Month: August 2018

I received an e-mail this morning from an area high school volleyball coach asking me for any scientific literature I could provide regarding the benefit of private coaching for athletes.  My area of expertise (if there is such a thing) is exercise physiology, not motor learning, per se, so I don’t have a file of articles from which to share.  It is requiring some digging on my part and my calling upon colleagues with more experience in this area.  Nonetheless, I am inspired to share some thoughts on sport specialization and, more specifically, where parents spend their money in support of their child’s sports dreams.

There is a trend in youth sports to pressure kids to specialize at younger ages—despite the evidence that early sports specialization (prior to the age of 12) may actually be detrimental.  While parents and coaches may accepted recommendations against early specialization, there seems to be a rush to specialization once the child hits 8^th or 9^th grade.  Much of this, in my opinion is driven by the club sport industry, coaches (particularly club team coaches), and parental competition.  Sadly, this pursuit of the rare college scholarship is likely costing the parent the price of a college education!

A secondary symptom of the early rush to sports specialization is the parental demand for “sport-specific” training.  This includes the off-season (if the athlete truly has an off-season) general preparatory training, as well as private skill coaching.  Again, the demand for this is driven by the club sport industry, coaches (particularly club team coaches), and parental competition.  Other than team practice and drills, however, there is no such thing as “sport-specific training”!  It is true that specific sports may have different emphases, but when it comes down to sports training, all athletes are faced with the same health-related components of physical fitness (i.e., cardiorespiratory endurance, muscle endurance, muscle strength, flexibility, and body composition) and motor skill-related components of physical fitness (i.e., speed, power, agility, balance, coordination, and reaction time).  These contribute to overall “athleticism”, but there is not sport-specific requirement in training.  Muscle does not know for what sport it is contracting!  One’s ability to change direction and move explosively is the same whether the athlete is a volleyball player, football player, basketball player, or wrestler.  I hear quite often from collegiate coaches that they recruit athletes not position players.

But what about specific sport skills?  Surely, it is a good investment to pay professional coaches to teach them?  Perhaps, but to what extent?  It is increasingly common for parents to invest thousands of dollars in position coaching for their child.  While this may be useful for some athletes, there is the question of the return on the investment.  If there were such a thing as a Sports Economist (and perhaps there is), I would suspect that he/she would present significant evidence that the benefit is next to zero.  Even for that quarterback prodigy who is being recruited in the seventh grade by D-I colleges.  First, if the kid is good enough, he/she is good enough.  The fundamental hardware is there (as David Epstein, Sports Gene, might say).  The software will develop with time and practice.  All the attention too early might lead to burn out or self-destruction (e.g., Todd Marinovich) or the late realization that the athlete’s success lay elsewhere (e.g., David Sills V).  A much more practical approach is for the athlete to attend quality sports camps and spending time playing (a variety of sports activities).

Opportunity costs.  One of the most important lessons I try to drive home for my students is that everything we do comes at the expense of something more or less important.  This is especially true of sports training.  For parents, it is not only time but money.  If you want your athlete to get a college education, first, prioritize academics, and second, save money!  A good athlete will find his or her place on a team.  The better the athlete the better the opportunity.  Invest in general athletic ability before sport-specific skill.  What is going to make a kid a better athlete is:

1. physical activity—let the kid play and have fun.

2. general preparatory training—allow an off-season for physical conditioning; dollars a much better invested with a competent strength and conditioning coach than a positions coach.

3. don’t buy into the club sport mentality—your athlete doesn’t get better by association. Just because you mortgage your house to pay for your athlete to be on a travel squad does not guarantee success. Encourage the athlete to participate in multiple sports.

4. failure—the best athletes become the best athletes by learning what not to do as much as by learning what to do. Having a positions coach teaching the athlete how to properly execute a movement is great, but failure will teach the athlete what to do when circumstances change. Athletic movement patterns must become instinctive.  Elite performance comes with diligent practice.

5. Allowing the sport to be enjoyable.

6. Let coaches coach.

Your athlete has the genes you gave them.  This can’t be changed.  No amount of private coaching can overcome poor genes.  If the genetic potential is there, it is just a matter of practice.  The best practice is what will make the athlete a better athlete—which has less to do with playing the specific sport more.

If other parents are telling you that you need to specialize in order to make the varsity squad, it is probably because they are afraid their kid doesn’t have the skills to make the varsity squad.  Rest assured, if your athlete is truly athletic, he or she will be desired by the coaches—even the coach who threatens that the athlete won’t see playing time if he/she doesn’t participate in year-around training.  For one, that coach doesn’t see the harm that he or she is causing the athletes.  Secondly, that coach probably has a financial interest in your athlete’s participation.

