Hey guys, my body has quickly adapted to my cardio training. I push myself at every single cardio session. At anytime, if it "feels" like cakewalk, I crank up the intensity (intensity or duration). I have been relying on soley perceived intensity over the past several weeks. For two weeks, I had promising results: LBM stayed about the same while fat decreased.

For the next three weeks however, the data has shown backwards progress: LBM loss, and fat the same

I have not changed any of the other variables (nutrition, lifting, etc.). This is an example list of the kind of cardio I do:

* Fasted: treadmill for 40 minutes steady.....nagging sensation of burning and slight breath shortness
* Fasted: treadmill with incline or intensity going all over the place
* Fasted: elliptical for 40 minutes with incline and intensity going all over the place....going for the "burn" feeling
* Fasted: elliptical for 40 minutes steady with a nagging sensation of burning all the way through
* Non-fasted: all of the above with greater intensity....occasional HIIT training to "confuse" my body

The data seems to suggest that I'm not having enough calories or I'm working too hard. I experimented with increasing calories, and it didn't help much. It's almost as if my body is doing whatever it can to hold onto my last 25 lbs of fat.

Today, I invested in a Polar F11 heart rate monitor. I had one cardio session today, and to my disbelief, I have been cardio training all the way at the edge of the "cardiovascular zone" this whole time. My perceived intensity tells me that it's "easy" however. I'm 24 yrs old, and 164BPM "feels" like cakewalk. Something is not right here.

Am I training too hard? How crucial is it to work out in the "fat loss zone"? If I really wanted to work in the fat loss zone, I'd probably have to POWERWALK on the treadmill (given my current fitness level)----that would seem way too easy.

Your input is appreciated! :confused:

How crucial is it to work out in the "fat loss zone"? I

On a scale of 1-10? -3 :lol:

The reasoning behind the fat loss zone myth is you burn a higher percentage of fat in that zone. Sounds great right?

Well think of pies. If I gave you a whole small pie that's sort of like working out in the fat zone.

Working out harder gets you a fraction of the pie but the pie is bigger. So you get a pie slice bigger then the small pie you get in the fat zone. The percentage of fat burned is lower but the actual amount of fat burned is higher.

Fat zone equals a small fast food single serving pie.

More intense equals 1/2 a large family size pie

:lol:

more importantly, what is your weight lifting like? ;)

I'd say balls to the cardio - what's your diet like?

I have not changed any of the other variables (nutrition, lifting, etc.)

Were you getting good results initially that have since tailed off?

Have you re-calculated your calorific needs based on any change in weight?

I'm probably starting to sound like a broken record on these forums but a fortnight ago I changed my diet to a 40/30/30 P/C/F split from 40/40/20 and my cardio alternates between 5 sets of 60 sec 100% effort sprint, 3 min rest and 10 sets of 30 sec 100% sprints with 90 sec rests (after trying all sorts of cardio routines) and have lost as much weight in 2 weeks as I'd previously lost in the first 2 months.

IMO you'll get more benefit from analysing your diet and adjusting it rather than worrying too much about the different cardio zones.

more importantly, what is your weight lifting like? ;)

:nod:

And the diet.

If you are looking for fat loss, that's more important than what cardio you do IMO. Cardio can help, but focus on diet and resistance work first. Especially if preserving lean mass is important to you.

Robert2006: Yeah, that's what I was thinking the whole time. I mean, at the end of the day, calories are still king.

Jedi: The lifting sessions are awesome. I'm making strength gains every week, and there's visual improvement in the muscles. However, with that stubborn 20ish pounds of fat on top, I can't aesthetically enjoy them. An upper-ab 2-pack is such a tease. :cry:

Medhatter: My HIIT usually consists of alternating for 1 min 100%/1 min rest for the entire duration. My body has already adapted to 20 minutes of this on say the treadmill, and I'm running out of options when it comes to changing up things. I've also played around with sporadic inclines, changing up the interval duty cycle, etc etc. I work my butt off, but at the end of the week, most of it just comes off the muscle. :bang:

I mean I can increase duration, but at this point, it seems like it'll only exacerbate adaption (when my body eventually catches up to the next level). I could also do other cardio e.g. elliptical, cycling, but I honestly feel like I'm "cheating" with these alternate forms....they're much easier in comparison to running.


