Fat Loss Supersets

[yadmit]

On page 212 there is an explanation of supersets. They chat about efficiency and inefficiency of different styles of supersets.

What confuses me is this: "that kind of inefficiency is perfect for fat loss" but it doesn't say 'why.'

Is there an answer for the 'why?'

t

[frogguruami]

This is how I understand efficiency and inefficiency as described in the book.

When the body does an exercise regularly it becomes very efficient at doing that exercise. The body begins to require less and less energy expenditure to accomplish the same task. For example if you ran 5 miles each day, it would take less energy (ie less calories) to complete 5 miles after doing it for 4 months because the body becomes efficient at running 5 miles.

So by changing up exercises and incorporating varying sets/rests, etc your body never has time to become "efficient" at the task. The method is "inefficient" therefore requiring the body to expend more energy/calories to complete the task.

If I am horribly flawed in my understanding I am confident someone will correct me!

[yadmit]

But why then the standard style supersets during the Hypertrophy programs?

[missjane]

The FL workouts create a metabolic disturbance by pairing unlike exercises in the superset (or more accurately alternating sets). In Hypertrophy, you are doing supersets of like exercises to focus on building muscle. See the last page of the FL section to read more about this.

[Moveon]

When the goal is FL, exercises that force the body to be inefficient are the most effective. The body must consume more energy (thus the fat loss) to accomplish the work. When hypertrophy is the goal, efficiency is important, because you want all the energy to go into the (now different) goal of growing muscles. So being inefficient is the most effective way to achieve fat loss and being efficient is the most effective way to gain size.

Confused? I think I am.


.

[stingo]

If I remember correctly, the working of unrelated muscle groups in the Fat Loss programs produces more cortisol, which breaks down more muscle which uses up more energy/calories to repair. I don't have my book here, but I think Lou Schuler mentions this in the writeup on the Fat Loss programs.

[Cynic]

Keep in mind the goal for the workout.

A fuller quote is:

"...if you were looking to build muscle, you might do supersets of exercises for the same muscle groups...Or to create a more time efficient workout, you might do a set of bench presses followed by a set of rows...For exercise efficiency, the worst thing you can do is pair up two exercises that have absolutely no relation to each other...But that kind of inefficiency is perfect for fat loss."

Now, drawing a conclusion from the previous two, the fat loss workouts are not time efficient, thus you're working longer. FLI takes me 1 1/2 hours.

They are muscle maintenance workouts and only for the most green will they build muscle to any degree.

They are metabolically hyping workouts and if done right, keep the metabolism at an elevated stated for up to 48 hours.

One last thought: the human body is an adaptation machine. It's constantly adapting to it's environment. That is how hominids and early humans survived lean times, by adapting. If you make the workout physically efficient:

1. It won't be working as hard and it's the body's attempts to adapt to stress that cause progressive development (fat loss, muscle growth, etc).
2. The body will adapt faster and the workouts won't be as effective for as long and you don't want to have a whole new workout each time you hit the gym. The adaptation must be encouraged, but also made difficult to attain.

[NY_Roadrunner]

1.5 hrs for a FLI? What am I doing wrong? I get thru a FLI session in about 40 minutes, maximum. I'm sweating heavy & breathing heavy from the third or fourth set, and I've lost 12lbs in 3wks (doing TNT Plan A). Was that a typo?

[sharsell119]

Sorry... "FLI"?

[missjane]

Originally Posted by sharsell119

Sorry... "FLI"?

NROL Fat Loss I

[Pman]

1.5 hours seems like the rest times are too long.

[fervorviolinist]

I think if you do all the different types of warm-ups (I think the book discusses 3 different types), which include exercise-specific warm-ups, and are experienced enough a lifter to be handling really heavy weights, an hour or longer is probably not unrealistic. I don't know if cynic's avatar is really a picture of him, but to be able to be that muscley at that advanced an age (just kidding) gives him the right to take as long as he wants

[Cynic]

Originally Posted by Pman

1.5 hours seems like the rest times are too long.

Well, FLI rest times start at 75secs and I use the count down timer to stay on time. I actually have my watch set 10sec short so I have that 10secs to motivate.

It's probably the time between the pairings that raise it, where I'm stripping the bar and putting plates back on the racks. I don't rush, mainly because I'm still trying to catch my breath. Then there are the warm-ups and while I don't rest between them, they still take time changing weights.

[Cynic]

Originally Posted by NY_Roadrunner

1.5 hrs for a FLI? What am I doing wrong? I get thru a FLI session in about 40 minutes, maximum. I'm sweating heavy & breathing heavy from the third or fourth set, and I've lost 12lbs in 3wks (doing TNT Plan A). Was that a typo?

Third or fourth set? FLI is only 3x15 @ 75s rest going to 3x10 @ 45s rest.

How much do you set up in advance? I have two bars, one pair of powerblocks, one rack, one bench, but I can only set up one superset at a time. I can't setup all three at the same time.

[jed111]

That must be why. Unless a lot of people are there, I set up all the supersets if I can.