Weight lfting to lose weight?
I go to the gym atleast 3 times a week, sometimes 4 if i can. 2 times a week i use the natulis machines to weight lift.
How many reps and sets do you d owhen using these machines?
I have been doing 3 sets of 5 reps, then once i cycle though all the machines I do another round of 2 sets of 5. I put on enough weight that it is difficult for me, but not too much. Im able to get though all my sets and reps with out too much struggle.
I just wanted to compare notes and see what other people do and their results. So far it has only been 3 weeks, I have not seen results but i feel better lol
You should be doing 3 sets of 10 for strengthing or 3 sets of 15 if you just want to tone. Usually, if you want to strengthen you increase the weight with each set and go down in reps. For example: You do arm curls - 10 reps at 10 pounds. Then you do 8 reps with 15 pounds. Then you do 5-6 reps with 20 pounds.
Original Post by ritual_silence:
I have been doing 3 sets of 5 reps, then once i cycle though all the machines I do another round of 2 sets of 5. I put on enough weight that it is difficult for me, but not too much. Im able to get though all my sets and reps with out too much struggle.
#1. You are not lifting anywhere close to enough if it's not "too much struggle"
#2. DO NOT use machines. They are far inferior to free weights and proven to cause more joint pain than free weights. You are more likely to hurt yourself using machines.
#3. Do big, compound lifts meaning lifts that use more than one muscle group. danielcrew gave an excellent example of an exercise to completely ignore: the curl. It works one little muscle. Focus on squats, presses, rows, dead lifts, lunges, etc. Ask these ladies about weight lifting for women!
#4. There is no such thing as toning as it's used. There is only losing muscle, keeping muscle or gaining muscle. What is wrongly called toning generally means "building muscle at the slowest rate possible, if at all"
Yeah spiro, curls are such a waste of time, why would anyone want to directly train and build one of the more visible muscles of the body(with clothes on) of the upper arm, I suppose any form of tricep training is a desecration also.
Get at least 5 reps in, and use a challenging weight that allows no more than 12...I wouldn't bother counting reps religiously, use the number as a guideline, but by all means, don't stop at 5, 8, or 10 reps if your body has a few left in the tank, your progress will stall quickly if you don't expend maximal effort.
I have been lifting free weights, compound lifting for over a month. On day 1 I do dead lifts, rows and shoulder press. On day 2 I do squats, chest press and chin ups using the assisted chin up machine. There is quite a positive difference in all of my muscles (including biceps and triceps). Plus I do not spend a whole lot of my time in the gym. Oh, I do 5 sets of each exercise. The reps I change around; the first set I may do 10 then I add weight and probably do 8....when I get to the 5th set the weights are quite heavy and I try for 5 but usually get 4. Now if I do less reps in the beginning I maybe able to get that 5th rep with the major weight
. I love lifting heavy weights rather then lighter weights with more reps.....I cannot believe how much time I wasted doing that.
Melkor and Spiro are very knowledgeable. Read the beginning posts in the Fitness Forum and you will get some great ideas!!!
Since you are going to the gym, have you thought about booking 1 session with a trainer just to develop a routine?
Nautilis is not a waste of time, and neither are targeting specific muscles. People want different things out of weight training, some want to just build more muscle mass, some want to get stronger, some want more definition. I think finding out what it is you want, and having a 1x1 with a trainer is going to give you the best personalized program.
Original Post by gary_dubois:
Yeah spiro, curls are such a waste of time, why would anyone want to directly train and build one of the more visible muscles of the body(with clothes on) of the upper arm, I suppose any form of tricep training is a desecration also.
As Alwyn Cosgrove puts it here: "Somehow this highly developed organism that we call the human body is not a remarkable piece of machinery that functions flawlessly as a unit, it's just random ass "parts" put together - each of which can be worked seperatly"
It's also been shown that trying to 'directly train' a muscle won't provide any additional results if you're already doing compound lifts.
You could do
A. Lower weight like you're doing now with more reps
or
B. Higher weight to where you struggle with less reps
The first option is usually for toning and the second for adding a lot of muscle. You should do about 8-10 reps in each set where the last 2 you start to struggle a little. I usually do 2 sets of 8-10 like that, but 3 would be fine
(i'm studying to be a personal trainer)
Original Post by floggingsully:
Original Post by gary_dubois:
Yeah spiro, curls are such a waste of time, why would anyone want to directly train and build one of the more visible muscles of the body(with clothes on) of the upper arm, I suppose any form of tricep training is a desecration also.
As Alwyn Cosgrove puts it here: "Somehow this highly developed organism that we call the human body is not a remarkable piece of machinery that functions flawlessly as a unit, it's just random ass "parts" put together - each of which can be worked seperatly"
It's also been shown that trying to 'directly train' a muscle won't provide any additional results if you're already doing compound lifts.
Alwyn Cosgrove or Arnold....who's advice should I heed...
And I'd love to see some photo testimonials from Cosgrove's clients, or those who use his philosophy? Alwyn doesn't look so impressive himself...
If you train the compound lifts correctly, the secondary emphasis on the bi's during pulling motions, or tri's during pushing movements should be very minimal, meaning that you're not achieving microtrauma in the assistance muscles, meaning minimal muscle hypertrophy.
Original Post by gary_dubois;Alwyn Cosgrove or Arnold....who's advice should I heed... The guy with the graduate degree who puts food on his table by getting people in shape and is one of the most highly respected minds in his field, or the guy who has freakish genetics, is 'chemically enhanced', and has trained... um... who has Arnold ever trained? That's a good question, I'm going to go with the first guy.
And I'd love to see some photo testimonials from Cosgrove's clients, or those who use his philosophy? Alwyn doesn't look so impressive himself... Testimonials from people with a wide variety of fitness backgrounds, including this one from Lou Schuler "Alwyn Cosgrove is the most knowledgeable fitness trainer I've encountered in my 10-plus years as a fitness journalist"
If you train the compound lifts correctly, the secondary emphasis on the bi's during pulling motions, or tri's during pushing movements should be very minimal, meaning that you're not achieving microtrauma in the assistance muscles, meaning minimal muscle hypertrophy. Well, Rogers et al (2000) seem to disagree, they found that the addition of bicep and tricep isolation exercises had no effect on are size when added to a workout consisting of compound movements.
Quoting articles and comments from fitness journalists is great, but I learn from my own personal trial and error. I can bench over 300 lbs at a bw of 160, so I've gotta be doing something right...I use a split routine which includes a myriad of bench press assistance exercises and plenty of triceps training
OP, working in the science field,as I do, your work and word can only be taken seriously if it has been published in a peer reviewed journal. So, just my opinion but I would take the word of someone who qoutes from such a journal (has something to back-up their advice). I got my original workout plan from a forum post done by Melkor and Sully, it is called the stripped 5x5. I do at times add a few more reps with the lighter weights but I do not have to (I have nothing to quote to say this helps or hinders).
So, when you do find a workout plan make sure that it comes from an expert who is respected by their peers.
Take care and goodluck with your lifting and weightloss
Quoting from someone else's journal means that you have something to back up your advice? Where I come from, physical results means backing up advice. Unlike the science field(bad analogy btw), the proof's in the pudding in the fitness/bodybuilding world, your results are physically visible. I can sit back and watch infomercials all day long then tell Joe Blow that Chuck Norris' Total gym is the hottest breakthrough in fitness technology of all time. Let's see those bicep photos instead of reverting back to the t-nation articles, people. I want to see some results from this 5x5 program instead of words of praise...
"Testimonials from people with a wide variety of fitness backgrounds, including this one from Lou Schuler "Alwyn Cosgrove is the most knowledgeable fitness trainer I've encountered in my 10-plus years as a fitness journalist"
Floggingsully, you've been following this philosophy long enough to provide some proof to it's validity then? no? Let's see a few before and afters. Or are we blindly handing out advice on these forums based on what we've read/heard....
Original Post by gary_dubois:
Quoting from someone else's journal means that you have something to back up your advice?
Don't mean to interupt your rant/pissing contest, but I thought puppykisses was refering to scientific journals, not cc+ ("someone else's") journals.
Original Post by gary_dubois:
Quoting from someone else's journal means that you have something to back up your advice? You do understand the difference between 'someone elses journal' and a peer reviewed sceientific journal don't you? Where I come from, physical results means backing up advice For a study to be published in a journal there generally must be a significant difference between your experimental group and the control group (remind me what the sample sizes were in groups your using to back up your claim?). Unlike the science field(bad analogy btw), the proof's in the pudding in the fitness/bodybuilding world fitness and exercise physiology are science fields so it's a perfectly good analogy, your results are physically visible. I can sit back and watch infomercials all day long then tell Joe Blow that Chuck Norris' Total gym is the hottest breakthrough in fitness technology of all time If it was there would be studies in scientific journals to back it up, there aren't. Just like there aren't any that show body-part split routines are as effective as routines that split up movements based on function. Let's see those bicep photos instead of reverting back to the t-nation articles, people. I want to see some results from this 5x5 program instead of words of praise...
Original Post by amethystgirl:
Original Post by gary_dubois:
Quoting from someone else's journal means that you have something to back up your advice?
Don't mean to interupt your rant/pissing contest, but I thought puppykisses was refering to scientific journals, not cc+ ("someone else's") journals.
Uh, yeah...she was referring to scientific journals as an anology, in other words attempting to note a similarity between them and cc+. Thanks for wasting your time. As far as the "pissing contest", I have a very open mind, I'm simply trying to find some sort of actual evidence in regards to all of this advice that's floating around, call it what you will....
Original Post by gary_dubois:
Floggingsully, you've been following this philosophy long enough to provide some proof to it's validity then? no? Let's see a few before and afters. Or are we blindly handing out advice on these forums based on what we've read/heard....
I could follow it for 20 years and it would be impossible for me to prove it's validity. If you remember back to middle school science class, to even suggest correlation between 2 variables you'd need a sample size greater than 1 and a control group, neither of which can one person provide.
I can give you anecdotal evidence, but I can't provide any proof. I did body-part split routines from when I started liftin at around the age of 12 through my early 20's. Currently I'm stronger and I look better than I have been at any point during my years of doing a split routine. Are my results due to the training philosophy? or due to diet? or stress levels? or genetics? I can't say for sure, but the studies that have been done (as well as the growing amount of knowledge about how the body works) suggest that it's due to the training philosophy.
Put up a double-bw bench then come talk to me....
I'm growing ever tired of this site
Original Post by gary_dubois:
Put up a double-bw bench then come talk to me....
I'm growing ever tired of this site
Who put sand in your vagina?
