Here's one for ya

Okay. I have heard mixed opinions on this just like many other things (like whether to work out on an empty stomach, heavy lifting vs higher reps, aerobic vs anaerobic blah blah blah blah). So! Opinions?

Is it better to do cardio first and then strength/weight training or vice versa? I have heard that you get more out of your cardio if you do the weights first, but I have also heard that it's better to take your heart rate up for awhile before the weights to max calorie burn.

So what's the deal? Which is better? Or, honestly, does it really even matter?

It's performance-dependent.  You do the sport/performance training that's most important to your goals first in any workout - if you're looking to improve cardio performance parameters (sprint speed, endurance, distance) you'll do the cardio first and then supporting strength training.

 If you're looking for fat loss or strength performance, you do the strength training first and then supporting cardio.

 So there's no set rule for how to do it, though for most people's goals related to weight loss it's generally best to do strength training first and then supporting cardio.

Weights first.  When performing an aerobic activity, like walking or running on a treadmill, your body has the option of using glycogen stores or fat stores. The
problem is that your body won’t use any fat stores until your glycogen
stores are used up. On the other hand, during anaerobic exercise, like
weight lifting, your body can only use glycogen as fuel.

So here’s how it plays out. Studies have shown that it can take as much as 29 minutes of cardio to burn your glycogen stores. So if you start your workout off
with 30 minutes of cardio, not only did you burn fat for a whopping one
minute, but you also depleted your body of the fuel it needs (glycogen)
to do your resistance training. Now, in order to manufacture glucose
(glycogen) during your weight training session, your body may actually
break down muscle tissue to use certain amino acids as your fuel. You
could end up losing muscle instead of gaining.

To make things simple, if you do your weight training first, you can use your glycogen stores as fuel. Then, when you move over to your cardio, you’re right
where you want to be… with depleted glycogen stores, giving your body
the opportunity to burn fat as a fuel source.

Original Post by fitnessgirll:

Weights first.  When performing an aerobic activity, like walking or running on a treadmill, your body has the option of using glycogen stores or fat stores. The
problem is that your body won’t use any fat stores until your glycogen
stores are used up. On the other hand, during anaerobic exercise, like
weight lifting, your body can only use glycogen as fuel.

So here’s how it plays out. Studies have shown that it can take as much as 29 minutes of cardio to burn your glycogen stores. So if you start your workout off
with 30 minutes of cardio, not only did you burn fat for a whopping one
minute, but you also depleted your body of the fuel it needs (glycogen)
to do your resistance training. Now, in order to manufacture glucose
(glycogen) during your weight training session, your body may actually
break down muscle tissue to use certain amino acids as your fuel. You
could end up losing muscle instead of gaining.

To make things simple, if you do your weight training first, you can use your glycogen stores as fuel. Then, when you move over to your cardio, you’re right
where you want to be… with depleted glycogen stores, giving your body
the opportunity to burn fat as a fuel source.

 Excellent explanation! :-)

Thank you "fitnessgirl"! I didn't know any of that and have been going about this all backwards. I'm going to try it the other way around from now on. My former logic was that my runs were warming my muscles up for lifting AND that if I lifted first, I would tire out more quickly during my run. No wonder my backside is taking so long to muscle up. I feel very silly now. Ah, I'm such a layman.

Well, looks like weights first it is! Thanks all!