PDA

View Full Version : How do you define fit?



NC Buckeye
12-09-10, 22:01
I started this year at 5'9" 208lbs and I haven't grown but I am down to 174 as of this morning with 1 lbs left to go for my annual goal.

I got through the first 25lbs with diet modification alone. If you are interested I will post my theory about in in Rob_S's diet thread. I'm am pretty ADD so I needed something pretty simple.

Almost a month ago I decided to get serious about not failing on my goal and added a goal to run 3 miles every other day. I have logged 45 miles since then. The first "run" took about 40 minutes and 2 bottles of water, tonights took 29:15, and my goal for the next one 28:35.

In 2011 I plan to set a 500 mile target and to set a fitness goal each month. January's is 40 push-ups each day. Feb's will be pull-up's et cetera.

I am trying to take small but consistent steps towards "fitness" and stay within my limitations, so I don't get out of the habit due to injury. Unfortunately my long term goals are simple and not well defined. I want to be able to keep up with my son at least until he is in HS (he's 5) and feel good with my shirt off. I would like to work towards a more quantifiable goal.

What metrics do you think define fit? 5K in 21mins? Ability to do 10 wide grip pull-ups? 20? 30 push-ups in a minute? 60 in a set? 10 reps of 225? Max of twice your body weight? I don't know.

billy-s
12-10-10, 09:53
Very personal question. How fit do you want to be? Back in my military days I could run 4 miles in 26 minutes, no problem. Now I'd be happy with 35 minutes.

If you could go out today and subject yourself to a different workout routine...circuit training, wind sprints, hill running...something out of your norm and not be sore the next day then you are 'fit'.

A technique I use to get my pushups up is to pick a 3 hour block and do 10 pushups every 10 minutes. It's easy do start off with and after 3 hours you would have done 180 pushups. It wont feel like much but you wont get too sore so you can keep this up daily. Increase it to 25 pushups every 10 minutes and that should get you to a good standard.

Some basic times I've seen in the past:

1 mile run: 6-7 min is good
50-60 pushups in a minute
80+ pushups, strict non stop, no time limit
50-60 situps in a minute
3 mile run in under 22 is very good for casual fitness

10km run in 50 minutes is respectable endurance.

Start getting some windsprints in your routine, they help in fast twitch muscle fitness and in recovery times. Get some hill work in as well and if that is not possible do a lot of real stairs, stay away from machines they are too easy compared to real road runs with wind resistance and real stairs and hills.

Hope this helps, I'm also trying to get back to my glory days of fitness, he he.

300WM
12-10-10, 10:59
A good way to determine if you are fit is your rested heart beats per minute. You do not have to look like an Olympian or run a 4 min. mile to be fit.

Cazwell
12-10-10, 11:00
How I would define it would depend on what you want to get "fit" for.

General fitness, I think of a balanced blend of;

1.) Strength (body-weight reps / core strength etc)
2.) Cardio (aerobic and anaerobic)
3.) Power (Multi-joint movements; Deads, squats, cleans, bench etc)
4.) Flexibility

I think fitness, particularly general fitness, must comprise a well rounded blend of "functional" ability.

I often check my general fitness by testing myself against military/police/fireman fitness measurements and evaluations.

I agree with the basics mentioned in the above post;

a fit man ought to be able to run a mile in 7 min. do 50+ pushups in a minute, 50 situps, run 3 miles, but should also be flexible (sit and reach) good range of motion, and have some power, for example, bench his weight, etc.

But then there is "fit" for a particular sport, that may require an emphasis on certain body systems or types of strength . As an Example, I am 6'2". Last year I weighed 195 lbs. I was lean, and strong, and had a lot of power resulting in heavy and explosive lifts. To maintain that weight, my long runs and cardio suffered a little, but I was trying fight in a particular weight class, so I made it work. I was "fit" relative to what I was trying to accomplish.

Right now, I have been spending a lot more time in the mountains, climbing etc, and I weigh 170lbs. with a focus on being able to hike and climb all day, and lift my body weight repetitively in climbs. This requires the only muscle I have be strong enough to pull my self up on a crimper, not bench 315lb... I don't want extra weight.

NC Buckeye
12-10-10, 13:35
A good way to determine if you are fit is your rested heart beats per minute. You do not have to look like an Olympian or run a 4 min. mile to be fit.

My resting heart rate has been about 54 the last 3 times I have checked it. In HS it was in the mid 40's.

