Ok, this post is a cheap shot. Its only real purpose is to alleviate my conscience. It does that by offering me the comfort of knowing that the month of November did not really go by without me posting a single entry here. Is that lame, or what?
Oh well. We're taking a break from fitness at the moment--10 days worth. Cycling now is pretty much limited to short sessions on the stationary bikes. But we have inaugurated a new upper-body strength-training routine, one we developed with the help of a relative who has some experience in this area.
I call the routine "JIM," in honor of my relative, and will be posting more about it soon.
Wednesday, November 30, 2011
Thursday, October 6, 2011
Back from the short tour
We got back from our short, independent (independent insofar as we did not join any group, but planned and rode the whole thing by ourselves) fall tour. We hit some really brutal hills in certain spots, which provided as much of a workout as an old body like this can handle: those were some serious intervals. Averaged about 50-55 miles a day. So we got in some good exercise and probably our last long mileage of the year--probably around 250 miles total over 5 days.
Kinda sad to call it quits for the year, but we had more than our share of mechanical issues during this trip. That made us a little less reluctant to end this one.
Thinking now of getting a different bike for touring--a recumbent tandem trike (something along the lines of what's in the photo above). They're pretty pricey, but it seems like having such a machine would resolve several issues we've faced.
Back to strength training tomorrow.
Kinda sad to call it quits for the year, but we had more than our share of mechanical issues during this trip. That made us a little less reluctant to end this one.
Back to strength training tomorrow.
Tuesday, September 20, 2011
An uninformed assessment of CrossFit
CrossFit, a fairly popular fitness regimen, came up in a discussion with a relative the other day and I thought it would provide a good opportunity for a blog entry. The relative mentioned that he did not approve of CrossFit as a fitness regimen, which got me thinking about why I have not used it.
I should point out to begin with that I call this assessment "uninformed" because I have never tried CrossFit: my only exposure to it thus far has been through reading about it or about the exploits of those who have tried or are using it. Furthermore, I have no formal training in the fitness field and, as merely a casual fitness practitioner, am far from being in a position to offer anything approaching an authoritative appraisal of CrossFit--even if at a distance. I nonetheless do hold that I have perfectly valid reasons for not using it, though those reasons are quite unique to me and my own philosophy and situation. Your mileage may vary. Thus, the following.
I learned about CrossFit some years ago, when I was initially planning out my current fitness regime. Though it had some attractive features--namely the fact that the regime makes use of both calisthenics and weights--I quickly ruled it out as viable option for me.
One of the main reasons I decided against using it was because it incorporates lower-body exercises--not a bad thing in and of itself, of course, just bad for me because, as I've written previously, I get all the lower-body exercise I need and want from bicycling. Taking on other lower-body exercises would be apt to interfere with my cycling endeavors, and is therefore something I do not want or intend to do.
And, as I am not looking for lower-body exercises other than cycling, I am also not looking for other forms of aerobic activity than cycling. So, the aerobic activities that the CrossFit program entails were also something that holds no interest for me: I get all the aerobic conditioning I need and want from bicycling.
Another major reason I did not opt to get involved in this form of fitness is convenience: there is no CrossFit affiliate anywhere near where I live, so in order to participate in a group setting, I would have to drive (or perhaps bike?) some distance, and in my pragmatic considerations, having to drive anywhere in order to participate in fitness activities is a non sequitur: if one were to walk, run, cycle, or use some other means of self-propulsion to get there, wouldn't that serve as the only activity needed to attain fitness? Perhaps if there were an affiliate within a short walking distance I would have tried CrossFit. But barring that scenario it is simply quite impracticable for me.
And my reasons for not undertaking CrossFit on my own as opposed to at an affiliate, are also pragmatic: I could only see myself doing CrossFit at an affiliate because I do not own, nor do I wish to invest in, the equipment required to execute the routines. I don't have an olympic weight set and certainly don't want to purchase and store one, and I don't see how a number of the exercises they prescribe (squats, deadlifts) could be done without one. So Crossfit was ruled out for me on those scores as well.
Finally, I should point out that CrossFit seems to be a community-centered fitness regimen. In other words, it cultivates and seems heavily reliant on, a community of exercise enthusiasts who urge along one another. Now I certainly don't intend to demean communal fitness programs: I can see many advantages to having exercise partners and a social context for fitness endeavors. But for me this is not needed. I have an exercise partner and to date, we have been all we both need for inspiration to continue exercising. I certainly can't fault anyone who does not have a good exercise partner from seeking out one or more, but for me it is simply not needed. So, CrossFit loses on that score for my purposes as well.
This is a concise synopsis of my own rationale for foregoing the CrossFit regimen. These things having been said, I can certainly see some virtues in the program. First and foremost among these is undoubtedly the comradery aspect of the program: having a fitness partner or partners can be a huge incentive to, if not beginning an exercise regimen, certainly to sustaining one. The incorporation of body-weight exercises and more calisthenic-oriented ones such as rowing, as well as the wide selection of exercises they prescribe, seems also a big plus in my view (variation) even though, as I said, the lower-body exercises are a detraction for me.
None of the reasons I list as obstacles to involvement in CrossFit are likely to apply as they do in my circumstance to the situations of others. So this review, while spelling out what I consider to be valid and substantial reasons for not getting involved in CrossFit, will not likely serve as a deterrent for many who are considering taking up this regimen. But it may, at the least, provide some food for thought for those casting about for a fitness regimen and may thus, ultimately, be of service to someone. And this is, in part, why I offer my thoughts on the matter.
There you have my uninformed assessment of CrossFit.
I should point out to begin with that I call this assessment "uninformed" because I have never tried CrossFit: my only exposure to it thus far has been through reading about it or about the exploits of those who have tried or are using it. Furthermore, I have no formal training in the fitness field and, as merely a casual fitness practitioner, am far from being in a position to offer anything approaching an authoritative appraisal of CrossFit--even if at a distance. I nonetheless do hold that I have perfectly valid reasons for not using it, though those reasons are quite unique to me and my own philosophy and situation. Your mileage may vary. Thus, the following.I learned about CrossFit some years ago, when I was initially planning out my current fitness regime. Though it had some attractive features--namely the fact that the regime makes use of both calisthenics and weights--I quickly ruled it out as viable option for me.
One of the main reasons I decided against using it was because it incorporates lower-body exercises--not a bad thing in and of itself, of course, just bad for me because, as I've written previously, I get all the lower-body exercise I need and want from bicycling. Taking on other lower-body exercises would be apt to interfere with my cycling endeavors, and is therefore something I do not want or intend to do.
And, as I am not looking for lower-body exercises other than cycling, I am also not looking for other forms of aerobic activity than cycling. So, the aerobic activities that the CrossFit program entails were also something that holds no interest for me: I get all the aerobic conditioning I need and want from bicycling.
Another major reason I did not opt to get involved in this form of fitness is convenience: there is no CrossFit affiliate anywhere near where I live, so in order to participate in a group setting, I would have to drive (or perhaps bike?) some distance, and in my pragmatic considerations, having to drive anywhere in order to participate in fitness activities is a non sequitur: if one were to walk, run, cycle, or use some other means of self-propulsion to get there, wouldn't that serve as the only activity needed to attain fitness? Perhaps if there were an affiliate within a short walking distance I would have tried CrossFit. But barring that scenario it is simply quite impracticable for me.
And my reasons for not undertaking CrossFit on my own as opposed to at an affiliate, are also pragmatic: I could only see myself doing CrossFit at an affiliate because I do not own, nor do I wish to invest in, the equipment required to execute the routines. I don't have an olympic weight set and certainly don't want to purchase and store one, and I don't see how a number of the exercises they prescribe (squats, deadlifts) could be done without one. So Crossfit was ruled out for me on those scores as well.
Finally, I should point out that CrossFit seems to be a community-centered fitness regimen. In other words, it cultivates and seems heavily reliant on, a community of exercise enthusiasts who urge along one another. Now I certainly don't intend to demean communal fitness programs: I can see many advantages to having exercise partners and a social context for fitness endeavors. But for me this is not needed. I have an exercise partner and to date, we have been all we both need for inspiration to continue exercising. I certainly can't fault anyone who does not have a good exercise partner from seeking out one or more, but for me it is simply not needed. So, CrossFit loses on that score for my purposes as well.
This is a concise synopsis of my own rationale for foregoing the CrossFit regimen. These things having been said, I can certainly see some virtues in the program. First and foremost among these is undoubtedly the comradery aspect of the program: having a fitness partner or partners can be a huge incentive to, if not beginning an exercise regimen, certainly to sustaining one. The incorporation of body-weight exercises and more calisthenic-oriented ones such as rowing, as well as the wide selection of exercises they prescribe, seems also a big plus in my view (variation) even though, as I said, the lower-body exercises are a detraction for me.
None of the reasons I list as obstacles to involvement in CrossFit are likely to apply as they do in my circumstance to the situations of others. So this review, while spelling out what I consider to be valid and substantial reasons for not getting involved in CrossFit, will not likely serve as a deterrent for many who are considering taking up this regimen. But it may, at the least, provide some food for thought for those casting about for a fitness regimen and may thus, ultimately, be of service to someone. And this is, in part, why I offer my thoughts on the matter.
There you have my uninformed assessment of CrossFit.
Monday, September 12, 2011
Bike tour aftermath
In an attempt to rein in procrastination, I need to get this entry out of the way. It's been way too long since I posted anything here, yet things keep coming up that I want to write about and I keep not writing. So, here's to overcoming writer's block and procrastination.
The tour ended some time ago and it was a joy for us. Well, if you subtract getting rained on then cold afterward, two flat tires, searing heat, harsh headwinds, etc. But despite those things it was a joy. Why? Because part of the reward from bicycle touring is overcoming hardships and getting to your destination despite obstacles. But more on that later.
We did over 500 miles in about 10 days. And at the end of it, we were sad that we had to stop.
