is it okay to NOT feel sore after lifting?

LesterBlackstone

4. Doing Full Body Workouts: Beginners (and most people) should not do full body workouts. Most people have splits of Chest & Triceps, Back & Biceps, and Legs. An example of a chest/triceps day is: (Bench Press (3 sets), Tricep pulldown (3 sets), Incline Bench Press (3 sets), Dips (3 sets)).

Taking out the rest of the post that is not relevent to my question.

Out of interest, why do you say that beginners (and most people) should not do full body workouts? I do a split workout for convenience with my schedule - but am not sure why that would be generally preferred over a full body workout.

1x/Wk/Bodypart is suboptimal for anyone who isn't chemically enhanced.

http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/muscle-gain/training-frequency-for-mass-gains.html

kylTKe

4. Doing Full Body Workouts: Beginners (and most people) should not do full body workouts. Most people have splits of Chest & Triceps, Back & Biceps, and Legs. An example of a chest/triceps day is: (Bench Press (3 sets), Tricep pulldown (3 sets), Incline Bench Press (3 sets), Dips (3 sets)).

Taking out the rest of the post that is not relevent to my question.

Out of interest, why do you say that beginners (and most people) should not do full body workouts? I do a split workout for convenience with my schedule - but am not sure why that would be generally preferred over a full body workout.

I'm strictly speaking about weight lifting here. If you're doing some kind of HIIT program that incorporates weights, that is different (of course you're going to do full body).

I'm not always the best at explaining things, but here is why you don't do full body workouts: If you hit legs for 25 minutes, you will be exhausted. Then you go to arms, and your arm workout suffers because you are exhausted. It is much better to split them up so that you are able to devote your full attention and energy to one workout at a time. Would you do a triathlon and then think you're going to get a good weight lifting session in afterwards? No.

Additionally, most people can only get in 1 workout a week for each specific muscle group. Then you have to rest several days to let that muscle group recover. Recovery is a huge part of weight lifting. By doing a full body workout, you're wasting your ONLY workout of the week for arms by doing it right after legs when your energy is really low.

There are some other problems too. The general bro-science advice is that if you're in the gym for too long (maybe more than 45 minutes) your body goes catabolic and starts burning muscle for fuel. I don't know whether that's really true or not, but if it is, you wouldn't want to spend an hour doing a full body workout.

So, the question is: Who can do full body workouts and get the same results as doing splits? People on steroids, basically.

It's not like full body workouts are a complete waste (unless you're really scared of going catabolic). But they are definitely not as good as doing a split. Of course, if your schedule only allows you to workout once a week, then full body makes sense. My advice would maybe be to do some full body exercises (like olympic lifts, kettlebells, etc...) instead of hitting one muscle group at a time. And also to try and interleave sets together. So like: Legs, Chest, Back, Legs, Chest, Back, etc... Instead of: Legs, Legs Legs, Chest, Chest, Chest, Back, Back, Back, etc...

However, you can do a 2 day split of upper body/lower body that will probably be a lot more effective, if you can do 2 workouts a week.

LesterBlackstone

Additionally, most people can only get in 1 workout a week for each specific muscle group. Then you have to rest several days to let that muscle group recover. Recovery is a huge part of weight lifting. By doing a full body workout, you're wasting your ONLY workout of the week for arms by doing it right after legs when your energy is really low.

This makes no sense. If you have time to go to the gym 3x/Week for a split, what makes you say that you wouldn't be able to go 3x/week for full body?

There are some other problems too. The general bro-science advice is that if you're in the gym for too long (maybe more than 45 minutes) your body goes catabolic and starts burning muscle for fuel. I don't know whether that's really true or not, but if it is, you wouldn't want to spend an hour doing a full body workout.

Broscience. And any concerns about cortisol, etc are easily mediated by taking in some calories during your workout.

So, the question is: Who can do full body workouts and get the same results as doing splits? People on steroids, basically.

You have this exactly backward. Prior to the steroid era, full body was the predominant method.
Bodypart splits didn't come along until the advent of drugs.

Sarauk2sf

4. Doing Full Body Workouts: Beginners (and most people) should not do full body workouts. Most people have splits of Chest & Triceps, Back & Biceps, and Legs. An example of a chest/triceps day is: (Bench Press (3 sets), Tricep pulldown (3 sets), Incline Bench Press (3 sets), Dips (3 sets)).

