high intensity/long duration vs. more moderate workout

icimani

In another area a member posted that she was moving away from high-moderate intensity workouts for long durations to low intensity workouts for moderate amounts of time, and that she's feeling better and more fit with the change.

I'm just curious if anyone else has done this and what difference are you seeing?

Is there such a thing as working out too hard for too long? Is it that the workout is fine but then you don't give your body enough time to rest?

How does this fit into exercise heart rate "zones"?
I do use an HRM, but if I stay with the "fat-burning zone" I don't feel like I'm working hard enough.

icimani

bump

piggydog

I think changing up your workout is important

3dogsrunning

It depends on what your goals are. There is a benefit to longer, lower intensity workouts, and to shorter higher intensity. Both build fitness.
IMO, excessively long workouts are not necessary unless you are training for something. High amounts of cardio and lower calorie intakes can cause problems in weight loss.

As for heart rate zones, they are useful in some circumstances, for athletes training for specific goals. In the case of fat loss - its pointless. Yes, at certain zones you burn more fat, however, you are working at such a low intensity (as you have noted) that you don't burn many calories during the workout. A higher intensity workout, you burn more calories over the same time so even though the percentage of fat might be lower, it still ends up being higher with the higher number of calories burned. (I hope that makes sense)
For example, at lower intensities the body may burn 50 percent of the calories from fat, while at higher intensities it may only burn 35 percent. But at higher intensities you burn way more total calories—and more fat calories overall—than you do at lower intensities.