Well, we didn't actually stop altogether. We, of course, continue riding. We're in training now, in fact, for another, shorter, tour--just 5 days this time.
And the tour had its health benefits. My blood pressure after we got back was almost ideal: I saw 119 over 72 a couple of days after we finished. That's without any medicine. But it's since then gone up a bit.
I want more . . .
We continue our upper-body strength training--we're still in the arm toner phase. I did have to leave town for 10 days, so we took one of our breaks from fitness during that interval, not doing any cycling or strength training. And we're fine with that.
So there. I've broken the procrastination cycle and hopefully preempted writer's block.
The tour ended some time ago and it was a joy for us. Well, if you subtract getting rained on then cold afterward, two flat tires, searing heat, harsh headwinds, etc. But despite those things it was a joy. Why? Because part of the reward from bicycle touring is overcoming hardships and getting to your destination despite obstacles. But more on that later.
We did over 500 miles in about 10 days. And at the end of it, we were sad that we had to stop.
Well, we didn't actually stop altogether. We, of course, continue riding. We're in training now, in fact, for another, shorter, tour--just 5 days this time.
And the tour had its health benefits. My blood pressure after we got back was almost ideal: I saw 119 over 72 a couple of days after we finished. That's without any medicine. But it's since then gone up a bit.
I want more . . .
We continue our upper-body strength training--we're still in the arm toner phase. I did have to leave town for 10 days, so we took one of our breaks from fitness during that interval, not doing any cycling or strength training. And we're fine with that.
So there. I've broken the procrastination cycle and hopefully preempted writer's block.
Sunday, July 17, 2011
Preparations for the upcoming bike tour
That's the headline for at least the last month. We've been training for our upcoming tour, which starts toward the end of the month.
We put in just short of 200 miles a couple of weekends ago. That was the culmination of our training. We're now tapering off to get ourselves rested up prior to the start.
So we've put in lots of miles these weeks. We've been riding in the heat so as to try and acclimatize ourselves to conditions we may be facing while on the road. And we'll still be putting in miles in the coming days, though shorter ones.
We've slacked off a bit here and there on our upper-body strength training. For example we missed doing our last session. And prior to that we did some half sessions, i.e., we did only part of the arm toner routine we're using at this point in the year.
But that happens. Sometimes the session has to get shortened or canceled. In this case, we're cutting back a bit on upper-body work so as to focus more on cycling. But in the fall/winter months it ends up that our hardest workouts are usually the upper-body sessions, while cycling (stationary bikes) is less intense.
This is our fitness philosophy. Sometimes you miss workout sessions, and that's ok. Sometimes one form of fitness overshadows another, and that's ok too. Flexibility in our fitness pursuits is what we're after.
We put in just short of 200 miles a couple of weekends ago. That was the culmination of our training. We're now tapering off to get ourselves rested up prior to the start.
So we've put in lots of miles these weeks. We've been riding in the heat so as to try and acclimatize ourselves to conditions we may be facing while on the road. And we'll still be putting in miles in the coming days, though shorter ones.
We've slacked off a bit here and there on our upper-body strength training. For example we missed doing our last session. And prior to that we did some half sessions, i.e., we did only part of the arm toner routine we're using at this point in the year.
But that happens. Sometimes the session has to get shortened or canceled. In this case, we're cutting back a bit on upper-body work so as to focus more on cycling. But in the fall/winter months it ends up that our hardest workouts are usually the upper-body sessions, while cycling (stationary bikes) is less intense.
This is our fitness philosophy. Sometimes you miss workout sessions, and that's ok. Sometimes one form of fitness overshadows another, and that's ok too. Flexibility in our fitness pursuits is what we're after.
Wednesday, June 22, 2011
It's time to celebrate!
Ok, there's a bit of hyperbole in the title of today's entry. You see, nothing particularly eventful happened today. Or yesterday. Or the day before. Or, probably, tomorrow or the next day. So, what's to celebrate about?
Well, it occurred to me the other day as I was thinking about what I'm doing fitness-wise and how long it would last. Won't I get bored with it at some point, won't it become a burden? Will I give up this regular fitness regime and go back to an active, as opposed to a very active, lifestyle? I hope not. I've sustained this regime for some time now, and I'm trying to organize things such that it can be sustained indefinitely--as long as I'm still alive and physically capable.
And that's what got me thinking about celebrating. I should be celebrating, I thought to myself, the fact that I've sustained my current regular fitness regime for over 3 years now. It's an accomplishment, and one I should not be taking lightly. Perhaps I could think of today as my 39th (month) anniversary of staying on a regular, year-round exercise regimen. Hooray for me! Keep up the good work!
On other fronts, I'm experimenting with electric assist for my bike--this in the hope that it will facilitate some long-distance bicycle touring such as I did in my younger years. "What!?" you may say, "you're talking electric wheels on a fitness site?!" All I can say in response now is that I'll have more to say about that in a subsequent entry and that, yes, I will address how it has/will impact my fitness endeavors--not a whole lot, as you will see.
And I continue looking out for new fitness routines to augment our upper-body strength training regimen. Nothing major to report on that front at the moment, but when something newsworthy develops I'll post about it here.
Wednesday, June 8, 2011
Further thoughts on workout variation
I ran across an article on yahoo yesterday entitled "The 5 Biggest Exercise Myths" that gave me some further ideas about workout variation. I just want to make a sort of mental note about the substance of the article here. But before doing that, a bit of review on the need for variation in workouts as well as an update on how my current experiment with variation is going. Oh, and, incidentally, the article can be found here.
So, why variation in workouts? As I've observed previously, it's to offset monotony. Sort of a mental trick to counteract some of the trudgery that can go along with engaging in fitness regularly. The theory is, keep things changing in order to sustain interest and perhaps to help boost morale. Sounds simple enough, doesn't it?
My own approach to varying things centered first and foremost on finding a few "canned routines." In layman's parlance this means finding a few exercise DVD's that suit my needs (upper-body strength training) that I can follow along with.
Well, we're in about our third year of working with those DVD's. So, though we've got some basic variety, I'm now looking into ways to vary things yet a bit more.
I recently decided that, for most of any given "phase" of our fitness cycle, I should be varying things by working out at a lower intensity. There should be a few sessions in each phase when I really go all out, but most sessions should be done at a lower intensity. I'm experimenting with that now.
And it's going ok. I can say it's refreshing to not have to feel that I'm pushing to my maximum all the time. It has its challenges but so far seems to be giving the desired effect.
One thing I will note here though is that I was initially thinking of doing high-intensity sessions toward the end of a given phase, while lately I've decided it's probably better to do the high intensity sessions at the beginning. But I may further change things based on what's said in the article I referenced at the beginning of this entry.
Before I address that issue though, I need to provide an overview of the article. Thus the following. It's a short piece that challenges some fitness "myths." What this means in the main is that it questions numerical standards such as the 10-repetition, 3-set formulas. Its not very technical and the alternate suggestions they make do seem appealing to me.
For example, the following excerpt:
That gets the variation gears working yet further in my mind. I don't intend to do 3 workouts per week, but it does seem as though I can adapt these directives in some way into my strength-training routines.
I could, for example, try to use heavier weights and fewer repetitions--and possibly more sets--during certain workouts. It doesn't seem, as I think of it now, that this is something I need to plan into my annual fitness schedule, but more like something that could be introduced more or less spontaneously. But I am still considering what are the possibilities for my purposes.
I should mention in closing that the article is tackling what could be considered body-building myths. In other words, they're saying that the received wisdom among body-builders is not necessarily going to build muscles as large or as quickly as has been assumed.
Which makes what's being said somewhat irrelevant to me, since I'm not trying to build bigger muscles. That said, the workout variation potential the article offers is definitely interesting. So I figure following some of the advice they give--despite the fact that I in no way, shape, or form, am interested in body-building-- certainly can't hurt me. It can help me introduce some further variation into my regimen and, though I don't vehemently opposing increasing the size of my muscles, I can't say that, if they did grow a bit further, I'd be terribly disappointed.
So, it's got me thinking. I'll be posting again on this topic once I decide how I can actually use the information I've found.
So, why variation in workouts? As I've observed previously, it's to offset monotony. Sort of a mental trick to counteract some of the trudgery that can go along with engaging in fitness regularly. The theory is, keep things changing in order to sustain interest and perhaps to help boost morale. Sounds simple enough, doesn't it?
My own approach to varying things centered first and foremost on finding a few "canned routines." In layman's parlance this means finding a few exercise DVD's that suit my needs (upper-body strength training) that I can follow along with.
Well, we're in about our third year of working with those DVD's. So, though we've got some basic variety, I'm now looking into ways to vary things yet a bit more.
I recently decided that, for most of any given "phase" of our fitness cycle, I should be varying things by working out at a lower intensity. There should be a few sessions in each phase when I really go all out, but most sessions should be done at a lower intensity. I'm experimenting with that now.
And it's going ok. I can say it's refreshing to not have to feel that I'm pushing to my maximum all the time. It has its challenges but so far seems to be giving the desired effect.
One thing I will note here though is that I was initially thinking of doing high-intensity sessions toward the end of a given phase, while lately I've decided it's probably better to do the high intensity sessions at the beginning. But I may further change things based on what's said in the article I referenced at the beginning of this entry.
Before I address that issue though, I need to provide an overview of the article. Thus the following. It's a short piece that challenges some fitness "myths." What this means in the main is that it questions numerical standards such as the 10-repetition, 3-set formulas. Its not very technical and the alternate suggestions they make do seem appealing to me.
For example, the following excerpt:
MYTH #1: DO 8 TO 12 REPETITIONS
The claim: It's the
optimal repetition range for building muscle.The origin: In 1954,
Ian MacQueen, M.D., an English surgeon and competitive bodybuilder, published a scientific paper in which he recommended a moderately high number of repetitions for muscle growth.The truth: This approach places muscles under a medium amount of tension for a medium amount of time—it's basically The Neither Here Nor There Workout.
