Will running cause muscle loss?

13

Replies

  • wilsoje74
    wilsoje74 Posts: 1,720 Member
    So switching up to running wouldn't be a good idea?? Should I just continue to lift 3 times a week? I've been lifting for almost 3 months and the scale hasn't moved and I haven't lost any inches. I blame my diet too. I'm trying to get back on track with eating right along with my running so I hope I will see a change. I'm trying to be at a calorie deficit. I want to shed off fat because I need to lose the last 10 lbs and I thought cardio would help a lot with that without having to lose muscle at the same time. I hope it speeds up the weight loss.

    Running won't really speed up your weight loss unless you eat at a deficit. Running is not a huge calorie burner. I ran for 2 yrs and lost zero weight because of my diet. And 4 miles is not really endurance running.
  • KeithAngilly
    KeithAngilly Posts: 575 Member
    " Running is not a huge calorie burner. "

    Just curious, what would you consider a huge calorie burning exercise?
  • wilsoje74
    wilsoje74 Posts: 1,720 Member
    " Running is not a huge calorie burner. "

    Just curious, what would you consider a huge calorie burning exercise?

    Well maybe I mis-spoke. The running I usually do doesn't burn a ton of calories. For my size running for 30 min (3 miles) only burns like 280 cals. Which to me isn't a ton. Maybe that's what I'd burn for any type of exercise in 30 min??? I know I believed that once I could run I would be thin, which did not happen until I watched my diet. I was eating all my running cals and then some!!!
  • TigerBite
    TigerBite Posts: 611 Member
    Most runners don't want to be "bodybuilder bulky", it makes them slower ...

    Personally, I consider myself a "runner" ... I do a distance run (about 8 miles) about twice a month, but everything else is HIIT sprints and hills ... I run 5Ks in under 23 minutes ...

    If I were you, I would do one or two regular pace runs a week and make the other two or three runs HIIT ones with hills and sprints (those workouts really help build nice legs) ... and then your one day strength training (keep that, it will help prevent injury) ... but make it total body, having a strong upper body and core will help improve your running posture and your pace ...
  • KeithAngilly
    KeithAngilly Posts: 575 Member
    " Running is not a huge calorie burner. "

    Just curious, what would you consider a huge calorie burning exercise?

    Well maybe I mis-spoke. The running I usually do doesn't burn a ton of calories. For my size running for 30 min (3 miles) only burns like 280 cals. Which to me isn't a ton. Maybe that's what I'd burn for any type of exercise in 30 min??? I know I believed that once I could run I would be thin, which did not happen until I watched my diet. I was eating all my running cals and then some!!!

    Ah, I understand. Yes, intensity varies the burn, for sure. The point is a solid one though, for sure. No exercise is the magic bullet. Move more, eat less, be kind to ourselves and we all get there. :o)
  • Why do you want smaller thighs?! Our thighs are one of our largest muscles and more muscles=more calories. I understand it sucks when your pants go up a size but there is a big difference between a woman with chubby jiggle thighs and big beautifully toned legs!
  • Amadbro
    Amadbro Posts: 750 Member
    I do both. I had muscular legs before weight lifting but only my legs not upper body. Now symmetrical thanks to weight lifting and still have good cardio stamina thanks to running. Depends on your goals. It is correct that lengthy steady state running will diminish muscle via catabolic effects. But my goals are just to be healthy, feel it and see it.

    Again--only if one is trying to achieve maximum muscle mass gains. Running in particular DOES inhibit muscle gain, it doesn't PREVENT muscle gain--and it doesn't necessarily "diminish" muscle as long as diet is appropriate.

    The average person that is trying to stay healthy, improve aerobic fitness, gain some muscle mass and strength, etc, will likely not see any effect on their progress by running.

    You couldn't be any more WRONG. I have yet to see you give any references for the information you're giving on these forums regarding steady state cardio and its effects on increased levels of cortisol, little to no increase in anabolism and the catabolic effects that come with long distance running. I have posted numerous links citing scientific studies regarding it all.

    Here's another:http://www.jyfit.com/4/post/2011/12/do-intervals-over-steady-state-aerobics-for-cardio-get-leaner-not-skinnier.html

    References:
    1) Marcus C.C.W. Elliott, Phillip P. Wagner, and Loren Chiu, Power Athletes and Distance Training, Physiological and Biomechanical Rationale for Change. USC Sports Med 2007, vol 37, issue 1. Retrieved from: http://www.spartascience.com/publishedresearch_assets/Power athletes and distance training physiological and biomechanical rationale for change.pdf
    2) Tremblay A, Simoneau JA, Bouchard C. Impact of exercise intensity on body fatness and skeletal muscle metabolism. Metabolism 1994; 43 (7): 814-8 Retrieved from: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0026049594902593
    3)Shawn Talbot, PH.D., FACSM (2007) The Cortisol Connection - Why Stress Makes You Fat and Ruins Your Health - And What You Can Do About It.
  • 777Gemma888
    777Gemma888 Posts: 9,578 Member
    You are falsely equating "causes muscle loss" with "inhibits maximum muscle mass gain". The two statements are not comparable, except from the narrowest of perspectives.

    Nope. You are trying to force-feed my perception. My point is, that both activities will shed muscle tissue. Basics - body composition. There's no need to further the dissension between runners vs bodybuilders/weight lifters. Correct me if i'm wrong ~ Do weight lifters/bodybuilders lose muscle as well as fat when they're cutting? Some of the very muscles they'd built whilst bulking?

    I'm not going to get into the semantics of one's physiology to prove your point or mine for that matter. I'm non-combative. I do what works for me, as many have pointed out on this thread, athletes will do what works for them, be they elite or amateur, runners or bodybuilders. We can not be irresponsible, by not citing even the most myopic of inferences.

    Isn't Science about the slightest of conclusions ~ the plausibility of substantiating a possible hypothesis, even the most inane? In this case, "Will running cause muscle loss?" Yes - running and strength-training can and will result in muscle loss if the individual is irresponsible. The risks and benefits on both sides are parallel.

    ETA: Addressing Azdak Joined Mar 2009 October 31, 2013 4:28 pm reply to me.
  • Azdak
    Azdak Posts: 8,281 Member
    I do both. I had muscular legs before weight lifting but only my legs not upper body. Now symmetrical thanks to weight lifting and still have good cardio stamina thanks to running. Depends on your goals. It is correct that lengthy steady state running will diminish muscle via catabolic effects. But my goals are just to be healthy, feel it and see it.

    Again--only if one is trying to achieve maximum muscle mass gains. Running in particular DOES inhibit muscle gain, it doesn't PREVENT muscle gain--and it doesn't necessarily "diminish" muscle as long as diet is appropriate.

    The average person that is trying to stay healthy, improve aerobic fitness, gain some muscle mass and strength, etc, will likely not see any effect on their progress by running.

    You couldn't be any more WRONG. I have yet to see you give any references for the information you're giving on these forums regarding steady state cardio and its effects on increased levels of cortisol, little to no increase in anabolism and the catabolic effects that come with long distance running. I have posted numerous links citing scientific studies regarding it all.

    Here's another:http://www.jyfit.com/4/post/2011/12/do-intervals-over-steady-state-aerobics-for-cardio-get-leaner-not-skinnier.html

    References:
    1) Marcus C.C.W. Elliott, Phillip P. Wagner, and Loren Chiu, Power Athletes and Distance Training, Physiological and Biomechanical Rationale for Change. USC Sports Med 2007, vol 37, issue 1. Retrieved from: http://www.spartascience.com/publishedresearch_assets/Power athletes and distance training physiological and biomechanical rationale for change.pdf
    2) Tremblay A, Simoneau JA, Bouchard C. Impact of exercise intensity on body fatness and skeletal muscle metabolism. Metabolism 1994; 43 (7): 814-8 Retrieved from: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0026049594902593
    3)Shawn Talbot, PH.D., FACSM (2007) The Cortisol Connection - Why Stress Makes You Fat and Ruins Your Health - And What You Can Do About It.

