HIIT Workouts
Replies
-
I think the point is that the classic Tabata protocol is HIIT, but not all HIIT is Tabata. That doesn't make it "not as good" in the abstract.
Similarly, not all intense intervals are HIIT, but that doesn't discount their value.
It's just about not over-broadening terminology until meaning becomes diluted; and to be careful that if we're going attribute specific benefits to something, that there's research linking those specific benefits to that specific thing (or something very close), not just to something someone's calling by the same name.
Quoted and bolded for truth.3 -
kimber0607 wrote: »I'm loving this work out at the moment
My plan is to work out 5x per week and 2 rest days
I usually work out 1 hour 15min...and am huffing and puffing and dripping in sweat..but in a good way
I would actually do this work out daily but I dont want to over exert myself and risk injury etc...seem reasonable?
Im using youtube..loving Astrid swam and the 30 min popsugar videos
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fckvlw9BsBg
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mioINZIzgbY
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_S92-wZ_tfMTIA!
Kim
Despite the marketing, this is not HIIT. It may be a good workout but is a classic example of how the use of the term HIIT gets applied to anything and everything these days. If you can do it for 1 hour and 15 minutes, it can't be HIIT. Also, due to it's impact on the central nervous system, HIIT (real HIIT) is not recommended more than twice, maybe 3 x per week. Most of the this information has already been posted earlier in this thread.
Good luck with you workout. I hope it achieves your goals
Thanks ...appreciate the insight
I usually watch 2-3 videos per work out session... but I should add def need a break in between the videos (and lots of water) ..I'm toast by the end..LOL
2 -
Just some clarification on what seems to be a never ending grey area....
At some point, Tabata licensed the use of his name to forms of intervals other than the IE1 protocol that many people know about. The below article shows a trailer and claims the official recognition into the circuit stuff was in 2018. I think I had seen this video trailer even prior to 2018, but I could be wrong.
https://bodybuilding.com/content/the-real-tabata-a-brutal-circuit-from-the-protocols-inventor.html
So in that respect the post by @Strongfitmoma100412 is correct in that she is doing "Tabata." The posts by others speaking of IE1 protocol are correct as well, it's just different forms of Tabata.
I've personally seen so many articles by fitness organizations, arguments on forums, and just grey area in general that I don't really know who to consider the authority on what is an isn't HIIT. But I really don't care either, since any hard to extreme intervals seem to have benefits. Can you reach 170% of VO2max doing circuits? I'm not sure. But I am sure you can do circuits that will dig into anaerobic power levels and create oxygen debt, so to me that will give benefits.
As for the discussion on "true" HIIT by some claiming it will leave you in a withering mess on the floor, I'll openly disagree. I've done true IE1 protocol Tabata on my elliptical machine, and even did the program for a week the way they did in the study. It's hard, but not crazy hard, and I recovered quick enough to be able to do steady state stuff following it, even when I had done extended and incorrectly high warm ups.
IE1 protocol is NOT based on "full out" effort. It is based on reaching 170% of VO2max. Without some type of power measure, it's just a guess what people are doing. Having done the protocol on a machine with a reliable power measure, it wasn't as crazy as some people think. This is not to say I disagree with what some state about "max effort" workouts. If I went full out every interval the recovery and stresses would no doubt be more extreme. I think I've tested up into the 200-210% of VO2max levels just screwing around. Tabata even tried another protocol using 200% VO2max as the work segment.
And as for calorie burn.... well IMO for any given period of time I can burn a much higher amount of calories just doing a steady state exercise that uses my legs as the primary power source.
3 -
kimber0607 wrote: »kimber0607 wrote: »I'm loving this work out at the moment
My plan is to work out 5x per week and 2 rest days
I usually work out 1 hour 15min...and am huffing and puffing and dripping in sweat..but in a good way
I would actually do this work out daily but I dont want to over exert myself and risk injury etc...seem reasonable?
Im using youtube..loving Astrid swam and the 30 min popsugar videoshttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fckvlw9BsBghttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mioINZIzgbYhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_S92-wZ_tfMTIA!
Kim
Despite the marketing, this is not HIIT. It may be a good workout but is a classic example of how the use of the term HIIT gets applied to anything and everything these days. If you can do it for 1 hour and 15 minutes, it can't be HIIT. Also, due to it's impact on the central nervous system, HIIT (real HIIT) is not recommended more than twice, maybe 3 x per week. Most of the this information has already been posted earlier in this thread.
Good luck with you workout. I hope it achieves your goals
Thanks ...appreciate the insight
I usually watch 2-3 videos per work out session... but I should add def need a break in between the videos (and lots of water) ..I'm toast by the end..LOL
I'm glad you are enjoying this and it's keeping you active. I will also agree with others that it's not "true" HIIT - if you can do more than one, even with a break in between, it's not "true" HIIT. But - it's a great workout anyway and that's what's important!
I think we're all just trying to explain the difference between real HIIT and waht gets marketed as HIIT.
But - I recon as long as you're happy doing it, then keep at it!3 -
Just a bump to add the below link, which was an attempt at better defining HIIT. Since people so often disagree on how it's defined, maybe some more insight from people would give us a thread that better defines it?
https://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/10650144/hiit-defined-what-is-or-isnt-hiit#latest0 -
Im pretty sure im doing it right. My heart rate gets up to 180-190. I burn 200 calories in 10 mins.
And yes I wear a heart rate monitor. Yes Im doing HIIT
Ive been working out for 30 years have been in the fitness industry for 15 years. Im pretty sure I know what Im doing.8 -
Strongfitmama100412 wrote: »Im pretty sure im doing it right. My heart rate gets up to 180-190. I burn 200 calories in 10 mins.
And yes I wear a heart rate monitor. Yes Im doing HIIT
Ive been working out for 30 years have been in the fitness industry for 15 years. Im pretty sure I know what Im doing.
You are aware that heart rate monitors are inaccurate for HIIT to the point of being useless for calorie counts right? It's highly unlikely you are burning 20 calories in 10 minutes.
2 -
Strongfitmama100412 wrote: »Im pretty sure im doing it right. My heart rate gets up to 180-190. I burn 200 calories in 10 mins.
And yes I wear a heart rate monitor. Yes Im doing HIIT
Ive been working out for 30 years have been in the fitness industry for 15 years. Im pretty sure I know what Im doing.
I'm pretty sure your numbers are comically inaccurate!
HR does not convert directly to calories - you really should know this.
You should also know that doing intervals and trying to use HR to estimate calories is a even worse, your elevated HR during recovery phases massively over-estimates calorie burns even if you have dialled in your HR with custom settings for steady state.
Get yourself on a power meter equipped indoor bike trainer and see if you can maintain 340 watt average for 10 minutes. Please report back.
If you can do that for 10 mins flat out with no intervals I would be massively impressed and so would the team managers for pro cycling teams.7 -
HIIT isn't the same a Tabata protocol. HIIT can be done beyond 4 minutes. A correct Tabata protocol really can't. Again, we're speaking a full out sprint and how many can sprint full out for more than 4 minutes? In Tabata, by about the 3rd cycle, most people would be gassed and couldn't continue.MikePfirrman wrote: »https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-intensity_interval_training
Not that Wikipedia is all that as the end all be all authority, but I found this part useful (and applicable to what some of you are asking about what defines HIIT).
Tabata regimen[edit]
A version of HIIT was based on a 1996 study[10] by Professor Izumi Tabata (田畑泉) et al. initially involving Olympic speedskaters. The study used 20 seconds of ultra-intense exercise (at an intensity of about 170% of VO2max) followed by 10 seconds of rest, repeated continuously for 4 minutes (8 cycles). The exercise was performed on a mechanically braked cycle ergometer. Tabata called this the IE1 protocol.[11] In the original study, athletes using this method trained 4 times per week, plus another day of steady-state training, for 6 weeks and obtained gains similar to a group of athletes who did steady state training (70% VO2max) 5 times per week. The steady state group had a higher VO2max at the end (from 52 to 57 mL/(kg•min)), but the Tabata group had started lower and gained more overall (from 48 to 55 mL/(kg•min)). Also, only the Tabata group had gained anaerobic capacity benefits. In the original study from 1996, participants were disqualified if they could not keep a steady cycling pace of 85RPM for the full 20 seconds of work.[relevant? – discuss]
In popular culture, "Tabata training" has now come to refer to a wide variety of HIIT protocols and exercise regimens [12] that may or may not have similar benefits to those found in Tabata's original study.
I do this one rowing workout. Not all the time because it's too strenuous for me personally, but it's helpful to build Wattage. It's a pretty well known Ed McNeely workout.
You basically find out what our max Wattage is on the rower (there's a Wattage reading toggle on the C2). Then you write that down. The workout is 10 second sprints, one minute off. Whenever your Wattage falls below 80% of your max, the workout is done. You shoot for 20 reps.
Similar to the study listed in Wikipedia. By most standards, if it's true HIIT, there's a measurable metric that can be accounted for. Once you stop hitting that metric/measure standard, you're not really doing HIIT, you're just simply elevating your HR. That's why things like Sprinting, Cycling (using Power meters), Rowers and other equipment where you can quantifiably measure output are useful in HIIT. Things like Mountain Climbers or Burpees tend to be much more subjective to the person doing them.
Now, let's say you use a Plyo Box. How many times you can jump up a certain height on a Plyo box in 20 seconds would be a nice measure. Dangerous if not matted, but a nice measure never the less. Once you can't do it a certain amount of times, why are you doing it?
Saying if someone does more than 4 minutes, it can't be HIIT is silly, though. I know guys that are in three times the shape I'm in that easily can do more than 4 minutes of HIIT. Now, granted, they are also doing 150K meters a week on the rower, so massive amounts of slower endurance work. But you can't really say, by definition, that someone can't be doing HIIT if it lasts over 4 minutes. That's just not true.
This guy's in his 60s. He's a World Champion Indoor Rower. His intervals are insane and well beyond 4 minutes. Most guys on college crew teams would be hard pressed to do his workouts.
https://www.c2forum.com/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=169648
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
2 -
On the contrary, Tabata is NOT a form of HIIT because most HIIT don't require 100% effort. Again I'll state, if you run a race at 100% with just a 10 second rest and have to do another 100% race and another 10 second rest, you're not going beyond 4 minutes and not likely going 100% again after that protocol and resting 1 min.MikePfirrman wrote: »MikePfirrman wrote: »https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-intensity_interval_training
Not that Wikipedia is all that as the end all be all authority, but I found this part useful (and applicable to what some of you are asking about what defines HIIT).
Tabata regimen[edit]
A version of HIIT was based on a 1996 study[10] by Professor Izumi Tabata (田畑泉) et al. initially involving Olympic speedskaters. The study used 20 seconds of ultra-intense exercise (at an intensity of about 170% of VO2max) followed by 10 seconds of rest, repeated continuously for 4 minutes (8 cycles). The exercise was performed on a mechanically braked cycle ergometer. Tabata called this the IE1 protocol.[11] In the original study, athletes using this method trained 4 times per week, plus another day of steady-state training, for 6 weeks and obtained gains similar to a group of athletes who did steady state training (70% VO2max) 5 times per week. The steady state group had a higher VO2max at the end (from 52 to 57 mL/(kg•min)), but the Tabata group had started lower and gained more overall (from 48 to 55 mL/(kg•min)). Also, only the Tabata group had gained anaerobic capacity benefits. In the original study from 1996, participants were disqualified if they could not keep a steady cycling pace of 85RPM for the full 20 seconds of work.[relevant? – discuss]
In popular culture, "Tabata training" has now come to refer to a wide variety of HIIT protocols and exercise regimens [12] that may or may not have similar benefits to those found in Tabata's original study.
I do this one rowing workout. Not all the time because it's too strenuous for me personally, but it's helpful to build Wattage. It's a pretty well known Ed McNeely workout.
You basically find out what our max Wattage is on the rower (there's a Wattage reading toggle on the C2). Then you write that down. The workout is 10 second sprints, one minute off. Whenever your Wattage falls below 80% of your max, the workout is done. You shoot for 20 reps.
Similar to the study listed in Wikipedia. By most standards, if it's true HIIT, there's a measurable metric that can be accounted for. Once you stop hitting that metric/measure standard, you're not really doing HIIT, you're just simply elevating your HR. That's why things like Sprinting, Cycling (using Power meters), Rowers and other equipment where you can quantifiably measure output are useful in HIIT. Things like Mountain Climbers or Burpees tend to be much more subjective to the person doing them.
Now, let's say you use a Plyo Box. How many times you can jump up a certain height on a Plyo box in 20 seconds would be a nice measure. Dangerous if not matted, but a nice measure never the less. Once you can't do it a certain amount of times, why are you doing it?
Saying if someone does more than 4 minutes, it can't be HIIT is silly, though. I know guys that are in three times the shape I'm in that easily can do more than 4 minutes of HIIT. Now, granted, they are also doing 150K meters a week on the rower, so massive amounts of slower endurance work. But you can't really say, by definition, that someone can't be doing HIIT if it lasts over 4 minutes. That's just not true.
I don't think niner was saying it's not HIIT if it's over 4 minutes. He was saying it's no the Tabata protocol. Possibly he'll clarify. Buyt that's how I read his comment above.
You might be right but Tabata is just a form of HIIT. I've seen Tabata where you rest one minute after a four minute block and continue doing four minute blocks. Is that Tabata then? If someone still has the same intensity, I'd say yes, it is. I think what he was saying is after four minutes, you should be done if you do it right. Not necessarily.
Personally, I might be done, but not world class athletes.
You CAN do high intensity interval training, but that's at 85%-90%. Most people have no idea how to go 100% in 4 minutes. I would challenge anyone to just box, hitting and swinging with all your might for 3 minutes and see if you can recover to do the same in 1 minute.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition, 4 -
I wouldn't consider any of these videos HIIT workouts. Interval workouts for the first one. But when they say cardio burn workout, you're not burning as much fat as you think. Since most physical exercise will utilize glycogen first (especially with anaerobic lifting exercises), the amount of fat burned will be minimal. The point I'm making here is that exercise is for fitness and health and to retain muscle. If you want to lose fat, you need to ensure that you're in a moderate calorie deficit. With or without exercise, that's how fat loss happens.kimber0607 wrote: »I'm loving this work out at the moment
My plan is to work out 5x per week and 2 rest days
I usually work out 1 hour 15min...and am huffing and puffing and dripping in sweat..but in a good way
I would actually do this work out daily but I dont want to over exert myself and risk injury etc...seem reasonable?
Im using youtube..loving Astrid swam and the 30 min popsugar videoshttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fckvlw9BsBghttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mioINZIzgbYhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_S92-wZ_tfMTIA!
Kim
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
6 -
Strongfitmama100412 wrote: »Im pretty sure im doing it right. My heart rate gets up to 180-190. I burn 200 calories in 10 mins.
And yes I wear a heart rate monitor. Yes Im doing HIIT
Ive been working out for 30 years have been in the fitness industry for 15 years. Im pretty sure I know what Im doing.
I suggest doing an experiment with a small amount of research prior. First do some research into how calories are most accurately calculated on a bike. The answer is with a power meter, but you don't need to take my word for it, a lot has been written about this from people who are more qualified than both of us (ie people who work with professional cyclists).
After you've done that, get on a bike with an accurate power meter (keyword be "accurate" - do a zero offset or calibrate it if need be) and get something that can record and save the metrics from your ride (most importantly power and HR over time). I'm pretty sure Strava would do that as can any of the Garmin devices that accept power meter data. After you've gotten all of that, do a ride of 5 intervals of 3 min at 130 watts/2 minutes at 90 watts with a 5 min warm up and cool down on either side of the interval session (wearing your HR monitor of course). Make sure to upload this to something like Strava or Garmin Connect.
Once you've done that workout look at your data on a graph. Report back on what you see. What you should see is that there's a lag between your HR and the intervals. You might also see a period of your HR continuing to elevate X seconds into the 2 min rest intervals. That HR lag is part of why using HR to calculate calories is especially bad for workouts that involve intervals.4 -
Do you know how many calories Michael Phelps burns in doing a lap of Olympic swimming in an Olympic pool? In less than 2 minutes of a 200 meter race at full speed he burns 27 calories. So you really believe you burn more than the greatest Olympic swimming athlete in 1 minute? At the rate you state, you're burning 20 calories a minute.Strongfitmama100412 wrote: »Im pretty sure im doing it right. My heart rate gets up to 180-190. I burn 200 calories in 10 mins.
And yes I wear a heart rate monitor. Yes Im doing HIIT
Ive been working out for 30 years have been in the fitness industry for 15 years. Im pretty sure I know what Im doing.
https://www.everydayhealth.com/fitness-pictures/how-many-calories-do-olympians-burn.aspx#200-meter-freestyle
Also read: https://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/10506547/heart-rate-monitors-are-not-calorie-monitors
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition 6 -
I wouldn't consider any of these videos HIIT workouts. Interval workouts for the first one. But when they say cardio burn workout, you're not burning as much fat as you think. Since most physical exercise will utilize glycogen first (especially with anaerobic lifting exercises), the amount of fat burned will be minimal. The point I'm making here is that exercise is for fitness and health and to retain muscle. If you want to lose fat, you need to ensure that you're in a moderate calorie deficit. With or without exercise, that's how fat loss happens.kimber0607 wrote: »I'm loving this work out at the moment
My plan is to work out 5x per week and 2 rest days
I usually work out 1 hour 15min...and am huffing and puffing and dripping in sweat..but in a good way
I would actually do this work out daily but I dont want to over exert myself and risk injury etc...seem reasonable?
Im using youtube..loving Astrid swam and the 30 min popsugar videoshttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fckvlw9BsBghttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mioINZIzgbYhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_S92-wZ_tfMTIA!
Kim
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
Yup...baseede on my understanding now, these are not true HII.. all I know is they are fun, and they challenge my *kitten*..LOL
As someone who has never worked out and had no clue where to begin...I actually enjoy doing these and feel accomplished when im done..hoping to see some results soon!
5 -
Do you know how many calories Michael Phelps burns in doing a lap of Olympic swimming in an Olympic pool? In less than 2 minutes of a 200 meter race at full speed he burns 27 calories. So you really believe you burn more than the greatest Olympic swimming athlete in 1 minute? At the rate you state, you're burning 20 calories a minute.Strongfitmama100412 wrote: »Im pretty sure im doing it right. My heart rate gets up to 180-190. I burn 200 calories in 10 mins.
And yes I wear a heart rate monitor. Yes Im doing HIIT
Ive been working out for 30 years have been in the fitness industry for 15 years. Im pretty sure I know what Im doing.
https://www.everydayhealth.com/fitness-pictures/how-many-calories-do-olympians-burn.aspx#200-meter-freestyle
Also read: https://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/10506547/heart-rate-monitors-are-not-calorie-monitors
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
I don't think this is relevant, swimming isn't a weight bearing activity, so you have to work much harder to achieve the same energy output. That's 740 kCal per hour which works out to about 200 watts on a bike. I can do that for an hour. I know because I have a direct force power meter. I'm sure I can't match his output in the water, probably most people can't. More runners would be able to achieve that kind of energy use. Anyway, my point is one person in a pool doesn't tell us much about what other people can and can't do outside a pool.3 -
On the contrary, Tabata is NOT a form of HIIT because most HIIT don't require 100% effort. Again I'll state, if you run a race at 100% with just a 10 second rest and have to do another 100% race and another 10 second rest, you're not going beyond 4 minutes and not likely going 100% again after that protocol and resting 1 min.MikePfirrman wrote: »MikePfirrman wrote: »https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-intensity_interval_training
Not that Wikipedia is all that as the end all be all authority, but I found this part useful (and applicable to what some of you are asking about what defines HIIT).
Tabata regimen[edit]
A version of HIIT was based on a 1996 study[10] by Professor Izumi Tabata (田畑泉) et al. initially involving Olympic speedskaters. The study used 20 seconds of ultra-intense exercise (at an intensity of about 170% of VO2max) followed by 10 seconds of rest, repeated continuously for 4 minutes (8 cycles). The exercise was performed on a mechanically braked cycle ergometer. Tabata called this the IE1 protocol.[11] In the original study, athletes using this method trained 4 times per week, plus another day of steady-state training, for 6 weeks and obtained gains similar to a group of athletes who did steady state training (70% VO2max) 5 times per week. The steady state group had a higher VO2max at the end (from 52 to 57 mL/(kg•min)), but the Tabata group had started lower and gained more overall (from 48 to 55 mL/(kg•min)). Also, only the Tabata group had gained anaerobic capacity benefits. In the original study from 1996, participants were disqualified if they could not keep a steady cycling pace of 85RPM for the full 20 seconds of work.[relevant? – discuss]
In popular culture, "Tabata training" has now come to refer to a wide variety of HIIT protocols and exercise regimens [12] that may or may not have similar benefits to those found in Tabata's original study.
I do this one rowing workout. Not all the time because it's too strenuous for me personally, but it's helpful to build Wattage. It's a pretty well known Ed McNeely workout.
You basically find out what our max Wattage is on the rower (there's a Wattage reading toggle on the C2). Then you write that down. The workout is 10 second sprints, one minute off. Whenever your Wattage falls below 80% of your max, the workout is done. You shoot for 20 reps.
Similar to the study listed in Wikipedia. By most standards, if it's true HIIT, there's a measurable metric that can be accounted for. Once you stop hitting that metric/measure standard, you're not really doing HIIT, you're just simply elevating your HR. That's why things like Sprinting, Cycling (using Power meters), Rowers and other equipment where you can quantifiably measure output are useful in HIIT. Things like Mountain Climbers or Burpees tend to be much more subjective to the person doing them.
Now, let's say you use a Plyo Box. How many times you can jump up a certain height on a Plyo box in 20 seconds would be a nice measure. Dangerous if not matted, but a nice measure never the less. Once you can't do it a certain amount of times, why are you doing it?
Saying if someone does more than 4 minutes, it can't be HIIT is silly, though. I know guys that are in three times the shape I'm in that easily can do more than 4 minutes of HIIT. Now, granted, they are also doing 150K meters a week on the rower, so massive amounts of slower endurance work. But you can't really say, by definition, that someone can't be doing HIIT if it lasts over 4 minutes. That's just not true.
I don't think niner was saying it's not HIIT if it's over 4 minutes. He was saying it's no the Tabata protocol. Possibly he'll clarify. Buyt that's how I read his comment above.
You might be right but Tabata is just a form of HIIT. I've seen Tabata where you rest one minute after a four minute block and continue doing four minute blocks. Is that Tabata then? If someone still has the same intensity, I'd say yes, it is. I think what he was saying is after four minutes, you should be done if you do it right. Not necessarily.
Personally, I might be done, but not world class athletes.
You CAN do high intensity interval training, but that's at 85%-90%. Most people have no idea how to go 100% in 4 minutes. I would challenge anyone to just box, hitting and swinging with all your might for 3 minutes and see if you can recover to do the same in 1 minute.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition,
Tabata IE1 protocol is not 100% effort though. Being that it's based on VO2max, it's also scaled to the fitness of the person. It's certainly not easy as 170% of VO2max is tough. But most people in decent shape could do it in my opinion. I did the protocol as they tested for the full week rotation, and I don't consider myself any type of elite athlete at all.
If you have any VO2max measure, hop on a bike and see for yourself the difference between 170% and max effort.1 -
HIIT isn't the same a Tabata protocol. HIIT can be done beyond 4 minutes. A correct Tabata protocol really can't. Again, we're speaking a full out sprint and how many can sprint full out for more than 4 minutes? In Tabata, by about the 3rd cycle, most people would be gassed and couldn't continue.MikePfirrman wrote: »https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-intensity_interval_training
Not that Wikipedia is all that as the end all be all authority, but I found this part useful (and applicable to what some of you are asking about what defines HIIT).
Tabata regimen[edit]
A version of HIIT was based on a 1996 study[10] by Professor Izumi Tabata (田畑泉) et al. initially involving Olympic speedskaters. The study used 20 seconds of ultra-intense exercise (at an intensity of about 170% of VO2max) followed by 10 seconds of rest, repeated continuously for 4 minutes (8 cycles). The exercise was performed on a mechanically braked cycle ergometer. Tabata called this the IE1 protocol.[11] In the original study, athletes using this method trained 4 times per week, plus another day of steady-state training, for 6 weeks and obtained gains similar to a group of athletes who did steady state training (70% VO2max) 5 times per week. The steady state group had a higher VO2max at the end (from 52 to 57 mL/(kg•min)), but the Tabata group had started lower and gained more overall (from 48 to 55 mL/(kg•min)). Also, only the Tabata group had gained anaerobic capacity benefits. In the original study from 1996, participants were disqualified if they could not keep a steady cycling pace of 85RPM for the full 20 seconds of work.[relevant? – discuss]
In popular culture, "Tabata training" has now come to refer to a wide variety of HIIT protocols and exercise regimens [12] that may or may not have similar benefits to those found in Tabata's original study.
I do this one rowing workout. Not all the time because it's too strenuous for me personally, but it's helpful to build Wattage. It's a pretty well known Ed McNeely workout.
You basically find out what our max Wattage is on the rower (there's a Wattage reading toggle on the C2). Then you write that down. The workout is 10 second sprints, one minute off. Whenever your Wattage falls below 80% of your max, the workout is done. You shoot for 20 reps.
Similar to the study listed in Wikipedia. By most standards, if it's true HIIT, there's a measurable metric that can be accounted for. Once you stop hitting that metric/measure standard, you're not really doing HIIT, you're just simply elevating your HR. That's why things like Sprinting, Cycling (using Power meters), Rowers and other equipment where you can quantifiably measure output are useful in HIIT. Things like Mountain Climbers or Burpees tend to be much more subjective to the person doing them.
Now, let's say you use a Plyo Box. How many times you can jump up a certain height on a Plyo box in 20 seconds would be a nice measure. Dangerous if not matted, but a nice measure never the less. Once you can't do it a certain amount of times, why are you doing it?
Saying if someone does more than 4 minutes, it can't be HIIT is silly, though. I know guys that are in three times the shape I'm in that easily can do more than 4 minutes of HIIT. Now, granted, they are also doing 150K meters a week on the rower, so massive amounts of slower endurance work. But you can't really say, by definition, that someone can't be doing HIIT if it lasts over 4 minutes. That's just not true.
This guy's in his 60s. He's a World Champion Indoor Rower. His intervals are insane and well beyond 4 minutes. Most guys on college crew teams would be hard pressed to do his workouts.
https://www.c2forum.com/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=169648
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
I posted up a guy doing 16 X 250 sprints in his 60s at, roughly 600 plus watts. You obviously have no idea what 600 Watts feels like if you believe that's not all out for a 60 year old. We just have to agree to disagree. Younger rowers can generate nearly 800/900 Watts for many more reps than 4 minutes in short bursts.
Tabata himself has YouTube videos up -- the source himself, Dr Tabata -- that aren't nearly this hard. They look like calisthenics, just what you're telling people isn't Tabata!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=akoBAs5SEJo 1 -
What's important about exercise for most is exercise they enjoy doing. That way it's incorporated into their lifestyle to help keep their health up and weight in check.kimber0607 wrote: »
I wouldn't consider any of these videos HIIT workouts. Interval workouts for the first one. But when they say cardio burn workout, you're not burning as much fat as you think. Since most physical exercise will utilize glycogen first (especially with anaerobic lifting exercises), the amount of fat burned will be minimal. The point I'm making here is that exercise is for fitness and health and to retain muscle. If you want to lose fat, you need to ensure that you're in a moderate calorie deficit. With or without exercise, that's how fat loss happens.kimber0607 wrote: »I'm loving this work out at the moment
My plan is to work out 5x per week and 2 rest days
I usually work out 1 hour 15min...and am huffing and puffing and dripping in sweat..but in a good way
I would actually do this work out daily but I dont want to over exert myself and risk injury etc...seem reasonable?
Im using youtube..loving Astrid swam and the 30 min popsugar videoshttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fckvlw9BsBghttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mioINZIzgbYhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_S92-wZ_tfMTIA!
Kim
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
Yup...baseede on my understanding now, these are not true HII.. all I know is they are fun, and they challenge my *kitten*..LOL
As someone who has never worked out and had no clue where to begin...I actually enjoy doing these and feel accomplished when im done..hoping to see some results soon!
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition 1 -
The resistance of the water makes the difference. It's why a boat that has the same HP as a car can't travel the same speed. Car only has to overcome wind resistance and drag. Boat has to overcome wind resistance and MUCH MORE drag than a car.NorthCascades wrote: »
Do you know how many calories Michael Phelps burns in doing a lap of Olympic swimming in an Olympic pool? In less than 2 minutes of a 200 meter race at full speed he burns 27 calories. So you really believe you burn more than the greatest Olympic swimming athlete in 1 minute? At the rate you state, you're burning 20 calories a minute.Strongfitmama100412 wrote: »Im pretty sure im doing it right. My heart rate gets up to 180-190. I burn 200 calories in 10 mins.
And yes I wear a heart rate monitor. Yes Im doing HIIT
Ive been working out for 30 years have been in the fitness industry for 15 years. Im pretty sure I know what Im doing.
https://www.everydayhealth.com/fitness-pictures/how-many-calories-do-olympians-burn.aspx#200-meter-freestyle
Also read: https://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/10506547/heart-rate-monitors-are-not-calorie-monitors
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
I don't think this is relevant, swimming isn't a weight bearing activity, so you have to work much harder to achieve the same energy output. That's 740 kCal per hour which works out to about 200 watts on a bike. I can do that for an hour. I know because I have a direct force power meter. I'm sure I can't match his output in the water, probably most people can't. More runners would be able to achieve that kind of energy use. Anyway, my point is one person in a pool doesn't tell us much about what other people can and can't do outside a pool.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
2 -
Personally I haven't seen any videos of elite athletes doing Tabata protocol and what wattage they put out, so I have no idea what watt rating they are achieving. It would be great to find one to see comparisons. I have seen videos of elite bike sprinters putting out 1800-2000 watts, so I know it's gotta be damn hard.MikePfirrman wrote: »
HIIT isn't the same a Tabata protocol. HIIT can be done beyond 4 minutes. A correct Tabata protocol really can't. Again, we're speaking a full out sprint and how many can sprint full out for more than 4 minutes? In Tabata, by about the 3rd cycle, most people would be gassed and couldn't continue.MikePfirrman wrote: »https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-intensity_interval_training
Not that Wikipedia is all that as the end all be all authority, but I found this part useful (and applicable to what some of you are asking about what defines HIIT).
Tabata regimen[edit]
A version of HIIT was based on a 1996 study[10] by Professor Izumi Tabata (田畑泉) et al. initially involving Olympic speedskaters. The study used 20 seconds of ultra-intense exercise (at an intensity of about 170% of VO2max) followed by 10 seconds of rest, repeated continuously for 4 minutes (8 cycles). The exercise was performed on a mechanically braked cycle ergometer. Tabata called this the IE1 protocol.[11] In the original study, athletes using this method trained 4 times per week, plus another day of steady-state training, for 6 weeks and obtained gains similar to a group of athletes who did steady state training (70% VO2max) 5 times per week. The steady state group had a higher VO2max at the end (from 52 to 57 mL/(kg•min)), but the Tabata group had started lower and gained more overall (from 48 to 55 mL/(kg•min)). Also, only the Tabata group had gained anaerobic capacity benefits. In the original study from 1996, participants were disqualified if they could not keep a steady cycling pace of 85RPM for the full 20 seconds of work.[relevant? – discuss]
In popular culture, "Tabata training" has now come to refer to a wide variety of HIIT protocols and exercise regimens [12] that may or may not have similar benefits to those found in Tabata's original study.
I do this one rowing workout. Not all the time because it's too strenuous for me personally, but it's helpful to build Wattage. It's a pretty well known Ed McNeely workout.
You basically find out what our max Wattage is on the rower (there's a Wattage reading toggle on the C2). Then you write that down. The workout is 10 second sprints, one minute off. Whenever your Wattage falls below 80% of your max, the workout is done. You shoot for 20 reps.
Similar to the study listed in Wikipedia. By most standards, if it's true HIIT, there's a measurable metric that can be accounted for. Once you stop hitting that metric/measure standard, you're not really doing HIIT, you're just simply elevating your HR. That's why things like Sprinting, Cycling (using Power meters), Rowers and other equipment where you can quantifiably measure output are useful in HIIT. Things like Mountain Climbers or Burpees tend to be much more subjective to the person doing them.
Now, let's say you use a Plyo Box. How many times you can jump up a certain height on a Plyo box in 20 seconds would be a nice measure. Dangerous if not matted, but a nice measure never the less. Once you can't do it a certain amount of times, why are you doing it?
Saying if someone does more than 4 minutes, it can't be HIIT is silly, though. I know guys that are in three times the shape I'm in that easily can do more than 4 minutes of HIIT. Now, granted, they are also doing 150K meters a week on the rower, so massive amounts of slower endurance work. But you can't really say, by definition, that someone can't be doing HIIT if it lasts over 4 minutes. That's just not true.
This guy's in his 60s. He's a World Champion Indoor Rower. His intervals are insane and well beyond 4 minutes. Most guys on college crew teams would be hard pressed to do his workouts.
https://www.c2forum.com/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=169648
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
I posted up a guy doing 16 X 250 sprints in his 60s at, roughly 600 plus watts. You obviously have no idea what 600 Watts feels like if you believe that's not all out for a 60 year old. We just have to agree to disagree. Younger rowers can generate nearly 800/900 Watts for many more reps than 4 minutes in short bursts.
Tabata himself has YouTube videos up -- the source himself, Dr Tabata -- that aren't nearly this hard. They look like calisthenics, just what you're telling people isn't Tabata!https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=akoBAs5SEJo
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition 2 -
Personally I haven't seen any videos of elite athletes doing Tabata protocol and what wattage they put out, so I have no idea what watt rating they are achieving. It would be great to find one to see comparisons. I have seen videos of elite bike sprinters putting out 1800-2000 watts, so I know it's gotta be damn hard.MikePfirrman wrote: »
HIIT isn't the same a Tabata protocol. HIIT can be done beyond 4 minutes. A correct Tabata protocol really can't. Again, we're speaking a full out sprint and how many can sprint full out for more than 4 minutes? In Tabata, by about the 3rd cycle, most people would be gassed and couldn't continue.MikePfirrman wrote: »https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-intensity_interval_training
Not that Wikipedia is all that as the end all be all authority, but I found this part useful (and applicable to what some of you are asking about what defines HIIT).
Tabata regimen[edit]
A version of HIIT was based on a 1996 study[10] by Professor Izumi Tabata (田畑泉) et al. initially involving Olympic speedskaters. The study used 20 seconds of ultra-intense exercise (at an intensity of about 170% of VO2max) followed by 10 seconds of rest, repeated continuously for 4 minutes (8 cycles). The exercise was performed on a mechanically braked cycle ergometer. Tabata called this the IE1 protocol.[11] In the original study, athletes using this method trained 4 times per week, plus another day of steady-state training, for 6 weeks and obtained gains similar to a group of athletes who did steady state training (70% VO2max) 5 times per week. The steady state group had a higher VO2max at the end (from 52 to 57 mL/(kg•min)), but the Tabata group had started lower and gained more overall (from 48 to 55 mL/(kg•min)). Also, only the Tabata group had gained anaerobic capacity benefits. In the original study from 1996, participants were disqualified if they could not keep a steady cycling pace of 85RPM for the full 20 seconds of work.[relevant? – discuss]
In popular culture, "Tabata training" has now come to refer to a wide variety of HIIT protocols and exercise regimens [12] that may or may not have similar benefits to those found in Tabata's original study.
I do this one rowing workout. Not all the time because it's too strenuous for me personally, but it's helpful to build Wattage. It's a pretty well known Ed McNeely workout.
You basically find out what our max Wattage is on the rower (there's a Wattage reading toggle on the C2). Then you write that down. The workout is 10 second sprints, one minute off. Whenever your Wattage falls below 80% of your max, the workout is done. You shoot for 20 reps.
Similar to the study listed in Wikipedia. By most standards, if it's true HIIT, there's a measurable metric that can be accounted for. Once you stop hitting that metric/measure standard, you're not really doing HIIT, you're just simply elevating your HR. That's why things like Sprinting, Cycling (using Power meters), Rowers and other equipment where you can quantifiably measure output are useful in HIIT. Things like Mountain Climbers or Burpees tend to be much more subjective to the person doing them.
Now, let's say you use a Plyo Box. How many times you can jump up a certain height on a Plyo box in 20 seconds would be a nice measure. Dangerous if not matted, but a nice measure never the less. Once you can't do it a certain amount of times, why are you doing it?
Saying if someone does more than 4 minutes, it can't be HIIT is silly, though. I know guys that are in three times the shape I'm in that easily can do more than 4 minutes of HIIT. Now, granted, they are also doing 150K meters a week on the rower, so massive amounts of slower endurance work. But you can't really say, by definition, that someone can't be doing HIIT if it lasts over 4 minutes. That's just not true.
This guy's in his 60s. He's a World Champion Indoor Rower. His intervals are insane and well beyond 4 minutes. Most guys on college crew teams would be hard pressed to do his workouts.
https://www.c2forum.com/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=169648
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
I posted up a guy doing 16 X 250 sprints in his 60s at, roughly 600 plus watts. You obviously have no idea what 600 Watts feels like if you believe that's not all out for a 60 year old. We just have to agree to disagree. Younger rowers can generate nearly 800/900 Watts for many more reps than 4 minutes in short bursts.
Tabata himself has YouTube videos up -- the source himself, Dr Tabata -- that aren't nearly this hard. They look like calisthenics, just what you're telling people isn't Tabata!https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=akoBAs5SEJo
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
That is an interesting question. I know some top rowers can produce well over 1000 Watts and more in shorter bursts. Pro Cyclists can hold 450 or so Watts for an hour, over 1500 for some super elite ones. I know that the Australian Olympic rower that set the Indoor World Record last year (I think) averaged around 750 Watts for 5:20 or so, which is just absolutely absurd. He did it as a "curtain call" of sorts before retiring. His teammates obviously tried to convince him to stay in competition after doing that feat of endurance.
A lady I know, pretty well-known in indoor rowing circles only, just set the over 60 Lgt WR for rowing a Marathon. She averaged 93% of max HR for the 3 plus hours it took her, shattering the old WR for lightweight females.
When people are extremely highly trained, their tolerance to lactic acid (and the ability to reuse it) is the limiting factor. Not reps or an obscure 4 minute timeframe made up by a scientist in Japan.0 -
Personally I haven't seen any videos of elite athletes doing Tabata protocol and what wattage they put out, so I have no idea what watt rating they are achieving. It would be great to find one to see comparisons. I have seen videos of elite bike sprinters putting out 1800-2000 watts, so I know it's gotta be damn hard.MikePfirrman wrote: »
HIIT isn't the same a Tabata protocol. HIIT can be done beyond 4 minutes. A correct Tabata protocol really can't. Again, we're speaking a full out sprint and how many can sprint full out for more than 4 minutes? In Tabata, by about the 3rd cycle, most people would be gassed and couldn't continue.MikePfirrman wrote: »https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-intensity_interval_training
Not that Wikipedia is all that as the end all be all authority, but I found this part useful (and applicable to what some of you are asking about what defines HIIT).
Tabata regimen[edit]
A version of HIIT was based on a 1996 study[10] by Professor Izumi Tabata (田畑泉) et al. initially involving Olympic speedskaters. The study used 20 seconds of ultra-intense exercise (at an intensity of about 170% of VO2max) followed by 10 seconds of rest, repeated continuously for 4 minutes (8 cycles). The exercise was performed on a mechanically braked cycle ergometer. Tabata called this the IE1 protocol.[11] In the original study, athletes using this method trained 4 times per week, plus another day of steady-state training, for 6 weeks and obtained gains similar to a group of athletes who did steady state training (70% VO2max) 5 times per week. The steady state group had a higher VO2max at the end (from 52 to 57 mL/(kg•min)), but the Tabata group had started lower and gained more overall (from 48 to 55 mL/(kg•min)). Also, only the Tabata group had gained anaerobic capacity benefits. In the original study from 1996, participants were disqualified if they could not keep a steady cycling pace of 85RPM for the full 20 seconds of work.[relevant? – discuss]
In popular culture, "Tabata training" has now come to refer to a wide variety of HIIT protocols and exercise regimens [12] that may or may not have similar benefits to those found in Tabata's original study.
I do this one rowing workout. Not all the time because it's too strenuous for me personally, but it's helpful to build Wattage. It's a pretty well known Ed McNeely workout.
You basically find out what our max Wattage is on the rower (there's a Wattage reading toggle on the C2). Then you write that down. The workout is 10 second sprints, one minute off. Whenever your Wattage falls below 80% of your max, the workout is done. You shoot for 20 reps.
Similar to the study listed in Wikipedia. By most standards, if it's true HIIT, there's a measurable metric that can be accounted for. Once you stop hitting that metric/measure standard, you're not really doing HIIT, you're just simply elevating your HR. That's why things like Sprinting, Cycling (using Power meters), Rowers and other equipment where you can quantifiably measure output are useful in HIIT. Things like Mountain Climbers or Burpees tend to be much more subjective to the person doing them.
Now, let's say you use a Plyo Box. How many times you can jump up a certain height on a Plyo box in 20 seconds would be a nice measure. Dangerous if not matted, but a nice measure never the less. Once you can't do it a certain amount of times, why are you doing it?
Saying if someone does more than 4 minutes, it can't be HIIT is silly, though. I know guys that are in three times the shape I'm in that easily can do more than 4 minutes of HIIT. Now, granted, they are also doing 150K meters a week on the rower, so massive amounts of slower endurance work. But you can't really say, by definition, that someone can't be doing HIIT if it lasts over 4 minutes. That's just not true.
This guy's in his 60s. He's a World Champion Indoor Rower. His intervals are insane and well beyond 4 minutes. Most guys on college crew teams would be hard pressed to do his workouts.
https://www.c2forum.com/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=169648
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
I posted up a guy doing 16 X 250 sprints in his 60s at, roughly 600 plus watts. You obviously have no idea what 600 Watts feels like if you believe that's not all out for a 60 year old. We just have to agree to disagree. Younger rowers can generate nearly 800/900 Watts for many more reps than 4 minutes in short bursts.
