jogging and motivation thread

[WussRedXLi]

 

[rarenick]

Around 6 now. I train via lats pulldown from resistance bands with a contraption that i can fix at the doorway of my bomb shelter door (my bedroom doors i scared pecah coz of the forces) and then when pass by fitness corner then try pull ups and then some negative pull ups (eccentric). But i am just training to keep muscles balanced coz i train a lot of "push" for anterior chain via pull ups.
Training upper body for maintain aero tuck for longer duration. And also to look better when in cycling jersey.

I have exactly the same equipment as yours and only occasionally do the lats at my room door and at fitness corner. Got one old uncle at hawker centre asked me are all cyclists as muscular as me. I suspect his eyes got stamps, but I had to honestly tell him I trained separately for upper body, otherwise he would be misinformed. To cycling friends, I always advocate a balanced training regime for lower and upper body, which will have benefits for overall health and performance. Too many local cyclists only focused on the legs and the speed record on strava. Speed is nothing to shout about if always struggling to keep up with the group. The only truly strong one is the puller who leads the front most of the time. If not, the speed appearing on the strava is not true.

 

[WussRedXLi]

No morning rain, heng! There seemed to be a squall line coming from Sumatra that was visible @ 1am but fizzled out when it approached SG.
So a matter of luck for this weekend.

 

[WussRedXLi]

I have exactly the same equipment as yours and only occasionally do the lats at my room door and at fitness corner. Got one old uncle at hawker centre asked me are all cyclists as muscular as me. I suspect his eyes got stamps, but I had to honestly tell him I trained separately for upper body, otherwise he would be misinformed. To cycling friends, I always advocate a balanced training regime for lower and upper body, which will have benefits for overall health and performance. Too many local cyclists only focused on the legs and the speed record on strava. Speed is nothing to shout about if always struggling to keep up with the group. The only truly strong one is the puller who leads the front most of the time. If not, the speed appearing on the strava is not true.

Actually not only cycling, but even walking/running/stairs climbing is the same thing.

I also have this idea/hypothesis that need to train upper body be it for strength or fast twitch muscle fibers and motor units coz if i fall then the reaction to counter it might be better. Also would strengthen the bones, Important for middle age and beyond coz of the decline of type 2 fibres and actually more importantly the motor units as a whole. Functioning motor units preservation is important as well other than the 3 types of muscle fibers, coz that encompasses the motor neuro and neuromuscular junction parts as well. Dont use it, we will lose it. Im always a fan of faster more explosive contractions and then slower 2-3 seconds eccentric for the exercises, i believe it gives more bang for the buck for the older folks.

For bones, it would esp be the clavicle collar bone and upper arm humerus. Maybe the wrists also. Then wont fracture as easily and also the speed in reacting or able to better grab a pole to stabilise etc......gives a better outcome.
True or not in real world, i dont know lah, but just do.


That Taobao purchased resistance band contraption is great, very versatile. I only got it last year Dec and that time i max out at 3 or 4 pull ups. After having this and doing more volume (coz at home mah, not only rely on fitness corner for negatives / more reps) i manage like 6 now.

Im only motivated to do it at home and not go to a gym so these are great. So these resistance bands are sufficient for me who is just aiming for a basic level and so multiple freee weights/kettlebells a bit space consuming. For others who are interested, a pic best describes it.

https://item.taobao.com/item.htm?_u...=5227426766222&spm=a1z09.2.0.0.52b52e8dZVXqDl

 

[WussRedXLi]

Hayden Wilde inside. For ref...5k PB i think still 13:21, not sure if faster or not liao. But his first debut in middle distance so dont expect too much.

 

[WussRedXLi]

AI result

Yes, upper body strength, along with overall strength and balance, can help prevent falls, especially in older adults, by improving balance and providing a stronger base for maintaining stability during movement or a potential fall.

Here's a more detailed explanation:

• Improved Balance:
  Strong upper body muscles contribute to better balance and coordination, which are crucial for maintaining stability and preventing falls.
  
  
• Enhanced Stability:
  Upper body strength allows individuals to brace themselves and maintain stability during unexpected movements or slips, reducing the risk of falling.
  
  
• Protective Response:
  Strong arms and shoulders can help individuals catch themselves or brace their bodies during a fall, potentially minimizing the severity of the impact and reducing the risk of injury.
  
  
• Fall Arrest Strategy:
  Training focused on upper body capacity can improve the protective responses inherent in forward fall landing and descent, increasing movement speed which may help reduce forward fall-related injury risk.
  
  
• Exercise and Fall Prevention:
  Physical therapists often incorporate upper body strengthening exercises into fall prevention programs, emphasizing the importance of overall strength and balance for fall prevention.
  
  
• Fall Arrest Strategy Training (FAST):
  A randomized trial compared standard fall prevention exercises to Fall Arrest Strategy Training (FAST) in older women and found that FAST improved upper body response time compared to standard fall prevention exercises.
  
  
• Benefits Beyond Falls:
  Upper body strength also contributes to overall functional capacity, making daily activities easier and improving quality of life.
  
  
• Importance of Balance and Strength:
  Research indicates that programs which include functional balance and muscle strength training are the most effective in preventing falls.
  
  
• Considerations for Exercise:
  Exercise programs should be tailored to individual needs and abilities, and individuals should consult with a healthcare professional before starting a new exercise program.

 

[WussRedXLi]

"Free" watts. (sort of)

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8401416/

Supplementation with β-alanine is becoming a common practice in high-performance athletes. The purpose of the present study was to investigate the effects of a one-week high-dose β-alanine loading phase employing a sustained-release powder on preserving the time-trial performance capacity of world tour cyclists during overreaching training. Per day, 20 g of sustained-release β-alanine was administered during one week (7 days) of intensive team training camp in a randomised balanced placebo-controlled parallel trial design, with six participants in each β-alanine (BA) or placebo (PLA) group. A 10-min time trial (10′ TT) was carried out to analyse performance and biochemical variables. Anthropometry, paresthesia, and adverse event data were also collected. Power-based relative training load was quantified. Compared to placebo, the BA improved mean power (6.21%, 37.23 W; 95% CI: 3.98–70.48 W, p = 0.046), distance travelled (2.16%, p = 0.046) and total work (4.85%, p = 0.046) without differences in cadence (p = 0.506) or RPE. Lactate (p = 0.036) and anion gap (p = 0.047) were also higher in the BA group, without differences in pH or Bicarbonate. High daily and single doses were well tolerated. One-week high-dose β-alanine loading with a sustained-release powder blend can help attenuate 10′ TT performance losses of world tour cyclists due to intensive training.

 

[WussRedXLi]

 

[bbbbbw]

i like this thread lots although others may have other interests like cycling, they are still welcomed by those regular contributors of this thread.

and people are ready to share their knowledge and advice by putting effort to writing walls of text to explain something.

appreciate it.

 

[Ender]

I think so far this is the race to watch out for.

 

[Ender]

Usng Gemini 2.5 (experimental for the youtube review)


Okay, here's a review of the provided text on Zone 2 training, highlighting key points for runners, fact-checking the claims, and offering a conclusion with recommendations.

Review of Provided Text ("zone 2 wrong.txt")​

The text argues against defining Zone 2 training intensity solely based on a fixed percentage of Functional Threshold Power (FTP), a common practice. It emphasizes that the primary goals of Zone 2 are aerobic development, improving fat burning efficiency, and stimulating mitochondrial growth, which requires significant oxygen turnover. The core argument is that the intensity at which an individual achieves maximum fat oxidation (termed "FatMax") is highly variable and changes with training, meaning a standard FTP percentage (like 70%) won't align with FatMax for everyone. Training precisely at or near FatMax is presented as more effective for aerobic adaptation (because fat requires more oxygen to burn) and for managing limited carbohydrate stores, which impacts recovery and subsequent high-intensity sessions. Therefore, the text concludes that relying on fixed FTP percentages is suboptimal and potentially leads to less effective training and poor fueling strategies.

Key Points for Runners​

• Zone 2 Goal: Primarily for building aerobic endurance, improving the body's ability to use fat for fuel, and stimulating mitochondrial adaptations.
• FTP % Limitation: Using a generic percentage of your FTP (e.g., 56-75%) to set Zone 2 intensity might not be optimal because individual physiology varies significantly.
• FatMax Importance: The intensity where your body burns the highest amount of fat (FatMax) is a crucial marker for effective Zone 2 training. Training at this intensity provides a strong stimulus for aerobic improvement.
• Individuality: Your specific FatMax intensity is unique to you and can change as you get fitter. It won't necessarily fall neatly into a standard %FTP zone.
• Carbohydrate Management: Zone 2 training still burns carbohydrates. Knowing your burn rate at your optimal Zone 2 intensity helps manage glycogen stores, crucial for recovery and fueling future hard workouts. Training significantly above FatMax burns more carbs unnecessarily for an "easy" session.
• Training Efficiency: Training closer to your actual FatMax intensity can make your Zone 2 runs more effective in stimulating aerobic adaptations compared to using a less personalized %FTP approach.

Fact Check​

The core concepts presented in the text align well with current sports science understanding:

• Zone 2: Generally understood as low-intensity aerobic training. Definitions vary but often fall between 56-75% FTP or 80-90% threshold heart rate.
• FatMax: A recognized physiological point representing the exercise intensity at which the rate of fat oxidation is maximal. Its importance for endurance performance via carbohydrate sparing is supported.
• Individuality of FatMax: Confirmed. Research shows FatMax occurs at widely varying percentages of maximum heart rate or VO2max across individuals, influenced by fitness, genetics, and diet.
• FTP % Limitations: The critique that FTP-based zones are not truly individualized regarding metabolic responses (like FatMax) is valid and discussed in coaching and scientific literature. Athletes with the same FTP can have different underlying physiologies.
• Carbohydrate Sparing & Fueling: The importance of managing carbohydrate stores and fueling appropriately, even during Zone 2 (especially longer sessions), is well-established. While Zone 2 maximizes fat burning rate, significant carbohydrates are still utilized.
• Fat Oxidation & Oxygen: Burning fat requires more oxygen than burning carbohydrates. Therefore, training at an intensity that maximizes fat oxidation (FatMax) logically provides a strong stimulus to the aerobic system.

Conclusion​

The provided text accurately highlights a significant limitation of relying solely on generic FTP percentages to define Zone 2 training intensity for runners. While %FTP zones offer structure, they don't account for individual metabolic differences, particularly the unique intensity at which each runner achieves their maximal fat burning rate (FatMax). Training closer to this individual FatMax point likely yields better aerobic adaptations and allows for more precise fuel management than a one-size-fits-all %FTP approach.

Recommendation for Runners​

1. Re-evaluate Your Zone 2: Don't blindly follow generic %FTP Zone 2 ranges (e.g., 56-75% FTP). While it's a starting point, recognize it might not be optimal for you.
2. Identify Your FatMax (or approximate it):
   • Gold Standard: Metabolic testing in a lab (measuring oxygen consumption and carbon dioxide production) can pinpoint your FatMax intensity. Services like INSCYD offer protocols.
   • Proxies: While less precise, you can try to approximate. FatMax often occurs at lower intensities than many realize. Focus on genuinely easy, conversational paces where breathing is controlled. Heart rate can be a guide (often cited around 60-75% of Max HR, but this is also highly individual). Pay attention to how you feel.
3. Prioritize Consistency: The main benefit of Zone 2 comes from accumulated time spent at an appropriate aerobic intensity. Aim for consistency in these easy runs.
4. Fuel Appropriately: Understand that even optimal Zone 2 running burns carbohydrates. For runs longer than 90 minutes to 2 hours, consider taking in carbohydrates to maintain energy levels and aid recovery, especially if you have other training sessions soon after. Knowing your approximate intensity helps estimate carb needs.

In essence, personalize your easy runs by focusing on finding a sustainable, truly aerobic intensity that maximizes fat utilization (likely lower than you think), rather than just hitting a number based on a generic FTP percentage.
Sources and related content
https://contribution.usercontent.go...kcGAE&filename=zone+2+wrong.txt&opi=103135050

 

[Ender]

Seemingly contradicting to the above video. Similarities is both video do not advocate sticking the the flawed percentage base zoning and use RPE. 2nd video doesn't place importance for the MaxFat burn point a soppose to the first video, but instead go for volume.


______________________________________________________________
Okay, here is a review based on the "Steve Magnus Zone 2.txt" file, highlighting key points, fact-checking, and providing a conclusion and recommendation for runners.

Review of Provided Text ("Steve Magnus Zone 2.txt")​

This text offers a critical perspective on the popular concept of Zone 2 training. It defines Zone 2 based on common physiological markers like maximal fat burning (FatMax), low lactate levels, primary use of slow-twitch fibers, and being below the first ventilatory threshold. However, the main argument is that these physiological markers don't align perfectly to create clearly defined, universal zones. The boundaries are described as "nebulous" and "arbitrary," more like a "dimmer switch" than a distinct on/off switch.

The text challenges the idea that Zone 2 is a unique "miracle" intensity for adaptations like mitochondrial growth. While acknowledging Zone 2 provides a stimulus, it explains that multiple training intensities (easy, moderate, hard) trigger mitochondrial adaptations through different biological signaling pathways. Research, including a recent meta-analysis, suggests similar mitochondrial improvements can result from various types of training, with frequency being a key factor. Similarly, fat burning improvements aren't exclusive to Zone 2 training.

Ultimately, the text argues that the value of easy running (often categorized as Zone 2) comes not from hitting precise physiological markers, but from the long-established training principle that accumulating a large volume of easy-to-moderate work builds the necessary foundation for endurance and handling harder workouts. It references the historical evolution of training and observations like the 80/20 principle as evidence for this approach.

Key Points for Runners

• Zone 2 Defined (Loosely):Typically refers to easy-to-steady intensity, often linked physiologically to high fat burning, low lactate, and conversational pace.
  
  
• Zones are Fuzzy:Don't expect precise, universally applicable boundaries for Zone 2 based on heart rate, pace, or lactate. These markers vary significantly, and zones overlap.
  
  
  
• No "Magic" Intensity:Mitochondrial growth and fat burning improvements are not exclusive to Zone 2. Different training intensities stimulate these adaptations through various pathways.
  
  
  
  
• Volume is Key:The primary benefit of "Zone 2" running comes from accumulating a significant volume of easy-to-moderate effort over time.
  
  
• Foundation Building:This large volume of easier running builds the aerobic foundation necessary to support and benefit from higher-intensity training.
  
  
• Mix Intensities:Optimal training involves a mix of intensities, not just Zone 2.
  
  
  
• Avoid False Precision:Obsessing over staying within narrow, arbitrary Zone 2 metrics (like a specific heart rate beat or lactate number) is unnecessary and likely inaccurate.
  
  

Fact Check​

The points raised in the text are generally well-aligned with exercise science:

• Zone Definitions & Variability:The descriptions of Zone 2 markers are standard, and the critique regarding their variability and the fuzziness of zone boundaries is accurate and widely acknowledged in physiology research.
  
  
• Multiple Adaptation Pathways:The explanation of different signaling pathways (AMPK, CAMK, MAPK, etc.) leading to mitochondrial adaptations from various stimuli (intensity, duration, frequency) is scientifically sound.
  
  
• Training History/Practice:The emphasis on learning from historical training methods and empirical evidence (like polarized training models showing lots of easy volume) is a valid perspective in coaching.
  
  
• Frequency:The point that higher training frequency contributes significantly to aerobic adaptations is supported by research.
  

Conclusion​

This text provides a valuable counterpoint to the hype sometimes surrounding Zone 2 training. While Zone 2 represents a useful physiological concept related to easy aerobic effort, its precise definition and boundaries are fuzzy and individual-dependent. Attributing unique "miracle" adaptations solely to Zone 2 is an oversimplification, as various training intensities contribute to overall aerobic fitness, including mitochondrial health. The most important takeaway for runners is the time-tested principle that building a large base of easy-to-moderate running volume is fundamental for endurance performance, regardless of whether it hits an exact, arbitrary Zone 2 definition.

Recommendation for Runners​

1. Embrace Easy Volume:Focus on accumulating a substantial amount of your running time at a comfortable, conversational effort (broadly covering Zones 1 and 2). This builds your aerobic foundation.
   
   
2. Don't Obsess Over Numbers:Avoid getting fixated on precise heart rate numbers, paces, or lactate levels to define your easy runs. Use perceived exertion (can you hold a conversation?) as a primary guide.
   
   
3. Mix It Up:Incorporate a variety of training intensities into your week according to your goals and a sensible plan (often resembling an 80/20 split – mostly easy, some hard).
   
   
4. Be Consistent: Consistency in training volume, particularly the easy efforts, is more important than hitting "perfect" zone metrics on any single run.

 

[Ender]

Both videos are scientifically sound in sport science. It's just a matter of which philosophy to adopt. I am primary following the 2nd video where my easy runs are usually likely hitting LT1 and maybe above it into the so call "Forbidden" zone of the 80/20 philosophy. Even though I am still using my HR chest strap, main thing if I want my HR to be steady state, rather then to find which percentage zone I am in.

Here is Gemini's take on the two videos.

Yes, the second text ("Steve Magnus Zone 2.txt") contradicts the first text ("zone 2 wrong.txt") in several key aspects regarding the emphasis and practical application of Zone 2 training, although they agree on some foundational points.

Here's a breakdown of the contradiction:
Importance of FatMax Precision:

• Text 1 ("zone 2 wrong.txt"): Places high importance on identifying and training at an individual's specific FatMax intensity. It argues this precision is key to maximizing aerobic stimulus (linking higher fat burning to higher oxygen uptake) and managing carbohydrate stores effectively. The message is: find your FatMax for "Zone 2 training done right."
• Text 2 ("Steve Magnus Zone 2.txt"): Downplays the importance of precisely hitting FatMax or any specific physiological marker. It calls chasing exact numbers "false precision," arguing that zone boundaries are fuzzy and individual markers don't align perfectly. It suggests the benefits aren't tied exclusively to that single point.

1. Source of Training Benefit:
   • Text 1: Focuses heavily on the physiological mechanisms tied directly to the FatMax intensity (maximal fat oxidation rate leading to higher oxygen demand) as the primary driver of Zone 2 benefits.
   • Text 2: Argues that benefits like mitochondrial adaptation come from multiple training intensities via different pathways, not just Zone 2/FatMax. It emphasizes that the real value of easy running comes from accumulated volume building an aerobic foundation, a principle derived from decades of training practice, rather than hitting a specific "miracle" intensity.
2. Practical Recommendation:
   • Text 1: Implicitly recommends targeting your specific FatMax intensity for optimal Zone 2 training.
   • Text 2: Explicitly recommends not obsessing over specific metrics (like FatMax, heart rate, or lactate). It advises focusing on accumulating lots of easy, conversational volume and incorporating a mix of intensities.

In Summary:

While both texts agree that generic %FTP zones are flawed and that easy running is important, they contradict each other on how to approach it and why it's beneficial. Text 1 advocates for a precise, physiologically targeted approach centered on individual FatMax. Text 2 argues for a less rigid, volume-focused approach, cautioning against overemphasizing specific physiological markers like FatMax.

 

[WussRedXLi]

 

[WussRedXLi]

I think so far this is the race to watch out for.

3 weeks 3 weeks!

 

[WussRedXLi]

 

[WussRedXLi]

 

[WussRedXLi]

 

[WussRedXLi]

The "mistake" that the pedestrian made is that she checked clear the first time round but not check clear for all lanes + all the time. That's what i always advocate, simply coz a few weeks ago my parents also nearly got knocked down when crossing cantonment road from pinnacle duxton towards Cantonment Pri school, with the cheongster chiong red at the last lane and missing them by 1 lane 1 second. My father 83 years old already, so you can imagine what could have happened. Crossed 6 lanes (4 lanes 1 side 3 lanes the other) safely checked right first and then left, but must be last lane at the very last moment kena.

You check clear first lane is not 100% one. Must be all lanes at all time. And your view could be blocked by vehicles on the other lane and only visible near the second last lane.

Running / cycling across for runners / cyclists is worse, the reaction time needed is so much higher....and seriously even walking speed also like that if the driver is distracted by the mobile phone.

 

[WussRedXLi]

Starto for pro women

Live Stream