The fitness world is so divided on things, it’s entertaining.  A fun one right now that produces all sorts of debates is CARDIO/AEROBIC TRAINING.

Out of the gates I will state that I think heavy weights, and intense effort for short(er) durations provide better and more efficient benefits than traditional cardio (20+ minutes at something like 180-age beats/minute).

So I wanna get a discussion going about how much “cardio” is too much…because saying that it is disastrous for one’s health to do anything more than 10 minutes is probably a bit too black and white, IMO.

I think training for or running a 5k 2/3 times a week is a safe goal that shouldn’t interfere with other athletic endeavors.  But that is only about 60-90 minutes/week.  This is different than 10 mile runs, or hours on the elliptical…

Now, for me personally-I find steady state stuff boring, and have never done it enough to interfere with my own goals of strength and power-but I understand how that could be problematic. Such as in sports-once the athletes are already in shape, through their games, and sport practice they likely receive enough conditioning and perhaps additional running etc is counter productive…seems like this is a trend that is picking up speed in the S&C team sports world. Pretty cool.

Easily my favorite stance is that of Jason Ferrugia…who says that you should either go really hard and short like hill sprints, or long and easy, such as walking for an hour.

So, I know not much of a post, but I want to know–HOW MUCH “CARDIO” IS TOO MUCH?