1. Sprint exercise resulted in 3 times more fat loss while expending 1/2 the calories compared to those who performed aerobic exercise. (Tremblay)

2. Low intensity aerobic exercise participants lost lean body mass. Over the long term, reduced lean body mass results in a lower resting metabolic rate and thus reduces the ability to burn fat. (Mouglos)

3. One study found that the addition of 4 hours of aerobic exercise per week had no effect on weight loss, while another found performing 45 mins of aerobic exercise 5 days per week for 12 weeks had no effect over dieting alone. (Van Date, Utter)

4. Twenty minutes of interval/sprint training, 3 times per week for 15 weeks led to greater fat loss compared to steady state aerobic exercise. (Trapp and Boutcher)

So is cardio pointless? Even thought it pales in comparison to other modes of exercise in the ability to burn fat, cardio is still effective. However, cardio should not be done alone as one's only form of exercise. Cardio is effective in promoting CNS recovery from intensive exercise and should be a small part of an exercise program that includes proper eating, muscle-building resistance training, and fat-burning intervals.

Charlie Francis was famous for the High/Low model developed for his track athletes. But that doesn't mean the concepts only apply to track athletes. This approach when effectively applied to athletes of any sport will produce tremendous results. The key principle of the system is to separate your training into high and low intensity days, with a minimum of 48 hours between High intensity days. This allows for the body to perform at its peak on a more consistent basis by providing the necessary recovery between high intensity training sessions.

How are High/Low days defined or structured?

High intensity days will include any activity that produces high levels of metabolic or nervous system stress. Examples would be explosive sprints/jumps/throws, explosive strength exercises, and high-intensity interval training to name a few. On those days, overall volume of exercise is kept to a moderate level. Low intensity days are designed to keep workout intensity at a moderate level while allowing your body a chance to recover fully. The low days are a great time to include technique work, sport specific drills, and aerobic capacity development drills such as tempo runs.

Properly structured and monitored in-season strength programs can be of tremendous benefit to athletes wanting to avoid decline in performance over the course of their season as well as minimize the occurrence of injuries. For example, studies have demonstrated that up to 85% of non-contact ACL injuries occur mid-late season. Maintaining adequate strength, body awareness, and performing exercises that help off-set the repetitive nature of sport can be the difference between a mid-season slump and a break-out year.

Here are some words from a former GP rugby athlete:

"The programming in season was designed to stay close to the gains I had made and still have energy to train for rugby, while utilizing different rep schemes and lifts to avoid undue muscle soreness. I was provided with a lot of information on nutrition, sleep, and mobility. Along with regular adjustments and soft-tissue treatment, I had a great season and felt better than I did while playing football in college."

-Carl N.

The best performance coaches and trainers will always perform thorough and complete assessments before working with a new client. Assessments establish the foundation for success.

On the training side, this means your trainer takes you through movement screening, baseline performance tests, and takes time to understand your injury history. On the nutrition side, this means taking time to evaluate and understand a client’s current dietary habits and other variables such as their work/school schedule, primary objectives, food sensitivities, level of social support, willingness to change, and many more.

With that in mind, is this how the majority of trainers and even nutritionists go about their job? No.

Most coaches/trainers seriously lack detail in their assessments. We hear this all the time at GP during our initial assessments, even from clients who have used a number of trainers in the past. The level of detail and depth of evaluation raises curiosity and they ask, "Why has no one spent the time to do this before?"

This is a huge mistake. Quality assessments are the key to gaining real insight into what a client needs and form the ability to make critical coaching decisions. This is the point at which training ceases to be a science and becomes an art.

If you’re not put through comprehensive training or nutrition assessments before your first session, know that you deserve better than that.