Shifting into a New Gear: The importance of mixing it up in my workouts

Today I had another intramural basketball game, and I've noticed a MAJOR difference in my speed on fastbreaks. I'd like to think that I could attribute it to my recent workout regimen, which--aside from weight lifting--includes a combination of plyometric workouts and runs various speeds.

In my limited experience in the world of fitness--or, at least, THINKING about fitness--I have learned one major thing: mixing it up is GOOD thing. I know a lot of people who have a routine that they repeat day after day, week after week, month after month, etc. And while I can't argue that they are still receiving a large number of health benefits from such consistency, I think they are missing out on potential fitness gains.

On my website, my profile lists three health goals that I have: 1. Dunk a basketball. 2. Run a mile in under 5 minutes. 3. Get my body fat under 8 percent. I think those are all good, quantifiable goals--abeit perhaps a little unrealistic, at least with the dunking. I'm 5' 9", and I don't know much about anything, but I DO know that there aren't a lot of guys my height throwing down tomahawk jams over 6'6" opponents. And it's not that I have a long way to go--I can sometimes throw down a miniball, so I'm right there, but I've been "right there" for about 9 years now.

I wish I could say that my new workouts have propelled me to incredible heights, and that I jam the ball down the other team's throat, but that would be inaccurate. Honestly, I didn't even ATTEMPT to dunk the ball. I DID, however, notice a lot more bounce in my step. I think I had about 8-10 rebounds in the game, and I was able to push the ball quickly up the court and get some easy baskets. I felt like anything was possible for me (that's called an endorphin high...;).

That's pretty much all I have to say about that, but I just wanted to reiterate the point that in my workouts, the key has been MIXING THINGS UP. I'll run just 1 1/2 to 2 miles on a breakneck speed on the treadmill one day, and then do plyometric workouts and leg lifts, and then another day go for a 4- to 5-mile run another day. It really helps me to gain cardio benefits one day, and explosive quickness the nest. But whatever workout I choose to do, I always make sure to get a good 48 hours of rest between rigorous exercises with the same muscle groups.

The 5-minute mile goal is coming--I can feel it. In fact, I wouldn't be suprised if I could run it right now; I just need to find a place where I can test it out--a high school track, for example.

The body fat percentage goal won't be attainable until I ascertain exactly what my current body fat percentage is, but I'm fairly certain I have a few percentage points to go there.

And the dunking goal, well, I have to go to work on this one. Most people get their first dunk in high school, not a year or two after graduating from college, so I realize that I only have so much time to accomplish this goal before it becomes increasingly more difficult.

But if I keep mixing things up, I feel like anything is possible.

"The Mystery of the Marathon Runner: Unlocking the secrets of the endurance athlete"

I consider myself to be in decent physical shape.

I can get up and down the basketball floor with relative ease. I finally got my Body Mass Index lower than my age (although I suppose if you wait around long enough, that one will take care of itself). And when I spend a day in the weight room, I'm usually not too concerned about waking up the next morning feeling like I was unwittingly volunteered to take on Evander Holyfield in Match 1 of his final Heavyweight Title run.

Yet, as I become more and more entrenched in the world of free weights and plyometrics, protein shakes and PowerBars, I find myself increasingly inspired, not by the gym-lurking masses of muscle who could snap my wiry frame in two without much effort, but rather by the lanky, long-legged speedsters who can be found jogging up mountain trails, zigging and zagging between pedestrians on crowded urban streets, and ultimately pumping their fists high in the air after finally reaching the finish line.

I am amazed by the long-distance runner.

These guys are incredible. After 3 or 4 miles, when most "regular athletes" would be calling it quits, these guys are barely beginning to find their groove. For the endurance athlete, there is only one number worth remembering-26.2 (that's miles, to the laeity)-and they will forget their own birthday before letting it out of their consciousness.

Bearing in mind that I have probably never exceeded 5 miles in my "long-distance" ventures - and that most of humanity is in the same boat - I thought it would be intriguing to find out how marathoners go about training for such a huge expenditure of energy. What kinds of things do they do differently in their preparations for a race, than, say, a college football running back, or a high school track and field high jumper?

Brian Casaday, who at the age of 24, has already completed 10 marathons and 4 half-marathons, modestly offered his training regimen: "My training program isn't very complex, nor professional. What I do to train for a marathon is to go running three times a week in the morning, about 3 to 4 miles, and then a long run on Saturday." 3 to 4 miles a day! I thought, now that is certainly do-able!

Of course, it gets longer. Brian continues: "I'll start my long runs about three months before a marathon, started 7-10 miles, and add a mile or two each week. . . "I work it out so I do one very long run two or three weeks before the marathon (20-22 miles) and then a 10-mile [run] one week before. I'm fairly active, so my cross training is usually replaced with hiking, Frisbee, swimming, other sports, and occasional sessions in the gym."

That's it? I had to wonder. That's the big secret to running long distances--you just run? Other than dabbling in some cross-training-type activities, and minimal time in the gym, the secret to running is…well…running. And it's not running 100-mile weeks, as I had feared, but, for the most part, starting with manageable distances, and then increasing the length of the run slightly each week, with a few rest weeks.

Convinced that the 10-time marathoner was overly simplistic in his advice, I spent some time reading about various training programs on www.RunningPlanet.com, an excellent authoritative resource for runners of all types.

The 24-week program for beginning marathoners listed on the website was eerily similar to the one Brian supplied me with--a simple system of slowly increasing the distance run each week, with period recovery weeks, which prevents the body from shutting down.

So if preparing for a marathon is simply a matter of running more and more each week, then why is it that after 4 miles I'm done, every time? Well, for one thing, it requires consistency. Most of us simply aren't willing to run every day, or we think that we run more frequently than we actually do.

But there is a simpler reason for my lack of long-distance proficiency.

Brian explained that he believes it doesn't have nearly as much to do with fitness or training in this case, but psychological conditioning. "I believe that anyone, if they can run three miles a day consistently, is physically fit to run 26.2 miles. Don't mistake this to mean that if someone can run three miles a day, they can go out and run a marathon on-demand. I believe they already have the strength and endurance to do so--they only lack psychological training," he said.

So the truth comes out. It isn't so much that my body lacks the proper ratio of slow- to fast-twitch muscle fibers (although that certainly could be part of the problem), or that I don't have a clear concept of what runners do to prepare their bodies for a race.

I just lack the psychosomatic know-how, that je ne sais quoi that keeps approximately 99.9% of Americans from ever seeing the final stretch of those 26.2 miles. Somewhere, deep within me, is a long-distance runner waiting to explode--no, cruise--into reality, if I can only learn to master myself. All I have to do is work toward unlocking the mystery of the marathon runner.

One step at a time.


Take the Marathon Quiz!

Now THAT is what you call Valentine's Day!

If you've watched the right channels on TV lately (and by "right", I mean sports-themed) you have seen the commercial featuring "The Girlfriend".  If you haven't seen it and are too lazy to click on the link to watch it, it features a scantily clad young woman--The Girlfriend--describing her ideal man with her foreign accent.  "I like guys...a little bit fat.  A little bit...hairy back.  Who watch a lotta football."  (She is, of course, simply outlining the target demographic of the bourbon-making Jim Beam company.)  She is, in essence, billed as the quintessential girlfriend.  

I bring this up, not for the purpose of getting more people to drink their Jim Beam bourbon, but rather to illustrate that I had my very own "The Girlfriend" moment, and it went something like this:

Hollie (my wife): "I don't really feel like going out for Valentine's Day."

Me: "You don't?  What do you feel like doing?"

Hollie:  "I don't know.  Honestly, I feel like just making something at home and watching NBA All-Star weekend."

???????

There aren't too many of these moments in a man's life, so I was honestly taken aback.  If this were an episode of Everybody Loves Raymond, it would be Deborah setting some sort of trap for Ray to fall into.  But my followup questions revealed that it was one-hundred percent genuine; my wife just wanted to sit back on the couch and watch the slam dunk competition.

And so we did.  

To be sure, there is something to be said for the high-maintenance gal, who carries herself high and proud in her designer jeans and perfectly coifed hairstyle.  

But nothing is sexier than a hottie who ALSO is interested in your ball games.  On Valentine's Day.  

So, while you other guys enjoyed your fancy-pants 5-course dinner with hard-to-pronounce foods and finished off the evening with some sort of predictable chick-flick, Hollie and I were kicking it in sunny St. George on the couch with two monster steaks, watching Nate Robinson dethrone Superman for the 2009 slam dunk title.

I wish I could say I felt your pain this Valentine's Day.

P.S.  Did you see those dunks by Nate?  He is generously listed at 5'9", and in one of his dunks, his head was just inches from the rim, which means his running vertical leap is somewhere around the 48-inch range.  Insane.  I'm working on mine, and will let you know how the intramural ball game goes down tonight!

Men: HER workout is not YOUR workout

Almost a year ago, I came home from work to find my wife glued to the television, salivating over what appeared to be a cheesy fitness infomercial.  Want to be in the best shape of your life?  Get rock hard abs, toned legs, and powerful arms.  Get RIPPED in 90 days.  The infomercial featured both men and women, perfectly shaped, performing a variety of gut-wrenching exercises.  "Let's do it," my wife, Hollie, said seriously.  Intrigued, I decided to take her up on the challenge.

We were going to get ripped--in 90 days.  

After receiving our set of workout DVDs, a nutrition guide that would give Jenny Craig a run for her money, and a separately ordered pull-up bar (which ultimately proved incompatible with our cinderblock walls and steel-framed doorways), we were ready to begin.

The workouts were incredibly intense--an hour to an hour-and-a-half of exercise, 6 days a week--and the nutrition program was very strict.  Each workout was directed by the stereotypical "fitness instructor dude," who bore an odd resemblance to Skeletor from the 1980s He-Man cartoons.  His motivation style was militant, always daring his minions to even try to outperform him on the pull-bar, dumbbell curls, and abdominal crunches.  I welcomed his gritty challenges (and, yes, even his fitness jokes that never seemed to hit the mark).

Hollie would just roll her eyes and follow along.

After the first week, we were already beginning to notice some positive changes in our bodies.  In fact, it was Hollie who saw the most tangible results; she had managed to trim several inches off of her waist and an inch or so off of her thighs.  My results were a little less tangible; I could detect an added strength to my core and back muscles, but felt that I looked basically the same in the mirror.  The small improvements, though, were encouraging, and with every day the diet seemed to feel more and more natural. 

Soon, however, things began to change.  After about the first month of our 90-day adventure, Hollie started losing interest in the workouts.  "They're too long," she would say, "and they're always the same."  She also expressed a growing concern; while she might have seen major changes in her body during the first week or two, she now thought her progress was going much too slowly to reach the desired goal.  I, on the other hand, had by this time lost three inches off my waist, and added very discernable definition to my muscles.  I would turn on each DVD with a scowl on my face, ready to prove our never-satisfied fitness instructor just how lean and mean I was.

About halfway through the second month, Hollie dropped out of get-ripped class.  Ultimately, she chose to enroll in an aerobics class offered locally.  She later added a running program to mix things up--something she follows religiously to this day.

I went on to finish the program, and while I never looked like anyone featured on the infomercial, I did feel much better about my body, and had more energy than I have ever had in my life.

In the end, both Hollie and I found workouts that suited us.  But what made her quit (what I thought was) such an effective workout regimen?  She told me that it was designed for men; that the types of exercises and the motivational style was geared toward the male psyche.  I argued that there were women on the DVDs, so it must certainly be for women as well.

What I have come to learn since then is that in most cases, men and women are wired completely differently when it comes to exercise.  Your workout, in many (if not, most) cases, is not HER workout.

Here are three things that I have come to learn about the workout gender gap.  I may be stereotyping a bit, so I will try to use words like generally and frequently, rather than always or never.

