Sign in to follow this  
jsc

Træn på 4 minutter!

Recommended Posts

Hvis du kun vil se begejstrede indlæg, så tryk på ignorer bruger under min profil, for det er bestemt ikke det, som jeg er på MOL for.  :wink:

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Der skal lidt mere til end det, min ven..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interessant, men jeg studsede lige over denher:

It's one of those strange training programs that seems to fit across disciplines: it's excellent for bicyclists

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

:blink: Banesprintere måske, men jeg kan ikke lige se hvad 4 minutters front squat skal hjælpe?

Sindbad

EDIT: måske kan 8x20s sprint med 10s pause gøre det? Jeg tror jeg prøver, selvom det på dén måde nærmest ligner god gammeldags intervaltræning...

Edited by Sindbad

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Interessant, men jeg studsede lige over denher:
It's one of those strange training programs that seems to fit across disciplines: it's excellent for bicyclists

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

:blink: Banesprintere måske, men jeg kan ikke lige se hvad 4 minutters front squat skal hjælpe?

Sindbad

EDIT: måske kan 8x20s sprint med 10s pause gøre det? Jeg tror jeg prøver, selvom det på dén måde nærmest ligner god gammeldags intervaltræning...

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Jeg er næsten også sikker på, at metoden oprindeligt er tiltænkt sprinttræning, altså løb.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Det lyder særdeles plausibelt :smile:

Gad vide hvordan det her Chiabatatræning er sammenlignet med 20 rep breathers angående afterburn.

INTET jeg har prøvet kan sammenlignes med breathe squats. Det er det værste i hele verden (bortset fra rosenkål!).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
INTET jeg har prøvet kan sammenlignes med breathe squats. Det er det værste i hele verden (bortset fra rosenkål!).

:laugh:

Yeah, rosenkål er sq nasty as hell

Det eneste jeg har prøvet værre end 20 rep breathing squats er The Bear.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Var du lige så bange under the bear, som du vel har været under et balls to the wall sæt breathers. Jeg synes den psykologiske overbygning og så det faktum, at stangen presser ubønhørligt ned på ryggen og besværliggør vejrtrækningen, næsten må gøre breather værre. Men har indrømmet aldrig kunne køre the bear, da jeg ikke kunne racke den til fronts efter cleans.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Var du lige så bange under the bear, som du vel har været under et balls to the wall sæt breathers. Jeg synes den psykologiske overbygning og så det faktum, at stangen presser ubønhørligt ned på ryggen og besværliggør vejrtrækningen, næsten må gøre breather værre. Men har indrømmet aldrig kunne køre the bear, da jeg ikke kunne racke den til fronts efter cleans.

Jeg har faktisk kun prøvet The Bear et par gange, men jeg synes det psykiske pres er stort, fordi én rep inkluderer så mange bevægelser, at hvis man viser svaghedstegn allerede i starten, så får tvivlen gode kår!

Om den reelt er mere nasty end 20 reps BS er svært at sige. Når jeg har kørt dem, har jeg som regel været færdig efter 10 reps, så resten har bare været 'dyk og håb'. :laugh:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Det minder lidt om hvad jeg har kørt nogle gange før.. Der var det bare tre frivend, tre front squats og så tre pushpreeses. og så fem sæt, og det var sgu hårdt nok for mig da. hehe..

Men ja, det skal da nok sætte gang i pumpeværket...

For mig personligt var det overstående hårdt nok til at det godt kunne give et par udmærkede svedture..! tror ikke at jeg har behov for at koble to bevægelser yderligere ind og så lige fordoble rep-antallet.. :devil:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It helps to have someone record the reps of each set for you because, well, you won’t remember after you pass out

:laugh:

Ellers lyder det vildt nok. Tror jeg vil prøve det med armbøjninger. Dog ikke nu hvor jeg sidder med DOMS fra bænkpress :innocent:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It helps to have someone record the reps of each set for you because, well, you won’t remember after you pass out

:laugh:

Ellers lyder det vildt nok. Tror jeg vil prøve det med armbøjninger. Dog ikke nu hvor jeg sidder med DOMS fra bænkpress :innocent:

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Det vil nok være mere effektivt i en øvelse, hvor du burger nogle større, og flere, muskler, Tomse :wink:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nogen jer andre, der har prøvet det endnu? :smile:

Har nuppet 5 gange med swings, indtil videre. Det er eddersprødme hårdt, men det kan jeg altså på en måde godt li'.

Og for dælan da, hvor tager det ikke langt tid :wink:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hvor meget opvarmning har du op til, og hvor hårdt er det - mentalt - at sætte sig op til og gennemføre?

Niske

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Jeg varmer ikke op :tongue: Jeg kan tage måske 40 reps i rap med den 32kg's kettlebell kold, så jeg føler ikke jeg har behov for det. Det tager vitterligt bare 4 minutter + den tid jeg ligger på min lille seng og hyperventilerer bagefter. Sådan en dag, hvor jeg bare ikke gider noget, er det perfekt.

Jeg bruger ikke så meget at sætte mig op. Jeg prøver mere, at rense sindet, om man vil, for tanker omkring det op til. Jeg prøver på at være et blankt stykke papir, mentalt set. Men selvfølgeligt skal der være noget, der motiverer én til at ville udsætte sig selv for den slags tortur. Jeg vil gerne i bedre form og hvis jeg kan gøre det uden at bruge særligt meget tid på det, så er jeg glad. Kan have sværere ved at skulle motivere mig for at træne i 30-45 minutter derhjemme.

Edited by jsc

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Da jeg nægter at lade denne trå dø en værdig død, og jeg samtidig selv er ret hooked på denne træningsmetode, poster jeg lige to artikler fra Clarence Bass hjemmeside om den:

FORGET THE FAT-BURN ZONE

High Intensity Aerobics Amazingly Effective

"The rate of increase in V02max is one of the highest ever reported."

-----------------------------------------------------------------Izumi Tabata, Japan

"Fat burn is greater when exercise intensity is high." Metabolism

I believe in high-intensity aerobics. In Ripped 3, for bodybuilders, I recommended "a variety of relatively short and infrequent aerobic sessions interspersed with explosive muscular effort." In Lean For Life, published six years later, I emphasized high-intensity aerobics even more; I reduced the frequency of aerobic sessions to two times a week (in Ripped 3 I recommended up to four) and substantially increased the intensity. But it wasn't until recently, when my friend Richard Winett, Ph.D., publisher of Master Trainer, called my attention to new research findings, that I came to fully appreciate the superiority of high intensity aerobics compared to the usual prescription that heart rate be maintained between 60% and 80% of maximum.

As explained in the nearby FAQ (Low intensity aerobics?), high intensity aerobics burns the same amount of fat as low intensity, but the expenditure of calories is substantially greater; plus, intense aerobics produces a higher level of fitness. Importantly, the more fit you become, the more likely you are to use fat as fuel for any given activity. And now, research in Japan and in Canada shows that short, very intense aerobic sessions are amazingly effective for both fitness and fat loss.

Maximal oxygen uptake, or V02max, is generally regarded as the best single measure of aerobic fitness. As the rate of exercise increases, your body eventually reaches a limit for oxygen consumption. This limit is the peak of your aerobic capacity, or your V02max. As intensity increases beyond V02max, your body must shift to anaerobic (without oxygen) energy production. An oxygen debt begins to build at this point and blood lactate levels climb. In general terms, one's ability to continue exercising in the face of rising oxygen deficit and lactate levels is called anaerobic capacity.

This is important because many high-intensity sports (including basketball, football, soccer and speed skating) require a high level of both aerobic and anaerobic fitness. Clearly, total fitness involves both high V02max and high anaerobic capacity. A training protocol that develops both would be a godsend.

