Working smarter not harder?
Options
Replies
-
Working smarter and not harder is in line with the principles of fitness, which covers specific training vs. overtraining vs. variation vs. effort, etc.. There are different layers of smarter there.0
-
i thought bb said semantics. did dav say it too?
anyways yeah they are not mutually exclusvie but the saying goes "Work smarter not harder"..implying a choice.
that's where the idea of choosing only one comes from it's embedded in the cliche itself.
Really this thread has been interesting. It seems fair to say that both are better but until you can get smarter working hard is still good as long as you aren't overdoing it. And then smart is great too as long as you aren't using that to look for shortcuts and gimmicks.0 -
"It's not how hard you work, it's how much you get done."
Pretty much applies to any field - it implies you understand your goals and work on optimizing the path to reach them.
For example, if my goal is doing pull-up, I can bench press until I can lift a cow and I'm still not going to be very good at pull-ups; there might just be a smarter way to get to goal. I'll still need to work hard to achieve it.
Sometimes just working hard is the fastest way to get things done rather than wasting time on a thousand trial and error ways of optimizing things.
entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem
The principle is often called Occam's Razor - find the most economic path to a given output or hypothesis. It's not too far from the KISS principle, except that simple isn't always fully useful or even enjoyable (hello, Karl Popper).
The idea is as old as the Greeks.0 -
This is my worthless point of view:
I'm very out of shape. I just simply cannot do aerobics for 45 minutes at full max speed on the floor. I can HARDLY get through ONLY the warm up. However, I can do an elliptical machine, at my aerobic target heart rate for well over an hour and burn lots of calories. If I am really smart, I'll add a little bit of resistance in to boost the calorie burn and overall fitness ETC.
However, I do have to put in effort. I have to work hard nonetheless..and I have to keep working harder in the smarter way so that I can keep improving.
However, there are many examples of how things can be improved which are not necessarily harder per se, but we should try to increase the difficulty, the repetitions, depending on what our goal is. The goal is what most things depend on.0 -
I think when it comes to exercise, working harder is the key. (within reason, of course. It is possible to overdo.)0
-
It depends on how you are going to view working harder for exercise.
I know people who miss a workout because of work/family/circumstances so will then burst themselves the following day by doing 2 workouts to make up for the one that's missed, or run long runs 3 days in a row, therefore increasing chance of injury.
To me, if I have to miss a workout for whatever reason, that's it, it's missed, it's in the past, I make sure I'm better organised or can be flexible enough to swap a workout to fit it in, I'm now in my taper for marathon trainer and have only missed 2 runs from the 18 week program (was at a 4 day horse show and discovered when I got there that running on the roads was in no way suitable), everything else has been tweaked or moved to fit in if something comes up.
Working smarter to me in exercise is about maximising my time for what I'm doing, yes, I could work out for 3hrs but if I'm not training smart then what's the point, I was guilty of this 18yrs ago, go to the gym and move about exercise equipment, yes I was there for 2hrs but probably didn't really workout as I didn't really have a clue what I should have been doing or what would benefit me, now I have much more knowledge and can structure what I want to do.
Structure, knowledge and discipline I think are important, if you're missing one of these are you getting the full potential from your workout??0 -
I think when it comes to exercise, working harder is the key. (within reason, of course. It is possible to overdo.)
Unless your workout is ineffective for your goals.0 -
isn't the whole point of specialized lifting programs (for example) to "work smarter" and "not harder"? to maximize the benefits for a given amount of time/effort.
this applies to any physical or athletic endeavor. training for a race, practicing for sports, lifting for mass vs. strength (depending on your goals), etc. if you're serious about your training, you're always working smarter, not harder.
i couldn't disagree more. whenever i see someone on a specialized program, they are working harder. MUCH harder. doesn't matter if they are gearing up to set a PR in a 10k or if they are doing Smolovs for squats, they are working hard hard hard. even athletes in a similar field of say, track and field will have specialized programs that make a high jumper's program different from a shot putter's program, but i guarantee you that both are working hard as hell.
it's really just a semantics issue. because they have a specific goal, they'll go hard in one area but slack in a less important area. that's being smart. but to imply that improving isn't about working harder is just plain false.
