The question speaks for itself really, which one is more effective? i've done the odd sprint 8 but i've never took burpees to high intensity before as i fricken hate 'em..haha. I suppose i would consider them if they were more effective than sprints, so that's the reasoning for this question. Any sensible scientific/non scientific answers would be much appreciated.
asked bysuperdad (930)
Get FREE instant access to our Paleo For Beginners Guide & 15 FREE Recipes!
on July 18, 2013
at 05:12 PM
I can't imagine one is much more effective than the other. They each jack your heart rate up like crazy, which is what you want for HIIT. Maybe just for the sake of variety mix them up, but otherwise, I'd say do whichever you want. So long as your applying max effort, you should get the results your looking for with either.
on July 18, 2013
at 05:16 PM
So, aside from my light-hearted comment above, the real answer is: it doesn't matter. Don't overthink this sort of thing. They'll both be effective means of fat loss b/c they're going to stimulate the right hormone production. Trying to figure out percentage-wise which is better is useless (I have trouble even thinking of a study that could accurately measure that...) because the difference is going to be too slight to notice. Don't get caught up in the numbers; we all do it (Hell, that's why most of us are here on PaleoHacks, because we love numbers and want to hang with other people that do :P) but we really shouldn't :)
on July 19, 2013
at 05:05 PM
It is been my personal experience that sprinting is better than burpees. To this day nothing jacks my heart rate like an all out, 100% 400m sprint. Also if you do sprints on a regular basis you may actually gain something from it, speed.