Izumi Tabata and his colleagues at the National Institute of Fitness and Sports in Tokyo, Japan, compared the effects of moderate-intensity endurance and high-intensity intermittent training on V02max and anaerobic capacity. (Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise (1996) 28, 1327-1330). Interestingly, the high-intensity protocol had been used by major members of the Japanese Speed Skating team for several years; it's a real-world training plan. As you will see, however, the protocol is unique among aerobic training programs for its intensity and brevity.

Many studies have been done on the effect of training on V02max, but little information has been available about the effect on anaerobic capacity. That's because until recently methods for measuring anaerobic capacity have been inadequate. This study used accumulated oxygen deficit to measure anaerobic energy release, and is one of the first to measure the effect of training on both aerobic and anaerobic capacity.

Notice that the duration of the moderate-intensity and the high-intensity protocols are drastically different: (excluding warm-ups) one hour compared to only about 4 minutes per training schedule

Tabata's moderate-intensity protocol will sound familiar; it's the same steady-state aerobic training done by many (perhaps most) fitness enthusiasts.

Here are the details (stay with me on this): In the moderate-intensity group, seven active young male physical education majors exercised on stationary bicycles 5 days per week for 6 weeks at 70% of V02max, 60 minutes each session. V02max was measured before and after the training and every week during the 6 week period. As each subject's V02max improved, exercise intensity was increased to keep them pedaling at 70% of their actual V02max. Maximal accumulated oxygen deficit was also measured, before, at 4 weeks and after the training.

A second group followed a high-intensity interval program. Seven students, also young and physically active, exercised five days per week using a training program similar to the Japanese speed skaters. After a 10-minute warm-up, the subjects did seven to eight sets of 20 seconds at 170% of V02max, with a 10 second rest between each bout. Pedaling speed was 90-rpm and sets were terminated when rpms dropped below 85. When subjects could complete more than 9 sets, exercise intensity was increased by 11 watts. The training protocol was altered one day per week. On that day, the students exercised for 30 minutes at 70% of V02max before doing 4 sets of 20 second intervals at 170% of V02max. This latter session was not continued to exhaustion. Again, V02max and anaerobic capacity was determined before, during and after the training.

In some respects the results were no surprise, but in others they may be ground breaking. The moderate-intensity endurance training program produced a significant increase in V02max (about 10%), but had no effect on anaerobic capacity. The high-intensity intermittent protocol improved V02max by about 14%; anaerobic capacity increased by a whopping 28%.

Dr. Tabata and his colleagues believe this is the first study to demonstrate an increase in both aerobic and anaerobic power. What's more, in an e-mail response to Dick Winett, Dr. Tabata said, "The fact is that the rate of increase in V02max [14% for the high-intensity protocol - in only 6 weeks] is one of the highest ever reported in exercise science." (Note, the students participating in this study were members of varsity table tennis, baseball, basketball, soccer and swimming teams and already had relatively high aerobic capacities.)

The results, of course, confirm the well-known fact that the results of training are specific. The intensity in the first protocol (70% of V02max) did not stress anaerobic components (lactate production and oxygen debt) and, therefore, it was predictable that anaerobic capacity would be unchanged. On the other hand, the subjects in the high-intensity group exercised to exhaustion ,and peak blood lactate levels indicated that anaerobic metabolism was being taxed to the max. So, it was probably also no big surprise that anaerobic capacity increased quite significantly.

What probably was a surprise, however, is that a 4 minute training program of very-hard 20 second repeats, in the words of the researchers, "may be optimal with respect to improving both the aerobic and the anaerobic energy release systems." That's something to write home about!

What About Fat Loss?

