High Intensity Training: On Duration
Posted on 05. Jul, 2009 by Dream in Exercise
One of the most remarkable things about High Intensity Training is the absolutely minimal time invested.
On one hand this is a great thing- you spend less time working out and have more time to live your life however you choose (instead of being a gym addict).
This is an excellent trait of the training since the number one reason people don’t exercise is a lack of time- the “lack” being profound because the mainstream fitness and health industry has lead people to believe that exercising for massive amounts of time is not only beneficial but necessary- when in fact the exact opposite is true.
At the same time, the short duration, relative infrequency, and safety of the training prevents joint problems down the road- unlike typical “cross” and “functional” training programs that actually promote these problems.
On the other hand, my hunch is that a lot of people simply scoff at the required time as if it’s a joke or scam of some sort. I’ve seen a number of people do this with my own eyes so the hunch is based off of those experiences (the hunch being that this is more common than is seen visually).
Which is probably the saddest thing of all since again, the exact opposite of what most people believe about exercise is true. You need to invest a very tiny amount of time to get the best results from your genetic potential.
But why is this? Let’s examine the typical questions to find out.
Q- How could a minimum amount of time be needed when I need to burn lots of calories?
A- Burning calories through exercise should never be the reason you exercise. Intentionally trying to burn lots of calories off- which is far harder than you think when you take your resting metabolism out of the equation- is downright counterproductive.
If you do manage to burn off more calories through exercise than you can eat back in a single large bite of food, you will have destroyed a significant amount of pre-existing muscle or stunted additional growth from proper exercise- muscle that would have burnt more calories doing nothing than you just actively tried to.
Combine that with the fact that exercise WILL make you hungry, and you begin to see why burning calories through physical activity is a horrible idea. Not to mention all of the wear and tear issues from typical modalities of exercise such as group exercise, half marathons, or any form of “cardio” for that matter.
Q- So high intensity training doesn’t burn a lot of calories?
A- I hesitate saying this because if you’re still fixated on burning calories you’re missing the point, but HIT actually burns a ton of calories for the time invested. Both in the short- but intense- time spent exercising, and the hours following the workout as a result of lactic acid build up (your aerobic system is cranking).
The muscle built from high intensity training also burns anywhere from 17-100 calories per pound per day- as opposed to fat’s measly 2.
Q- I still don’t understand, why exactly do the workouts need to be so short? Can you clarify?
A- Most people hear “work harder”, and do the exact opposite by working longer (but less intensely). With the advent of “aerobics” and the blind notion of modern day generic “cardio”, this has been compounded to unprecedented levels.
Benefits achieved directly from exercise will always and only come when a meaningful level of intensity is present. Nothing else is even possible.
The best way to achieve this- to the furthest extent of my knowledge- is 1 set per exercise to the point of utter failure. Failure must be achieved at a minimum of about 50 seconds, and a maximum of about 2 minutes (which is pretty damn long, I personally don’t recommend using a resistance that allows failure to happen past 90 seconds).
Momentum must also be eliminated to further increase the intensity.
Does this mean intensity is the only factor in muscular hypertrophy? Hardly, but it’s one of the big ones
Another is working out intelligently- meaning you avoid reworking the same muscle if possible .
Doing so will drain recovery resources from the very muscle you are trying to grow. Hence multiple sets are never done, and you should not be performing too many similar movements during the same workout- which means either do a leg press or a barbell squat for your compound leg movement in a workout, not both.
And finally, as Doug Mcguff has said time and time again, you simply can’t stand more than a little bit of proper exercise.
There is no putting this into words, only a well performed high intensity workout can get the point across. At the 12 minute mark, most people- and I’m talking people who have already been in the gym for years- are physically and mentally exhausted. At 15, most people are ready to keel over (if they’ve been giving 100% of their effort with each movement).
Q- Okay it’s starting to make sense. But are the workouts really THAT short?
A- Yes, they are, almost without exception.
Most often exercises are done back to back with no rest, resulting in workouts as short as 6 or 7 minutes. On the long side of things, perhaps 12 minutes. 15 or more usually only comes into play if there are other people using the equipment, the equipment is spaced far apart, or you are intentionally resting between exercises and not focusing on metabolic condition.
Q- Final question just to be sure, am I taking care of my cardiovascular system only working out this briefly? Be honest with me.
A- Yes, you are, by leaps and bounds.
In fact I would go so far as to say that your “cardio” will be infinitely better than it ever was performing steady state activities for multiple hours per week.
Think of it this way, your cardiovascular system responds to the quality of the activity performed (intensity). Doing a lot of low quality work- cardio- will not provide meaningful benefits.
In fact excessive amounts of it can cause a plethora of problems. Even minimal sessions of it can be counter productive in terms of recovery from proper exercise (among other downsides).
Q-Does this mean I can never ride a bike or play a sport again?
A- No, of course not, just understand there is a difference between exercise and recreation, and respect the differences (don’t confuse one with the other).
- Exercise is only fun for those with a few screws loose (myself included), recreation should always be fun.
- Exercise is a logical choice, recreation is an emotional choice (for the most part).
- Proper exercise respects fundamental principles that work across the board, recreation is specific to each individual.
Read this article if these concepts interest you (or even upset you).
Recreation has it’s benefits, but again, it needs to be a separate activity. It is not one in the same with exercise.
In Summary
Often times when you hear something that’s “too good to be true”, it is. In the case of high intensity weight training however, the opposite is the case. Not only do ~10 minute workouts at a maximum intensity work, they are often times the most you can be doing, period, for the best results possible.
I’ll do a piece on the next piece of heresy that HIT subscribes to, once or twice a week frequency, oh no! =)
-Dream
HA!! One of my favourite ways to exercise (and yah, I’m one of those with a few screws loose that considers EXERCISE to be fun. Then again, I do almost nothing active for what you call ‘recreation’… unless beating the hell out of yourself with HIT or HIIT can, in any way be classified as ‘recreation’!!
May I interject one point? you start out the article stating that ‘time’ is one of the reasons people find not to exercise. May I point out one of the other reasons?
PAIN! LOL.
I know lots of people that don’t exercise because they don’t like the FEELING of it. HIT is not gonna cure THAT issue… because baby, HIT HURTS!!!!! (and those of us with a screw loose love to hurt ourselves that way).
Luckily HIT hurts for a less amount of time than traditional lifting or cardio, but it does hurt MORE for that lesser amount of time.
In any case, just shut up and do it, its a great way to exercise. Your body will thank you.
ok, I gotta go do some hillsprints now!! haha
thanks Dream. Always love reading your stuff.
GWNN
GWWN is right, although rather than labeling it ‘pain’ I would classify it as the general population’s desire to avoid physical discomfort. Mix that in with the preponderance of injury provoking, and marginal ‘results-producing’ exercise prescriptions championed by the so-called fitness industry, and it’s no wonder most fail to see any measurable long term benefits from exercise.
In a perfect world, people will be taught from an early age the way to have life-long strength–and the accompanying physical benefits–is from properly conducted strength training.
For those with an aversion to physical discomfort, it should also become a common-place recommendation they seek out a physical trainer to help administer their ‘weekly-dose’ of exercise. All too often I read newspaper, or online fitness articles that suggest hiring a trainer for 4 or 5 sessions until you ‘learn the exercises’ as if having a trainer is a luxury, and not a necessity for 95% of the population that won’t self-administer their dosage of weekly exercise. What good is knowing how to brush your teeth, if you don’t actually do it?
With this in mind, it’s unfortunate that some people that manage large fitness facilities don’t realize the incredible opportunity offered by having properly trained staff administer once-a-week exercise sessions. All you have to do is look at fitness industry numbers to see the turnover most commercial facilities experience. If these facilities promoted–at least as an option–once-a-week supervised HIT sessions, they’d engage a whole subset of the population that would gladly ’suffer through’ exercise, and actually stick with it long-term –especially if it produces results and is only once-a-week.
You have some good points in this article. I believe your HIT workouts work; I have several friends who follow HIT programs and it definitely works for them. However, in my case, and the community I belong to present an interesting challenge. I am a rock climber (ironic, I live in florida) but I live for the sport. I boulder, lead trad and sport, mountaineer, and climb at the gainesville rock gym as much as I possibly can. Why? Exercise? No. It’s because I love it. I think rock climbing is one of the most beautiful things I’ve ever experienced in this physical life, second only to sex. So it fits into the recreation category, right?
Maybe not… Rock climbing, bouldering especially, requires strength that most people absolutely cannot comprehend. Not to be purposefully conceded or prideful about the sport, but some of the movements I’ve seen/done in my climbing career are not only breathtakingly beautiful, but unsurpassed in required physical ability, that again, leaves the average joe in awe.
My favorite type of climbing is bouldering, which usually consists of short, overhanging, climbs that consist of less than 20 intense moves. Sounds just like HIT. Except we boulder 10-20 of these problems a ’session’ (rock climbing term for a day on the rocks) and I usually have a good session at least 3 times a week.
And obviously you want to get better at climbing, you want to do more problems, and find the most amazing movement possible. Which entails 3 parts:
-1. Learning technique and ‘beta’ (the way to do the climb), developed quickly, just from being exposed to the sport
-2. Working a problem, or ‘projecting’, where you repeatedly work a boulder problem that’s outside your range
-3. Training. Involving hangboard workouts (similar to a pull-up bar, simulates different types of climbing holds), calesthenics, and campus rungs (basically tiny vertical monkey bars)
All of this sounds like way overboard on the quantity level according to your thinking, but I’d argue VERY good quality.
You can’t say it’s ineffective. I’m the strongest I’ve ever been, and my core climbing community has the highest concentration of wickedly strong people I’ve met in my entire life.
So if it’s not strictly inneffective;
Am I putting my joints, muscles, and body at risk?
Am I training myself to death?
Should I stop climbing so much?
Even if the answers are yes, I wouldn’t. Because I love it too much.
-Austin
p.s. I hate running and agree that aerobic usually just destroys your body. But unfortunately, I’ve gotta get used to it, I’m joining the Air Force in the fall.
p.s.s. Check out Aguille, the gym in Orlando
Hey Cooner, thanks for stoppin by. Some thoughts in response to your comment (your comment is spliced throughout beginning with ***, my response is next to >>>)
***I am a rock climber (ironic, I live in florida) but I live for the sport. I boulder, lead trad and sport, mountaineer, and climb at the gainesville rock gym as much as I possibly can. Why? Exercise? No. It’s because I love it. I think rock climbing is one of the most beautiful things I’ve ever experienced in this physical life, second only to sex.
>>>I think this is an important quote for all readers to take a look at. You do rock climbing because you love it, not for exercise- although we’ll get to that in a moment per your comment.
***Maybe not… Rock climbing, bouldering especially, requires strength that most people absolutely cannot comprehend. Not to be purposefully conceded or prideful about the sport, but some of the movements I’ve seen/done in my climbing career are not only breathtakingly beautiful, but unsurpassed in required physical ability, that again, leaves the average joe in awe.
>>>Austin, I have no doubt that rock climbing requires an intensity most people fail to comprehend- mentally and physically. As a result, the “exercise effect” I’ve recently discussed in this post, is especially potent from rock climbing. Or in other words, it can likely result in substantial strength gains, as well as improvements in motor skill.
***My favorite type of climbing is bouldering, which usually consists of short, overhanging, climbs that consist of less than 20 intense moves. Sounds just like HIT.
>>>It does sound intense, but it differs from high intensity training (or similar versions of strength training) in the sense of safety and effectiveness. Yes, it is intense, and will result in some level of muscular hypertrophy, however the same effect can be had in less time, with substantially less wear and tear, as well as immediate risk from the high force movements- in the form of properly conducted strength training.
***All of this sounds like way overboard on the quantity level according to your thinking, but I’d argue VERY good quality.
>>>Not necessarily, in fact Patrick Diver who commented just above you had some of the best results of his life at a 3x per week frequency. Recovery ability varies from person to person, as well as personal goals, lifestyle, and so on.
***You can’t say it’s ineffective. I’m the strongest I’ve ever been, and my core climbing community has the highest concentration of wickedly strong people I’ve met in my entire life.
>>>That I can not. Again, I believe rock climbing in particular has a potent exercise effect, however as Drew Baye has said, that does not make it effective exercise. I can also say that no matter how potent that effect is, it will not exceed that of properly conducted strength training.
Furthermore, I can only imagine your current level of strength. I remember back in high school you did some physically impressive feats, that I can assume have only been improved upon since then (also in accordance with your age now and naturally higher level of musculature as you near your mid twenties). However, you may be able to enjoy that same level of strength with with almost no activity- depends on your genetics. Some people (remember Lance B.?) are just naturally strong from birth, and have above average levels of muscle no matter what type of training they employ.
Also, I can guarantee you the same or better results could be had from strength training alone that you currently enjoy. Perhaps not the same (activity specific) cardiovascular adaptations and motor skill efficiency, but the foundation- plain and simple muscle- would be there.
As for the rock climbing community, there is a section in Body by Science that discusses this phenomena. Not that rock climbing doesn’t have a strong exercise effect- as I’ve already mentioned- but specific types of people are attracted to specific types of sports. The sport does not produce the body type. Swimming does not produce a “swimmer’s body”, nor does “power lifting” produce the body of a “power lifter”. These sports attract people that naturally excel at them, and weeds out those who do not. Accelerated evolution in a sense.
***
Am I putting my joints, muscles, and body at risk?
Am I training myself to death?
Should I stop climbing so much?
>>>Yes, you are putting various parts of your body at risk climbing rocks- I’m sure you know this well enough from first hand experience. The point I’m making is that you would do even better in your chosen sport if you were to incorporate an intense, brief, and infrequent session of strength training. In your case, likely less than once a week so as not to over train (while still rock climbing).
Should you stop climbing? That’s up to you, but I would think the answer is no. You seem very passionate about it and that’s something that’s all to rare these days. Be proud of it, just accept that it’s not the *best* thing you can be doing for your health, and at the same time you can-better- protect your body from possible future injury by further increasing your lean body mass in the safest way possible- properly conducted strength training.
Gl with the millitary. I’m doubting as well that you’ll be able to get out of running lol, but being intellectually aware of the problems with the training they employ is a big step in the right direction.
Again, good luck, and thanks for stoppin by
-Anthony