Taking out the rest of the post that is not relevent to my question.

Out of interest, why do you say that beginners (and most people) should not do full body workouts? I do a split workout for convenience with my schedule - but am not sure why that would be generally preferred over a full body workout.

I'm strictly speaking about weight lifting here. If you're doing some kind of HIIT program that incorporates weights, that is different (of course you're going to do full body).

I'm not always the best at explaining things, but here is why you don't do full body workouts: If you hit legs for 25 minutes, you will be exhausted. Then you go to arms, and your arm workout suffers because you are exhausted. It is much better to split them up so that you are able to devote your full attention and energy to one workout at a time. Would you do a triathlon and then think you're going to get a good weight lifting session in afterwards? No.

Additionally, most people can only get in 1 workout a week for each specific muscle group. Then you have to rest several days to let that muscle group recover. Recovery is a huge part of weight lifting. By doing a full body workout, you're wasting your ONLY workout of the week for arms by doing it right after legs when your energy is really low.

There are some other problems too. The general bro-science advice is that if you're in the gym for too long (maybe more than 45 minutes) your body goes catabolic and starts burning muscle for fuel. I don't know whether that's really true or not, but if it is, you wouldn't want to spend an hour doing a full body workout.

So, the question is: Who can do full body workouts and get the same results as doing splits? People on steroids, basically.

You may get some arguement here from a lot of folks that do full body workouts as I am not sure you need to work legs for example for 25 minutes, especially if you are a beginner. Plus, if people are only able to go to the gym twice a week, then the rest days required for a full body workout would be less of an issue (assuming those two days were not back to back) and they would be able to train each body part twice in one week. However, from my personal schedule, the rest/recovery time is exactly the reason why I do a split workout (as I want to be able to back to back workouts if necessary).

DonttrythatwithME

sometimes im sore the next day sometimes i suffer with DOMS for 2/3 days sometimes I dont hurt at all, if your seeing results and not hurting then brilliant is what i say!

ishtar13

These are your problems: You're doing full body workouts.

4. Doing Full Body Workouts: Beginners (and most people) should not do full body workouts. A common 3 day split is Chest & Triceps, Back & Biceps, and Legs. An example of a chest/triceps day is: (Bench Press (3 sets), Tricep pulldown (3 sets), Incline Bench Press (3 sets), Dips (3 sets)).

There's nothing wrong with full body for a beginner, as long as you allow adequate rest between sessions.

kylTKe

Additionally, most people can only get in 1 workout a week for each specific muscle group. Then you have to rest several days to let that muscle group recover. Recovery is a huge part of weight lifting. By doing a full body workout, you're wasting your ONLY workout of the week for arms by doing it right after legs when your energy is really low.

This makes no sense. If you have time to go to the gym 3x/Week for a split, what makes you say that you wouldn't be able to go 3x/week for full body?

There are some other problems too. The general bro-science advice is that if you're in the gym for too long (maybe more than 45 minutes) your body goes catabolic and starts burning muscle for fuel. I don't know whether that's really true or not, but if it is, you wouldn't want to spend an hour doing a full body workout.

Broscience. And any concerns about cortisol, etc are easily mediated by taking in some calories during your workout.

So, the question is: Who can do full body workouts and get the same results as doing splits? People on steroids, basically.

You have this exactly backward. Prior to the steroid era, full body was the predominant method.
Bodypart splits didn't come along until the advent of drugs.

Why can't you work out every body part 3 times a week? Because you wouldn't be getting in very good workouts and you wouldn't be allowing your muscles time to recover by hitting the same muscle groups every other day. We *are* talking beginners here, not professionals.

I'm a little confused by your second point. I think you mean mitigated? Sounds like you're fighting bro science with bro science.

Also, just because full body (may) have been used more often prior to the introduction of steroids in body building doesn't make it the better method and certainly doesn't mean that you need to be on steroids to get results with a 3 day split. You're drawing some wild conclusions from circumstantial evidence.

ishtar13

4. Doing Full Body Workouts: Beginners (and most people) should not do full body workouts. Most people have splits of Chest & Triceps, Back & Biceps, and Legs. An example of a chest/triceps day is: (Bench Press (3 sets), Tricep pulldown (3 sets), Incline Bench Press (3 sets), Dips (3 sets)).

Taking out the rest of the post that is not relevent to my question.

Out of interest, why do you say that beginners (and most people) should not do full body workouts? I do a split workout for convenience with my schedule - but am not sure why that would be generally preferred over a full body workout.

1x/Wk/Bodypart is suboptimal for anyone who isn't chemically enhanced.

http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/muscle-gain/training-frequency-for-mass-gains.html

I do full body 3x week, as do others on Starting Strength, Stronglifts 5x5, and NROLFW.

ebonijo2

This is what I do, I just dont go to the gym w/o a plan. I write what body parts I want to workout(UE, LE, core). Writing out exericise w/ reps & weight you want to use really helps.

Sarauk2sf

4. Doing Full Body Workouts: Beginners (and most people) should not do full body workouts. Most people have splits of Chest & Triceps, Back & Biceps, and Legs. An example of a chest/triceps day is: (Bench Press (3 sets), Tricep pulldown (3 sets), Incline Bench Press (3 sets), Dips (3 sets)).

Taking out the rest of the post that is not relevent to my question.

Out of interest, why do you say that beginners (and most people) should not do full body workouts? I do a split workout for convenience with my schedule - but am not sure why that would be generally preferred over a full body workout.

1x/Wk/Bodypart is suboptimal for anyone who isn't chemically enhanced.

http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/muscle-gain/training-frequency-for-mass-gains.html

That was my understanding also, which is why I was confused and asked for clarification. I only do splits for convenience.

LesterBlackstone

Why can't you work out every body part 3 times a week? Because you wouldn't be getting in very good workouts and you wouldn't be allowing your muscles time to recover by hitting the same muscle groups every other day. We *are* talking beginners here, not professionals.

You're ignoring the fast that the primary adaptation at the beginner stage is neural (not muscular). Since they aren't lifting as much weight, beginners require less recovery time between workouts. Once the loads get heavy enough, a split may be in order - but even then a push-pull or upper/lower split will offer much better adaptation than 1x/week/bodypart.

I'm a little confused by your second point. I think you mean mitigated? Sounds like you're fighting bro science with bro science.

Not at all. Consuming carbs during your workout will keep glycogen stores replenished and can aid in recovery.

Also, just because full body (may) have been used more often prior to the introduction of steroids in body building doesn't make it the better method and certainly doesn't mean that you need to be on steroids to get results with a 3 day split. You're drawing some wild conclusions from circumstantial evidence.

Quite hilarious given your explanation.

jolarocknrolla

I've done it both ways, and if you are not going to failure you don't need to do splits IMHO - especially if you only lift twice a week. If you lift every other day I think a split routine makes more sense. Clearly, opinions differ.

I do know that you can do squats every other day, that is one exercise that will give you a LOT of benefit in overall strength and you can work it into just about every non-consecutive routine if you aren't going to failure (like you probably will not as you are starting out).

mishkat

Bump for later as I too am starting to lift weights.

kylTKe

Why can't you work out every body part 3 times a week? Because you wouldn't be getting in very good workouts and you wouldn't be allowing your muscles time to recover by hitting the same muscle groups every other day. We *are* talking beginners here, not professionals.

You're ignoring the fast that the primary adaptation at the beginner stage is neural (not muscular). Since they aren't lifting as much weight, beginners require less recovery time between workouts. Once the loads get heavy enough, a split may be in order - but even then a push-pull or upper/lower split will offer much better adaptation than 1x/week/bodypart.

I'm a little confused by your second point. I think you mean mitigated? Sounds like you're fighting bro science with bro science.

Not at all. Consuming carbs during your workout will keep glycogen stores replenished and can aid in recovery.

Also, just because full body (may) have been used more often prior to the introduction of steroids in body building doesn't make it the better method and certainly doesn't mean that you need to be on steroids to get results with a 3 day split. You're drawing some wild conclusions from circumstantial evidence.

Quite hilarious given your explanation.

I read through the article you posted before and it very closely matches my entire explanation of weight lifting. It says that full body workouts cause the later exercises to suffer, especially for beginners. Additionally there's some stuff about hitting each muscle group once a week being bad, which I definitely did *not* recommend. I recommended a common split of 2 upper body and 1 lower body workouts per week. Which is almost exactly the same thing that the guy who wrote that article recommended. Literally the only difference in his program is that instead of doing 2 upper body and 1 lower body each week, you alternate every other week with 2 lower body and 1 upper body. He just phrases it a little differently, doing 2 workouts every 5 days versus my recommendation of 3 workouts every 7 days, which is almos the same frequency.

And seriously, nobody wants a training program that isn't based on the 7 day week. People want to have the same training days each week so that they can plan their schedule, not randomly have sessions fall on saturday and sunday when you're probably spending time with friends or family.

Also, consuming carbohydrates during exercise does little to replenish glycogen stores in any sort of immediate way. Plus, most people who go to the gym and work out for 30 minutes don't need to worry much about glycogen replenishment.

This is getting way off track though. I think we can all agree that the OP is training too light and needs a more structured workout plan. Whether she splits upper and lower body or works every body part three times a week (...) is up to her.

LesterBlackstone

Why can't you work out every body part 3 times a week? Because you wouldn't be getting in very good workouts and you wouldn't be allowing your muscles time to recover by hitting the same muscle groups every other day. We *are* talking beginners here, not professionals.

You're ignoring the fast that the primary adaptation at the beginner stage is neural (not muscular). Since they aren't lifting as much weight, beginners require less recovery time between workouts. Once the loads get heavy enough, a split may be in order - but even then a push-pull or upper/lower split will offer much better adaptation than 1x/week/bodypart.

I'm a little confused by your second point. I think you mean mitigated? Sounds like you're fighting bro science with bro science.

Not at all. Consuming carbs during your workout will keep glycogen stores replenished and can aid in recovery.

Also, just because full body (may) have been used more often prior to the introduction of steroids in body building doesn't make it the better method and certainly doesn't mean that you need to be on steroids to get results with a 3 day split. You're drawing some wild conclusions from circumstantial evidence.

Quite hilarious given your explanation.

I read through the article you posted before and it very closely matches my entire explanation of weight lifting. It says that full body workouts cause the later exercises to suffer, especially for beginners.

That's not what he said at all.

"An additional potential benefit to a higher frequency of training, and this is especially true for beginning training, is that performing movements more frequently tends to improve motor learning. And since a majority of the adaptations that occur initially to training are neural in nature, the faster you can get through them adaptation, the sooner you can get into real growth."

Once you progress beyond the beginner stage, then a different frequency is optimal.

Additionally there's some stuff about hitting each muscle group once a week being bad, which I definitely did *not* recommend. I recommended a common split of 2 upper body and 1 lower body workouts per week. Which is almost exactly the same thing that the guy who wrote that article recommended.

Literally the only difference in his program is that instead of doing 2 upper body and 1 lower body each week, you alternate every other week with 2 lower body and 1 upper body. He just phrases it a little differently, doing 2 workouts every 5 days versus my recommendation of 3 workouts every 7 days, which is almos the same frequency.

LOLWUT?


"even if top level bodybuilders only hit every bodypart once per week after they have been training for 10 or more years, that’s usually not how they built the majority of their muscle mass"

"For the most part, I can’t think of any situation where I’d recommend only hitting a bodypart once per week for growth unless the goal was to simply maintain a given muscle group. And that’s usually in the context of a specialization cycle (a topic for another day) when other bodyparts are being trained more frequently."

"And while it’s still common to emulate the training pattern of elite (read: drug using) bodybuilders and bomb and blast everything once per week, my experience (and that of many others) is simply that the majority of natural trainees (and even many drug users) simply don’t get optimal growth that way. This is one of those cases where the athletes seem to be succeeding in spite of the training rather than due to it."

Also, consuming carbohydrates during exercises does little to replenish glycogen stores in any sort of immediate way. Plus, most people who go to the gym and work out for 30 minutes don't need to worry much about glycogen replenishment.