Angelo Tremblay, Ph.D., and his colleagues at the Physical Activities Sciences Laboratory, Laval University, Quebec, Canada, challenged the common belief among health professionals that low-intensity, long-duration exercise is the best program for fat loss. They compared the impact of moderate-intensity aerobic exercise and high-intensity aerobics on fat loss. (Metabolism (1994) Volume 43, pp.814-818)

The Canadian scientists divided 27 inactive, healthy, non-obese adults (13 men, 14 women, 18 to 32 years old) into two groups. They subjected one group to a 20-week endurance training (ET) program of uninterrupted cycling 4 or 5 times a week for 30 to 45 minutes; the intensity level began at 60% of heart rate reserve and progressed to 85%. (For a 30-year-old, this would mean starting at a heart rate of about 136 and progressing to roughly 170 bpm, which is more intense than usually prescribed for weight or fat loss.)

The other group did a 15-week program including mainly high-intensity-interval training (HIIT). Much like the ET group, they began with 30-minute sessions of continuous exercise at 70% of maximum heart rate reserve (remember, they were not accustomed to exercise), but soon progressed to 10 to 15 bouts of short (15 seconds progressing to 30 seconds) or 4 to 5 long (60 seconds progressing to 90 seconds) intervals separated by recovery periods allowing heart rate to return to 120-130 beats per minute. The intensity of the short intervals was initially fixed at 60% of the maximal work output in 10 seconds, and that of the long bouts corresponded to 70% of the individual maximum work output in 90 seconds. Intensity on both was increased 5% every three weeks.

As you might expect, the total energy cost of the ET program was substantially greater than the HIIT program. The researchers calculated that the ET group burned more than twice as many calories while exercising than the HIIT program. But (surprise, surprise) skinfold measurements showed that the HIIT group lost more subcutaneous fat. "Moreover," reported the researchers, "when the difference in the total energy cost of the program was taken into account..., the subcutaneous fat loss was ninefold greater in the HIIT program than in the ET program." In short, the HIIT group got 9 times more fat-loss benefit for every calorie burned exercising.

How can that be?

Dr. Tremblay's group took muscle biopsies and measured muscle enzyme activity to determine why high-intensity exercise produced so much more fat loss. I'll spare you the details (they are technical and hard to decipher), but this is their bottom line: "[Metabolic adaptations resulting from HIIT] may lead to a better lipid utilization in the postexercise state and thus contribute to a greater energy and lipid deficit." In other words, compared to moderate-intensity endurance exercise, high- intensity intermittent exercise causes more calories and fat to be burned following the workout. Citing animal studies, they also said it may be that appetite is suppressed more following intense intervals. (Neither group was placed on a diet.)

The next time someone pipes up about the fat-burn zone, ask them if they are familiar with the Tabata and Tremblay research reports.

[You'll find high-intensity aerobic workouts for bodybuilding in Ripped 3 and for balanced fitness, strength and endurance, in Lean For Life; both books are in the products section of this site. Routines specifically applying Tabata-type intervals are explained in chapter 5 of Challenge Yourself. Keep in mind that VO2max can only be measured in the laboratory; you'll have to estimate 170% of VO2 max. Don't try to make it too complicated. Simply chose a pace that brings you near exhaustion on the final 20-second rep; you should become more fatigued with each rep. Increase the pace as your condition improves. It's always better to underestimate your ability at the start. Begin a little slower than you think you can handle, and then adjust the pace from workout to workout. Don't attempt high-intensity intervals unless you are in good condition; they're not appropriate for beginners. Note the medical warning which follows.]

Warning

The Tremblay group and Dr. Tabata, in his e-mail response to Richard Winett, emphasize this warning: "High-intensity exercise cannot be prescribed for individuals at risk for health problems or for obese people who are not used to exercise."

Og så artikel to:

In Search Of The Ideal Aerobics Routine

"[six to 8 very hard 20 second intervals with 10 second rest periods] may be one of the best possible training protocols...."

..................Izumi Tabata, Ph.D., National Institute of Health & Nutrition, Tokyo, Japan

Why does this very short interval workout ( it is also discussed in article #10, Forget The Fat-Burn Zone) work so well? Why does this protocol substantially improve both aerobic and anaerobic capacity? Why is that a surprise? Is there a lesson in this for bodybuilders and others interested in both strength and endurance?