Here's the deal: Higher tension—a.k.a. heavier weights—induces the type of muscle growth in which the muscle fibers grow larger, leading to the best gains in strength; longer tension time, on the other hand, boosts muscle size by increasing the energy-producing structures around the fibers, improving muscular endurance. The classic prescription of 8 to 12 repetitions strikes a balance between the two. But by using that scheme all the time, you miss out on the greater tension levels that come with heavier weights and fewer repetitions, and the longer tension time achieved with lighter weights and higher repetitions.
The new standard:
Vary your repetition range—adjusting the weights accordingly—so that you stimulate every type of muscle growth. Try this method for a month, performing three full-body sessions a week: Do five repetitions per set in your first workout, 10 reps per set in your second workout, and 15 per set in your third workout.
That gets the variation gears working yet further in my mind. I don't intend to do 3 workouts per week, but it does seem as though I can adapt these directives in some way into my strength-training routines.
I could, for example, try to use heavier weights and fewer repetitions--and possibly more sets--during certain workouts. It doesn't seem, as I think of it now, that this is something I need to plan into my annual fitness schedule, but more like something that could be introduced more or less spontaneously. But I am still considering what are the possibilities for my purposes.
I should mention in closing that the article is tackling what could be considered body-building myths. In other words, they're saying that the received wisdom among body-builders is not necessarily going to build muscles as large or as quickly as has been assumed.
Which makes what's being said somewhat irrelevant to me, since I'm not trying to build bigger muscles. That said, the workout variation potential the article offers is definitely interesting. So I figure following some of the advice they give--despite the fact that I in no way, shape, or form, am interested in body-building-- certainly can't hurt me. It can help me introduce some further variation into my regimen and, though I don't vehemently opposing increasing the size of my muscles, I can't say that, if they did grow a bit further, I'd be terribly disappointed.
So, it's got me thinking. I'll be posting again on this topic once I decide how I can actually use the information I've found.
Sunday, May 29, 2011
About my diet
I haven't posted much of anything here about my diet thus far. The details of my eating habits are not, I think, crucial to understanding my own health or even the more general topic of this blog, i.e., health and fitness at age 50 and beyond.
Still, in the interest of full disclosure, I feel I should offer a few comments about my diet. Thus, the following.
I have been what might be most concisely termed an ovo-lacto-pesco vegetarian for many years--going on 25 now, actually. So in many respects I've been for the most part observing a pretty healthy diet for quite some time.
In case it's not apparent from the terms I've used to describe the diet concisely, what they mean is that I do not eat red meats and poultry, though I do incorporate other animal products into my diet--namely eggs (the ovo part), milk and dairy (the lacto part) and fish (the pesco part). I must observe that lately, in an attempt to address some digestive issues, I've cut way back on the dairy part of the diet, so I'm presently eating very little in the way of lactose.
My diet does vary during the year to some extent, there having been periods when I've followed more what might be called a vegan diet, i.e., one with virtually no animal products. But I have, with advancing age, been trying to vary the diet less and less and trying to and eat more of the same types of things throughout the year
I did not actually adopt this diet for any kind of health reasons--though I do think it has had much to do with my steady weight over the years. Probably it has played a key role in the pretty low cholesterol readings I've had as well. But that was no my intention when I started eating the way I do.
No, I actually eat this way for religious reasons. I led a fairly intense religious life for some years, and in the setting where I did that, an ovo-lacto-pesco vegetarian diet was what we followed. Though I left that life quite a few years ago, I continued following the eating prescriptions even down to today.
I have to say that I really do not recall missing red meat in my diet. Perhaps toward the beginning I had an occasional craving for red meat--I just don't remember. But I can say with confidence now that I don't feel any sort of craving for meat. I have tried a bit of meat here and there during the last quarter century, just to see what it tastes like again. But I've had no desire in those instances to go back to eating it.
That said, I am a fairly ruthless pragmatist. So, if I decided that red meat would be a good thing to have in my diet, I'd have no qualms about eating it. But so far--low-carb and paleo diet trends notwithstanding--I just haven't seen any compelling reason to go back to it. But I am keeping an open mind, and if I thought a change in diet would address some of my chronic health problems, I'd definitely be amenable to some experimentation.
That said, I wonder as I write this what my health and physique might be like now had I not given up eating red meat all those years ago? Hard to say. But I do feel like I must assign some degree of credit, given what I believe to be my unusually trim and athletic build for a man my age, to the dietary rules I've followed for the last two decades and more.
So, there you have it. If this entry will be of help to someone pondering their dietary habits, I'll be happy. If anyone has disagreements to voice or advice to offer, please feel free.
Still, in the interest of full disclosure, I feel I should offer a few comments about my diet. Thus, the following.
I have been what might be most concisely termed an ovo-lacto-pesco vegetarian for many years--going on 25 now, actually. So in many respects I've been for the most part observing a pretty healthy diet for quite some time.
In case it's not apparent from the terms I've used to describe the diet concisely, what they mean is that I do not eat red meats and poultry, though I do incorporate other animal products into my diet--namely eggs (the ovo part), milk and dairy (the lacto part) and fish (the pesco part). I must observe that lately, in an attempt to address some digestive issues, I've cut way back on the dairy part of the diet, so I'm presently eating very little in the way of lactose.
My diet does vary during the year to some extent, there having been periods when I've followed more what might be called a vegan diet, i.e., one with virtually no animal products. But I have, with advancing age, been trying to vary the diet less and less and trying to and eat more of the same types of things throughout the year
I did not actually adopt this diet for any kind of health reasons--though I do think it has had much to do with my steady weight over the years. Probably it has played a key role in the pretty low cholesterol readings I've had as well. But that was no my intention when I started eating the way I do.
No, I actually eat this way for religious reasons. I led a fairly intense religious life for some years, and in the setting where I did that, an ovo-lacto-pesco vegetarian diet was what we followed. Though I left that life quite a few years ago, I continued following the eating prescriptions even down to today.
I have to say that I really do not recall missing red meat in my diet. Perhaps toward the beginning I had an occasional craving for red meat--I just don't remember. But I can say with confidence now that I don't feel any sort of craving for meat. I have tried a bit of meat here and there during the last quarter century, just to see what it tastes like again. But I've had no desire in those instances to go back to eating it.
That said, I am a fairly ruthless pragmatist. So, if I decided that red meat would be a good thing to have in my diet, I'd have no qualms about eating it. But so far--low-carb and paleo diet trends notwithstanding--I just haven't seen any compelling reason to go back to it. But I am keeping an open mind, and if I thought a change in diet would address some of my chronic health problems, I'd definitely be amenable to some experimentation.
That said, I wonder as I write this what my health and physique might be like now had I not given up eating red meat all those years ago? Hard to say. But I do feel like I must assign some degree of credit, given what I believe to be my unusually trim and athletic build for a man my age, to the dietary rules I've followed for the last two decades and more.
So, there you have it. If this entry will be of help to someone pondering their dietary habits, I'll be happy. If anyone has disagreements to voice or advice to offer, please feel free.
Wednesday, May 18, 2011
A new evolution in our fitness regime: using lists
This is sort of another ho-hum contribution. But I want to write about it anyway in case it may benefit anyone else. It will also help me to remember the stages of progression in our fitness pursuits.
Lists. Yes, I've been hoping for some time now to get away from the DVD's we're using for our strength-training sessions and simply to work from a list of exercises. Why?
Part of the reason for this is that I get tired of watching--and hearing--the same thing over, and over, and over, and over (etc.) again. But I also see it as a small step in progressing beyond canned fitness routines to something I devise myself. We've now made some actual steps in that direction.
For now, I've simply made lists of the exercises, in the order in which they occur, from the DVD's we use. Not too creative, but it's a first step. So, rather than popping in, for example, the Arm Toner DVD when doing our strength training during the Arm Toner phase, we just consult a list of the exercises done on the DVD as we go through the routine.
There are a few reasons--aside from the fact that I think it will help us to progress in our fitness undertakings--this has turned out to be a good approach. One is that we can play our own music while exercising. That's a relief after listening over and over again to what's being said on the DVD's (and we even get in a little extra exercise by dancing during "stretch breaks" :) ).
But, as I said, the main reason we're doing things this way now is to try and progress closer to a point when we can, by picking and choosing from exercises we've done, design our own routines. Once we're able to do that, we will likely have minimized the drudgery that usually accompanies regular fitness pursuits--also called, not surprisingly, "routines."
We'll undoubtedly still pop in, and work out along with , a DVD from time to time. That will help us to ensure we're using proper form. But I assume we may also notice nuances in the routines that had escaped our notice with repeated viewing.
In any case, I'll be offering updates on how things are going with our new approach involving lists. Stay tuned for those.
Friday, May 13, 2011
The challenge of low-intensity workouts
The title probably sounds a bit self-contradictory. But it's accurate--at least in my experience so far.
What do I mean? Well, this entry is a follow-up to my last entry, where I discussed a new experiment I'm trying--one in which I'll be doing most upper-body strength training sessions within a given phase at a low intensity, while doing just a few sessions at the end of the phase at full intensity. I'm hoping thereby, as I said, to introduce some further variation into my workouts.
Ok, so I'm going easy in these last few sessions. What's the challenge in that? Well, I've found it challenging to restrain myself from ramping up the intensity. I start doing reps with the resistance bands and think to myself unconsciously, "this is too easy, I'll have to use less slack next time." As you may have noted from my last entry, that's the first step toward getting into competition with myself--something I'm trying to avoid during this low-intensity segment of the experiment I'm doing during this phase.
So, it takes some conscious effort to ramp down the intensity. It's something I'll probably have to work on continuously.
And it brings up some interesting possibilities. I'm perhaps more engaged in the routines mentally than when I'm just trying to go all out in my efforts. So, what will be the effect--if any--on my efforts when I come to the high-intensity segment of this phase?
