Please Scroll Down to See Forums Below 
Fukkenshredded
New member
Sometimes we tend to overanalyze things. Lots of threads here, on the ELITE DRAMA SQUABBLE BOARDS, start out as interesting discussions about good ideas and then deteriorate into generalized comments about conflicting possibilities, then into comments about the comments, at which point the thread becomes too nebulous to really continue forward in its original spirit, so the final few posts tend to be argumentative or redundant, then the thread is closed, and the cycle repeats itself.
It is quite amusing at times.
However, lost in the deluge of sophistry are a few very simple facts, especially with regards to cardiovascular exercise.
The fact is that ALL exercise is cardiovascular. Anything that stimulates the cardiovascular system to work harder than called upon in day to day activity would qualify.
The question has nothing to do with the actual activity in question, and everything to do with intensity.
I think the confusion arises from a lack of understanding of what intensity really means in this context.
Think about a set of squats. Especially a high rep set. Most of us have legs that are conditioned well enough to accomplish twenty reps with a good percentage of our max weight. However, that exercise demands a great deal of oxygen, as well as a great deal of muscular exertion, and can certainly be indentified as a cardiovascula exercise. The intensity of effort required to do the exercise is such that any duration of effort is limited. It is this short duration that leads some people to discard this as cardio.
And yet, the same people will gladly do deep knee bends in a cardio class at the gym. What is the difference? Only the weight being utilized. Which means that there is more effort per unit time.
Somewhere we became convinced that an exercise must be continued for a certain amount of time in order to make the transition from a muscular exercise to a cardiovascular exercise. I think this stemmed from the idea that cardio must burn fat THEN AND THERE to qualify as cardio. Well, that's where I disagree, and that's where we can gain some insight if we can simply disregard the notion of burning fat while doing an exercise.
What should be looked at is optimizing the muscle/fat ratio, and what exercises accomplish this. Clearly the body does not build muscle DURING the lift, and likewise, the majority of fatburning occurs AFTER the gym.
This is where the concept of HIIT comes into play. Certainly the expenditure of glucose is not the equivalent of fatburning, but bearing in mind that we continue to physically function beyond the exercise, we ask ourtselves what happens AFTER the HIIT. Our heartrates are up, our muscles exhausted, and our glucose levels low. Where do we go for energy? KEEERECT! To the fat cell.
The simplest, quickest route to your goal is to understand that the only rules to be followed are:
Work out safely.
Go to maximum exhaustion on every exercise, whatever it is.
Get proper nutrition.
Get enough rest.
Forget "Limiting Factor Thinking" such as number of reps, duration of sessions, rate of speed, etc.
Just do as much as possible until you hit exhaustion. Then go eat and rest. That way everything you do will always be cardio, always be muscular, always be intense, and always work.
It is quite amusing at times.
However, lost in the deluge of sophistry are a few very simple facts, especially with regards to cardiovascular exercise.
The fact is that ALL exercise is cardiovascular. Anything that stimulates the cardiovascular system to work harder than called upon in day to day activity would qualify.
The question has nothing to do with the actual activity in question, and everything to do with intensity.
I think the confusion arises from a lack of understanding of what intensity really means in this context.
Think about a set of squats. Especially a high rep set. Most of us have legs that are conditioned well enough to accomplish twenty reps with a good percentage of our max weight. However, that exercise demands a great deal of oxygen, as well as a great deal of muscular exertion, and can certainly be indentified as a cardiovascula exercise. The intensity of effort required to do the exercise is such that any duration of effort is limited. It is this short duration that leads some people to discard this as cardio.
And yet, the same people will gladly do deep knee bends in a cardio class at the gym. What is the difference? Only the weight being utilized. Which means that there is more effort per unit time.
Somewhere we became convinced that an exercise must be continued for a certain amount of time in order to make the transition from a muscular exercise to a cardiovascular exercise. I think this stemmed from the idea that cardio must burn fat THEN AND THERE to qualify as cardio. Well, that's where I disagree, and that's where we can gain some insight if we can simply disregard the notion of burning fat while doing an exercise.
What should be looked at is optimizing the muscle/fat ratio, and what exercises accomplish this. Clearly the body does not build muscle DURING the lift, and likewise, the majority of fatburning occurs AFTER the gym.
This is where the concept of HIIT comes into play. Certainly the expenditure of glucose is not the equivalent of fatburning, but bearing in mind that we continue to physically function beyond the exercise, we ask ourtselves what happens AFTER the HIIT. Our heartrates are up, our muscles exhausted, and our glucose levels low. Where do we go for energy? KEEERECT! To the fat cell.
The simplest, quickest route to your goal is to understand that the only rules to be followed are:
Work out safely.
Go to maximum exhaustion on every exercise, whatever it is.
Get proper nutrition.
Get enough rest.
Forget "Limiting Factor Thinking" such as number of reps, duration of sessions, rate of speed, etc.
Just do as much as possible until you hit exhaustion. Then go eat and rest. That way everything you do will always be cardio, always be muscular, always be intense, and always work.