1. Men's and women's bodies respond differently to diet and exercise.  This is not a stereotype--it's biology.  Men and women can perform the same exercises and get different results.  Why?  Testosterone certainly plays a large part.  This predominantly male hormone is what triggers muscle growth, among other things.  This means that men will get stronger, faster.  They will also build bigger muscles, which burn fat faster.  If a man and a woman are doing the same workout side by side, this may lead the woman to become discouraged.

2. Women often have different fitness end-goals than men.  Men frequently try to look intimidating, with strong muscles and a wide frame.  Women, on the other hand, usually seek a sleeker frame, with toned, long muscles.  These very different bodies are attained through different workouts.  To achieve the "ideal man-frame," there should be a heavy focus on anaerobic lifting with heavy weights.  To get the "ideal woman-frame," the emphasis needs to be on cardio and lighter weights.

3. Most women prefer encouragement, rather than a challenge.  This is a note to any bachelors out there: except in rare cases, women don't want to be told how weak, out-of-shape, or soft they are.  When I attended my wife's aerobics class once with her, I realized this fact.  The workouts were every bit as intense, but the focus was on a communal achievement, rather than a "can-you-top-this" arrogance.  Women often want to connect, rather than compete with each other.  

In the end, it may be true that one of the best things a couple can do together is exercise.  A gym date is an ideal weekday activity for the married couple looking to stay in shape.  But men, if your wife finds your endless clanking of ridiculous amounts of weight and that purple-faced, eye-bulging face you make as you lift them a little bit of a turn-off, don't be offended.

Unless of course you plan on joining her for the belly dance class afterwards.

"Fitness Ain't Cheap"

I hate the "fitness ain't cheap" excuse.  Okay, okay, I realize that this isn't a household expression or anything, but really, the "it's-too-expensive-to-work-out" rationalization is  becoming for the 2000s what the "I'm-too-busy" excuse was for the 1990s.  It doesn't really hold up.  It seemed that during the 90s we could somehow convince people that we were too busy for anything.  Perhaps Al Gore's brilliant invention of the internet, or the Walkman CD player, or the final episode of Seinfeld had such a jarring effect on us that it truly was an understandable cop-out during that decade.

Not anymore.

You see, somewhere along the lines someone started conducting studies that showed that the average American watches 4 hours and 35 minutes of television a day.  

They also spend an average of 9.5 hours a week online at home.

Even if we used half of that time for working out, it would amount to nearly 3 hours of physical activity a day.  Now that's quite a nice workout.

So, the 'busy' excuse is toast.  We're all busy all the time and no one wants to hear about it.  However, the latest justification ostensibly holds more ground:  "I'm too poor to stay in shape," with the basic assumption being, "you have to be rich to get a proper workout."  

It makes sense, doesn't it?  After all, a decent multifunctional home gym machine from Wal-Mart--the discount king--will set you back at least 600 bucks.  And then there's the yoga mat: 30-50 bucks.  A set of dumbbells, ranging from 5-80 pounds: 300-400 bucks.  Good running shoes: 80 bucks.  A treadmill: 400-1000 bucks.  Workout clothes: 300 bucks. A swiss ball: 40 bucks.  Etc. Etc. Etc.

Et cetera.

You know what the truth is?  The fitness industry has us fooled into thinking two contradictory things: 

1. That all you need is this one tiny little contraption for $19.95 (plus shipping and handling) and you will receive the single tool that will guarantee you weight loss, sexy abs, a higher self-esteem, and that beach bod you've been dreaming of all of your life.

2. That in order to be physically fit, we have to have all of those pricey items listed above, and much, much more.  

In actuality, both of those deceptive and antithetical notions are one and the same--the idea that physical fitness has a price.  They calmly seduce us into thinking that by dishing out our hard-earned cash to buy their product, we will somehow stop watching television, stop surfing the net, stop all of our bad eating habits, and start setting aside time to move around.  

False.

You want to know what it takes to be physically fit?  It takes you and enough space to move around a bit without hurting yourself.  That's right.  All you need is enough space to do some pushups and aerobics, a wall or two, perhaps a bar for pull-ups if you're lucky, throw in some gravity and you have a recipe for cut abs, toned muscles, cardiovascular endurance, and enhanced flexibility.  (The self-esteem is still sold separately)

With just your body weight only, there is so much that you can do to keep yourself in shape.  You can go running, do aerobics, kickboxing, Tae-Bo, plyometrics, pushups, situps, crunches, pull-ups, dips, lower back exercises, flies, shoulder presses, squats, lunges, hip extensions, calf raises, jumping jacks, yoga, Pilates, stretches, dancing, hiking, etc., etc. etc.

Et cetera.

While it is true that the nice fitness equipment can be expensive, even the average poor college kid can cover the cost of nothing.  Now, I must mention that you can't get ANY body you want without equipment.  Body weight exercises are great for beginners looking to build some muscle, and are always good for anyone looking to increase muscular tone and endurance.  However, they aren't going to give you bulging biceps or gigantic pectorals.  For those, you WILL need some heavier resistance, such as dumbbells and barbells.  

Here are some suggestions of MINIMAL equipment that you can get for a decent price:

• A set of SOME dumbbells.  Okay, let's face it--every guy wants a nice rack of every dumbbell in 5-pound increments, but that isn't always feasible; you may not have the space in your place.  You may not have the funding.  So find out which weights you most need, and which weights you will most need in three months.  If you are currently doing shoulder presses and curls with 30-pounders, get yourself a pair of thirties, a pair of thirty-fives, and a pair of forties.  Eventually, you'll need more, but it's a great start, and hopefully you can save 30 bucks for your next set in a few months.  For lighter dumbbells, you can substitute household objects, such as a can of soup or a gallon jug.
• Find SOMETHING that could be used as a pull-up bar.  It may be a part of a jungle gym.  It may be a part of a basketball hoop.  Or a soccer goal.  Anything that can support your weight can be used.  There is a pretty sweet bar that I just got for a little under 50 bucks and it can be used for dips and situps as well.
• If you can get a bench and a barbell, do it.  Even a decent Olympic Standard barbell with weights up to 300 pounds isn't terribly expensive.  You can get the whole set for a couple hundred dollars.
• Forget the home gyms.  Those things are a ton of money, and they aren't as effective as free weights.  If you really like those fitness machines, a gym membership is the most cost-effective way to go.
• Get some good running shoes.
  

Other than that, you really don't need a lot to get the body you want.  Some free weights, some running shoes, and determination.

And, yes, the self-esteem is still sold separately.  (Seriously, go see a shrink)

P.S. I'm currently working on a fitness program for the website that can be done with just body-weight exercises.  I'll get that link on here when it's done.

Want explosive power? Ditch the aerobics...

So, I was sitting contently in the upper-bowl of Energy Solutions Arena (up near the rafters, where I belong), watching my Utah Jazz wail on the 76ers, and it must have been sometime during the goofy half-time presentation that I picked up the program for the game and began flipping through it.  

Inside the program there was an article by either Mark McKown or Gary Briggs--one of the fitness trainers for the Jazz--talking about developing athletic explosiveness.  His comments were interesting, and I wish that I had the article in front of me to quote from.  

Basically, he declared that playing basketball is actually primarily an anaerobic activity, not an aerobic one.  This was stunning for me; the thought that all of those 3 to 5-mile runs were practically done in vain was, well, kind of a downer.  While there may be a kind of aerobic element to the sport, according to this trainer, the vast majority of playing hoops has nothing to do with endurance energy.  Players are best served by spending the majority of their workouts doing wind sprints, plyometric activities (jump training), and other explosive movements.  

The more I thought about it, the more I realized that he was right.  You DO have to be in decent cardiovascular shape to play basketball well, but true professional basketball--a sport that is high-speed, but more often than not a kind of stop-and-go activity because of fouls and other violations--is all about bursts of explosive energy.  