Might I be able to break through some barriers that I've confronted thus far while being in full-throttle-mode for most workouts? Might I, for example, be able to do more push-ups than the maximum I've been kind of stuck at for a year or two? Do more reps with a given amount of weight?
I'll have to wait to find out the answers to those questions. And, interesting as those answers will be, I can't say that an answer in the positive is terribly important. As I said, I do this for health reasons, not to win any sort of competition or anything.
But still, it will be interesting to see what are the effects on performance. I am--in addition to trying to maintain god health--out to learn, after all.
I'll be posting results as they become available.
What do I mean? Well, this entry is a follow-up to my last entry, where I discussed a new experiment I'm trying--one in which I'll be doing most upper-body strength training sessions within a given phase at a low intensity, while doing just a few sessions at the end of the phase at full intensity. I'm hoping thereby, as I said, to introduce some further variation into my workouts.
Ok, so I'm going easy in these last few sessions. What's the challenge in that? Well, I've found it challenging to restrain myself from ramping up the intensity. I start doing reps with the resistance bands and think to myself unconsciously, "this is too easy, I'll have to use less slack next time." As you may have noted from my last entry, that's the first step toward getting into competition with myself--something I'm trying to avoid during this low-intensity segment of the experiment I'm doing during this phase.
So, it takes some conscious effort to ramp down the intensity. It's something I'll probably have to work on continuously.
And it brings up some interesting possibilities. I'm perhaps more engaged in the routines mentally than when I'm just trying to go all out in my efforts. So, what will be the effect--if any--on my efforts when I come to the high-intensity segment of this phase?
Might I be able to break through some barriers that I've confronted thus far while being in full-throttle-mode for most workouts? Might I, for example, be able to do more push-ups than the maximum I've been kind of stuck at for a year or two? Do more reps with a given amount of weight?
I'll have to wait to find out the answers to those questions. And, interesting as those answers will be, I can't say that an answer in the positive is terribly important. As I said, I do this for health reasons, not to win any sort of competition or anything.
But still, it will be interesting to see what are the effects on performance. I am--in addition to trying to maintain god health--out to learn, after all.
I'll be posting results as they become available.
Sunday, May 8, 2011
Dullard's revelation: does variation in workout intensity = fitness variety?
It's an enigmatic title, I admit. But I don't think it'll take you long to figure out what I had in mind in formulating it. So please, read on.
I'm slowly coming to grips with the fact that my existence has been a series of moments of intellectual density interspersed with occasional flashes of brilliance. That's a change from, say, 30 years ago, when I might have thought the reverse--viz., a succession of brilliant moments disrupted by occasional bouts of density. And, yes, it's taken me that long to realize the truth of the matter. But I digress.
In this entry I just want to write about a "revelation" I had the other day for introducing further variation into my exercise regimen. And, as I consider how to write about it, I realize that it's something that should have become evident to me some time ago.
Put simply, I've finally figured out that a good way to further vary my regimen is to introduce periods of lessened intensity with periods of heightened intensity. Same exercises, but a slightly different approach. And, as I write these lines, it further occurs to me that we already do this with the staple part of our regimen--the cycling part. Guess I just never thought about it in this way before.
Now, bear in mind that, as I've written previously, I believe that variation in the fitness routine can help us maintain our regimens by breaking up the monotony of doing the same exercises over and over, week after week, and--hopefully--year after year.
What I mean when I mention the role lessened intensity has played in our cycling regimen is that, as readers of this blog (yes, all 0 of you) will be aware, we ride stationary bikes during the part of the year when on-road cycling is not possible. And that we take it a lot easier when doing that than when we ride on the roads. So we have a period of lessened intensity built into the mainstay of our fitness regimen, one that corresponds to cycling season.
And, of course, there have been times when I've taken it easy when doing the upper-body, strength-training component of our regimen--mostly on days when I'm not feeling too well--as well. But I never thought of doing something similar to what we do with respect to cycling when it comes to our strength-training routines, i.e., having periods when we work out with less intensity. Nor did I, for some reason, think of that as a way to introduce further variation into our fitness regimen. But now I have.
So, how comes this revelation? Well, there are a few contributing factors.
Perhaps first and foremost is the fact that we're now going into our 4th year of having a regular, year-round exercise regimen. And we've been using some of the same upper-body routines for some time now--some we've done for 3 or 4 cycles already.
And believe me "muscle confusion" has not worked as advertised by the P90X folks (no great surprise to me). That is to say that the exercises, despite the variation we have over the course of the year, cease to have the sort of impact they used to. No longer do I feel sore for days after a hard workout: no, sometimes when I've gone really hard and am expecting the soreness I used to see, I'm pretty well recovered after only 36 hours or so: not much soreness remains at all.
And I find myself "hitting a wall" as well. For example, it's just as hard for me to do 10 push-ups today as it was a year ago. I'm not gaining much in that department--owing, certainly in some measure, to advancing age.
But at the same time I'm not out to win any push-up contests. So, though I wonder about the seeming lack of progress, I can't say it's something that is especially bothersome.
But this sort of thing can, it must be recognized, detract from morale. The seeming lack of progress can make one wonder whether what they're doing is really worthwhile: haven't we all come to that (faulty) conclusion at some point(s) in our fitness journey(s)?
Then, there's a related issue I confront. I tend to get into a sort of contest with myself, always pushing to outdo some previous mark I've made: a larger number of push-ups, more repetitions with a given amount of weight--that sort of thing. That kind of attitude can further erode morale when the hoped-for results are not quickly attained.
But there is really no contest here. I'm deluding myself to some extent in pretending that there is. I'm certainly not going to enter--much less win--any push-up contests. I'd be blown away by just about anyone who's serious about fitness and is even as little 10 years younger than me. So there's a bit of delusion involved in these imagined competitions.
No, the only thing I'm really aiming to achieve in all these fitness pursuits is a good health. So why the contests? No, I think I need to get away from that mentality more. Being intense at times is good, but being in a competitive mode all the time is not and, in my experience of exercising on my own, is even likely to contribute to burn-out.
So, what's needed to counteract that is to deliberately lessen intensity. At least a certain part of the fitness year as I've conceived of it, should be conducted at a lessened intensity. And I plan on that portion being the majority of the year. Yes, intensity in my upper-body strength training is henceforth to be limited to short intervals during the course of the year--as I'm now conceiving of it, to just several sessions of each the phases into which we divide our annual regimen.
And an added benefit to deliberately lessening intensity of upper-body workouts will be to introduce a bit more variation into our regimen. True, we're doing the same exercises. But my speculation is that lessening intensity during most of the period during which we're doing these exercises is going to make them seem somewhat different. And preliminary experimentation proves this out.
Ok, so that's the theory. Now, how will it be implemented?
As I mentioned, I have a habit of getting into competitions with myself, trying always to push harder and outdo myself--often unsuccessfully. So, how can I get myself to "take it easy" for most of each of the phases into which I've divided my fitness year?
My lone experiment thus far was conducted using a resistance band instead of weights. That way, I had only one resistance level--and not a terribly difficult one at that.
It worked pretty well. There were a couple of logistical issues--mainly related to hairy arms and the bands ripping out hairs when performing certain exercises. But I did find using the band to be a fairly effective way of restraining myself.
Another way to introduce restraint would be, of course, to simply set out only lighter-weight dumbbells for use in a given routine. I'm not sure whether I'll use the resistance band or the lighter weights, but either should be equally effective in lessening the intensity of my workouts.
So I would use that band or those lighter weights for most of a given cycle or phase, then, for a certain number of sessions in that cycle, I'd allow myself to push hard--to get intense--to my heart's content. I haven't decided for how many sessions that should go on, nor have I thought much about at what point during the phase those heightened-intensity sessions should occur. Offhand, I presume something like 6 - 8 sessions per phase, and as I've thought about it thus far, those would probably be grouped together at the end of the phase.
But these are matters I'm still considering. Likely I'll have to experiment a bit to see what works best. But that is probably what I'll try to start off with.
So, stay tuned for my reports on how this new form of variation is working and whether, as it seems to me now, it comprises a worthwhile adjustment to my regimen.
I'm slowly coming to grips with the fact that my existence has been a series of moments of intellectual density interspersed with occasional flashes of brilliance. That's a change from, say, 30 years ago, when I might have thought the reverse--viz., a succession of brilliant moments disrupted by occasional bouts of density. And, yes, it's taken me that long to realize the truth of the matter. But I digress.
In this entry I just want to write about a "revelation" I had the other day for introducing further variation into my exercise regimen. And, as I consider how to write about it, I realize that it's something that should have become evident to me some time ago.
Put simply, I've finally figured out that a good way to further vary my regimen is to introduce periods of lessened intensity with periods of heightened intensity. Same exercises, but a slightly different approach. And, as I write these lines, it further occurs to me that we already do this with the staple part of our regimen--the cycling part. Guess I just never thought about it in this way before.
Now, bear in mind that, as I've written previously, I believe that variation in the fitness routine can help us maintain our regimens by breaking up the monotony of doing the same exercises over and over, week after week, and--hopefully--year after year.
What I mean when I mention the role lessened intensity has played in our cycling regimen is that, as readers of this blog (yes, all 0 of you) will be aware, we ride stationary bikes during the part of the year when on-road cycling is not possible. And that we take it a lot easier when doing that than when we ride on the roads. So we have a period of lessened intensity built into the mainstay of our fitness regimen, one that corresponds to cycling season.
 |
| Ta daaah! |
So, how comes this revelation? Well, there are a few contributing factors.
Perhaps first and foremost is the fact that we're now going into our 4th year of having a regular, year-round exercise regimen. And we've been using some of the same upper-body routines for some time now--some we've done for 3 or 4 cycles already.
