|
|
Forums:
Climbing Information:
Technique & Training:
Re: [Grizvok] GLYCOGEN STORES: To Deplete or Not?:
Edit Log
|
|
Learner
Jun 10, 2011, 6:15 AM
Views: 15145
Registered: May 28, 2011
Posts: 187
|
Grizvok wrote: Learner wrote: Grizvok wrote: You post some of the dumbest shit ever. Like seriously. I just got dumber from reading that. In no way are you correct. In fact look up how much exercise it takes to be TRULY glycogen depleted because I'll bet you aren't even close.  Of course your glycogen is never literally depleted. Perhaps you didn't catch this part of my original post: "I'm sure we all have our own opinions on what "depleted" means to us, and our muscle glycogen is not ever entirely depleted." I'm implying that my sources (ex., the author of book "9 Out of 10 Climbers Make the Same Mistakes") also realize that you don't ever truly deplete your glycogen stores. BTW, it's not a dumb question at all. There are very mixed opinions on it, and systems of training (ex., Muscle Logic) are based on it. Many people credit this type of training (draining yourself completely) for their increases in power endurance. If you have a problem with anything else I posted, you don't have the knowledge to understand its relevance. For example, many people claim that if you deplete your power endurance too much, you'll use bad technique, which makes you susceptible to injury. I was claiming it's not dangerous if, from that point on, you climb routes with sequences involving engrams you've already got well established. Maybe you don't know what engram means. Maybe a stiff prick like you can't tie together two pieces of information. Other than that, I don't appreciate your attitude, your reply was counterproductive and it doesn't belong in this thread. I've done my research on glycogen depletion and which athletes should even begin to even use the term when it comes to training and how to avoid it and/or use it as a method of increasing any type of fitness. Climbing isn't that sport. And I mean NOT EVEN CLOSE to the extreme that your forearms will be absolutely fucking fried hours and hours and hours before getting anywhere close to glycogen depletion especially when climbing something that you "need to have the engrams down" which means a tougher climb but one you know the balance of. Look up how many calories you are burning climbing, it isn't that much at all. And the term is anaerobic endurance. You should probably even come up with a half-assed definition of "depleted" instead of none at all because in reality you are just feeling tired from being pumped. Climb a 5.4 for 5 hours straight and let us know!
Why not just tell me this in your first reply instead of attacking me personally? All I did is read in 2 different climbing books now that you shouldn't deplete your glycogen stores. This didn't seem like it made sense, for one because I did realize that it's not realistic to do so in a climbing session. Two, in the process of stimulating an increase in energy stores, you'll have to use up (partially "deplete") some glycogen stores.
When I read the advice not to "deplete" glycogen stores, I thought that it was strange advice. I have to assume that these authors actually mean "don't deplete them too much." In other words, I assume they mean partial depletion. They're not actually implying that you ever come close to depleting glycogen stores 100% while climbing, just some percentage, and they're saying leave a sufficient amount (whatever that's supposed to be). I'm questioning the sources that give this advice--that's why this thread was posted. Get it?
As for the term, power endurance is just an informal term for anaerobic endurance. Of course I'm familiar with both--pick your favorite. From the dictionary in The Self-Coached Climber, page 218:
power endurance: The common name climbers use for anaerobic endurance.
(This post was edited by Learner on Jun 10, 2011, 7:14 AM)
|
|
|
Edit Log:
|
|
Post edited by Learner
() on Jun 10, 2011, 6:18 AM
|
|
Post edited by Learner
() on Jun 10, 2011, 6:24 AM
|
|
Post edited by Learner
() on Jun 10, 2011, 7:14 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