    The studies you cite are primarily "micro" studies--looking at isolated processes and extrapolating the results without ever testing them in a "cause and effect" macro study.

    Just looking at an isolated event and saying "look, that increased cortisol" is an interesting observation, but it doesn't mean anything unless you can actually prove that that particular event and that transient increase in cortisol actually causes the specific effect that you think it does. It's one of the most common mistakes that people make when citing "research" to support their ideas.

    In your case, it seems (and I apologize if I am incorrect) that you are looking at the subject from the narrow perspective of your chosen sport/activity. A bodybuilder, a football lineman, a power lifter--in the case of someone who is trying to maximize gains in muscle mass will likely see "loss of mass" from doing a lot of cardio--especially if the cardio involves a lot of eccentric movements, like running. So yes, someone who is 6' tall, 250lbs and 6% bodyfat and starts to run 40 miles a week is likely going to lose a substantial amount of muscle.

    But that only applies to a rather tiny subset of the population. With an appropriate diet and lifting program, the average person can run a lot and gain muscle mass. It probably won't be as fast or as much as if they didn't run (that's the inhibiting part), but they can gain, and likely gain as much as they want--again assuming they don't "want" to become bodybuilders or power lifters or maximize muscle mass gains.

    It's important to put these discussions in the proper context. It's quite common for people who are into max lifting and max muscle building to assume that what is applicable to them is the same for everyone--but that's just not true.
  • Amadbro
    Amadbro Posts: 750 Member
    I do both. I had muscular legs before weight lifting but only my legs not upper body. Now symmetrical thanks to weight lifting and still have good cardio stamina thanks to running. Depends on your goals. It is correct that lengthy steady state running will diminish muscle via catabolic effects. But my goals are just to be healthy, feel it and see it.

    Again--only if one is trying to achieve maximum muscle mass gains. Running in particular DOES inhibit muscle gain, it doesn't PREVENT muscle gain--and it doesn't necessarily "diminish" muscle as long as diet is appropriate.

    The average person that is trying to stay healthy, improve aerobic fitness, gain some muscle mass and strength, etc, will likely not see any effect on their progress by running.

    You couldn't be any more WRONG. I have yet to see you give any references for the information you're giving on these forums regarding steady state cardio and its effects on increased levels of cortisol, little to no increase in anabolism and the catabolic effects that come with long distance running. I have posted numerous links citing scientific studies regarding it all.

    Here's another:http://www.jyfit.com/4/post/2011/12/do-intervals-over-steady-state-aerobics-for-cardio-get-leaner-not-skinnier.html

    References:
    1) Marcus C.C.W. Elliott, Phillip P. Wagner, and Loren Chiu, Power Athletes and Distance Training, Physiological and Biomechanical Rationale for Change. USC Sports Med 2007, vol 37, issue 1. Retrieved from: http://www.spartascience.com/publishedresearch_assets/Power athletes and distance training physiological and biomechanical rationale for change.pdf
    2) Tremblay A, Simoneau JA, Bouchard C. Impact of exercise intensity on body fatness and skeletal muscle metabolism. Metabolism 1994; 43 (7): 814-8 Retrieved from: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0026049594902593
    3)Shawn Talbot, PH.D., FACSM (2007) The Cortisol Connection - Why Stress Makes You Fat and Ruins Your Health - And What You Can Do About It.

    The studies you cite are primarily "micro" studies--looking at isolated processes and extrapolating the results without ever testing them in a "cause and effect" macro study.