Overload and Specificity

The answers to the first three questions lie mainly in the principles of overload and specificity. The overload principle says that training adaptations come about when the body is subjected to unaccustomed stress. Specificity says the adaptation depends on the nature of the overload imposed. In other words, specific exercise overload brings about specific training effects. For example, strength training induces specific strength (anaerobic) adaptations and endurance exercise elicits specific endurance (aerobic) adaptations - with essentially no interchange between the two types of training. As you'll see, these two principles explain both why the single protocol was not supposed to cause both aerobic and anaerobic improvements and, interestingly, why both types of adaptations did in fact occur.

As a follow-up to the study discussed in article #10, Forget The Fat-Burn Zone, Dr.Tabata and his colleagues conducted a second study "to evaluate the magnitude of the stress on the aerobic and the anaerobic energy release systems" of the high intensity protocol used in the previous study and, additionally, of a second interval protocol. (Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise (1997) 29, 390-395) The two protocols in the follow-up study differed in three ways: interval duration, intensity and rest between bouts.

As in the previous study, young male members of college varsity teams exercised on stationary bicycles. The two protocols were given the catchy names 1E1 and 1E2. Protocol 1E1 was the same as before: following a 10 minute warm-up, each subject did one set of 6-7 bouts of 20 seconds at approximately 170% of the subject's maximal oxygen uptake (VO2max), with 10 second rest periods, to exhaustion. The 1E2 group did 4-5 bouts of 30 seconds at 200% of VO2max, with 2 minute rest periods, to exhaustion. For each protocol, the criteria for exhaustion was that the subject was unable to maintain a pedaling speed of 85 rpm. Expired gas was collected continuously every 10 seconds to measure the oxygen uptake. As in the earlier study, accumulated oxygen deficit was used to measure anaerobic energy release.

The results were eye-opening. The 1E1 protocol taxed both aerobic and anaerobic capacity significantly more than the 1E2 protocol. The peak oxygen uptake during the last 10 seconds of 1E1 was "not statistically different from the subjects' VO2max." But the peak oxygen uptake at the end of 1E2 "was much less than the VO2max." Likewise for anaerobic output: For 1E1, accumulated oxygen deficit was essentially 100% of the subjects anaerobic capacity, but for 1E2 it was only 67%. In short, the 20 second intervals, with 10 seconds rest, overloaded both aerobic capacity and anaerobic capacity to the max, while the longer and harder interval protocol, with two minute rest periods, did not. In both respects, the stress produced by 1E2 fell well short of maximum.

This, of course, is why 1E1 improved both aerobic and anaerobic fitness. In the words of the researchers, "For most physical properties the more demanding the training is the greater the improvement of the property." If you overload aerobic capacity and anaerobic capacity maximally, you should get maximum improvement in both capacities.

Yes, this study is good news for the many athletes engaged in high-intensity sports which demand both aerobic and anaerobic fitness and those who strive for total fitness. But why did 1E1 work so much better than 1E2? (The explanation is a little long, so bear with me.)

First, it has long been known that intervals are an effective training method. With intervals, more total work can be accomplished at a given intensity than when exercising continuously. For example, few people can run a 4 minute mile, but many more can complete a mile in 4 minutes of actual running, if the distance is broken into segments or intervals separated by rest periods.

The Surprise

Exercise physiology textbooks tell us that work interval duration and intensity, and the length of the rest periods - the variables studied by Dr. Tabata - must be carefully adjusted to meet the specific requirements for different performances. As indicated above, adaptations are specific to the speed and duration of workout. Generally, short hard intervals with long rest periods are recommended to improve anaerobic capacity; and many sets and repetitions of longer less intense intervals with short rest periods are suggested to overload the aerobic system.

