Weights then aerobic workout or other way around?
 

If you are pressed for time in your week and have to lift and ride/run/eliptical in the same day, is it better to lift and then do the aerobic workout or the other way around?

I lift first, then do aerobic exercises. Best for me is lift on one day, do aerobic stuff the next. I never lift more than three days a week. I need the rest.

You should be doing both an aerobic workout and weights on the same day anyway!

When I go to the gym, I do about 20 minutes on the treadmill ... then I do weights ... and then I do another 10 minutes on the treadmill again.

The first 20 minutes warms my muscles up and gets the blood flowing. That way I'm not lifting cold. The last 10 minutes is a cool-down walk.

And then because my main love is cycling, I'll sometimes head out for an hour's ride. :)

It is not a MUST that one must do both aerobic and weights on the same day. That's erronous thinking. However, you should be doing both aerobic activity and weight training and incorporating full body weight training, not just select muscles.

Having said that, it is better to start with weight training, then move to aerobic training. If anything, you can fatigue your muscles too easily with aerobic training, so better to do your resistance training first, then follow it up with your aerobic training.

It's also been hypothesized and proven in some exercise physiology studies that the lactic acid accumulated from aerobic exercise can serve to increase your endurance because lactic acid accumulated from the anaerobic weight training will then combine with the oxygen from your aerobic exercise, which means you continue to produce even more ATP for energy, which means you can go longer and stay stronger.

Bottom line- do weights, then aerobics. And as long as you're getting in a full body workout two times per week (or however you split it up), you're doing pretty good.

Koffee

But you risk injury to the muscles if you just walk into a gym and start lifting. Same with stretching ... if you walk in and plunk yourself down on the stretching mats and go to it, you could tear something. It has been proven that it is a good idea to warm up first.

That warmup doesn't have to be a full-blown sprint on the treadmill or anything, but walking, or a light jog, or a spin on the exercise bike, for at least 10 minutes - enough to get your heart rate up a bit and get some blood flowing - will warm up your muscles so that you can continue with weightlifting and stretching.

And as for two times per week ... well, the recommended amount of exercise is now 60 minutes per day, 5 to 6 days a week. That doesn't necessarily mean weightlifting 6 days a week, or jogging/cycling 6 days per week, but we should be active in some way almost every day.


Just another comment ... when I was heavily into bodybuilding many years ago, my trainer put me onto a 4-day weightlifting cycle, as follows:

Day 1: Back, Biceps, Abs
Day 2: Triceps, Shoulders, Chest, Abs
Day 3: Legs, Abs
Day 4: off

And the reason for that is so that the muscles have recovery time in between, because we all know that muscle grows during rest and recovery, not during the actual act of weightlifting or exercise. With that cycle, I would workout my back muscles (for example) on Day 1. On Day 2, the back muscles would still probably come into play a little bit. On Day 3, I would hardly use my back muscles at all, and then I'd rest ... so my back muscles would essentially have 2.5 days off.

I'm just getting back into this all again, so I'm not following that cycle yet, but I hope by Christmas I'll be there.

Just another comment ... when I was heavily into bodybuilding many years ago, my trainer put me onto a 4-day weightlifting cycle, as follows:

Day 1: Back, Biceps, Abs
Day 2: Triceps, Shoulders, Chest, Abs
Day 3: Legs, Abs
Day 4: off

thats a good body building program but is abit advanced for any-one new to training. plus there are better ways to warm up then running/cycling before weight training.

like doing to warm up stes with lighter weighter weights before the real lifts.

i agree with Koffee start of total body workout twice a week to start with. speak to a proper gym instructor, to make a plan for you.

Yes. That is correct. If you walk into a gym and start lifting straight away, you risk doing injury to the muscles you're working. So it's recommended you do a VERY LIGHT warmup- ie: a light walk on the treadmill for 5- 10 minutes first. Then you can go right into your weight lifting routine. When you finish, flip over to your aerobic exercise. For the record, warm-ups are NEVER counted towards your total aerobic exercise. The intensity is just way too low.

The newest guidelines are recommendations by ACSM (American College of Sports Medicine). Under the old ACSM guidelines, they recommended 30- 45 minutes, 3- 5 days per week. The newest ACSM Health and Fitness summit now says something quite different. Through the latest research, for fat loss, they recommend 200- 280 minutes per week of aerobic activity- not including warm up and cool down. This newest concept is called "accumulated time", and is being spread around the fitness industry. There is a whole method to the accumulated time, but it goes beyond the scope of this thread. (google J. Jakicic and his study from 2003, and his subsequent lecture at the 2005 ACSM Health and Fitness Summit). For people exercising regularly, they recommend 6-= 90 minutes 5- 6 days per week (I believe). Under the old guidelines, people had a difficult time losing weight, but after several submissions from research facilities on exercise training, they've modified their recommendation and increased the amount of time.

Your trainer could have easily had you on a split routine, or upper body/lower body/upper body/lower body lifting program, which would more than adequately allow for you to ride as much as you want. So either your trainer didn't understand cycling, or he simply didn't know how to put together a training program for you. That's too bad.

Drop me a PM. I think I can get you back on track if you want.

Koffee

At the time when I was bodybuilding, I wasn't much into cycling. I just used a bit of cycling as an aerobic part of my workout. The workout my trainer set up for me (that 4 day cycle I mentioned) worked very well, and I put on muscle quite quickly. So much so, it was suggested to me on several occasions that I should start competing.


And ... I am on track for the results I want, thanks.

Well, you know what they say: "one person's aerobic workout is another person's warmup. However, the original question had to do with the concept of "training volume". Since the original post, made n o mention of actually trying to "gain" anything - but just "get it done" - the answer is -- it doesn't make much difference.

The best answer would be to "switch off" and reverse the routine, (i guess).....

As far as the haughty-taughty reference to physiological/metabolic benefit of performing "lifting" first, - I say, "big deal", if the poster was really working out, and really lifted to exhaustion, they wouldn't be doing any aerobic workout after it...

Oh-well, another truly BF mangled discussion.

It is possible to convey the information without the insults. Koffee and Machka are both elite athletes and both have great knowledge of training. Check their credentials if you don't believe me.

WTF are you?

Thank you very much. (i guess)......

I don't see any insults and he has a point.

Maybe I'm wrong. I thought "haughty-taughty" and "mangled discussion" were flames?

The research I've read and the seminars I've attended that tell you to do the lifting FIRST say to do the lifting first regardless of training intensity. The method I outlined specifically to increase lactic acid in the blood by lifting first, then doing your aerobic exercise second is a strategy (again, REGARDLESS OF INTENSITY) to increase your advantage when exercising aerobically. Additionally, it would be a great idea if you plan to do a lower body cardiovascular activity to train upper body with the weights. But if you plan to do lower body weights and lower body cardiovascular activity, then do your weights first and cardio second to get the most positive effect. I'll just throw in this tidbit too- if you're pressed for time with your aerobic activity, and you want to maximize the caloric burning after exercise, do your aerobic activity at a higher intensity- ie: intervals or steady state riding would be good examples of types of higher intensity work. If you're not pressed for time, please... put together a good, sound strategic aerobic activity that works for the time you do have available.

There's a researcher that I really REALLY respect and admire that works out of a university out west- Dr. Len Kravitz. He always stays on top of all the research and puts together very good training programs after going through all the research. And I mean he goes through ALL the research. Then he tests them on his students just to be sure. Then he does the fitness community a HUGE favor by summarizing every article into one big article and gives examples from his own test studies. I just saw him this weekend, and he was awesome, as usual. He said we could take his papers and do whatever, since he retains control over all his publications, so I'll just post his paper as an example of what I'm talking about. For the sake of keeping people sane, I'll put it in the next post I do rather than include it in this post.

