Ashtanga Vinyasa yoga

2»

Replies

  • kshama2001
    kshama2001 Posts: 25,972 Member
    xxzenabxx wrote: »


    This is one of the videos that I was talking about! One of my favourites.

    Nice!

    Other people: note that around 6 minutes she starts jumping forward and back rather than stepping. This really kicks it up a notch!

    My practice when I was a full time yoga teacher included jumping, but I haven't done it in some time. I tried it recently and was about 18" short on the forward jump :lol:

    My ultimate fitness goal is to be able to do that routine again. I call it my Om Namah Shivaya Inna Gadda Da Vida flow as those are the songs to which I choreographed it.
  • springlering62
    springlering62 Posts: 5,541 Member
    That’s very similar to our flows at my studio, but our classes are an hour (used to be 75 minutes but shortened to get more students into fewer, socially distanced slots) so we have time for arm balances, shoulder stretches, head and hand stands, intense shoulder stretches, etc.

    I love yoga because it’s like playtime. What can I see if I can do today?! But then again, so is weightlifting. Don’t get that vibe from Pilates. It’s great for core, but it can get very repetitive and a little dull. Dullness is never an issue in yoga.

    Those people on the other thread who said that headstands are easy and require no more work than standing on your feet should watch the spot in the first video where the lady’s abs are clearly flexing to hold her in place. It takes strength to hold a head or hand stand.
  • swandebmaq
    swandebmaq Posts: 5 Member
    Still getting these choices...Hatha, Chair, Aerial, Yoga Six, Yoga to the people, Yogaworks, Bikram, Corepower. No flow, vinyasa or ashtanga.
  • xxzenabxx
    xxzenabxx Posts: 916 Member
    swandebmaq wrote: »
    Still getting these choices...Hatha, Chair, Aerial, Yoga Six, Yoga to the people, Yogaworks, Bikram, Corepower. No flow, vinyasa or ashtanga.

    Vinyasa comes up for me. Try core power-I think that has a higher calorie burn.
  • AnnPT77
    AnnPT77 Posts: 26,264 Member
    swandebmaq wrote: »
    Still getting these choices...Hatha, Chair, Aerial, Yoga Six, Yoga to the people, Yogaworks, Bikram, Corepower. No flow, vinyasa or ashtanga.

    You can create a custom exercise in MFP and name it whatever you like.

    If you buy into the standard MFP METS-based estimating approach, use the 4.0 METS factor (for power yoga) from the Compendium of Physical Activities as the basis for an initial calorie estimate. To do that, pick another 4.0 METS activity that's in the MFP database (it doesn't have to be an even remotely similar activity, BTW). When you have a Vinyasa workout to log, take the number of minutes you did it, and look up the other 4.0 METS activity, for that number of minutes. Use that calorie estimate to create you custom Vinyasa exercise.

    After that, when you use your custom exercise again, MFP will adjust the calories proportionately depending on the new number of minutes, and your then-current body weight, just as it does for the standard exercises.

    I know this sounds a little crazy, but if you understand what the rationale for METS-based estimating is, it's really not crazy at all. There's more to it, but METS are a way of reducing dissimilar activities to a common bodyweight-based intensity metric.

    Some 4.0 MET activities in the standard database are "Bicycling, < 10 mph, leisure", or "Softball, officiating". Yes, those are *nothing like* Vinyasa. Research suggests they have a similar physiological/energy "cost" in calories. If you compare calorie estimates for each in the database, you'll find that MFP gives the same number of calories for each of those for the same duration, even though they're *completely dissimilar* activities.
  • swandebmaq
    swandebmaq Posts: 5 Member
    Thank-you. That is wonderful.
  • vanmep
    vanmep Posts: 396 Member
    Thanks for the info about METS - I never really understood how it worked. That compendium is fascinating. I think the only way to be 100% certain of calories in or calories out is by trial and error. If you are accomplishing what you intended to accomplish then you have good numbers 😊
  • AnnPT77
    AnnPT77 Posts: 26,264 Member
    vanmep wrote: »
    Thanks for the info about METS - I never really understood how it worked. That compendium is fascinating. I think the only way to be 100% certain of calories in or calories out is by trial and error. If you are accomplishing what you intended to accomplish then you have good numbers 😊

    I've read that power metered bikes (i.e., ones that have an accurate watts measurement mechanism) can be pretty close, especially because IMU bicycling has a pretty narrow efficiency band (people from unfit/uncoordinated to high level pros are not hugely far apart in efficiency of the mechanical movements, though they clearly differ in other major performance-related ways). Some other kinds of machines that are properly calibrated and measure watts could be OK-ish. IMU, after that, there's a bunch of approximating involved.

    Doesn't matter; can be close enough to work. (Even trial and error may not get us to "accurate", but still, what matters is reaching some approach that works, for managing weight.)

    I do think it's a useful idea to understand the pros/cons of different calorie estimating methods for different activities, try to use the most reliable ones (or failing accuracy the more conservative ones) for the activities I do. Too many people think fitness trackers deliver gospel, across the board. They don't. Close enough to work, for a lot of people, though.