I was reading through the fatloss routines in NROL and notice they are high rep. What I understand from reading is you want to use lower reps and heavier weights to maintain your lbm while dieting and that high reps while dieting can result in loss of lbm. Why then are all the fatloss routines high rep?
The concept of the fatloss routines, IIRC, is to work you hard almost in a circuit training fashion (though no circuits). But I'd have to reread the book to be sure.
You aren't going to lose lean muscle because your reps are too high. Don't worry about it.
LOL, I didn't even see that thread. Seriously, not trying to start trouble. I find it very confusing when you have two experts giving conflicting advice. I've just been rereading my NROL and NROLFW agian and trying to decide which direction to go. Then I read Lyles article, the one that was posted in that other train wreck of a thread, and feel very conflicted.
If anyone wants to offer advice, I'm at a good weight (5' 7" 124lb ) but look a bit soft, on which direction to go, I'm open to suggestions. I've been leaning towards NROLFW and eating at maintainance and hoping for a bit of a body recomp.
What worked for me, and of course, yrmv, is low reps of just a few sets. I don't really do "intensity" well on a deficit… I just crash and burn and sloooowly die of exhaustion. So I had a 5x5 routine that was one alternating set a day, 4days of 5, revolving.
Basically, as long as you lift heavy things and eat enough protein, you'll not lose your lean mass while you are in a deficit… and the rest is what you can handle on however much of a deficit you want to have. If you'd just looking for recomp, your choices are even more open because you'll hardly be at a deficit, if at all.
If you're worried about the loss of lbm, why not maybe regularly interrupt your fatloss workouts with a hypertrophy/strength phase? Lyle is going to publish an article about mixing those next week as well, I think.
One thing that is always lost in threads like the one linked is this:
That exception is beginners. Complete beginners, who haven’t built any real muscle mass in the first place don’t have to worry much about muscle loss while dieting (just about any training will maintain it). (taken directly from Lyle)
The majority of these threads and concerns are from beginners. The thread linked above was started/about a beginner as well. Honestly, pretty much every single professionally designed program will work for a beginner.
Lyle is actually doing a 2 part article on this very topic as we speak. You can read part 1 here and part 2 is scheduled to be out today which talks about practical issues of how to put together a weight training program during dieting in terms of volumes, frequencies, scheduling, etc.
I honestly think people read way too much information and see too many contradicting opinions and get confused. When the answer may be as simple as both routes work. The important thing is just to pick a route and stick with it. When you see results that you don't like or you stop getting results, it's time to try something new and evolve.
I think part of the problem is that different people have different definitions. (Yeah, they really do!)
In NROL they do use high reps, but you are still supposed to go as heavy as you are able with good form. And even the high reps are 15-20. (I'm just starting NROL, so I may be wrong on that -- maybe there are some that go higher???).
When some people think high reps, it's like the cardio bunnies who think they need to do 100 crunches, 100 reverse crunches and 100 bicycles for their abs. And then maybe add 50 tricep kickbacks with a 2 pound dumbbell. That's not going to maintain your lbm.
That's a big departure from some
__________________
Karen -- Not going in circles anymore!
BTB is right in that almost anything works for a beginner.
And as Aoife said, one has to account for the deficit size with the workout type.
Some of Lyle's programs have you on a big deficit, with targeted low rep/high weight lifting and easy strolling cardio.
Something like NROL FL1 - it is more like you are eating non-active maintenance and adding these higher rep workouts to your day with possibly some intervals on a couple of days.
Not NROL FL1 with intervals on a super-big deficit.
The LBM loss studies I've seen referenced around are things like comparing 800 calories a day plus steady state cardio to 800 calories a day plus weight training.
Cardio group loses more weight in 12 weeks, weights group loses less weight but retains more LBM (and so loses greater % as BF).
... Why then are all the fatloss routines high rep?[/quote]
Probably because they work if your goals are lean & strong.
FL1 is part of a program "NROL" that gets to the end goal of lean & strong. Every program looks different in pieces. Working on FL2 right now I know I have questions all along and the faith in the results are bearing out that following the program is getting me to lean & strong.
It is about 365 days of workouts. Alwyn mentioned on "The Fitcast" that looking back he would make changes but that the program still delivers - I'll assume he meant in its entirety.
Many paths to our goals. For a lot of us this program has brought about great results.
I was reading through the fatloss routines in NROL and notice they are high rep. What I understand from reading is you want to use lower reps and heavier weights to maintain your lbm while dieting and that high reps while dieting can result in loss of lbm. Why then are all the fatloss routines high rep?
I think the confusion is coming from people not making a distinction between the different types of fat loss programs people pick.
There's 2 types.
The first is the person who is out of shape, fat and probably hasn't trained before. Their primary goal is to lose the fat quickly with muscle loss really not even coming into the equation.
The second is someone going through a bulking and cutting phase. When they diet they need to maintain as much of the muscle they've added in their bulking phase.
The vast majority of regular people will be looking for goals that fit with the first type of fat loss diet. Confusion may arise from the recent events and discussion of FL1 vs Lyle's program as to which is best when in fact they are for different goals.
FL1 is for the first type of dieter who's main goal is to lose fat and isn't concerned about losing muscle. Coincidently though, as is mentioned in the book beginners who either have never trained before or who haven't trained in a while will put on muscle by doing almost any routine.
So for most people, and the type of person the book is aimed at FL1 will work well to build them some strength, some muscle, some cardiovascular conditioning and fat loss.
In fact nowhere in the book does it recommend the fat loss programs for experienced lifters aiming to cut up after a bulking phase. The entire argument in the nacho thread was really pointless. It was comparing apples to oranges.
It would be silly for a beginner to do low rep heavy weights to try to maintain muscle and lose fat at the same time. They haven't conditioned their muscles or tendons yet and they don't even know what kind of weights they should be lifting for 5RM.
I think the confusion is coming from people not making a distinction between the different types of fat loss programs people pick.
There's 2 types.
The first is the person who is out of shape, fat and probably hasn't trained before. Their primary goal is to lose the fat quickly with muscle loss really not even coming into the equation.
The second is someone going through a bulking and cutting phase. When they diet they need to maintain as much of the muscle they've added in their bulking phase.
The vast majority of regular people will be looking for goals that fit with the first type of fat loss diet. Confusion may arise from the recent events and discussion of FL1 vs Lyle's program as to which is best when in fact they are for different goals.
FL1 is for the first type of dieter who's main goal is to lose fat and isn't concerned about losing muscle. Coincidently though, as is mentioned in the book beginners who either have never trained before or who haven't trained in a while will put on muscle by doing almost any routine.
So for most people, and the type of person the book is aimed at FL1 will work well to build them some strength, some muscle, some cardiovascular conditioning and fat loss.
In fact nowhere in the book does it recommend the fat loss programs for experienced lifters aiming to cut up after a bulking phase. The entire argument in the nacho thread was really pointless. It was comparing apples to oranges.
It would be silly for a beginner to do low rep heavy weights to try to maintain muscle and lose fat at the same time. They haven't conditioned their muscles or tendons yet and they don't even know what kind of weights they should be lifting for 5RM.
Hmmm ... you sound so reasonable and yet ... let me get my book. Ahh yes. You're right. It doesn't specifically recommend the fat loss programs for experiencd lifters aiming to cut up after a bulking phase. So far so good!
Lets see here ... page 198. "Lifter #4 Serious about lifting but seriously overweight." Reccomendation ... Fat-Loss II for four weeks. One week break. Fat-Loss III for four weeks.
Have you actually read the book? You can read the description of lifter #4 yourself but it seems like they would be the kind of individual that would want to keep all the lean muscle they worked so hard to get.
I do apologize because I am not an expert on the topic but when I look at FLII and FLIII it seems to be metabolic training that would cause lean muscle loss. Are they not?
I do apologize because I am not an expert on the topic but when I look at FLII and FLIII it seems to be metabolic training that would cause lean muscle loss. Are they not?
I am following the fourth protocol (no pun intended) and I can tell you that I did lose 15 pounds in about 10 weeks and did not lose any strength at all. I got a little stonger over that period of time.
I am following the fourth protocol (no pun intended) and I can tell you that I did lose 15 pounds in about 10 weeks and did not lose any strength at all. I got a little stonger over that period of time.
Blasphemy! NACHO and another would say that's impossible. The only way to lose weight is low reps with heavy weight and seriously caloric restricted diet.
__________________
"Only those who will risk going too far can possibly find out how far one can go." -- T.S. Eliot
"We are what we repeatedly do. Excellence, therefore, is not an act, but a habit."-- Aristotle
Blasphemy! NACHO and another would say that's impossible. The only way to lose weight is low reps with heavy weight and seriously caloric restricted diet.
For me it is, akshully. Intensity on a decent deficit I just can't manage to keep NEAT up and then my life just sucks too much. (because my total intake ends up so low, not because of the amount of the deficit, of course. Be much easier if my maintenance was higher.)
Blasphemy! NACHO and another would say that's impossible. The only way to lose weight is low reps with heavy weight and seriously caloric restricted diet.
I would? Tell me where I said this? I don't know enough about this whole exercise/diet/lifting thing to make any such sweeping statements. As I understand it weight doesn't just lose itself so to lose weight your body has to use more calories than it takes in. Right?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Adrian O'Rourke
I am following the fourth protocol (no pun intended) and I can tell you that I did lose 15 pounds in about 10 weeks and did not lose any strength at all. I got a little stonger over that period of time.
Congrats! How did you like FLIII? It looks like it is VERY brutal!
Congrats! How did you like FLIII? It looks like it is VERY brutal!
I was a whole new way of lifting weight for me. I made the mistake of going too heavy to start with (male ego), and bonked the first time I tried it. After a couple of weeks I could really feel a difference in my cardiovascular conditioning. It was pretty effective for me.
I still think the single hardest exercise I've ever tried is the Bulgarian Split-Squat with Overhead Press from FLII.
Congrats! How did you like FLIII? It looks like it is VERY brutal!
I think this is the real issue Nacho has with NROL. Cosgrove's workouts are hard. But they are hard for a reason - they get results.
Since you are a beginner you are probably better off with Lyle's RFL workouts for now (that's not a knock on the workouts). It's not as demanding at such a low deficit and you will recover better for the next workout.
When you get used to working out you can return to NROL. Trust me you will get results (and HYP 1 will let you build muscle).
__________________
"A government big enough to give you everything you want is a government big enough to take from you everything you have."
I think this is the real issue Nacho has with NROL. Cosgrove's workouts are hard. But they are hard for a reason - they get results.
Since you are a beginner you are probably better off with Lyle's RFL workouts for now (that's not a knock on the workouts). It's not as demanding at such a low deficit and you will recover better for the next workout.
When you get used to working out you can return to NROL. Trust me you will get results (and HYP 1 will let you build muscle).
Although you are still on ignor I checked out your post because I figured (correctly) you were talking about me.
Your comprehension of my situation is getting better but you still don't understand why I left NROL. It was not because the workouts were too hard, nor because I wasn't making gains with them.
I left it because it wasn't getting me to MY goals fast enough and I don't believe (at least in my case) engaging the flux capacitor works very well for the kind of weight I need to lose.
Let me put it another way for you, possibly easier to understand.
I am fat. I don't want to be fat. You can't lose fat as rapidly using NROL as you can with RFL. When I am less fat I will evaluate what to do next.
Hopefully you can stop talking about me and start trying to be more on topic.
Admitting you have a problem is the first step to solving it.
Quote:
I left it because it wasn't getting me to MY goals fast enough and I don't believe (at least in my case) engaging the flux capacitor works very well for the kind of weight I need to lose.
After 2 workouts you, in your infinite lack of wisdom, decided that FL1 will not get you to your goal. How could you know when you don't really know anything?
From your "bonking" thread:
Quote:
Started FLI, workout A Sunday with HIIT after. The next day, Monday, I was VERY hungry which I ignored.
Do you want to know why you bonked? Because your impatient. You can't do a metabolic workout and follow it with another metabolic workout on an extreme deficit diet and expect to have any kind of recovery capability. It has nothing to do with the workouts - it has to do with you not knowing what you are doing. And your impatience. You want all the fat off NOW. I'm sure it didn't get there overnight.
Stick with RFL. Cosgrove's workouts are hard and at this point you don't have the training sense to handle it.
__________________
"A government big enough to give you everything you want is a government big enough to take from you everything you have."
Admitting you have a problem is the first step to solving it.
After 2 workouts you, in your infinite lack of wisdom, decided that FL1 will not get you to your goal. How could you know when you don't really know anything?
From your "bonking" thread:
Do you want to know why you bonked? Because your impatient. You can't do a metabolic workout and follow it with another metabolic workout on an extreme deficit diet and expect to have any kind of recovery capability. It has nothing to do with the workouts - it has to do with you not knowing what you are doing. And your impatience. You want all the fat off NOW. I'm sure it didn't get there overnight.
Stick with RFL. Cosgrove's workouts are hard and at this point you don't have the training sense to handle it.
What is your glitch? Do you sit on your porch waiting for opportunities to yell "Get off my lawn!"?
Fatloss routines question
I find it very confusing when you have two experts giving conflicting advice. I've just been rereading my NROL and NROLFW agian and trying to decide which direction to go. Then I read Lyles article, the one that was posted in that other train wreck of a thread, and feel very conflicted.
Linear Mode
