Roadwork 2.0: the Comeback

Bigger Stronger Leaner
21

[quote]NickViar wrote:

[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:
The idea that roadwork doesn’t work for conditioning for fighters is an idea that non-fighters came up with.

All fighters do roadwork. Those that don’t, tend to lose. It has been tested by thousands of fighters over hundreds of years. I could give two fucks what some know-it-all writer or poster on a bodybuilding board thinks.[/quote]

Most people just see fists flying for a few seconds before a break in action when they watch fights. They don’t see, or see the reason for, the nearly constant movement that creates angles/positioning. That’s why a fight is seen as multiple sprints-people only see the punches and don’t understand what’s happening.[/quote]

That’s actually a very good point that I never thought of.

Yea, seeing the actual exchanges may make people think interval training makes more sense, but the fight, taken as a whole, is much more like a 36-minute run done at different inclines and intensities, than it is like a bunch of sprints.

Again, not saying sprints aren’t important and that I wouldn’t do them, but if you want to simulate the stress - both mental and physical - that a fight puts on you, a distance run is probably closer to that.

Great point.

22

The whole sprinting thing is a distortion of reality. People see sprinters as lean, muscular and powerful. They see distance runners as skinny, weak and slow (relative to sprinters). Part of that is body type and not training. Some Kenyan who wins the NYC marathon would never look like a bodybuilder no matter how hard he trained for it. The other problem is that these “experts” don’t really know what exactly sprinters do in training.

I don’t even think many understand what they do in competition either. When I read on here how someone recommends a few 40 yard sprints for conditioning and body comp, and then points to sprinters as as example of what sprinting can do, I have to wonder what they are thinking. Usain Bolt runs the 100 and 200m. That isn’t 40m. You are looking at times of around 10 seconds for the 100 and 20 for the 200. 20 seconds at full speed is not the same as 5 or less (for 40 yards). The idea that 5 seconds of work is going to have some benefit on conditioning is ridiculous.

I don’t know if I have ever read some contributor recommend 200m sprints for conditioning. I definitely never read any recommending 400m. Why? Probably because they are too hard to do if you aren’t in shape. I mean, sprinting 40m does not require you to be fit but try sprinting 200m if you are out of shape. So my point is that all of these “experts” who recommend sprinting for conditioning and body comp because of what they see when they look at a sprinter turn around and don’t actually recommend or provide workouts that these sprinters are actually doing.

They give the impression that if you run a few short sprints twice a week you’ll look like a sprinter even though it doesn’t approach the intensity or workload of a sprinter. It’s faulty reasoning.

23

Jarvan- I cannot find any and if you don’t produce it your opinion has zero validity. The medical library that I have rights to can do searches in one to two days that require a months reading to just sift through. I can tell you it doesn’t exist bud. Sure there are studies but they do not show what your saying (remember double blind). If it is double blind it has validity, any other study not so much. I have been burnt way to many times by bogus trash research and findings.

24

I see what you’re saying brotha, but I really doubt there will ever be a study for every thing in this world. Especially because roadwork has been a mainstay in boxing for much of its history… it will just generally be accepted as a necessity.

But take bodybuilding for example. Mike Mentzer used HIT in his program to build his legendary physique. Wouldn’t you agree that since then, a slew of bodybuilders have reached beastly proportions without the use of HIT? It doesn’t necessarily prove that HIT doesn’t work… It just goes to show there will never be one way to do anything.

So then back to the question, does roadwork improve boxing cardio? Maybe so, or maybe no.

None of us on this forum can act like we know either.

25

[quote]Jarvan wrote:
I see what you’re saying brotha, but I really doubt there will ever be a study for every thing in this world. Especially because roadwork has been a mainstay in boxing for much of its history… it will just generally be accepted as a necessity.

