3 ms·

Since we do anecdotes here, a friend who is purely heavy lifter (squats, deadlifts, benchpresses etc), exactly in those low reps range, and pretty good at it. H

Since we do anecdotes here, a friend who is purely heavy lifter (squats, deadlifts, benchpresses etc), exactly in those low reps range, and pretty good at it. He is utterly useless in 2h+ hikes with 1000m+ elevation gains. Glad you don't disagree that its more injury-prone to lift heavy. Of course its all good if one has perfect form, but technically its impossible to keep it 100% of the time. Again anecdotally I had various smaller tendon/ligament issues when lifting at my max, every few months I had to stop for a week or two to heal. Since switching to what I described, I can do exactly the same, but no injury at all for 4 years. But all bodies are unique, I found what works for me and my goals long term, if different approach works for you, stick to it.

elhudy 8y ago
>Since we do anecdotes here, a friend who is purely heavy lifter (squats, deadlifts, benchpresses etc), exactly in those low reps range, and pretty good at it. He is utterly useless in 2h+ hikes with 1000m+ elevation gains. The difference is that I made a statement which is scientifically accepted as true, followed by an anecdote to support it: "Heavy lifting actually trains both fast-twitch and slow twitch muscle fibers, as it takes your entire muscle to lift heavy. The reverse can not be said for higher-repetition lifting." There's a reason why NFL running backs can run an entire game and still squat 600 lbs; basketball players are also some of the most active athletes but still put up huge lifting numbers. Reps in the 12-20 range do not increase muscular endurance any more than the 6-8 rep range. [1] [1]https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18787090 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18787090
- nradov 8y ago
  I generally agree, but in a regulation NFL game the running backs are typically only running for about 5 minutes total.
- gamblor956 8y ago
  The study you linked does not support your claims. Also, professional athletes do both high rep and low rep weight training. The high rep build the strength but the low rep build the endurance to use the strength.
  - elhudy 8y ago
    >The study you linked does not support your claims. It does support my claims - but that was not the purpose of the study so you'll actually have to read beyond the abstract to see it >Also, professional athletes do both high rep and low rep weight training. The high rep build the strength but the low rep build the endurance to use the strength. I agree - which is why I don't believe that heavy weightlifting is detrimental to one's ability to do multi-hour hikes.
    - deleted 8y ago
      [deleted]
drawnwren 8y ago
In the case of weight lifting, it's usually the mind, not the body, that leads to injury. Crossfit is probably the fastest way to injure yourself, followed by trying to lift more than you should. It's injury prone to make your body do more than it should, you can lift heavy and not do this. Similarly, it's quite easy to stay in the good form zone and still get a good workout. You aren't going to be Ronnie Coleman, but you'll be healthy. And yeah, I hope no one is claiming that weight lifting trains your aerobic system.
- elhudy 8y ago
  >And yeah, I hope no one is claiming that weight lifting trains your aerobic system. The issue is when people claim that weight lifting is detrimental to cardio-related activities, which is what OP seems to be insinuating.
n4r9 8y ago
> Since we do anecdotes here, a friend who is purely heavy lifter (squats, deadlifts, benchpresses etc), exactly in those low reps range, and pretty good at it. He is utterly useless in 2h+ hikes with 1000m+ elevation gains. Kind of a false equivalence. Firstly, I'm not sure that long, arduous hikes are very relatable to e.g. moving around in old age, whereas doing a single squat is absolutely comparable to getting out of a chair for anyone. Secondly, my guess is that you'd be utterly useless if you had to carry a pack whose weight equalised the difference between your respective bodyweights.

elhudy 8y ago

>Since we do anecdotes here, a friend who is purely heavy lifter (squats, deadlifts, benchpresses etc), exactly in those low reps range, and pretty good at it. He is utterly useless in 2h+ hikes with 1000m+ elevation gains. The difference is that I made a statement which is scientifically accepted as true, followed by an anecdote to support it: "Heavy lifting actually trains both fast-twitch and slow twitch muscle fibers, as it takes your entire muscle to lift heavy. The reverse can not be said for higher-repetition lifting." There's a reason why NFL running backs can run an entire game and still squat 600 lbs; basketball players are also some of the most active athletes but still put up huge lifting numbers. Reps in the 12-20 range do not increase muscular endurance any more than the 6-8 rep range. [1] [1]https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18787090 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18787090

nradov 8y ago
I generally agree, but in a regulation NFL game the running backs are typically only running for about 5 minutes total.
gamblor956 8y ago
The study you linked does not support your claims. Also, professional athletes do both high rep and low rep weight training. The high rep build the strength but the low rep build the endurance to use the strength.
- elhudy 8y ago
  >The study you linked does not support your claims. It does support my claims - but that was not the purpose of the study so you'll actually have to read beyond the abstract to see it >Also, professional athletes do both high rep and low rep weight training. The high rep build the strength but the low rep build the endurance to use the strength. I agree - which is why I don't believe that heavy weightlifting is detrimental to one's ability to do multi-hour hikes.
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]

drawnwren 8y ago

In the case of weight lifting, it's usually the mind, not the body, that leads to injury. Crossfit is probably the fastest way to injure yourself, followed by trying to lift more than you should. It's injury prone to make your body do more than it should, you can lift heavy and not do this. Similarly, it's quite easy to stay in the good form zone and still get a good workout. You aren't going to be Ronnie Coleman, but you'll be healthy. And yeah, I hope no one is claiming that weight lifting trains your aerobic system.

elhudy 8y ago
>And yeah, I hope no one is claiming that weight lifting trains your aerobic system. The issue is when people claim that weight lifting is detrimental to cardio-related activities, which is what OP seems to be insinuating.

n4r9 8y ago

> Since we do anecdotes here, a friend who is purely heavy lifter (squats, deadlifts, benchpresses etc), exactly in those low reps range, and pretty good at it. He is utterly useless in 2h+ hikes with 1000m+ elevation gains. Kind of a false equivalence. Firstly, I'm not sure that long, arduous hikes are very relatable to e.g. moving around in old age, whereas doing a single squat is absolutely comparable to getting out of a chair for anyone. Secondly, my guess is that you'd be utterly useless if you had to carry a pack whose weight equalised the difference between your respective bodyweights.