So am I the only one that has been doing it all wrong?

ibiaboochie
ibiaboochie Posts: 20
edited September 26 in Fitness and Exercise
I just read this article from Yahoo Sports stating that for optimal fat burn I should be doing a quick 10 minute cardio warm up and then my weights and THEN my longer cardio?! This flies in the face of everything I ever thought I knew about working out. I always thought that by doing cardio first that whatever I did after would be done with an elevated heart rate (assuming you jump right into the weights without a cool down or "rest") and would be much more effective.

Any workout "kings/queens" in here to confirm this "new" info for me?

http://www.thepostgame.com/blog/training-day/201104/warm-cardio-then-go-weights-right-wrong
«1

Replies

  • atlraine
    atlraine Posts: 172 Member
    No, I was doing it all wrong as well......at least on the days I was not working out at Curves. LOL!
  • Kirsty_UK
    Kirsty_UK Posts: 964 Member
    The various threads on this over the last day or two seem to agree with the article - burn off your quick energy sources doing your weights (after a warm up), then jump into the cardio after.
  • BflSaberfan
    BflSaberfan Posts: 1,272
    I was doing my cardio then lifting, my trainer advised me not to.
  • foxxybrown
    foxxybrown Posts: 838 Member
    My brother is a personal trainer and has always told me this. He also told me that I do too much cardio! But I enjoy cardio much more than strength training.
  • Soooze
    Soooze Posts: 122 Member
    interested to hear about this.... bump
  • SoldierDad
    SoldierDad Posts: 1,602
    I have always lifted weights before cardio. I usually do a light 5 minute jog then jump into my weights. It depends on what your lifting goals are to how long you should lift weights but 30-45 is about right for most fitness goals. And then 30-45 minutes of interval training to finish it off is perfect. So often wee all tend to over train and it is not needed. I am a strong strong believer in interval training at the highest intensity you can handle.
  • farmgirlsuz
    farmgirlsuz Posts: 351 Member
    Isn't that crazy? Goes against everything I had previously thought but it won't hurt anything to give it a try! Definitely not a "queen" of working out by any means, but considering where I started from, just tying my shoes might be considered a cardio workout!
  • savlyon
    savlyon Posts: 474 Member
    If you do cardio first your muscles will be tired and will not respond properly to the weight training. I've had multiple trainers tell me this same thing.
    Don't worry so much about the "rules"--just keep at it! :)
  • breezymom81
    breezymom81 Posts: 499 Member
    My last trainer always had me do 10 min **hard** bursts of cardio after every 3-4 weights moves, said it kept my heart rate up more and so I could burn more calories. After that I feel off the wagon but it was great while I did it! Then at the end of work out I would do 30-40min of cardio. He also said there is no such thing as too much cardio. I have started doing short amount during the day like before I do laundry...dont know if it helps me loose weight but it keeps my energy up all day!!!
  • MinnieInMaine
    MinnieInMaine Posts: 6,400 Member
    That article backs up what my trainer taught me a few years ago. I tend to still do my cardio first and then weights since I don't have a ton of time but on the days when I do have more time, I will do it the right way.

    You'd be surprised at how quickly your heart rate drops once you're done cardio and how little it goes up while doing weight. Most of the time while I'm strength training, my HRM is beeping to tell my my heart rate has dropped below my target workout range. It'll stop while I'm lifting (or doing crunches, squats, etc) but start back up at soon as I stop moving.
  • darrenham
    darrenham Posts: 110 Member
    Who the hell gets their sports science from Yahoo?


    Doing exercise burns calories. As far as is important it doesn't matter what order you do it in.

    A real training programme probably wouldn't put cardio and resistance training in the same session anyway.

