Another article comparing burst-type HIIT to moderate, steady-state cardio: https://experiencelife.com/article/steady-state-cardio-vs-high-intensity-interval-training/ Whatever mutually exclusive benefits either one may (or may not) have over the other, the clear winner for fat loss (and time saving) is burst-type HIIT. Nothing new, just thought I'd throw it in. The only apparent downside to burst-type HIIT is the risk of overtraining, which is reiterated here: http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/02/26/how-to-get-fit-in-a-few-minutes-a-week/?_r=0 "The takeaway of both studies is that it is best, if you wish to perform high-intensity interval training, to stick to what is well documented as effective: a few sessions per week of 30- or 60-second intervals so strenuous you moan, followed by a minute or so of blessed recovery, and a painful repetition or four. Done correctly, such sessions, in my experience, get you out of the gym quickly and inspire truly inventive cursing." Less is more. I can live with that.
Not quite on subject but perhaps slightly related...I've been trying something a little different with my cardio. After 10 minutes of light to moderate walking I'll run lightly for 5 minutes, increase the angle and speed very slightly, then walk 1 minute then run 4, increase the angle again and walk 2, run 3, etc until my run is 1 minute after 4 min of walking at the higher speed. Then I return to walking at about 3mph for 5 min, then run for 5min at a slightly higher speed than the prior highest speed increasing the speed slightly each of those 5 minutes. I had stopped running a year ago, and trying to ease myself back in. Don't feel like walking is quite the same (though some will suggest otherwise, which is ok). Some of my workout routine is cardio itself, too. I usually try to get 3 miles in walking or running. +1 regarding less is more, so often true.
Another article (with great links) on why less is more, and why intensity and carbs go together: http://chriskresser.com/why-you-may-need-to-exercise-less/
Intervals keep cardio interesting, don't they? I only do very brief ~Tabata-type all-out interval cardio, and I think I may have been doing a bit too much of it lately, when combined with the resistance training. I was slowly adding, but now I'm subtracting. After reading the articles I posted on the weekend, it occurred to me that I have a few of the overtraining symptoms, notably insomnia. So I am taking today off and won't see the gym until Thursday. And I will cut back on the cardio by eliminating the somewhat longer cardio-only workout, and slightly reducing that which I will continue to do right after the resistance routine. I should probably be doing the cardio on alternate days, but since the RT is only ~35 minutes at most, what's another ~6-8 minutes or so? I'll see how that goes. A few days ago, I started reading Body by Science, which I referred to earlier in this thread and, while I won't be doing such an abbreviated routine only once a week, much of the considerable research that is presented and explained is quite thought-provoking. It inspires introspection. However, I do take comfort in the fact that my routine is somewhat similar and includes only a few more exercises. The "research and experimentation" in this laboratory of one continues...
Baron, in the predecessor thread you mentioned that you did 6 sets per muscle group per week to failure. Are you still doing that volume? Also, since there appears to be a number of definitions of failure, depending on whom you ask, how do you define it?
Aerobics...Just Say No! http://clinicalexercise.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/more_aerobic_than_aerobics.pdf
I like the High Intensity training and pump to failure, but with a couple of caveats. If you're just starting out, HIT and going to failure is a recipe for disaster. Muscle strains and pulls will be the least of it. Serious damage can be done. This also holds true the older you get. I don't do anything to failure anymore. That one more rep has cost me unneeded downtime on more that on occasion. All that said, there's no reason to be in the gym for more than an hour, if that, and I agree that long periods of aerobic exercise are pretty much useless once you have yourself in decent shape. It's a good way to start, especially if you've let yourself go to the Lard-ass stage, but long term it's more counter productive than not.