...
The conventional model of training espouses the development of conditioning in a pyramidal concept. Many experts in the fields of training believe the peak of conditioning can only be as high as the base allows. The base in theory is the development of a level of aerobic capacity onto which a series of anaerobic blocks could be placed. This is an architectural
model based on a mechanical system that probably does not apply to exercise.
In all of my programming since the early '80s I have indicated the concept of aerobic base is flawed and the development of an aerobic base is counterproductive. Numerous studies have proven this over the past ten years, yet many continue to advocate a period of general aerobic training to develop the aerobic base.
....
Long, slow distance sounds like a torture method, "You've been sentenced to one year of long slow distance." I despise long, slow distance aerobic training. It is bad for women and it's bad for almost all athletes other than those who race for long periods of time or over long distances. Most running injuries are of the overuse nature. Very little trauma occurs in the
endurance world save the infrequent untimely meeting of runner and motorized vehicle. And when overuse is the problem, less is always the answer.
Conventional aerobic training is only good to get a person fit enough to tolerate interval training, or to serve as a break from interval sessions. Steady-state aerobics may be nothing more than the necessary
precursor to any interval program. Does that mean we've been lied to all
these years? I think unintentionally, yes. The whole aerobic craze was a mistake. Long aerobic training is popular because it is easy to implement and because the media glorified it.
Interval training is hard. Interval training is uncomfortable. Interval training is superior.
Interval training develops aerobic capacity better than aerobic training. The fastest way to raise V02 max, our standard measure of aerobic fitness, is through interval training. Look at the research; ask a physiologist: If you want to be more aerobically fit, steady-state aerobics is not the best way to get there. Another benefit to interval training is
the positive changes in the body that come about from interval work. Bottom line, sprinters have leaner bodies with a more aesthetically pleasing appearance than those who only do steady-state aerobic
training. Those engaged in interval sports almost inadvertently develop a better body. In fact, sprinters generally have less bodyfat than the thinner distance athletes.
If that's true, why would anyone do long aerobic training? The truth is, I have no idea. I can't see the benefit, and that is why my athletes and clients almost never do aerobic training.
http://www.strengthcoach.com/public/791.cfm
zdravi
?
)
zadny rejpani, nevykrikujete hosi, argumentujete, nepisete anonymni hlasky, tak to ma v diskuzi byt, takze v poho 
To ne, viděl bych to spíš na aikido...