According to the trainer, many people go on these long runs to train for basketball, when they should be going on shorter runs at maximum speed.  If they don't train at maximum-speed sprints, they will actually tire out more quickly, despite their endurance training experience.  

On the flipside, basketball also is not bodybuilding.  The trainer dude stated that while we can basically break exercise down into the two aforementioned categories--aerobic and anaerobic--the anaerobic category actually is subdivided into two smaller categories.  The first is what we traditionally think of as anaerobic--slow, methodical weight lifting.  It is power and strength in 4-6 repetitions.  It is muscle and grunting and not a lot of dancing around like a pixie.

The second category is the explosive athlete, which is fast, explosive, high-jumping, ankle-breaking, slam-dunking goodness.  Again, maybe my efforts in the weight room have not been geared toward the correct end result.  

With this in mind, last night I had a totally different approach in the gym.  

It was legs night, which usually means squatting and calf-raising, and wall-sitting and all that jazz.  And, to be sure, there was still some of that in there.  But the very first thing I did when I got into the fitness room, was start jumping.  That's right, I just squatted down, and leapt as high as I could off of two feet with no running start.  As I landed, I tried to come down softly.  Then I immediately exploded upward again.  I did 10 reps, then did some lateral jumping off of one foot.  I also tried high skips, and 180-degree jumps.  When my jumping sets were done, then I finally started doing some leg lifts with weights.

I'll let you know when I play ball next to see if I feel a difference.  Check that, I'll hand you the rim I tore off the backboard on the final play of the game.

Okay, I'm still 5'9".  But you never know--I've surprised people before...

Am I Stuck with What I've Got???

Okay, here is a question that I will send out into the void, and perhaps some bored personal trainer or fitness expert can enlighten me (and any potential readers of this blog).


And let me preface the question by saying that I understand that as human beings our bodies are made up of genetic code that dictates things like our eye color, baldness potential, and possibly even obesity. These things are set in stone. My 5' 9" height has been dictated almost entirely for me by genetic information encoded within me (nope, I'm pretty sure it has nothing to do with whether or not I finished my plate of chicken pot pie, although that certainly could have added a substantial amount of GIRTH...).


I also realize that, as human beings, current science tells us that, despite the overwhelming diversity of individuals in our species, our body types can generally be broken down into three categories: mesomorph, endomorph, and ectomorph.

Mesomorphs are muscular and compact. They tend to look shorter than they actually are. They are generally the guys you don't want to mess with. They are usually powerful and fast with poor flexibility.



Endomorphs are the "perpetually doughy" look. I know this kid who was quite overweight, and then was able to lose all of his weight and maintain a healthy B.M.I. and all that jazz. He STILL looks a little pudgy, simply because he has this body type.



Ectomorphs are the bean-poles. They look long and lean, and are the kinds of people who seem to eat and eat and never gain a pound.



Obviously, in reality most people are not one single body type, but a mix of two or more. For example, I tend to have a very strong, mesomorphic lower body, yet my arms, shoulders, and chest are usually weaker than average.



I guess my question is: How much can diet and exercise affect the overall make-up of our muscularity and fitness?



I mean, taking examples from the basketball world, I look at a guy like Andre Kirilenko, or the retired Shawn Bradley. These guys have the country's best personal trainers working with them, and play positions, power forward and center, respectively, which almost REQUIRE some extra beefiness to battle for rebounds. Yet these guys never gain a pound. I remember reading one time that they had Bradley on like a 6,000- or 7,000-calorie diet to try to add some poundage to him, and it just didn't work. That's insane.



I realize that those are probably extreme examples, but the fact that even with a very rigid workout regime, these guys remain shockingly thin.



So, I again pose the question: Can you alter your body type? Can a mesomorph be as limber as an ectomorph or have the endurance of an endomorph? Can an endomorph get a 'cut' look like the mesomorph, or the lean look of the endomorph? Can the ectomorph pack on muscle like a mesomorph, or fill out their frame like an endomorph?



I have no idea.

P.S. Here's a good article I just found on the topic.