Cardio before Weights or Weights before Cardio

nyrick

Is any one better than the other?

Oompa_Loompa

Im not 100% so dont take my word..but I thought it was better to do cardio before just because you'l burn more calories...but I could be COMPLETLEY wrong..so I was no help lol

onelegpat

I dont know technically if one is better to do before the other, but I know when I go hard doing cardio I sweat like a pig so the last thing i want (and everyone else at the gym) is to go from station to station sweating all over.
That is why I do my weights in the morning and cardio at night.

Rainster

The trainers at my gym say that you should do weights before the cardio. I don't remember why, but I'm sure they know what they'll taking about.

fishernd

Weights before cardio, if you do both on the same day. You'll get your heart rate up from weight training, and then the cardio will help your muscles get rid of the lactic acid that builds up. This is what my personal trainer has us doing.

SarahJoy_79

I'm sure there is scientifically arguments for each side of the discussion, so I think it's probably just a personal preference. For me I like to get my cardio in first to warm up and loosen my muscles and I feel like I get a much better workout in.

samseed101

Weights before cardio, if you do both on the same day. You'll get your heart rate up from weight training, and then the cardio will help your muscles get rid of the lactic acid that builds up. This is what my personal trainer has us doing.

This is correct and a great way of doing it. Also, think about how tired you are after a session of cardio. Chances are you will be tired (or at least slightly weakened.) As a result, you probably won't be able to lift as much weight, do as many reps, or do as many sets.

Personally, I would rather have my cardio negatively affected by my lifting than have my lifting affected negatively by my cardio.

iplayoutside19

Neither, I alternate days. That way neither gets in the way of the other.

MissVitaVonCherry

WOW! good to know, I am so glad that you posted this because i do my cardio first on monday and wednesdays I guess I will have to do a switch! TFS:flowerforyou:

ColnagoW

My trainer - when I used one - was a body builder. He had me do 20 minutes of cardio before weight work just to warm muscles and get the blood flowing. Assuming both were done early in the day, I could do more extended light cardio in the PM. I'm a biker and it's very difficult - probably counter-productive - to try and do heavy cardio (40-50 miles at a strong pace) on the same day as you do a hard workout with weights. Remember, you don't get strong in the lifting but in the recovery. If you don't allow for the proper recovery, strength gain will elude you!

fishernd

Weights before cardio, if you do both on the same day. You'll get your heart rate up from weight training, and then the cardio will help your muscles get rid of the lactic acid that builds up. This is what my personal trainer has us doing.

Just to clarify, yes, you should do maybe a 5 minute cardio warm-up before you hit the weights. This helps get your muscles relaxed and ready for training. I usually jog or walk fast enough to bring my heart rate up. Then, after you're finished, a 20-minute cardio session will help disburse the lactic acid. Nothing too strenuous.

Also, you should be rotating what you definie as cardio and weight training days. I do cardio 3x a week and weights 3x a week, rotating each day. If you do both on the same day, you'll take away from the effort you put into whatever you do second.

ColnagoW

Good point. Any exercise done regularly is far better than SuperSessions of anything done once a month. Good recipe for injury!

Sorry, forgot to add the post I was addressing re "Is any one better than the other"!

Azdak

The trainers at my gym say that you should do weights before the cardio. I don't remember why, but I'm sure they know what they'll taking about.

There is only a remote chance of that statement being correct--trainers "knowing what they are talking about", I mean.

Azdak

Weights before cardio, if you do both on the same day. You'll get your heart rate up from weight training, and then the cardio will help your muscles get rid of the lactic acid that builds up. This is what my personal trainer has us doing.

It doesn't make any real difference which you do first, but your "trainer"'s explanation is totally wrong. Makes me wonder what else he or she doesn't know.

Azdak

This is one of those topics that is: a) given way too much importance and b) governed as much by urban foklore as by science.

If you are an elite athlete--whether an elite marathoner or elite bodybuilder, power lifter, whatever--then tiny differences in performance can mean the difference between winning and losing--or even winning and making it to the finals. Athletes at that level need to be precise about the specificity of their training.

Almost no one here is at that level. So, for most of us, it is a matter of personal preference OR personal goals. As a practical matter, doing one type of strenuous workout of one kind will affect the performance of the other. So you need to choose which is your focus for that day, or how your body responds the best. Ideally, we would do these workouts at separate times and/or separate days. Given that most people have trouble fitting in ONE workout a day, I think it is unrealistic to expect to do multiples.

Will doing a longer cardio workout have a somewhat negative effect on your strength workout? Yes. Can you still do quality workouts and achieve significant increases in strength and increases in mass? Yes. The same goes for doing strength training first. Will it affect the quality of your cardio workout? Yes. So, choose which one is most important to you.

Or just start doing these "metabolic" type workouts--that way you are not doing either....;-)

My personal preference has always been to do cardio first. I would never "recommend" that as the ideal choice for anyone else. It is the routine that best fits my goals. I have always been oriented more to improving my cardiovascular performance, with strength training as an adjunct. I know that this negatively affects my strength workouts, but that's OK. I have still achieved significant gains in both areas--I have increased my 1RM bench press weight by 74% since March. At age 56, I can lift heavier weights than when I was 30. I have increased my muscle mass by 5-10 lbs. Normally my cardio workouts are 30-75 min at a 65% to 80% HR reserve effort. To say that you "can't achieve strength gains by doing cardio first" is nonsense. I also regularly cycle though different types of strength workouts. When I am pushing for a new peak, I will change my focus for my strength workouts that week and just do a minimal 10-15 min low-level cardio workout. Yes, I notice an improvement in my lifting performance on those days--not huge, but notable. That's why I do it, because my program calls for an extra push that day.

Here are some "myths" about positioning strength/cardio workouts:

1. Doing strength first will burn up your carbs, so you'll burn more fat during cardio. Wrong. Not only wrong, but SILLY and wrong.

2. Doing cardio after weights "gets rid of" lactic acid in the muscles. Wrong. It's curious that even after 25 years of research data, lactic acid is still so misunderstood. Lactic acid is not a "waste product". While it is often associated with fatigue and muscle soreness, it is not a cause of either. Lactic acid is a dynamic metabolite that is processed at various points in the body and clears quite nicely after exercise all on its own.

3. Doing weights first increases the "afterburn" after the workout. I read a study that looked at the "afterburn" effect of various combinations: strength only, cardio only, strength then cadio, and cardio then strength. Technically, the "cardio then strength" workout had the longest "afterburn" effect. While I don't think the differences are particularly significant, the cardio/strength sequence did win.

It IS true that doing extended amounts of cardio will have a negative effect on building muscle mass, but that is true no matter when you do the cardio. And it also gets back to "what are your goals?" and "are the effects of a routine on a performance athlete relevant to the recreational exerciser?"

So do whatever you want. Just don't make a choice based on false information.

onelegpat

Nice post, thanks for the info!

crosskat

True that it is personal preference. Personally, I do not do heavy cardio on days that I do heavy strength training -- but I always incorporate some cardio into my strength training. The opposite is not true: I do not incorporate strenght training into a heavy cardio day.

In a typical week, I do heavy cardio every other day, and strength training on alternate days. For strength trainin, I warm up for 10 minutes by doing cardio. Then I do a few sets of strength training, followed by a few minutes of cardio. Then more strength training, followed by a few more minutes of cardio. I continue this throughout my workout. Then I cool down in the same way I would on a cardio day. For any workout, I finish with stretches.

samseed101

While I understand what Azdak is saying, I disagree when he says that there are "tiny differences in performance." I find the differences rather extreme. I'm far from an emite athlete or elite bodybuilder, but I do notice huge differences.

My cardio almost always consists of HIIT. If I did that and then attempted my typical workout program (which currently is HST,) there is no way I'd be able to to complete the sets to the best of my ability. Especially when I get to the weeks where I'm working in the 5RM range.

Typically, I'm pretty exhausted after HIIT (as most people should be.) I can't even picture trying to squat or deadlift heavy weights after that.

Because of my personal goals, lifting is more important for me. During some cycles I'm shooting for hypertrophy, and during other cycles I'm shooting for strength gains. But either way, I always lift first because if I did a hard cardio session after, my lifting would suffer. Of course, I do warmup on a treadmill lifting but that's a light jog (7MPH for 5 min.)

Of course, if I do cardio after a good lifting session, then I'm not as fast and can't run as long. My cardio greatly suffers because of the intensity of my workout. But I'm willing to sacrifice that in order to reach my main goals.

My point is, the differences in performance aren't tiny at all, even for someone like myself who is far from a top athlete. If your goal is strength or muscle gain, then cardio first can hurt performance. If your goal is overall fitness and to lose weight, then I suppose it won't matter as much... However, I feel that people should be more concerned with "fat loss" or body fat percentage and not "weight loss." Therefore, I'd always recommend setting your goals based on that.

Azdak

While I understand what Azdak is saying, I disagree when he says that there are "tiny differences in performance." I find the differences rather extreme. I'm far from an emite athlete or elite bodybuilder, but I do notice huge differences.

My cardio almost always consists of HIIT. If I did that and then attempted my typical workout program (which currently is HST,) there is no way I'd be able to to complete the sets to the best of my ability. Especially when I get to the weeks where I'm working in the 5RM range.

Typically, I'm pretty exhausted after HIIT (as most people should be.) I can't even picture trying to squat or deadlift heavy weights after that.

Because of my personal goals, lifting is more important for me. During some cycles I'm shooting for hypertrophy, and during other cycles I'm shooting for strength gains. But either way, I always lift first because if I did a hard cardio session after, my lifting would suffer. Of course, I do warmup on a treadmill lifting but that's a light jog (7MPH for 5 min.)

Of course, if I do cardio after a good lifting session, then I'm not as fast and can't run as long. My cardio greatly suffers because of the intensity of my workout. But I'm willing to sacrifice that in order to reach my main goals.

My point is, the differences in performance aren't tiny at all, even for someone like myself who is far from a top athlete. If your goal is strength or muscle gain, then cardio first can hurt performance. If your goal is overall fitness and to lose weight, then I suppose it won't matter as much... However, I feel that people should be more concerned with "fat loss" or body fat percentage and not "weight loss." Therefore, I'd always recommend setting your goals based on that.

I would say we are disagreeing on matters of nuance and personal perspective, not on the essentials. From your standpoint and your goals, I don't disagree with anything you are saying. I left some detail out of some of my statements to make a point to what I perceive is the average exerciser on this site.

I understand that while you may not be an "elite" athlete by international standards, you are beyond "recreational" and you have specific goals and a high degree of personal commitment to your plant.

I had a feeling that what I said would raise questions in some people--especially those with your background. Like I said, I made some statements that were more general than I normally would in order to keep things simple.

I certainly appreciate your perspective and, like all good discussions, it adds some valuable input.

samseed101

I would say we are disagreeing on matters of nuance and personal perspective, not on the essentials. From your standpoint and your goals, I don't disagree with anything you are saying. I left some detail out of some of my statements to make a point to what I perceive is the average exerciser on this site.

I understand that while you may not be an "elite" athlete by international standards, you are beyond "recreational" and you have specific goals and a high degree of personal commitment to your plant.

I had a feeling that what I said would raise questions in some people--especially those with your background. Like I said, I made some statements that were more general than I normally would in order to keep things simple.

I certainly appreciate your perspective and, like all good discussions, it adds some valuable input.

I understand your point. It is probably safe to say that for someone just starting out and is just looking for general fitness, then they could probably go either route and see some great results. It's also probably safe to say that when they start seeing results, they will simply be happy with that for awhile until they are ready to move on, at which point trivial things like when to do cardio, how much to do, etc become important.

Then again, by the time they get to the point where it will make a difference, chances are they will already know enough about their body and their specific goals that they won't even need to ask what they should do