fitness

[amsy_x]

what is better for losing weight...running fast over a shorter distance, or running slow over a longer distance?....thnx

[Ethel]

Apparently a mix is better. On one session, short and fast.

Another much further but slower.

And then traditional scouts pace - a jog alternated with sharp sprints.

[Keeprockin]

I would have thought distance is the better. You need to have your heart rate up to a reasonably high level for a while. Also takes approx 20 mins before you start burning into fat. Fast walking is probably as good as anything,puts less stress on knee joints

[parkesquay]

Is your question meant to be about fitness or weight loss cos they ain't necessarily the same thing. For example Ruby players 'bulk' up to be stronger. Consistency is the best answer anyway for both. One of the problems with any exercise where weight can be lost through liquid loss is that just having a drink of water shortly after puts it all back on. So one can get fitter but not necessaily lose weight. Usually longer distances are for stamina build-up and shorter for power but whatever way you go you have to do it consistently.

[lulubaloo]

Hi, the best way to burn fat is to bring your heart rate up and down, so go slow then fast slow then fast etc but don't be too regimented with the timing e.g. you could go slow for 2 mins fast for 4 mins slow for 1 min fast for 2 etc etc.

The idea is you are 'shocking' your metabolism, because if you run at the same pace for the whole time your body sort of gets used to it, so it's easier than going at all different paces...

I do a thing called a pyramid run were I start off slow and get faster and faster every 2-3 minutes until I cannot run any faster, then I start bringing the speed down a bit every 2-3 mins. So you peak in the middle of your run...

A good way of toning your legs is (if you are on a tredmill) is to put an incline on and do a fast walk.

Hope this helps...