Why I Recommend Strength Training and NO Cardio If You're In A Startup(sett.com)
sett.com
Why I Recommend Strength Training and NO Cardio If You're In A Startup
http://sett.com/dicktalens/why-i-recommend-strength-training-and-no-cardio
12 comments
>Are they really that set apart from the rest of the population and that similar to one another?
Yes. :) Lifestyle is one of the biggest factors into fitness regimen fit. The lifestyle of folks who work in tech/startups, especially with regards to variability, tend to be far different than your average working Joe.
Yes. :) Lifestyle is one of the biggest factors into fitness regimen fit. The lifestyle of folks who work in tech/startups, especially with regards to variability, tend to be far different than your average working Joe.
But is it REALLY that different to a lot of office workers? Developers and startup types like to think that they are unique in having work hard for long periods of time, but they really aren't. Junior Lawyers work long hours, apprenticeship labourers work long hours, anyone involved in the creative process for digital agencies work long hours, teachers that are starting out work long hours. It's really no different to those careers, and they all seem to manage to exercise and have some form of social life just fine.
My first job was a startup, and the hours weren't much different to working in an agency (where I work now). I still manage to go to the gym three days a week, and I manage to get a run in every week.
My first job was a startup, and the hours weren't much different to working in an agency (where I work now). I still manage to go to the gym three days a week, and I manage to get a run in every week.
So I clearly don't know you or what you do, but ou're definitely not wrong in the general sense.
However, Dick and I spent the last year working 60-80+ hour weeks while our company was stationed out of a pretty big coworking space. I can tell you that in our time there, I only saw a single person out of the (what must be at least several hundreds of other people) peers sharing our space with us at the gym, where as Dick and I went at least 3x a week every week.
I also lost 60lb while working more than I've ever worked in my life (by following Dick's program) and here's the punchline: 20lb of that was the weight I gained from my last start-up job.
I think the issue is the exact mindset Dick wrote about, of having to "pay off your credit card" by going and running hours and hours after eating badly (a mindset that I still default to sometimes and have to try really hard to stop myself from doing) makes it so that people who are already insanely stressed eventually just give up and decide to go into a default instead of "paying off their card", so to speak.
P.S. There's already been some lawyers, creative agency folks, and people from big government funded organizations applying to take part in the course, I think the difference between what they saw on the page versus what you saw on the page is that they (correctly) assumed being "in tech" meant "work really long hours" to the people that wrote the page versus "do you work at a company that has an AngelList page".
However, Dick and I spent the last year working 60-80+ hour weeks while our company was stationed out of a pretty big coworking space. I can tell you that in our time there, I only saw a single person out of the (what must be at least several hundreds of other people) peers sharing our space with us at the gym, where as Dick and I went at least 3x a week every week.
I also lost 60lb while working more than I've ever worked in my life (by following Dick's program) and here's the punchline: 20lb of that was the weight I gained from my last start-up job.
I think the issue is the exact mindset Dick wrote about, of having to "pay off your credit card" by going and running hours and hours after eating badly (a mindset that I still default to sometimes and have to try really hard to stop myself from doing) makes it so that people who are already insanely stressed eventually just give up and decide to go into a default instead of "paying off their card", so to speak.
P.S. There's already been some lawyers, creative agency folks, and people from big government funded organizations applying to take part in the course, I think the difference between what they saw on the page versus what you saw on the page is that they (correctly) assumed being "in tech" meant "work really long hours" to the people that wrote the page versus "do you work at a company that has an AngelList page".
Actually this sounds like a viable business model
This isn't applicable to people that are exercising just for health, rather than to also lose weight.
For naturally skinny "dicks" like me, I find I get the best workout and feel the healthiest when I do a mix of the tread mill with intermittent breaks of lifting and power push-ups when my legs can't take it anymore.
For naturally skinny "dicks" like me, I find I get the best workout and feel the healthiest when I do a mix of the tread mill with intermittent breaks of lifting and power push-ups when my legs can't take it anymore.
> exercising just for health
If you aren't making progress, than you aren't exercising "for health." This article is very enlightening: http://startingstrength.com/articles/barbell_medicine_sulliv...
