Women’s World Cup 2019

[4matic]

Regarding golf being "great exercise" This is a ski forum for fuck's sake.

Who are you quoting? Exactly no one said "great"


There are plenty of drunk fat skiers that smoke. And, riding up the lift and skiing down ain't all that.

[4matic]

We’ve got to listen more and talk less.

While we're talking, let me offer you some free advice
Talk less
What?
Smile more

[waxman]

When was the last time the US military won a war?

Unassisted? The Civil War.

[JimmyCarter]

Unassisted? The Civil War.

[4matic]

Grenada was glorious victory for USA

[Danno]

There are plenty of drunk fat skiers that smoke. And, riding up the lift and skiing down ain't all that.

Even backcountry skiing is mostly just walking. If an 18 hole round of golf carrying a bag isn't exercise, not sure how one could characterize backcountry skiing as exercise.

But absolutely, walking the 18 holes isn't going to get you in shape for mt biking or any olympic sport. But it also isn't nothing.

[waxman]

Not to diminish the contribution but there's a bunch of Russians, Brits, Canucks, Chinese, Indians, ANZACS that might qualify for that shirt too.

[4matic]

any olympic sport.

Well, golf..

[EWG]

Not to diminish the contribution but there's a bunch of Russians, Brits, Canucks, Chinese, Indians, ANZACS that might qualify for that shirt too.

But not the French. And they thought they would win the Women's World Cup because they were hosting. Ha. The French don't do well on European soil.

[Kenny Satch]

World Series. Until the Blue Jays won back to back I never liked that term.

Now The World Series of Poker sound real legit.

Btw is the British Open winner able to say "I'm the world champion" ?

[Dantheman]

Not to diminish the contribution but there's a bunch of Russians, Brits, Canucks, Chinese, Indians, ANZACS that might qualify for that shirt too.

The numbers of Chinese and Russians killed in WWII were absolutely insane. The average American doesn't have the faintest idea how bad that war was for those countries, and certainly not anyone who would wear that shirt.

[4matic]

The numbers of Chinese and Russians killed in WWII were absolutely insane. The average American doesn't have the faintest idea how bad that war was for those countries, and certainly not anyone who would wear that shirt.

Or that France had more casualties than USA.

[brutah]

Regarding golf being "great exercise" I would agree if the alternative is sitting on your ass. It's like when doctors advise that walking is is just as good as running. It isn't. Not even close. Unless your only goal of exercising is to stave off heart disease. If that isn't your only goal, don't take fitness advice from your fucking doctor unless s/he is very fit. Also, don't take advice from anyone who thinks about exercise in terms of how many calories they imagine they have burned.

If you want to stay strong, fast and capable as you age, you need to utilize your strength, keep moving fast, and generally challenge your physical capabilities. Golf doesn't do any of that. This is a ski forum for fuck's sake. If you want to be skiing into your 80's, as I do, golf isn't even in the discussion when it comes to "great" exercise

Not to thread drift, but this advice basically contradicts most current exercise physiology theories including Steve House and Scott Johnson. Both claim that most beneficial Heart Rate Intensity level is 2 and 3 which is 40-60% of your max heart rate, a pace that you can easily talk. Translates to walking and light running for most people.

Even backcountry skiing is mostly just walking. If an 18 hole round of golf carrying a bag isn't exercise, not sure how one could characterize backcountry skiing as exercise.

Do you ski at a golf course? I'm not a golfer, but most golf courses are flat AF.

[detrusor]

China 20 million, Soviet Union 24 million.

US 418,500.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[Danno]

Do you ski at a golf course? I'm not a golfer, but most golf courses are flat AF.

Fair enough, but most people don't ski in 90 degree weather with a golf bag slung over their shoulder.

I'm not a golfer either, FWIW. I just know that a shit ton of walking is decent exercise. It's not exercise designed to optimize performance for the sports I do, but it is exercise in terms of all the health metrics.

[SumJongGuy]

Or that France had more casualties than USA.

Well duh, the US didn't enter the conflicts until late in the game when the other combatants had been pounding eachother relentlessly for years. We were like the competitor in the WWE battle royal who hides under the ring until there are only one or two others remaining and they are wrecked from going on for an hour.

We were the only remaining super power whose factories, navies and air forces weren't decimated. That's also why our economy did so well in the 50s and 60s, no real competition.

[4matic]

Well duh,

Yes, it was a tongue in cheek comment to the poster that made an uninformed populist comment about France.

[Danno]

Not to thread drift, but this advice basically contradicts most current exercise physiology theories including Steve House and Scott Johnson. Both claim that most beneficial Heart Rate Intensity level is 2 and 3 which is 40-60% of your max heart rate, a pace that you can easily talk. Translates to walking and light running for most people.

As this thread is devoted to the women's world cup and we're discussing the exercise value of golfing, I'd say we're already pretty drifted.

I'm curious about this (I have heard it but only in vague terms). I also have heard/read that HIIT is the way to improve performance. Are the two theories reconcilable or are they looking at different things?

[SB]

Launching a new sport!

Cross country ski golfing, competitors will ski the first 9 holes with 70 lbs of golf bag on back while whacking little orange balls into holes. The last 9 holes they can dump the golf bag but spectators will be throwing lawn darts from the sides of the course while they are in play.

[4matic]

Moderate exercise offers all the health benefit of HIT without the associated risks of injury.

Athletic performance is a separate discussion and imo HI resistance training is superior to high intensity aerobic. Ideally, for performance, a blend of hi-lo resistance and aerobic is likely ideal. The research is mixed but most athletes value a long slow warm down after HIT. Supposedly it assists recovery.

[Dantheman]

I'm curious about this (I have heard it but only in vague terms). I also have heard/read that HIIT is the way to improve performance. Are the two theories reconcilable or are they looking at different things?

This is a simple question with a long and complex answer that is highly dependent of what sport/activity you're training for, your current fitness level, and your own personal physiological strengths and weaknesses.

[I've seen black diamonds!]

Not to thread drift, but this advice basically contradicts most current exercise physiology theories including Steve House and Scott Johnson. Both claim that most beneficial Heart Rate Intensity level is 2 and 3 which is 40-60% of your max heart rate, a pace that you can easily talk. Translates to walking and light running for most people.

I've read the House/ Johnson book and the new one with Journet too, as well as a number of others on the topic. My advice doesn't contradict theirs. Yes, if you are training for endurance, most of your time needs to be spent on long slow distances. But strength training matters a great deal, and the House/ Johnson book in particular doesn't neglect it. In fact, of all the books I've read on endurance training, it has by far the best section on why strength training matter and how to do it. The protocols in that book for hill sprints (as a replacement for weight training) and weighted pull ups are particularly excellent, as is the advice on hauling rocks or water up hill then running down. Another thing I got from House/Johnson was replacing squats (which can aggravate my arthritic back) with weighted box steps. Awesome book.

The other thing about long slow distances is that the benefits are pretty darn specific. Biking doesn't help all that much with running which doesn't help that much with swimming, etc. But many people running/biking/swimming are also trying to do it fast some of the time. That matters. Many also learn that an hour or two of strength training a week will improve performance and reduce the risk of injury. If you carry a golf bag around for 10+ hours a week, you will get better at hauling a golf bag but not much else.

Look, if my dad, who is 72, would golf 3 times a week, and get in a couple sessions of some sort of resistance training, I'd be psyched. What he does is walk slowly 2-4 miles a day on flat roads. His doctor tells him how great it is. He is aging fast.

My mom is the same age. She also walks a lot, but with more hikes in the mountains. She also does pilates and yoga with lots of strength poses (or whatever they call it). My mom can still (and does) ski all day about 50-80 days a year. We still go on moderate ski tours together. She's not hard core. Never has been. But she takes care of herself.

The difference between them is stark. When I was young my father was by far the more physically capable and athletic. Now it is completely reversed. Before my parents were divorced they were what I call "ex-hippie recreational farmers" who raised sheep in addition to working day jobs. That farm work kept my dad strong and lean. Once that stopped it's been down hill ever since.

Last comment before I let it go:

I used to teach with a guy who had been a pretty good D1 college golfer. Arizona State I think. When he had a kid he went from 2 rounds a week to 1 a month. "Are you really that busy?" I asked him. "I had to chose between golf and staying fit." he told me. He rode a bike and lifted. When the kid got older the golf time went back up.

[Fritz]

Damn. This thread is sucking.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[EWG]

If we continue with this is should be it’s own thread, but to answer Danno...

To explain where this is coming from, I have multiple family members who are professional coaches (one happens to coach olympians and world champions), another who is a pro nutritionist, and I have run a bike team, played a sport semi pro, etc. I live in this world everyday.

With that background, my current opinion is that as a normal guy trying to be generally fit, what you want is a combination of short, high intensity exercise that pushes your max heart rate; easy exercise for an hour or two; and full body strength work. As an example, if each week you did one day each of those three things, and did them correctly, you would be pretty damn fit. You could do that in three hours per week.

Edit: I should specify - this would be for general life fitness and work well for almost everyone. However, if you are trying to train for a specific activity and do that at a very high level, you would want a different program. Someone mentioned House and Johnson, who are very focused on quite long endurance activity - that would have a tweaked program, but you'd still want some high intensity and some strength. On the other extreme, if you were training to be a sprinter, you'd push toward the other extreme, but you'd still want some slow and easy for recovery. However, the basic trio still holds as building blocks.

Happy to get into it further if folks are interested.

[adrenalated]

Damn. This thread is sucking.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

Right? Although it's no surprise that a thread about badass women accomplishing something big on a world stage has turned into men debating whether walking around a golf course or jerking off is better exercise.