I have NROLFW and love it and am faithfully doing the program. I am also reading your other book Perfect Body Diet. On page 8 of this book in reference to the body shape Pears under excercise you write:
"Cut down on weight-training exercises for the lower body,to prevent it from becomming any larger".
Can you clarify this ......it seems to go against the grain of NROLfW. Thank you!!!! Bobbie
I know it's not exactly what you're asking about, but she did make some comments there about the differences between NROLFW and PBD. The two books aren't the same.
Quote:
Another thing, with PBD, they wanted big results in just 8 weeks. Not any longer, especially not 6 months. I wanted a 12 week program at least, but that was nixed because no one thought they had to work out and eat right for 3 months to lose weight - especially in the diet world. NROL4W is also not a diet book - it's a book to encourage women to lift very hard and very intensely, so if the cals were any lower, they'd all fail.
@Sue_H: Well, in NROLFW there isn't traditional "cardio", so no worries there. There's HIIT after some workouts starting in Stage 2 (looks to me like a crazy, structured fartlek).
I have NROLFW and love it and am faithfully doing the program. I am also reading your other book Perfect Body Diet. On page 8 of this book in reference to the body shape Pears under excercise you write:
"Cut down on weight-training exercises for the lower body,to prevent it from becomming any larger".
Can you clarify this ......it seems to go against the grain of NROLfW. Thank you!!!! Bobbie
This is my theory, which isn't the same theory as NROL4W. Doesn't mean one is better than the other though.
For women, we tend to lose weight slower than we put on muscle. So, to ensure that women following PBD didn't hate me because I increased the size of the areas of their body that they wanted smaller (i.e., legs in pears, tummies in apples), I had them lessen the amount of muscle-buidling work in those areas and focus on muscle growth in their smaller areas until the fat came off. It would make their body look more symmetrical and leaner rather than emphasizing areas that were larger than desired. Does this make sense?
__________________
Fitness and Nutrition Scientist Blog:
It makes sense but I guess it makes me rethink the whole NROLfW thing,my thighs are my largest part and I sure don't want them any bigger....
the more I read the more confused I get So, do you think following NROLfW will result in leaner legs in the long run???If so, I guess it's a matter of hanging in there for a while.
I am a total pear (and a short one at that) and have found that weight training eventually slims my lower body.
I was always scared of "bulking" up in the thigh/butt area and was one of those girls doing squats with 5 lb dumbbells. But then a trainer convinced me to try going heavier. The first few weeks I think my thighs might have been a tiny bit bigger but he explained that was normal, some fluid retention (and this is mentioned in the NORL4W book) but then as I kept with it my lower body really got smaller.
Just doing leg intensive cardio (bike, run) did not make my legs smaller at all. They firmed up a bit but nothing like when I added weight training.
I read a quote once from Gin Miller, the creator of step aerobics. She said "don't just have a big butt when you could have a GREAT big butt" (or something to that extent) I will always be bigger in the lower body area. Even when I was underweight I still had a bootay. But weights have helped make it so much more lifted and firm
Bootay all the way! I too agree that a fit and strong posterior but can be quite an ASSet for us women in our every day activities. I am talking about picking up heavy things, moving them, chasing our kids up the hill, pushing the car with hubby steering, because the old jalopy ran out of gas 0.5 miles away from the gas station, etc.
Bootay all the way! I too agree that a fit and strong posterior but can be quite an ASSet for us women in our every day activities. I am talking about picking up heavy things, moving them, chasing our kids up the hill, pushing the car with hubby steering, because the old jalopy ran out of gas 0.5 miles away from the gas station, etc.
@BobbieK: Yes, work your legs on NROLFW. Strengthen those muscles. And, as the fat around them is burned off, your strong legs will be revealed. Your genetics may not let you be have stick-thin model legs, but you can definitely have the best looking legs that you can have.
Cass said earlier that PBD and NROLFW have different timeframes: PBD was designed for 8 weeks, while NROLFW is 6 months. If you put someone on PBD and heavy leg work, and in 8 weeks they see the water retention LaraT mentioned (or muscle gain in their legs, which might make their legs temporarily bigger until fat loss caught up), they'll assume PBD isn't working (even though it really is). So I think she lays off the heavy leg workouts for pear-shaped women so that they don't think they're getting negative results. Instead, they'll see muscle gains or fat loss in more visible areas, so they'll be encouraged to continue.
Thanks. Now that wasn't exactly the way it happened. Once my hubby had to push the car while I was steering, but I am sure there are men out there who'd make their women do it.
Thanks. Now that wasn't exactly the way it happened. Once my hubby had to push the car while I was steering, but I am sure there are men out there who'd make their women do it.
cynic, rather ballsy of you to post this on the women's forum. particularly with all of the heavy weight we've been lifting. could be dangerous, really....
@BobbieK: Yes, work your legs on NROLFW. Strengthen those muscles. And, as the fat around them is burned off, your strong legs will be revealed. Your genetics may not let you be have stick-thin model legs, but you can definitely have the best looking legs that you can have.
Cass said earlier that PBD and NROLFW have different timeframes: PBD was designed for 8 weeks, while NROLFW is 6 months. If you put someone on PBD and heavy leg work, and in 8 weeks they see the water retention LaraT mentioned (or muscle gain in their legs, which might make their legs temporarily bigger until fat loss caught up), they'll assume PBD isn't working (even though it really is). So I think she lays off the heavy leg workouts for pear-shaped women so that they don't think they're getting negative results. Instead, they'll see muscle gains or fat loss in more visible areas, so they'll be encouraged to continue.
Hit the nail right on the head with this post. Thank you.
The different time frames was my my main reasoning for lessening the leg work. There still is leg work for pears, but it's just less. For an 8-week program, this is what I went with. Let me tell ya, it was hard to write the book. No one can ever satisfy every woman with one program, but I gave one theory although there are many out there that work. I like both PBD program and NROL4W. I've been training for 10+ years and alternate between many different programs - that's what periodization is all about.
__________________
Fitness and Nutrition Scientist Blog:
Cassandra,
I have PBD and read it. I had a really hard time determining which body type I was and ended up getting frustrated over it. Is it possible to not be one of the types in the book?
Thanks!
__________________
Ginger
"The miracle isn't that I finished. The miracle is that I had the courage to start." ~ John Bingham
Thanks so much for the reply. I have had a couple of questions and appreciate you answering them.
My waist measurement (just did them again) is 33, my hips are 40........
That makes the ratio .83. So, by the book that would make me a pear, right?
Another revelation that I had when reading this book, is that I have pretty much thought my whole life, because someone, somewhere called me "big boned" that I was. (I am 5.9 1/2) By the wrist measurement (which is 6'') I have a small frame.
__________________
Ginger
"The miracle isn't that I finished. The miracle is that I had the courage to start." ~ John Bingham
Yes, that would classify you as a pear shape. Most definitely.
And, your wrist measurement does indicate that you have smaller bones, not larger. You're just tall! Not big-boned. My wrist measure is the exact same.
__________________
Fitness and Nutrition Scientist Blog:
Thanks for the input. I think the realization that a) I'm a pear and b) I am actually small boned, somewhat freaked me out a bit. Takes away the "excuse" of being big boned and therefore, taking away that mental allowance to carry more weight. Taking down a wall or two, I guess.
Thanks for your time, I appreciate it.
__________________
Ginger
"The miracle isn't that I finished. The miracle is that I had the courage to start." ~ John Bingham
Is pear shape basically the same as hour-glass shaped then? I just checked and I have a .73 ratio, which apparently makes me a pear. But I really don't look like a pear: I have boobs and shoulders. I've always thought I was very clearly an hourglass shape, regardless of my weight. What am I missing?
By the wrist measurement (which is 6'') I have a small frame.
Thanks for bringing up the wrist measurement. I completely spaced that part of the book out, I guess, and never measured. I just did, though, and mine is 6.75" (and my wrists are bony) and I'm 5' 10.5" so that puts me well into large-frame territory. I had always been told I was small-framed. Go figure. Not that it really matters to me but it's interesting anyway.
Well, I always knew I was small-framed, even though 5'8" because my wrists are a measly 5 1/2". I can't find a bracelet to save my life! I guess that's why I started designing jewelry....so I could finally have something to put on my non-existent wrists!
This is also why the same weight on someone else looks so much better than on me. I can't carry much extra weight (read: fat) on my small frame.
@BobbieK: Yes, work your legs on NROLFW. Strengthen those muscles. And, as the fat around them is burned off, your strong legs will be revealed. Your genetics may not let you be have stick-thin model legs, but you can definitely have the best looking legs that you can have.
Cass said earlier that PBD and NROLFW have different timeframes: PBD was designed for 8 weeks, while NROLFW is 6 months. If you put someone on PBD and heavy leg work, and in 8 weeks they see the water retention LaraT mentioned (or muscle gain in their legs, which might make their legs temporarily bigger until fat loss caught up), they'll assume PBD isn't working (even though it really is). So I think she lays off the heavy leg workouts for pear-shaped women so that they don't think they're getting negative results. Instead, they'll see muscle gains or fat loss in more visible areas, so they'll be encouraged to continue.
I was wondering if any other pears out there have experienced this water gain/bulking up in their thighs?
I've been doing this program for five weeks now, and I'm really happy with the most of my body. I am starting to be able to see the changes in my arms, lower quads, and abs (actually, right now, it just looks like one general "ab." hee hee).
However, my pants are definitely tighter in my upper thighs, and this has always been the first place that I put on fat. (I'm definitely a pear.) I'm worried that I'm putting on fat along with muscle, and frankly I would rather not have any more junk in my trunk. If this is temporary, though, I guess it's fine. Just curious if anyone else is experiencing this.
I am experiencing that as well and it is so frustrating. I have to buy new pants and I don't want to do that. I do realize that you need to build your quads to have killer abs. But I am still deciding if I want to go back to my slender legs or build to have abs??
I do realize that you need to build your quads to have killer abs.
Not really. There are lots of examples of ppl with 'killer abs' and chicken legs. Look at recreational rowers, for example. Or paralyzed wheel chair athletes....
On the subject of bulked legs. If you eat well and train intensely on NROL4W your legs will grow. Your are building muscle under the layer of fat. My pants are tight in the thigh are as well right now. When you have sufficiently built up the mass adjust your diet for fat loss. Thats's all.
I do realize that you need to build your quads to have killer abs. But I am still deciding if I want to go back to my slender legs or build to have abs??
I don't think I've heard that before, that you have to bulk your quads to see your abs... :-/
I do know that overall fat loss will eventually reveal the abs, as well as improve definition in your legs. And doing exercises that target the largest muscles in your body, i.e., your legs, will increase the muscle there and therefore increase the overall calorie burning in your body. Most fitness competitor workouts I've seen have them going heavy on their lower body, and they have slender yet strong legs. (And I know people with "slender" legs and hardly an ounce of muscle on them. I'd rather have strong legs, the better to kick people with .
I've gained in my hips as well, though. I've been doing NROLFW for 3 weeks now, and I've gained 0.5" in my hips but have lost some bodyfat and gained muscle overall. So that makes me happy. The metabolic overhaul will catch up eventually, and all that extra water weight and fat baggage will get ditched. So no worries.
I've never really thought about frame size before. At 5'5" and a wrist size of just over 6.25, I have a large frame. How does that affect BMI and Body Fat Percent measurements?
Question for Cassandra
. There's HIIT after some workouts starting in Stage 2 (looks to me like a crazy, structured fartlek).
So, do you think following NROLfW will result in leaner legs in the long run???If so, I guess it's a matter of hanging in there for a while.
Linear Mode
