
Why I Recommend Strength Training and NO Cardio If You're In A Startup - dicktalens
http://sett.com/dicktalens/why-i-recommend-strength-training-and-no-cardio
======
sequoia
Do startup "hackers" really need their own fitness regimen? Are they really
that set apart from the rest of the population and that similar to one
another? Is there a startup person diet as well? This one-size approach
doesn't make sense to me; it seems there are probably variations among startup
people & their needs similar if not identical to the general population, for
whom one work out plan will not fit all.

"Folks in tech tend to think... differently. They will often think in discrete
parts, rather than holistically. (This is call 'neckbearding,' and it's done
by people called 'neckbeards.')"

Sorry, _male_ startup people. Maybe targeting startup people as a niche market
for non-tech non-business related services is a good marketing move.
Personally, I hope to never ride my Startup Bike™ to get a Startup Latte™
followed by a trip to the Startup Gym™. I expect to consume the same bikes,
lattes, and gyms as the rest of the population. :)

~~~
dicktalens
>Are they really that set apart from the rest of the population and that
similar to one another?

Yes. :) Lifestyle is one of the biggest factors into fitness regimen fit. The
lifestyle of folks who work in tech/startups, especially with regards to
variability, tend to be far different than your average working Joe.

~~~
EnderMB
But is it REALLY that different to a lot of office workers? Developers and
startup types like to think that they are unique in having work hard for long
periods of time, but they really aren't. Junior Lawyers work long hours,
apprenticeship labourers work long hours, anyone involved in the creative
process for digital agencies work long hours, teachers that are starting out
work long hours. It's really no different to those careers, and they all seem
to manage to exercise and have some form of social life just fine.

My first job was a startup, and the hours weren't much different to working in
an agency (where I work now). I still manage to go to the gym three days a
week, and I manage to get a run in every week.

~~~
jc4p
So I clearly don't know you or what you do, but ou're definitely not wrong in
the general sense.

However, Dick and I spent the last year working 60-80+ hour weeks while our
company was stationed out of a pretty big coworking space. I can tell you that
in our time there, I only saw a single person out of the (what must be at
least several hundreds of other people) peers sharing our space with us at the
gym, where as Dick and I went at least 3x a week every week.

I also lost 60lb while working more than I've ever worked in my life (by
following Dick's program) and here's the punchline: 20lb of that was the
weight I gained from my last start-up job.

I think the issue is the exact mindset Dick wrote about, of having to "pay off
your credit card" by going and running hours and hours after eating badly (a
mindset that I still default to sometimes and have to try really hard to stop
myself from doing) makes it so that people who are already insanely stressed
eventually just give up and decide to go into a default instead of "paying off
their card", so to speak.

P.S. There's already been some lawyers, creative agency folks, and people from
big government funded organizations applying to take part in the course, I
think the difference between what they saw on the page versus what you saw on
the page is that they (correctly) assumed being "in tech" meant "work really
long hours" to the people that wrote the page versus "do you work at a company
that has an AngelList page".

------
Lambdanaut
This isn't applicable to people that are exercising just for health, rather
than to also lose weight.

For naturally skinny "dicks" like me, I find I get the best workout and feel
the healthiest when I do a mix of the tread mill with intermittent breaks of
lifting and power push-ups when my legs can't take it anymore.

~~~
pvnick
> exercising just for health

If you aren't making progress, than you aren't exercising "for health." This
article is very enlightening:
[http://startingstrength.com/articles/barbell_medicine_sulliv...](http://startingstrength.com/articles/barbell_medicine_sullivan.pdf)

~~~
dicktalens
This is exactly my point. :) Progress and adherence are both prerequisites in
order to exercise "for health." The mere act of engaging in healthy activities
alone do not make them healthy.

------
sopooneo
A year ago, everyone in my office got memberships to a gym down the street.
All the other guys had long discussions about what was best and this article
and that one, including a lot of stuff about only doing strength training. I
did the stuff that I found made me feel most refreshed and cleared my head
best.

Now there are only two us that _ever_ go anymore. I am fit. They are not. It
must be remembered that the routine you design is not going to run on a cpu
that will execute it exactly over and over without complaint. It runs on _you_
, which in my case is much more fickle, and needs to be indulged a bit to keep
going.

------
pvnick
Completely agree, this is very good advice. I wish I had more time to respond
but I'm at risk of being late to work. Here's how you put forth the minimum
amount of time commitment while deriving the greatest amount of benefit:

-If you typically squat less than 270 pounds all the way down to parallel, do Starting Strength until you do [1].

-If you typically squat at least 270 pounds all the way down to parallel, do Madcow 5x5 [2]. I can't speak past this fitness level because this is where I am.

-Eat according to the Leangains nutrition guide to achieve massive strength gains while getting/staying lean and eating only a couple meals a day [3].

Make sure to read the Starting Strength book _or_ watch Mark Rippetoe videos
on youtube to learn proper technique (vitally important!)

[1]
[http://startingstrength.wikia.com/wiki/The_Starting_Strength...](http://startingstrength.wikia.com/wiki/The_Starting_Strength_Novice/Beginner_Programs)

[2] [http://stronglifts.com/madcow-5x5-training-
programs/](http://stronglifts.com/madcow-5x5-training-programs/)

[3] [http://www.leangains.com/2010/04/leangains-
guide.html](http://www.leangains.com/2010/04/leangains-guide.html)

Disclaimer: There are obviously other programs which offer the same amount of
benefit, but I don't think you'll find anything that _surpasses_ the benefit
you'll receive from these guidelines, and you certainly won't find many
programs that surpass the simplicity; therefore, for the sake of not
overwhelming anybody, I've only listed a small compilation of systems that
really work.

~~~
atdrummond
What's the rationale for shifting programs right at 270 lbs? That seems
somewhat arbitrary, at least more so than say 225 (2 45 lbs plates per side)
or 315 (3 45s per side).

~~~
pvnick
[http://www.exrx.net/Testing/WeightLifting/SquatStandards.htm...](http://www.exrx.net/Testing/WeightLifting/SquatStandards.html)

Really it's somewhere between 250 and 300, but I chose 270 because 1) it's in
the middle near where average-weight men would be and 2) starting strength
just keep being good right up to around 300 pound squats.

------
bengillies
I'm not sure I understand the whole "The only exercise people should be doing
is strength training" meme that seems to be going around at the moment. Can
someone with more knowledge explain it to me?

It seems (to me at least) that some exercise is better than no exercise, and
that more exercise (at least to an extent) is better than less exercise. It
seems to me therefore, that people should find an exercise that they really
enjoy (whether running, cycling, strength training, climbing, martial arts,
etc) and do it. That way, they'll be doing something they enjoy and they'll do
more of it.

It seems slightly disingenuous for "experts" to recommend that everyone drop
everything else and just do one type of exercise as if everyone they're
speaking to is exactly the same, has exactly the same goals and enjoys exactly
the same stuff.

Are they targeting geeks/the HN crowd because geeks tend to favour the idea
that there is one "right way" of doing something and are more likely to latch
on to it?

~~~
pvnick
Read this article for the answer
[http://startingstrength.com/articles/barbell_medicine_sulliv...](http://startingstrength.com/articles/barbell_medicine_sullivan.pdf)

Fitness relativism is _not_ acceptable. It leads people to live unhealthy,
and, in some cases, shorter lives.

~~~
bengillies
Ok, well that makes sense, but I suppose what I'm really asking (I already
kind of assumed that training with barbells was good for you) is what's wrong
with every other form of exercise?

To take two examples (these two because I am intimately familiar with them):
Why should someone stop climbing or doing martial arts and start lifting
barbells (by stop I mean assume said person doesn't have enough time to do
both and must choose one or the other)? Both of the former seem (to me at
least) really good for developing strength and, AFAICT do so in a much more
realistic and natural way than lifting barbells.

~~~
tehwalrus
Lifting barbells allows you to control the weight much more than climbing or
punching things.

If you read Starting Strength (Riptoe, mentioned many times on this thread)
you'll learn about the recovery and response cycles to stress on the body. You
should be regularly increasing the amount you're lifting regardless of your
bodyweight (which is what you are always lifting in climbing,) in order to
actually _increase_ your strength over time.

Barbells also allow you to start with smaller weights at the beginning of the
workout, and then move on to heavier sets when you're warm. AFAIK there's no
way to do this with climbing.

Re: barbells not "natural" \- firstly, more natural than most of the other
equipment in the gym, and secondly it depends what you're doing with them.
lifting them over and over, slowly is one way to use them (and builds
strength), but speeding up your reps and/or performing power cleans will
improve your _power_ (literally rate-of-work) which is what is important in
sports like martial arts and ball games. You can train for almost any sport
with a barbell, with the right lift, rate, set lengths and intra-workout rest
period.

~~~
bengillies
> Lifting barbells allows you to control the weight much more than climbing or
> punching things.

Ok so that makes a lot more sense. Thanks for the explanation.

> Barbells also allow you to start with smaller weights at the beginning of
> the workout, and then move on to heavier sets when you're warm. AFAIK
> there's no way to do this with climbing.

So with climbing in general climbing harder problems (smaller holds, further
apart, more overhang, etc etc) works muscles more, and the harder you climb,
the fitter and stronger you will be.

~~~
pvnick
Yes this will make you stronger, but not as much as barbell exercises

------
landland
As someone on leangains following a Reverse Pyramid Training program after
Starting Strength, I agree that this is good general advice.

However, it IS general advice. "Cardio" is loosely defined, and can be
anything from steady state (takes a longish time) to intervals (can be VERY
quick) and anything in between. I'd be more inclined to say if you like to do
it, be it basketball or gardening or running or whatever, then do it because
you'll be more likely to stick with it.

I don't really buy the lack of time argument as a reason to not do something
you enjoy that has health benefits. I see the argument here though, IF you
believe you lack time (which I don't think you should believe) then MVF is a
good way to go, but not the only option.

------
petercooper
"What do you do for cardio? _Lift weights faster._ " ;-)
[http://www.jensinkler.com/lift-weights-
faster/](http://www.jensinkler.com/lift-weights-faster/)

If you're not particularly fit then rigorous strength training including
ballistic and plyometric activities will get you out of breath, increase
heart-rate, and give you a serious workout while being a lot more fun than
running on the spot. (But as always, different strokes for different folks..)

------
runamok
The 35 hours to lose 1 lb. of fat is VERY questionable to me. There are ~3500
calories in a lb. of fat. Walking or running 1 mile consumes at LEAST 100
calories but usually closer to 120 calories. So they are walking 1 hour miles?

Not all "cardio" is equal. I generally run 20 to 40 miles per week at 7:30/
mile pace. So my caloric burn is 120 calories per mile x 1 hour (8 miles) =
960 calories. So I could lose 1 pound of fat per 3.5 hours.

Someone walking 3mph (20 minute miles) on a treadmill would burn 300 to 360
calories in contrast. So that means they would lose 1 pound every ~10 hours.
This is very doable for most people. This of course assumes they don't eat
more.

Then the OP is very hand wavey about the idea that you have more muscle so
your metabolic rate is so much higher. It's quite hard to build many pounds of
lean muscle too!

An interesting section on individual metabolic rate differences:
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basal_metabolic_rate#Causes_of_...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basal_metabolic_rate#Causes_of_individual_differences_in_BMR)

~~~
phamilton
Mentioned multiple time is the increase in hunger and consumption which often
negates the burned calories.

I've never lost weight via cardio. I lost 30 lbs over 6 months without any
exercise at all (too busy with school and would just forget to eat until the
end of day.) 3 years later, I'm back up at the same weight. I worked out 5
days a week for 3 months (~1000 calories per day) and didn't lose any weight.

Completely anecdotal, but I think it's a good data point. I'm going to give
the no cardio work out a shot.

------
chollida1
The person putting this on seems to know what they are doing. They have some
exceptional references on the site.

Without seeing the actual program its very hard to make a determination if
this is something that would be beneficial to do or not.

It's kind of like being asked to buy a car but you can't see it until you put
down your money:)

For other programs like P90x you can atleast try it out and see if you like
it.

> 40 minutes, 3 days/week.

This seems about right for a beginner program and for anyone looking to
maintain their current form.

> The price is $125/month for founders and $175/month for folks with salaries.

This is just bizarre. I think the whole founder worship thing has gotten a bit
out of control here. What about employee #1 :)

~~~
dicktalens
hi @chollida1 – while I certainly don't mind the eventual traffic to MVF, my
main intention was to share thoughts around cardio... discipline/exercise
selection tends to be a make or break thing in fitness.

Regarding the discount for founders, it's more because I remember how much it
sucked being broke when I started Fitocracy. :) I'd assumed it'd be easier for
employee #1 just because at that point, some de-risking had probably occurred.
Really wanted to do funded/non-funded, but that would've been unfairly
glorifying raising money for raising's sake.

------
snowwrestler
This article is basically about body building. It promotes a focus on how you
look rather than how strong or fit you actually are.

------
tehwalrus
I love weightlifting, but I also love cardio. My goal is different though -
I'm not trying to lose weight, I'm trying to gain it (slowly).

lifting = only 3 days per week*

running = all the rest, not too far (except once a week).

* someone else has mentioned Riptoe - go read that. then _do_ that.

------
mjt0229
I presume this is for fisticuffs with VCs, right?

