5 ms·

Running and walking seems to be particularly good for thinking. Could be a link to our evolution, or the fact that it’s a simple exercise you don’t have to focu

• vsareto 6y ago
  >Sometimes high intensity stop all other thoughts is exactly what the brain needs. HIIT has been great for the rest of the day as long as I don't overdo it, but yeah, completely focused on the workout during that.
  • Swizec 6y ago
    I find HIIT doesn’t do it for me. Can’t push myself hard enough in such short bursts because I have ridiculous cardio conditioning* from running. Boxing is great because it’s hiit but with technique and tactics and strategy. * ridiculous conditioning in that I can keep average heart rate at 155bpm for 2 hours no problem. Most hiit isn’t long enough to get me above 110
    • tomjakubowski 6y ago
      What do you normally do to get to a 155 bpm heart rate? Not an expert but when I've done HIIT workouts, they've always started with a mild warm up to elevate the heart rate. Maybe you'd benefit from something more strenuous to start.
      • swader999 6y ago
        Sprint up hill or grab onto straps and try repeated jumps into the air from a deep squat. Try adding a weighted vest if this isn't enough. If that doesn't work you should join the Navy Seals.
        • redis_mlc 6y ago
          Somebodu approaching a 4 minute mile runs at almost double the speed of normal people and is twice as efficient. That might be what the person mentioned, and I hope he enjoys it while it lasts.
        • tomjakubowski 6y ago
          Thanks, however I have no issue getting my outta shape heart to 155 bpm! Was wondering if OP needed a stronger warmup to get their heart rate in the "target zone" for the HIIT work.
      • johnohara 6y ago
        Continuous fartlek style running will get you to 155+ bpm. Back off the pace to actively recover to 120 bpm, then go after it again. Problem is, you need to be fit to do this right, reducing the risk of injury. Always preferred fartlek to repeat intervals on the track. Both have their place however.
        • hluska 6y ago
          If anyone is new to fartleks, it’s a Swedish word that means ‘speed play’. They’re an excellent tool for training. Maybe be careful the first few times you type that on a phone - my poor running coach got a lot of text messages about ‘fart leaks’ when I was trying to report on my training. They are not the same. Edit - If you’d like to try one, Mona fartleks are pretty well known. https://www.runnerstribe.com/features/the-mona-fartlek-a-classic-session-article-by-sub-230-minute-1km-runner-mark-tucker/ https://www.runnerstribe.com/features/the-mona-fartlek-a-cla...
        • tomjakubowski 6y ago
          Oh yes, I remember giggling at Fartlek in high school.
          • johnohara 6y ago
            Few terms are more perfectly suited to the high school mind.
      • Swizec 6y ago
        2 hours of running at 4:45/km keeps your heart rate nice and high. When I ran a marathon in 3:24:xx my average heart rate was 170bpm.
    • hnrodey 6y ago
      I have a lengthy background in hiit (specifically CrossFit). And I say this in the most polite way possible. You're doing HIIT wrong if you cannot elevate your heart rate beyond 110 bpm. Whatever you're doing, there's a huge gap in the training programming/protocol. Everyone suffers in CrossFit. Everyone.
      • f311a 6y ago
        Can confirm. It’s pretty easy to elevate heart rate while doing HIIT. Even if you do it for 10 years.
      • Swizec 6y ago
        I agree. My problem is that I am unable to push myself hard enough for such short periods. My explosivity isn’t good enough. And I have fast recovery which makes typical rest periods too long compared to how hard I’m able to push myself during the thing. Probably would work better if I got a personal trainer to push me specifically rather than in a group/video setting HIIT with heavy weights works very well for me, but I don’t have those available at home. When gyms are open I prefer boxing anyway :)
        • hnrodey 6y ago
          The training with weights is something else. Olympic weightlifting as part of a metcon is just a different level of physical fitness. Good luck finding stuff that keeps you interested. That’s all that matters.
      • blaser-waffle 6y ago
        Seconded. Did HIIT and Crossfit stuff off and on for a while. The main difference between being fit and not fit, when it comes to HIIT, is that you can do more burpiees or curls or whatever in the 45 second period. It still sucks just as much, but your high-score is better.
    • conistonwater 6y ago
      HIIT means all-out sprints with short rests in between, but that's (unfortunately) not how it's presented in social media sometimes. No matter your shape, running all-out sprints in that particular way will get you to the max heart rate. It's just there are too many people misusing the word now.