True. I was talking about longer workouts (which you seemed to be so concerned about in your other post).

kcoftx

I'm following the New Rules of Lifting for Women. I had my first workout last Saturday. I was sweating buckets but I didn't feel sore. The book doesn't tell you where to start with weights because it is different for everyone. So I made notes to increase weights on certain exercises for the next time. That was workout A. For workout B, I was watching a personal trainer show a beginning newbie (also a girl) how to do the first exercise that was on my list. She was being set up for 40 more pounds than what I had planned to attempt. I set mine up for more than I expected to but slightly below hers (they were doing a lot of talking and resting and I was doing the actual multiple reps). Oh MY! I not only felt I could do it, but I knew instantly it was gonna leave me sore like the other workout didn't do the time before.

It is important not to injure ourselves but we also do underestimate what we can do in the beginning. Just keep upping it until you find where you are supposed to be.

I was able to spit out the require reps but it was tough. That's good.

Today I go back with workout A and I will be increasing some of the weights.

LesterBlackstone

More on beginning training frequency by the same author:

.

Training Frequency

Training frequency refers, rather simply, to how many days per week a given type of training is performed. As you might guess, this impacts on a number of different things relevant to beginners. Research on the topic suggests that, contrary to more advanced individuals (who seem to get the best strength gains with an average training frequency of 2X/week per muscle group), beginners get better strength gains with a frequency of three times per week.

Research has also found that lifting twice per week for beginners will provide approximately 80% of the strength gains of lifting three times per week (I’d note very tangentially that cardiovascular training needs to be done three times per week to generate adaptations). I can’t recall seeing anything to suggest that lifting more often than 3X/week is better for beginners in terms of gains in strength.

From the standpoint of motor learning, a higher frequency is probably better; the more often a trainee can practice something, the faster that they’re going to learn it (again, assuming that practice is occurring under non-fatigued conditions). I’d mention here that the most common approach to training beginners is to use the same full body workout (e.g. the entire body is trained at once) at each of the three weekly workouts.

Of course there are exceptions (Mark Rippetoes Starting Strength alternates two basic full-body workouts so that each workout gets done 3 times every 2 weeks) and, again from a learning standpoint, I think there is much merit to this approach. Performing the same basic set of exercises at each workout gives beginning trainees the most practice on them, this is key to proper motor learning.

For the most part, I don’t like split routines (where the body is split into various parts) for beginners for a number of reasons although they can be appropriate under the right conditions.. A basic upper/lower split type of routine can be made to work but trainees have to keep the volume and intensity well under control in the beginning stages or they will get themselves into problems. As well, split routines do reduce the opportunity to learn the movements with frequent practice. This may be outweighed by other potential benefits.

I would never use a typical bodybuilding split (where only one or two muscle groups is hit at each workout) with a beginner. NEVER. Of course, I’d almost never use them with anybody but for beginners they accomplish nothing relevant to beginner goals. They allow volume to be far higher than necessary and they don’t give the trainee sufficient practice since each exercise is being done perhaps once every 7 days.

Drawbacks to training three times per week are scheduling, especially when a full body routine is being used. That generally necessitates training on alternate days per week (e.g. Monday/Wednesday/Friday or Tuesday/Thursday/Saturday) and for some trainees that causes problems. Moving to twice per week avoids this as more training flexibility is allowed. A basic split routine can also avoid these problems since they tend to allow a little more flexibility in terms of what days can and cannot be trained on.

I’d also note that training frequency is probably a place where differences may be seen depending on the ultimate goals of the weight room. Someone only looking for general strength health/fitness may be more than served by only lifting weights twice/week with no need nor desire to move past that. Other days are then freed up for cardiovascular conditioning or other types of exercise. The gains obtained by adding that third day of weight training may be more than outweighed by the time requirement/scheduling or what have you.

Athletes using the weight room to improve performance may also be well suited by only lifting twice/week although this depends massively on the demands of their sport and what else they have to do each week. If nothing else, they may simply lack the time to get into the weight room more often than that, even in the beginning stages. Once again, this depends on what else is being done in training.

For those aspiring to either the physique sports or powerlifting/strongman or what have you down the road, getting into the weight room three times per week is probably mandatory. Since lifting makes up the primary training in those types of activities, developing good technique/work capacity/etc. in the weight room is going to be relatively more important. And unless trainees get used to training three times per week in the early stages, they’ll have trouble adding a fourth or fifth day later down the road.[/b]

http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/muscle-gain/beginning-weight-training-part-3.html

jackieatx

Going to do squats- check!

Weights 3x a week- check!

Upping my weight- check!

Thanks guys that was good info, very helpful! Going to FEEL ZE BURN this week!

JNick77

You have this exactly backward. Prior to the steroid era, full body was the predominant method.
Bodypart splits didn't come along until the advent of drugs.

I don't want to get a full blow arguement because this thread is already de-railed. First, the pre-steroid era was also during the era of the Soviet Union. Since the Soviet Union has fallen and information is available regarding Russian training methods, that information has very much changed the way we look at training nowadays. It's not so much the steroid era, steroids were around long before. Russian Olympic athletes were widely regarded as some of the best in the world. Many good training philosophies have come from it, Westside adopted the Russian Conjugate method, and we're also aware of Sheiko just to name two. So looking at early 20th century training methods is not even relevant in today's standards and available information. Maximal strength training combined with some hypertrophy training is more optimal in various splits being Upper / Lower or by body part.

Is there some value to full-body training, sure but it's short-lived. Google information on negatives/shortcomings of full-body training and one of the most common issues is quick plateau's in strength. Now various methods do some modified full-body training but not full blown hit every body part.

riskiestlavonn

I find that I feel sore the day afterwards. Maybe it's just delayed?

LesterBlackstone

You have this exactly backward. Prior to the steroid era, full body was the predominant method.
Bodypart splits didn't come along until the advent of drugs.

I don't want to get a full blow arguement because this thread is already de-railed. First, the pre-steroid era was also during the era of the Soviet Union. Since the Soviet Union has fallen and information is available regarding Russian training methods, that information has very much changed the way we look at training nowadays. It's not so much the steroid era, steroids were around long before. Russian Olympic athletes were widely regarded as some of the best in the world. Many good training philosophies have come from it, Westside adopted the Russian Conjugate method, and we're also aware of Sheiko just to name two. So looking at early 20th century training methods is not even relevant in today's standards and available information. Maximal strength training combined with some hypertrophy training is more optimal in various splits being Upper / Lower or by body part.

Is there some value to full-body training, sure but it's short-lived. Google information on negatives/shortcomings of full-body training and one of the most common issues is quick plateau's in strength. Now various methods do some modified full-body training but not full blown hit every body part.

No argument there. But the topic at hand is regarding novice trainees. The methodology you're referring to is more applicable to intermediate/advanced trainees. And none of them advocate 1x/week/bodypart.

dad106

You could have some delayed soreness... I know when I lift, I feel tired after but not always sore.. but with in like an hour or two, thats when I feel it.

I also do total body programs.. Do between 2-3 sets, of 10-15 reps.. but I do mine with heavy weights(to me) and to failure... IE by the time I'm done, I feel like I'm going to collapse on a bench and not make it out to my car. Thats how I know I will def. be sore the next day.

JNick77

You have this exactly backward. Prior to the steroid era, full body was the predominant method.
Bodypart splits didn't come along until the advent of drugs.

I don't want to get a full blow arguement because this thread is already de-railed. First, the pre-steroid era was also during the era of the Soviet Union. Since the Soviet Union has fallen and information is available regarding Russian training methods, that information has very much changed the way we look at training nowadays. It's not so much the steroid era, steroids were around long before. Russian Olympic athletes were widely regarded as some of the best in the world. Many good training philosophies have come from it, Westside adopted the Russian Conjugate method, and we're also aware of Sheiko just to name two. So looking at early 20th century training methods is not even relevant in today's standards and available information. Maximal strength training combined with some hypertrophy training is more optimal in various splits being Upper / Lower or by body part.

Is there some value to full-body training, sure but it's short-lived. Google information on negatives/shortcomings of full-body training and one of the most common issues is quick plateau's in strength. Now various methods do some modified full-body training but not full blown hit every body part.

No argument there. But the topic at hand is regarding novice trainees. The methodology you're referring to is more applicable to intermediate/advanced trainees. And none of them advocate 1x/week/bodypart.

Yes, I was just more referencing the pre vs. post steroid period.