- This topic has 16 voices and 51 replies.
-
Posts
-
I take part in two Body Pump classes a week, but honestly plateaued until I started doing proper heavy weight training. Now I can do 40kgs in the squat track, bearing in mind I weigh 77. There are a couple of tracks, namely chest and shoulders (occasionally biceps as well) where I get close to muscle failure. However I don't feel it gets anywhere close to draining my glycogen stores. Body Attack on the other hand..
I take part in two Body Pump classes a week, but honestly plateaued until I started doing proper heavy weight training. Now I can do 40kgs in the squat track, bearing in mind I weigh 77. There are a couple of tracks, namely chest and shoulders (occasionally biceps as well) where I get close to muscle failure. However I don't feel it gets anywhere close to draining my glycogen stores. Body Attack on the other hand..
40kg still sounds too little to me...How many reps do you do? When I was talking about high volume strength training I had in mind doing something like squats 80kg, deadlifts 100-140kg, push press 50kg... (which still might be too little for me...I plan to increase the weight on all drills) I weight currently 67kg Maybe high volume strength training is not for everybody if the goal is glycogen depletion...
5-6 minutes depending on the release, the exact number of reps varies, but there aren't any breaks in the squat track (well not where you put the bar down anyway). They're not all singles (which are really 2 second reps – 1 up, 1 down) either; some are 4 second reps (either 1 second down, hold, 2 seconds up; 2 down, 2 up; 3 down, 1 up or rarely these days, 1 down, 3 up) and on occasion there are the super-slow 8 second reps (4 down, 4 up).
Couple of notes… "Heavy" weight is COMPLETELY subjective. 100kg could be my max, but be someone else my same size/composition's 10 rep max. Also, in terms of glycogen depletion, you have to remember that besides the liver, we store glycogen in muscles. So smaller muscle groups (ie; bi's, tri's, etc) they don't hold as much glycogen as say your quads and hamstrings, which are bigger muscles. So if you do a workout of just some smaller muscles, even though you're going to failure, you may not be FEELING glycogen depleted, but chances are that those muscles are glycogen depleted, it's just not a large enough chunk out of your total glycogen for you to get the headache and stuff that are the standard symptoms. (This is all supposing, also, that liver glycogen is, indeed, empty.. otherwise it would just mobilize to refill your muscles. To whatever extent it can)
So smaller muscle groups (ie; bi's, tri's, etc) they don't hold as much glycogen as say your quads and hamstrings, which are bigger muscles.
Do you know this for a fact? It is my understanding glycogen is mostly contained in TypeIIa muscle fibers and Type IIb muscle fibers to a lesser extent. Different muscles have different fiber compositions, which depends on the type of training and your genetics.
So smaller muscle groups (ie; bi's, tri's, etc) they don't hold as much glycogen as say your quads and hamstrings, which are bigger muscles.
Do you know this for a fact? It is my understanding glycogen is mostly contained in TypeIIa muscle fibers and Type IIb muscle fibers to a lesser extent. Different muscles have different fiber compositions, which depends on the type of training and your genetics.
I've never dissected anyone, thankfully.. so no, I guess I don't know as fact. But I guess it just seems like a logical conclusion... A bigger muscle = more muscle fibers = more potential glycogen storage... So I guess if someone had trained specifically in a way that increased their 2a fibers in their arms, and in a way that increased mostly 2b fibers in their legs, the storage capabilities could be skewed. But I really don't know.As a practical application though, isn't this the very reason it's suggested that modulating the size of your backload based on the muscle groups worked that day can be beneficial? (IE: larger muscle groups = bigger BL and vice versa)Damn you for adding to my list of things that I'm now curious about and want to research. 😛
So smaller muscle groups (ie; bi's, tri's, etc) they don't hold as much glycogen as say your quads and hamstrings, which are bigger muscles.
Do you know this for a fact? It is my understanding glycogen is mostly contained in TypeIIa muscle fibers and Type IIb muscle fibers to a lesser extent. Different muscles have different fiber compositions, which depends on the type of training and your genetics.
