Is an hour long workout session better than 2 30-minute ones?

ahegaochan
ahegaochan Posts: 4 Member
edited December 4 in Fitness and Exercise
Hi! Question is in the title, just curious.
I've read some places that it's better to have 2-3 smaller workout sessions a day than one big one, mind giving me some insight?

Replies

  • MeanderingMammal
    MeanderingMammal Posts: 7,866 Member
    It depends what you're trying to achieve, and what the sessions are.

    Personally I rarely train for less than an hour as a shorter session wouldn't support my objectives.
  • sijomial
    sijomial Posts: 19,809 Member
    What workout?
    In what way better?
    How much better? (That's crucial - if "optimal" only gives you 0.1% improvement over "convenient" would it be worth it to you?)

    To answer your title question - an hour (or more) is far better for me as it fits in my schedule easier and suits my goals.
  • GottaBurnEmAll
    GottaBurnEmAll Posts: 7,722 Member
    I never break up lifting, but I often have varying length runs or walks due to time constraints.
  • cwolfman13
    cwolfman13 Posts: 41,865 Member
    Depends on what you're doing...depends on what the objective of your training is. A longer session is going to build more endurance/stamina...most of my threshold work is shorter in duration but far more intense than an endurance ride...I tend to mix it up.

    If by better you are talking about weight loss, it's irrelevant.
  • ahegaochan
    ahegaochan Posts: 4 Member
    Sorry, I was talking specifically about weight loss aerobic or cardio exercises.
  • cwolfman13
    cwolfman13 Posts: 41,865 Member
    ahegaochan wrote: »
    Sorry, I was talking specifically about weight loss aerobic or cardio exercises.

    It doesn't matter for weight loss...taking in less energy (calories) than you expend results in weight loss...when you're in a deficiency of energy, you burn body fat to make up for it...your body fat is like your backup generator. Exercise has numerous health benefits and there's the added bonus of expending a bit more energy...but for most people, the energy expenditure from exercise is fairly nominal relative to energy expenditure from just being alive and doing your day to day stuff.
  • NorthCascades
    NorthCascades Posts: 10,968 Member
    ahegaochan wrote: »
    Sorry, I was talking specifically about weight loss aerobic or cardio exercises.

    For weight/fat loss, you just need to burn more calories than you eat. You burn calories typing, and even reading, because you have a heart beat and you breathe and digest food and think and all of that. Whether you burn a lot of them in a batch, or in two smaller batches, or whatever, does not matter. You'd get the same result (weight loss only, not talking about health) by not exercising at all and eating less.

    Aerobic/cardio exercises is a big umbrella. I don't like to stop when I'm cycling or running because one of the most important things to me is building endurance. Resting kind of gets in the way of that. I chose a place to run because it's flat and not interrupted by any stoplights. On the other hand, throughout the summer I do hill repeats once a week, on the bike. I ride up a hill, then coast back down. In a 45 minute session on one of the hills I use, I'll do 6 laps at 5 minutes up the hill each time, then recover for 2 minutes on the way back down. This type of workout is better for improving my sprint, but doesn't improve my stamina for long rides. Once a month I do "short and punchy" hill repeats to improve my recovery time. So, either type of workout can be better, depending on what exactly you're trying to achieve.

    If you don't have specific goals that you're working towards, but just want to improve fitness overall, then it really doesn't matter.
  • Cherimoose
    Cherimoose Posts: 5,208 Member
    ahegaochan wrote: »
    Sorry, I was talking specifically about weight loss aerobic or cardio exercises.

    Whichever you prefer. Shorter sessions will leave you with more energy afterward, and less hunger, both of which are conducive to fat loss. This may be why short sessions gave better fat loss results in a few studies. :+1:
  • ksenya03
    ksenya03 Posts: 51 Member
    Depends on what you are doing and why. I focus on exercise as being good for stress reduction and mental health because I can see those results immediately. Because of this focus 20 minutes of exercise 5 days a week is more beneficial to my goals than 1 hour once a week.
  • stuwbooth
    stuwbooth Posts: 1 Member
    One area where two 15-minute workout *could* be better than one 30-minute workout is when you are going for max intensity. You will burn more calories working harder. But there is only so long that you can work out at that intensity. So by working really hard and then taking time to recover properly, you can work out at a higher rate again. In this instance, the calories burned will be higher across the two sessions than it would be in one longer session, where you would have just been sucking air in the last ten minutes perhaps.

    For weight lifting, I'd prefer one longer session
  • maxit
    maxit Posts: 880 Member
    Prolonged sitting around is bad for your health even if you burn an hour of cardio at the gym. That's not what you asked, but if you take your "hour" and break it up during the day, then add 30 minutes of intentional cardio, you'll be a lot better off.
  • MeanderingMammal
    MeanderingMammal Posts: 7,866 Member
    stuwbooth wrote: »
    One area where two 15-minute workout *could* be better than one 30-minute workout is when you are going for max intensity. You will burn more calories working harder. But there is only so long that you can work out at that intensity.

    If you're trying to do a 15 minute maximum intensity session without warm up then you're more likely to injure yourself than anything else. Or you're not really doing maximum intensity.

    For a sprint sessions I'd expect to warm up for 15 minutes.
  • sijomial
    sijomial Posts: 19,809 Member
    ahegaochan wrote: »
    Sorry, I was talking specifically about weight loss aerobic or cardio exercises.

    Weight loss is down to calorie balance over a prolonged period of time and not how you divide up your exercise sessions - and you are supposed to be eating back exercise calories anyway if you set your calorie goal on this site.

    Cardio exercise - short sessions would be way too little for me. Too much showering and changing as well..... Work towards your fitness goals not some spurious "advantage" which is probably more theoretical than actual.
  • sgt1372
    sgt1372 Posts: 3,997 Member
    I have a home gym and I'm retired, so I have the luxury of doing 2-3 one hour workouts a day w/LOTS of rest betwen sets and lifts.

    For this means, 1 hr each for:

    1) SQTS & DLs
    2) BPs & Rows (or OHPs & Farmer's Walks)
    3) Pushups, Pullups & Dips

    I'm older and need more rest. This routine reduces fatigue and allows me more time to recover which enhances my strength & energy to do all of these things in a single day w/o ovetraining and burning myself out.
This discussion has been closed.

Categories