I don't think it's a bad thing to question other folks. That's how we get quality discussions. But I guess it always is better to give some kind of research we can all use to back up our assertions, right?

But I don't think our discussions have gotten off topic at all- we're still referring to the original posts. This isn't one of those "when good posts go bad" threads.

Koffee

The Effect of Concurrent Training
Len Kravitz, Ph.D.

Introduction
Countless numbers of recreational workout enthusiasts complete their cardiovascular and resistance training workouts during the same training session, or within hours of one another. This sequential exercise regime is referred to as ‘concurrent training’. For many clients, the question and concern often posed to the personal trainer is whether the aerobic exercise will impair the resistance training workout performance. This recent publication, by Sporer and Wenger (2003), addresses this question as well as some related meaningful training issues.

Background and Theoretical Basics With Concurrent Training
The research on concurrent training, where aerobic exercise precedes resistance training, is inconclusive how strength improvements are affected. Several investigations have shown strength improvements are impaired while other studies show no impairments in strength training. Much of the inconsistencies in research on concurrent training reflect differences on one or all of the following:
1. Type of strength training method (i.e., isokinetic and isotonic)
2. Intensity and/or duration of the aerobic exercise
3. The intensity (% of repetition maximum) and/or volume (reps x sets) of the resistance exercise performed
Since little ‘basic’ research (research performed to determine the underlying mechanism of a phenomenon) has been completed on current training, the theoretical basis how strength training is affected by preceding aerobic exercise is mostly speculative. One prevalent concept explaining how aerobic exercise affects strength outcomes is the ‘fatigue’ hypothesis, which states that the strength training performance is reduced due to fatigue from the aerobic exercise. Muscle fatigue is a multi-factorial phenomenon caused by cellular protons (H+) increasing acidosis, decreases in energy-providing substrates, decreases in neural drive, and muscle cell damage (Sporer and Wenger, 2003). More research is needed in this particular area to attempt to identify a specific mechanism(s) how previous aerobic exercise may (or may not) impair strength performance.

Study Methodology
This very sophisticated study actually investigated 3 research questions.
1. Does prior aerobic exercise compromise strength training, and if so, for how long?
2. Does the intensity of aerobic training have a varying affect on strength performance?
3. Is acute strength training affected depending on muscle groups used in aerobic exercise?
Seventeen male athletes (3 hockey players, 2 rugby players, 1 rower, 3 tennis players, 1 soccer player and 7 recreational athletes) who were strength training (2-3 times per week) for the previous 6 months were recruited for the study. Sixteen subjects completed the study.

It is noted that subjects were initially divided into a high intensity aerobic group or a submaximal aerobic group on cycle ergometers. The high-intensity aerobic group performed a 5-minute warm-up, six 3-minute exercise intervals from 85 – 100% of maximum cycling power output of their VO2 max, separated by 3-minute recovery periods (performed at 40% of maximum cycling power output of their VO2 max), finishing with a 5-minute cool-down. The submaximal aerobic group performed a 5-minute warm-up, 36 continuous minutes at approximately at 70% of maximum cycling power output of their VO2 max, finishing with a 5-minute cool-down. Each of these groups then performed a resistance training session (each trial separated by 72 hours) under the following conditions:
1. Control – Strength training with no previous aerobic exercise
2. 4-hour recovery – Strength training four hours after aerobic exercise
3. 8-hour recovery - Strength training eight hours after aerobic exercise
4. 24-hour recovery - Strength training 24 hours after aerobic exercise
To mimic a typical resistance training session, all subjects performed 4 sets of incline leg press and 4 sets of bench press at 75% of their one repetition maximum. For each set, subjects performed as many repetitions as they could successfully execute. This is how the four conditions were statistically analyzed. See FLOW chart below for pictoral view of methodology.
Results
No significant different was found between the different intensities of aerobic exercise on the subsequent resistance exercise training session. The researchers therefore combined the high-intensity aerobic group and the submaximal aerobic group data to compare the results (of both groups) on the different recovery periods. The recovery time comparisons of the incline leg press are presented in Table 1 with the bench press results in Table 2.

