Weights before Cardio or viceversa?

[Steve]

hey steve, how about this...

a general collection, sort of a small personal library, on being healthy and fit. so, both exercise theory as well as nutrition. also, if you have any interesting reads on sports related exercise and nutrition, that would be good too. as i said, think of it as a small "essentials" collection. also, if you dont mind, give me a general idea of where to find the books. thanks

Many of the books I read are very technical. If you are into that kind of stuff, listen to me. If you aren't, don't, b/c the books are pricey.

Exercise Theory:

Supertraining by Mel Siff
Practical Programming for Strength Training by Rippetoe
Starting Strength by Rippetoe (I'd read this first then the above)
Science and Practice of Strength Training by Zatsiorsky
Essentials of Weightlifting and Strength Training
Neuromechanics of Human Movement
Periodization Training for Sports
Strength Training Anatomy (not really a words book, more a picture book of the anatomy during the various exercises, if you are interested)
Physiology of Sport & Exercise by costill & willmore

With regards to nutrition books, most of the books I feel are worthwhile to me are texts. Some for undergrads, some for post. Without adequate knowledge, a lot of it is going to be very complex. I am not sure how advanced you are in terms of nutrition?

A good starting place might be something like:

Optimum Sports Nutrition by Michael Colgan (this is a little dated but def. worth the read)

I buy my books from various locations. has a fantastic list of books. If you want to get into sport specific training, elitefts has a few great reads on their list that you should check out. It's also a great website. There is a ton of info just in the articles there that is equivalent to the best of books. I buy from amazon too, all depends on availability and pricing.

This is by no means a complete list of books I've given you. It is a fantastic starting place though. It would take most a good amount of time and money to read/comprehend these books.

Happy readings!

This is

 

[Steve]

Maybe I'm reading this completely wrong, but I'm not convinced that it's that simple. Why do most people bonk well before that 2,000 calorie point during cardio workouts? With this mindset, a person cycling fairly hard and burning 700 calories per hour should be able to keep that effort up for 3 hours straight on an empty stomach, without even tapping into the carb stores in their liver. In reality, most people would bonk hard, be crazy hungry, have their blood sugar bottomed out, will probably be cramped up, etc., well before that point. And, this is assuming a fairly fit person who according to you could store 50% more glycogen than the figures you gave out. I don't get it.

Wrangell was not talking about endurance type activities. He was talking about intense strength training. They are fueled completely different.

 

[corndogggy]

Wrangell was not talking about endurance type activities. He was talking about intense strength training. They are fueled completely different.

He was talking about fueling the cardio activities after strength training. The reasoning behind that is what struck me as being odd.

there should be more than enough left after weight training to fuel any cardio you might want to do.

 

[Steve]

His statement is correct.

 

[corndogggy]

So, a fit person can have 3,000 readily available calories for any given cardio activity? I understand that you can store that much, but if all of that were available for any activity, then why would anybody ever bonk except for while in really really long activities? If that were true I should be able to go cycling for 2 hours hard without even coming close to tapping into my liver stores or fat stores. That's what I don't get.

 

[Steve]

So, a fit person can have 3,000 readily available calories for any given cardio activity? I understand that you can store that much, but if all of that were available for any activity, then why would anybody ever bonk except for while in really really long activities? If that were true I should be able to go cycling for 2 hours hard without even coming close to tapping into my liver stores or fat stores. That's what I don't get.

I didn't say this.

I said Wrangell was correct when he said glycogen is not very depleted after a *normal* strength training session and there would be plenty left over to fuel cardio along with oxygen.

You do understand that we use other substates as fuel, correct?

 

[Wrangell]

Maybe I'm reading this completely wrong, but I'm not convinced that it's that simple. Why do most people bonk well before that 2,000 calorie point during cardio workouts?

I suspect it might be for a variety of issues from overall muscle fatigue / sub-optimal muscle endurance, lactate threshold, to their general cardio fitness level etc. etc. Also depends on what you mean my ' bonking '. From a long distance running perspective ( i.e marathon running ) ' bonking ' is akin to ' hitting the wall ' when your liver and muscle glycogen stores and the subsequent steps for deriving energy are virtually tapped out so you can't continue to run efficiently / effectively. So, " bonking " for the average gym rat running a treadmill for 60 minutes may mean something else. For example, they may quit after 60 minutes even though they still have lots of glycogen ' left in the tank.'

Now, I'm not saying that just because someone has the ' topped -up " glycogen / glucose stores of 1,880 calories or 2,000 caloires that the availability of all this energy will allow them to run for 1 or even 2 hours. Reaching various levels of ahtletic performance is - as you say - much more " complex " than that. What I was saying, is that typically one can't deplete all of one's glycogen stores simply by means of single hard weight training session. If you want to do cardio after training, there are a lot of reasons you may want to or not want to do it or feel able or not able to do it - but in most cases the availability of glycogen shouldn't be a reason either way.

With this mindset, a person cycling fairly hard and burning 700 calories per hour should be able to keep that effort up for 3 hours straight on an empty stomach, without even tapping into the carb stores in their liver.

Well, you can sustain a 3 hour hard bike ride with 1 of 2 kinds of fuel - or some combo of both . Fat or glucose / glycogen. Fat utilization obviously requires that you not be in oxygen debt, so it depends on how far you can go for 3 hours both aerobically ( using mostly fat stores ) and / or anearobically ( using mostly glycogen stores ) without re-fuelling. If someone has the fitness level to go hard for 3 hours without re-fuelling along the way, that's great. Again, being able to pull off a " hard ' 3 hour bike ride isn't simply a matter of available glycogen stores, but it's an issue of overall fitness as well.

Either way, once you do tap liver glycogen stores close to exhaustion, you're running the risk of causing a shortage of glucose being sent to the brain, and that's when “ bonking ” kicks in.

In reality, most people would bonk hard, be crazy hungry, have their blood sugar bottomed out, will probably be cramped up, etc., well before that point.

Again, to me, ' bonking ' means you have pretty muuh exhaused all your glycogen stores to the point where it is affecting your brain ( i.e lack of glucose ). If you are saying most people might ' bonk ' go hard anaerobically for 3 hours without re-fuelling - I'd agree with you.

And, this is assuming a fairly fit person who according to you could store 50% more glycogen than the figures you gave out. I don't get it.

Well, my assumption would be different. I would put the capacity for 50% more glycogen as being more characteristic of a more ' elite ' ( extremely fit ) athete rather than some gym rat who is fairly fit ..... thus the 20% - 50%. However, if you compare the glycogen capacity of someone who is really good shape to someone who is sedentary, the muscle adaptations of exercising to get fit to usually allows for more glycogen storage. The fact is, there is an estimate of glycogen calories ( for normal people ) that can be attributed to the muscles and an estimate of glycogen calories that can be attributed to the liver. As I said before - combined - it comes close to something like 2,000 calories ( some have it as less ). The capacity for muscle glycogen storage has opportunties for improvement due to exercise, and that is simply the point I was trying to make.

 

[Wrangell]

He was talking about fueling the cardio activities after strength training. The reasoning behind that is what struck me as being odd.

This seems to be getting a bit off topic.

I'm talking about the typical gym rat who goes into the gym and is trying to figure out whether he should workout with weights before or after cardio.

The poster I repsonded to thought it was better to do running after weights because weight depleted glycogen stores, and he thought that depleted glycogen stores will therefore ensure that your cardio then burns pure 100% fat. Even though that reasoning itself - i.e 100% depleted glycogen = opportunities for 100% fat burning - is flawed, i didn't comment on that specifically. Rather, I simply wanted to point out to the poster that it is very diffcult for the average gym rat to deplete all their glycogen stores after one visit to the gym.

Assuming glycogen stores are topped up, a fit gym rat can train with hard with weights for an hour, and then, if he / she wants to, can still do a hard 20-30 minute cardio HIIT session or 45 minute steady state cardio run afterwards without fear of being out of glycogen. You seldom see any gym rat go hard with the weighs for 1 hour and then follow it up with 1 hour of HIIT or 2 hours of slower cardio. As for burning 100% fat during cardio, the primary determinant of that is oxygen availability and not a direct consequence of depleted glycogen stores. Either way, if all your liver glycogen was drained as the poster I responded to was thinking, you'd be so dizzy and fatigued from a lack of glucose to your brain, any contemplation of a 100% fat fuelled cardio run with " zero " glycogen stores becomes a moot point.

 

[CoachCrimson]

Steve, thanks for that list! I think I am going to start with Supertraining by Mel Siff. those are definitely a bit pricey, but that one seems to be quite encompassing. Since I've had very good success with periodization when in college, i might pick up the book on that too, so i can ensure I am doing it right when i make my own workouts. My knowledge on nutrition is very application based. When you get into things like the Krebs cycle and the stuff that is more of the "how" at the cellular level, i am much more of a noob with far less experience. it does, however, interest me nonetheless. i have to say, it was quite fun talking with my girlfriend about her biochem class, and learning and understanding a decent amount with only a high school chem class under my belt 5 years ago, lol. i may not have a myostat deficiency, or a super speedy metabolism, but my gift is being able to learn very easy and teach myself, so i look forward to getting my hands on some of these.

i was going through some old stuff, and came across one of the texts i have from an intro to nutrition class i took in college. text is pretty interesting, lots of "this is what x does" without going too much into the "how". I went to that class 3 times, once for each exam, and got an A. So basically, don't worry too much about the difficulty, as long as it builds up. i mean, obviously reading a book that assumes you know things you dont would be difficult for anyone, but as long as it explains what it talks about, then im up for the challenge.

thanks again for the suggestions

 

[Steve]

I would definitely start with Supertraining. It is the best strength training book ever written IMO.

Both of the Rippetoe books are worth every penny, and they just happen to be the cheaper of the bunch.

 

[CoachCrimson]

i just placed an order for supertraining, and figured i might as well get a good set of digital food scales while im at it. hoping they will both be here sometime this week.

 

[almostthere]

I would have a solid meal 60-90 minutes before you weight training session. Do you HAVE to walk to the gym?

That pre workout meal should have protein and carbs in it. Fat is OK, as long as it fits into your macros.

I can drive to the gym but I naturally assumed walking would be better. The meal I eat before is pretty much veggies, chicken, brown rice, and a slice of wheat bread.

Steve can you elaborate a bit more on why walking to the gym might not be a good thing?

 

[Steve]

i just placed an order for supertraining, and figured i might as well get a good set of digital food scales while im at it. hoping they will both be here sometime this week.

I love my digital food scale.... use it multiple times every single day. Take to work with me every single day. Good purchase.

Have fun reading supertraining. I know you are a smart guy, but take your time. There are a lot of concepts in that book to grasp. I still go back and read it every now and then to freshen up. Many of the top strength coaches today still go back and reference this book.

 

[Steve]

Steve can you elaborate a bit more on why walking to the gym might not be a good thing?

Oh, not that it's bad. I just like to go into the gym completely fresh. Intensity is a critical component of a strength training program, especially when dieting.

I don't like wasting any energy before hand. If you feel that the walk helps you, then keep doing it.