    Heart Rate != Calories burned, and I have no idea why so many people on here think that it is.
  • MissAnjy
    MissAnjy Posts: 2,480 Member
    awesome!! i'm going to try this & start with my lifting (clx) before m running w/ c25k
  • jbug100
    jbug100 Posts: 406 Member
    Yep. I read that yesterday as well. I too always do my intense cardio before moving to the weights. I always thought I could perform the weights better with warm muscles. Who knew! I'm not sure if I am going to change or not. I've done pretty well so far. Maybe it's worth trying. I also prefer cardio to strength training, so the thought of starting with strength training turns me off. What to do..what to do:)
  • MzChiz
    MzChiz Posts: 70 Member
    Well shucks! I've been doing it wrong for years. I'll give it a try.
  • Who the hell gets their sports science from Yahoo?


    Doing exercise burns calories. As far as is important it doesn't matter what order you do it in.

    A real training programme probably wouldn't put cardio and resistance training in the same session anyway.

    Heart Rate != Calories burned, and I have no idea why so many people on here think that it is.

    Dang Debbie Downer...it was an article that was sent to me and the science behind it makes sense. I am pretty sure that most trainers would tell you to incorporate cardio into EVERY workout. Most will tell you that there is no such thing as too much cardio.
  • overit
    overit Posts: 273
    I was doing my cardio then lifting, my trainer advised me not to.

    Ditto
  • darrenham
    darrenham Posts: 110 Member
    Who the hell gets their sports science from Yahoo?


    Doing exercise burns calories. As far as is important it doesn't matter what order you do it in.

    A real training programme probably wouldn't put cardio and resistance training in the same session anyway.

    Heart Rate != Calories burned, and I have no idea why so many people on here think that it is.

    Dang Debbie Downer...it was an article that was sent to me and the science behind it makes sense. I am pretty sure that most trainers would tell you to incorporate cardio into EVERY workout. Most will tell you that there is no such thing as too much cardio.

    I've just read the second paragraph, and no, the science does not make sense.

    Losing weight happens when calories burned is greater than calories eaten. It doesn't matter what metabolic substrate the body is using when you're actually doing the exercise, because as long as it's not replaced, the body will have to dip into it's fat stores sooner or later.
  • Who the hell gets their sports science from Yahoo?


    Doing exercise burns calories. As far as is important it doesn't matter what order you do it in.

    A real training programme probably wouldn't put cardio and resistance training in the same session anyway.

    Heart Rate != Calories burned, and I have no idea why so many people on here think that it is.

    Dang Debbie Downer...it was an article that was sent to me and the science behind it makes sense. I am pretty sure that most trainers would tell you to incorporate cardio into EVERY workout. Most will tell you that there is no such thing as too much cardio.

    I've just read the second paragraph, and no, the science does not make sense.

    Losing weight happens when calories burned is greater than calories eaten. It doesn't matter what metabolic substrate the body is using when you're actually doing the exercise, because as long as it's not replaced, the body will have to dip into it's fat stores sooner or later.

    As another poster eluded to, most often our heart rates are not high enough while doing weights to get the same result as cardio. The instant stress of weights burns the sugars off regardless of heart rate. Once those are burnt off then the body can dip into the fat stores and do so more consistently while doing cardio with NO sugar energy present.

    Why does that not make sense?
  • darrenham
    darrenham Posts: 110 Member
    Who the hell gets their sports science from Yahoo?


    Doing exercise burns calories. As far as is important it doesn't matter what order you do it in.

    A real training programme probably wouldn't put cardio and resistance training in the same session anyway.

    Heart Rate != Calories burned, and I have no idea why so many people on here think that it is.

    Dang Debbie Downer...it was an article that was sent to me and the science behind it makes sense. I am pretty sure that most trainers would tell you to incorporate cardio into EVERY workout. Most will tell you that there is no such thing as too much cardio.

    I've just read the second paragraph, and no, the science does not make sense.

    Losing weight happens when calories burned is greater than calories eaten. It doesn't matter what metabolic substrate the body is using when you're actually doing the exercise, because as long as it's not replaced, the body will have to dip into it's fat stores sooner or later.

    As another poster eluded to, most often our heart rates are not high enough while doing weights to get the same result as cardio. The instant stress of weights burns the sugars off regardless of heart rate. Once those are burnt off then the body can dip into the fat stores and do so more consistently while doing cardio with NO sugar energy present.

    Why does that not make sense?

