Talk:Circuit training

Could I add some information about the effects of Circuit Training on diferent kind of people and add a section in the article about types of circuit training? ̃#Acarbe92 (talk) 16:04, 18 July 2018 (UTC)

Could someone please clean up the "Disadvantages of Circuit Training" section? I'm not a writer or anything, but even I can tell that the way it's written is extremely unprofessional.

Okay - I rewrote the "Disadvantages of Circuit Training" section - hope you like it better! Steve Pitchers 13:55, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

Restored the advantages and disadvantages sections (rmed by MrVibrating) as the text is useful, generally uncontentious and does include links to other pages supporting the content. It is surely not necessary to provide a plethora of citations for text that is widely perceived to be true. Where would you find a citation that water feels wet? If you want to take issue with specific points, I'll attempt to find better citations for them. Please let's not lose these entire sections wholesale - let's use the current text as a starting point and progressively improve upon it! Steve Pitchers (talk) 18:34, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Duration

The duration of a circuit is anywhere from 15 to 60 seconds. Curves, the largest fitness franchise and the copy cats, who make up 97% of the Circuit training facilities out there use 30 second intervals. It can range from 15, so do not place 45 in the article, because when you do, you are leaving out 97% of the circuit training world. Please discuss any concerns you have here. --Maniwar (talk) 21:13, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

What is the typical duration of the stations in circuit training? Perhaps in the area where you live, Curves is dominant, but that really isn't so around here, where it is normal for the intervals to be a lot longer. I fully accept that it is possible for intervals to be as short as 15 seconds, which is why I let your figure stand in the introduction. However, the figure in the "disadvantages" section really does need to be long, otherwise the whole disadvantages section now makes no sense! If you do use a 15 second interval, the number of reps would be quite low and the concern about being a long way out on the endurance end of the strength-endurance scale goes away. Indeed, I also made the suggestion that it might be reduced to 15 seconds if this can be done safely. Please be so kind as to re-read the whole disadvantages section - it is not saying the minimum possible time is 45 seconds, just considering the consequences if it is made relatively long. We either need to let a longer interval stand (for the disadvantages section) or get rid of the entire section. Steve Pitchers 21:45, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

Wow! I'm amazed that Curves is not dominant where you live. There is now one Curves per two McDonald's, and they now number 10,000 world wide making them the largest fitness company in the world. Having said that, I see where you want to go with your disadvantage section. But I must challenge you on that. Again, pointing to Curves, it's not so much how many reps you do as much as how intense you work. When you use weights like some of the copy cats do, reps must be an integral part, however, when you use hydraulic equipment, the intensity is the focus and not the number of reps. Now, having said that, the workout can be catered individually allowing one to focus on reps more so than intensity. But, when you focus on the intensity, the focus is more strength training than it is endurance. The problem here lies in that we are trying to address all circuit training. Maybe we need to break it out to specifics. There are some companies out there that do 15 second stations, although I personally think that is not an efficient workout, nor is it sufficient. Similarly, I do not think those who go past 45 seconds to be efficient. I like what you're doing with the article, but if you want to point that out in the disadvantages area, perhaps you can specify only to the circuit training company's that it applies to. Again, some use hydraulic equipment, some use free weights, some use a combo, some use other resistance equipment such as elastics, and some (by far the smallest group) use muscle flexing and cardio. What do you think? --Maniwar (talk) 22:11, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

I'm relying on the ACSM guidelines on muscular, strength and endurance training for my facts and figures for the influence of reps on the strength-endurance continuum. I agree that there are many options for the format of a circuit training class, and perhaps we should mention that in the advantages section - this makes it possible to adjust the format according to the wishes of your participants. If I (accidentally) reduce the time to 30 seconds or less, I get complaints! If I increase beyond 90 seconds, I also get complaints, but I do believe in pushing people so I do it on purpose once in a while. I really do know an instructor who routinely uses 120 second stations for the whole circuit, but I feel that tends to discourage new members. So where do we stand on the particular issue of the "endurance disadvantage"? I think we are converging on an agreement, so maybe you'd like to propose a figure or maybe a different form of wording? Steve Pitchers 22:53, 19 May 2007 (UTC) PS: It's getting late here, so I'm going to have to sign off for now.

Citations are needed for the quote "The most popular form in the US is found at Curves facilities" Without that the whole section on curves should be removed as it bears no real importance to the history of circuit training. It also reads like an advertisement for curves, so unless someone provides a citation lets get rid of this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.234.53.174 (talk) 02:59, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Maniwar, do not delete page edits arbitrarily, I posted an edit page warning asking for citations and gave heads up that the curves section reads like an advertisement for curves. In fact circuit training has been extremely popular with athletes for far longer then curves has existed. I will be altering the article again if a citation is not provided and the section is not changed in general to not sound like an advertisement for curves. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.234.53.174 (talk) 17:46, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Advertising on this page

I feel there is far too much advertising present on this page for the 'Curves' organisation. This is an online encyclopedia and shouldn't be used as free advertising space for commercial entities. As another user has already stated, Circiut Training has been in existence for a considerable time already, and is used in various gyms, for example the one I belong to in the U.K. At the moment this page sounds like an advertisement. It would good if more information about the benefits and types of specific exercises involved in Circuit Training could be provided - if anyone can help? --Mge456 (talk) 14:32, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

advantage of circuit traning

blalalalalalala....and be patient for all the fittnes training so your body will controled easy....

How to make a ups —Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.18.229.131 (talk) 03:24, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

External links

I wanted to add an external link to a (free) software which compiles circuit training music tracks. Assuming people who seek information about circuit training here many times intend to perform such circuit trainings and since it is hard to get any appropriate sound resources (i tried hard a long time!) i had the impression this would enrich this article. What do you think?

Then i'd like to point out that the existing external link ("Circuit Training for Women - Melbourne, Australia") doesn't seem to give much additional value to the article; I visited the page and it looks to me like just another commercial gym (which at least offers circuits). I'd propose to remove this external link from the article. 83.78.48.209 (talk) 16:46, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

The link is inappropriate per WP:ELNO point 13 which reads Sites that are only indirectly related to the article's subject: the link should be directly related to the subject of the article. A general site that has information about a variety of subjects should usually not be linked to from an article on a more specific subject. Similarly, a website on a specific subject should usually not be linked from an article about a general subject. If a section of a general website is devoted to the subject of the article, and meets the other criteria for linking, then that part of the site could be deep linked. The link would be proper in an article about the specific software program, but it doesn't directly deal with the broader topic of this article. ThemFromSpace 19:38, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

Very well, thank you! 83.78.48.209 (talk) 20:01, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

Circuit Electric

This is a topic that everyone has to learn because it is so important to have an idea of what is going around us. It is said that any thing that has a positive and negative charges a lethal! We are to be careful to while working with these staff.