HIIT for someone whose BF is 21~22%

2»

Replies

  • singingflutelady
    singingflutelady Posts: 8,736 Member
    Do you mean 15 sets of 5 reps or 5 sets of 15 reps? 15 sets is way too many
  • Packerjohn
    Packerjohn Posts: 4,855 Member
    Look into a weight program that concentrates on compound movements. Much more bang for your buck than tricep and bicep isolation exercises
  • kcjchang
    kcjchang Posts: 709 Member
    Heart rate monitor are useless when doing HIIT. The rep and rest period, ~60-90 seconds, will be over before your heart rate ramps up (~2 minutes average). It's losing proposition for the following rep as your heart rate will never settle to reflect the intensity. Anyone saying otherwise needs to hit the books.

    By the way HIIT is done at 150-170%+ of VO2Max depending on the regimen. Except for cycling, there is no consumer available monitor that can measure the workload, PERIOD. Power meter makes it possible for cycling to gauge intensity as well as estimating one's VO2Max. All else is through laboratory testing (although to be as accurate as possible it's still recommended for cyclist).
  • robertw486
    robertw486 Posts: 2,399 Member
    kcjchang wrote: »
    Heart rate monitor are useless when doing HIIT. The rep and rest period, ~60-90 seconds, will be over before your heart rate ramps up (~2 minutes average). It's losing proposition for the following rep as your heart rate will never settle to reflect the intensity. Anyone saying otherwise needs to hit the books.

    By the way HIIT is done at 150-170%+ of VO2Max depending on the regimen. Except for cycling, there is no consumer available monitor that can measure the workload, PERIOD. Power meter makes it possible for cycling to gauge intensity as well as estimating one's VO2Max. All else is through laboratory testing (although to be as accurate as possible it's still recommended for cyclist).

    For the HR monitors, useless for tracking the burn I would agree. But they can be very helpful in figuring out the high intensity vs recovery time, as well as keeping track of actual max heart rate.

    I'm a bit confused as to your statement about not being able to monitor workload except during cycling though. Any type of HIIT done on a machine that can measure would be just as accurate measuring as would a cycle power meter, as in only as good as the device.
  • MeanderingMammal
    MeanderingMammal Posts: 7,866 Member
    robertw486 wrote: »
    For the HR monitors, useless for tracking the burn I would agree. But they can be very helpful in figuring out the high intensity vs recovery time, as well as keeping track of actual max heart rate
    .

    It's a question of lead and lag. If you're doing true HIIT then work efforts of 20-30 seconds aren't long enough for the heart to respond enough to reflect the change in workload. Similarly the change in worload entering the rest period leaves the heart slowing at a slower rate, so the gradients on the rising slope and falling slope aren't equivalent. Essentially the slow speed of response to both increased and reduced demand means the short times of true HIIT can't be reliably managed using HR data, better to use time or distance.

    I'd make the same distinction about true HIIT and what people call HIIT. I've seen some people refer to 160-180 as high HRs on here, when in their 20s or 30s. If they're working those as their effort periods then there is no way it's HIIT, that's aerobic effort.

  • kcjchang
    kcjchang Posts: 709 Member
    It's a matter of determining intensity or work effort. Most people, including myself, are really bad at it especially when your red lining. It takes practice and subjectivity to apply RPE when doing steady state tempo (up to 80-90% LT) but that goes out of door when there is no effective matrix to track for 20-30 seconds of work, especially when one don't know there VO2Max in the first place. Power meter gives you the exact level of effort one is putting out, coupled with known VO2Max, 170% of that effort is easly known and tracked during the session. It's just a stab in the dark otherwise.

    Again, there is no really benefit of doing HIIT unless you're peaking for an event. (Not a real problem for 99.9% since the term is misused.)
  • robertw486
    robertw486 Posts: 2,399 Member
    MeanderingMammal wrote: »
    robertw486 wrote: »
    For the HR monitors, useless for tracking the burn I would agree. But they can be very helpful in figuring out the high intensity vs recovery time, as well as keeping track of actual max heart rate
    .

    It's a question of lead and lag. If you're doing true HIIT then work efforts of 20-30 seconds aren't long enough for the heart to respond enough to reflect the change in workload. Similarly the change in worload entering the rest period leaves the heart slowing at a slower rate, so the gradients on the rising slope and falling slope aren't equivalent. Essentially the slow speed of response to both increased and reduced demand means the short times of true HIIT can't be reliably managed using HR data, better to use time or distance.

    I'd make the same distinction about true HIIT and what people call HIIT. I've seen some people refer to 160-180 as high HRs on here, when in their 20s or 30s. If they're working those as their effort periods then there is no way it's HIIT, that's aerobic effort.

    If you're doing HIIT early in a workout, completely agree that HR isn't going to get anywhere elevated quickly. But in my case I often do some HIIT stuff at the end or well into some steady state cardio, where my HR might already be up in the 150-160 range. Though the lifts are still relatively slow, doing the intervals with too short of a rest gives opportunity to allow them to keep climbing and limits the ceiling somewhat for those of us not still 20 or 30 years old.

    And I completely agree it's an abused term. I do have to slightly alter from true HIIT on the elliptical, since you don't have the easy option to stop, puke, and fall over without potentially hitting heavy metal pieces of the machine. But other than tapering off slightly sooner for the sake of safety, it's still easy to get up above the oxygen capabilities pretty quick.

    kcjchang wrote: »
    It's a matter of determining intensity or work effort. Most people, including myself, are really bad at it especially when your red lining. It takes practice and subjectivity to apply RPE when doing steady state tempo (up to 80-90% LT) but that goes out of door when there is no effective matrix to track for 20-30 seconds of work, especially when one don't know there VO2Max in the first place. Power meter gives you the exact level of effort one is putting out, coupled with known VO2Max, 170% of that effort is easly known and tracked during the session. It's just a stab in the dark otherwise.

    Again, there is no really benefit of doing HIIT unless you're peaking for an event. (Not a real problem for 99.9% since the term is misused.)

    That makes more sense with the direction you explained. I was just wondering why you had singled it out to using a bike vs any known power meter method. I would think with the right data available, really you could do it on just about anything, just by adjusting the data source used to measure power output.

    Being I don't have a power meter on the bike, I use the elliptical to watch output vs heart rate, both during steady state and HIIT type stuff. It's helped me get much better connected with appropriate power output when I'm actually on the bike with less data available to me. To agree with your RPE statement, I found I was using small acceleration events and minor changes to allow too much swing in my HR by outputting energy where it was essentially wasted. Using the HRM on the bike computer and watching HR on the elliptical put my in much better touch concerning where the added effort and keeping HR more stable on the bike paid off in real pace. It was actually easier riding to higher pace but being mindful of HR, verses the "old me" version which put too much effort into some of the acceleration events that were in terms of overall pace, slow regardless.

    I wish it wasn't cooling off so much here. Even with the old crappy mountain bike, I'm confident I could knock down some good steady state pace if I just pack the bike to places clear enough of traffic to do it.
  • MeanderingMammal
    MeanderingMammal Posts: 7,866 Member
    robertw486 wrote: »
    If you're doing HIIT early in a workout, completely agree that HR isn't going to get anywhere elevated quickly.

    Indeed, if I'm running I won't do sprint intervals until I've warmed up for 15-20 minutes, at about a 9-10min/mile, on the bike/ turbo it's about 15 minutes at about 25kph before I'll go into it.

  • heatherwartanyan
    heatherwartanyan Posts: 66 Member
    HIIT even 30 min will burn more calories then an hour on a treadmill. It increases your epoc.
  • MeanderingMammal
    MeanderingMammal Posts: 7,866 Member
    heatherwartanyan wrote: »
    HIIT even 30 min will burn more calories then an hour on a treadmill. It increases your epoc.

    If you're doing 30 minutes of HIIT, you're not doing HIIT.

    And no... To put the calorie expenditure in context, using a sprint interval session:
    • 15 minute warm up - 1.5 miles - c 150cals
    • 10* 100metre sprint with 100 metre rest periods - c1.2 miles - c120cals
    • 15 minute cool down - 1.5 miles (unlikely as much slower after the session) - c150 cals
    • Total - 420cals (optimistically)
    • EPOC @ 8% - 33cals

    Compare that with a steady state run:
    • 60 minutes easy pace - 6.5miles - 650cals
    • EPOC @ 4% - 25cals

    You'll note that the actual high intensity period within the sprint session is quite a small part, so most of the calorie expenditure comes from the warm up and cool down.

    As upthread, the value of a HIIT session isn't about the calorie expenditure, it's about the effect on VO2Max.

  • MeanderingMammal
    MeanderingMammal Posts: 7,866 Member
    I should probably ad, that's very illustrative. There is no way that 10*100metre sprints could be HIIT, the first 5 or 6 possibly, but not all of them.
  • kcjchang
    kcjchang Posts: 709 Member
    I wished the Timmons regimen was never publicized or started in the first place. Jamie Timmons' hypothesis was/is misguided in the first place (at least applied to the general public) and his hobnob with Michael Mosley in the BBC Horizon programme in February 2012 only serves to mislead (disgusting in my book).
  • robertw486
    robertw486 Posts: 2,399 Member
    kcjchang wrote: »
    I wished the Timmons regimen was never publicized or started in the first place. Jamie Timmons' hypothesis was/is misguided in the first place (at least applied to the general public) and his hobnob with Michael Mosley in the BBC Horizon programme in February 2012 only serves to mislead (disgusting in my book).

    I only recently took a look at the various regimens/protocols of the HIIT theory through the years. And I think they all have some use for slightly differing reasons. More than anything I think for me that type of stuff has put me more in touch with where my VO2 max is roughly, and how long I can exceed it and recover without serious problems.

    But it does seem that the recent stuff has people convinced that not only is HIIT good, but it's so good that it's going to overcome the lesser time with a greater calorie burn.
  • LKArgh
    LKArgh Posts: 5,178 Member
    MeanderingMammal wrote: »
    heatherwartanyan wrote: »
    HIIT even 30 min will burn more calories then an hour on a treadmill. It increases your epoc.

    If you're doing 30 minutes of HIIT, you're not doing HIIT.

    And no... To put the calorie expenditure in context, using a sprint interval session:
    • 15 minute warm up - 1.5 miles - c 150cals
    • 10* 100metre sprint with 100 metre rest periods - c1.2 miles - c120cals
    • 15 minute cool down - 1.5 miles (unlikely as much slower after the session) - c150 cals
    • Total - 420cals (optimistically)
    • EPOC @ 8% - 33cals

    Compare that with a steady state run:
    • 60 minutes easy pace - 6.5miles - 650cals
    • EPOC @ 4% - 25cals

    You'll note that the actual high intensity period within the sprint session is quite a small part, so most of the calorie expenditure comes from the warm up and cool down.

    As upthread, the value of a HIIT session isn't about the calorie expenditure, it's about the effect on VO2Max.

    Thank you. It is funny how everyone these days, even just a few weeks after joining the gym, appears to be doing HIIT for hours ;)

Categories