So basically, in around two weeks I'm hoping to go away, having also not let my wrist recover (Slight pain when pressured) I've decided to lay off the weights for atleast another week, and do HIIT daily with a slight defeceit in my calories.
But, I can't seem to do HIIT right, I mean I used to do hill climb programs and they'd tire me out, but even the max setting on the bike isn't burning me out by 25mins, or the cross trainer...
I'm using:
5min warmup
30s on
60s rest

How can I change this to suit ? Less rest or more work ?
Also comments on this amount of work in general ?
Thank's.

From everything I've heard, HIIT every day is NOT a good idea. It puts a lot of strain on your CNS, as well as your leg muscles. I have been doing HIIT for 3 or 4 months, but doing it two days in row has not worked out well for me. Why not alternate between HIIT and steady state?

Absolutely not. Too taxing on the entire system.

Agreed, Keep it to three days a week max. Two days will likely serve you well.

Steve - this is an area that has always puzzled me.......optimal vs sub-optimal HIIT frequency per week. Would really appreciate getting your views on this.

When I was training hockey players during pre-season camp, we'd easily do a few weeks of daily or twice daily ' on-ice ' workouts - 5 days a week - where we would a mimimum of 30 minutes of ' up-tempo ' drills to simulate 45 second hockey shifts ( going flat out as possible ) followed by a simulated active recovery of being on the bench till the next shift for 2 minutes. In other words, we did some pretty heavy duty interval conditioning pre-season 5 days a week and also during the season with games and practices taking up 5 days a week.

In addition, I noticed that Alywn Cosgrove - as part of his " 16 week Afterburn " HIIT cardio interval program - advocates a 1 minute hard / 2 minutes recovery interval protocol similar to what our players were doing. Not only that, but Alwyn also advocates that for the latter 9 weeks of his HIIT program, HIIT be done at least 4X a week for 9 weeks and within that time, that HIIT be done 5X a week for the final 3 weeks. See below....from Cosgrove....


The Cosgrove interval protocol...



Energy System Training - The Science of Total Training

Now, I'm not suggesting that anyone adopt a 4/5X a week HIIT protocol as the basis of their cardio program on an on-going basis - indefinitely. However, I always felt that since HIIT really drains glycogen stores, and given glycogen is replaced at anywhere from 5%+ an hour, assuming sound nutrition protocols are used, there should be ample glycogen available for each day for back to back to back ( as an example ) HIIT sessions. So - at least on paper - glycogen issues wouldn't be the reason you couldn't do consecutive HIIT sessions. And, since the HIIT sessions only call on your muscles ( ie, legs ) to go really hard for maybe 6 minutes a session, I don't know if these HIIT sessions are overtaxing your muscles from an adaptation point of view such that muscle soreness etc would prevent back to back HIIT sessions. .

- But, in I'm wondering if in the extreme short term when fat loss is a short term priority, does doing HIIT 4X a week for 9 weeks have any significant adverse effects or draw backs in your view ? And if so, what would those adverse effects or draw backs be ?

Welcome any thoughts ( or literature references ) you may have on this topic Steve.

Thks

Comparing athletes in full "pre-season training" swing to the average, dieting individual is not real practical. In general, athletes have better recovery capabilities than the average counterpart.

In the context of your example though, pending nutrition, recovery, and other intensive bouts of exercise that the players are exposed too, I could see it being "okay."

Okay assuming this level and frequency of intensity once the season starts is drastically reduced. But I certainly don't think you need me to tell you how to train your athletes. You probably have more hands on work with full teams than I do. Actually, I know you do.

It certainly isn't a matter of glycogen repletion. That is accomplished rather easily with proper nutrition, which I am sure you know. And this goes for the athlete or the average.

It's also not about local muscular fatigue.

It's about neural fatigue.

And for those reading this who don't understand that there is a neural component to training (especially energy intensive training). The neural component has to do with the short term changes in the firing characteristics of the nerves that connect to your muscles (including the brain) in order to create force very rapidly. The muscle tissue itself is only involved tangentially, as opposed to other types of action.

And remember the context of my advice, Wrangell. My advice is directed, again, toward the dieting individual. When someone is deficient in energy, their capacity to recover is drastically reduced, locally and neurally.

When dieting, IMO, intensive weight lifting is NEEDED if you are going to optimally reach your physique goals. I recommend at least 2-3 sessions per week of this.

Again, when dieting, you need some regulation of intensity. I will certainly cut this intensity in the cardio (HIIT included) side of things first, before the other forms of intensive exercise (weights). This only makes sense for the dieter though, looking for physique improvements. This would certainly not be the case for athletes such as the example you gave.

This is the meat of my advice here. There are other, more important, energy-intensive components in a fitness routine for the dieting individual. HIIT takes a back seat to these components (namely weights).

For your athletes, it's all about training specificity for your athletes, mentioned above. You are directly mimicking the work they will do in the real world (on the ice). As you know, specificity is a fundamental and required variable if real world progress and enhancement in performance is desired.

Your athletes are not trying to improve their physiques. They are trying to improve their conditioning. Two totally different scenarios. KWIM?