But take bodybuilding for example. Mike Mentzer used HIT in his program to build his legendary physique. Wouldn’t you agree that since then, a slew of bodybuilders have reached beastly proportions without the use of HIT? It doesn’t necessarily prove that HIT doesn’t work… It just goes to show there will never be one way to do anything.

So then back to the question, does roadwork improve boxing cardio? Maybe so, or maybe no.

None of us on this forum can act like we know either. [/quote]

Mentzer built his physique with traditional bodybuilding methods. He didn’t use HIT til much later in his career…

Back on track, roadwork is invaluable for damn near any athlete. If you can run 3 miles straight at a good clip (let’s say 7 minutes a mile or less), you’re gonna have a bigger gas tank for your chosen sport.

26

[quote]Jarvan wrote:
I see what you’re saying brotha, but I really doubt there will ever be a study for every thing in this world. Especially because roadwork has been a mainstay in boxing for much of its history… it will just generally be accepted as a necessity.

But take bodybuilding for example. Mike Mentzer used HIT in his program to build his legendary physique. Wouldn’t you agree that since then, a slew of bodybuilders have reached beastly proportions without the use of HIT? It doesn’t necessarily prove that HIT doesn’t work… It just goes to show there will never be one way to do anything.

So then back to the question, does roadwork improve boxing cardio? Maybe so, or maybe no.

None of us on this forum can act like we know either. [/quote]

I can tell right away in the ring if I’ve been running enough because I gas out badly when I don’t. It’s not some mystery… I know my body, and I know how it reacts to things and what is necessary to make it do the things I want it to.

Your statements sound to me more like, “There can be loads of empirical evidence dating back hundreds of years, but I’m going to choose not to believe it because I don’t agree with the conclusions.”

Which is fine - that’s up to you. But don’t act that those of us on this forum who disagree - which includes a number of amateur and pro/former pro boxers, Muay Thai fighters, wrestlers, and BJJ practitioners - don’t know what we’re talking about, and “can’t say for sure.”

Yea we can. We see it every single day in the gym.

And dude, I’m not trying to berate you or argue. I’m just saying that this new school idea of “Well, they succeeded IN SPITE of the way they were training” pisses me off to no end.

27

Irish- I agree 100% with your comments.

28

[quote]WhiteFlash wrote:

[quote]Jarvan wrote:
I see what you’re saying brotha, but I really doubt there will ever be a study for every thing in this world. Especially because roadwork has been a mainstay in boxing for much of its history… it will just generally be accepted as a necessity.

But take bodybuilding for example. Mike Mentzer used HIT in his program to build his legendary physique. Wouldn’t you agree that since then, a slew of bodybuilders have reached beastly proportions without the use of HIT? It doesn’t necessarily prove that HIT doesn’t work… It just goes to show there will never be one way to do anything.

So then back to the question, does roadwork improve boxing cardio? Maybe so, or maybe no.

None of us on this forum can act like we know either. [/quote]

Mentzer built his physique with traditional bodybuilding methods. He didn’t use HIT til much later in his career…

Back on track, roadwork is invaluable for damn near any athlete. If you can run 3 miles straight at a good clip (let’s say 7 minutes a mile or less), you’re gonna have a bigger gas tank for your chosen sport.
[/quote]

Much later in his career… which is when he was at his best.

And three miles under 21 minutes is no easy task… but it won’t give you a better gas tank in another sport, imo. Slightly, initially, but there’s a plateau.

29

[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:

[quote]Jarvan wrote:
I see what you’re saying brotha, but I really doubt there will ever be a study for every thing in this world. Especially because roadwork has been a mainstay in boxing for much of its history… it will just generally be accepted as a necessity.

But take bodybuilding for example. Mike Mentzer used HIT in his program to build his legendary physique. Wouldn’t you agree that since then, a slew of bodybuilders have reached beastly proportions without the use of HIT? It doesn’t necessarily prove that HIT doesn’t work… It just goes to show there will never be one way to do anything.

So then back to the question, does roadwork improve boxing cardio? Maybe so, or maybe no.

None of us on this forum can act like we know either. [/quote]

I can tell right away in the ring if I’ve been running enough because I gas out badly when I don’t. It’s not some mystery… I know my body, and I know how it reacts to things and what is necessary to make it do the things I want it to.

Your statements sound to me more like, “There can be loads of empirical evidence dating back hundreds of years, but I’m going to choose not to believe it because I don’t agree with the conclusions.”

Which is fine - that’s up to you. But don’t act that those of us on this forum who disagree - which includes a number of amateur and pro/former pro boxers, Muay Thai fighters, wrestlers, and BJJ practitioners - don’t know what we’re talking about, and “can’t say for sure.”

Yea we can. We see it every single day in the gym.

And dude, I’m not trying to berate you or argue. I’m just saying that this new school idea of “Well, they succeeded IN SPITE of the way they were training” pisses me off to no end.[/quote]

“There can be loads of empirical evidence dating back hundreds of years, but I’m going to choose not to believe it because I don’t agree with the conclusions.”

I haven’t seen it if there are any and I apologize for the ignorance. And I want to mention I never took a stance against anyone’s beliefs. What I did write is that the truth lies in the eyes of the beholder. Experts and pundits will always agree and disagree… so to base so much faith into dubious empirical evidence seems moot. Rather, hear it from the ‘experts’, see it for yourself, and you decide in the end (hopefully still with an open mind) which side you’re gonna take.

My opinion is based on mostly what I’ve seen.

I’ve seen high school varsity wrestlers come into BJJ class. Fresh off the season, right around last month. They can’t weather the storm. And it’s not because they are out of shape, it is because BJJ brings different elements into the game.

Over at the local PAL, you spar, kid has a soft belly, hit em once and his cardio is out the window. Perhaps the kid should spend more time sharpening his defense, and his body density.

Take Lance Armstrong. Superb endurance athlete. He had to train separately for a marathon. Explains in an article how running is a different endurance sport. Chat: Lance Armstrong | Runner's World

ON THE OTHER HAND…

Manny Pacqiuao, runs 5 miles daily during fight camp.
So does Mayweather and countless other combat athletes…

But there are also many that don’t.

Muay Thai fighters do run, and many run daily, but it’s at a turtle pace. Nothing remotely close to 3 miles in under 21 minutes. At least in Thailand.

So in the end, it’s not so much about how much you’re running… It’s only about how it can help YOU in the end. So if you feel it’s necessary, by all means.

30

Jarvan- All the wrestlers you see in your BJJ class, have never had a punch thrown at them that’s why they gas . They tense up and do what everyone has done there first time actually fighting GAS. This is not unique to BJJ, it happens in all sports where someone is trying to take your head off. BY the way 21 minutes is a turtles pace, 18 minutes now that’s starting to push the fast button. You get to 17’s and you are fast. If your going to fight just take the pill ( the 5 mile a day pill) and be done with it don’t over think it.

31

I always find if I’m not running…Heck at least a 1 mile sprint a week, that my sparring and conditioning suffers. I find skipping rope really easy, but running raises my conditioning level more personally. I know it’s not a one size fits all prescription, but I skipped 1,000 skips today, could pick it up again in a couple weeks and be fine. Running however, is a different story. Every time I come back to running after changes in my program I wind up sucking wind.

32

I don’t see how anyone who runs could say it doesn’t help them. It makes a very noticeable difference.

The only way I think you could argue otherwise is if you don’t run and therefore have no idea how much it helps in all other sports.

33

[quote]Kirks wrote:
I don’t see how anyone who runs could say it doesn’t help them. It makes a very noticeable difference.

The only way I think you could argue otherwise is if you don’t run and therefore have no idea how much it helps in all other sports. [/quote]

Actually a good point.

Wrestling in high school, our coach used to make us run with the cross country track team on saturday mornings. Our team wouldn’t necessarily outrun them, but we definitely kept up. We would then proceed to have a 3 hour practice with one water break. during the other 5 - 6 days we jogged in the gymnasium for the warm up and break a sweat.

From my own experience, my conditioning in grappling right now is superior than that of the 14 - 18 year old version of me… and I rarely run now. Only time I ‘run’ is when it’s nice out here in Jersey and I make my way up to the trails. I don’t even run, I ruck. Maybe a 12 minute/mile pace.

I’m taking a trip to thailand in 2 weeks for a 3 month fight camp. Gonna be running everyday. I’ll have a better idea how it effects me then.

34

So the question of road work for fighters has been brought up a million times already and in this latest article on TNation it is mentioned again and not surprisingly it speaks against road work…or I should say “jogging” which is the term the author used to describe what boxers do. He also used the same term, jogging, to describe what competitive distance runners do in training. Someone who is preparing to run a 2 hour marathon or sub 4 minute mile is not jogging.

The author inevitably brings up Dr. Tabata, because every anti-“jogging”/pro-HIIT article mentions Tabata, as having shown the superior fat loss effects of the Tabata method (when as far as I know, Tabata didn’t do any fat loss testing which makes sense since he was dealing with elite athletes who were not fat). He left out the fact that Tabata used athletes who were already in great shape (hmmmmm, how did they get that way?) and he was simply seeing if there was a way to get them into better shape so in other words, Tabatas were not meant for getting in shape (or fat loss) but going from great shape to greater shape. Tabatas also include, and everyone leaves this part out (I wonder why?), some longer duration endurance work.

I would bet that 99.9% of the people who set out to do Tabatas are not in good enough shape to do them, they aren’t going to do them correctly regardless and, most importantly, do not even need to do them in the first place.

35

[quote]zecarlo wrote:
So the question of road work for fighters has been brought up a million times already and in this latest article on TNation it is mentioned again and not surprisingly it speaks against road work…or I should say “jogging” which is the term the author used to describe what boxers do. He also used the same term, jogging, to describe what competitive distance runners do in training. Someone who is preparing to run a 2 hour marathon or sub 4 minute mile is not jogging.

The author inevitably brings up Dr. Tabata, because every anti-“jogging”/pro-HIIT article mentions Tabata, as having shown the superior fat loss effects of the Tabata method (when as far as I know, Tabata didn’t do any fat loss testing which makes sense since he was dealing with elite athletes who were not fat). He left out the fact that Tabata used athletes who were already in great shape (hmmmmm, how did they get that way?) and he was simply seeing if there was a way to get them into better shape so in other words, Tabatas were not meant for getting in shape (or fat loss) but going from great shape to greater shape. Tabatas also include, and everyone leaves this part out (I wonder why?), some longer duration endurance work.

I would bet that 99.9% of the people who set out to do Tabatas are not in good enough shape to do them, they aren’t going to do them correctly regardless and, most importantly, do not even need to do them in the first place. [/quote]
The original Tabata study I believe had the trainees preforming one LISS workout a week. The idea that anaerobic training will yield better cardiovascular shape than aerobic training is also false. It depends on what you’re training for, and the anaerobic system, both lactic and alactic are pretty difficult to actually improve to any significant amount, we’re talking seconds. The burning calories argument has also been challenged by Lyle Mcdonald in a really great series he did.

36

[quote]zecarlo wrote:
So the question of road work for fighters has been brought up a million times already and in this latest article on TNation it is mentioned again and not surprisingly it speaks against road work…or I should say “jogging” which is the term the author used to describe what boxers do. He also used the same term, jogging, to describe what competitive distance runners do in training. Someone who is preparing to run a 2 hour marathon or sub 4 minute mile is not jogging.

The author inevitably brings up Dr. Tabata, because every anti-“jogging”/pro-HIIT article mentions Tabata, as having shown the superior fat loss effects of the Tabata method (when as far as I know, Tabata didn’t do any fat loss testing which makes sense since he was dealing with elite athletes who were not fat). He left out the fact that Tabata used athletes who were already in great shape (hmmmmm, how did they get that way?) and he was simply seeing if there was a way to get them into better shape so in other words, Tabatas were not meant for getting in shape (or fat loss) but going from great shape to greater shape. Tabatas also include, and everyone leaves this part out (I wonder why?), some longer duration endurance work.

I would bet that 99.9% of the people who set out to do Tabatas are not in good enough shape to do them, they aren’t going to do them correctly regardless and, most importantly, do not even need to do them in the first place. [/quote]

A guy in the livespill cited benefits of jogging start to fall off around the 40km/week mark.

Anyone in this forum running four 10Ks a week?

37

Update from Thailand:

Many pro fighters where I’m at (MMA and Muay Thai)

Nobody goes running here.

38

[quote]zecarlo wrote:
So the question of road work for fighters has been brought up a million times already and in this latest article on TNation it is mentioned again and not surprisingly it speaks against road work…or I should say “jogging” which is the term the author used to describe what boxers do. He also used the same term, jogging, to describe what competitive distance runners do in training. Someone who is preparing to run a 2 hour marathon or sub 4 minute mile is not jogging.

The author inevitably brings up Dr. Tabata, because every anti-“jogging”/pro-HIIT article mentions Tabata, as having shown the superior fat loss effects of the Tabata method (when as far as I know, Tabata didn’t do any fat loss testing which makes sense since he was dealing with elite athletes who were not fat). He left out the fact that Tabata used athletes who were already in great shape (hmmmmm, how did they get that way?) and he was simply seeing if there was a way to get them into better shape so in other words, Tabatas were not meant for getting in shape (or fat loss) but going from great shape to greater shape. Tabatas also include, and everyone leaves this part out (I wonder why?), some longer duration endurance work.

I would bet that 99.9% of the people who set out to do Tabatas are not in good enough shape to do them, they aren’t going to do them correctly regardless and, most importantly, do not even need to do them in the first place. [/quote]

Agreed. Left a comment on that article. It was very insulting I thought to boxers and fighters.

39

I don’t think it’s insulting at all. I think you might be taking it personally only because it doesn’t jive with your personal agenda.

40

[quote]Will207 wrote:

[quote]zecarlo wrote:
So the question of road work for fighters has been brought up a million times already and in this latest article on TNation it is mentioned again and not surprisingly it speaks against road work…or I should say “jogging” which is the term the author used to describe what boxers do. He also used the same term, jogging, to describe what competitive distance runners do in training. Someone who is preparing to run a 2 hour marathon or sub 4 minute mile is not jogging.

The author inevitably brings up Dr. Tabata, because every anti-“jogging”/pro-HIIT article mentions Tabata, as having shown the superior fat loss effects of the Tabata method (when as far as I know, Tabata didn’t do any fat loss testing which makes sense since he was dealing with elite athletes who were not fat). He left out the fact that Tabata used athletes who were already in great shape (hmmmmm, how did they get that way?) and he was simply seeing if there was a way to get them into better shape so in other words, Tabatas were not meant for getting in shape (or fat loss) but going from great shape to greater shape. Tabatas also include, and everyone leaves this part out (I wonder why?), some longer duration endurance work.

I would bet that 99.9% of the people who set out to do Tabatas are not in good enough shape to do them, they aren’t going to do them correctly regardless and, most importantly, do not even need to do them in the first place. [/quote]

A guy in the livespill cited benefits of jogging start to fall off around the 40km/week mark.

Anyone in this forum running four 10Ks a week?[/quote]
Some do more, but it’s also kind of arbitrary to say 40km. 40 km for what? In order to improve aerobic endurance, usually more aerobic work is the best option. I’m not talking about mixed needs sports, but there is a reason the kenyan runners sometimes run up to 3 times a day.