Home   |   Contact   |   Help

Get Our Newsletter
Sign up for our free newsletter to get training tips and stay up to date on Catalyst Athletics, and get a FREE issue of the Performance Menu journal.

Go Back   Catalyst Athletics Forums > Training > Endurance

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 12-28-2009, 09:29 AM   #21
Shane Skowron
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Queens, NY
Posts: 227
Default

I would agree that Tabata intervals are mostly pretty silly for calisthenic exercises.

But for endurance exercise (running, swimming, cycling, rowing, etc) I don't think we need individual studies to demonstrate that it is an effective means of training for anaerobic and aerobic benefit. There are other studies shown that interval training is effective. Tabata may or may not be better than other interval schemes. But this doesn't matter since it shouldn't be considered the holy grail of interval training, but rather be employed as just another tool in the training repertoire.
Shane Skowron is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-28-2009, 10:20 AM   #22
Jonathan Silverman
New Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Posts: 34
Default

Thanks for helping me understand all of this...

so since a tabata protocol was used for aerobic activities as a way to incr. aerobic and anaerobic ability...

then i think the way to incorporate it into front squats would be..

first front squat 2-3 reps for 10-12 sets until you feel your heart is like pounding in your chest, and then right away

drop the weight really light and shoot for 7-12 reps or more tabata protocol wise.

and then my conclusion is in a month you will be able to do heavier 4-6 reps than somebody who doesn't do this.


what do you guys think?

basically what my logic is this:
tabata = incr aerobic & anaerobic capacity in an aerobic excercise and not include incr. aerobic & anaerobic capacity within anaerobic excercise. so to get tabatas benefits for weight training we kinda gotta trick the body into thinking its doing an aerobic excercise. im talking about a new subjective protocol that incorporates the tabata protocol for anaerobic work.
Jonathan Silverman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-28-2009, 10:59 AM   #23
Donald Lee
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 646
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jonathan Silverman View Post
Thanks for helping me understand all of this...

so since a tabata protocol was used for aerobic activities as a way to incr. aerobic and anaerobic ability...

then i think the way to incorporate it into front squats would be..

first front squat 2-3 reps for 10-12 sets until you feel your heart is like pounding in your chest, and then right away

drop the weight really light and shoot for 7-12 reps or more tabata protocol wise.

and then my conclusion is in a month you will be able to do heavier 4-6 reps than somebody who doesn't do this.


what do you guys think?

basically what my logic is this:
tabata = incr aerobic & anaerobic capacity in an aerobic excercise and not include incr. aerobic & anaerobic capacity within anaerobic excercise. so to get tabatas benefits for weight training we kinda gotta trick the body into thinking its doing an aerobic excercise. im talking about a new subjective protocol that incorporates the tabata protocol for anaerobic work.
If you just want some basic aerobic capacity, something like that could work. The Tabata research indicated increases in V02 Max as their indicator of aerobic fitness. V02 Max is important for the shorter endurance events, but power outut at lactate threshold becomes the primary indicator of aerobic performance during longer events. Tabata intervals would do very little for that beyond a basic threshold.
Donald Lee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-28-2009, 11:01 AM   #24
Donald Lee
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 646
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Prevost View Post
Most adaptations that affect performance are inside of the muscles. The central adaptations are less important when it comes to performance. For example, only a small percentage of the most fit athletes actually desaturate (less than 98-100% oxygen saturation on hemaglobin) at max exercise levels. Even these athletes are rarely doing any event at this intensity level, even in a shorter event like a 5K. As a result, we are almost never limited by central adaptations, which argues for a focus on training specificity if you want to perform.
Mike,

I posted what you wrote on another forum and got this response:

Quote:
There has been a debate for years in exercise physiology about whether the limiting factor in aerobic performance comes from the cardiovascular supply side or oxygen utilization within the muscles themselves. There are arguments for both sides within the literature and I don't think there is really a clear answer yet but regardless, performance depends on both supply and utilization as well as contractile properties of the muscles, technique and skill, etc. It's probably a bit simplistic to say there is any one piece of the physiological puzzle that is single most important. When it comes to performance, it's all important.
Donald Lee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-28-2009, 03:15 PM   #25
Andew Cattermole
New Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Sydney Australia
Posts: 41
Default

"There has been a debate for years in exercise physiology about whether the limiting factor in aerobic performance comes from the cardiovascular supply side or oxygen utilization within the muscles themselves. There are arguments for both sides within the literature and I don't think there is really a clear answer yet but regardless, performance depends on both supply and utilization as well as contractile properties of the muscles, technique and skill, etc. It's probably a bit simplistic to say there is any one piece of the physiological puzzle that is single most important. When it comes to performance, it's all important."