Going balls to the wall does little if the effort isn't applied in an intelligent fashion.0 -
isn't the whole point of specialized lifting programs (for example) to "work smarter" and "not harder"? to maximize the benefits for a given amount of time/effort.
this applies to any physical or athletic endeavor. training for a race, practicing for sports, lifting for mass vs. strength (depending on your goals), etc. if you're serious about your training, you're always working smarter, not harder.
i couldn't disagree more. whenever i see someone on a specialized program, they are working harder. MUCH harder. doesn't matter if they are gearing up to set a PR in a 10k or if they are doing Smolovs for squats, they are working hard hard hard. even athletes in a similar field of say, track and field will have specialized programs that make a high jumper's program different from a shot putter's program, but i guarantee you that both are working hard as hell.
it's really just a semantics issue. because they have a specific goal, they'll go hard in one area but slack in a less important area. that's being smart. but to imply that improving isn't about working harder is just plain false.
Going balls to the wall does little if the effort isn't applied in an intelligent fashion.
Why would you assume that I, or anyone else, is recommending working harder in something besides an intelligent fashion? In what world does this black or white dichotomy exist?0 -
I work harder and smarter. I'm not sure why I'd do one and not the other?
What point is there is being smart about my workouts if I'm not doing all I can (without screwing myself up)?
What's the point in doing all I can if I'm not smart about it?0 -
And why are so many people equating working harder with working longer? Working longer is duration and/or perhaps frequency. It's not always this mythical "elliptical for 3 hours" type thing that keeps getting used as an example.
Do 50 pushups
Do 50 plyo push ups is working harder
Do 500 pushups (plus 3 hours on the elliptical, I guess) is working longer.0 -
isn't the whole point of specialized lifting programs (for example) to "work smarter" and "not harder"? to maximize the benefits for a given amount of time/effort.
this applies to any physical or athletic endeavor. training for a race, practicing for sports, lifting for mass vs. strength (depending on your goals), etc. if you're serious about your training, you're always working smarter, not harder.
i couldn't disagree more. whenever i see someone on a specialized program, they are working harder. MUCH harder. doesn't matter if they are gearing up to set a PR in a 10k or if they are doing Smolovs for squats, they are working hard hard hard. even athletes in a similar field of say, track and field will have specialized programs that make a high jumper's program different from a shot putter's program, but i guarantee you that both are working hard as hell.
it's really just a semantics issue. because they have a specific goal, they'll go hard in one area but slack in a less important area. that's being smart. but to imply that improving isn't about working harder is just plain false.
Going balls to the wall does little if the effort isn't applied in an intelligent fashion.
Why would you assume that I, or anyone else, is recommending working harder in something besides an intelligent fashion? In what world does this black or white dichotomy exist?
Your logical bipolarism shows in the bold above. The hardest path to a goal is not always the most effective way to get there. We see the stories here all the time ... the newbie runner going all out on C25K (working hard) rather than trusting the plan and working smarter and reaching their goals ... the newbie lifter going for a max lift every set rather than thinking it out first.
Working smart allows the one to reach a goal in the least time using the most effective use of activities. Working hard is trying to bull through things thinking energy expended somehow equals progress towards a goal.0 -
hours of cardio and not effective workouts
What do you consider a "not effective workout"? And by whose standards?
I think the standards are your own. To me, Couch to 5k was very effective in getting me off the couch (literally) and back to a beginner's level of fitness. But now, jogging doesn't help me change my appearance at all, but lifting, even inconsistently, has been more effective.
Not effective, I think, is self-explanatory. If you haven't improved by your own standards, then it wasn't effective.
And some of us (especially those with low body weight who don't need as many calories to maintain-and even less to lose) have to have both cardio and strength. Over the winter I cut my cardio to two days a week and was working "harder" than ever on strength. I gained weight, and I assure you it was not all muscle:(
So with the warm weather, I have gone back to four cardio days and 2-3 strength days, and stopped pushing quite so hard at the strength.
Suddenly I am losing again, my body looks better, not bloated, and I am not tired and sore constantly.
So for me that is smarter. I would say smarter is what works better for you.0 -
Hey Niner, can you post a new topic and ask: Which is better, working smarter or working dumber?
Because that seems to be the question people prefer to answer and I believe in giving the people what they want.0 -
When I think of working smarter not harder in terms of exercise, I immediately think of interval training. If you alternate walking and running for a period of time, your average heart rate will be much higher than if you were just walking and you could be doing a lot less work than you would if you were just running.
I know there's a lot of controversy about using a HRM to log the calories burned for this, but still... It makes enough sense to me. Meh.0 -
isn't the whole point of specialized lifting programs (for example) to "work smarter" and "not harder"? to maximize the benefits for a given amount of time/effort.
this applies to any physical or athletic endeavor. training for a race, practicing for sports, lifting for mass vs. strength (depending on your goals), etc. if you're serious about your training, you're always working smarter, not harder.
i couldn't disagree more. whenever i see someone on a specialized program, they are working harder. MUCH harder. doesn't matter if they are gearing up to set a PR in a 10k or if they are doing Smolovs for squats, they are working hard hard hard. even athletes in a similar field of say, track and field will have specialized programs that make a high jumper's program different from a shot putter's program, but i guarantee you that both are working hard as hell.
it's really just a semantics issue. because they have a specific goal, they'll go hard in one area but slack in a less important area. that's being smart. but to imply that improving isn't about working harder is just plain false.
Going balls to the wall does little if the effort isn't applied in an intelligent fashion.
Why would you assume that I, or anyone else, is recommending working harder in something besides an intelligent fashion? In what world does this black or white dichotomy exist?
Your logical bipolarism shows in the bold above. The hardest path to a goal is not always the most effective way to get there. We see the stories here all the time ... the newbie runner going all out on C25K (working hard) rather than trusting the plan and working smarter and reaching their goals ... the newbie lifter going for a max lift every set rather than thinking it out first.
Working smart allows the one to reach a goal in the least time using the most effective use of activities. Working hard is trying to bull through things thinking energy expended somehow equals progress towards a goal.
Your working hard definition sounds an awful lot like 'Being stupid' to me. Is Working Hard code for Being Stupid? Because that would explain why this topic is so confusing0 -
Does this apply to exercise? You hear this term a lot in the working world so people can be more efficient. Don't get me wrong, I'm for being efficient with using time and organization, but can one really "outsmart" the body when it comes to exercise?
Smart not harder is just a question of using the type of workout session that'll get the results you want.
If ones objective is to complete a 10K there is little point in spending all the time in the weight room, but finding a balance of time on the road and time in the weight room. It's it's running a faster 10K then it's a question of time on the road doing different types of session to improve exercise efficiency, threshold tolerance and VO2Max, as well as time doing resistance work.
Equally the latter programme is of little benefit if the objetive is bodybuilding competition.
At the shorter distances it's recognising that without a solid aerobic base it doesn't matter how much speedwork one does, the gains aren't going to be as significant as just getting the miles in.0 -
isn't the whole point of specialized lifting programs (for example) to "work smarter" and "not harder"? to maximize the benefits for a given amount of time/effort.
this applies to any physical or athletic endeavor. training for a race, practicing for sports, lifting for mass vs. strength (depending on your goals), etc. if you're serious about your training, you're always working smarter, not harder.
i couldn't disagree more. whenever i see someone on a specialized program, they are working harder. MUCH harder. doesn't matter if they are gearing up to set a PR in a 10k or if they are doing Smolovs for squats, they are working hard hard hard. even athletes in a similar field of say, track and field will have specialized programs that make a high jumper's program different from a shot putter's program, but i guarantee you that both are working hard as hell.
it's really just a semantics issue. because they have a specific goal, they'll go hard in one area but slack in a less important area. that's being smart. but to imply that improving isn't about working harder is just plain false.
Going balls to the wall does little if the effort isn't applied in an intelligent fashion.
Why would you assume that I, or anyone else, is recommending working harder in something besides an intelligent fashion? In what world does this black or white dichotomy exist?
