"DrollTroll" <fitcat@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
news:487271c3$0$7349$607ed4bc@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> "Steve Freides" <steve@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
> news:6df7ffF2bc3nU1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> <Mamadu.Bwana@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>>
news:833c3179-7b11-4100-9856-0f8c00865a26@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>> 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
>>
>>
>
>
|