Can I ask which forum? as that's a great reply
Andew Cattermole is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-29-2009, 04:45 PM   #26
Mike Prevost
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 54
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Donald Lee View Post
Mike,

I posted what you wrote on another forum and got this response:
Donald

Seems like a well thought out reply but it is wrong. Only Dr. Tim Noakes and his lab believe that there is a limiter besides the cardiovascular side. The other 99.9% of exercise physiologists are pretty clear on this, and the research supports it....the limiter for VO2 max is the supply of oxygen to working muscles. If you could supply more oxygen, the muscles would use it and you would see an increase in VO2 max.

The situation gets a bit more complicated when you try to test VO2 max in a modality other than running. But even that does not invalidate the finding that VO2 max is limited by the cardiovascular system.

In the context of my post however.....VO2 max is not really that important when it comes to predicting performance. THis is because most events are not run at VO2 max intensities. THerefore it is metabolic adaptations inside of the muscles that will primarily determine performance. This is why power or pace at lactate threshold are considered better predictors than VO2 max.
Mike Prevost is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-29-2009, 06:33 PM   #27
Shane Skowron
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Queens, NY
Posts: 227
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Prevost View Post
In the context of my post however.....VO2 max is not really that important when it comes to predicting performance.
Correct.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Prevost View Post
THis is because most events are not run at VO2 max intensities.
Really? The 5000 meters is 95% of VO2Max and the 3000 meters is right about 100% of VO2Max.
So you must mean every event above 5k?
Shane Skowron is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-30-2009, 12:51 AM   #28
Donald Lee
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 646
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Prevost View Post
Donald

Seems like a well thought out reply but it is wrong. Only Dr. Tim Noakes and his lab believe that there is a limiter besides the cardiovascular side. The other 99.9% of exercise physiologists are pretty clear on this, and the research supports it....the limiter for VO2 max is the supply of oxygen to working muscles. If you could supply more oxygen, the muscles would use it and you would see an increase in VO2 max.

The situation gets a bit more complicated when you try to test VO2 max in a modality other than running. But even that does not invalidate the finding that VO2 max is limited by the cardiovascular system.

In the context of my post however.....VO2 max is not really that important when it comes to predicting performance. THis is because most events are not run at VO2 max intensities. THerefore it is metabolic adaptations inside of the muscles that will primarily determine performance. This is why power or pace at lactate threshold are considered better predictors than VO2 max.
I don't get what you're saying, Mike. I mean, I don't get how you're trying to argue against what Joel over at www.8weeksout.com was saying. How does what you're saying relate to the central vs. peripheral adaptation contributions for endurance events?
Donald Lee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-30-2009, 07:48 AM   #29
Steven Low
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 3,091
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shane Skowron View Post
Correct.



Really? The 5000 meters is 95% of VO2Max and the 3000 meters is right about 100% of VO2Max.
So you must mean every event above 5k?
No, because everyone (the elite guys) is grouped up towards the end of most of the long distance races. So ability to sustain high lac threshold intensities... aka the sprint to the finish... determines who wins. Not Vo2max.
__________________
Posts NOT intended as professional medical, training or nutrition advice.
Site // Bodyweight Strength Training Article // Overcoming Gravity Bodyweight Book
Steven Low is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-30-2009, 08:46 AM   #30
Shane Skowron
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Queens, NY
Posts: 227
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Steven Low View Post
No, because everyone (the elite guys) is grouped up towards the end of most of the long distance races. So ability to sustain high lac threshold intensities... aka the sprint to the finish... determines who wins. Not Vo2max.
I get that. But I don't get how "most events are not run at VO2 Max intensities."
Shane Skowron is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:31 PM.

Powered by vBulletin Version 3.6.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Subscribe to our Newsletter


Receive emails with training tips, news updates, events info, sale notifications and more.
ASK GREG

Submit your question to be answered by Greg Everett in the Performance Menu or on the website

Submit Your Question
WEIGHTLIFTING TEAM

Catalyst Athletics is a USA Weightlifting team of competitive Olympic-style weightlifters with multiple national team medals.

Read More
Olympic Weightlifting Book
Catalyst Athletics
Contact Us
About
Help
Newsletter
Products & Services
Gym
Store
Seminars
Weightlifting Team
Performance Menu
Magazine Home
Subscriber Login
Issues
Articles
Workouts
About the Program
Workout Archives
Exercise Demos
Text Only
Instructional Content
Exercise Demos
Video Gallery
Free Articles
Free Recipes
Resources
Recommended Books & DVDs
Olympic Weightlifting Guide
Discussion Forum
Weight Conversion Calculator