Your logical bipolarism shows in the bold above. The hardest path to a goal is not always the most effective way to get there. We see the stories here all the time ... the newbie runner going all out on C25K (working hard) rather than trusting the plan and working smarter and reaching their goals ... the newbie lifter going for a max lift every set rather than thinking it out first.
Working smart allows the one to reach a goal in the least time using the most effective use of activities. Working hard is trying to bull through things thinking energy expended somehow equals progress towards a goal.
Your working hard definition sounds an awful lot like 'Being stupid' to me. Is Working Hard code for Being Stupid? Because that would explain why this topic is so confusing
that's what OP wanted. he likes to post topics and watch people argue. he's like that Star Trek monster that feeds on confusion and anger.0 -
Maybe she really enjoys Zumba and spin classes? Maybe she takes the class because it's fun not to lose weight? Idk. I'm
A runner. I'm 5'8" 130 pounds, and I'll be the first to admit, I wish my body looked a little different, but I'm not willing to drastically decrease my running or change my diet. I frequently like to complain to people that I wish I had a 6 pack.. Do I know how to get those results? Yes. Am I willing to make the changes? No.
it's fine to like what you are doing- that's good- but if you like what you are doing- but you aren't getting the results you want- then you need to accept that it is what it is- OR you should change something- just because you change doesn't mean you have to fully give up what you like.
As for your 6 pack- I suspect if you just added some solid weight training to your life you abs would pop right out- I'm almost 30 pounds heavier than you at the same height and in another 10 pounds I will have my high abs popping- that's 155 pounds for me. At 130 and 5'8" there is no reason other than weight training you don't have abs. No need to give up running- just tweak a little.
considering the plethora of people who get down to within 10-20 pounds of their goal weight and are realizing they aren't looking yet like they want and they start asking "should I do this yet" Should I do that" or- " I have XX pounds to lose- how does my workout plan look?"that's what OP wanted. he likes to post topics and watch people argue. he's like that Star Trek monster that feeds on confusion and anger.
I think it's a valid question to ask and cause people to think about how they approach their workouts- and how other people approach training.
And yes- I fully 150% believe there is a difference between people working out and people training. And both people should be thinking about if they are working smart, harder, longer, shorter and what their goals are and how to get it.
Why is asking a question that causes people to think a bad thing?0 -
isn't the whole point of specialized lifting programs (for example) to "work smarter" and "not harder"? to maximize the benefits for a given amount of time/effort.
this applies to any physical or athletic endeavor. training for a race, practicing for sports, lifting for mass vs. strength (depending on your goals), etc. if you're serious about your training, you're always working smarter, not harder.
i couldn't disagree more. whenever i see someone on a specialized program, they are working harder. MUCH harder. doesn't matter if they are gearing up to set a PR in a 10k or if they are doing Smolovs for squats, they are working hard hard hard. even athletes in a similar field of say, track and field will have specialized programs that make a high jumper's program different from a shot putter's program, but i guarantee you that both are working hard as hell.
it's really just a semantics issue. because they have a specific goal, they'll go hard in one area but slack in a less important area. that's being smart. but to imply that improving isn't about working harder is just plain false.
Going balls to the wall does little if the effort isn't applied in an intelligent fashion.
Why would you assume that I, or anyone else, is recommending working harder in something besides an intelligent fashion? In what world does this black or white dichotomy exist?
Your logical bipolarism shows in the bold above. The hardest path to a goal is not always the most effective way to get there. We see the stories here all the time ... the newbie runner going all out on C25K (working hard) rather than trusting the plan and working smarter and reaching their goals ... the newbie lifter going for a max lift every set rather than thinking it out first.
Working smart allows the one to reach a goal in the least time using the most effective use of activities. Working hard is trying to bull through things thinking energy expended somehow equals progress towards a goal.
Your working hard definition sounds an awful lot like 'Being stupid' to me. Is Working Hard code for Being Stupid? Because that would explain why this topic is so confusing
that's what OP wanted. he likes to post topics and watch people argue. he's like that Star Trek monster that feeds on confusion and anger.
I see. Well in that case this thread is a rousing success.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.7K Introduce Yourself
- 43.5K Getting Started
- 259.8K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 395 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.7K Motivation and Support
- 7.8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.3K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 960 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions