Mountain Project Logo

New Alpinism

FosterK · · Edmonton, AB · Joined Nov 2012 · Points: 67

From my reading of the book, all activity should be included (i.e. weekend cragging, or Steve's example: heli-ski guiding) though probably only the time spent actually climbing ;) . They also provide that rough guideline of 50% of your previous year's volume (sounds like it should be 2.5 hours for your Week 1 - Transition Period).

You're right, that as volume increases those workouts will be more difficult to sustain with other priorities... then the question is, how bad do you want it? :)

Maybe I'll post what my schedule and volume looks like next week.

jaredj · · Unknown Hometown · Joined Jan 2013 · Points: 165
divnamite wrote: While I don't have precise number from previous year, I generally average 5 hours of working out a week (more if including weekend cragging). So it really depends on how I count. If I'm maintaining the 5 hours a week target, the long zone 1 is 75 minutes which is no big deal at the beginning. But if I was to follow this program, the volume will go up. That's when the long zone 1 workouts becomes an issue in terms of time (in week 9 - 16, 1 workout of 30% and 1 workout of 20%).
I'm doing step ups with a pack onto a box in the storage unit of my apartment building from 4:30am to 6:30am a couple of times a week before my wife and toddler get up and I have to go to work. You gotta do what you gotta do.

Success at any conventional mid-to-high volume program is about engineering your life (to the extent you can) to accomodate workouts. Don't watch TV, don't dink around on the internet at night. Like a post up-thread, I did competitive cycling for awhile with barely managable training volumes and got good practice at the juggling.

If your career demands north of 55 hours a week on the regular and you've got kidz / a heinous commute / some other commitment, start doing Mountain Athlete and accept the limitations. The approach recommended in this book is, in my opinion, really for the athletes who have at least 8 hrs / week to commit to training to begin with, and are capable of scaling at least to 12 hrs temporarily for the later base efforts. Less than that, and it's gonna be hard to fit in the mixture of activities they recommend in a way that will be meaningful if you're already somewhat fit or not just off the couch. Particularly if you're spending time doing rock climbing - specific gym sessions or hitting the crags.
Optimistic · · New Paltz · Joined Aug 2007 · Points: 450
Todd Cook wrote:For you people following the book and heart rate monitor advice, did you do the true maximum heart rate fitness test recommended or are you still using that old bullshit rule 220 - your age? If you did the test, what's the difference between the two numbers? Me: bullshit rule = 175 true test = 192 (+ maybe 9) Todd
Did a sprint workout yesterday on the treadmill, not quite the true test but approaching it. Got the HR to 179. My "220-" result is 174, so I guess I proved THAT one wrong! Interestingly, my heart rate monitor has a function that will estimate your max HR while you lie quietly with your eyes closed...it predicts my HRmax to be 182, which, after yesterday's treadmill effort, I'm guessing is almost exactly right.

But I know I still gotta do the real test...
builttospill · · Unknown Hometown · Joined Nov 2006 · Points: 0

I'd strongly encourage everyone wondering whether they should do the true HR test to do it. The 220-age thing has been known to be bogus for a long time. Mine was about 5 bpm off several years ago, and at the time I had a training partner where it was about 20-25 bpm off. I believe 220-age suggested 198 for him, and his max was ~170 or 175. He tested it repeatedly too, including in actual races.

Optimistic · · New Paltz · Joined Aug 2007 · Points: 450
jaredj wrote: The approach recommended in this book is, in my opinion, really for the athletes who have at least 8 hrs / week to commit to training to begin with, and are capable of scaling at least to 12 hrs temporarily for the later base efforts. Less than that, and it's gonna be hard to fit in the mixture of activities they recommend in a way that will be meaningful if you're already somewhat fit or not just off the couch. Particularly if you're spending time doing rock climbing - specific gym sessions or hitting the crags.
I'm starting to think that your 8-12h estimate may be right on...I really don't see how to to simultaneously include the hours spent climbing and have the whole weekly program add up to 5 hours (based on a 250 hour budget and a 50-week year). Seems like a day of actual climbing (as opposed to a quick structured run to the climbing gym) would have you "over budget" in one day, much less one week. In my case, I can mostly make the time to do that, it's just hard for me to see how the climbing can be fit in on top of two strength workouts, two hour-plus long Zone 1 runs, a short zone 2 run, and have it add up to 5 hours! But the authors do emphasize in several spots that you need to "count" all your physical activity...
cjdrover · · Watertown, MA · Joined Feb 2009 · Points: 355
Optimistic wrote: \Seems like a day of actual climbing (as opposed to a quick structured run to the climbing gym) would have you "over budget" in one day, much less one week. ... But the authors do emphasize in several spots that you need to "count" all your physical activity...
My take on it has been that "hours" spent doing recreational stuff (climbing, skiing, etc) are not really full hours. As an example, a few weeks ago we skinned and skiied the Sherbie on Mt. Washington, then spent the afternoon riding lifts across the street at Wildcat. I logged the 60 minute uphill as Zone 1 (based on breathing). For the lift skiing, I figured 11 runs x 4 minutes of actual work on each run. Since the intensity felt high and it left my legs feeling just as sore as doing squats, I called it 45 minutes of general strength.

Same goes for a day of climbing, IMHO. How many pitches do you really log in a day? I'd wager that for most casual days at the crag, an 8 hour day of climbing is more like 2 hours of true climbing time (if that).
Alexander Blum · · Livermore, CA · Joined Mar 2009 · Points: 143
jaredj wrote: The approach recommended in this book is, in my opinion, really for the athletes who have at least 8 hrs / week to commit to training to begin with, and are capable of scaling at least to 12 hrs temporarily for the later base efforts. Less than that, and it's gonna be hard to fit in the mixture of activities they recommend in a way that will be meaningful if you're already somewhat fit or not just off the couch. Particularly if you're spending time doing rock climbing - specific gym sessions or hitting the crags.
I definitely am struggling with the idea of including the recommended volumes vs. the realities of life. There is a point in the book where the recommend yearly training volumes for students, working professionals, and full time climbers, respectively. The working professional recommendation was 200hours/year, which works out to roughly five hours/week. This seems reasonable to me- it just means your "long zone 1 workout" will not be as long as one for someone whom has time for more total volume. Using a heart rate monitor/nose breathing self awareness can also help with keeping a good estimate of time spent in zone 1 during climbing days. They speak of relative volumes a lot, and they provide some very detailed graphs to help you divvy out your volume between the necessary activities. There is a strong emphasis in the book on the fact that you may have to give up some of the more enjoyable aspects of climbing in the short term for long term gains, this may mean this cragging that would put you over budget on volume is out of the picture until your muscular endurance or climbing specific periods.
Optimistic · · New Paltz · Joined Aug 2007 · Points: 450

More in the schedule juggling vein: I'm in the transition phase described in the book, but one modification I've made (suggested in the book, among other places) is to replace the Zone 2 training with some high-intensity interval training (sprints on a treadmill) to facilitate weight loss. These sprints are pretty hard, and one scheduling challenge I'm running into is getting adequate recovery time after them.

Question: does anyone know if there would be an inherent problem with doing this Zone 4-5 sprint work on the same day as a Zone 1 run? I've tried doing the sprints on the same day as the strength training and that definitely had a wrong/overtraining feel to it, whether I did the sprints first or the strength first.

Nathan Bell · · La Grande, Oregon · Joined Oct 2011 · Points: 5

Off topic but everyone should check out Steve House's other book "Beyond the Mountain." It is an amazing book and the fact that Steve is from my home town, La Grande Oregon, makes it particularly inspiring for me. Hope you like it.

Optimistic · · New Paltz · Joined Aug 2007 · Points: 450
Optimistic wrote:More in the schedule juggling vein: I'm in the transition phase described in the book, but one modification I've made (suggested in the book, among other places) is to replace the Zone 2 training with some high-intensity interval training (sprints on a treadmill) to facilitate weight loss. These sprints are pretty hard, and one scheduling challenge I'm running into is getting adequate recovery time after them. Question: does anyone know if there would be an inherent problem with doing this Zone 4-5 sprint work on the same day as a Zone 1 run? I've tried doing the sprints on the same day as the strength training and that definitely had a wrong/overtraining feel to it, whether I did the sprints first or the strength first.
Bump...
Alexander Blum · · Livermore, CA · Joined Mar 2009 · Points: 143
Optimistic wrote:More in the schedule juggling vein: I'm in the transition phase described in the book, but one modification I've made (suggested in the book, among other places) is to replace the Zone 2 training with some high-intensity interval training (sprints on a treadmill) to facilitate weight loss. These sprints are pretty hard, and one scheduling challenge I'm running into is getting adequate recovery time after them. Question: does anyone know if there would be an inherent problem with doing this Zone 4-5 sprint work on the same day as a Zone 1 run? I've tried doing the sprints on the same day as the strength training and that definitely had a wrong/overtraining feel to it, whether I did the sprints first or the strength first.
If your body is telling you that it's problematic, then it probably is. It sounds like you have a few options to consider here. If you are not significantly overweight you can simply ditch the extra Zone 2 work so you can keep your volume up, shedding a few pounds via minor caloric restriction as you move through the training periods. If you have enough weight to shed that doing so is a higher priority than increasing your aerobic base you can reduce your volume appropriately during this transition period.

Personally, I would drop the Zone 2 in favor of volume, but the bottom line is you have to analyze the trade-off between intensity and volume and manipulate it in the way that you feel best helps you reach your goals.
divnamite · · New York, NY · Joined Aug 2007 · Points: 90

According to the book, a zone 1 work out less than 2 hour can be recovered within 12-24 hours, a zone 1 workout longer than 2 hours requires 24-48 hours for recovery. High intensity workout requires up to 2-3 full days. While recovery time is individual dependant, the authors feel the number is very accurate.

Zone 1 and zone 4 workout in a day is out of the question in this book. Zone 1 (1-2 hours)and Zone 1 (1 hour) is probably ok assuming you do one in the morning, and one at night. This is one of the reasons I asked about two-a-day for zone 1 for higher volume days.

cjdrover · · Watertown, MA · Joined Feb 2009 · Points: 355
Optimistic wrote: Did a sprint workout yesterday on the treadmill, not quite the true test but approaching it. Got the HR to 179. My "220-" result is 174, so I guess I proved THAT one wrong! Interestingly, my heart rate monitor has a function that will estimate your max HR while you lie quietly with your eyes closed...it predicts my HRmax to be 182, which, after yesterday's treadmill effort, I'm guessing is almost exactly right. But I know I still gotta do the real test...
220 - my age = 194. Uphill sprint + HRM = 203.

Chris
Ryan Watts · · Bishop, CA · Joined Apr 2013 · Points: 25
Optimistic wrote:More in the schedule juggling vein: I'm in the transition phase described in the book, but one modification I've made (suggested in the book, among other places) is to replace the Zone 2 training with some high-intensity interval training (sprints on a treadmill) to facilitate weight loss. These sprints are pretty hard, and one scheduling challenge I'm running into is getting adequate recovery time after them. Question: does anyone know if there would be an inherent problem with doing this Zone 4-5 sprint work on the same day as a Zone 1 run? I've tried doing the sprints on the same day as the strength training and that definitely had a wrong/overtraining feel to it, whether I did the sprints first or the strength first.
Are you doing the sprints *just* for weight loss? If so then just eat less. Or do a longer zone 1 run or other training to burn cals. Calories in vs. calories out. Minor oversimplification but let's be real that's what weight loss boils down to.
Optimistic · · New Paltz · Joined Aug 2007 · Points: 450
divnamite wrote:According to the book, a zone 1 work out less than 2 hour can be recovered within 12-24 hours, a zone 1 workout longer than 2 hours requires 24-48 hours for recovery. High intensity workout requires up to 2-3 full days. While recovery time is individual dependant, the authors feel the number is very accurate. Zone 1 and zone 4 workout in a day is out of the question in this book. Zone 1 (1-2 hours)and Zone 1 (1 hour) is probably ok assuming you do one in the morning, and one at night. This is one of the reasons I asked about two-a-day for zone 1 for higher volume days.
Thanks divnamite... Was more picturing recovering from BOTH types of workout at the same time, on the theory that one was focused on the fast-twitch fibers and one was focused on the slow-twitch.

That 2-3 day recovery from the HIIT is sounding right to me (and my legs!)...it may be that even one HIIT workout per week would be enough to keep the metabolism elevated, though. Quite anectdotally, however, the introduction of HIIT does appear to have broken the plateau I'd encountered in my diet/exercise regime (ie, similar amount of exercise, same calorie intake, resumption of weight loss that had stalled for about 2 weeks), so I'm going to keep it up!
jaredj · · Unknown Hometown · Joined Jan 2013 · Points: 165
Optimistic wrote:Question: does anyone know if there would be an inherent problem with doing this Zone 4-5 sprint work on the same day as a Zone 1 run? I've tried doing the sprints on the same day as the strength training and that definitely had a wrong/overtraining feel to it, whether I did the sprints first or the strength first.
The sprint work they recommend is for power / speed - all out efforts for 8-10sec. Like you, I thought about stacking these on the end of an easy aerobic workout for convenience. I tried it a couple of times, and felt like I wasn't able to get the quality out of the sprints. They're supposed to be about maximal efforts for recruitment. If you partially fatigue yourself with the earlier workout, then you won't get the same effect. What you're training by stacking these is your "tired sprint" - how hard you can go after you've taken something out of your legs.

I then experimented with stacking the sprints on a strength training day after doing some single leg work (Curtis Ps and lunges) and felt like I was able to do better efforts, certainly better than appending them to the aerobic workouts. My recollection from the book is that they characterize this sprint work as a power / strength alternative; as such I think it makes more sense trying to do them on days you're doing strength work. Perhaps trim your strength work a little bit (e.g. instead of trying 2 separate leg strength exercises plus sprints, just one leg strength exercise and sprints?).

As for weight loss via sprints, I think it's important to think carefully here. The claim made about HIIT and the like is that it raises your metabolism for the day so you burn more calories and can get skinnier. Which is probably true. But it feels like (in my experience) I burn more calories with the straight up Zone 1 / 2 work (as measured by my appetite that day). Like posted earlier, weight loss is generally more about calorie restriction and food choices; learning to eat until one is not hungry as opposed to eating until one is full.
Optimistic · · New Paltz · Joined Aug 2007 · Points: 450
Ryan Watts wrote: Are you doing the sprints *just* for weight loss? If so then just eat less. Or do a longer zone 1 run or other training to burn cals. Calories in vs. calories out. Minor oversimplification but let's be real that's what weight loss boils down to.
I've actually been on a calorie-restricted diet for about 6 weeks. As I mentioned above, it had been going really well for several weeks and then hit a plateau, which suggested to me that I had gotten into a "fasted" state where the metabolism slows down quite a bit in order to squeeze every possible calorie out of the available intake. HIIT is felt to be a way to counter this fasted response and raise the metabolism.

Prior to the HIIT/Zone 1 combo, the exercise was basically all Zone 3 (bike and treadmill) alternating with Recovery/Zone 1-ish (bouldering at the gym). Related or not, when the HIIT started, the weight loss plateau ended, with no change in caloric intake. Just sayin'.
Optimistic · · New Paltz · Joined Aug 2007 · Points: 450
jaredj wrote: The sprint work they recommend is for power / speed - all out efforts for 8-10sec. Like you, I thought about stacking these on the end of an easy aerobic workout for convenience. I tried it a couple of times, and felt like I wasn't able to get the quality out of the sprints. They're supposed to be about maximal efforts for recruitment. If you partially fatigue yourself with the earlier workout, then you won't get the same effect. What you're training by stacking these is your "tired sprint" - how hard you can go after you've taken something out of your legs. I then experimented with stacking the sprints on a strength training day after doing some single leg work (Curtis Ps and lunges) and felt like I was able to do better efforts, certainly better than appending them to the aerobic workouts. My recollection from the book is that they characterize this sprint work as a power / strength alternative; as such I think it makes more sense trying to do them on days you're doing strength work. Perhaps trim your strength work a little bit (e.g. instead of trying 2 separate leg strength exercises plus sprints, just one leg strength exercise and sprints?). As for weight loss via sprints, I think it's important to think carefully here. The claim made about HIIT and the like is that it raises your metabolism for the day so you burn more calories and can get skinnier. Which is probably true. But it feels like (in my experience) I burn more calories with the straight up Zone 1 / 2 work (as measured by my appetite that day). Like posted earlier, weight loss is generally more about calorie restriction and food choices; learning to eat until one is not hungry as opposed to eating until one is full.
Good point about the not hungry vs full...the calorie regime I am using (Noom smartphone app) combined with nearly eliminating sweets and alcohol rarely leaves me hungry and is working quite well.

No question at all, as you say, that calorie restriction is king for weight loss, the exercise will do nothing without control of the diet.

Zone 1 running through the woods is also a hell of a lot more fun than a sprint workout on a treadmill.

I'm in a funny situation on my leg strength work, it's actually some quite intense physical therapy for my knees, using 1-legged squats with my hangboard pulley to off-load some weight...I have to do those 3x/wk so I can't really get rid of that... I think just dropping the sprint to 1x/wk may be the answer...this all goes back to the book's comments about being your own coach: lots of adjustments to make for your individual setup and goals.
divnamite · · New York, NY · Joined Aug 2007 · Points: 90
Optimistic wrote: I'm in a funny situation on my leg strength work, it's actually some quite intense physical therapy for my knees, using 1-legged squats with my hangboard pulley to off-load some weight...I have to do those 3x/wk so I can't really get rid of that... I think just dropping the sprint to 1x/wk may be the answer...this all goes back to the book's comments about being your own coach: lots of adjustments to make for your individual setup and goals.
Wait, you are doing physical therapy on your knees right now and you are doing long runs?
Optimistic · · New Paltz · Joined Aug 2007 · Points: 450
divnamite wrote: Wait, you are doing physical therapy on your knees right now and you are doing long runs?
Yep! Cleared to do so by my therapist, and they are improving... It's not a joint problem, it's a patellar tendinitis. Don't worry, I'm watching it extremely carefully, and like I said, it's getting better, not worse!

But you're right to do a double-take, I agree!
Guideline #1: Don't be a jerk.

Mountaineering
Post a Reply to "New Alpinism"

Log In to Reply

Join the Community

Create your FREE account today!
Already have an account? Login to close this notice.

Get Started.