Artwork

Content provided by Cycling Performance Club, Cyrus Monk, Dr. Jason Boynton, and Damian Ruse. All podcast content including episodes, graphics, and podcast descriptions are uploaded and provided directly by Cycling Performance Club, Cyrus Monk, Dr. Jason Boynton, and Damian Ruse or their podcast platform partner. If you believe someone is using your copyrighted work without your permission, you can follow the process outlined here https://player.fm/legal.
Player FM - Podcast App
Go offline with the Player FM app!

Dr. Nick Jamnick - Down the rabbit hole of exercise intensity - Part 2 of 2

45:44
 
Share
 

Manage episode 442042452 series 3489842
Content provided by Cycling Performance Club, Cyrus Monk, Dr. Jason Boynton, and Damian Ruse. All podcast content including episodes, graphics, and podcast descriptions are uploaded and provided directly by Cycling Performance Club, Cyrus Monk, Dr. Jason Boynton, and Damian Ruse or their podcast platform partner. If you believe someone is using your copyrighted work without your permission, you can follow the process outlined here https://player.fm/legal.

In this episode we continue our trip down the rabbit hole of exercise intensity with Dr. Nick Jamnick (part 2 of 2). Previously, we critically examined graded exercise tests, VO2max testing, lactate thresholds, and the usefulness of lactate testing. Herein, we dive deep into Nick’s comprehensive review critiquing the common methods of determining and prescribing exercise intensity.

This review evaluated different methods of prescribing intensity based on their ability to cause the distinct acute responses found in each of the physiologically defined exercise domains. The methods were categorised into three groups: maximal anchors (e.g. percentage of maximal heart rate or peak power), submaximal anchors (e.g. critical power, MLSS), and delta methods (e.g. heart rate reserve).
Spoiler alert: Most of the methods examined did not fare well!

So, continue with us down the exercise intensity rabbit hole to find out what methods survived the brutal scrutiny of Nick’s review and why only a few methods out performed the rest. Did the method you use to determine exercise intensity pass or fail?

Guest panelist:
Nicholas Jamnick, Ph.D.
Researchgate
LinkedIn
Twitter: @SportResearchEx

Episode References:
An Examination and Critique of Current Methods to Determine Exercise Intensity

Polarized training has greater impact on key endurance variables than threshold, high intensity, or high volume training

This is a listener supported podcast, and we would be stoked if you supported us by becoming a member of The Cycling Performance Club! With your backing we can continue our mission to deliver the best in cycling performance knowledge and practical advice to you and the greater cycling community. Support The Club by clicking here!

Co-hosts:
Jason Boynton, Ph.D.
boyntoncoaching.com

Cyrus Monk
cyclistscientist.com

Producer & co-host:
Damian Ruse
semiprocycling.com

Instagram: @cyclingperformanceclub
Facebook: @cyclingperformanceclub
Twitter: @cyclingclubpod
LinkedIn: The Cycling Performance Club Podcast

  continue reading

47 episodes

Artwork
iconShare
 
Manage episode 442042452 series 3489842
Content provided by Cycling Performance Club, Cyrus Monk, Dr. Jason Boynton, and Damian Ruse. All podcast content including episodes, graphics, and podcast descriptions are uploaded and provided directly by Cycling Performance Club, Cyrus Monk, Dr. Jason Boynton, and Damian Ruse or their podcast platform partner. If you believe someone is using your copyrighted work without your permission, you can follow the process outlined here https://player.fm/legal.

In this episode we continue our trip down the rabbit hole of exercise intensity with Dr. Nick Jamnick (part 2 of 2). Previously, we critically examined graded exercise tests, VO2max testing, lactate thresholds, and the usefulness of lactate testing. Herein, we dive deep into Nick’s comprehensive review critiquing the common methods of determining and prescribing exercise intensity.

This review evaluated different methods of prescribing intensity based on their ability to cause the distinct acute responses found in each of the physiologically defined exercise domains. The methods were categorised into three groups: maximal anchors (e.g. percentage of maximal heart rate or peak power), submaximal anchors (e.g. critical power, MLSS), and delta methods (e.g. heart rate reserve).
Spoiler alert: Most of the methods examined did not fare well!

So, continue with us down the exercise intensity rabbit hole to find out what methods survived the brutal scrutiny of Nick’s review and why only a few methods out performed the rest. Did the method you use to determine exercise intensity pass or fail?

Guest panelist:
Nicholas Jamnick, Ph.D.
Researchgate
LinkedIn
Twitter: @SportResearchEx

Episode References:
An Examination and Critique of Current Methods to Determine Exercise Intensity

Polarized training has greater impact on key endurance variables than threshold, high intensity, or high volume training

This is a listener supported podcast, and we would be stoked if you supported us by becoming a member of The Cycling Performance Club! With your backing we can continue our mission to deliver the best in cycling performance knowledge and practical advice to you and the greater cycling community. Support The Club by clicking here!

Co-hosts:
Jason Boynton, Ph.D.
boyntoncoaching.com

Cyrus Monk
cyclistscientist.com

Producer & co-host:
Damian Ruse
semiprocycling.com

Instagram: @cyclingperformanceclub
Facebook: @cyclingperformanceclub
Twitter: @cyclingclubpod
LinkedIn: The Cycling Performance Club Podcast

  continue reading

47 episodes

All episodes

×
 
Loading …

Welcome to Player FM!

Player FM is scanning the web for high-quality podcasts for you to enjoy right now. It's the best podcast app and works on Android, iPhone, and the web. Signup to sync subscriptions across devices.

 

Quick Reference Guide