Table 1. Incline Leg Press Results of All Subjects (n=16)
Control 4-Hour 8-Hour 24-Hour
All Subjects Combined (reps) 48 36 44 49

Table 2. Bench Press Results of All Subjects (n=16)
Control 4-Hour 8-Hour 24-Hour
All Subjects Combined (reps) 32 32 32 32

For the leg press, at both the 4-hour and 8-hour recovery conditions, the repetitions were significantly lower than the control (no aerobics performed) and the 24-hour recovery group. There was no difference between the control group and the 24-hours group.
There was no difference in bench press repetitions performed between any of the conditions. As shown in Table 2, the average repetitions performed on each condition was 32 repetitions.

Major Practical Findings of the Study
The three major practical findings of this study are:
1. The effect of recovery on strength performance following aerobic exercise (on a cycle ergometer) is similar regardless of the intensity of aerobic exercise. There was no difference in strength training performance when subjects performed high-intensity interval training (high-intensity intervals above 85% of maximum aerobic capacity) or submaximal continuous training (at 70% of maximum aerobic capacity).
2. Strength impairments are limited to the muscle groups used in the prior aerobic training. Cycle ergometry is a lower body cardiovascular modality. Bench press output was not impaired regardless of the condition (no prior aerobics, 4-hour recovery, 8-hour recovery, and 24-hours recovery). Thus, clearly there is no impairment of resistance training work when the prior aerobic exercise utilizes different muscle groups (for the mode of exercise).
3. Incline leg-press was dramatically influenced by the aerobic exercise. It is clear from the results in Table 1 that all of the trained subjects were not capable of completing an equivalent number of repetitions (at the same percentage of their one repetition maximum) for all conditions. Further inspection of Table 1 shows that strength output was most noticeably weakened during the 4-hour recovery period, with the next highly affected condition being the 8-hour recovery period.

Practical Application for Personal Trainers
This well-designed study reveals constructive insights for personal trainers who train some clients with cardiovascular and resistance exercise within the same session. When the sequence involves aerobic exercise followed by resistance training, the personal trainer may be well advised (from results of this study) to attempt to emphasize different muscle groups during the aerobic training as those conditioned in the resistance exercise. There was no significance difference in the intensity of aerobic exercise completed prior to the subsequent resistance workout; so this decision can be made exclusively on the cardiovascular goals of the client for that workout. Should the trainer wish to ensure no compromise of strength training output in a concurrent workout session, another educated option is to perform the resistance exercise first, followed by the aerobic training. One research question, not addressed by this study that needs to be addressed by future studies is whether LONG-TERM strength outcomes are truly affected by aerobic exercise performed prior to resistance training.

You call those insults. :D

Just to address this up front, though, if the original poster is pressed for time and wants maximum benefits with the minimum time they have, isn't it better to give them good fitness advice that allows them to get the best gains they can get in the little time they have? There are valid ideas I've given for someone who just doesn't have the same amount of time as the general population, yet wants to see as much gains as they can get in the time they do have. If that's the case, then it's definitely more important for them to do their weights first, so that the cardiovascular activity doesn't compromise their weight lifting and vice versa. Consequently, the options I've given will help him to make gains regardless to the time (or lack thereof) he has to complete his exercise activities.

Koffee

Just as an additional reference, here's an article on Resistance Training for Endurance Athletes:

http://www.ultracycling.com/training...training1.html

This article addresses the osteoporosis issue over in the Rides forum:

"In addition to muscular adaptations, strength training also promotes development of bone and connective tissue. Bone is a very dynamic tissue that provides a rigid lever to support movement. Bone is very sensitive to changes in forces it experiences and has the capacity for growth and regeneration if damaged. Activities must be weight bearing to provide the most effective stimulus for bone formation. Cyclists and swimmers are particularly vulnerable since their activities are non-weight bearing in nature. They should incorporate strength training to promote bone health."