I've never dissected anyone, thankfully.. so no, I guess I don't know as fact. But I guess it just seems like a logical conclusion... A bigger muscle = more muscle fibers = more potential glycogen storage... So I guess if someone had trained specifically in a way that increased their 2a fibers in their arms, and in a way that increased mostly 2b fibers in their legs, the storage capabilities could be skewed. But I really don't know.As a practical application though, isn't this the very reason it's suggested that modulating the size of your backload based on the muscle groups worked that day can be beneficial? (IE: larger muscle groups = bigger BL and vice versa)Damn you for adding to my list of things that I'm now curious about and want to research. 😛
Regarding the backload regulation, that really isn't something I am a fan of. There are simply too many variables like volume, amount of ULC days, and also according to Kiefer, tGLUT translocates more easily in upper body muscles.
It's true that based on genetics you will have Mixed, Small, and large twitch fibers. But generally speaking . Large muscle groups are going to have a bigger composition of these fibers. The make up of each group in an individual is goin to determine the optimal training method for them. (Including TUT “Time Under Tension”) per set, rest periods ect.
What is the best workout for quickly using up significant amounts of glycogen? Workout should be less than 45 mins
This is Kiefer's suggestion:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VZeUl4vFDcEhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oZev9g_N5Cohttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=acBWvYRxgYg
5-6 minutes depending on the release, the exact number of reps varies, but there aren't any breaks in the squat track (well not where you put the bar down anyway). They're not all singles (which are really 2 second reps - 1 up, 1 down) either; some are 4 second reps (either 1 second down, hold, 2 seconds up; 2 down, 2 up; 3 down, 1 up or rarely these days, 1 down, 3 up) and on occasion there are the super-slow 8 second reps (4 down, 4 up).
I was not talking about singles - i do usually 3-5 reps but my rest periods last 2-5 min...I do not know how long it takes to perform one rep...so I do not really understand what you are talking about 😀 but for your body weight 40kg sounds too little if you are doing 1-8 reps...maybe it would be best to stick to HIIT for glycogen depletion!?
So smaller muscle groups (ie; bi's, tri's, etc) they don't hold as much glycogen as say your quads and hamstrings, which are bigger muscles.
Do you know this for a fact? It is my understanding glycogen is mostly contained in TypeIIa muscle fibers and Type IIb muscle fibers to a lesser extent. Different muscles have different fiber compositions, which depends on the type of training and your genetics.
I've never dissected anyone, thankfully.. so no, I guess I don't know as fact. But I guess it just seems like a logical conclusion... A bigger muscle = more muscle fibers = more potential glycogen storage... So I guess if someone had trained specifically in a way that increased their 2a fibers in their arms, and in a way that increased mostly 2b fibers in their legs, the storage capabilities could be skewed. But I really don't know.As a practical application though, isn't this the very reason it's suggested that modulating the size of your backload based on the muscle groups worked that day can be beneficial? (IE: larger muscle groups = bigger BL and vice versa)Damn you for adding to my list of things that I'm now curious about and want to research. 😛
Regarding the backload regulation, that really isn't something I am a fan of. There are simply too many variables like volume, amount of ULC days, and also according to Kiefer, tGLUT translocates more easily in upper body muscles.
I can understand the variables.. I would still say that, following logic, a larger muscle group would have more capacity for glycogen. Even if it is only stored in certain types of muscle fibers, a larger muscle group-you would think-would have more of those fibers. BUT... I am completely open to the fact this could be inaccurate, I'm just drawing (leaping?) to a logical conclusion.
I don't do BP for glycogen depletion, rather Body Attack which is a totally different ball game. As for the weight bear in mind it's on your back for at least 5 minutes and I described one movement – you perform well over a hundred of those during the track.
I don't do BP for glycogen depletion, rather Body Attack which is a totally different ball game. As for the weight bear in mind it's on your back for at least 5 minutes and I described one movement - you perform well over a hundred of those during the track.
The squat track makes me hate life for that moment in time. Oh my god the burn!
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.