I was afraid that somebody would mention nutrition, because I've grown happy with the way I handle it nowadays: I'm no longer a macronutrient-miser and I just count calories. I'll of course put in more quality protein and limit the carbs. Also, I'll make sure to get 5-6 small meals and pay attention to meal timing. I keep a nutrition journal.

In the very beginning of my fitness program, I calculated macronutrients/calories PRECISELY to the TEASPOON. It was frustrating and time-consuming, and when I wasn't getting the results I wanted, I simply phased out into the "lazy" nutrition scheme that I am using now.

My fitness program is pretty much: lazy nutrition + hardcore weights + hardcore cardio = brute force fat loss

Do I really have to go back to counting calories/macros within +/- % tolerance? Sighh.....

I wouldn't fret too much over going for the exact quantities etc, just initially work out what food you like eating, what quantities of macros you get from each and measure out what an individual portion looks like.

Once you've got that initial groundwork done then it's much easier to to put things together without specifically measuring it out each time; I measured out a portion of muesli to see what it looks like in a bowl, now I just guess each morning; also, just try to ensure you get a balance of macros in your meals; if I'm eating tuna as my protein in my meal I know there's enough fat in the sunflower oil it comes in to negate the need for any more, if I'm having chicken or cod I know I'll have to grab some nuts or something to get my fats.

I think worrying about exact measurements only really comes into play when you're shredding away the final bits of fat, for now, just knowing a rough area of where to aim for should be fine.

But definitely, your progress will be hindered if your diet totally lacks any sense of planning; think of it this way; would you rather work your ass off in the gym and have some slight progress or spend a couple of hours one afternoon planning out quantities of food that'll go together to make a balanced meal, then make great amounts of progress for the same amount of effort in the gym?

Hope that doesn't sound "preachy" or anything, but it's so much more motivational when you see results from your efforts and the sooner the better for me :)

i find that doing HIIT on the exercise bike going the 60% effort 90% effort works the best for me. could be worth a shot if you haven't been hitting the bikes.

I don't think you always have to measure everything, however, if things aren't going the way you want them to go, it might be time to measure for awhile to see what the baseline is so that you can tweak and find out what works to get your progress going again.

I never worried about macros. I kept fat mostly low. I ate a reasonable amount of protein. Mostly more then the RDA but far below what some take in. The carbs made up the difference. The vast majority of things most days ended up being carbs. But that's me and it may not work for everybody.

I did worry about calories. I found I needed to increase the calorie intake over time.

Have you tried bumping up your fat intake? I know I lose more fat by eating more of it, counter-intuitive as that may be.

Just make sure it's healthy fat of course....

hey folks, i suppose it's best for me to just go back to measuring food precisely and planning out meals on excel spreadsheets....

i think i might even start off on a "clean slate" and add in variables one at a time.....say first week with super controlled nutrition + weights only.....next week controlled nutrition + weights + minimal cardio....and then adjust accordingly each week........that way, i'll know what exactly is working

great results take great measures right? :spaz:

newkoba: yeah, i think i might just take a break from running for a while, and then i'll shock the system with bike HIIT out of nowhere

Mannish, Robert, Medhatter: I guess I can't really comment on my nutrition since it's very lazy and random (except for food selection and calories); the macros are constantly going all over the place and i really have no basis of "more" or "less"

how do u measure your body fat%? r u sure it's accurate?

how do u measure your body fat%? r u sure it's accurate?

This was never a problem for me....but in case you were wondering

Skinfold + jackson-pollock 3 site + WEEK-TO-WEEK CHANGE

(Yes, the 3 site calculation stinks, but it still allows for week-to-week progress checks.)

How crucial is it to work out in the "fat loss zone"?

Not crucial at all.

Maybe reading this (http://forums.johnstonefitness.com/showpost.php?p=501935&postcount=25) might help.