Why aren't runners huge?

>>38597901
Because cardio is for pussies

>>38597901

Long distance running requires enormous amounts of fuel, so the body catabolizes stores of glycogen, starting with the liver and ending with the muscles. Basically, they eat shit tons but end up losing all their gains.

Because physics.

1) Most would not eat at such a surplus as to build a lot of size, assuming they were inducing

2)hypertrophy in the correct fashion to do so.
The type/amount of work they do does not induce the "mass-building" kind of hypertrophy needed for size.

3)and more size = more over all energy expenditure meaning they'd have to intake much heavier amounts of energy relative to size

Low twitch muscles that are responsible for endurance aren't big
Also endurance athletes wanna stay as light as they can, no need to weigh yourself down

File: H2ZgmDH.png (427KB, 478x598px) Image search: [Google]

427KB, 478x598px

>>38597941

So theoretically, if they ate enough, they would get huge?

cuz its harder to run for a long amount of time weighing more, duh. sprinters are a different story, cuz those run for only a few mtrs. when i weighed 64kg i could literally run all day and not get gased, then i dirty bulked all my way up to 105kg and trust me, could not literally jog for 2 mins

>thinking any high weight routines arent fucking volume packed
L M A O
M
A
O

>>38597901
They don't want to get huge. They want to be light af

>>38597939
kek

>>38597901
OK, so running is so low weight, it doesn't count as weight lifting.

When people do a "hypertrophic" routine, they reduce weights a little to, say, double their rep range and do drop sets, etc.

Running is aerobic... and doesn't work muscles the same way as lifting heavier weights... even the "light" weights of a hypertrophic routine.

File: 1471347139526.jpg (148KB, 600x901px) Image search: [Google]

148KB, 600x901px

>>38597967

What do you mean? Are you saying that 5x5 is high volume, for example?

I thought "real" high volume was like 4x10

>>38597901
Fast and slow twitch muscle fibers, also look into the three types of energy your body uses for short, medium and long term effort

Cardio doesn't build muscle. You're not a physiologist and you don't know shit about exercise or muscle building. Really the only simple truth anyone on /fit/ needs to know is that strength=muscle.

When you progress to lifting more weight your body builds strength to adjust. Strength=muscle so you get big. Cardio on the other hand doesn't come with increasing strength demands. Running, for example, is just putting one leg ahead of the other. It's like lifting a 45 lb barbell forever: you won't make any gains. Your body does adjust to aerobic exercise, but does so without growing in size because things like mitochondria density and O2 transportation help with aerobic exercise and are not related to bigger muscles.

File: 8IO00J9.png (483KB, 712x401px) Image search: [Google]

483KB, 712x401px

>>38598017
>you don't know shit about exercise or muscle building

I know right? It's almost like I'm trying to learn

Because they train for their sport. Hauling around extra muscle would slow them down. Building endurance doesn't build as much muscle mass, allows the muscle to utilize fuel better for long distance, and makes the muscle more resilent to repeats at high impact. It's not for strength and explosivenesd since long distance running does not require it.

>>38598017
I'm cardio only and reasonably muscular for a grill.

Because running costs a lot in terms of calories and energy.
So the body will begin to perfect running style, force you into a place where you don't weigh as much by blunting appetite, and change your muscle type so that you can work better and use energy more efficiently.

You are building muscle. It's just not the type of muscle that high energy output athletes and lifters want.

>>38597901
>aerobic exercise
>no progressive overload cuz no load basically
>???
>gains goblin

>>38598057
Let me explain since your education system failed to teach you how to read.
"As far as I understand it (in general):

LOW volume + HIGH weight => more muscle density, more strength

HIGH volume + LOW weight => more energy allocation to the muscles, more mass

If that is true, why aren't long distance runners jacked?
"
>all total bullshit
"
I'm confused.
"
>because you don't know shit

Stop trying to make theories when you don't know shit about exercise physiology. It's literally more retarded than trying to do calculus without knowing algebra. Answers to simple questions are on google, and if you want to actually learn something go read a book.

>>38597955
nah
it's basically the same principle that applies to objects apparoaching light speed

>>38598114
Now this is the angry manlet tier shitposting I expect from shot people autism.

>>38597901
three energy systems in body
in order of usage
1. creatine phosphate
2. glygogen reserves
3. krebs cycle

power is associated with creatine as it is used first, depletes quickly but provides the highest amount of force in contraction and muscle torque /first 30seconds+run/1-5 reps?, and your body adapts

glycogen requires higher volume to be stored, so it allows for higher gains in hypertrophy, this is used after creatine is used 30sec+run/6-12+? reprange. Your body adapts to this by increasing glycogen stores (massive compared to creatine storage)

the other is oxidative phosphorylation, or krebs cycle which works on slow twich muscles. You burn fat for energy here. The way your body adapts to this is with increasing mitochondria that metabolize fat and increasing oxygen uptake in lungs and hearts ability to pump, this does not work or benefit from the muscles being larger, so it does not adapt to it. It does not need to store energy energy on the sit of the used muscle as fat is stored all over your body.

File: ImoUR49.jpg (109KB, 1080x1233px) Image search: [Google]

109KB, 1080x1233px

>>38598114

I am literally here asking questions. Where did I say "this is 100% accurate?"

I prefaced everything I said with "As far as I understand it".

Why not just say, "your understanding is wrong because x, y, and z", instead of being a complete dick for absolutely no reason?

No one else in the thread has the same attitude as you. Seriously, do you act like this in real life?

>>38597901
Since everyone else in this thread appears to be a retard, Ill give you the answer: not enough resistance.

Look up sprinters musculature vs long distance runners, or sprint cyclists quads vs tour de france cyclists quads.

The more resistance, the more muscle. Which is why you lift weights o build muscle in an efficient way.

>>38598073
...so not muscular at all?

>>38597901
Cardio kills gains

>>38598157
Fuck up and fuck off, idiot.

>>38597955

I gained almost 15 pounds my freshman year of college running D1 XC. I was running 70-80 miles per week but I was lifting for the first time in my life and eating like a horse using my athlete unlimited meal plan (and I was underweight going in). It's possible, but you have to fucking EAT.

>>38598114
You sound like you're short

>>38598313
>70-80 miles per week
I hope your xc was 10km plus, or your training sounds shit

>>38597901
I want to fuck a girl in a wet tech suit so badly. That is ideal

File: image.jpg (49KB, 480x448px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 480x448px

>>38597901
Endurance training of any kind (walking, cycling, distance running/jogging, swimming, arm cycling) causes a different chemical cascade in the body which interferes with the release of mTOR in the cascade caused by resistance training. This interference limits the amount of protein synthesis that can occur.
Plus, endurance training eats up a ton more calories, limiting what the body has to draw upon.

>>38598648
Well he is angry, so he is probably short

Jesus Christ fit is retarded. It's slow twitch muscle fiber you get from running, which is smaller. And the difference between 8 and 3 reps is not really going to change the muscle fiber being created.
End of story.