In other words, the interval protocols traditionally prescribed to engage the aerobic system are usually quite different from those suggested for anaerobic training. This is simply an application of the specificity principle, with little or no interchange predicted between the two types of training.

That, of course, is why it was a surprise when Dr. Tabata's earlier study found that the 1E1 protocol (20 second bouts with 10 seconds rest) "may be optimal with respect to improving both the aerobic and anaerobic energy release systems." As readers of my earlier article will remember, Dr. Tabata told Dick Winett in a personal communication "that the rate of increase in VO2max [14% in only 6 weeks] is one of the highest ever reported in exercise science." Recall also that anaerobic capacity increased by a whopping 28%.

The Key Factor

Like Goldilocks' porridge, it seems that Dr. Tabata has come upon an interval protocol that is "just right." As shown in the follow-up study, 1E1 overloads both aerobic and anaerobic capacity maximally - with the predictable result that both systems benefit optimally. As the original research report stated: "1E1 may be one of the best possible training protocols...."

But why? Why did the 1E1 protocol stress both aerobic and anaerobic capacity maximally, when the more intense (200% Vo2max vs. 170%) and longer (30 seconds vs. 20-s) bouts of the 1E2 protocol did not? The researchers believe the key factor was the difference in the rest periods.

The relatively long 2 minute rest periods in 1E2 allowed oxygen uptake to fall considerably and, therefore, when the next exercise bout started there was a delay before the oxygen uptake increased and began again to approach maximum. On the other hand, the short 10 second rest periods in 1E1 allowed only slight recovery, and therefore oxygen uptake increased in each succeeding bout, reaching maximum capacity in the fiinal seconds of the last bout. The same was true for anaerobic energy release. The long rest periods in 1E2 stopped the buildup of lactate and allowed the resynthesis of phosphocreatine (see creatine article on this website) to occur. Again, the short rest periods in 1E1 caused the oxygen deficit to continue building from rep to rep, reaching maximum anaerobic capacity at the end of the exercise.

Dr. Tabata's 1E1 protocol may not be perfect, but he and his colleagues seem to have found a sweet spot where aerobic and anaerobic capacity peak simultaneously.

The Lesson

It seems to me that the lesson in this for bodybuilders and other fitness enthusiasts is that more aerobic training is not necessarily better. Many athletes and coaches believe that gains in aerobic endurance are proportional to the volume of training. In fact, noted exercise physiologists Jack H. Wilmore and David L. Costill, in their text Physiology of Sport and Exercise (Human Kinetics, 1994), state flatly: "Because volume is the key to successful aerobic training, [athletes] must perform a large number of [intervals]." (They do caution that there's an upper limit.)

Importantly, the two studies by Dr. Tabata's group strongly suggest that volume is not necessarily the key.

Recall that the moderate-intensity group in the first study trained 5 days per week at 70% of VO2max, 60 minutes each session, and increased aerobic capacity only 10% and anaerobic capacity not at all. And in the second study, the 1E2 group exercised both harder and longer; they did more total work than the 1E1 group. Clearly, these studies indicate that gains are not necessarily dependent on volume or total work performed.

If the goal is improved aerobic and anaerobic capacity, the Tabata research suggests that intensity, carefully applied to produce maximum overload - not volume - is the key to success.

At A Price

Progress by this method, of course, comes at a price. Tabata's 1E1 protocol is physically and psychologically taxing. It requires considerable motivation. Dr. Tabata, in a personal communication, warned Dick Winett: "This protocol [was] invented to stress the cardiovascular systems of top Japanese [speed] skaters who got medals in the Olympic games. Therefore, the protocol is very tough. The subjects lay down on the floor after the training." Tabata wondered how many people would "feel eager to do this type of exercise."

Still, for those who are fit and healthy (if you have questions about your health by all means check with your doctor) and up to the challenge, Tabata offered this encouragement: "From the theoretical point of view, the higher the oxygen uptake obtained in a specific training protocol, the higher the improvement of VO2max."