    Because as I said, it doesn't matter what substrate your body is metabolising at the time of exercise, it's the net calorie deficit which sees you lose weight. And even if it did, the body will always prefer to metabolise carbohydrate, because it's a faster fuel.

    Heart rate does not equal calories burned either, you can burn just as much if not more energy doing a proper weights session than you can plodding on a treadmill even though your HR is higher during the latter.
  • iplayoutside19
    iplayoutside19 Posts: 2,304 Member
    Unless you're a professional athlete, or a body builder cutting for a contest I wouldn't worry about "doing it wrong"

    There's a lot of stuff you do need to pay attention to. I file this under : "Something I'm not going to worry about"

    ....and like most articles about exercise and fat loss it leaves out the most important part....nutrition.
  • darrenham
    darrenham Posts: 110 Member
    Unless you're a professional athlete, or a body builder cutting for a contest I wouldn't worry about "doing it wrong"

    There's a lot of stuff you do need to pay attention to. I file this under : "Something I'm not going to worry about"

    ....and like most articles about exercise and fat loss it leaves out the most important part....nutrition.

    I disagree with "the most important part". As a simple X = Y - Z equation, Y (calories burned) and X (calories eaten) are equally important when it comes to defining X (weight loss).
  • SHBoss1673
    SHBoss1673 Posts: 7,161 Member
    Who the hell gets their sports science from Yahoo?


    Doing exercise burns calories. As far as is important it doesn't matter what order you do it in.

    A real training programme probably wouldn't put cardio and resistance training in the same session anyway.

    Heart Rate != Calories burned, and I have no idea why so many people on here think that it is.

    Dang Debbie Downer...it was an article that was sent to me and the science behind it makes sense. I am pretty sure that most trainers would tell you to incorporate cardio into EVERY workout. Most will tell you that there is no such thing as too much cardio.

    As a trainer, I disagree with this. I don't like doing cardio and weight training in the same session (regardless of the order). There's science behind this, it's not just a preference. Yes, if you absolutely find it necessary to do both cardio and weight training in the same day, do your weight training first (after a warm up period) so you maximize glycogen usage and can perform all the required Maximal lifts needed.

    BUT

    Cardio and resistance are two separate activity types, and they don't necessarily complement each other with regards to hormone secretion, energy recovery, and muscle work. It's a complex dance we play with exercise, but to keep it as simple as possible I'll just say this, cardio requires high amounts of energy, and burns lots of glycogen. Heavy resistance (weight training for example) requires high amounts of glycogen at the muscle site as well. Either way you're burning enough energy to reduce your total energy available for a while. Simultaneously while this is going on, resistance training triggers certain hormones and enzymes be released, these hormones stimulate muscle repair and growth, which pulls energy and material for that purpose. Cardio training stimulates different hormones (actually they're all the same hormones basically, just at vastly different levels depending on the exercise type).
    The thing to remember is many of these hormones compete for the same resources in the body. So what happens is you receive the maximum benefit from neither, while incurring a higher cost (in both energy needed, energy used, and strength and endurance gains).
    I don't say this to discourage anyone. If you're looking for fat loss, and just to maintain existing muscle mass and/or endurance levels, doing both resistance and cardio (or a hybrid routine like HIIT training) may be just the thing. But remember, if you perform both types of exercise together, you'll maximize the results from neither.
  • darrenham
    darrenham Posts: 110 Member
    Boss isn't a misnomer. He's done what I couldn't be bothered to do, good job sir.
  • Who the hell gets their sports science from Yahoo?


    Doing exercise burns calories. As far as is important it doesn't matter what order you do it in.

    A real training programme probably wouldn't put cardio and resistance training in the same session anyway.

    Heart Rate != Calories burned, and I have no idea why so many people on here think that it is.

    Dang Debbie Downer...it was an article that was sent to me and the science behind it makes sense. I am pretty sure that most trainers would tell you to incorporate cardio into EVERY workout. Most will tell you that there is no such thing as too much cardio.

    As a trainer, I disagree with this. I don't like doing cardio and weight training in the same session (regardless of the order). There's science behind this, it's not just a preference. Yes, if you absolutely find it necessary to do both cardio and weight training in the same day, do your weight training first (after a warm up period) so you maximize glycogen usage and can perform all the required Maximal lifts needed.

    BUT

    Cardio and resistance are two separate activity types, and they don't necessarily complement each other with regards to hormone secretion, energy recovery, and muscle work. It's a complex dance we play with exercise, but to keep it as simple as possible I'll just say this, cardio requires high amounts of energy, and burns lots of glycogen. Heavy resistance (weight training for example) requires high amounts of glycogen at the muscle site as well. Either way you're burning enough energy to reduce your total energy available for a while. Simultaneously while this is going on, resistance training triggers certain hormones and enzymes be released, these hormones stimulate muscle repair and growth, which pulls energy and material for that purpose. Cardio training stimulates different hormones (actually they're all the same hormones basically, just at vastly different levels depending on the exercise type).
    The thing to remember is many of these hormones compete for the same resources in the body. So what happens is you receive the maximum benefit from neither, while incurring a higher cost (in both energy needed, energy used, and strength and endurance gains).
    I don't say this to discourage anyone. If you're looking for fat loss, and just to maintain existing muscle mass and/or endurance levels, doing both resistance and cardio (or a hybrid routine like HIIT training) may be just the thing. But remember, if you perform both types of exercise together, you'll maximize the results from neither.

    Ok, so I am a former athlete that had a good muscle base at one point and feel I could get it back fairly quickly with the proper program. I am most concerned with fat/weight loss for the moment because I feel once the weight comes off I can start doing other things like actual running outside without risk to my knees and ankles. I know right now I struggle with muscle endurance because my first set or weights is usually ok but for sets 2 and 3 I fall off quickly. I'm not trying to get bulky but want to get back to where I was strength wise.

    What would be your suggestion to a proper program for losing max fat/weight while gaining muscle endurance and strength?
  • cj1234cj23
    cj1234cj23 Posts: 113 Member
    When I first started going to the gym, it was amazing to me the amount of advice that I got and how different it all was. After going to a physical therapist several times a week for a couple of months, I learned that before I did any exercises that they always made me do 5 to 10 minutes of cardio warm-up, and then the "tough" exercises. What I carried away from that was to always get on my eliptical for a minimum of 10 minutes, then do my strength or ab/core training. In the afternoons, I do my long cardio. I find my muscles hurt less this way...:smile:
  • juliemouse83
    juliemouse83 Posts: 6,663 Member
    Wow....Much debate.

    I try to keep my strength training and cardio on separate days...On MWF I do strength training for 45-50 minutes, and TThS I do an hour of cardio of some sort. I was under the impression that your body needs to skip a day between each type of exercise so that it can "heal" or whatever the proper terminology is.

    Now, I am no fitness expert by any means, and just lumbering along trying to make this all work, but then, I'm not losing at a great rate of speed, either. I didn't realize diet and exercise needed to be rocket science, but apparently there's more to it than simply getting off one's tail and working out daily and eating "right"...In my case I have got to find the food combo that works best for me.
  • In a hard working muscle the the glycogensupply will run out fairly quickly (1 - 2 hours ccording to my anathomy book). Then the muscles has to reduce the energy metabolism velocity, because ATP-production has to be based on supply of fattyacids and oxygen from the blood. It will take a while for the muscles to restore the empty glycogen storage. If you eat a lot of carbohydrates you can fill them up within 1 day or even less. If on the other hand you have a poor intake of carbohydrates, the refillment can take uptill 1 week!

    Remember that if you work over a long period of time, with a low intensity level, you will not increase your mass, but you will increase the number of mitochondria in the muscle fibre whitch gives you the chance to work longer without becoming tired.

    If you want to increase the mass volum of your muscles you have to use intense and heavy sessions over a short period of time. Doing this will result in increased production of actin and myosin in the muscle fibres --> more myofilaments and increased diameter of the muscle.

    So... To do cardio before weightlifing is a risk because you might get tired and not be able to give 100% in your weigh lifting..
    I think its a better idea to focus on building muscle because that will help you to burn your fat storage.
  • darrenham
    darrenham Posts: 110 Member
    Ok, so I am a former athlete that had a good muscle base at one point and feel I could get it back fairly quickly with the proper program. I am most concerned with fat/weight loss for the moment because I feel once the weight comes off I can start doing other things like actual running outside without risk to my knees and ankles. I know right now I struggle with muscle endurance because my first set or weights is usually ok but for sets 2 and 3 I fall off quickly. I'm not trying to get bulky but want to get back to where I was strength wise.

    What would be your suggestion to a proper program for losing max fat/weight while gaining muscle endurance and strength?

    When you want to lose fat and gain muscle, you have a bit of a compromise to make. In order to get the best out of a weight gain programme, you need to be in a positive energy balance. Which is obviously counter-intuitive to fat loss.

    So what I'd advise is to try to maintain energy balance. But to add a proper lifting regime to your exercise.

    What that involves is the following:
    - lift to failure, the last lift of every set has to be the last you can do, this is easier with a spotter, so if you don't have one, it's fine to stop one early
    - lift no more than 6-8 reps, whilst following the above advice (unless you're just starting out, in which case maintaining form is more important)
    - lift no fewer than 3 sets.
    - lower the weight slowly, and make sure you hold the lift at the top and the bottom.
    - lift the weight as fast as you want as long as a) you're not relying on momentum and b) you're maintaining form.

    And don't worry about supplements, if you're maintaining energy balance and eating a healthy, balanced diet you'll be taking in all the nutrients you need to worry about.
  • darrenham
    darrenham Posts: 110 Member
    Now, I am no fitness expert by any means, and just lumbering along trying to make this all work, but then, I'm not losing at a great rate of speed, either. I didn't realize diet and exercise needed to be rocket science, but apparently there's more to it than simply getting off one's tail and working out daily and eating "right"...In my case I have got to find the food combo that works best for me.

    Quite the contrary, it's not rocket science. The science behind it can be complex, but it always comes back to simple principles. To lose weight, eat less than you burn. To gain muscle, don't lose weight, and lift big weights, few times. etc,
  • Ok, so I am a former athlete that had a good muscle base at one point and feel I could get it back fairly quickly with the proper program. I am most concerned with fat/weight loss for the moment because I feel once the weight comes off I can start doing other things like actual running outside without risk to my knees and ankles. I know right now I struggle with muscle endurance because my first set or weights is usually ok but for sets 2 and 3 I fall off quickly. I'm not trying to get bulky but want to get back to where I was strength wise.

    What would be your suggestion to a proper program for losing max fat/weight while gaining muscle endurance and strength?

    When you want to lose fat and gain muscle, you have a bit of a compromise to make. In order to get the best out of a weight gain programme, you need to be in a positive energy balance. Which is obviously counter-intuitive to fat loss.

    So what I'd advise is to try to maintain energy balance. But to add a proper lifting regime to your exercise.

    What that involves is the following:
    - lift to failure, the last lift of every set has to be the last you can do, this is easier with a spotter, so if you don't have one, it's fine to stop one early
    - lift no more than 6-8 reps, whilst following the above advice (unless you're just starting out, in which case maintaining form is more important)
    - lift no fewer than 3 sets.
    - lower the weight slowly, and make sure you hold the lift at the top and the bottom.
    - lift the weight as fast as you want as long as a) you're not relying on momentum and b) you're maintaining form.

    And don't worry about supplements, if you're maintaining energy balance and eating a healthy, balanced diet you'll be taking in all the nutrients you need to worry about.

    Ok, so let's say that I'm more concerned with losing weight at this point than "building muscle". Where should my focus be? My main focus right now IS to lose weight. Once I am to a fairly happy level weight wise I will turn my focus to getting stronger, not necessarily bigger. I really appreciate your help here Darren. There's so many opinions out there and different methods that I am trying to gather them all and weed out the ones that "stick out" as "bad". Typically the more sound the thought the more often you hear it. For those of us with no "Health science/medical" back grounds it's difficult to discern the fluff from the fact. TIA!
This discussion has been closed.