The Official Gym & Fitness Thread

Depends. What did he lift 200 times?

 

Tempo run this am.

I ended up running my first sub 25 minute 5k within my 5 mile tempo run.

I think what I'm more impressed about is the fact that I fucking did it with a HR under 160. I'm more thrilled about that, than I am about the time.

I've been running the MAF method since I had surgery. Shit fucking works.
I know we got people on there that want to improve their run times. Look that method up. Speed work is a complete waste of time until you have an aerobic base. Take that from someone who's run upwards of 75 miles a week, still never had an aerobic base and was always a shit runner.

 

Panthers fan, so i won't troll him. We are a thin herd these days.

1g/pro is a good goal per day. if you fall short don't get wound around the axle. figure out how many calories you need per day depending on your goals. shoot for around 50g of fat per day. If you can figure out those two calories limits then the rest can be carbs.
stick to healthy whole foods. Meats, veggies, fruits, more water than you think you need.

Where are you starting from and what are you trying to get too?

 

Train harder than last time

 

Lol you silly little sexy man

 

He only eats rice

 

Well. That’s not cool.

 

I’m 5’10 around 163 lbs right now and I’m trying to get to like 185 with low body fat.

 

Well, you got me looking into MAF. But trying to figure out what the volumes are and how often, not finding much there in my searches. Warm up, cool down and HR for in between seems easy enough to figure out, but not clear on how to consider weekly volumes, especially how to start given existing cardio work which includes run, bike and elliptical.

 

I've not found anything where Phill Maffetone recommends that you limit volume or frequency. It just all needs to be at or below that maximum HR.

So if you currently are doing X minutes of cardio a week, keep it up just make sure you don't exceed your calculated max HR.

I've been adding volume the whole time I've been doing it.

 

Interesting, thinking about trying it. Guess I'll check back in a few months, assuming I acquire a HR monitor of some sort.

BTW, when you say volume are you referring to time or distance volume, or both?

 

I use my running watch for HR. The wrist based HR monitors are criticized for not being super accurate but I do feel mine is pretty accurate most of the time.

Volume to me is how much activity you do typically in a given week. That can be measured via time or distance.

I will warn you it's challenging at first to workout that slow/easy lol

 

I get that, my cardio is usually at 145-155, and my max calc'd is 120-130. So I definitely need a HRM, but I hate wearing watches and I suspect the chest strap would be the same. But, I'll have to figure that one out somehow.

 

I hate wearing watches as well and didn't know how I would adjust to my Coros Apex but I love that thing. My husband has the Pace which is not as expensive at $200. I hardly know it's there.

I was mostly worried about how a watch would feel with lifting and I wear mine 24/7, even while sleeping and like I said hardly know it's there.

 

I need to find it but my Fitbit was fine even when lifting. I haven't worn anything on my wrists since I was a kid but it never bothered me

 

GNC has a BOGO going on right now!! Google the bro split.. That weight and height sounds like you have quite the pencil neck... Throw in some IPA's and eat some potatoes!

BW

 

What's the BOGO deal..

 

OK, so there is something I want to understand better and I think you experienced guys, especially ones who use or have used gear can provide valuable insight. Because you guys is far smarter than me.

I notice a lot of you guys have, in my humble opinion, pretty low dietary fat intakes, especially given your body size.
Fat is an essential macronutrient, and saturated fat in particular is important for men as androgen hormone pre-cursor.

So I would kind of think, even though anabolics would be provided exogenously, an increased fat intake still be needed to support that additional hormone load? Maybe less? Unrelated?

Why is fat not prioritized as much in strength and bodybuilding when science shows it's such an essential macronutrient as much as protein?
Is lean body mass size and dietary fat requirements not as linearly related as it is with protein and thus you don't need to be increasing fat intake past a certain body mass regardless of whether it is lean body mass or not?

The reason I ask is because I usually see two groups of people when it comes to giving perspectives on being lean (lean meaning under 10% for men). One group, typically those who only maintain single digit body fat percentages for short periods of time, will say being lean sucks, your hormones are all fucked up, and you are constantly hungry. Then the second group, who typically maintain leanness year round, say the total opposite, they feel great, sex drive goes up, they aren't hungry, life is wonderful.

I think this comes down to guys in the first group get super fucking lean for show, and yes that shit will suck; but even when we aren't talking extreme stage ready leanness (likes say 8%) they get to that point via unsustainable methods, which I think leads to the obvious feeling it's not sustainable. But in addition to that, I would argue dietary fat intake is a major influencer. I observe a lot of physique guys consuming very low fat in their diet and contrastingly those who stay lean all the time prioritize it much more. I think there is a hormonal influence for sure that's contributing to that feeling like life sucks and your hormones are all over the place.

So really why the low fat?

There is a reason why everyone in the physique/strength world does things a certain way, I'm just not sure what the fundamental reasoning for that is.

I want strength athletes opinions and physique athlete opinions on that.

I know legit conversations on here are frowned upon, but humor me.

 

I am too important to take the time to research otherwise, but my guess would be because fat is or has not traditionally been recognized or considered as a muscle building macro, and if you're on anabolics, then you are or should already be taking something to regulate hormones, so it becomes worthless or unnecessary in that respect.

But I think your comparison points out why your observations are what they are. Totally different goals and means to achieve them.

Would you argue that people leaning out for shows should be eating more fat? I really don't know shit. Just asking, as I think you are, too.

 

You're way beyond what I know, or have knowledge of, but is it possible this is caught up in the sugar industries "anti-fat" push from 20-30+ years ago where fat is "evil" and the cause of all health issues?