Good luck.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Besluttede mig for at prøve det her Tabata-halløj derhjemme på trods af, at jeg har tømmermænd :innocent:

Jeg har ingen vægte hjemme, så et stk 10 liters plastikdunk fyldt op med vand (vægten siger 11 kg totalt). Holder jeg så foran i brysthøjde og så ellers noget front squat agtigt.

Det lykkedes mig at tage 5 ture, så var mit hoved ved at eksplodere og maven ved at vende vrangen ud.

For dælende der er hårdt (nok heller ikke lettere med tømmermænd - men så kan man jo lære det :laugh: ). Pulsen og vejrtrækningen brager af sted.

Og jeg skal ellers love for at antallet af reps inden for de 20 sekunder faldt rimeligt hurtigt. De 5 ture så sådan ud: 20, 17, 13, 11, 6.

Højest sansynligt ikke sidste gang jeg prøver Tabata!

Edited by laraag

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

hmm.... Men kan denne total seje metode erstatte er løbetur?? For jeg hader fandme at løbe.... Men hvad med noget HIIT? Eller er det egentligt ikke også bare cardio???

Nu forbrænder jeg ca. 400-500 kcal på en løbetur, men hvor meget forbrænder men på det der feta-halløj??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Det er godtnok hårdt! Har aftalt med en ven at vi skal træne det en gang om ugen i januar, og så skulle jeg lige teste det idag. Mine ben er stadig syrede helt til... og det var kl 14 jeg trænede. Jeg prøvede med front squat med stangen alene og kørte ikke til failure i nogle af sættene, og alligevel var jeg helt bombet :4thumbup: Godtnok har jeg ikke kørt nogen form for squat i mindst et år nu pga elendige knæ, men det her blev jeg nødt til at prøve.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Okay... det her er jeg med på :4thumbup:

Jeg er en n00b her på MO.dk, men denne form for træning fangede mig alligevel da den minder mig meget om træningen i Kyokushin Karate (som jeg altid har holdt vældigt meget af)!

Jeg har mit eget stunt-team, og vi træner hver tirsdag og grundet vores lidt specielle fag, så er vi vant til at prøve lidt forskellige træningsformer!

Så det var med stor glæde at jeg en tirsdag i november introducerede Tabata for holdet... det var hårdt (på den gode måde), det gjorde ondt (på den gode måde) og vi fik faktisk ikke foretaget os noget som helst efter opvarmningen :blink:

Vi tog programmet som flg.:

1 x 4 min. med armbøjninger (bred armstand)

1 x 4 min. med mavebøjninger (hænder på hagen og hagen op til loftet, dvs. undgå at bruge hoftebøjeren og ram de øverste packs)

1 x 4 min. med squats (ingen vægte her, kun armene strakt ud foran dig og SÅ mange og SÅ hurtigt som muligt)

1 x 4 min. med mavebøjninger (ja, det er så for de nederste packs og de rammes ved at stikke fødderne i vejret og med lettere bøjede ben skubbe fødderne op i loftet, så man faktisk kun løfter hoften fra gulvet... hold hænderne under lænden)

1 x 4 min. armhævninger (og den er hård)

og til sidst...

1 x 4 min. slag på boksepude (få en til at holde puden, og send derefter SÅ mange slag, SÅ hurtigt som muligt og SÅ hårdt som muligt mod puden... hvis du er vant til boksetræning, så begynder dine knoer HELT sikkert at bløde) :cooldance:

Dagen efter kan det mærkes at man lever :4thumbup:

Men prøv det hvis I har lyst, vi fortsætter i hvert fald med at kombinere tingene!

Cheers og tak for tippet!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow, prøvede lige princippet med armbøjninger. Det er sgu noget der vil noget - bliver klart min form for cardio når jeg skal til at cutte :devil:

Edited by Birch

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Sign in to follow this