10 Surprising Fitness Tips

I can only assume she was trying to say there are no strength training benefits to cross training, but that is true of any aerobic exercise.

Azdak... Thank you for your post; I think your views are well-reasoned and appropriate, but I do have a question about the point you made that I quoted above. In light of that statement, how do you classify plyometrics or jump training? For me, I have an hour-long workout of this type once a week, and my heart rate is very much elevated through the course of the workout, similar to a traditional "aerobic" activity. I am noticing modest gains in strength, balance, and kinesthetic awareness, but mostly in improved muscular endurance.

I'll be interested to hear your views.

Good question. One of the most important things about discussing exercise training adaptations is to make sure that we are defining our terms properly.

What I was referring to was primarily traditional weight training. With this type of training, the increase in heart rate that occurs is NOT due to a stressing of the cardiovascular system. When we measure heart rate during exercise, we are actually trying to estimate increased oxygen uptake, achieved through an increase in cardiac output. In other words, we are measuring a *volume* load on the heart and an activation of the cardiovascular system. Heart rate is only an indirect measurement, but it is reliable during aerobic exercise because there is a parallel relationship between heart rate and aerobic intensity.

This relationship is uncoupled during strength training. The HR increase that occurs during weight training is a *pressure* load, not volume--the increase in HR is NOT matched by an increase in oxygen uptake or cardiac output. Therefore, during weight training, heart rate is NOT a reliable indicator of aerobic activity. A study was done in the 1980s that demonstrated this definitively.

Now, plyometrics is a little different in that the gains achieved are often more due to neural recruitment of muscle fibers than actual hypertrophy of the muscles themselves. There are also some changes in the muscle fibers related to energy substrate utilization. There is probably not a single answer to the question. None of these situations I describe are black/white, either/or--it's more like a continuum. So depending on the type of plyometric exercise, there might be a cardio component (esp w/"bounding" and jumping-type exercises). The cardio adaptation that will occur will be more specific to that activity--i.e. designed to cope with the stresses of the pylometrics. It will probably result in better interval recovery and maybe short-term aerobic power (intensity) as opposed to long-term endurance. How much "carryover" transfers to your other activities will be variable--in this case, you're kind of an experiment of 1.

I apologize if this sounds overly detailed. Training adaptations are very specific to the activity being performed. If that adaptation happens to coincide with some other activity you are doing, then you will notice greater "improvement" just because it has a "real life" effect. An inactive person or someone starting a new activity will feel that "general improvement" even more.

I hope this is helpful.

Azdak... That was an outstanding answer my good man; I am all about the details. As I've gotten more into my fitness routines, I've become a bit of a bookworm (as is my habit) concerning issues relating to exercise, performance, general and sports nutrition, and anatomical function (I have a parallel interest in this last regard as pertains to my martial arts studies as the techniques I practice focus on manipulation of the body's energy systems, anatomical structures, and nerve plexi to achieve desired body positions or reactions in an opponent for debilitation or control, but that's another story). I'm doing some studying right now on energy systems and energy conversion within skeletal muscle fibers as I want to understand the chemistry behind energy production, the role ATP and other compounds play, how the body uses various "sugar" compounds, and so on. Helps me get my mind around the usefulness of the more common performance-enhancing supplements that can be taken advantage of (the LEGAL ones, of course).

So... Keep the details coming, and thanks again. If I may ask, can you provide some more details of your background, since I'm assuming at this point that you've had some extensive collegiate study in these areas, possibly exercise phisiology, sports nutrition, or similar courses of study? I'm always happy to know folks who are well-educated resources. I've got a gentleman that works for my employer who's working on a PhD in Sports Nutrition and Physical Performance and has trained Olympic athletes, and he's a wonderful resource when I have questions come up.

I earned a Master's in Exercise Physiology with a clinical emphasis back in 1985. I was/am (not sure if it if still valid) a Certified Exercise Specialist by ACSM. I worked from 1985-1993 in clinical settings like cardiac rehab and then from 1993-2000 in hospital based wellness centers. In addition to the clinical work I was always interested in fitness-based ex phys as well, mainly focusing on the recreational and advanced recreational exerciser. I spent several years in the 1990s heavily involved with some fitness-related newsgroups and also answered questions through an "Ask the Trainer" website that was sponsored by the health system I worked for. Up until a few months ago, I could google my name and still find a lot of the newgroup comments and website answers 10 years later. In 2000, I was recruited to sell fitness equipment to schools--I decided to give it a try and make a few more $$$. Well, I made the $$$, but I also got stuck in a situation for 8 years that beat me up, physically and healthwise. I was laid off in January, so I am trying to use this opportunity to get my lifestyle back under control--that's what brings me here.

I am more of a physiologist than, say, a trainer. To me, one is science and the other art (I don't really have the "charisma", the imagination, or the patience to be the kind of trainer I would want to be). I studied for the CSCS certification for the NSCA and could have passed but I never took the test because, not being an actual strength coach, I thought I would be misrepresenting myself.

So, I'm a little rusty after 8 years out of the game, but I still think I have something to offer ;-)
I have some strong opinions--I think a lot of what passes for "exercise info" is dreck, and I think that a lot of so-called "trainers" are frauds. I like to think I can combine a good base of academic and research knowledge along with the practical experience of having worked with and observed thousands of exercisers. And I'm never afraid to say "I don't know" when appropriate ;-)

how do you get your ticker on your reply?:happy: