Treadmill advice needed
in [Aerobic]
|
Prev: 9Q \9 Get-Rich-Quick Cons BEWARE 9Q \9+=
Next: Nike shoes worn out, seeking recommendations for another pair/ brand
From: Steve Freides on 7 Jul 2008 15:01 <Mamadu.Bwana(a)gmail.com> wrote in message news:833c3179-7b11-4100-9856-0f8c00865a26(a)25g2000hsx.googlegroups.com... > Hi, > > I am thinking about buying my first treadmill. My family and I are on > a very, very tight budget and we are counting every penny so this is a > huge decision for us and I need some help in deciding which one to > pick. > > I am 6 foot 3 (189cm) for 252 pounds (115kgs) and I need to walk for > about 30min on a daily basis to loose weight. The climate where I > live makes outdoor walking impossible most of the year and, besides, I > need to stay at home to watch for the kids. I do not plan to run on > the treadmill, only walk, initially slowly (I am very much out of > shape), but eventually at a brisk pace to get a good aerobic exercise. > > I have been initially tempted to buy the NordicTrack C2155 ( > http://tinyurl.com/5amgjq ) > > But the newer NordicTrack A2350 looks even better to me ( > http://tinyurl.com/5mfsxs > ) > > My questions to you are: > > 1) Do NordicTrack treadmills have a good reputation? > 2) What do you think of the two models I am considering? > 3) Can you think of a better (as in value for the money) deal than > these NordicTrack treadmills? > > Many thanks for any pointers! > > Mamadu Google the phrase strength-endurance, and don't settle for just a treadmill. Google also "ross budget training" and read his web site. There are a ton of things one can do, at home, for little or no money, to build both strength and conditioning, and certainly for well less than the cost of a treadmill of any sort. My choice would be a kettlebell plus the book "Enter The Kettlebell" by Pavel Tsatsouline - the combination will cost you about $200 and is widely available. Or buy yourself a screw-on dumbbell set at the local mega-mart plus a jump rope - that combination will cost you $50. Or any of a thousand other things. Just say no to the dishonor of dieting and aerobics :) and get stronger _and_ well-conditioned instead - and lose weight while doing it. -S- http://www.kbnj.com
From: DrollTroll on 7 Jul 2008 15:41 "Steve Freides" <steve(a)fridayscomputer.com> wrote in message news:6df7ffF2bc3nU1(a)mid.individual.net... > <Mamadu.Bwana(a)gmail.com> wrote in message > news:833c3179-7b11-4100-9856-0f8c00865a26(a)25g2000hsx.googlegroups.com... >> Hi, >> >> I am thinking about buying my first treadmill. My family and I are on >> a very, very tight budget and we are counting every penny so this is a >> huge decision for us and I need some help in deciding which one to >> pick. >> >> I am 6 foot 3 (189cm) for 252 pounds (115kgs) and I need to walk for >> about 30min on a daily basis to loose weight. The climate where I >> live makes outdoor walking impossible most of the year and, besides, I >> need to stay at home to watch for the kids. I do not plan to run on >> the treadmill, only walk, initially slowly (I am very much out of >> shape), but eventually at a brisk pace to get a good aerobic exercise. >> >> I have been initially tempted to buy the NordicTrack C2155 ( >> http://tinyurl.com/5amgjq ) >> >> But the newer NordicTrack A2350 looks even better to me ( >> http://tinyurl.com/5mfsxs >> ) >> >> My questions to you are: >> >> 1) Do NordicTrack treadmills have a good reputation? >> 2) What do you think of the two models I am considering? >> 3) Can you think of a better (as in value for the money) deal than >> these NordicTrack treadmills? >> >> Many thanks for any pointers! >> >> Mamadu > > Google the phrase strength-endurance, and don't settle for just a > treadmill. Google also "ross budget training" and read his web site. > There are a ton of things one can do, at home, for little or no money, to > build both strength and conditioning, and certainly for well less than the > cost of a treadmill of any sort. > > My choice would be a kettlebell plus the book "Enter The Kettlebell" by > Pavel Tsatsouline - the combination will cost you about $200 and is widely > available. Or buy yourself a screw-on dumbbell set at the local mega-mart > plus a jump rope - that combination will cost you $50. Or any of a > thousand other things. Just say no to the dishonor of dieting and > aerobics :) and get stronger _and_ well-conditioned instead - and lose > weight while doing it. As usual, Friedes is partially right in his obs/recs, but has so far to go as yet in trying to get over himself, that the correct stuff is often unrecognizable, buried beneath his sundry personal issues and self-preoccupations. He is right that walking is perhaps a middling approach to complete fitness, but it is an excellent beginning, certainly a very convenient tool, and actually capable of burning a lot of calories. And possibly a requisite beginning for many people. I myself walk 2-4 hours/week, brisk and up-hill (both ways!), in preference to running in summers. In winter, the emphasis is more on running. Nothing wrong with aerobics, nothing wrong with dieting, when done intelligently and in context. As a culture, we just eat too goddammuch anyway, and the zeitgeist of "revving up our metabolisms" so's we can eat even *more* is just effing ludicrous, profligate, and reprobate. And immoral. I am a big believer in weights and HIT, but everything in time. The site Friedes refers to is rosstraining.com, and it is indeed an excellent site--altho pretty intense stuff, but which you can always tailor for yourself. If you look at the cultures renowned for their longevity and health, walking/hiking/carrying/herding is likely the full extent of their "exercise"--they just do lots of it. Also, if you are going to go the eventual weight-route, forget about Friedes and his obsession with effing kettlebells. KBs certainly aren't bad, but *nary a person on this planet* can rationally explain why KBs are *at all* better than dumbbells, save for one or two possible moves. Whilst there are a litany of people who can cogently argue why dumbbells are FAR better than KBs. DBs serve the same basic function--resistance-- but are *far* more versatile, more economical, more ergonomic, more use-able..... you get the idea. But Friedes doesn't. And never will. It takes time and experience to figger out the context and "hierarchy" of all the fitness options available, and altho I don't really like treadmills myself, they can be a very good option/place to start. And for some people, indispensable. -- DT > > -S- > http://www.kbnj.com > >
From: Mark Cleary on 7 Jul 2008 17:29 I am going to answer your question buy a Sole treadmill. I bought one after running 30 years always outside or indoors on a track when I could. After this winter I said enough and bought a Sole pretty close to the top of the line for running just do a google for Sole. I only use it in the winter but was able to run 40 or more miles a week for all of Jan, Feb and March. I could run on it everyday if I wanted but it is only when I can get out. I think you could easily buy one for about $1500 a lower model and it will hold up. Mark Cleary plays Hollenbeck Jazz Guitars Handmade http://hollenbeckguitar.com/ Mamadu.Bwana(a)gmail.com wrote: > Hi, > > I am thinking about buying my first treadmill. My family and I are on > a very, very tight budget and we are counting every penny so this is a > huge decision for us and I need some help in deciding which one to > pick. > > I am 6 foot 3 (189cm) for 252 pounds (115kgs) and I need to walk for > about 30min on a daily basis to loose weight. The climate where I > live makes outdoor walking impossible most of the year and, besides, I > need to stay at home to watch for the kids. I do not plan to run on > the treadmill, only walk, initially slowly (I am very much out of > shape), but eventually at a brisk pace to get a good aerobic exercise. > > I have been initially tempted to buy the NordicTrack C2155 ( > http://tinyurl.com/5amgjq ) > > But the newer NordicTrack A2350 looks even better to me ( http://tinyurl.com/5mfsxs > ) > > My questions to you are: > > 1) Do NordicTrack treadmills have a good reputation? > 2) What do you think of the two models I am considering? > 3) Can you think of a better (as in value for the money) deal than > these NordicTrack treadmills? > > Many thanks for any pointers! > > Mamadu
From: Steve Freides on 7 Jul 2008 22:45 "DrollTroll" <fitcat(a)optonline.net> wrote in message news:487271c3$0$7349$607ed4bc(a)cv.net... > > "Steve Freides" <steve(a)fridayscomputer.com> wrote in message > news:6df7ffF2bc3nU1(a)mid.individual.net... >> <Mamadu.Bwana(a)gmail.com> wrote in message >> news:833c3179-7b11-4100-9856-0f8c00865a26(a)25g2000hsx.googlegroups.com... >>> Hi, >>> >>> I am thinking about buying my first treadmill. My family and I are >>> on >>> a very, very tight budget and we are counting every penny so this is >>> a >>> huge decision for us and I need some help in deciding which one to >>> pick. >>> >>> I am 6 foot 3 (189cm) for 252 pounds (115kgs) and I need to walk for >>> about 30min on a daily basis to loose weight. The climate where I >>> live makes outdoor walking impossible most of the year and, besides, >>> I >>> need to stay at home to watch for the kids. I do not plan to run on >>> the treadmill, only walk, initially slowly (I am very much out of >>> shape), but eventually at a brisk pace to get a good aerobic >>> exercise. >>> >>> I have been initially tempted to buy the NordicTrack C2155 ( >>> http://tinyurl.com/5amgjq ) >>> >>> But the newer NordicTrack A2350 looks even better to me ( >>> http://tinyurl.com/5mfsxs >>> ) >>> >>> My questions to you are: >>> >>> 1) Do NordicTrack treadmills have a good reputation? >>> 2) What do you think of the two models I am considering? >>> 3) Can you think of a better (as in value for the money) deal than >>> these NordicTrack treadmills? >>> >>> Many thanks for any pointers! >>> >>> Mamadu >> >> Google the phrase strength-endurance, and don't settle for just a >> treadmill. Google also "ross budget training" and read his web site. >> There are a ton of things one can do, at home, for little or no >> money, to build both strength and conditioning, and certainly for >> well less than the cost of a treadmill of any sort. >> >> My choice would be a kettlebell plus the book "Enter The Kettlebell" >> by Pavel Tsatsouline - the combination will cost you about $200 and >> is widely available. Or buy yourself a screw-on dumbbell set at the >> local mega-mart plus a jump rope - that combination will cost you >> $50. Or any of a thousand other things. Just say no to the dishonor >> of dieting and aerobics :) and get stronger _and_ well-conditioned >> instead - and lose weight while doing it. > > As usual, Friedes is partially right in his obs/recs, but has so far > to go as yet in trying to get over himself, that the correct stuff is > often unrecognizable, buried beneath his sundry personal issues and > self-preoccupations. Personal attacks serve no purpose, so stick to the issues at hand. > He is right that walking is perhaps a middling approach to complete > fitness, but it is an excellent beginning, certainly a very convenient > tool, and actually capable of burning a lot of calories. And possibly > a requisite beginning for many people. > I myself walk 2-4 hours/week, brisk and up-hill (both ways!), in > preference to running in summers. In winter, the emphasis is more on > running. I walk quite a bit as well, e.g., I walked about 4 miles yesterday with my wife in two outings, the first a mile each way to a local farmers market and home with produce, the second an evening visit to a friend a mile each way. It is a lovely thing to do, and sufficient for many purposes, e.g., the elderly, but I assume our original poster is middle aged or younger because he/she did not indicate otherwise. > Nothing wrong with aerobics, nothing wrong with dieting, when done > intelligently and in context. > As a culture, we just eat too goddammuch anyway, and the zeitgeist of > "revving up our metabolisms" so's we can eat even *more* is just > effing ludicrous, profligate, and reprobate. And immoral. > > I am a big believer in weights and HIT, but everything in time. > The site Friedes refers to is rosstraining.com, and it is indeed an > excellent site--altho pretty intense stuff, but which you can always > tailor for yourself. > > If you look at the cultures renowned for their longevity and health, > walking/hiking/carrying/herding is likely the full extent of their > "exercise"--they just do lots of it. > > Also, if you are going to go the eventual weight-route, forget about > Friedes and his obsession with effing kettlebells. > KBs certainly aren't bad, but *nary a person on this planet* can > rationally explain why KBs are *at all* better than dumbbells, save > for one or two possible moves. > > Whilst there are a litany of people who can cogently argue why > dumbbells are FAR better than KBs. > DBs serve the same basic function--resistance-- but are *far* more > versatile, more economical, more ergonomic, more use-able..... you > get the idea. > But Friedes doesn't. And never will. You miss the point entirely. No one says kettlebells are better or worse. Read my reply again - it begins with the words "my choice would be" and I assume the original poster doesn't need your help to figure out that he/she may have a different opinion. I shared mine and I'm not bashful about doing that. That you seem to feel my opinion carries the weight of some religious dictum is your problem, I'm afraid. > It takes time and experience to figger out the context and "hierarchy" > of all the fitness options available, and altho I don't really like > treadmills myself, they can be a very good option/place to start. And > for some people, indispensable. There are many better ways to exercise. Working up to doing strength/endurance training is, in my opinion, a better choice for most people most of the time. -S- http://www.kbnj.com > -- > DT > > > >> >> -S- >> http://www.kbnj.com >> >> > >
From: DrollTroll on 8 Jul 2008 06:23
"Steve Freides" <steve(a)fridayscomputer.com> wrote in message news:6dg2n2F2e0knU1(a)mid.individual.net... > "DrollTroll" <fitcat(a)optonline.net> wrote in message > news:487271c3$0$7349$607ed4bc(a)cv.net... >> >> "Steve Freides" <steve(a)fridayscomputer.com> wrote in message >> news:6df7ffF2bc3nU1(a)mid.individual.net... >>> <Mamadu.Bwana(a)gmail.com> wrote in message >>> news:833c3179-7b11-4100-9856-0f8c00865a26(a)25g2000hsx.googlegroups.com... >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> I am thinking about buying my first treadmill. My family and I are on >>>> a very, very tight budget and we are counting every penny so this is a >>>> huge decision for us and I need some help in deciding which one to >>>> pick. >>>> >>>> I am 6 foot 3 (189cm) for 252 pounds (115kgs) and I need to walk for >>>> about 30min on a daily basis to loose weight. The climate where I >>>> live makes outdoor walking impossible most of the year and, besides, I >>>> need to stay at home to watch for the kids. I do not plan to run on >>>> the treadmill, only walk, initially slowly (I am very much out of >>>> shape), but eventually at a brisk pace to get a good aerobic exercise. >>>> >>>> I have been initially tempted to buy the NordicTrack C2155 ( >>>> http://tinyurl.com/5amgjq ) >>>> >>>> But the newer NordicTrack A2350 looks even better to me ( >>>> http://tinyurl.com/5mfsxs >>>> ) >>>> >>>> My questions to you are: >>>> >>>> 1) Do NordicTrack treadmills have a good reputation? >>>> 2) What do you think of the two models I am considering? >>>> 3) Can you think of a better (as in value for the money) deal than >>>> these NordicTrack treadmills? >>>> >>>> Many thanks for any pointers! >>>> >>>> Mamadu >>> >>> Google the phrase strength-endurance, and don't settle for just a >>> treadmill. Google also "ross budget training" and read his web site. >>> There are a ton of things one can do, at home, for little or no money, >>> to build both strength and conditioning, and certainly for well less >>> than the cost of a treadmill of any sort. >>> >>> My choice would be a kettlebell plus the book "Enter The Kettlebell" by >>> Pavel Tsatsouline - the combination will cost you about $200 and is >>> widely available. Or buy yourself a screw-on dumbbell set at the local >>> mega-mart plus a jump rope - that combination will cost you $50. Or any >>> of a thousand other things. Just say no to the dishonor of dieting and >>> aerobics :) and get stronger _and_ well-conditioned instead - and lose >>> weight while doing it. >> >> As usual, Friedes is partially right in his obs/recs, but has so far to >> go as yet in trying to get over himself, that the correct stuff is often >> unrecognizable, buried beneath his sundry personal issues and >> self-preoccupations. > > Personal attacks serve no purpose, so stick to the issues at hand. Dude, I thought I was oh-ficially kill-filed by you, as you most often completely ignore what I say in a given thread, and blindly post yer own stuff, often just repeating what I said--further evidence of your self-preoccupation. But since you ARE apparently reading my stuff, I'll tone down the insults--at least the gratuitous ones. > >> He is right that walking is perhaps a middling approach to complete >> fitness, but it is an excellent beginning, certainly a very convenient >> tool, and actually capable of burning a lot of calories. And possibly a >> requisite beginning for many people. >> I myself walk 2-4 hours/week, brisk and up-hill (both ways!), in >> preference to running in summers. In winter, the emphasis is more on >> running. > > I walk quite a bit as well, e.g., I walked about 4 miles yesterday with my > wife in two outings, the first a mile each way to a local farmers market > and home with produce, the second an evening visit to a friend a mile each > way. It is a lovely thing to do, and sufficient for many purposes, e.g., > the elderly, but I assume our original poster is middle aged or younger > because he/she did not indicate otherwise. But clearly not ready for Ross training--re-read his post. > >> Nothing wrong with aerobics, nothing wrong with dieting, when done >> intelligently and in context. >> As a culture, we just eat too goddammuch anyway, and the zeitgeist of >> "revving up our metabolisms" so's we can eat even *more* is just effing >> ludicrous, profligate, and reprobate. And immoral. >> >> I am a big believer in weights and HIT, but everything in time. >> The site Friedes refers to is rosstraining.com, and it is indeed an >> excellent site--altho pretty intense stuff, but which you can always >> tailor for yourself. >> >> If you look at the cultures renowned for their longevity and health, >> walking/hiking/carrying/herding is likely the full extent of their >> "exercise"--they just do lots of it. >> >> Also, if you are going to go the eventual weight-route, forget about >> Friedes and his obsession with effing kettlebells. >> KBs certainly aren't bad, but *nary a person on this planet* can >> rationally explain why KBs are *at all* better than dumbbells, save for >> one or two possible moves. >> >> Whilst there are a litany of people who can cogently argue why dumbbells >> are FAR better than KBs. >> DBs serve the same basic function--resistance-- but are *far* more >> versatile, more economical, more ergonomic, more use-able..... you get >> the idea. >> But Friedes doesn't. And never will. > > You miss the point entirely. No one says kettlebells are better or worse. > Read my reply again - it begins with the words "my choice would be" And why would that be your choice, *if you didn't believe KBs were superior*? Are you now adding disingenuousness to your repertoire? I will say *flat out* that dumbbells are superior to kettlebells, for most applications/users. The difference between you and me is 1. I'm not wrapped up in fukn mystical Medievil Russia fantasyland, and all its kettlebell soldier trappings, like some child playing with toy trains; 2. I can defend my statements in some detail, and 3. I'm not selling either dumbbells or kettlebells. > and I assume the original poster doesn't need your help to figure out that > he/she may have a different opinion. I shared mine and I'm not bashful > about doing that. But, the OP DOES need YOUR help, right?? please....... > That you seem to feel my opinion carries the weight of some religious > dictum It DOES! See (1) above. is your problem, I'm afraid. > >> It takes time and experience to figger out the context and "hierarchy" of >> all the fitness options available, and altho I don't really like >> treadmills myself, they can be a very good option/place to start. And >> for some people, indispensable. > > There are many better ways to exercise. Working up to doing > strength/endurance training is, in my opinion, a better choice for most > people most of the time. I agree, but probably not this time, AT this time, for this OP. AND, I *already* quite alluded to this, but you, as usual, choose to re-invent the wheel. I will say one thing, tho: You are absolutely correct in the very last line of your previous post: Get stronger/well-conditioned AND lose weight while doing it. A subtle, but very profound point, that escapes most of Merka, as they chase the holy grails of effing abs, weight loss, and long lean effing muscles as they morph into a dancer's body. Many of your insights are legitimate, so it's too bad you choose to view the world through Steve Freides binoculars, and think your KB workout routines should be fresco-ed in a Systine Chapel. When you sell your kettlebells, do you autograph them? -- DT > > -S- > http://www.kbnj.com > > >> -- >> DT >> >> >> >>> >>> -S- >>> http://www.kbnj.com >>> >>> >> >> > > |