I think that is pretty good and on my runs I get it into the mid 180's at the end. I typically accelerate through the run and if I have anything left at the end I add incline.

It should be noted that all of my runs are on a treadmill as by knees are such that I can't run down hill, the pounding is too much. Up hill is much easier on them.

Watrdawg
12-10-10, 14:32
FIT is a very subjective notion. For example, I'm 47, 5'5" 175. I'm in the gym 4 days a week and martial arts, Taekwondo and Krav Maga, 3 nights a week. I have arthritis on both of my knees so I can't run anymore without being in major pain the next day. However, I still bench 300lbs, squat 400lbs and deadlift close to 450. Not much different than when I was in the Army and in my early 20's. The main difference between now and then is that I used to do my 2 mile run between 11 - 12 minutes. Now I take a spin class during 2 of my gym days and I've gained almost 30lbs but thankfully it's mostly muscle. Still wear the same size waist. So for being 47 I will call myself fit.

300WM
12-11-10, 07:14
My resting heart rate has been about 54 the last 3 times I have checked it. In HS it was in the mid 40's.


I remember when George Bush 2 was President. One of the questions about his fitness regimine they bombarded him with was what was his heartbeats per min. count. It was always 48 to 52 and everyone was amazed. I don't know of a President that took care of himself the way GB2 did.

120mm
12-11-10, 10:45
This is a very stimulating topic for me.

I turn 47 in a couple weeks, am 5'9" 165 pounds, used to be 240ish. RHR is 38-42 and I look fit.

I define fit by two things: First, I look at my capabilities. I am not as strong or as fast as I was at 24, but I have better endurance. I also have fine tuned my workout to where my recovery is better, despite my age.

I also define "fit" by my appearance. While one aspect of that is how I look in the mirror, the second is how others appear to look at/react to me. I've noticed, since becoming "fit" the demographic of person who will approach and interact with me has been slanting heavily toward younger, fitter, more attractive people. I am attributing this to people self-selecting people they identify with.

Plus, my wife gives me lots of positive feedback about my appearance. That is huge for me.

300WM
12-25-10, 12:04
This is a very stimulating topic for me.

I turn 47 in a couple weeks, am 5'9" 165 pounds, used to be 240ish. RHR is 38-42 and I look fit.

I define fit by two things: First, I look at my capabilities. I am not as strong or as fast as I was at 24, but I have better endurance. I also have fine tuned my workout to where my recovery is better, despite my age.

I also define "fit" by my appearance. While one aspect of that is how I look in the mirror, the second is how others appear to look at/react to me. I've noticed, since becoming "fit" the demographic of person who will approach and interact with me has been slanting heavily toward younger, fitter, more attractive people. I am attributing this to people self-selecting people they identify with.

Plus, my wife gives me lots of positive feedback about my appearance. That is huge for me.

No doubt! I am not ashamed to say that I want my wife to still be able to get a "visual stimulation" from an almost 50 year old man. Your mirror will tell you a lot about how fit you are.

120mm
12-26-10, 04:17
No doubt! I am not ashamed to say that I want my wife to still be able to get a "visual stimulation" from an almost 50 year old man. Your mirror will tell you a lot about how fit you are.

There is something else....

My wife tells me that my waist size and *ahem* "reach" are inversely proportional....

drsal
12-26-10, 10:02
One can be 'fit' but not healthy, apologies if this appears to put a damper on the OP, no disrespect intended. Two personal examples,
a former associate, a 'fit' 44yo marathon runner, martial arts guy,died last year of colon ca. Close friend, 46, daily workout 1-2 hrs, jogger,cyclist, extremely fit, passed away 2yrsago, astrocytoma, a rare type of brain cancer. I can give more examples, however, point being, just because you are 'young and fit', please don't forget to get a regular check up every year or two or three for that matter. Stay healthy....and fit too!

J8127
12-26-10, 12:51
Said by someone wiser than myself,

Combat Fitness is being able to outrun the guy you cant beat up, and beat up the guy you cant outrun.

NC Buckeye
12-26-10, 15:58
One can be 'fit' but not healthy, apologies if this appears to put a damper on the OP, no disrespect intended. Two personal examples,
a former associate, a 'fit' 44yo marathon runner, martial arts guy,died last year of colon ca. Close friend, 46, daily workout 1-2 hrs, jogger,cyclist, extremely fit, passed away 2yrsago, astrocytoma, a rare type of brain cancer. I can give more examples, however, point being, just because you are 'young and fit', please don't forget to get a regular check up every year or two or three for that matter. Stay healthy....and fit too!