And believe me "muscle confusion" has not worked as advertised by the P90X folks (no great surprise to me). That is to say that the exercises, despite the variation we have over the course of the year, cease to have the sort of impact they used to. No longer do I feel sore for days after a hard workout: no, sometimes when I've gone really hard and am expecting the soreness I used to see, I'm pretty well recovered after only 36 hours or so: not much soreness remains at all.
And I find myself "hitting a wall" as well. For example, it's just as hard for me to do 10 push-ups today as it was a year ago. I'm not gaining much in that department--owing, certainly in some measure, to advancing age.
But at the same time I'm not out to win any push-up contests. So, though I wonder about the seeming lack of progress, I can't say it's something that is especially bothersome.
But this sort of thing can, it must be recognized, detract from morale. The seeming lack of progress can make one wonder whether what they're doing is really worthwhile: haven't we all come to that (faulty) conclusion at some point(s) in our fitness journey(s)?
Then, there's a related issue I confront. I tend to get into a sort of contest with myself, always pushing to outdo some previous mark I've made: a larger number of push-ups, more repetitions with a given amount of weight--that sort of thing. That kind of attitude can further erode morale when the hoped-for results are not quickly attained.
But there is really no contest here. I'm deluding myself to some extent in pretending that there is. I'm certainly not going to enter--much less win--any push-up contests. I'd be blown away by just about anyone who's serious about fitness and is even as little 10 years younger than me. So there's a bit of delusion involved in these imagined competitions.
No, the only thing I'm really aiming to achieve in all these fitness pursuits is a good health. So why the contests? No, I think I need to get away from that mentality more. Being intense at times is good, but being in a competitive mode all the time is not and, in my experience of exercising on my own, is even likely to contribute to burn-out.
So, what's needed to counteract that is to deliberately lessen intensity. At least a certain part of the fitness year as I've conceived of it, should be conducted at a lessened intensity. And I plan on that portion being the majority of the year. Yes, intensity in my upper-body strength training is henceforth to be limited to short intervals during the course of the year--as I'm now conceiving of it, to just several sessions of each the phases into which we divide our annual regimen.
And an added benefit to deliberately lessening intensity of upper-body workouts will be to introduce a bit more variation into our regimen. True, we're doing the same exercises. But my speculation is that lessening intensity during most of the period during which we're doing these exercises is going to make them seem somewhat different. And preliminary experimentation proves this out.
Ok, so that's the theory. Now, how will it be implemented?
As I mentioned, I have a habit of getting into competitions with myself, trying always to push harder and outdo myself--often unsuccessfully. So, how can I get myself to "take it easy" for most of each of the phases into which I've divided my fitness year?
My lone experiment thus far was conducted using a resistance band instead of weights. That way, I had only one resistance level--and not a terribly difficult one at that.
It worked pretty well. There were a couple of logistical issues--mainly related to hairy arms and the bands ripping out hairs when performing certain exercises. But I did find using the band to be a fairly effective way of restraining myself.
Another way to introduce restraint would be, of course, to simply set out only lighter-weight dumbbells for use in a given routine. I'm not sure whether I'll use the resistance band or the lighter weights, but either should be equally effective in lessening the intensity of my workouts.
So I would use that band or those lighter weights for most of a given cycle or phase, then, for a certain number of sessions in that cycle, I'd allow myself to push hard--to get intense--to my heart's content. I haven't decided for how many sessions that should go on, nor have I thought much about at what point during the phase those heightened-intensity sessions should occur. Offhand, I presume something like 6 - 8 sessions per phase, and as I've thought about it thus far, those would probably be grouped together at the end of the phase.
But these are matters I'm still considering. Likely I'll have to experiment a bit to see what works best. But that is probably what I'll try to start off with.
So, stay tuned for my reports on how this new form of variation is working and whether, as it seems to me now, it comprises a worthwhile adjustment to my regimen.
Thursday, April 28, 2011
Just another update
So, I've been seriously neglecting my blog lately. My sincere apologies.
Not too much to report. We took one of our scheduled weeks off last week but are back at it this week. We've managed to finally get out and do some riding on the road. Longest day so far is only 24 miles, but we should have plenty more opportunity to increase on that. Upper body strength training is going fine
With this entry I also wanted to post a picture I've seen around. Not sure if it's photo-shopped or not. But I do know someone in his early 60's who has a physique somewhat like this guy's, so it's not a forgone conclusion that this is a photoshop product. The image comes from here--a not too terribly informative blurb on aging and fitness.
As an example, the following blurb from that site:
Sounds hopeful. He's trying to present an optimistic view, obviously. But the math just don't add up. By reckoning using figures he provides, you're down to 90% of your strength, flexibility, and balance by the time you reach age 40. If the pace of loss that he informs us inexorably occurs is correct, then by age 70, regardless of what you do, you're down another 15%--to 75% of what you had at age 20.
This probably comes down to bad writing. Had he thought things out more carefully and been more intent on conveying something meaningful, he probably would have qualified the 5% loss figure with a statement such as "but you can lower that rate of loss by training, the result being that, even into your 60's, 70's and 80's you may be able to retain as much as 90% . . ." I think you get the idea.
More to come, hopefully a bit more regularly now.
Not too much to report. We took one of our scheduled weeks off last week but are back at it this week. We've managed to finally get out and do some riding on the road. Longest day so far is only 24 miles, but we should have plenty more opportunity to increase on that. Upper body strength training is going fine
With this entry I also wanted to post a picture I've seen around. Not sure if it's photo-shopped or not. But I do know someone in his early 60's who has a physique somewhat like this guy's, so it's not a forgone conclusion that this is a photoshop product. The image comes from here--a not too terribly informative blurb on aging and fitness.
As an example, the following blurb from that site:
Here’s the bad news: You lose up to 5% of your strength, flexibility and balance for every decade after age 20. But here’s the good news: With a little effort and determination, you can maintain 90% of the strength, flexibility and balance you had at age 20 well into your 60s, 70s and even 80s.
Sounds hopeful. He's trying to present an optimistic view, obviously. But the math just don't add up. By reckoning using figures he provides, you're down to 90% of your strength, flexibility, and balance by the time you reach age 40. If the pace of loss that he informs us inexorably occurs is correct, then by age 70, regardless of what you do, you're down another 15%--to 75% of what you had at age 20.
This probably comes down to bad writing. Had he thought things out more carefully and been more intent on conveying something meaningful, he probably would have qualified the 5% loss figure with a statement such as "but you can lower that rate of loss by training, the result being that, even into your 60's, 70's and 80's you may be able to retain as much as 90% . . ." I think you get the idea.
More to come, hopefully a bit more regularly now.
Monday, March 28, 2011
Spinning: what to expect
In this entry I just want to reflect a bit further on the spin class we took, hoping that it would provide us with some variation in our off-season stationary bike riding. It turned out to be a bit of a bust for us, so part of this entry will be a rehearsal of reasons we will not be doing further spin classes. But it will also describe some of the features of the workout and so could be helpful for others wondering whether spin class will be suitable to their needs.
The class we took featured a smallish room really packed with stationary bikes. There must have been 30 or more bikes in this ca. 15' by 20' room. So it was pretty tight quarters.
One of my initial concerns--air circulation--was allayed on entering the room. There were a number of wall-mounted fans around the room and the air was circulating well. In my fairly long experience of stationary bike riding I've come to realize that I need a fan blowing directly on me when doing stationary cycling and, owing to the fact that we arrived early, was able to find a spot that suited my needs pretty well.
In the calls we took, most of the bikes face the front of the room, which is where a stationary bike used by the class instructor, and that faces all the other bikes, stands.
Prior to the start of the class the instructor made sure all the fans were powered on, then she put on some loud, high-tempo music. She had a head set and microphone on, which was also plugged into the sound system. As you might guess, it ended up being quite loud in that small room.
The routine started off with some high-RPM, warm-up pedaling. Then the routine itself started.
The instructor was giving directions throughout about at what RPM rate participants should be pedaling, as well as about adjusting tension on the bike's flywheel. At various stages participants were instructed to stand and pedal at lower RPM rates, while at others they were to sit and pedal at higher RPM rates.
With warm-up and cool-down phases, the whole routine took about 40 minutes. This seemed to be the average length for spinning sessions at this particular health club.
There were several things we did not like about this class. To begin with, the noise level was really too much. Were I to do something like this on a regular basis I would definitely be wearing ear plugs. It was just overboard noise-wise.
As to the exercise itself, I found it unsuitable for my needs. The high-RPM seated pedaling was suitable, but the increase of tension on the flywheel, the need to stand on the bike, and especially the explicit instruction to lower the RPM rate to as little as 30 RPM were all extraneous activities for me.
I mean, they make bikes with multiple speeds specifically to allow riders to maintain a certain RPM rate (90 is usually a good rate to shoot for), regardless of terrain. Why would anyone willing go as low as 30 RPM's? Actually, I think I know why: because many of those who do this type of exercise never get on a real bike and ride for any distance. So they are unfamiliar with optimal cadence under real road conditions. The only time many of these people get on a bike of any kind is at the health club.
As for increasing intensity, as readers of this blog will know, I already utilize a means for increasing intensity: it's called intervals. This involves short bursts of intense exercise interspersed with a longer period of leisurely riding. I do these intervals, in large part, to vary my off-season routine a bit. It offers a nice break from high RPM spinning and allows me to shorten the session slightly.
Thursday, March 17, 2011
Just a miscellaneous update
Not much to report. We're remaining injury-free, and keeping at our fitness pursuits. We just finished one of our week-long breaks, but got back to stationary bike riding a couple of days ago. And we've once again started the arm toner phase of our upper-body strength training regimen.
I suppose I could report that we tried a spin class at a local athletic club just to see if it might provide us with some variation in our winter cycling regimen. But it's really not what we want for off-season training--mainly because it's too intense. We'll get enough intensity on the bike once we start riding on the road any time here, and up until we get off the road in November or so. No need for us to, as it were, artificially increase intensity such as they do in spin classes.
We did try about a month's worth of the S90 routine I recently reviewed, just to see how well we could work it into our overall fitness regimen. The results were encouraging. No plans yet as to how/where we'll work it in, but we will undoubtedly be using it for part of the year.
We've mapped out a longer-distance bicycle tour for this summer, part of which will involve riding with the SAGBRAW tour. So we're excited about that. Will be posting more about that in the future.
With the warm weather we're now seeing we're very eager to get back out on the bike.
I suppose I could report that we tried a spin class at a local athletic club just to see if it might provide us with some variation in our winter cycling regimen. But it's really not what we want for off-season training--mainly because it's too intense. We'll get enough intensity on the bike once we start riding on the road any time here, and up until we get off the road in November or so. No need for us to, as it were, artificially increase intensity such as they do in spin classes.
We did try about a month's worth of the S90 routine I recently reviewed, just to see how well we could work it into our overall fitness regimen. The results were encouraging. No plans yet as to how/where we'll work it in, but we will undoubtedly be using it for part of the year.
We've mapped out a longer-distance bicycle tour for this summer, part of which will involve riding with the SAGBRAW tour. So we're excited about that. Will be posting more about that in the future.
With the warm weather we're now seeing we're very eager to get back out on the bike.
Friday, February 18, 2011
Supreme 90 day: the poor man's P90X?
Here's the review of the Supreme 90 day (S90 hereafter) regime I recently found. We've now done a few of the routines and so have a decent idea about its pro's and cons. I'll begin with some caveats.
My first caveat is that this is only a partial review of the regime. Like P90X, S90 offers a variety of work-outs and apparently even some kind of diet plan. As was the case with my partial review of P90X, though, several of the workouts do not interest me, so I've not tried, and do not plan to try, them. And, as with P90X, the dietary rules are not applicable to me so I have not even looked to see what the dietary plan is like. I can thus only offer a partial review--a review of the parts of this regime that interest me and that I intend to incorporate into my own exercise regimen.
As a refresher on my "partiality" in writing reviews of fitness regimes, I will just reiterate the following factors: 1) I do not need to lose any weight and so am uninterested in diet plans; 2) the mainstay of my fitness regimen is an aerobic activity--cycling--so I am uninterested in both aerobic and leg-strengthening routines; and 3) what I am interested in is augmenting my base fitness activity with some toning/strengthening routines for the upper body. Now you have some idea of why I am offering only a partial review of S90: I don't intend to address the parts of the program that don't interest me and that I don't use.
You may guess from the foregoing remarks that I don't intend to review the S90 plan as a whole. By that, I mean that, like P90X, this program is undoubtedly structured in a certain way, with certain DVD's meant to be done on certain days and in a particular order throughout a 90-day period. Well, since I'm picking and choosing from this program what I want to use in my own regimen, I'm not in a very good position to assess their plan for executing the series of exercises they offer. In fact, I've not even looked at that plan, and do not intend to. It's irrelevant to my aims. So, sorry I can't provide feedback on that.
Another caveat I will make concerns the title of this review. As you will note both from the title and from the few paragraphs I've thus far written, the P90X program is being invoked as a sort of standard against which I am judging S90. The main reason for that, in case it's not obvious, is because this program clearly styles itself after P90X: a 90-day program marketed as one that will get you in great shape, that uses minimal equipment and can be done in the home, that is comprised of a series of roughly one-hour exercise routines, each contained on one of several DVD's (10 in total) that make up a set, that offers a diet plan, that has an instructor accompanied by a small group of participants who help to demonstrate exercises--they even use the same scientific-sounding (but, ultimately bogus) concept of "muscle confusion" as a sales gimmick. The list of similarities could go on.
As someone who is fairly familiar with P90X, I've in fact speculated as to how this program came into being. Of course only the folks who planned and produced this program know the answer for sure, but I can conjecture some enterprising individual thinking to themselves "P90X is a great program, but its price probably scares off many who might otherwise give it a try. So what if something comparable were produced but sold at a much lower price? The market has already been prepped and there must be quite a number of folks who would buy a 90-day routine sold at a much lower price. . . ." Etc., etc.
I'm pretty sure something very much like this scenario is what actually led to the conception and production of the S90 exercise routine. Thus the title of this entry--"the poor man's P90X." Hard to see how the creators of S90 could object to that if my speculations are anywhere near valid.
Now, gauging by what I know of the P90X crowd, many of them are liable to look on S90 with disdain--as a cheap, perhaps even unworthy--imitation P90X. That disdain stems, I think, from the innate human sensibilities of allegiance and loyalty--sensibilities which, in this case, I think are being subverted by, and wrongly devoted toward, capitalist entities whose interest in health, exercise, and individual well-being is dictated solely by profit margins. Not to veer further into philosophical considerations, let me just point out that I feel absolutely no allegiance or loyalty to P90X or the company that markets it.
Zero. Nada. I like the exercises they present and have enjoyed certain health benefits from using them in a disciplined way, but I'm not going to pretend that this company has some sort of monopoly on any aspect of the field of exercise and health. No, I take the same stance toward them and their products as they take toward me: to the extent that their products are of use and beneficial to me, I'm willing to buy and use them. When they cease to be useful or beneficial, or if find something I like better, it's good-bye charlie to P90X and the associated company and products. In short, I am an absolute and total non-partisan when it comes to P90X and the company backing them.
To summarize, you'll find no life-changing testimonial in this review. Given the shape that I'm in, even if I were to do this program to a "T" over the specified 90-day duration, I'd say the results would be almost negligible. So I don't look to S90 for the types of reasons the company who sells it hopes I might. Rather, I aim to use parts of it in my existing fitness regimen and this review will be mostly a rehearsal of how well or poorly it can augment that.
The review
This review concerns the set of 10 DVD's sold under the name "Supreme 90 Day," all of which DVD's I've viewed, but only 4 of which I've used. The 4 I've used are labeled: Chest and Back; Back and Bi's; Chest, Shoulders, and Tri's; Shoulders and Arms. The 6 remaining ones that I've not tried are labeled: Legs; Cardio Challenge; Tabata Inferno; Total Body; Core Dynamics; and Ultimate Ball. I've noted why I'm not interested in leg-strengthening exercises or cardio routines--which tells you why I won't be using the Legs, Cardio Challenge, or Tabata Inferno DVD's. I may, at some point, test out the Total Body, Core Dynamics, and Ultimate Ball DVD's. But for now I'm using just the 4 I listed and am most likely to incorporate just those into my long-term fitness plan.
I suppose I should mention at this point as well that the company sells a separate abs/core DVD as well, marketing it as some kind of supplement you can get for "only" another 5 dollars (or, in marketing speak, $4.99). There is enough ab/core work in the other DVD's--as I'll presently explain--for my purposes, so I didn't get and won't review that ab/core DVD here either.
I feel as though I should actually be writing two reviews: one largely positive and that reflects my own rather unique fitness situation and needs, and one mostly negative review for S90's target audience. You see for me S90 is a great find. I'm very happy I found it. It will fit nicely into my fitness regimen and I'm very pleased at the low price.
But for the target audience, i.e., the group to whom S90 is being marketed, I presume the program will be something of a bust. You see, this is a fairly advanced fitness regime and, moreover, one that is rather poorly "choreographed" (more on the poor choreography later). The target audience, on the other hand, seems to to be low-income couch potatoes. Thus, I foresee many people buying this program on a whim, trying to follow along with the first few DVD's and having difficulty, owing to both the advanced fitness level required and the poor choreography, getting discouraged, and then abandoning the program. For these sorts of people, S90 will turn out to be a waste of time and money.
If you fall within the S90 target audience, consider yourself warned: you may well end up being disappointed. That said, there have to be more folks out there like me who, despite the program's shortcomings--and it does have some notable shortcomings--can nevertheless make good use of it and for whom it will be well worth the modest price. It is mainly for these latter that I write this review.
I begin with a list of pro's and cons that, as I intimated earlier, will use P90X as something of a standard. First, S90's pro's: 1) all routines I've used begin with a warm-up of core body muscles--in fact, we've suspended our ab work-outs while testing out S90 on the assumption that we get an equally good core work-out from the S90 warm-up; 2) use of a balance ball for many exercises, which helps to engage more muscle groups; 3) fairly short routines, running between 22 and 32 minutes; 4) a fairly advanced program, something good for me because I've been exercising regularly for a few years and am up for the challenge; and 5) a modest price.
Here are the cons: 1) the routines are plagued by poor choreography, meaning that the routines were not sufficiently rehearsed, which lends the videos a bit of a chaotic feeling with some participants finishing before others and instances in which example exercises are poorly or wrongly demonstrated--it can thus be difficult to follow along at times; 2) the videos appear to suffer from cheap production and are somewhat amateurish; 3) most of the participants appear to be either models or fitness professionals; 4) from some internet postings I've read, it appears that the company marketing the product is somewhat unscrupulous, apparently attempting to hound callers to their toll-free number into buying a lot of their other merchandise (which is why I recommend buying them through a retailer like Bed, Bath & Beyond or Walgreens).
These observations having been made, what's on the DVD's? Each DVD I've used has 3 segments: 1) a warm-up session that goes for about 5 minutes; 2) the workout to which that DVD is devoted; and 3) a cool-down session--again running about 5 minutes. The warm-up and cool-down sessions are on separate tracks from the main workout, and same warm-up/cool-down sessions are used for all DVD's.
As with P90X, the videos have a few participants demonstrating and executing the exercises while a "coach" urges them on. All the DVD's I've used so far have 4 participants.
S90 differs from P90X in the number of exercises and the way they are structured. The P90X routines I've used usually have you doing just one set of any given exercise per session, though one of the DVD's does involve two "rounds." That latter DVD has you doing two sets of each exercise, one set in each round or half of the session.
With S90, on the other hand, each exercise comprising the set is repeated: most of the exercises on the DVD's I've used are repeated 3 times. The typical structure is as follows: a set of 3 exercises is introduced and demonstrated, then the exercises are executed in sets of 3. To make up an example for this explanation, say the 3 exercises are pull-ups, push-ups and chair dips. After the demonstration of how the exercises are done, the participants then do a set of pull-ups, then a set of push-ups, then a set of chair dips, and they repeat that cycle 3 times. Breaks between each of these exercises are to be minimized. Once this complex of 3 exercises is repeated 3 times, the next threefold complex of exercises is demonstrated, then executed.
Overall, then, there are fewer exercises in S90 than in P90X, but more total repetitions of each of the exercises are performed in S90. Each of the S90 DVD's I've thus far used has you doing 3 or 4 of these threefold complexes in the session. So S90 is comparatively more repetitive than P90X.
The main flaw I've found in this program, as I've mentioned, is poor choreography. By that I mean that insufficient time was devoted to determining how well the home viewer might be able to follow along with the video participants. The fact that at least some of those participants seem like they may be fitness professionals is related: given that fitness is their profession, they are in better condition than most of us and can thus perform these exercises quickly. In order for those who are not fitness professionals to follow along, the professionals should be making a special effort to perform exercises more slowly and deliberately, but sometimes they are not. In fact, in some of the DVD's, one or more of the participants may get significantly behind the others. Thus, the participants are not always doing the same exercise at the same time--which could introduce confusion for some. From my observations to date it seems that the first DVD in the set suffers most from this flaw, while subsequent DVD's are a bit better. But there is some element of chaos in all the DVD's I've viewed in this respect. I personally do not find this especially distracting but others may.
In the way of other major contrasts between P90X and S90, the S90 routines I've done involve more use of dumbbells and less use of calisthenics or bodyweight exercises than do the P90X routines. While various types of push-ups are to be found in the S90 routines, there is nothing like chin-ups/pull-ups, tri-ups, or chair dips. So, though there are some calisthenics/bodyweight exercises in S90, comparatively there is more focus on use of dumbbells.
Some of the exercises found on these DVD's are similar to those found in the P90X repertoire, but there are enough differences to make these S90 routines a welcome variant for those who use P90X routines over longer periods (we've been incorporating parts of P90X into our regimen for over 2 years now). A few exercises in S90 are essentially the same as those in P90X.
The fellow who leads the exercise routines is Tom Holland. He definitely doesn't have Tony Horton's charisma or knack for lovable obnoxiousness, but I find him to be a welcome break. His demonstrations of technique, while at times a bit too fast, are generally easy to follow. Unlike Tony, Tom mostly walks around talking and coaching, not doing most of the exercises. Not a minus in my book, but a point of contrast.
About the only thing I can say about the nutrition program is that it has the name of Tosca Reno attached to it. I have no idea who she is but have read some internet postings indicating that her association with this program is something positive.
At some later date I may post a list of the exercises found on each of the S90 DVD's I use. There are not that many on any given DVD, so that will be easy enough to do.
I will just reiterate in closing that, for my purposes, S90 is working great. It fills a need I have to further vary my upper-body strengthening/toning exercises and for the price it has been well worth it for me. If you are in good condition like me, even though your fitness aims and needs may be different from mine, you may likewise be pleased with this fitness regime.
If you're not in very good shape, however, S90 may not be such a good program to start with. But if you take things slowly and put in the time and effort to figure out the structure of the routines, you may be able to benefit from this regime. The key for those of us who are less fit will be patience--which will likewise probably mean taking longer than 90 days slated for completing the program.
My first caveat is that this is only a partial review of the regime. Like P90X, S90 offers a variety of work-outs and apparently even some kind of diet plan. As was the case with my partial review of P90X, though, several of the workouts do not interest me, so I've not tried, and do not plan to try, them. And, as with P90X, the dietary rules are not applicable to me so I have not even looked to see what the dietary plan is like. I can thus only offer a partial review--a review of the parts of this regime that interest me and that I intend to incorporate into my own exercise regimen.
As a refresher on my "partiality" in writing reviews of fitness regimes, I will just reiterate the following factors: 1) I do not need to lose any weight and so am uninterested in diet plans; 2) the mainstay of my fitness regimen is an aerobic activity--cycling--so I am uninterested in both aerobic and leg-strengthening routines; and 3) what I am interested in is augmenting my base fitness activity with some toning/strengthening routines for the upper body. Now you have some idea of why I am offering only a partial review of S90: I don't intend to address the parts of the program that don't interest me and that I don't use.
You may guess from the foregoing remarks that I don't intend to review the S90 plan as a whole. By that, I mean that, like P90X, this program is undoubtedly structured in a certain way, with certain DVD's meant to be done on certain days and in a particular order throughout a 90-day period. Well, since I'm picking and choosing from this program what I want to use in my own regimen, I'm not in a very good position to assess their plan for executing the series of exercises they offer. In fact, I've not even looked at that plan, and do not intend to. It's irrelevant to my aims. So, sorry I can't provide feedback on that.
Another caveat I will make concerns the title of this review. As you will note both from the title and from the few paragraphs I've thus far written, the P90X program is being invoked as a sort of standard against which I am judging S90. The main reason for that, in case it's not obvious, is because this program clearly styles itself after P90X: a 90-day program marketed as one that will get you in great shape, that uses minimal equipment and can be done in the home, that is comprised of a series of roughly one-hour exercise routines, each contained on one of several DVD's (10 in total) that make up a set, that offers a diet plan, that has an instructor accompanied by a small group of participants who help to demonstrate exercises--they even use the same scientific-sounding (but, ultimately bogus) concept of "muscle confusion" as a sales gimmick. The list of similarities could go on.
As someone who is fairly familiar with P90X, I've in fact speculated as to how this program came into being. Of course only the folks who planned and produced this program know the answer for sure, but I can conjecture some enterprising individual thinking to themselves "P90X is a great program, but its price probably scares off many who might otherwise give it a try. So what if something comparable were produced but sold at a much lower price? The market has already been prepped and there must be quite a number of folks who would buy a 90-day routine sold at a much lower price. . . ." Etc., etc.
I'm pretty sure something very much like this scenario is what actually led to the conception and production of the S90 exercise routine. Thus the title of this entry--"the poor man's P90X." Hard to see how the creators of S90 could object to that if my speculations are anywhere near valid.
Now, gauging by what I know of the P90X crowd, many of them are liable to look on S90 with disdain--as a cheap, perhaps even unworthy--imitation P90X. That disdain stems, I think, from the innate human sensibilities of allegiance and loyalty--sensibilities which, in this case, I think are being subverted by, and wrongly devoted toward, capitalist entities whose interest in health, exercise, and individual well-being is dictated solely by profit margins. Not to veer further into philosophical considerations, let me just point out that I feel absolutely no allegiance or loyalty to P90X or the company that markets it.
Zero. Nada. I like the exercises they present and have enjoyed certain health benefits from using them in a disciplined way, but I'm not going to pretend that this company has some sort of monopoly on any aspect of the field of exercise and health. No, I take the same stance toward them and their products as they take toward me: to the extent that their products are of use and beneficial to me, I'm willing to buy and use them. When they cease to be useful or beneficial, or if find something I like better, it's good-bye charlie to P90X and the associated company and products. In short, I am an absolute and total non-partisan when it comes to P90X and the company backing them.
To summarize, you'll find no life-changing testimonial in this review. Given the shape that I'm in, even if I were to do this program to a "T" over the specified 90-day duration, I'd say the results would be almost negligible. So I don't look to S90 for the types of reasons the company who sells it hopes I might. Rather, I aim to use parts of it in my existing fitness regimen and this review will be mostly a rehearsal of how well or poorly it can augment that.
The review
This review concerns the set of 10 DVD's sold under the name "Supreme 90 Day," all of which DVD's I've viewed, but only 4 of which I've used. The 4 I've used are labeled: Chest and Back; Back and Bi's; Chest, Shoulders, and Tri's; Shoulders and Arms. The 6 remaining ones that I've not tried are labeled: Legs; Cardio Challenge; Tabata Inferno; Total Body; Core Dynamics; and Ultimate Ball. I've noted why I'm not interested in leg-strengthening exercises or cardio routines--which tells you why I won't be using the Legs, Cardio Challenge, or Tabata Inferno DVD's. I may, at some point, test out the Total Body, Core Dynamics, and Ultimate Ball DVD's. But for now I'm using just the 4 I listed and am most likely to incorporate just those into my long-term fitness plan.
I suppose I should mention at this point as well that the company sells a separate abs/core DVD as well, marketing it as some kind of supplement you can get for "only" another 5 dollars (or, in marketing speak, $4.99). There is enough ab/core work in the other DVD's--as I'll presently explain--for my purposes, so I didn't get and won't review that ab/core DVD here either.
I feel as though I should actually be writing two reviews: one largely positive and that reflects my own rather unique fitness situation and needs, and one mostly negative review for S90's target audience. You see for me S90 is a great find. I'm very happy I found it. It will fit nicely into my fitness regimen and I'm very pleased at the low price.
But for the target audience, i.e., the group to whom S90 is being marketed, I presume the program will be something of a bust. You see, this is a fairly advanced fitness regime and, moreover, one that is rather poorly "choreographed" (more on the poor choreography later). The target audience, on the other hand, seems to to be low-income couch potatoes. Thus, I foresee many people buying this program on a whim, trying to follow along with the first few DVD's and having difficulty, owing to both the advanced fitness level required and the poor choreography, getting discouraged, and then abandoning the program. For these sorts of people, S90 will turn out to be a waste of time and money.
If you fall within the S90 target audience, consider yourself warned: you may well end up being disappointed. That said, there have to be more folks out there like me who, despite the program's shortcomings--and it does have some notable shortcomings--can nevertheless make good use of it and for whom it will be well worth the modest price. It is mainly for these latter that I write this review.
I begin with a list of pro's and cons that, as I intimated earlier, will use P90X as something of a standard. First, S90's pro's: 1) all routines I've used begin with a warm-up of core body muscles--in fact, we've suspended our ab work-outs while testing out S90 on the assumption that we get an equally good core work-out from the S90 warm-up; 2) use of a balance ball for many exercises, which helps to engage more muscle groups; 3) fairly short routines, running between 22 and 32 minutes; 4) a fairly advanced program, something good for me because I've been exercising regularly for a few years and am up for the challenge; and 5) a modest price.
Here are the cons: 1) the routines are plagued by poor choreography, meaning that the routines were not sufficiently rehearsed, which lends the videos a bit of a chaotic feeling with some participants finishing before others and instances in which example exercises are poorly or wrongly demonstrated--it can thus be difficult to follow along at times; 2) the videos appear to suffer from cheap production and are somewhat amateurish; 3) most of the participants appear to be either models or fitness professionals; 4) from some internet postings I've read, it appears that the company marketing the product is somewhat unscrupulous, apparently attempting to hound callers to their toll-free number into buying a lot of their other merchandise (which is why I recommend buying them through a retailer like Bed, Bath & Beyond or Walgreens).
These observations having been made, what's on the DVD's? Each DVD I've used has 3 segments: 1) a warm-up session that goes for about 5 minutes; 2) the workout to which that DVD is devoted; and 3) a cool-down session--again running about 5 minutes. The warm-up and cool-down sessions are on separate tracks from the main workout, and same warm-up/cool-down sessions are used for all DVD's.
As with P90X, the videos have a few participants demonstrating and executing the exercises while a "coach" urges them on. All the DVD's I've used so far have 4 participants.
S90 differs from P90X in the number of exercises and the way they are structured. The P90X routines I've used usually have you doing just one set of any given exercise per session, though one of the DVD's does involve two "rounds." That latter DVD has you doing two sets of each exercise, one set in each round or half of the session.
With S90, on the other hand, each exercise comprising the set is repeated: most of the exercises on the DVD's I've used are repeated 3 times. The typical structure is as follows: a set of 3 exercises is introduced and demonstrated, then the exercises are executed in sets of 3. To make up an example for this explanation, say the 3 exercises are pull-ups, push-ups and chair dips. After the demonstration of how the exercises are done, the participants then do a set of pull-ups, then a set of push-ups, then a set of chair dips, and they repeat that cycle 3 times. Breaks between each of these exercises are to be minimized. Once this complex of 3 exercises is repeated 3 times, the next threefold complex of exercises is demonstrated, then executed.
Overall, then, there are fewer exercises in S90 than in P90X, but more total repetitions of each of the exercises are performed in S90. Each of the S90 DVD's I've thus far used has you doing 3 or 4 of these threefold complexes in the session. So S90 is comparatively more repetitive than P90X.
The main flaw I've found in this program, as I've mentioned, is poor choreography. By that I mean that insufficient time was devoted to determining how well the home viewer might be able to follow along with the video participants. The fact that at least some of those participants seem like they may be fitness professionals is related: given that fitness is their profession, they are in better condition than most of us and can thus perform these exercises quickly. In order for those who are not fitness professionals to follow along, the professionals should be making a special effort to perform exercises more slowly and deliberately, but sometimes they are not. In fact, in some of the DVD's, one or more of the participants may get significantly behind the others. Thus, the participants are not always doing the same exercise at the same time--which could introduce confusion for some. From my observations to date it seems that the first DVD in the set suffers most from this flaw, while subsequent DVD's are a bit better. But there is some element of chaos in all the DVD's I've viewed in this respect. I personally do not find this especially distracting but others may.
In the way of other major contrasts between P90X and S90, the S90 routines I've done involve more use of dumbbells and less use of calisthenics or bodyweight exercises than do the P90X routines. While various types of push-ups are to be found in the S90 routines, there is nothing like chin-ups/pull-ups, tri-ups, or chair dips. So, though there are some calisthenics/bodyweight exercises in S90, comparatively there is more focus on use of dumbbells.
Some of the exercises found on these DVD's are similar to those found in the P90X repertoire, but there are enough differences to make these S90 routines a welcome variant for those who use P90X routines over longer periods (we've been incorporating parts of P90X into our regimen for over 2 years now). A few exercises in S90 are essentially the same as those in P90X.
The fellow who leads the exercise routines is Tom Holland. He definitely doesn't have Tony Horton's charisma or knack for lovable obnoxiousness, but I find him to be a welcome break. His demonstrations of technique, while at times a bit too fast, are generally easy to follow. Unlike Tony, Tom mostly walks around talking and coaching, not doing most of the exercises. Not a minus in my book, but a point of contrast.
About the only thing I can say about the nutrition program is that it has the name of Tosca Reno attached to it. I have no idea who she is but have read some internet postings indicating that her association with this program is something positive.
At some later date I may post a list of the exercises found on each of the S90 DVD's I use. There are not that many on any given DVD, so that will be easy enough to do.
I will just reiterate in closing that, for my purposes, S90 is working great. It fills a need I have to further vary my upper-body strengthening/toning exercises and for the price it has been well worth it for me. If you are in good condition like me, even though your fitness aims and needs may be different from mine, you may likewise be pleased with this fitness regime.
If you're not in very good shape, however, S90 may not be such a good program to start with. But if you take things slowly and put in the time and effort to figure out the structure of the routines, you may be able to benefit from this regime. The key for those of us who are less fit will be patience--which will likewise probably mean taking longer than 90 days slated for completing the program.
Saturday, January 29, 2011
Supreme 90 day?
Ok. I quite by chance happened to glimpse a TV advertisement for yet another 90-day fitness regimen--by chance because I really watch very little TV and, even more importantly, because I view almost no commercials (thanks to MythTV DVR/PVR!). In fact, it was really only because I recently migrated my MythTV DVR/PVR to a newer machine and was thus doing some experimentation with it, that I saw this ad.
Most immediately the commercial caught my eye because, well, it looked a lot like the P90X regimen but seemed to have been done by a completely different company. What was additionally a bit arresting is that the advertised price was far lower than P90X--only $20.00 (the marketing euphemism for which is $19.99). Oh, and shipping and handling sets you back another $6.00 (as you'll deduce from the comment above, that's non-market-speak for $5.99).
Finally this advertisement held a continued interest for the following reason: I've been considering how to further vary our upper-body strength training and it seemed as though it might help me accomplish that. I'm not feeling the aftereffects of our sessions nearly as strongly as, say, even last year. That, and just the desire for greater variation in our routines, made this seem like something worth pursuing. Would it be different enough from P90X to give the needed variation? That's one thing I hope to find out soon, and which I plan to share on this blog.
So I began trying to find out more on the internet about this routine. Well, this really was quite the chance occurrence: I, who miss at least 99% of all the commercials that occur during the limited amount of television I watch, appear to have seen some of the earliest advertising for this routine. Seems like it's only just now getting out to customers.
My internet searching didn't turn up much. Apparently this routine is so new that no one has yet written any full-fledged reviews. I did find some worthwhile snippets on it here and there--"worthwhile" meaning they were written by people who'd actually viewed and/or used the routines, as opposed to sites that try to disguise marketing hype as user commentary. Though the little real information (as opposed to marketing hype disguised as information) I found seemed to indicate the exercise routines might be worthwhile, I gathered from some of the commentary I found that the company marketing this regimen is rather disreputable.
In the end, I decided to plunk down the modest price--though I did make sure to go through a national retail store (Bed, Bath, and Beyond) who will be selling this set rather than having any direct dealings with the shady company doing the marketing. The set is due soon and I intend to use and review it on this blog (e-mail notifying that the order was shipped is dated 1/28/11).
That's the news for the moment. So, watch in the coming days for the review I'll be writing of this P90X knock-off.
LATER NOTE: I see now that one of the links I provide above has a comment stating that these DVD's are currently available at Walgreens (in the "As seen on TV" section).
Most immediately the commercial caught my eye because, well, it looked a lot like the P90X regimen but seemed to have been done by a completely different company. What was additionally a bit arresting is that the advertised price was far lower than P90X--only $20.00 (the marketing euphemism for which is $19.99). Oh, and shipping and handling sets you back another $6.00 (as you'll deduce from the comment above, that's non-market-speak for $5.99).
Finally this advertisement held a continued interest for the following reason: I've been considering how to further vary our upper-body strength training and it seemed as though it might help me accomplish that. I'm not feeling the aftereffects of our sessions nearly as strongly as, say, even last year. That, and just the desire for greater variation in our routines, made this seem like something worth pursuing. Would it be different enough from P90X to give the needed variation? That's one thing I hope to find out soon, and which I plan to share on this blog.
So I began trying to find out more on the internet about this routine. Well, this really was quite the chance occurrence: I, who miss at least 99% of all the commercials that occur during the limited amount of television I watch, appear to have seen some of the earliest advertising for this routine. Seems like it's only just now getting out to customers.
My internet searching didn't turn up much. Apparently this routine is so new that no one has yet written any full-fledged reviews. I did find some worthwhile snippets on it here and there--"worthwhile" meaning they were written by people who'd actually viewed and/or used the routines, as opposed to sites that try to disguise marketing hype as user commentary. Though the little real information (as opposed to marketing hype disguised as information) I found seemed to indicate the exercise routines might be worthwhile, I gathered from some of the commentary I found that the company marketing this regimen is rather disreputable.
In the end, I decided to plunk down the modest price--though I did make sure to go through a national retail store (Bed, Bath, and Beyond) who will be selling this set rather than having any direct dealings with the shady company doing the marketing. The set is due soon and I intend to use and review it on this blog (e-mail notifying that the order was shipped is dated 1/28/11).
That's the news for the moment. So, watch in the coming days for the review I'll be writing of this P90X knock-off.
LATER NOTE: I see now that one of the links I provide above has a comment stating that these DVD's are currently available at Walgreens (in the "As seen on TV" section).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