    Just looking at an isolated event and saying "look, that increased cortisol" is an interesting observation, but it doesn't mean anything unless you can actually prove that that particular event and that transient increase in cortisol actually causes the specific effect that you think it does. It's one of the most common mistakes that people make when citing "research" to support their ideas.

    In your case, it seems (and I apologize if I am incorrect) that you are looking at the subject from the narrow perspective of your chosen sport/activity. A bodybuilder, a football lineman, a power lifter--in the case of someone who is trying to maximize gains in muscle mass will likely see "loss of mass" from doing a lot of cardio--especially if the cardio involves a lot of eccentric movements, like running. So yes, someone who is 6' tall, 250lbs and 6% bodyfat and starts to run 40 miles a week is likely going to lose a substantial amount of muscle.

    But that only applies to a rather tiny subset of the population. With an appropriate diet and lifting program, the average person can run a lot and gain muscle mass. It probably won't be as fast or as much as if they didn't run (that's the inhibiting part), but they can gain, and likely gain as much as they want--again assuming they don't "want" to become bodybuilders or power lifters or maximize muscle mass gains.

    It's important to put these discussions in the proper context. It's quite common for people who are into max lifting and max muscle building to assume that what is applicable to them is the same for everyone--but that's just not true.

    Just saw you had a MS degree in Exercise Physiology..my apologies. You're right, I was looking at it from a bodybuilding standpoint.

    /tucks tail between legs
  • UCSMiami
    UCSMiami Posts: 97 Member
    Takes a big person to admit error. A rarity on the Internet. Compliments all around.
  • Amadbro
    Amadbro Posts: 750 Member
    Takes a big person to admit error. A rarity on the Internet. Compliments all around.

    Hey when I'm wrong or have a skewed vision of something I'll be the first to admit it. Not to mention with a MS degree in Exercise Physiology I think he knows what he's talking about.
  • omma_to_3
    omma_to_3 Posts: 3,265 Member
    I run as my primary source of cardio. I also do strength training twice a week (not heavy lifting, but still good strength work with a trainer). In the last 7.5 months of doing this, I haven't lost a lot of weight (partially due to poor diet, but not entirely). However, I do think I've lost a lot more body fat than the scale shows. The running has actually done a lot for that too - especially in my upper body (my chest especially, which for me was a good thing). The running has not affected my legs in a negative way at all. Not the muscle in my upper body either. I'm getting some testing done tomorrow so I'll have "real" numbers on my BF and RMR changes.
  • Azdak
    Azdak Posts: 8,281 Member
    I do both. I had muscular legs before weight lifting but only my legs not upper body. Now symmetrical thanks to weight lifting and still have good cardio stamina thanks to running. Depends on your goals. It is correct that lengthy steady state running will diminish muscle via catabolic effects. But my goals are just to be healthy, feel it and see it.

    Again--only if one is trying to achieve maximum muscle mass gains. Running in particular DOES inhibit muscle gain, it doesn't PREVENT muscle gain--and it doesn't necessarily "diminish" muscle as long as diet is appropriate.

    The average person that is trying to stay healthy, improve aerobic fitness, gain some muscle mass and strength, etc, will likely not see any effect on their progress by running.

    You couldn't be any more WRONG. I have yet to see you give any references for the information you're giving on these forums regarding steady state cardio and its effects on increased levels of cortisol, little to no increase in anabolism and the catabolic effects that come with long distance running. I have posted numerous links citing scientific studies regarding it all.

    Here's another:http://www.jyfit.com/4/post/2011/12/do-intervals-over-steady-state-aerobics-for-cardio-get-leaner-not-skinnier.html

    References:
    1) Marcus C.C.W. Elliott, Phillip P. Wagner, and Loren Chiu, Power Athletes and Distance Training, Physiological and Biomechanical Rationale for Change. USC Sports Med 2007, vol 37, issue 1. Retrieved from: http://www.spartascience.com/publishedresearch_assets/Power athletes and distance training physiological and biomechanical rationale for change.pdf
    2) Tremblay A, Simoneau JA, Bouchard C. Impact of exercise intensity on body fatness and skeletal muscle metabolism. Metabolism 1994; 43 (7): 814-8 Retrieved from: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0026049594902593
    3)Shawn Talbot, PH.D., FACSM (2007) The Cortisol Connection - Why Stress Makes You Fat and Ruins Your Health - And What You Can Do About It.

    The studies you cite are primarily "micro" studies--looking at isolated processes and extrapolating the results without ever testing them in a "cause and effect" macro study.

    Just looking at an isolated event and saying "look, that increased cortisol" is an interesting observation, but it doesn't mean anything unless you can actually prove that that particular event and that transient increase in cortisol actually causes the specific effect that you think it does. It's one of the most common mistakes that people make when citing "research" to support their ideas.

    In your case, it seems (and I apologize if I am incorrect) that you are looking at the subject from the narrow perspective of your chosen sport/activity. A bodybuilder, a football lineman, a power lifter--in the case of someone who is trying to maximize gains in muscle mass will likely see "loss of mass" from doing a lot of cardio--especially if the cardio involves a lot of eccentric movements, like running. So yes, someone who is 6' tall, 250lbs and 6% bodyfat and starts to run 40 miles a week is likely going to lose a substantial amount of muscle.

    But that only applies to a rather tiny subset of the population. With an appropriate diet and lifting program, the average person can run a lot and gain muscle mass. It probably won't be as fast or as much as if they didn't run (that's the inhibiting part), but they can gain, and likely gain as much as they want--again assuming they don't "want" to become bodybuilders or power lifters or maximize muscle mass gains.

    It's important to put these discussions in the proper context. It's quite common for people who are into max lifting and max muscle building to assume that what is applicable to them is the same for everyone--but that's just not true.

    Just saw you had a MS degree in Exercise Physiology..my apologies. You're right, I was looking at it from a bodybuilding standpoint.

    /tucks tail between legs

    It's not a contest--we're just having fun. :smile: And there are a lot of people out there with degrees and certifications who probably haven't read as much as you.

    Not to mention--you have much better looking legs than I do.
  • simple...10 sets of wind sprints, and 400 cals burned on thread mill incline at 2.4 mph without holding on..the fat melts off. Running is a waste of time, and energy IMO. I used to run for about 25 minutes a day never saw a pound drop and thats with adjusted macros.
  • Also, have you everseen a bodybuilder jogging or running on a treadmill? my point exactly
  • LJCannon
    LJCannon Posts: 3,636 Member
    :drinker: bump
  • 3dogsrunning
    3dogsrunning Posts: 27,167 Member
    Also, have you everseen a bodybuilder jogging or running on a treadmill? my point exactly

    Um, yes.


    <
    trained for a half marathon while also training for a bodybuilding competition. Also have seen others.
  • Also, have you everseen a bodybuilder jogging or running on a treadmill? my point exactly

    Um, yes.


    <
    trained for a half marathon while also training for a bodybuilding competition. Also have seen others.
    IM talking about those with Pro cards.
  • 3dogsrunning
    3dogsrunning Posts: 27,167 Member
    Also, have you everseen a bodybuilder jogging or running on a treadmill? my point exactly

    Um, yes.


    <
    trained for a half marathon while also training for a bodybuilding competition. Also have seen others.
    IM talking about those with Pro cards.

    You didn't specify that. Azdak already addressed that point a few posts back. There is a big difference between a pro-bodybuilder and your average person losing weight.

    ETA to add his quote
    In your case, it seems (and I apologize if I am incorrect) that you are looking at the subject from the narrow perspective of your chosen sport/activity. A bodybuilder, a football lineman, a power lifter--in the case of someone who is trying to maximize gains in muscle mass will likely see "loss of mass" from doing a lot of cardio--especially if the cardio involves a lot of eccentric movements, like running. So yes, someone who is 6' tall, 250lbs and 6% bodyfat and starts to run 40 miles a week is likely going to lose a substantial amount of muscle.

    But that only applies to a rather tiny subset of the population. With an appropriate diet and lifting program, the average person can run a lot and gain muscle mass. It probably won't be as fast or as much as if they didn't run (that's the inhibiting part), but they can gain, and likely gain as much as they want--again assuming they don't "want" to become bodybuilders or power lifters or maximize muscle mass gains.

    It's important to put these discussions in the proper context. It's quite common for people who are into max lifting and max muscle building to assume that what is applicable to them is the same for everyone--but that's just not true.
  • Mr_Knight
    Mr_Knight Posts: 9,532 Member
    simple...10 sets of wind sprints, and 400 cals burned on thread mill incline at 2.4 mph without holding on..the fat melts off. Running is a waste of time, and energy IMO.

    I'm having trouble deciphering that sentence - are you suggesting that 10 wind sprints will burn 400 calories?
  • RGv2
    RGv2 Posts: 5,789 Member
    It's absolutely laughable that these are labeled 90% running.

    Sorry, it's true. The top one is a very well known player, who's "supplemental" cardio consists of 2 hours/day of steady state running. That's in addition to normal practice time, which is 3-4 hours a day of, basically, running. This is of course supplemented with interval type training.

    If anything, his time in the weight room is even less than 10% of his other activities. And if we go by calorie burn, it's in the low single-digit percentages, easily.

    He also does about 3000 situps/crunches a day to "focus" his abs, and follows a strict "eat every 2 hours" feeding policy, so I'm sure by some MFP standards he's doing it all wrong. :tongue:

    Typical professional soccer player covers 8-10km in 90 minutes. It is done with lots of variation in pace, of course, but the distance is covered. I don't know too many people who are going to claim 10km isn't a worthy "distance".

    Thanks for the lesson in soccer. I played for 20 years, and spent time in the Olympic developmental program. Yes, 8-10 K in 90 minutes, in all reality, isn't that much, especially for a conditioned athlete.

    Yes, a soccer player will put in the time to get the base miles, but 95% of the game is played at a sprint pace, and a player needs just as much strength in the upper body as the lower due to the physical nature of the game, so to say that a soccer player only performs 10% of their workout in the weight room is absurd.

    If that's what Ronaldo does, than you just lumped every soccer player with someone who has absolute freak genetics.
  • msf74
    msf74 Posts: 3,498 Member
    , but 95% of the game is played at a sprint pace

    Within aerobic capacity, not anaerobic thresholds.

    If aerobic capacity conditioning (which is what running is predominantly based on as I am sure you know) was therefore as muscle wasting as is often alleged then you would expect football players (what is this soccer of which you speak?) to have scrawny legs. They clearly don't and it's not because of weights...

    I do wonder when people say they do HIIT what they are really saying is that they are working at a relatively high intensity in steady state conditions - so towards the upper end of their functional threshold.
  • RGv2
    RGv2 Posts: 5,789 Member
    , but 95% of the game is played at a sprint pace

    Within aerobic capacity, not anaerobic thresholds.

    If aerobic capacity conditioning (which is what running is predominantly based on as I am sure you know) was therefore as muscle wasting as is often alleged then you would expect football players (what is this soccer of which you speak?) to have scrawny legs. They clearly don't and it's not because of weights...

    I do wonder when people say they do HIIT what they are really saying is that they are working at a relatively high intensity in steady state conditions - so towards the upper end of their functional threshold.

    I'm not sure if you're agreeing or not.....

    I'm not saying that running causes muscle loss.... Never did... I disbelieve a physique such as Ronaldo's comes from 90% running, and if that's what Ronaldo does, than every soccer player has just been lumped in with a genetic freak.

    There are quite a few scrawny legged football players too....see every WR not named Dez Bryant, Larry Fitzgerald, or Calvin Johnson. Also see every DB in the game.
  • scorpio516
    scorpio516 Posts: 955 Member
    " Running is not a huge calorie burner. "

    Just curious, what would you consider a huge calorie burning exercise?

    Well maybe I mis-spoke. The running I usually do doesn't burn a ton of calories. For my size running for 30 min (3 miles) only burns like 280 cals. Which to me isn't a ton. Maybe that's what I'd burn for any type of exercise in 30 min??? I know I believed that once I could run I would be thin, which did not happen until I watched my diet. I was eating all my running cals and then some!!!

    Could be pace or mass.
    On Tuesday, I ran 36 minutes and burned ~650 KCal.
    18 KCal/min. 144 KCal/mile. That particular run was high, lots of hills. Over the last year, I averaged 120 KCal/mile or 0.73 KCal/mile/lb.

    @ my 160 lbs, I'm probably not double your mass ;)
  • msf74
    msf74 Posts: 3,498 Member
    I'm not sure if you're agreeing or not.....

    I'm not saying that running causes muscle loss.... Never did...

    My bad. I was misinterpreting what you were saying.

    I am saying player's physiques are generally determined by the majority of the training they do - which is mostly running - which is vastly aerobic in nature and not anaerobic or weights based.

    There seems to be a view around these parts that aerobic work will somehow inevitably lead to an emaciated or flabby look which is simply not true. That was my general point. It seems some people believe that the only way aerobic work is ever done is at 50% VO2 max or MHR which is why that outcome must arise.

    ps: and by football I mean what Americans call soccer ;)
  • RGv2
    RGv2 Posts: 5,789 Member
    I'm not sure if you're agreeing or not.....

    I'm not saying that running causes muscle loss.... Never did...

    My bad. I was misinterpreting what you were saying.

    I am saying player's physiques are generally determined by the majority of the training they do - which is mostly running - which is vastly aerobic in nature and not anaerobic or weights based.

    There seems to be a view around these parts that aerobic work will somehow inevitably lead to an emaciated or flabby look which is simply not true. That was my general point. It seems some people believe that the only way aerobic work is ever done is at 50% VO2 max or MHR which is why that outcome must arise.

    ps: and by football I mean what Americans call soccer ;)

    Fair enough, but football (soccer) players do put down base miles but a lot of the soccer player legs which everyone is speaking of comes from the sport specific training they do (sprints, short sided games, intervals, and Lifting).

    My point was a physique like Ronaldo's (the large upper body he has) doesn't come from 90% cardiovascular work. If that indeed is the training that Ronaldo does, than lumping every soccer player in with him is lumping every soccer player in with a genetic freak.

    That's like lumping all basketball players in with Lebron James, or every American football player with Adrian Peterson. They're genetic freaks, as most professional athlete's are.
  • nitaleotta
    nitaleotta Posts: 24 Member
    I want to cut down the weight training to once a week and run 4 miles everyday instead. Will I lose my thigh muscles? Or will it just get smaller?

    These "90% running" bodies should answer your questions...

    652e4-Ronaldo_2.jpg

    Soccer-Goalie-Stuart-Tomlinson-Moonlights-as-a-Model-01.jpg

    These pictures answer quite a different set of questions for me, but thanks all the same :).
  • msf74
    msf74 Posts: 3,498 Member
    My point was a physique like Ronaldo's (the large upper body he has) doesn't come from 90% cardiovascular work.

    That's a fair point (re: his upper body.)

    Given CR's modelling work I am pretty sure he is doing a little more than the usual football specific training...
  • OP:

    Why do you want to cut your weight training down to once a week? Why can't you lift AND run? I run 4 days a week (5th day is a different cardio) for 30 min. which is 3.1 - 3.5 miles depending on the type of run I'm doing and I lift every day.

    Is there a specific reason as to why you don't want to do both?