If you aren't making progress, than you aren't exercising "for health." This article is very enlightening: http://startingstrength.com/articles/barbell_medicine_sulliv...
This is exactly my point. :) Progress and adherence are both prerequisites in order to exercise "for health." The mere act of engaging in healthy activities alone do not make them healthy.
If you are naturally skinny, I think you ought to take the strength-training only approach until you bulk up.Then you can switch to cardio+strength-training to balance.Unless of course,you want to just stay lean.
A year ago, everyone in my office got memberships to a gym down the street. All the other guys had long discussions about what was best and this article and that one, including a lot of stuff about only doing strength training. I did the stuff that I found made me feel most refreshed and cleared my head best.
Now there are only two us that ever go anymore. I am fit. They are not. It must be remembered that the routine you design is not going to run on a cpu that will execute it exactly over and over without complaint. It runs on you, which in my case is much more fickle, and needs to be indulged a bit to keep going.
Now there are only two us that ever go anymore. I am fit. They are not. It must be remembered that the routine you design is not going to run on a cpu that will execute it exactly over and over without complaint. It runs on you, which in my case is much more fickle, and needs to be indulged a bit to keep going.
Completely agree, this is very good advice. I wish I had more time to respond but I'm at risk of being late to work. Here's how you put forth the minimum amount of time commitment while deriving the greatest amount of benefit:
-If you typically squat less than 270 pounds all the way down to parallel, do Starting Strength until you do [1].
-If you typically squat at least 270 pounds all the way down to parallel, do Madcow 5x5 [2]. I can't speak past this fitness level because this is where I am.
-Eat according to the Leangains nutrition guide to achieve massive strength gains while getting/staying lean and eating only a couple meals a day [3].
Make sure to read the Starting Strength book or watch Mark Rippetoe videos on youtube to learn proper technique (vitally important!)
[1] http://startingstrength.wikia.com/wiki/The_Starting_Strength...
[2] http://stronglifts.com/madcow-5x5-training-programs/
[3] http://www.leangains.com/2010/04/leangains-guide.html
Disclaimer: There are obviously other programs which offer the same amount of benefit, but I don't think you'll find anything that surpasses the benefit you'll receive from these guidelines, and you certainly won't find many programs that surpass the simplicity; therefore, for the sake of not overwhelming anybody, I've only listed a small compilation of systems that really work.
-If you typically squat less than 270 pounds all the way down to parallel, do Starting Strength until you do [1].
-If you typically squat at least 270 pounds all the way down to parallel, do Madcow 5x5 [2]. I can't speak past this fitness level because this is where I am.
-Eat according to the Leangains nutrition guide to achieve massive strength gains while getting/staying lean and eating only a couple meals a day [3].
Make sure to read the Starting Strength book or watch Mark Rippetoe videos on youtube to learn proper technique (vitally important!)
[1] http://startingstrength.wikia.com/wiki/The_Starting_Strength...
[2] http://stronglifts.com/madcow-5x5-training-programs/
[3] http://www.leangains.com/2010/04/leangains-guide.html
Disclaimer: There are obviously other programs which offer the same amount of benefit, but I don't think you'll find anything that surpasses the benefit you'll receive from these guidelines, and you certainly won't find many programs that surpass the simplicity; therefore, for the sake of not overwhelming anybody, I've only listed a small compilation of systems that really work.
What's the rationale for shifting programs right at 270 lbs? That seems somewhat arbitrary, at least more so than say 225 (2 45 lbs plates per side) or 315 (3 45s per side).
http://www.exrx.net/Testing/WeightLifting/SquatStandards.htm...
Really it's somewhere between 250 and 300, but I chose 270 because 1) it's in the middle near where average-weight men would be and 2) starting strength just keep being good right up to around 300 pound squats.
Really it's somewhere between 250 and 300, but I chose 270 because 1) it's in the middle near where average-weight men would be and 2) starting strength just keep being good right up to around 300 pound squats.
How that compare to P90x?
I'm not sure I understand the whole "The only exercise people should be doing is strength training" meme that seems to be going around at the moment. Can someone with more knowledge explain it to me?
It seems (to me at least) that some exercise is better than no exercise, and that more exercise (at least to an extent) is better than less exercise. It seems to me therefore, that people should find an exercise that they really enjoy (whether running, cycling, strength training, climbing, martial arts, etc) and do it. That way, they'll be doing something they enjoy and they'll do more of it.
It seems slightly disingenuous for "experts" to recommend that everyone drop everything else and just do one type of exercise as if everyone they're speaking to is exactly the same, has exactly the same goals and enjoys exactly the same stuff.
Are they targeting geeks/the HN crowd because geeks tend to favour the idea that there is one "right way" of doing something and are more likely to latch on to it?
It seems (to me at least) that some exercise is better than no exercise, and that more exercise (at least to an extent) is better than less exercise. It seems to me therefore, that people should find an exercise that they really enjoy (whether running, cycling, strength training, climbing, martial arts, etc) and do it. That way, they'll be doing something they enjoy and they'll do more of it.
It seems slightly disingenuous for "experts" to recommend that everyone drop everything else and just do one type of exercise as if everyone they're speaking to is exactly the same, has exactly the same goals and enjoys exactly the same stuff.
Are they targeting geeks/the HN crowd because geeks tend to favour the idea that there is one "right way" of doing something and are more likely to latch on to it?
Read this article for the answer http://startingstrength.com/articles/barbell_medicine_sulliv...
Fitness relativism is not acceptable. It leads people to live unhealthy, and, in some cases, shorter lives.
Fitness relativism is not acceptable. It leads people to live unhealthy, and, in some cases, shorter lives.
Ok, well that makes sense, but I suppose what I'm really asking (I already kind of assumed that training with barbells was good for you) is what's wrong with every other form of exercise?
To take two examples (these two because I am intimately familiar with them): Why should someone stop climbing or doing martial arts and start lifting barbells (by stop I mean assume said person doesn't have enough time to do both and must choose one or the other)? Both of the former seem (to me at least) really good for developing strength and, AFAICT do so in a much more realistic and natural way than lifting barbells.
To take two examples (these two because I am intimately familiar with them): Why should someone stop climbing or doing martial arts and start lifting barbells (by stop I mean assume said person doesn't have enough time to do both and must choose one or the other)? Both of the former seem (to me at least) really good for developing strength and, AFAICT do so in a much more realistic and natural way than lifting barbells.
Lifting barbells allows you to control the weight much more than climbing or punching things.
If you read Starting Strength (Riptoe, mentioned many times on this thread) you'll learn about the recovery and response cycles to stress on the body. You should be regularly increasing the amount you're lifting regardless of your bodyweight (which is what you are always lifting in climbing,) in order to actually increase your strength over time.
Barbells also allow you to start with smaller weights at the beginning of the workout, and then move on to heavier sets when you're warm. AFAIK there's no way to do this with climbing.
Re: barbells not "natural" - firstly, more natural than most of the other equipment in the gym, and secondly it depends what you're doing with them. lifting them over and over, slowly is one way to use them (and builds strength), but speeding up your reps and/or performing power cleans will improve your power (literally rate-of-work) which is what is important in sports like martial arts and ball games. You can train for almost any sport with a barbell, with the right lift, rate, set lengths and intra-workout rest period.
If you read Starting Strength (Riptoe, mentioned many times on this thread) you'll learn about the recovery and response cycles to stress on the body. You should be regularly increasing the amount you're lifting regardless of your bodyweight (which is what you are always lifting in climbing,) in order to actually increase your strength over time.
Barbells also allow you to start with smaller weights at the beginning of the workout, and then move on to heavier sets when you're warm. AFAIK there's no way to do this with climbing.
Re: barbells not "natural" - firstly, more natural than most of the other equipment in the gym, and secondly it depends what you're doing with them. lifting them over and over, slowly is one way to use them (and builds strength), but speeding up your reps and/or performing power cleans will improve your power (literally rate-of-work) which is what is important in sports like martial arts and ball games. You can train for almost any sport with a barbell, with the right lift, rate, set lengths and intra-workout rest period.
> Lifting barbells allows you to control the weight much more than climbing or punching things.
Ok so that makes a lot more sense. Thanks for the explanation.
> Barbells also allow you to start with smaller weights at the beginning of the workout, and then move on to heavier sets when you're warm. AFAIK there's no way to do this with climbing.
So with climbing in general climbing harder problems (smaller holds, further apart, more overhang, etc etc) works muscles more, and the harder you climb, the fitter and stronger you will be.
Ok so that makes a lot more sense. Thanks for the explanation.
> Barbells also allow you to start with smaller weights at the beginning of the workout, and then move on to heavier sets when you're warm. AFAIK there's no way to do this with climbing.
So with climbing in general climbing harder problems (smaller holds, further apart, more overhang, etc etc) works muscles more, and the harder you climb, the fitter and stronger you will be.
Yes this will make you stronger, but not as much as barbell exercises
Any physical activity is obviously much better than living a sedentary lifestyle. If you only like running, that would be better than nothing (though your joints may not think so). But the argument here is that if you have limited time and are looking for the most benefit per hour of physical activity, strength training is much better than cardio. As for why barbell training in particular is so much better than other ways of getting strong, I recommend this article: http://startingstrength.com/index.php/site/article/strength_...
As someone on leangains following a Reverse Pyramid Training program after Starting Strength, I agree that this is good general advice.
However, it IS general advice. "Cardio" is loosely defined, and can be anything from steady state (takes a longish time) to intervals (can be VERY quick) and anything in between. I'd be more inclined to say if you like to do it, be it basketball or gardening or running or whatever, then do it because you'll be more likely to stick with it.
I don't really buy the lack of time argument as a reason to not do something you enjoy that has health benefits. I see the argument here though, IF you believe you lack time (which I don't think you should believe) then MVF is a good way to go, but not the only option.
However, it IS general advice. "Cardio" is loosely defined, and can be anything from steady state (takes a longish time) to intervals (can be VERY quick) and anything in between. I'd be more inclined to say if you like to do it, be it basketball or gardening or running or whatever, then do it because you'll be more likely to stick with it.
I don't really buy the lack of time argument as a reason to not do something you enjoy that has health benefits. I see the argument here though, IF you believe you lack time (which I don't think you should believe) then MVF is a good way to go, but not the only option.
"What do you do for cardio? Lift weights faster." ;-) http://www.jensinkler.com/lift-weights-faster/
If you're not particularly fit then rigorous strength training including ballistic and plyometric activities will get you out of breath, increase heart-rate, and give you a serious workout while being a lot more fun than running on the spot. (But as always, different strokes for different folks..)
If you're not particularly fit then rigorous strength training including ballistic and plyometric activities will get you out of breath, increase heart-rate, and give you a serious workout while being a lot more fun than running on the spot. (But as always, different strokes for different folks..)
The 35 hours to lose 1 lb. of fat is VERY questionable to me. There are ~3500 calories in a lb. of fat. Walking or running 1 mile consumes at LEAST 100 calories but usually closer to 120 calories. So they are walking 1 hour miles?
Not all "cardio" is equal. I generally run 20 to 40 miles per week at 7:30/ mile pace. So my caloric burn is 120 calories per mile x 1 hour (8 miles) = 960 calories. So I could lose 1 pound of fat per 3.5 hours.
Someone walking 3mph (20 minute miles) on a treadmill would burn 300 to 360 calories in contrast. So that means they would lose 1 pound every ~10 hours. This is very doable for most people. This of course assumes they don't eat more.
Then the OP is very hand wavey about the idea that you have more muscle so your metabolic rate is so much higher. It's quite hard to build many pounds of lean muscle too!
An interesting section on individual metabolic rate differences: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basal_metabolic_rate#Causes_of_...
Not all "cardio" is equal. I generally run 20 to 40 miles per week at 7:30/ mile pace. So my caloric burn is 120 calories per mile x 1 hour (8 miles) = 960 calories. So I could lose 1 pound of fat per 3.5 hours.
Someone walking 3mph (20 minute miles) on a treadmill would burn 300 to 360 calories in contrast. So that means they would lose 1 pound every ~10 hours. This is very doable for most people. This of course assumes they don't eat more.
Then the OP is very hand wavey about the idea that you have more muscle so your metabolic rate is so much higher. It's quite hard to build many pounds of lean muscle too!
An interesting section on individual metabolic rate differences: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basal_metabolic_rate#Causes_of_...
Mentioned multiple time is the increase in hunger and consumption which often negates the burned calories.
I've never lost weight via cardio. I lost 30 lbs over 6 months without any exercise at all (too busy with school and would just forget to eat until the end of day.) 3 years later, I'm back up at the same weight. I worked out 5 days a week for 3 months (~1000 calories per day) and didn't lose any weight.
Completely anecdotal, but I think it's a good data point. I'm going to give the no cardio work out a shot.
I've never lost weight via cardio. I lost 30 lbs over 6 months without any exercise at all (too busy with school and would just forget to eat until the end of day.) 3 years later, I'm back up at the same weight. I worked out 5 days a week for 3 months (~1000 calories per day) and didn't lose any weight.
Completely anecdotal, but I think it's a good data point. I'm going to give the no cardio work out a shot.
The person putting this on seems to know what they are doing. They have some exceptional references on the site.
Without seeing the actual program its very hard to make a determination if this is something that would be beneficial to do or not.
It's kind of like being asked to buy a car but you can't see it until you put down your money:)
For other programs like P90x you can atleast try it out and see if you like it.
> 40 minutes, 3 days/week.
This seems about right for a beginner program and for anyone looking to maintain their current form.
> The price is $125/month for founders and $175/month for folks with salaries.
This is just bizarre. I think the whole founder worship thing has gotten a bit out of control here. What about employee #1 :)
Without seeing the actual program its very hard to make a determination if this is something that would be beneficial to do or not.
It's kind of like being asked to buy a car but you can't see it until you put down your money:)
For other programs like P90x you can atleast try it out and see if you like it.
> 40 minutes, 3 days/week.
This seems about right for a beginner program and for anyone looking to maintain their current form.
> The price is $125/month for founders and $175/month for folks with salaries.
This is just bizarre. I think the whole founder worship thing has gotten a bit out of control here. What about employee #1 :)
hi @chollida1 – while I certainly don't mind the eventual traffic to MVF, my main intention was to share thoughts around cardio... discipline/exercise selection tends to be a make or break thing in fitness.
Regarding the discount for founders, it's more because I remember how much it sucked being broke when I started Fitocracy. :) I'd assumed it'd be easier for employee #1 just because at that point, some de-risking had probably occurred. Really wanted to do funded/non-funded, but that would've been unfairly glorifying raising money for raising's sake.
Regarding the discount for founders, it's more because I remember how much it sucked being broke when I started Fitocracy. :) I'd assumed it'd be easier for employee #1 just because at that point, some de-risking had probably occurred. Really wanted to do funded/non-funded, but that would've been unfairly glorifying raising money for raising's sake.
This article is basically about body building. It promotes a focus on how you look rather than how strong or fit you actually are.
I love weightlifting, but I also love cardio. My goal is different though - I'm not trying to lose weight, I'm trying to gain it (slowly).
lifting = only 3 days per week*
running = all the rest, not too far (except once a week).
* someone else has mentioned Riptoe - go read that. then do that.
lifting = only 3 days per week*
running = all the rest, not too far (except once a week).
* someone else has mentioned Riptoe - go read that. then do that.
I presume this is for fisticuffs with VCs, right?
"Folks in tech tend to think... differently. They will often think in discrete parts, rather than holistically. (This is call 'neckbearding,' and it's done by people called 'neckbeards.')"
Sorry, male startup people. Maybe targeting startup people as a niche market for non-tech non-business related services is a good marketing move. Personally, I hope to never ride my Startup Bike™ to get a Startup Latte™ followed by a trip to the Startup Gym™. I expect to consume the same bikes, lattes, and gyms as the rest of the population. :)