Tabata himself has YouTube videos up -- the source himself, Dr Tabata -- that aren't nearly this hard. They look like calisthenics, just what you're telling people isn't Tabata!https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=akoBAs5SEJo
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
Oh how convenient that the TdF is right now and that Strava exists.
Here's Thomas De Gendt's race on Monday on Strava. His average power for over 5 hours was 244 watts... His max wattage that day was 1,196 and that was after hours of riding.
And this is why cyclists at professional/elite races need to eat so much food both on the bike and off because 5,100 calories on top of your regular caloric needs is a lot (I ran the numbers and I think he likely burned more like 4,550 calories but regardless, that's a lot). This is also why at some point I said that I think the people who these calorie calculations aided by power are most useful for are elite cyclists and the people who manage/take care of elite cyclists. I would imagine that this would actually be far harder to deal with for an elite level junior who is still growing. You've got the calories they're burning while on the bike and then their caloric need from being a growing teenager.
4 -
Personally I haven't seen any videos of elite athletes doing Tabata protocol and what wattage they put out, so I have no idea what watt rating they are achieving. It would be great to find one to see comparisons. I have seen videos of elite bike sprinters putting out 1800-2000 watts, so I know it's gotta be damn hard.MikePfirrman wrote: »
HIIT isn't the same a Tabata protocol. HIIT can be done beyond 4 minutes. A correct Tabata protocol really can't. Again, we're speaking a full out sprint and how many can sprint full out for more than 4 minutes? In Tabata, by about the 3rd cycle, most people would be gassed and couldn't continue.MikePfirrman wrote: »https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-intensity_interval_training
Not that Wikipedia is all that as the end all be all authority, but I found this part useful (and applicable to what some of you are asking about what defines HIIT).
Tabata regimen[edit]
A version of HIIT was based on a 1996 study[10] by Professor Izumi Tabata (田畑泉) et al. initially involving Olympic speedskaters. The study used 20 seconds of ultra-intense exercise (at an intensity of about 170% of VO2max) followed by 10 seconds of rest, repeated continuously for 4 minutes (8 cycles). The exercise was performed on a mechanically braked cycle ergometer. Tabata called this the IE1 protocol.[11] In the original study, athletes using this method trained 4 times per week, plus another day of steady-state training, for 6 weeks and obtained gains similar to a group of athletes who did steady state training (70% VO2max) 5 times per week. The steady state group had a higher VO2max at the end (from 52 to 57 mL/(kg•min)), but the Tabata group had started lower and gained more overall (from 48 to 55 mL/(kg•min)). Also, only the Tabata group had gained anaerobic capacity benefits. In the original study from 1996, participants were disqualified if they could not keep a steady cycling pace of 85RPM for the full 20 seconds of work.[relevant? – discuss]
In popular culture, "Tabata training" has now come to refer to a wide variety of HIIT protocols and exercise regimens [12] that may or may not have similar benefits to those found in Tabata's original study.
I do this one rowing workout. Not all the time because it's too strenuous for me personally, but it's helpful to build Wattage. It's a pretty well known Ed McNeely workout.
You basically find out what our max Wattage is on the rower (there's a Wattage reading toggle on the C2). Then you write that down. The workout is 10 second sprints, one minute off. Whenever your Wattage falls below 80% of your max, the workout is done. You shoot for 20 reps.
Similar to the study listed in Wikipedia. By most standards, if it's true HIIT, there's a measurable metric that can be accounted for. Once you stop hitting that metric/measure standard, you're not really doing HIIT, you're just simply elevating your HR. That's why things like Sprinting, Cycling (using Power meters), Rowers and other equipment where you can quantifiably measure output are useful in HIIT. Things like Mountain Climbers or Burpees tend to be much more subjective to the person doing them.
Now, let's say you use a Plyo Box. How many times you can jump up a certain height on a Plyo box in 20 seconds would be a nice measure. Dangerous if not matted, but a nice measure never the less. Once you can't do it a certain amount of times, why are you doing it?
Saying if someone does more than 4 minutes, it can't be HIIT is silly, though. I know guys that are in three times the shape I'm in that easily can do more than 4 minutes of HIIT. Now, granted, they are also doing 150K meters a week on the rower, so massive amounts of slower endurance work. But you can't really say, by definition, that someone can't be doing HIIT if it lasts over 4 minutes. That's just not true.
This guy's in his 60s. He's a World Champion Indoor Rower. His intervals are insane and well beyond 4 minutes. Most guys on college crew teams would be hard pressed to do his workouts.
https://www.c2forum.com/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=169648
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
I posted up a guy doing 16 X 250 sprints in his 60s at, roughly 600 plus watts. You obviously have no idea what 600 Watts feels like if you believe that's not all out for a 60 year old. We just have to agree to disagree. Younger rowers can generate nearly 800/900 Watts for many more reps than 4 minutes in short bursts.
Tabata himself has YouTube videos up -- the source himself, Dr Tabata -- that aren't nearly this hard. They look like calisthenics, just what you're telling people isn't Tabata!https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=akoBAs5SEJo
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
Oh how convenient that the TdF is right now and that Strava exists.
Here's Thomas De Gendt's race on Monday on Strava. His average power for over 5 hours was 244 watts... His max wattage that day was 1,196 and that was after hours of riding.
And this is why cyclists at professional/elite races need to eat so much food both on the bike and off because 5,100 calories on top of your regular caloric needs is a lot (I ran the numbers and I think he likely burned more like 4,550 calories but regardless, that's a lot). This is also why at some point I said that I think the people who these calorie calculations aided by power are most useful for are elite cyclists and the people who manage/take care of elite cyclists. I would imagine that this would actually be far harder to deal with for an elite level junior who is still growing. You've got the calories they're burning while on the bike and then their caloric need from being a growing teenager.
That's just silly power. I can (barely) hold 240 Watts on the Assault Bike for an hour and can only hold around 190 on the rower for an hour when I'm my best shape. To hold that level for five hours is incredible. But that's why they are that elite! The kind of training that goes into that stamina is mind blowing.1 -
MikePfirrman wrote: »
Personally I haven't seen any videos of elite athletes doing Tabata protocol and what wattage they put out, so I have no idea what watt rating they are achieving. It would be great to find one to see comparisons. I have seen videos of elite bike sprinters putting out 1800-2000 watts, so I know it's gotta be damn hard.MikePfirrman wrote: »
HIIT isn't the same a Tabata protocol. HIIT can be done beyond 4 minutes. A correct Tabata protocol really can't. Again, we're speaking a full out sprint and how many can sprint full out for more than 4 minutes? In Tabata, by about the 3rd cycle, most people would be gassed and couldn't continue.MikePfirrman wrote: »https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-intensity_interval_training
Not that Wikipedia is all that as the end all be all authority, but I found this part useful (and applicable to what some of you are asking about what defines HIIT).
Tabata regimen[edit]
A version of HIIT was based on a 1996 study[10] by Professor Izumi Tabata (田畑泉) et al. initially involving Olympic speedskaters. The study used 20 seconds of ultra-intense exercise (at an intensity of about 170% of VO2max) followed by 10 seconds of rest, repeated continuously for 4 minutes (8 cycles). The exercise was performed on a mechanically braked cycle ergometer. Tabata called this the IE1 protocol.[11] In the original study, athletes using this method trained 4 times per week, plus another day of steady-state training, for 6 weeks and obtained gains similar to a group of athletes who did steady state training (70% VO2max) 5 times per week. The steady state group had a higher VO2max at the end (from 52 to 57 mL/(kg•min)), but the Tabata group had started lower and gained more overall (from 48 to 55 mL/(kg•min)). Also, only the Tabata group had gained anaerobic capacity benefits. In the original study from 1996, participants were disqualified if they could not keep a steady cycling pace of 85RPM for the full 20 seconds of work.[relevant? – discuss]
In popular culture, "Tabata training" has now come to refer to a wide variety of HIIT protocols and exercise regimens [12] that may or may not have similar benefits to those found in Tabata's original study.
I do this one rowing workout. Not all the time because it's too strenuous for me personally, but it's helpful to build Wattage. It's a pretty well known Ed McNeely workout.
You basically find out what our max Wattage is on the rower (there's a Wattage reading toggle on the C2). Then you write that down. The workout is 10 second sprints, one minute off. Whenever your Wattage falls below 80% of your max, the workout is done. You shoot for 20 reps.
Similar to the study listed in Wikipedia. By most standards, if it's true HIIT, there's a measurable metric that can be accounted for. Once you stop hitting that metric/measure standard, you're not really doing HIIT, you're just simply elevating your HR. That's why things like Sprinting, Cycling (using Power meters), Rowers and other equipment where you can quantifiably measure output are useful in HIIT. Things like Mountain Climbers or Burpees tend to be much more subjective to the person doing them.
Now, let's say you use a Plyo Box. How many times you can jump up a certain height on a Plyo box in 20 seconds would be a nice measure. Dangerous if not matted, but a nice measure never the less. Once you can't do it a certain amount of times, why are you doing it?
Saying if someone does more than 4 minutes, it can't be HIIT is silly, though. I know guys that are in three times the shape I'm in that easily can do more than 4 minutes of HIIT. Now, granted, they are also doing 150K meters a week on the rower, so massive amounts of slower endurance work. But you can't really say, by definition, that someone can't be doing HIIT if it lasts over 4 minutes. That's just not true.
This guy's in his 60s. He's a World Champion Indoor Rower. His intervals are insane and well beyond 4 minutes. Most guys on college crew teams would be hard pressed to do his workouts.
https://www.c2forum.com/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=169648
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
I posted up a guy doing 16 X 250 sprints in his 60s at, roughly 600 plus watts. You obviously have no idea what 600 Watts feels like if you believe that's not all out for a 60 year old. We just have to agree to disagree. Younger rowers can generate nearly 800/900 Watts for many more reps than 4 minutes in short bursts.
Tabata himself has YouTube videos up -- the source himself, Dr Tabata -- that aren't nearly this hard. They look like calisthenics, just what you're telling people isn't Tabata!https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=akoBAs5SEJo
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
Oh how convenient that the TdF is right now and that Strava exists.
Here's Thomas De Gendt's race on Monday on Strava. His average power for over 5 hours was 244 watts... His max wattage that day was 1,196 and that was after hours of riding.
And this is why cyclists at professional/elite races need to eat so much food both on the bike and off because 5,100 calories on top of your regular caloric needs is a lot (I ran the numbers and I think he likely burned more like 4,550 calories but regardless, that's a lot). This is also why at some point I said that I think the people who these calorie calculations aided by power are most useful for are elite cyclists and the people who manage/take care of elite cyclists. I would imagine that this would actually be far harder to deal with for an elite level junior who is still growing. You've got the calories they're burning while on the bike and then their caloric need from being a growing teenager.
That's just silly power. I can (barely) hold 240 Watts on the Assault Bike for an hour and can only hold around 190 on the rower for an hour when I'm my best shape. To hold that level for five hours is incredible. But that's why they are that elite! The kind of training that goes into that stamina is mind blowing.
Yeah it's stupid amounts of power and endurance that's for sure. And then doing that for 21 days with 2 rest days. Oh and then you also might crash and depending on how bad or not bad that crash is, manage to finish out the Tour despite that (thank god for massage therapists and team doctors). Or you could just be crazy (in a good and/or mildly unwise way) like Lawson Craddock last year and crash, end up with a hairline fracture in your scapula, and then manage to finish the TdF (raising thousands of dollars for a local velodrome in the process).
There's a really good 6 episode docu-series on Amazon (free with Amazon Prime) called Eat. Race. Win. that looks at what it takes to feed a team during the TdF. It's a good watch and doesn't include much if any pseudoscience. Logical given that pseudoscience and high level endurance sports with lots of money and glory on the line don't really go together. It makes you really appreciate how hard and tedious it is for the riders to eat enough and how much thought, labor, and specificity goes into feeding the athletes. In an alternate universe I would love to be a dietitian working with athletes at that level because it's absolutely fascinating.2 -
That would be awesome to work in that field. One PT I got close to (when my wife had her worst Fibro years ago) treated some really world famous athletes. He's been on the support team for a while for the American that just finished 3rd at Badwater (he's previously won it) from my home town. The support teams are becoming huge just to make one really world class, elite athlete.
Also, the fact that he could hit over 1000 Watts after 3 hours of riding is insane. I'd only hit 1000 Watts in my dreams! For that matter, anything close to 1000 Watts.1 -
MikePfirrman wrote: »That would be awesome to work in that field. One PT I got close to (when my wife had her worst Fibro years ago) treated some really world famous athletes. He's been on the support team for a while for the American that just finished 3rd at Badwater (he's previously won it) from my home town. The support teams are becoming huge just to make one really world class, elite athlete.
Also, the fact that he could hit over 1000 Watts after 3 hours of riding is insane. I'd only hit 1000 Watts in my dreams! For that matter, anything close to 1000 Watts.
Nice, yeah I've been really lucky with all of my PTs after my four knee surgeries as well as both of my orthopedic surgeons. All of them worked elite athletes on a regular basis and the orthos both have been team doctors at different Summer Olympic games (one went to Beijing and the other to Rio). One of my former chiropractors (the only good chiro I ever had) also was one of the US team chiros in Beijing and was a chiropractor for a professional cycling team in the 90s that raced at major UCI races (including the TdF). Needless to say, I've gotten exceedingly lucky with orthos and PTs.
For a very short while I thought about becoming a PT with the goal of working primarily with elite athletes. Then I realized that I would, in all likelihood, primarily work with the average patient who has no desire to actually do their exercises (which I can commiserate with - see my shoulder injury of last late winter). I suspect that realization happened during a PT session where someone else in the PT gym was really not having it and appeared to have no desire to be there. I can remember this person pretty clearly despite it being over 6 years ago. It was a good decision because my current trajectory, education wise, is looking good, but one can dream.2 -
I hit 1,142w on my lunch ride today.
https://connect.garmin.com/modern/activity/3859086983
But 1 second power is pretty meaningless, I'm still slow. Was only 168w for the whole ride.1 -
NorthCascades wrote: »I hit 1,142w on my lunch ride today.
https://connect.garmin.com/modern/activity/3859086983
But 1 second power is pretty meaningless, I'm still slow. Was only 168w for the whole ride.
Psst - if you're near Green Lake on Aug 3rd you should swing by and watch some of the regatta.3
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 431 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions