![]() |
|
|||||||
| Register | FAQ | Members List | Calendar | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read |
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
|
I was thinking of using thrusters and push-ups in tabata style for the short interval portion of SFP 2.0.
The typical tabata protocol is 20secs of work followed by 10secs rest for 8 rounds. This is a total of 4min. Both SFP1.0 and 2.0 have an interval period of 5-10 min. Should the rounds then be increased to 10 for each exercies in order to reach to 5-10min mark? Also, I understand that SFP1.0 and 2.0 are more taxing. Is there a specific caloric deficit or level of carb intake wherein SFP1.0 and 2.0 are no longer appropriate/safe? Last edited by nadfubach : 09-12-2008 at 01:20 PM. |
|
#2
|
|||
|
|||
|
i did SFP 2.0 today using tabata method for the short interval portion. i used pushups, thrusters, and kettle bell swings, alternating between the three for 20 seconds, resting 10 for a total of 10 min(ie a set of pushups, then a set of thrusters, then a set of kelltle bell swings). it was definitely tough.
still curious about the max caloric defict recommended for adequate recovery using this method. |
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
This isn't to say what you did wasn't effective, it probably was. But it's impossible to peform Tabata intervals for 10 minutes. That would be like running a sub 9-sec 100 meters. Last edited by patriots2 : 09-13-2008 at 06:22 PM. Reason: poor spelling |
|
#4
|
||||
|
||||
|
moderate daily deficit, 20-25% from maintenance.
|
|
#5
|
|||
|
|||
|
okay. thankyou.
|
|
#6
|
|||
|
|||
|
So how did this work out ? Did you continue using kettlebells for the interval portion ?
|
|
#7
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
i only used this method once as i got the impression i wasn't really doing it as effectively as i could/should have been. i didn't use kettlebells either. i just used a dumbbell. |
|
#8
|
||||
|
||||
|
The original tabata protocol was done on a bike for a reason
All of the internet bastardizations using KB's, front squats and body weight stuff are completely idiotic. There is no posible way to achieve the intensities used in the original study and just 'doing 20 seconds hard/10 seconds easy' is NOT tabata |
|
#9
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
|
|
#10
|
||||
|
||||
|
Page 81 in the book
|
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|