I had stage IV Burkitt's Lymphoma when I was 19. I was 155lbs, 3% body fat, resting heat rate in the mid 40's, worked out 3+ hours a day, and ate about 6000 calories a day.

You can't control if you are going to have cancer et cetera. You can reduce your risks against other heath problems though and being in shape can make them all more survivable too.

drsal
12-27-10, 19:16
You can reduce your risks against other heath problems though and being in shape can make them all more survivable too.


In complete agreement !

FMJ556
12-28-10, 22:26
Genetics for better or worse plays a very big role in good health and longevity. Sometimes no amount of working out can prevent heart disease or cancer . Triathletes have died of clogged arteries while chain smokers have lived to 100+ . Someday we'll be able to download "patches" for the flaws in our DNA to fix the genetic glitches like we do for our computers...

The_War_Wagon
12-29-10, 11:01
Genetics for better or worse plays a very big role in good health and longevity.

Very true. My dad is the first male in the family since since 1846, to make it to age 73 (he'll turn 75 this coming June). He can still fit in the Coast Guard uniform he retired out of 35 years ago, but his heart is FULL of stints & bypasses; he has ulcers, and high blood pressure too. He's FIT, but he's NOT healthy. Invariably, the Big Three (heart attack, stroke, cancer) take all the men in our family, with cancer being the most prominent one - he's had some skin cancers removed, too.


Someday we'll be able to download "patches" for the flaws in our DNA to fix the genetic glitches like we do for our computers...

Doubtful. Physical fitness is good and important, and diet, medicine, and science have done much to improve longevity, but Original Sin can NOT be, 'outrun.'

Or, as George Carlin put it - in his "Book-of-the-Month-Club" routine on 1982's A Place for my Stuff - MY favorite book title of his was, "Eat, Run, Stay Fit & Die Anyway!"

nhskull21
12-29-10, 23:28
One idea, good numbers on your blood work. Healthy heart rate and organs. Normal bodily functions.

Second idea, max the army physical fitness test for a 17 year old. Id haved to look for the specific numbers.

Jay Cunningham
12-30-10, 05:41
One thing I wanted to throw in - too often people equate skinny with fit, and that just ain't so.

Many times skinny is weak, skinny is sickly, skinny has no endurance. I have known numerous guys with moderate guts who were very strong and had great endurance.

2% body fat does not necessarily equal fit, not by a long shot.

:secret:

montanadave
12-30-10, 08:44
Here's a topical column from yesterday's NYT which discusses how "fitness" (once a baseline has been established) can be maintained during periods of substantially reduced exercise.

http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/12/29/phys-ed-if-you-are-fit-you-can-take-it-easy/?ref=health

The trick is establishing that baseline! :laugh:

120mm
12-30-10, 10:47
One thing I wanted to throw in - too often people equate skinny with fit, and that just ain't so.

Many times skinny is weak, skinny is sickly, skinny has no endurance. I have known numerous guys with moderate guts who were very strong and had great endurance.

2% body fat does not necessarily equal fit, not by a long shot.

:secret:

Yeah, well, whatever. If your average fatass weighed less, he'd be more "fit" and/or capable.

Skinny that doesn't work out, yeah. Skinny that does a large variety of fitness exercise kicks fatasses 10 for 10.

I've been both of those guys, and let me tell you, I was lying to myself when I thought I had a gut, was strong and had great endurance.

chuckman
12-30-10, 15:10
Yeah, well, whatever. If your average fatass weighed less, he'd be more "fit" and/or capable.

Skinny that doesn't work out, yeah. Skinny that does a large variety of fitness exercise kicks fatasses 10 for 10.

I've been both of those guys, and let me tell you, I was lying to myself when I thought I had a gut, was strong and had great endurance.

Generally, I agree. Occasionally there are exceptions, but they are exceptions and not the rule. A buddy of mine, we were corpsmen together, he went to BUDS. He was 20, 21% bodyfat. He performed to standard, and actually outperformed most of his colleagues when it was cold because of his BF. Again, an exception.

I know a ton of skinnies who can't run from here to there without dying, or do 10 push-ups, but I know more fat people who are un-fit than skinny people.

120mm
12-30-10, 19:51
Generally, I agree. Occasionally there are exceptions, but they are exceptions and not the rule. A buddy of mine, we were corpsmen together, he went to BUDS. He was 20, 21% bodyfat. He performed to standard, and actually outperformed most of his colleagues when it was cold because of his BF. Again, an exception.

I know a ton of skinnies who can't run from here to there without dying, or do 10 push-ups, but I know more fat people who are un-fit than skinny people.

Lots of variables, here. Hard is hard. A dude that can gut out things is tough, period.

There are some definite negatives to being thin; You mentioned the cold. When I was that guy with the gut, I was temp insensitive. Now, I freeze my ass off. But it's just easier to do about anything else, which means I can accomplish with ease what I used to have to "gut out". That means when "gut out" time comes, I got a hell of a lot more reserves.

The two other downsides to skinny are food intake (my mates get nervous around meal times, as I think they suspect I will kill, clean, cook and eat them if I cannot eat right away) and believe it or not, sitting.

I got no more cushion in my ass, in other words.

FMJ556
12-30-10, 21:45
Dunno if this has been discussed but an intriguing observation about weight is the so called "Obesity Paradox":


"However, recent studies have shown that obese people with chronic diseases have a better chance of survival than normal-weight individuals do. This finding has been called the obesity paradox."

link (http://health.howstuffworks.com/human-body/bodily-feats/obesity-paradox.htm)

120mm
12-30-10, 23:48
Dunno if this has been discussed but an intriguing observation about weight is the so called "Obesity Paradox":

link (http://health.howstuffworks.com/human-body/bodily-feats/obesity-paradox.htm)

Ah, yes. Nothing like junk/pop "science".

So, for those with chronic diseases, the obese have a better survival rate. Let's look at that using logic.

I would venture that being obese leads to a higher incidence of chronic disease. I would also venture that obese people have more diagnosed chronic disease, primarily because it affects them more dramatically than non-obese.

I would then take an educated guess that the most non-obese people who are diagnosed with chronic diseases have more serious diseases or more advanced/dramatic forms of them. Frankly, I know non-obese people that carry around chronic diseases that don't bother to get medical treatment because it just doesn't affect them that much.

From a personal standpoint, I had a couple of so-called chronic conditions that just magically disappeared when I lost my 80 pounds, for instance.

I'd like to see what they mean by "chronic disease". A skinny guy will die of chronic heart disease, but a fatass will survive with so-called "chronic knee pain" (which is really caused by being a fatass) and both could count for a "1" in the survive/doesn't survive category.

FMJ556
12-31-10, 07:50
I wouldn't say it is "junk science". Seems like the association between obesity and the lower incidence of heart failure is complex. This study was published in the American Heart Journal, which is pretty reputable:


An obesity paradox in acute heart failure: Analysis of body mass index and inhospital mortality for 108927 patients in the Acute Decompensated Heart Failure National Registry

Results

Body mass index quartiles in the 108927 hospitalizations were QI (16.0-23.6 kg/m2), QII (23.7-27.7 kg/m2), QIII (27.8-33.3 kg/m2), and QIV (33.4-60.0 kg/m2). Patients in the higher BMI quartiles were younger, had more diabetes, and had a higher left ventricular ejection fraction. Inhospital mortality rates decreased in a near-linear fashion across successively higher BMI quartiles. After adjustments for age, sex, blood urea nitrogen, blood pressure, creatinine, sodium, heart rate, and dyspnea at rest, BMI quartile still predicted mortality risk. For every 5-U increase in BMI, the odds of risk-adjusted mortality was 10% lower (95% CI 0.88-0.93, P < .0001).

Conclusions

In this cohort of hospitalized patients with HF, higher BMI was associated with lower inhospital mortality risk. The relationship between BMI and adverse outcomes in HF appears to be complex and deserving of further study.

link (http://www.ahjonline.com/article/PIIS0002870306008271/abstract?browse_volume=153&issue_key=TOC%40%40JOURNALSNOSUPP%40YMHJ%400153%400001&issue_preview=no&select1=no&select1=no&vol=)

JeffWard
12-31-10, 08:10
BMI has a very poor correlation to fitness for many.

I run about 29.5 BMI... Borderline OBESE.

I'm 6'4" and 240-243 lbs. With a 34" waist! I run 6-8% body-fat year round, and I'm a fitness professional. I TEACH
the business of personal training for a living n addition to my own clients.

I define "fit" as being able to consistently kick the crap out of my 20-25 year old "aspiring fitness professionals" in standardized fitness testing!

I can out run, out lift, and out sprint 90% of them, half my age. Good enough for me! LOL

JeffWard

Age 40...
http://i231.photobucket.com/albums/ee197/Jeff_Ward/Shorts.jpg

120mm
12-31-10, 09:38
I wouldn't say it is "junk science". Seems like the association between obesity and the lower incidence of heart failure is complex. This study was published in the American Heart Journal, which is pretty reputable:

link (http://www.ahjonline.com/article/PIIS0002870306008271/abstract?browse_volume=153&issue_key=TOC%40%40JOURNALSNOSUPP%40YMHJ%400153%400001&issue_preview=no&select1=no&select1=no&vol=)

Oops. Pry should've read the link.

But, it's not the first time some media types blew a medical study out of proportion.

FMJ556
12-31-10, 09:52
I agree BMI is pretty useless. Athletes exceed the "normal" limit more often than not. But I think one thing that is important to note is even superfit people can have chronic conditions like heart disease. Jim Fixx (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jim_Fixx) is an example. Though in his case his genetics and previous smoking and obesity probably played a major part.

Hammer27
12-31-10, 12:33
I'd define fit as being able to do your job without excessive exertion or stress.

Uglyguns
12-31-10, 12:50
I think the CF total is a good snap shot of fittness. Anyone of the girls would also be a good gauge. BMI is a joke at best.

V/r
Uglyguns

Chameleox
12-31-10, 15:58
There's a difference between "healthy" and "fit". While one may be healthy, they might not be fit.

A sedentary human being with a decent diet and blood numbers may very well be "healthy", but not fit, in the context of a strenuous activity (whether or not they're fit to their lifestyle is another matter).

The contrary is also true. A fit person, who runs 20+miles a day with minimal caloric intake may not be healthy, or even "fit" in a different arena than aerobic endurance. An overweight officer might be a cheeseburger away from a heart attack, can't run more than 10 yards to either chase a suspect or escape a fire, and has chronic back issues from their weight and posture is still "fit for duty"(:rolleyes:), but is certainly not healthy.

To define "fitness", you have to first define the parameters in which this "fitness" will be used, or measured.

Powerlifters, gymnasts, triathletes, LEOs, FFs, servicemen and -women, and bodybuilders all have different parameters for physical success. Within their own fields, they may be "fit". Put them in another field, and they may not be "fit". They may or may not be "healthy", as well.


I'd define fit as being able to do your job without excessive exertion or stress.
Yeah, that's about it.

bsf
01-06-11, 22:46
5K in 21mins? Achievable for many. That figure is probably in the ballpark. I cannot do it now. I need to work on cardio and stamina more.

Ability to do 10 wide grip pull-ups? 20? 20 dead hang, wide grip, pull ups: too high a general standard. If someone can do 10 proper, dead hang, wide grips they are doing pretty good IMO.

30 push-ups in a minute? 60 in a set? I think both of those are quite easy for males I consider to be fit.

10 reps of 225? Not likely. Too much variation in body type. For a general measure of fitness, I would rather see strength measured relative to body weight.

Max of twice your body weight?Holy hell batman. I know there are lots of people that can do that, but they are strong even compared to other “fit” people. Far too tough a standard.

crazymoose
01-09-11, 04:35
There is something else....

My wife tells me that my waist size and *ahem* "reach" are inversely proportional....

:sarcastic:

The ol' "sand around the flagpole" effect. Not ashamed to say that was one of the motivating factors for me to lose weight!

BooneGA
01-09-11, 07:25
I disagree with most people that say performance in the gym or physical appearance defines fitness.

Perfomance. The gym isnt where you determine how fit you are. It is where you train to perform in the real world. There are a ton of guys whos #s look good in the gym (and im sure they think they look great in the mirror) but whos "fitness" absolutely fails in real life.

If your body cant perform in the real world your fitness is worthless.

Rick

Uglyguns
01-09-11, 12:24
I disagree with most people that say performance in the gym or physical appearance defines fitness.

Perfomance. The gym isnt where you determine how fit you are. It is where you train to perform in the real world. There are a ton of guys whos #s look good in the gym (and im sure they think they look great in the mirror) but whos "fitness" absolutely fails in real life.

If your body cant perform in the real world your fitness is worthless.

Rick

I disagree. It depends on what type of gym you attend. If your doing a Helen or Kelly thats real world. I agree a bench press or a barbell curl isn't a true fitness gauge, but there are other gym's ie: Gym jones, Crossfit, Military athlete. Those type of work outs are a way to determine fitness.

V/r
Uglyguns

BooneGA
01-09-11, 12:46
As a former crossfiter and a 2 year member of Gym Jones I see where you are coming from.

But if your training in the gym doesnt result in improved performance OUTSIDE of the gym its worthless. You dont train for good times in the gym (why I stopped crossfit) you train in order to perform.

Rick

RogerinTPA
01-09-11, 13:05
If you are physically fit and the mind is weak, you are not in shape to deal with any situation, physically or mentally. Developing the mind and foster a warrior spirit first, is paramount IMHO.

QuickStrike
01-09-11, 15:48
If you are physically fit and the mind is weak, you are not in shape to deal with any situation, physically or mentally. Developing the mind and foster a warrior spirit first, is paramount IMHO.

How? You can't change personality easily and reading/thinking will only get you so far IMO.

Muay Thai keeps me in shape and forces me to keep going, through the pain of shin-to-shin blocks, body shots, nose bleeds, etc and being exhausted at times. Teaches me that only determination to execute the technique/timing will bring victory; and that cowering, wincing along with inactivity will only make things worse.

You need physical challenge to build the so called "warrior spirit". Approaching them with a fighting mentality is probably useful.

TehLlama
01-09-11, 18:29
For somebody who get a BMI right at 28% and honestly struggles to bench my own weight (6'2" 220), and clear 8 dead hang pullups, you'd never guess that my athsmatic ass can play soccer competitively or out-hike anybody in my company up a mountain.
For my body shape, I'm reasonably fit. Nowhere near where I could be, and still not close to where I feel I should be, but I can still outrun anybody who could beat me badly in a fight.

BooneGA
01-09-11, 18:34
A good example of my point earlier. Your "perfomance" in the gym would be laughed at by most gym rats, however you are able to perform OUTSIDE of the gym where it actually counts.

Rick

Tzoid
01-10-11, 13:30
BMI in my opinion is total bullshit... I'm 46 5'11" 210lbs and I weight train 4 days a week and cardio 3 days a week. The BMI indicates that I'm obese :confused:. I think it was formulated when the average male was 5'5 and 135lbs.

My knees are shot so I'm not a runner but I do what I can to stay as fit as I can. Diet and excersize with weight training and cardio has been my key to looking and feeling 10-15 years younger than most of my friends. 34" waist and I can see some ab muscles....yea I'm a big obese fat ass....

My keys have always been proper hydration...Water is the number one key to fitness. I try to drink a gallon or more a day. Many people confuse being dehydrated with being hungry.

I also eat a high protein low complex carb diet and try to eat 6 meals a day.

STS
01-27-11, 19:11
I'm 6'-4" and 220 lbs, I stay around 11-14% bodyfat depending on if I'm watching my diet or not, and yet every year on my physical, the damn department doc writes down that I am severely overweight and at risk for a cardiac event. According to his chart, I am supposed to be no more than 188 lbs! I'd be a walking skeleton.

For me, there are certain basic fitness goals I think most men should be able to do.

30 perfect pushups in a row with no stopping.
30 perfect situps in a row with no stopping.
1.5 mile run in under 12 minutes.
8 perfect pullups.

These aren't crazy wazoo numbers, but if an average guy can knock them out, he has a good foundation to work with.

You also have to look at what you are working out for? In high school and college, I just cared about putting size on, straight bodybuilding. In the military, I was more concerned with longer distance endurance. As a firefighter, I want to be able to perform balls to the wall for 10-15 minutes in full turnouts and SCBA (around 40lbs). After that I'm probably wrecked and heading to rehab for at least 15-30 minutes. But for that 10-15 minutes in a good working fire, I need to be able to perform at a high heart rate while also moving heavy things. So that is what I train for.

What is crazy is the younger guys usually drop first. There is always that fat older guy with retard strength that can just go and go. They have also been doing it for 20 years though so their bodies are used to the workload.

Tzoid
01-27-11, 19:17
STS,

I'm with ya Bro.. The BMI Chart says I should be 160-165lbs. I would look like I had Cancer. :rolleyes: