Warren G, you cranky dogmatic blowhard (hey, this childish insult thing is kinda fun, who knew?)
Originally Posted by WarrenG
What I've said is widely available by reading ANY good exercise pyhsiology text, looking at countless scientific studies, etc. What I've said sounds foreign to you, but it's actually pretty basic physiology that you could easily read about yourself.
if they are so widely available, let's see them. back up your stand. remember, they must involve athletes that have had time to acclimate. you demanded studies from me, but seem rather reluctant to produce your own.
meanwhile, this article references some studies you might find of interest:
http://www.lowcarbportal.com/archive...cise/index.php
You have only shown us studies where the subjects were exercising at intensities of 60-64% of VO2max, and below that. These are very low intensities-as I said earlier, these are the intensity a recreational cyclist would use for their recovery or off days on the bike and a decent bike racer would use something near 70% of MHR for their recovery days. This intensity is BELOW the threshold of what would improve aerobic or anaerobic fitness in a person with at least a minimum of training. You can look it up.
Also, some of the studies said they had to feed the subjects large amounts of carbs right before the testing and during the te
sting, or they did carbo loading for three days prior to the testing. What does this tell you about the need for carbs? You said you would use carbs on the day of a race if you ever did a triathlon. Well, if you think the carbs would help you during that event it shouldn't be too hard to understand they'd also help you perform better in training too. If you train better you'll race better too.
I'll refer you back to the studies posted regarding increased mitochondriia and triglycerides in the muscle after just a few weeks training on a high fat diet...
I think we already agreed on the role carbs can play for a competive athlete. OP's situation doesn't have much in common with the Lance Armstrongs of the world.
So you rely on the age estimate for MHR? I suggest you do some reading about the way that number was calculated. Generally speaking you are almost as likely to be off by 10bpm plus or minus as you would be to find your actual MHR at the age estimate. Furthermore, MHR is a very poor estimator for intensity (that's why real studies don't use it to estimate intensity) because there is a fairly wide range of HR% associated with a person's actual VO2max intensity, or LT intensity, or OBLA intensity, etc. So if you use %of your estimated MHR for your intensities you are using a broad estimate, and then compounding the problem by using another estimate on top of the first estimate.
um, once again, what does my situation have to do with anything? that said, I'll be sure to give you an update in six months... btw, dont want to defend the age based guestimater for MHR, but it's interesting how it did accurately predict the MHR for the poster above. in my case, I suspect it's at least 10 beats low, but I wont know till I get into good enough shape to figure it out myself.
11+ hours a week of exercise and all of it at MAYBE 70% or lower of your estimated MHR... you need to learn a LOT more about training and nutrition before you try to tell other people what they should be doing.
imo, so do you. You've offered no valid reason why OP should change his diet. also, I really dont care about your opinion of my training methods, so shut the f*** up already.
mr freddy: beginner expert, an oxymoron.
once again, go f*** yourself. yawn.