UnderGround Forums
 

S&C UnderGround >> what 3 mile time should a heavyweight be gettin?


2/25/13 9:24 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
bigballsmgee
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 4/16/11
Posts: 101
 
im gettin 22 mins doing 1 min intervals going to try beat it tommorow . fighting in 2 weeks weight 230 lbs Phone Post
2/25/13 10:32 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
JamesDean57
31 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Edited: 02/25/13 10:33 AM
Member Since: 1/30/13
Posts: 47
2 weeks is not enough time to improve cardio, you should be working on your fighting technique. JMO
2/25/13 11:19 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
vermonter
88 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 12277
At that weight I was pushing 28 minutes or so when in shape. However, that's straight... it sounds like you are only doing intervals and counting only the intense portion?

If you could do a 5k in 22 mins at 230 straight without any intervals that would certainly be impressive. You'd likely out cardio anyone in a local fight at that weight as long as nerves didn't get the best of you and your technique/breathing were decent.
2/25/13 11:21 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Adventure Runner
107 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 7/18/11
Posts: 1699
I love mile time threads.

If you are getting 7:20 miles at 230 lbs, you are probably one of the faster guys at your size on the planet. You're fine.
2/25/13 11:30 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
turducken
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/7/09
Posts: 12213
Adventure Runner - I love mile time threads.

If you are getting 7:20 miles at 230 lbs, you are probably one of the faster guys at your size on the planet. You're fine.

running time has become the new bench pressing
2/25/13 11:40 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
vermonter
88 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 12279
Yeah but he's doing them in minute intervals. Ergo, it's taking him 22 intervals to make it 3 miles.

So he's averaging .136 miles a minute, which would be a little less than 8.2 mph. If the rest is also a minute, and all he's doing is intervals and no aerobic work, his cardio is probably in trouble.
2/25/13 11:44 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
rpribyl
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 6/28/12
Posts: 571
bigballsmgee - im gettin 22 mins doing 1 min intervals going to try beat it tommorow . fighting in 2 weeks weight 230 lbs Phone Post
Why are you doing it in intervals? It makes your time/distance irrelevant for what you are asking. I don't know of anyone else that would have a time for you to compare to, because I don't know anyone who breaks up a distance run into intervals.

I understand the importance of doing sprint intervals, but not how you are talking about them. Phone Post
2/25/13 11:46 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
turducken
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/7/09
Posts: 12215
yea that is a pretty slow pace for intervals, but a shitload of work. if you are doing 1 minute intervals, i would think it would be far better to drop the number of sets to 10 and increase the speed.

a 22min continuous 3 mile run is far above average for any weight class. its certainly not on pace for a competitive runner, but its still pretty solid
2/25/13 12:10 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
vermonter
88 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Edited: 02/25/13 12:10 PM
Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 12281
Hard to say, really, how hard that is for work. People regularly run marathons non-stop at faster paces. Granted, he's a heavy weight, but still...

Now that i'm thinking about it, though, that's probably in the neighborhood of 700 calories because of the repeated acceleration. That is a fair bit of work spread out over one minute stretches.

Outside of intestinal fortitude, i'm not sure what he'll gain in fitness. Probably just enough time to be deep in overtraining for the fight...
2/25/13 2:15 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
bigballsmgee
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 4/16/11
Posts: 102
no im countin them all together do them at 11mph then 6mph for a couple then 10mph 6mph for a few then 9 mph and 7mph then ill get bored of changin the speed and just run at 7 Phone Post
2/25/13 2:19 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
bigballsmgee
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 4/16/11
Posts: 103
its also on a treadmill at 1% incline Phone Post
2/25/13 2:20 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Taku
149 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 6537

"all he's doing is intervals and no aerobic work, his cardio is probably in trouble."

That does not make sense to me. It's all aerobic work.

All energy systems - ATP-PC (immediate), Lactic Acid (short term-high power) and Aerobic (long term-lower power) - are activated at the onset of any activity. What determines which system is relied upon the most is the intensity and length of the activity.
 
One can improve lactate threshold and VO2 max with a variety of training regimens: short and long intervals, fartlek runs and continuous runs using various running speeds, distances, volumes and work-to-rest ratios.

TAKU


 

 

2/25/13 2:28 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
vermonter
88 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 12287
Yeah you're right that at a minute's worth of work each time there is a fair bit of aerobic contribution. I didn't really think that statement through very well before typing it did I?

That said...

I don't think this is the best way for him to develop his cardio 2 weeks before a fight. Also, I find that most fighters, especially at his weight, need less anaerobic involvement for the best improvement to performance.

I simply don't think intervals are the best for most combat athletes. Especially shorter duration intervals.
2/25/13 4:59 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
blaznbison24
16 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 8/7/07
Posts: 919
I think what matters is how your cardio is while sparring. You could take MMA guys with world class MMA cardio, enter them into a 5k and they would get beat by middle schoolers and soccer moms. Take a world class 5k runner and have him spar a round or two with an amateur girl and they would be sucking wind. You want specificity.

But with two weeks to go, you can't make a "real" increase in your cardio. However, you can improve the neuromuscular system to become more efficient at certain movements, so drilling is probably your best bet.
2/25/13 7:47 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Taku
149 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 6541
I agree that positional sparring with realistic resistance is a great way to go.
 
Because of the specificity of energy demands, varied muscle contraction dynamics and general body stress and fatigue, playing and practicing your sport should be a priority when it comes to physical preparation. As they did in the good ole days, you CAN play yourself into shape. It's “sport-specific” and still true today. That stated, following a sensibly-designed conditioning program can further prepare one for the rigors of competition provided it “fits” with all strength training activities and practice sessions and does not over-stress the body's recovery systems.
 
I do want to note however that in my personal experience, I have had many people improve conditioning in two weeks time.
 
It all depends on where you are now, and what you do next.
 
TAKU
 
2/26/13 4:04 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Leigh
757 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 31898
blaznbison24 - I think what matters is how your cardio is while sparring. You could take MMA guys with world class MMA cardio, enter them into a 5k and they would get beat by middle schoolers and soccer moms. Take a world class 5k runner and have him spar a round or two with an amateur girl and they would be sucking wind. You want specificity.

But with two weeks to go, you can't make a "real" increase in your cardio. However, you can improve the neuromuscular system to become more efficient at certain movements, so drilling is probably your best bet.
A soccer mom is not beating any top level pro mma fighter in a race, especially not the cardio machines like Nick Diaz, GSP, Mighty Mouse etc.

And a marathon runner would not gas in a couple of rounds sparring an amateur girl, that's just silly.

Agree the specificity is important and agree with Taku that under the right training variables, significant improvement in conditioning can be gained in 2 weeks. If he was to put in 60-90 mins of sparring 3 times a week, he would notice the difference. Problem is, sparring the week of your fight is a risk Phone Post
2/26/13 11:24 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
vermonter
88 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 12302
I also agree that 2 weeks can lead to a substantial improvement in cardio.

For a guy who's already sparring, this one minute interval stuff isn't the way.
2/26/13 2:21 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Taku
149 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 6542

Although there may be better ways...What he is doing does not sound that bad. If I am understanding him correctly,he is moving continuously, and not passively recovering (standing still). So this is a bit more activity / energy system specific.

I have used various forms of interval training with every fighter I have ever trained, and none of them has ever gassed. No matter what any current psuedo GURUS say, fighting is not and AEROBIC dominant sport.

TAKU

 

2/26/13 2:35 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
vermonter
88 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 12316
There seems to be an implication that I am a "pseudo guru" in that last paragraph. Just seeking clarification.
2/26/13 3:11 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Adventure Runner
107 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 7/18/11
Posts: 1702
vermonter - Hard to say, really, how hard that is for work. People regularly run marathons non-stop at faster paces. Granted, he's a heavy weight, but still...

Now that i'm thinking about it, though, that's probably in the neighborhood of 700 calories because of the repeated acceleration. That is a fair bit of work spread out over one minute stretches.

Outside of intestinal fortitude, i'm not sure what he'll gain in fitness. Probably just enough time to be deep in overtraining for the fight...

At my age (35), this pace would *barely* (2 minutes off or 4.6 seconds/mile off) keep me outside of qualifying for the Boston Marathon, which is one of they hardest marathons (if not the hardest), marathon to qualify for. Saying people regular run marathons at this pace is a bit of a misnomer. People regularly hit 95 mph fastballs too, but that doesn't mean you're not one hell of a baseball athlete if you're one of those people.

A 230 lbs man running 7:20 miles in just "ho-hum I don't even run" fashion is very impressive to the point of being unbelievable. I race quite a bit and know many racers, and I can't remember if I've ever seen a big guy run that fast.
2/26/13 3:46 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
vermonter
88 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 12322
Adventure Runner - 
vermonter - Hard to say, really, how hard that is for work. People regularly run marathons non-stop at faster paces. Granted, he's a heavy weight, but still...

Now that i'm thinking about it, though, that's probably in the neighborhood of 700 calories because of the repeated acceleration. That is a fair bit of work spread out over one minute stretches.

Outside of intestinal fortitude, i'm not sure what he'll gain in fitness. Probably just enough time to be deep in overtraining for the fight...

At my age (35), this pace would *barely* (2 minutes off or 4.6 seconds/mile off) keep me outside of qualifying for the Boston Marathon, which is one of they hardest marathons (if not the hardest), marathon to qualify for. Saying people regular run marathons at this pace is a bit of a misnomer. People regularly hit 95 mph fastballs too, but that doesn't mean you're not one hell of a baseball athlete if you're one of those people.

A 230 lbs man running 7:20 miles in just "ho-hum I don't even run" fashion is very impressive to the point of being unbelievable. I race quite a bit and know many racers, and I can't remember if I've ever seen a big guy run that fast.

This is an interesting thing to be disagreeable about. I'm not sure where the point of contention is, but I guess I'll try to debate the points...

People do regularly run marathons at faster paces. There is no qualifier at all for the Vermont Marathon, and yet 7% of participants (nearly 200 people) completed the marathon at that pace or faster last year. Over 1400 people did the same at the Boston Marathon last year (interstingly, a slightly lower percentage of participants to the Vermont marathon despite the qualifier).

I suppose you may simply disagree with the use of the word "regularly," but there is no point in me arguing. If you think that 1600 people in only 2 marathons isn't "regularly" then that's fine. However, the OP kept that pace for 3 miles, not a full marathon, and not non-stop, but rather with 21 breaks of indeterminate length. As far as people go, this isn't very fast at all.

Now, he isn't just any person, he weighs 230 lbs. Since body weight is the most substantial factor in performace for running, this is significant. However, I'd question just how significant to the point at hand. At 240, I could have done this with no trouble.

As to your final paragraph, not only do I agree, I have already stated the same thing in a post prior to this one.

From my first reply on this thread: "If you could do a 5k in 22 mins at 230 straight without any intervals that would certainly be impressive."

However, this isn't what he's doing. He's running one minute intervals. At his pace, and without any mention of how long he's resting (and presumably making it 3 miles? But I now note he didn't say so specifically, but rather I inferred from the title), as I already said in the post you quoted "Hard to say, really, how hard that is for work." We simply don't have enough information. But considering pace alone, at only one minute stretches, that isn't much to brag about, nor is it an indication of how his cardio will be for the fight.

Hopefully I've addressed your major points to satisfaction. Not sure if i wasn't clear, or what, but I'm still not sure where you are disagreeing with me exactly.
2/26/13 4:13 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Adventure Runner
107 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 7/18/11
Posts: 1706
vermonter - 
Adventure Runner - 
vermonter - Hard to say, really, how hard that is for work. People regularly run marathons non-stop at faster paces. Granted, he's a heavy weight, but still...

Now that i'm thinking about it, though, that's probably in the neighborhood of 700 calories because of the repeated acceleration. That is a fair bit of work spread out over one minute stretches.

Outside of intestinal fortitude, i'm not sure what he'll gain in fitness. Probably just enough time to be deep in overtraining for the fight...

At my age (35), this pace would *barely* (2 minutes off or 4.6 seconds/mile off) keep me outside of qualifying for the Boston Marathon, which is one of they hardest marathons (if not the hardest), marathon to qualify for. Saying people regular run marathons at this pace is a bit of a misnomer. People regularly hit 95 mph fastballs too, but that doesn't mean you're not one hell of a baseball athlete if you're one of those people.

A 230 lbs man running 7:20 miles in just "ho-hum I don't even run" fashion is very impressive to the point of being unbelievable. I race quite a bit and know many racers, and I can't remember if I've ever seen a big guy run that fast.

This is an interesting thing to be disagreeable about. I'm not sure where the point of contention is, but I guess I'll try to debate the points...

People do regularly run marathons at faster paces. There is no qualifier at all for the Vermont Marathon, and yet 7% of participants (nearly 200 people) completed the marathon at that pace or faster last year. Over 1400 people did the same at the Boston Marathon last year (interstingly, a slightly lower percentage of participants to the Vermont marathon despite the qualifier).

I suppose you may simply disagree with the use of the word "regularly," but there is no point in me arguing. If you think that 1600 people in only 2 marathons isn't "regularly" then that's fine. However, the OP kept that pace for 3 miles, not a full marathon, and not non-stop, but rather with 21 breaks of indeterminate length. As far as people go, this isn't very fast at all.

Now, he isn't just any person, he weighs 230 lbs. Since body weight is the most substantial factor in performace for running, this is significant. However, I'd question just how significant to the point at hand. At 240, I could have done this with no trouble.

As to your final paragraph, not only do I agree, I have already stated the same thing in a post prior to this one.

From my first reply on this thread: "If you could do a 5k in 22 mins at 230 straight without any intervals that would certainly be impressive."

However, this isn't what he's doing. He's running one minute intervals. At his pace, and without any mention of how long he's resting (and presumably making it 3 miles? But I now note he didn't say so specifically, but rather I inferred from the title), as I already said in the post you quoted "Hard to say, really, how hard that is for work." We simply don't have enough information. But considering pace alone, at only one minute stretches, that isn't much to brag about, nor is it an indication of how his cardio will be for the fight.

Hopefully I've addressed your major points to satisfaction. Not sure if i wasn't clear, or what, but I'm still not sure where you are disagreeing with me exactly.

Sorry, I figured it was clear that I was disagreeing about since it was the only thing I addressed. It was your "not sure how hard of work it is/people regularly run marathons at this pace" statement. I don't feel like validating stats, but yours sound accurate enough. Saying something isn't hard because 93% of people fail to do something, but 7% do it "regularly", I'll take exception to that. It's not like it's even close. I think the average finishing time in Boston is around 4:15, which is over an hour slower than this pace. Nobody other than a natural world-class level marathon runner will ever run 7:20/miles in a marathon without a lot of direct, focused training, and even then many people simply can't do that. It's hard. Nevermind for somebody carrying 230 lbs.

Also, I believe he is saying he's running straight through. Maybe I'm reading it wrong. "no im countin them all together do them at 11mph then 6mph for a couple then 10mph 6mph for a few then 9 mph and 7mph then ill get bored of changin the speed and just run at 7 "

Sounds to me like he's running at 11mph, then 6mph, then 10mph, then back to 6mph... and so on straight through.

Either way I don't buy it. I see a lot of running-related bs posted in this forum. I usually don't call people on it. Life is too short to care what people lie about online. I decided to on a whim this time. In keeping with that, this will be last post on this subject.
2/26/13 4:28 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
vermonter
88 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Edited: 02/26/13 4:41 PM
Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 12325
I see. I just wasn't clear and we disagree on "regular."

If 7% of participants can do something, I'd call that regular, but i'm fine if you won't. Like i said, a funny thing to be disagreeable about, but i'm not about to argue any further as it's meaningless.

However, that wasn't my point. My point was that if 7% of people can run a marathon at that pace, the number of people who can run a 5k at that pace must be substantially higher (15% in one race I checked that includes people of every age, gender and ability, so yeah, a hair over double). The number of people who can do it with rest intervals mixed in, would be even higher. As such, the feat wouldn't be impressive, even for a 230 lber, as I myself could have done it 10 lbs heavier and my cardio was mediocre at best

Now, to echo your statements, that's just based on how I read it (and again, we don't have enough info). If he ran 3 miles in 22 minutes at 230, then yes, I don't believe it either. Someone with that ability wouldn't be asking how they're doing, they would be competing at a high level and much lower bodyweight. (Although, I did know a guy who was close to that weight that finished a 5k with a chip timer in something like 24 minutes....) If that 22 minutes was done in interval fashion with the slower portions counted in the time, that would be even more unebelievable.

I don't think we particularly disagree. Hence my confusion. You're a better runner than I, we can agree on that :)
2/26/13 5:50 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Taku
149 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 6543

Hey Doug,

LOL...No, that comment was not meant for you at all. Sorry if it seemd that way. I was actually referring to another coach whose work gets referenced here quite a bit, but with whom I am not impressed at all.

TAKU <---Does not think Vermonter is a GURU os PSEUDO GURU.

2/26/13 5:54 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Leigh
757 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 31911
LOL I'm going to take a guess at JJ ;) Phone Post

Reply Post

You must log in to post a reply. Click here to login.