However, I would closely monitor how "hard" you push those athletes.... and you can take this advice for what it's worth.... which comparably speaking, isn't much. I have never worked with high level teams in totality. I have worked with numerous athletes though, with success via one-on-one training situations.

While you are building "fitness" in these athletes with high frequency HIIT, you are also accumulating a bunch of "fatigue." This fatigue MUST be managed for:

1. Optimal results (read: increased performance)

2. Recovery. Running (skating) athletes into the ground using energy intensive approaches such as HIIT is great, as long as you allow for recovery. "Over-reach" your athletes too far and injury is probable IMO. And this is general advice.... I have no clue exactly what you are doing with your athletes.

With regards to Alwyn, I love him. However, I've never been a fan of his ideologies when it comes to cardio and HIIT for the average person. I lost interest on this side of his theories when he wrote an article about steady state cardio actually making you fat. There were not his exact words, but it seemed like he was stretching the facts a good bit to write a neat article.

I am tired as sin. Sorry if I am babbling..... b/c it really feels like I am!!

If I didn't answer your question Wrangell, feel free to post more. Interesting discussion to say the least.

I'm too ignorant to comment, but it sure makes for some great reading. This is one of the reasons why I love this site!

I was lifting, but I was lifting despite a very slight wrist injury (Prevents me from doing press ups, lets me do most over things though) And I just don't want to injure myself ...
So, today I should go in and do an upper body routine, light weight short rests ? Or how about a game of squash ?

First off...thank for taking the time to reply with a detailed post. Appreciate it.

I see your point on the pre-season reference. On that, I was simply to trying to provide a non-gym workout example of where you might find a 5 day a week back to back HIIT session - apart beyond what some ' guru ' trainer like Alywn might have come up with. I didn't intend to compare these hockey jocks to gym rats who need to cut fat, but the intent was more of establisihing the fact that 5 x a week HIIT sessions are seemingly productive and constuctive under the right circumstances.

Good info - must confess, I'm not to up to speed on the details behind " neural fatigue " ( another fitness topic to add to my ' learn about it ' to do list )

It seems to me , most gym rats that contemplate bumping up their cardio sessions - for example to HIIT 5 X a week usually have a solid areobic base going in and maybe do 1 HIIT session a week already.

Now, assume they want to now go to 4 or 5 times a week with HIIT. My sense from your comments however is that this ' adaptation ' is in the near short term and that your muscles DO eventually adapt to more frequent HIIT sessions. So, going back to Alywn's protocol, he suggests doing HIIT 3 X a week for 3 weeks to start out....then to 4X a week ......then to 5X a week Perhaps this 3X a week is when your adaptation is takes place, allowing enough adaptation so that 5X a week of HIIT is sustainable.

This issue of neural adaptation reminds me of a my buddy who does triathalons. He claims he runs 5 X a week each morning & runs for anywhere from 30 minutes to 1 hour before work ( I've run some 10k races with him - damn him - he runs hard too ! ) . I'm sure his body needed some big time adaptation to get comfortable with this 5X a week regimen as well, but his body seems to be O.K with it. So, I often thought that from an adaptation point of view, your body can also adapt to a 5X a week HIIT regimen.

Gotcha.

I see the distinction. In fact, I would put diet as 1a. and 1 b. as far as where to put the emphasis on any healthy ' lean body '- sustainable - regimen....cardio / HIIT would be last.

Granted, doing a 5X a week HIIT protocol has limited applications. My ' fog ' on this while topic - as I said earlier - was to simply confirm that while doing HIIT 5X a week isn't an ' opitmal ' approach from a sustained approach to staying lean, there is no problem in doing HIIT 5 X a week from a muscular / structural / celluar / neural perspective.

Good points...you're are 100% correct.

It is ALL about conditioning....be it pre-season or during the season. Added muscle mass and low % body fat are just the natural conseqences.

We did a lot of dry land training for speed, agility, quickness and some lactate threshold training on treadmills etc. The on-ice cardio was to get the legs in ' game shape ' in the context of skating stride, stops-starts, etc. and the hockey biomechanics of skating etc.

Funny you should touch on how ' hard ' we pushed them.....I once had a coach who didn't consider a pre-season cardio session on ice hard enough unless someone puked on the bench....sort of ' old school ' thinking I know, but then again, as hard intervals go, I suppose the Tabata protocols could do a number on you ( i.e make you puke ) just as easily.


Don't worry....that's makes 2 of us.

I hear you.

It seems if you just mention the word " areobics " these days and it's considered a dirty word. It as though it's all HIIT, HIIT, HIIT. Don't get me wrong , HIIT is a very effective tool, ( and I've done it more often than I care to remember ) but it is just 1 tool of many to help people reach their fitness goals. It isn't a case where it is HIIT or nothing, or where HIIT is the panacea to all our fat loss or cardio fitness goals.

I

I'll reply later today or this evening Wrangell, I have a lot going on today.

I haven't the time to read that myself until later on, but with how sleepy I felt after my exam I'm just hitting the xbox/guitar for today, a days rest can only do me good after five days in a row.