Before you consider your investment in club sports and private coaching read this:

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/8-things-you-should-know-about-sports-scholarships/

Be your best today; be better tomorrow.

Carpe momento!

I read the post of a former student today on Facebook.  She has taken a challenging course to success and is on a path to doing (extra)ordinary things.  I have watch her and many other students mature over the last few years, and, soon going into yet another academic year, it gives me momentum to be better this year.

A comment was made in the post that “It didn’t work out exactly like I planned.”  I am sure it did not.  Life, thankfully, rarely ever does.  I would argue, however, that her life has worked out (is working out) exactly as it should.  If life worked out like we plan, we would most certainly miss lessons and opportunities, although they may be hard and sometimes overwhelming, that shape who we are becoming.

As a college professor, I often see dramatic change in my students from the time they arrive on campus to the time they leave.  If they so honor me with the opportunity to remain connected post-graduation, I see even greater growth.  Rarely, if ever, does the student (or anyone) follow the path they planned.  The unwanted challenges and difficulties strengthen the individual as his or her path is revealed before them.  They who dare to face the challenges and accept them as opportunities are the ones who become (extra)ordinary.

In her post, the student, who recently completed a Master’s degree in Athletic Training, commented that “I have the tools to help athletes in my same position go further than I did”.  This particular statement expresses what I like to refer to as “grattitude” (gratitude + attitude).  It expresses a growth in Spiritual maturity and “well-centeredness”.  Our Purposes—whatever they might be—are intended to pay our lives forward.  When we can recognize this, we become truly (extra)ordinary.

As my former student reflects on her path, it gives me cause to reflect upon my own.  It gives me hope and inspiration what tomorrow—and the coming academic year will bring.  It strengthens my own grattitude and reminds me that while my life has not work out exactly like I had planned it is, indeed, working out exactly as it should.

Be your best today; be better tomorrow.

Carpe momento!

As we send our children and young adults, Kindergarten through college, off to school, what advice are we giving them?  I tell mine that I want them to “fail”.  Now, obviously, I don’t want them to get failing grades.  I want nothing less than A’s and B’s.  But, I want them to “fail”.

By “fail”, I want my children to fall short of their expectations.  In other words, I want them to reach beyond their comfort zone—beyond their current abilities.  Sadly, I am not sure this is a universal goal in our current education system.

It is unfortunate that a teacher’s success is most often measured according to standardized test.  In my opinion, this dumbs-down our children and fosters mediocrity.  I don’t blame the teachers.  I fault the politicians, administrators, the unions, and, above all, the parents.

Politicians and administrators are too focused on rather arbitrary standards and accessing schools and teachers accordingly when no two students have the same abilities and/or needs.  Thus, too much time is spent “teaching to the test”—focusing on minimal accomplishment rather than individual accomplishment.  In such instances, the top and the middle students are left under-challenged and the struggling students rarely learn the value of effort for effort’s sake.

I am not a fan of teachers’ unions.  Please, don’t take this of a condemnation of or lack of support for teachers.  I appreciate the challenges our teachers face—particularly our best and most dedicated teachers.  The unions, in my opinion and experience, have a purely political agenda.  If they did not, we would see less effort going into political campaigns and more going toward teacher pay and funding for classroom supplies.  Moreover, we would see greater pressure against standardized testing and standardized teaching.  The current system fails the teachers and, moreover, fails the students.

We as parents, however, hold the greatest responsibility.  In so many ways, it is the parents who weaken the efforts of students.  Parents expect their children and young adults to receive high marks regardless of effort.  Parents do not teach that it is the process of learning that is most important.  Thus, an ever-increasing number of students feel they “deserve” an ‘A’.  (Then of course they complain when their employees don’t want to work for their pay.)

As a professor, I am most concerned with the final outcome.  I prefer to see fewer A’s on my exams.  Why?  Because we learn from our failures.  Consider your response when getting back a test in school.  Of course, the first thing you looked at was the grade.  (This is natural.)  Then, did you look at all the questions?  No.  You likely reviewed the questions you got wrong.  I believe the point of exams is to identify and correct areas of weakness.  I am less concerned about what a student knows at midterm than I am about what knowledge they are leaving the course.  More importantly, I am focused on providing the foundation to continue learning and expand knowledge.  Knowledge only grows if someone is willing to ask questions and fail.

One of my most influential college professors was Dr. Dennis Morse, an Anatomy professor at the (then) Medical College of Ohio.  Our graduate courses in Anatomy involved a small group of us dissecting a human cadaver and studying self-selected texts.  Dr. Morse would meet with us weekly and question us—orally—on our progress.  I did not understand for some time why I was getting A’s in the courses when I, seemingly, knew nothing.  I could answer the questions asked of my peers, but I rarely correctly answered the questions asked of me.  Dr. Morse had a seemingly psychic knack of knowing what we didn’t know.  (My friends, too, would miss their questions.)  He would ask follow-up questions that guided us to the question’s answer.  Most Anatomy exams involve identifying pinned structures and require rote memorization.  Somehow, however, Dr. Morse taught how to know Anatomy.  When it came time for my oral comprehensive exam at the end of my doctoral program, Dr. Morse asked me progressively harder questions—questions to which I did not specifically prepare—until his final question (“If you were to make an incision in the abdominal wall, what structures would you encounter from superficial to deep?”).  I had not memorized this (I could not have memorized any of the questions he asked that day); rather, I had to draw on what I knew and reason my way to the answer.  I gave my best response, and he replied: “Wow!  I didn’t expect you to get all that.  I’m done.”  I aced my Anatomy comprehensive exam.  How?  Certainly not out of brilliance or memorization.  I succeeded because Dr. Morse taught me the process of understanding the material.  I follow his example in teaching yet today.

Whether academics or sports, I want my children to be challenged beyond that which they are currently capable.  In other words, fail.  I want them to be their best today, of course, and, thereby, be better tomorrow.

Support your kids’ teachers.  Encourage them to challenge your child or young adult.  Rather that ask your kid, “How was school, today?”, ask them, “What did you find challenging today?”  Let your child know that it is alright to struggle.  I remind my children and students of the lesson my friend, Travis, learned from one of his biology professors: “We don’t really learn something until we struggle with it.”

Education is an opportunity.  Encourage your child to embrace the struggle.

Be your best today; be better tomorrow.

Carpe momento!

As a physiologist, I am well aware of the “fight-or-flight” response—the physiological response to a perceived threat that prepares the body to either combat the threat or turn and run.  We have all experienced the response—heart rate increases, muscles tense, blood flow is diverted from the skin and the gut to the muscles (causing the skin to go pale and the sensation of “butterflies in the stomach”), etc.).  It is a positive adaptive response intended to protect life and limb.

Recently, I have begun to hear references to what some call the “fight, flight, or freeze response”.  Being a physiologist, my initial response was to deem it inaccurate.  After all, when presented with a potential life-or-death threat, freezing can get you killed.  As well, the sympathetic nervous system that drives the fight-or-flight response prepares the body for activity.  So, I dismissed the initial mention of the fight, flight, or freeze response—until my wife brought it up the other day (she had it mentioned to her in a recent conversation).  Thus, I was compelled to give it more thought.  We had been talking about the fight-or-flight response and the “third way” over recent weeks.  In my mind, “freeze” is not the “third way”.  So, were we considering now a “fourth way”?

With a rather cursory study of the “freeze response”, it is apparent that we are talking of a psychological, rather than physiological, response.  Notice that the fight-or-flight (and fight, flight, or freeze) response is to a “perceived threat”.  Threats are either real or imaginary.  The magnitude of the threat is often a matter of perception.

A number of years ago, I travelled from Michigan to Northern California with students to a research conference.  Our hotel was in what I perceived to be a less than nice area of town, and it was a modest walk to the university campus where the conference was being held.  Early one morning, I was walking by myself to the conference when I heard footsteps running up behind me.  I immediately tensed up (went into fight-or-flight mode).  Out of the corner of my eye, I saw the perceived “threat”—a gentleman, a foot shorter and, perhaps, a hundred pounds lighter than me, running with a grocery bag.  I can’t help but embarrass myself by telling this story to my exercise physiology students as an example of the fight-or-fight response.

My embarrassing story paints a humorous, but accurate, portrait of the necessity of the fight-or-flight response.  Fortunately, there was no threat (and, if there was, I could have easily defended myself).  Had the threat been greater (I like to use the example with my students of Dwayne Johnson wielding a knife), then my body (ideally) would have elevated the response.  This is a key point I make with my students about the importance of being in good physical condition and having an appropriate response to stress.  Had the threat, indeed, been real and someone the size of Dwayne Johnson, my moderate sympathetic response would have allowed me to magnify the response without causing, say, a heart attack.

Many stressors in our lives are acute stimuli, like in the above story.  The perceived threat quickly diminishes and the response subsides.  There is sometimes, however, stress (perceived or real) that persists and causes a prolonged fight or flight (or, possibly, freeze) response.  Such persistent stress can potentially have harmful effects.  Herein is where I consider the “third way”—the way of dealing with stressful situations (often people) in a way that requires neither conflict or escape.  So, the option of “freeze” warrants consideration.

To freeze is, in a sense to do nothing (though freezing is doing something).  We sometimes hear the phrase “paralyzed with fear”.  It would seem correct to me to say that the “fight, flight, or freeze response” is a psychological response that precedes the physiological response—it is the (likely) unconscious or subconscious processing of the perceived threat.  In this way, “freeze” is the ideal psychological response to an acute perceived threat—stop and process the information we are receiving.  When I perceive the “threat” in Northern California, I did not immediately run or turn in a crazed frenzy to fight the little guy.  I paused and prepared.  The unfamiliar environment, perhaps, lead to a premature physiological response, but it was, over all, a controlled response.  Thus, the healthy psychological response to a perceived threat is to pause and assess—Do I fight?  Do I run? Or Is there a third way?  Stephen Covey referred to this as the space between the stimulus and the response.  He suggested that “in that space lies our freedom and power to choose our response.”  Alternatively, the irrational responses of immediately running or fighting or remaining in a prolonged state of “paralysis” is unproductive.  We have all seen people (and have perhaps responded as such ourselves) who “fly off the handle” and immediately fight at the slightest provocation.  Likewise, we have seen people who immediately “escape” at the slightest provocation.

I read in one article that we don’t have a choice when we freeze.  I would agree in the immediate sense, but we do have choose in the duration of time we spend in “freeze mode” and in what we do during this time.

We should allow an appropriate time to process the threat (or stressor) and determine our response.  I would prefer to call this “pause” rather than “freeze”, but I suppose that “fight, flight, or freeze” has more appeal.  “Freeze” leaves me with the image of a “deer in the headlights”.  “Pause”, on the other hand, it purposeful and allows one the time to process and decide on an appropriate response.  The key here, in my opinion, is that there is a response—there is no sense of paralysis or defeat.

When presented with a stressful situation, it is important to pause and assess the situation.  Take a few breaths, consider the options, and act.  If stressful situations lead to excessive freezing, e.g., “panic attacks”, professional help may be warranted.  Being focused and prepared is essential.  This is, in my opinion, one of the greatest benefits of a morning journaling and growth routine—of pursuing “well-centered fitness”.  When we seek to understand the things that cause us undue stress and why we respond the way we do, we are better prepared to determine the “third way” option and not battle unnecessarily, shut down, put up walls, or any other unhealthy coping mechanism we may have created to respond to our “triggers”.  If fight, flight, and or freeze is prolonged or frequent, take time to consider why and what are your options.  Herein is where the practice of “productive pause” is useful.  Begin the day with intentional thought and meditation, but also interject the day with periods of contemplative pause—like stopping to check the map (if anyone uses maps anymore) on a road trip to confirm one is on the right route.

We teach in exercise physiology that the muscle contraction “begins and ends with the brain”.  Likewise does our response to stress and perceived threats.  Choose well how you respond.  Learn from previous responses.

Be your best today; be better tomorrow.

Carpe momento!

The folks at Renaissance Periodization (one of my favorite sources of diet and exercise information) shared a meme on Facebook: “Nothing annoys me more than wasting calories on disappointing food.”  I couldn’t agree more.

Trying to manage one’s calories and lose fat is hard.  When we reach our goals and enter a maintenance phase, we know we don’t want to waste calories (or money) on food that is less than enjoyable.

I last some weight a few years ago.  We went out to one of our favorite local restaurants for dinner, and I ordered a burger—medium rare (it’s gotta be pink in the middle).  It came out well-done.  I was tormented about sending it back.  My wife, though, reminded me that I worked too hard not to get what I wanted.  The burger was replaced with one that was perfectly cooked, and it was delicious.  The owner was overly apologetic and insisted it was “on the house”.  I scarcely consume a calorie at this restaurant that is less than enjoyable.  The food and the service is always great.

I love to eat!  I can never maintain a very lean physique because I love good food and good beer.  Still, I try no maintain a healthy lean.  So, when I eat or drink.  I want it to be better than good.  I am fine with food that fits my calories and macros being passable (we like to say about such food: “Well, it’ll make poop.”—in other words, it serves our basic physiological and nutritional needs), but foods that cost me calories better be good.

When one is “dieting” (i.e., eating a hypocaloric diet with the intent of losing fat), food should be bland to discourage over-eating.  When the “diet” ends (one enters the maintenance phase), one does not want to damage one’s success with excessive calories.  So, when we are enjoying ourselves with some extra calories, we want them to be good.  Desserts, in particular, should be rewarding.  The second bite of a donut is rarely as satisfying as the first.  Any dessert that comes in plastic packaging is going to be less satisfying than fresh baked.  One should never be left asking “Why did I eat that?”  We should never leave the dining table with regrets!

The principle of “opportunity costs” applies also to food.  Choose wisely.

Be your best today; be better tomorrow.

Carpe momento!

I saw an ad this morning for a home chest exercise machine that is in “nearly new condition”.  It seems like all used exercise equipment is in “nearly new condition”.  Why is that?  You would hope that exercise equipment would be sold as “well used and maintained”.  Shouldn’t the only reason for selling exercise equipment be “upgrading” or “I joined a gym”?  It saddens me to see exercise equipment that doesn’t look used—unless I am upgrading my own home gym.

There are viable reasons to selling used exercise equipment, but it should never be sold in “nearly new condition”.  We bought a reconditioned Tectrix Climbmax 1000 stepper for our home gym in 2009 or so.  It got a lot of use until the transmission went last year.  It still sits in my garage—I keep hoping I can find the necessary part.  Likewise, nothing in my home gym goes unused.  This is because a) I always do my homework before I buy, and b) I use it.

The transtheoretical model of behavioral change suggest that we move through five (or six) stages of motivation: precontemplation, contemplation, preparation, action, and maintenance (and, perhaps, relapse).  If you are considering buying exercise equipment, you are likely in the preparation stage—the stage in which we feel ready to change but are more likely to be disappointed and quit.  This is when equipment that is to become “nearly new” is purchased.  If one plans and executes exercise well, he or she is than likely to move into the action and, eventually, maintenance stages.  Hopefully, one can avoid relapse.

Before buying any piece of home gym equipment, do your homework.  Consider your likes and dislikes.  Research the product.  Try before you buy.  Most importantly, start small.

If one has never exercised before, starting out by oneself at home is probably not a good idea.  This would be an ideal time to try a gym membership and a personal trainer.  If the idea of going to a gym doesn’t suit you, and you are confident you can commit to a home exercise program, consult someone with experience—and who will ask you questions about your needs rather than tell you what you need—about what to purchase and how to set up your home gym.  (This should not be someone, e.g., a salesperson, who has a financial stake in what you buy!)  Once the purchase is made, have someone knowledgeable get you set up on how to use it.  A qualified personal trainer might be warranted here.  Not knowing how or why to use exercise equipment will certain doom it to a fate of being sold in “nearly new condition”.

If you have had experience exercising in the past, what have you enjoyed?  The best exercise is the exercise you like to do and will do regularly.  The best treadmill is useless, if it sits collecting dust.  Machines and free-weights only have advantages when they are used.

What are your goals?  A heavy-duty power rack, bumper weights, and a lifting platform are not necessary if you just “want to get toned”.  Likewise, a cheap bench and vinyl weights are not the best for your high school football player that is lifting to prepare for varsity.  Ask yourself how you plan to use exercise and what you need to start.

Buy what you need to start and what will allow for growth.  You may not lift a lot of weight now, but the intent is to get stronger.  There is no need to have plates lying around unused.  A benefit of free weights is that one can buy more as needed.

Weight machines can be great for true beginners—to learn how to lift in a more safe environment.  The downside of machines are that they lack versatility, and they take up space.  Weight machines have fixed weight stacks.  So, at some point, you are going to be sitting with a fair amount of weight being unused or not having enough weight to overload the muscles.  The former is fine—for a while—but the latter requires an overhaul of your gym.

I prefer free-weights for a home gym.  They are versatile and expandable.  They are also relatively inexpensive.  If one is interested in lifting weights (and, in my opinion, everyone should to some extent or another), start with a modest quality Olympic set—the weights with the bigger hole and longer bar.  An Olympic set usually comes with a 45# bars and a variety of plates from 2.5 to 45 pounds.  Thus, this one set will allow for weights from 45 to 290 pounds (two 45#, two 35#, two 25#, two 10#, two 5#, and two 2.5# plates, plus the bar).  The addition of an adjustable dumbbell set (a starter set usually includes two 5# bars and four 10#, four 5#, and four 2.5# plates—thus, 5 to 40# dumbbells) adds more versatility and can, with added weights grow.  (I also have 25# plates and can load my with up to 160#.)  More bars and weights can be added to make super-sets possible, as well.

Other than weights, the basic essentials for a free-weight home gym is a study rack and an adjustable bench.  If space is a premium, there are well-made racks that can fold into the wall for storage.  Other racks can be expanded with attachments.  (I have a Yukon Caribou III Smith machine rack with a dual-lat attachment that costs about $1000.  We added a dip station for about $55.  I have saved more than the cost in gym memberships over the 14 years of use.)  Look carefully at quality.  It need not be commercial quality, but it should be sturdy enough to last years of personal use.

When you can, try before you buy.  Be sure it suits you and is of the quality you desire.  Also, be sure it fits the space available.

Buying home cardio equipment can be a more formidable challenge.  We often want variety, but we rarely have the space (or the disposable income) to have multiple machines.  So, choose wisely.

I do miss using my stepper.  It gave me years of intense workouts.  It also took up relatively little space—which was of greater importance when our available home-gym space was downsized in the move from Michigan to Oregon.  Replacing it with a treadmill was out of the question.  Instead, we replaced it with a spin cycle.  I can do some intense HIIT workouts, but I do miss that stepper!  Personally, I find treadmills to be a less-than-ideal purchase.  First, one can most certainly run-walk outdoors as an alternative.  Second, they are expensive.  You get what you pay for, and one will certainly notice the difference between running on a moderate-priced personal treadmill and a commercial-quality treadmill.  So, if you are considering a treadmill, be sure it suits your goals and your body type.  Ideally, a quality treadmill should—minimally—go up to 13 mph and a 15% grade for optimal versatility.

In the end, it comes down to the question of what you like and what you will use.  “If you build it, they will come” may work for a baseball field in Iowa, but one is naïve to think “if I buy it, I will use it”.  Motivation to use the equipment has to be there.  Don’t end up listing something for sale as “nearly new condition”!

Be your best today; be better tomorrow.

Carpe momento!

High-intensity exercise is gaining popularity.  The terminology is, however, often confusing and misleading.  The acronyms are similar, but there are some differences.  This is Part 2 of a three part series,

HIIRT.  High-intensity interval resistance training differs from HIIT in that it involves resistance training (obviously).  HIIRT (unfortunately, in my opinion) is increasingly referred to as “Tabata” training in some gyms.  Personally, I don’t think this is an appropriate label.  In part, this is because the intensities involved in performing high-repetitions of resistance exercises safely cannot reach the levels required in the Tabata IE1 protocol.  If there is an understanding that HIIRT exercise cannot be performed at the intensities necessary to stimulate significant improvement in VO_2max, it is not without benefit.  I suggest that it is best intended for affecting body composition rather than cardio.

HIIRT greatly stimulates the fat-burning response, leading to a sustained post-exercise energy expenditure.  While the workout itself might not expend as many calories as more traditional cardio or HIIT, the resulting calories burned over the subsequent 24-48 hours (or, possibly, more) may lead to increased fat loss.

Unlike traditional weight training, HIIRT also does not stimulate significant muscle strength or muscle hypertrophy (though the loss of body fat might lead to an appearance increased muscle).  One will see improved muscle endurance (along with some strength gains) and improved appearance.

HIIRT is no alternative to cardio or weight training, but it is a great supplement.  Depending on the goals, HIIRT should be included is at least a couple exercise sessions per week.  (More, if cardio is less of a goal and maintaining muscle mass while losing fat is important.)

Like HIIT, there is no ultimate HIIRT workout.  Primarily, it involves cycles of high-intensity movements followed by a recovery period.  These can be a prescribed number of repetitions or as many repetitions as possible (AMRAP) in a predetermined time period.  The “Tabata” tag gets applied because the 20:10 (second) ratio is often applied.  A name is just a name, but it is important to recognize that weighted movements (e.g., body-weight squats, burpees, etc.) cannot be perform to the necessary intensities (e.g., 170% VO_2max without a substantial risk of injury.

Nearly any exercise can be incorporated into a HIIRT workout.  Again, of key importance is the ability to maintain good technique throughout the sets.  These exercises can involve body weight, dumbbells, barbells, kettlebells, sandbags, Bulgarian bags (my favorite), medicine balls, etc.  There is great opportunity to be creative.

I’ll discuss the distinctions from HIRT more tomorrow.  The differences are subtle.  I prefer the different labels to express the intent of the exercise.  HIIT emphasizes cardiorespiratory fitness, HIIRT emphasizes muscle endurance and body composition, and HIRT emphasizes muscle strength and hypertrophy (and thus body composition, as well).  Thus, the exercises are also distinct.  HIIT is performed with tradition aerobic exercise (e.g., treadmills, steppers, bikes, rowers, etc.), HIIRT is performed with fixed weights (i.e., the weight is not significantly changed from exercise to exercise), and HIRT is more traditional weight training performed as “super sets”.

There are an infinite number of ways to perform HIIRT.  As mentioned, “Tabata” is common—a series of exercises (preferably whole body or complex movements) performed as eight (more or less) cycles of AMRAP to 20 seconds with a 10-second recovery.  Eight cycles is 4 minutes, so 5 exercises, for example, is a solid 20-minute workout.

I have a “core 550” workout that I do with my Bulgarian bag that takes about 9 minutes.  It involves 5 sets of 5 movements performed sequentially for 10 repetitions each (550 total reps).  The “core” exercises are a front hinge (similar to a kettlebell swing), right and left side swings, and right and left spins.  The “550”, however, can be done with any sequence of exercises (e.g., squats, presses, rows, pushups, lunges).  Similar movements can be performed for time (AMRAP) or a fixed number of repetitions and sets.  Rests are also predetermined.

