you can push yourself and not die lmao.

49 min for a 10k is respectable, but if you're saying you only did it once, your hr was probably through the roof, you should keep it under 160 for LISS. And if you see the graphs above, caloric burn is similar to high impact aerobics and low impact aerobics, but generally speaking, 1km is a bit under 100kcal, so theoretically I burn around 700-1k in a 10k run, heres a calculation from casian View attachment 552260

Again, the cardiovascular health study you're citing is the same one from above https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4657417/, It was in untrained individuals and the LISS group had the same improvements in health markers as the HIIT group.

Also you're talking like a 10k run is big deal, if you have done any running regularly for a couple of months, 10k can become a regular workout, but I am not a runner, so I reserve 10k runs for when I am extra energetic or want to cut down bodyfat %

I went from obese to pretty fit, so i have read a shittone about fitness in strength and cardio, but the thing that bugs me is you're quoting a fitness blog article which quotes a study, so you're basically interpreting the results through the blogs authors interpretation.

It's true, I have no idea who or what you are, a lot of fitness advice on the internet is given by unhealthy people, you seem like you know where to find sources, if you quit reading others interpretations of studies and read them yourself, youll be gucci )

Respect for rebutting and providing at least some sources.

All in all, do both and you will be in a better spot than doing nothing.

Honestly respect for looking into the studies more than I did. Admittedly, I just went to the first few places I found, so I could write up a response. Would've been more detail-oriented in a different situation. But you seem to know your shit, and the fact that you're willing to lo. And if you really are doing ring workouts 4x a week, that's impressive. Gymnasts are some of the strongest ppl i've seen (I actually started out working out with calisthenics, so I use to be on that wave).

You're taking this way too seriously and personally, but i like it D
lmao sorry for that, i thought you were a bit dismissive of HIIT too quickly, but my fault.

49 min for a 10k is respectable, but if you're saying you only did it once, your hr was probably through the roof, you should keep it under 160 for LISS. yeah no it wasn't just a regular 10k run It was part of a marathon event, and I was coughing and cramping up at around 6k, and ended up puking after finishing. Plus, there was a pretty good runner with me, so he was kind of like a pacemaker. I was practically sprinting to keep up with him. If I ran it alone, I would of probably ran something in the mid 50s.

Also you're talking like a 10k run is big deal, if you have done any running regularly for a couple of months, 10k can become a regular workout, but I am not a runner, so I reserve 10k runs for when I am extra energetic or want to cut down bodyfat % yeah my only real experience of running 10k was during that marathon event, and I vowed to never do that shit again . That's where much of my dislike of long-distance running comes from.

I went from obese to pretty fit, so i have read a shittone about fitness in strength and cardio, but the thing that bugs me is you're quoting a fitness blog article which quotes a study, so you're basically interpreting the results through the blogs authors interpretation. Lmao you're completely right about this tho. Truthfully, I wasn't really looking at the studies and was just skimming through so I could find a response. Generally, I like to be more meticulous, but I just couldn't be bothered.

if you quit reading others interpretations of studies and read them yourself, youll be gucci )
Agreed

Respect for rebutting and providing at least some sources.

All in all, do both and you will be in a better spot than doing nothing.
Yeah that was my final consensus and what I recommended to the OP. Good discussion tho G

 

[yorker12]

Honestly respect for looking into the studies more than I did. Admittedly, I just went to the first few places I found, so I could write up a response. Would've been more detail-oriented in a different situation. But you seem to know your shit, and the fact that you're willing to lo. And if you really are doing ring workouts 4x a week, that's impressive. Gymnasts are some of the strongest ppl i've seen (I actually started out working out with calisthenics, so I use to be on that wave).

You're taking this way too seriously and personally, but i like it D
lmao sorry for that, i thought you were a bit dismissive of HIIT too quickly, but my fault.

49 min for a 10k is respectable, but if you're saying you only did it once, your hr was probably through the roof, you should keep it under 160 for LISS. yeah no it wasn't just a regular 10k run It was part of a marathon event, and I was coughing and cramping up at around 6k, and ended up puking after finishing. Plus, there was a pretty good runner with me, so he was kind of like a pacemaker. I was practically sprinting to keep up with him. If I ran it alone, I would of probably ran something in the mid 50s.

Also you're talking like a 10k run is big deal, if you have done any running regularly for a couple of months, 10k can become a regular workout, but I am not a runner, so I reserve 10k runs for when I am extra energetic or want to cut down bodyfat % yeah my only real experience of running 10k was during that marathon event, and I vowed to never do that shit again . That's where much of my dislike of long-distance running comes from.

I went from obese to pretty fit, so i have read a shittone about fitness in strength and cardio, but the thing that bugs me is you're quoting a fitness blog article which quotes a study, so you're basically interpreting the results through the blogs authors interpretation. Lmao you're completely right about this tho. Truthfully, I wasn't really looking at the studies and was just skimming through so I could find a response. Generally, I like to be more meticulous, but I just couldn't be bothered.

if you quit reading others interpretations of studies and read them yourself, youll be gucci )
Agreed

Respect for rebutting and providing at least some sources.

All in all, do both and you will be in a better spot than doing nothing.
Yeah that was my final consensus and what I recommended to the OP. Good discussion tho G

I used to hate longer distance running because I was too heavy(knees hurt) and ran with an extremely high hr.

When I got my fitness tracker with real time hr, everything changed, if i kept my hr at 140-150, I was practically walking, but over time 150 turned in to a slow run in to a normal pace. When you can run at a normal pace and keep your hr under 150, thats when the fun starts.

After around 5km you are warmed up and running feels effortless, when you reach higher distances, for me it starts around 7km, you start to get the fabled runners high, a lot of people don't get this, but I go in to a flow like state, especially if music is blasting.