Maintaining Intensity

[Fadi]

im talking about intensity of work.

we all perceive pain differently, what you might see a easy, I might view as hard, you might workout (operate)at a very high level of pain, to me it might look like murder.

at the end of the day we look for results, that is something we can measure, it's tangible.

so don't get hung up on the intensity, work as hard as you can bare.
As an aside, increasing the intensity of a workout is not something you can just do straight away, it takes months of workouts to find out what that is.

Great thank you. I had a feeling that we might define the word differently and I was right in my assumption. Not about right or wrong here, just simply a different definition of the term. Again, thank you.

 

[spartacus]

at end of day, only thing that counts is results. Some people describe certain people as soft trainers, but they can be huge (and/or strong) and their training methods much more intense than people give credit.

 

[Goosey]

at end of day, only thing that counts is results. Some people describe certain people as soft trainers, but they can be huge (and/or strong) and their training methods much more intense than people give credit.

That's it my friend.

 

[Goosey]

This is one of my many favorite quotes;

"it is impossible to understand anything that you cannot measure; and thus it unavoidably follows that you cannot determine the results of any action until you can accurately measure any such results"

 

[Fadi]

I can see that the discussion has shifted from my original question, to now discussing measurement of results/outcomes/achievements. No one here is disputing the fact that at the end of the day what counts is the result one's applied efforts have achieved over time. What I was really after is for someone to define the word intensity for me, as the title of this thread is "maintaining intensity".

To me, intensity is but one part of the 5 pillars that support our iron sport. These 5 pillars, or parameters of training are as follows, and I'll use them as they apply for the sport of Olympic weightlifting:

1. REPS
2. SETS
3. VOLUME
4. INTENSITY
5. LOAD

So yes, for sure we can discuss the end result of something, or the way we perceive (wrongly or rightly) based on our subjectivity, how hard someone is or is not training, however that was not what my question was about. So forgive me if I was not clear enough in asking it. For me, measurement of the end results after all is said and done is great, but the measuring, calculating, and balancing of the 5 training parameters (of which intensity is but one), is also important and needs to be factored into our measurement. Perhaps I should define this word as I understand it, and show how it is vastly different from the other parameters, yet not independent of any of them.

Intensity: is the measurement based on one's 1RM. If 100kg is all one can squat for one rep, then we can conclude that if he was to squat 70kg, then 70kg would be 70% intensity. We can break this down further into the following expressions as a percentage of one's maximum:
70% or less = light, 80% = medium, 90% = heavy, 90% or above = maximum.

Volume: is defined as the total number of times the weight has been lifted. If for example at the end of an exercise a lifter has done 6 sets of 3 reps, the volume of that exercise would be 18 reps. Volume can also be broken down into its different compartments as follows for one exercise: 15 reps or less = small, 20 reps = medium, 25 reps = large, 30 reps or above = very large. For one training session, the measurements are as follows: 60 reps or less = small, 80 reps = medium, 100 reps = large, 120 reps or above = very large. Now that we've set our foundation, we can build and design a program based on these training parameters.

Reps & sets: we all know what these are.

Load: training load is a combination of intensity and volume. It is the training load that determines how much fatigue will be experienced after a training session and how long this fatigue will last. If the intensity is high and the volume is large, then one can expect fatigue to likely last for several days. If the intensity is high but the volume is low, a moderate fatigue lasting a day would be the result. A low intensity coupled with a high volume would meet with the same or similar result as the one mentioned before it. Finally, if both intensity as well as volume were on the low side, there'll be no fatigue.

im talking about intensity of work.

I understand, but was asking for a definition.

we all
perceive pain differently,

Of course we do Andy.

what you might see a easy, I might view as hard

Hence why we need something objective to work with and not subjective, based on some perception or the like.

you might workout (operate) at a very high level of pain, to me it might look like murder.

I agree.

at the end of the day we look for results, that is something we can measure, it's tangible.

Yes that is so true, however we can also use the training parameters I've laid out above (before we get to) and in order to get to those tangible, measurable results you've mentioned.

so don't get hung up on the intensity,

I simply asked for a definition of the word as you've understood it.

work as hard as you can bare.

Hopefully not all the time, hence I favour the application of a periodisation system for my training. I say that because sometimes we need to hold ourselves back from working as hard as we can bare. It's a subject, a critical subject not discussed often enough in the bodybuilding circles, where the mantra seems to always be focusing on push push and push some more. I know for a fact that all bodybuilders would benefit greatly from utilising and taking advantage of a tapering week, where the growth or strength they're so desperately seeking would occur.

As an aside, increasing the intensity of a workout is not something you can just do straight away, it takes months of workouts to find out what that is

I don't get the message you were aiming to convey here, sorry Andy.

 

[Darkoz]

I think you've left out one of the most important aspects of an intense workout Fadi and that is 'time'
I'm sure that anyone who has done it would agree, a person liftiing at say 70% of intensity (by your definition, although I'm not sure I agree with it) but with little to no rest between exercises would find it a very intense workout session indeed compared to lifting say 90% but with only a couple of reps and 5 mins rest between sets.

So as I see it and have also experienced, intensity is not just about the amount of weight lifted, it's not as simple as that

 

[spartacus]

I think you've left out one of the most important aspects of an intense workout Fadi and that is 'time'
I'm sure that anyone who has done it would agree, a person liftiing at say 70% of intensity (by your definition, although I'm not sure I agree with it) but with little to no rest between exercises would find it a very intense workout session indeed compared to lifting say 90% but with only a couple of reps and 5 mins rest between sets.

Yes, very true. short rests at 70% is indeed brutal.

 

[spartacus]

I don't really think percentage of weight has much to do with intensity; intensity is more about how close you get to failure regardless of percentage. for instance, for me, one set of 20 reps on 70% is 100% intensity, as is 10x80%, 4 x90% and so on.

likewise, you can do 3x8 on 65-75% with 1minute rest which I also rank near 100% intensity.

 

[Goosey]

Intensity me me has always been very well described by Arthur jones, if you want to understand it read what he had to say.

this had been a big influence on what I do.

pick an exercise and stimulate the maximum possible amount of muscle fibers.

it can be done a lot of ways, if one had a training partner they could stand by and assist with negative accentuated reps when you cannot possibly move any more on your own, this same partner would have also prepared the next exercise so there is no downtime if you maintain this work the intensity would be so high you could only stand so much, your workout would only last no more than 30 minutes thereafter the intensity of work would diminish.

so, this is what I mean by "subjective" because one is unable to measure intensity.

if you can't measure results are no obtained

so the measure rep's and progressive resistance but even the it is subjective if one is not maintaining a rep cadence because more of than not as one fatigues one speeds up the rep and shortens the ROM, we all do it.

all this takes time, and practice and hard work

 

[Goosey]

I've read where lots of people sat HIT isn't for them but I think that's mainly due to not doing what I wrote ^ there

 

[Goosey]

I think you've left out one of the most important aspects of an intense workout Fadi and that is 'time'
I'm sure that anyone who has done it would agree, a person liftiing at say 70% of intensity (by your definition, although I'm not sure I agree with it) but with little to no rest between exercises would find it a very intense workout session indeed compared to lifting say 90% but with only a couple of reps and 5 mins rest between sets.

So as I see it and have also experienced, intensity is not just about the amount of weight lifted, it's not as simple as that

Yes!
and to add if one reduced the time over a period of months good things are happening here.

but both methods work.
if one was using multiple sets and longer rests of say 2-5 min then the difference is that the trainee should include a cardio element their weekly template.

as HIT is a lot more metabolic

 

[Goosey]

Speaking of cardio, and this is now tricky, one needs to be careful here as recovery isn't selective, it all comes from the same source.

 

[Shrek]

Cardio does not have to be intense, does it, since the goal is too purely expend (surplus) energy.

 

[steveP]

Cardio does not have to be intense, does it, since the goal is too purely expend (surplus) energy.

Depends on why you're doing it. If simply to burn off calories, then yeah I would say keep is low intensity. But some people do it to increase their VO2 max or practice a sport (running).

I think everyone should be doing 1-2 sessions of cardio a week for no other reason than to stay active.

 

[Goosey]

Cardio does not have to be intense, does it, since the goal is too purely expend (surplus) energy.

I don't think so.
the age old question is some is good more is better, which can be bad, really bad if you are always in a state of stress caused by too much exercise.
the amount of cardio you do would depend on your ability to recover and you ability to perform your day to day functions, including lifting weights.

if you use cardio to also control your weight you are an idiot.

to add, intensity would need to be higher if the duration of cardio is less.

a 4 mile jog (1hour)
A form of HIIT 20 to 30 minutes
how many times a week?
for a bloke that does a PL style workout and who plays no sport, I reckon maybe two sessions of HIIT a week would no optimal.

 

[Fadi]

I think you've left out one of the most important aspects of an intense workout Fadi and that is 'time'

I would like nothing more than to engage with you in a discussion regarding this subject sir. However we need to be discussing the same subject, and as things stand right now, I don't believe we are. I wrote the following in my previous post:

These 5 pillars, or parameters of training are as follows, and I'll use them as they apply for the sport of Olympic weightlifting:...

I was not thinking of bodybuilding and the time factor when I wrote what I did. That does not mean the time factor/rest intervals between sets does not apply in the sport of weightlifting, but it's a given that a weightlifter takes between 3 to 5 minutes of rest during his working sets. And it's also a given that a weightlifter's working sets begin at 80% and above; that's the intensity/volume combined that is calculated to make up the total weekly tonnage lifted...and it's also a given that speed is a critical factor in that sport, though it does not make the training parameters list of "pillars" if you like. Had I had bodybuilding on my mind, then for sure your point regarding the time factor would be very valid indeed, as that's a crucial aspect, a switch if you like that has the potential to either increase or decrease the rate of intensity in a set or workout session. Thank you Darkoz.

 

[Darkoz]

I would like nothing more than to engage with you in a discussion regarding this subject sir. However we need to be discussing the same subject, and as things stand right now, I don't believe we are. I wrote the following in my previous post:I was not thinking of bodybuilding and the time factor when I wrote what I did. That does not mean the time factor/rest intervals between sets does not apply in the sport of weightlifting, but it's a given that a weightlifter takes between 3 to 5 minutes of rest during his working sets. And it's also a given that a weightlifter's working sets begin at 80% and above; that's the intensity/volume combined that is calculated to make up the total weekly tonnage lifted...and it's also a given that speed is a critical factor in that sport, though it does not make the training parameters list of "pillars" if you like. Had I had bodybuilding on my mind, then for sure your point regarding the time factor would be very valid indeed, as that's a crucial aspect, a switch if you like that has the potential to either increase or decrease the rate of intensity in a set or workout session. Thank you Darkoz.

No problem Fadi I see what you're saying but take a look at where this thread is posted

 

[Fadi]

No problem Fadi I see what you're saying but take a look at where this thread is posted

Your point is 100% legit mate, it's my bad, and I'm sorry.

 

[Darkoz]

Your point is 100% legit mate, it's my bad, and I'm sorry.

I'm just stirring you up Fadi