Another HIIRT technique I like are “100’s”.  I learned these years ago as part of my coach’s “Russian conditioning” (which, in hindsight, was a variation of HIIRT) in high school wrestling.  We did them with pushups, but I have since done whole-body workout using a combination of bodyweight exercises, Bulgarian bag, and barbells/dumbbells.  The “100’s” includes a series of movements for 3, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 9, 8, 7, 6, 5, 4, 3, 3 repetitions (100 total).  We did them with the captains leading and the team following—so the rest was as long as it took one to finish the set.  My son informed me that they did a similar workout at the high school practice, the other day, where they ran the length of the mats and back between sets.  Either way, it gets the heart going and the muscles thumping.

No one way of doing HIIRT is superior.  Do what you like.  Try different workouts.  Workouts can be short (8-12 minutes) or they can be long (40-60 minutes).  Personally, I think the 20-30 minute range is ideal.

Be your best today; be better tomorrow.

Carpe momento!

High-intensity exercise is gaining popularity.  The terminology is, however, often confusing and misleading.  The acronyms are similar, but there are some differences.

HIIT.  High-intensity interval training or HIIT is the most common term.  Although it is rather broadly applied, HIIT specifically refers to cardiorespiratory exercise.  While there are no specific protocols, per se, they all involve the manipulation of training intensities between high- or ultra-high-intensity intervals and low-intensity recovery intervals.  Generally, the high-intensity intervals are greater than 85-95% (depending on fitness level) of maximum intensity.  Maximum is usually determine as maximal oxygen uptake (VO_2max), which requires a maximal graded exercise test, or heart rate maximum (HR_max; 220-age—not this is a very rough estimate).  Recovery intensities are usually <50% of maximum.  The interval:recovery ratios vary from protocol to protocol, but it is not as important as the total work done.

The beauty of HIIT is that a lot of work can be performed in a rather short period of time (some protocols, e.g., the Tabata IE1 protocol*, are as short as 8-12 minutes.  HIIT workouts can also be as long as 30-45 minutes (or longer).

I consider the three bioenergy systems (ATP-PC, glycolytic, and oxidative) when determining the interval durations.  The ATP-PC system is our ultra-intensity, short-duration energy system that utilized the stored adenosine triphosphate and phosphocreatine for muscle contraction.  There is usually enough ATP and PC in the cell to sustain maximal effort for up to 15 seconds.  The glycolytic energy system involves the breakdown of glucose or glycogen to pyruvate (or lactate).  Because lactate is produced, it is also often referred to as the “lactic acid system”.  One is in this energy system between 30 s to 2 minutes of intense exercise (at least 70-85% of maximum).  The oxidative energy system (or aerobic energy system) involves low-to-moderate-intensities for a duration of greater than 3 minutes.  Depending on goals, the interval durations vary accordingly.

The famed Tabata IE1 protocol involves 8 cycles of ultra-intense cycling (yes, cycling, not burbees) at about 170% VO_2max (extremely intense!) for 20 seconds followed by 10-s recovery intervals.  Given that 170% VO_2max is virtually impossible (the study involved Olympic speedskaters, some of whom could not complete the study), I tend to use quotation marks around Tabata (e.g., “Tabata”) for similar workouts that might approach the necessary intensities.  While the likely effect will be less than in the Tabata et al. study*, it is a great intense workout that can be performed in as few as 8 minutes.  I would suggest a somewhat longer duration (e.g., 12 or 20 minutes including warm-up and cool-down and, perhaps, more cycles).  “Tabata” is great for a quick stimulus to the cardiorespiratory system, though the immediate calorie expenditure may less than longer workouts (there is a possibility, however, of a more sustained post-exercise energy expenditure).

Longer HIIT workouts allow for a greater calorie burn and a more effective stimulus to the cardiorespiratory system.  Again, there is no ideal protocol.  My suggestion would be to work from the allotted time and caloric goals.  I have a favorites protocol scheme I have adapted from an (I believe it was) old Men’s Health magazine.  I warm up with a moderate-intensity for 3 minutes, followed by a slightly more intense 4 minutes, 1 minute high-intensity, 3 minutes recovery, 5 cycles of 1:1 (minutes) high-intensity to recovery (last recovery for 2 minutes), and 2 cycles of 1:3 (minutes) high-intensity to recovery.  This is a mice 30-minute workout that can be performed on any aerobic exercise.

Fartleks, or tempo-training, is a variation of interval training.  Interval training utilizes more uniform intervals (e.g., 1:1, 1:1, 2:1, etc.), whereas, Fartleks (Swedish for “speed play”) are a be more random.  An example might involve randomly picking up the pace (“tempo”) between landmarks—e.g., telephone poles or street corners.  Another is a “fun” group exercise involves a line of runners, say 10.  The rear runner sprints to the front, then the next, and so on.  Like intervals, the durations and intensities are determined by the desired energy system(s).

HIIT is an effective change or pace from regular steady-state exercise.  As long as one considers the energy systems, anything goes be creative, but be safe (HIIT may not be for one with certain health conditions).

Interval training need, also, not be only high-intensity.  Moderate-, or even low-, intensity intervals can be effective ways of increasing the amount of exercise that can be performed in an allotted period of time.

HIIT is (at least in my opinion) limited to cardiorespiratory training and not the same as HIIRT and HIRT.  These will be discussed in the upcoming Part 2 and Part 3.

Be your best today; be better tomorrow.

Carpe momento!

“If there is a lesson to be gleaned from this branch of exercise genetics, it’s that there is no one-size-fits-all training plan. If you suspect that you aren’t responding as well to a particular training stimulus as your training partner, you might be right. Rather than giving up, try something different.”–David Epstein, The Sports Gene

A key principle of exercise training and adaptation is individuality.  Exercise is not a one-size-fits-all exercise prescription.  Though the WOD-approach (i.e., workout of the day) is gaining increasing popularity in the fitness industry, it is not necessarily the best approach.  The greatest benefit of a WOD-approach is the community it builds—and a sense of community and belonging contributes to exercise adherence and motivation (just look at the success of CrossFit).  Likewise, generic exercise prescriptions are not always the best approach either.  There are basic guidelines for exercise that define the “minimum effective volumes” for adaptations—many are aware of the “F.I.T.T. Principle” (frequency, intensity, type, and time)—but these provide, at best, a starting point for exercise.  Look at what bodybuilders, powerlifters, Olympic weight lifters, and athletes of all types do for training, and you will begin to see the diversity of effective training methods.  Even within sport-specific training there are unique individual needs that defy a one-size-fits-all program.

The understanding of genetics is quite new.  The unlocking of the genetic code has prompted the search for the genes that make athletes successful.  No athlete is going to be great at everything.  Nor is there any training methodology that is going to make anyone good at everything.  If a program works for one “athlete”, it is because it works for that athlete.

I find it fascinating that we look to the most fit person in the gym for our example.  We neglect to understand that that person is likely where they are because they have “superior” genes in that particular training.  So, when your workout partner is seeing better results than you on a specific training program, it is you.  You probably don’t need to try harder.  You probably need to try different.  You may require more or less volume or different intensities.  You may require different recovery strategies.  As well, you might need different goals.

A good training program, executed properly, will produce results—just not for you, per se.  There is increasing evidence of responders and non-responders to specific exercise.  If you find yourself to be in the “non-responder” category (and you are putting in a real effort), you need to change what you are doing.  If you have “tried every program under the sun”, maybe you are pursuing the wrong goals—or pursuing the right goals but expecting the wrong results.  Sometimes we just have to accept who we are and pursue the best we can be.  Accept your limitations, but don’t use these as an excuse to do nothing.

Other than a bald head, I am never going to be built like Dwayne Johnson.  I have tried countless training programs over the years with pretty similar results.  I am okay with this.  As a 55-year-old, I am fine with seeing continued strength gains and maintaining what little muscle mass I have.  I was not born with six-pack abs.  I don’t expect to die with them.  Genetically, I am probably more inclined to aerobic performance, but I neither enjoy endurance training (e.g., for marathons or triathlons) nor wish to look like a runner (no offense to runners).  So, weights are a priority and cardio is to maintain my heart health and somewhat manage my body fat.  Others, certainly, have different priorities.

If you want to be successful exercising, look for the person most like you who has had success and emulate their training—modifying accordingly.  Personally, I find the trainers who have overcome their own limited genetics to be in the best shape they can be to have an advantage over the trainers who do just about anything and succeed.  Not that such people can’t be great trainers.  Just, sometimes, they don’t fully understand the battle.  I have respect for trainers like Drew Manning (“Fit-to-Fat-to-Fit”) who gained a significant amount of weight so he could lose it to better understand the plight of his clients.  Certainly, setpoint theory would suggest that his short-term gain (and genetics) would make it easier for him to lose the fat again and to maintain the physique he again has, but some understanding is better than none.  I, likewise, admire the people who overcome years of obesity and “poor genes” to get into great shape.  I also have respect for the likes of Richard Simmons (yes, I do) who will never have looked like Drew Manning or others and fights an ongoing battle with his body composition.  Perhaps, he could have benefited from more weight training and less “Sweating to the Oldies”, but he did what worked for him.

The bottom line is: do what works for you and what helps bring you closer to your goals.  Do this, and you will succeed.

Be your best today; be better tomorrow.

Carpe momento!