      • mips_avatar 6y ago
        You won't get to max HR from a 40 meter dash.
        • conistonwater 6y ago
          No, of course not, but that's not the correct protocol for HIIT. The first few intervals definitely don't get you to max heart rate, that's why the rest periods are kept short.
      • vsareto 6y ago
        I thought they present it as ratios as well, so 1:1 is 1 minute on, 1 minute off, or 2m on, 2m off. They give different ratios depending on your level of conditioning, so like 2:1 for fit folks or 1:2 if you're not as fit. I've heard max effort most of the time, but some others have just recommended doing what feels comfortable for newer folks.
        • conistonwater 6y ago
          I got it from searching on google scholar, there were lots of papers on it because it's both a buzzword and a seemingly effective training technique for even high-level athletes. The basic issue with the whole concept is that it's supposed to produce similar improvements to long steady sessions of cardio, but only very hard efforts with short intervals produce such improvements. So beginners can't really do hard efforts very well, and if they also use long rest periods, and especially if they don't go all-out, then the benefits aren't there for them at all and it just becomes false advertising. I think it's a little sad how a valuable bit of sports science got mangled. If you do all this stuff to save time and you don't even get the benefits, then doing low-intensity cardio is just so much better. I run a lot these days but I can't imagine an all-out anaerobic sprint that's 2m long, it seems both difficult and biologically impossible, I think that's just regular interval training (not high-intensity).
    • hluska 6y ago
      Have you ever tried taking off your shoes at the end of a run, doing some 100m gliders and then hard 40m sprints?? I ran barefoot all last outdoor season so your mileage may vary but I can always get into high intensity zones when I do that. Or, if that doesn’t do the trick for you, mixing burpees and light jogging is a lot of fun.
    • saberience 6y ago
      You're probably doing it wrong? Try running 400m flat out sprints with 1 min rest between each one and tell me how high your heart rate gets.
      • Swizec 6y ago
        According to my watch, I have pretty good recovery. 150bpm down to 120 or less in 1min Boxing for 10 years trained that into me very well. 1min rest between 3min rounds
• mantas 6y ago
  As a cyclist, I noticed an interesting difference between road cycling and mountain biking. Road cycling is zen meditation. Great for coming up with solutions. Meanwhile MTB is entirely different. No chance to think. But great to remove built up stress. In my experience, both is necessary in different life situations. And sometimes both. First reduce stress, then evaluate the source and remove it. Otherwise it’s permanent rollercoaster.
  • boringg 6y ago
    100% agree - never realized this when I got into the sports. Cycling lets me go deep into thought and break things apart. Mountain biking is all action so you can actually tune out.
• hi41 6y ago
  Someone said that doing highly repetitive exercises like running can cause increase in the stress hormone cortisol and hence we must do that in limit. Is that true?
  • mikestew 6y ago
    No offense, but we're supposed to counter argue against an anonymous "someone" for which you don't even provide a source? Post a link, we can go from there. That said, I've been a competitive distance runner for over 40 years. What adverse effects should I be seeing? 'cuz I can't think of any.
    • hi41 6y ago
      It was my close family who told that. I told him that I got an Peloton bike for exercise. At that point he told me what I wrote above. It was part of a conversation and not a webpage that can be linked. Sorry about that.
      • hluska 6y ago
        Hey friend, you have no reason to apologize. That idea comes from a former endurance athlete turned fitness blogger named Mark Sisson. It’s quite a famous article amongst competitive long distance athletes, mostly because it ignores how we actually train. Mark Sisson’s entire idea is based off of the idea that long distance athletes train at what’s called tempo pace. Tempo pace is about 80-85% of maximum heart rate. He went on to argue that consistently training at long distances increases cortisol levels and said this is bad. There are two problems with this. First, distance runners don’t do all of their training at tempo pace because that’s stupid. Second, cortisol isn’t all bad - the body needs to be over stressed at points in order to create the adaptations that we are exercising for. Point being, you’ve got to be careful just like you are with any form of exercise. If you destroy your body day after day for long enough, bad things will eventually happen to you. The important thing to always remember is that more runners die from drinking too much water than die from not drinking enough. Everything can and will kill if taken to the very extreme.