TacticalBarbell.com

Hi everyone,

I've been reading up on this over at StrongFirst. As I understand it, the glycolytic system is the one you enter after the alactic (anaerobic) system runs out of steam. They favor either the alactic or the anaerobic system, and say athletes shouldn't spend much time in the glycolytic system (except for peaking phases for competition etc) because it shuts the body down in the long run and brings ill health.

Now, I've been experimenting with the TB protocols for about a year now. My experience is that if I overdo the HICs, I pay the price for sure. My question: aren't many of the HICs glycolytic in nature (>10-15 seconds of intense activity without ample rest between rounds)? What am I missing here?

Thanks!

Well that doesn't make any sense to me. You'll be hard pressed to find any conditioning system that doesn't require intense effort over 10-15 seconds... I mean a squat set alone takes more time than that.

Can you post the studies Pavel references? That might help put things into context.

The key here is "overdoing". Let's take a look at the two HIC focused protocols, Black and Black-Professional:

Black = 2 HICs per week/1 E every other week
Black Pro = 2 HICS + 1 E every week

2 HICs per week isn't going to have negative effects unless you seriously seriously overextend yourself (like meeting Rabdo). And-- the same applies to E, LISS, maximal-strength, strength-endurance.... if you overdo anything there will be consequences. Look at LISS for example. Sure I can take a group of marathon runners and make a grand sweeping statement that aerobic exercise is bad for you, it increases cortisol, lowers testosterone, has negative mTor effect on signalling muscle growth etc etc

The dose determines if it's a cure or poison.

Not to mention you should be following the "Easy Week" principles, along with Base Building once a year. Both of those mitigate the effects of excess HIC. Do you follow the Easy week principle? Do you do more than 2 HIC per week?

If you're a performance based athlete you'll be seriously handicapping yourself without the right amount of anaerobic development.

This does have some validity if the case is that HIIT/HIC/WODs make up the bulk of your training. Think about the average Crossfitter that WODs 3-4 times a week at maximum intensity all year round. That's a far cry from the methodical block style approach TB takes. Now I can take that and apply it to LISS/E. If all you do year round is LISS-long distance running 4-5x week then it'll likely have negative effects on any adaptations other than endurance or aerobic capacity.

How does he explain the original Tabata study then?

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8897392

5 days a week for 6 weeks
7-8 sets of 20 second high intensity intervals at 170% of VO2 Max (pretty fkn' high intensity!)

VO2 max, aerobic and anaerobic capacity ALL increased significantly. I'm not seeing any mention of negatives in the study.

Corax wrote:Hi everyone,

I've been reading up on this over at StrongFirst. As I understand it, the glycolytic system is the one you enter after the alactic (anaerobic) system runs out of steam. They favor either the alactic or the anaerobic system, and say athletes shouldn't spend much time in the glycolytic system (except for peaking phases for competition etc) because it shuts the body down in the long run and brings ill health.

Now, I've been experimenting with the TB protocols for about a year now. My experience is that if I overdo the HICs, I pay the price for sure. My question: aren't many of the HICs glycolytic in nature (>10-15 seconds of intense activity without ample rest between rounds)? What am I missing here?

Thanks!

I'm no sports scientist, but what constitutes "a lot of time" being spent in the glycolytic zone? Is it even possible to spend a lot of time in that zone? If the anaerobic lactic/alactic system are both exhausted wouldn't you naturally slow down and eventually return to the aerobic zone? I'm guessing not many people can push for long after the anaerobic system runs out of steam in any case.

Which brings me to another question...by training and improving the anaerobic system (through intervals beyond 15s) wouldn't that increase the amount of time you can spend in the lactic zone before you hit the glycolytic phase?

Does Pavel cite any studies or provide an example of what spending time in the glycolytic zone looks like? i.e. what's an example of a workout that does that?

Again I'm no scientist, just trying to logic my way through things!

Ah so the pendulum swings.... first we used to demonize aerobic training now we're going the other way. Someone should let Ross Enamait know.

I love Pavel and recommend ETK to everyone I meet, but I'll take this one with a big fat grain of salt (if he in fact preaches this).

DocOctagon wrote:Can you post the studies Pavel references? That might help put things into context.

The key here is "overdoing". Let's take a look at the two HIC focused protocols, Black and Black-Professional:

Black = 2 HICs per week/1 E every other week
Black Pro = 2 HICS + 1 E every week

2 HICs per week isn't going to have negative effects unless you seriously seriously overextend yourself (like meeting Rabdo). And-- the same applies to E, LISS, maximal-strength, strength-endurance.... if you overdo anything there will be consequences. Look at LISS for example. Sure I can take a group of marathon runners and make a grand sweeping statement that aerobic exercise is bad for you, it increases cortisol, lowers testosterone, has negative mTor effect on signalling muscle growth etc etc

The dose determines if it's a cure or poison.

Not to mention you should be following the "Easy Week" principles, along with Base Building once a year. Both of those mitigate the effects of excess HIC. Do you follow the Easy week principle? Do you do more than 2 HIC per week?

If you're a performance based athlete you'll be seriously handicapping yourself without the right amount of anaerobic development.

This does have some validity if the case is that HIIT/HIC/WODs make up the bulk of your training. Think about the average Crossfitter that WODs 3-4 times a week at maximum intensity all year round. That's a far cry from the methodical block style approach TB takes. Now I can take that and apply it to LISS/E. If all you do year round is LISS-long distance running 4-5x week then it'll likely have negative effects on any adaptations other than endurance or aerobic capacity.

Excellent post Doc!!!!!!!!

All things in their proper measure.

StayGrey wrote:Ah so the pendulum swings.... first we used to demonize aerobic training now we're going the other way. Someone should let Ross Enamait know.

I love Pavel and recommend ETK to everyone I meet, but I'll take this one with a big fat grain of salt (if he in fact preaches this).

Agreed! I too love ETK, and, by the way, if you follow ETK you are likely going to go anaerobic 2-3 x week. I think some of the deepest lung burn I have every experienced is when I've rolled "box cars" for my swings on the hard day.

J-Madd wrote:

StayGrey wrote:Ah so the pendulum swings.... first we used to demonize aerobic training now we're going the other way. Someone should let Ross Enamait know.

I love Pavel and recommend ETK to everyone I meet, but I'll take this one with a big fat grain of salt (if he in fact preaches this).

Agreed! I too love ETK, and, by the way, if you follow ETK you are likely going to go anaerobic 2-3 x week. I think some of the deepest lung burn I have every experienced is when I've rolled "box cars" for my swings on the hard day.

Good point! Never even thought of that.

I have done ETK and it is a great program (not for variety junkies though). Despite the simplicity I was able to get to a 32 kg single arm press and 186 24 kg snatches on the 10 min snatch test. I think one of Pavel's big take away points is not only how much volume of glycolitic training you do but also the recovery time in between sets (a "comfortable" stop as he describes it). IN S&S he specifically talks about recovering heart rate in between sets of swings. I think this is something that a lot of people discover on their own (a bit of a less is sometimes more) and K. Black specifically addresses this as well I believe in TB.