And something I sort of generally suspected, but didn't specifically realize:

"Lactate threshold, an important element of endurance performance, can be enhanced with strength training. One study in 1991 found that strength training improves cycling endurance performance independently of changes in VO2 max. After twelve weeks of strength training performed three times per week, cycling endurance time performed at 75% VO2 max improved by an average of nearly nine minutes. The improved endurance comes from changes in muscle fiber-type recruitment. A greater percentage of slow-twitch and reduced rates of fast-twitch recruitment during co exercise results in increased power."

And here's what they recommend for a workout (note - this is specifically to build endurance):

> Since you are trying to build muscular endurance, do resistance training 3 or 4 days a week, with rest days interspersed.
> Warm-up thoroughly. Swim, ride a trainer, walk briskly, jog, use a Nordic track for at least 15 minutes.
> For most exercises, do sets of 12-20 reps. If you are doing two sets of 12-20 reps, start with two sets of 12 reps; the next session, do two sets of 13, etc. Keep increasing the reps until you get to 20 reps. Then increase the resistance and go back to two sets of 12 reps.
> Rest 30 seconds between sets (short rest breaks builds endurance) .
> Rest 1 minute between exercises.
> Use moderate resistance; you should feel like you are working, but not at your maximum and should not be sore the next day.
> Lift weight for two counts and lower for four counts.
> Exhale when lifting, inhale when lowering.


And just a personal note: Most winters I workout quite a bit in addition to using my trainer, snowshoeing, cross-country skiing, and riding outside as much as I can. Last winter I just rode my bicycle a lot (in Australia) -- no working out, no snowshoeing, no skiing ... and I didn't ride my trainer until January, and then only a very little bit. I figured that after all the actual outdoor cycling I did over the winter (thousands of kilometers), I would have a wonderful season this year. I figured I'd be in great shape, I'd be faster and stronger than ever ........ I wasn't. This has been the worst season I've had in ages. I've felt much weaker and more tired than usual with zero motivation. This winter, I've started working out again, and when it snows I plan to hit the snowshoes and skis again ... I'll see if it really does make a difference.

A good method:
Aerobic til tired then weights. It will force you to use technique, teach you to operated under fatigue and really build true strength.

Bike hard until you want to give up, wait a few minutes, then weight train. Make sure to get lots of protein after....

I ain't gunna read all the above,:) but the last relevant lecture I attended said that the most important weights warm-up was one that was specific to the movement. In other words, it's insufficient to warm up on a bike, then go straight to doing your maximum bench. Light sets first.....etc


anyway, I can't touch a weight after a 'proper' run (I can't run anymore) or decent bike ride, so I'd have to do the weights first.

One also needs to take into account what your specific goals are with your lifting. With the info from the studies presented and the general comments made, the desired end result wasn't mentioned. My workouts are pretty unconventional, but work very well for me in acheiving my goals, for someone else with different goals and fitness level, they would not be successful.
Back to the original question, what is the goal of the day? If you want to emphasize your aerobic workout, do that first. If you want to emphasize your lifting that day, start with that. I prefer to ride to the gym, lift and then ride home. Best of both worlds and makes for good endurance workouts.

Okay thanks everyone for the help and sorry to not fill in a little more information in my original post. I always start my lifting workout with about 10-15 minutes on either an ellipitcal machine or bike. Back when I lifted for muscle mass for football and basketball I had no trouble with a weight workout as Machka talked about. The difference is now I don't want the muscle mass so much since I cycle now as my main sport and don't want to be as bulky as I was before. In the past I never did aerobic training after lifting because I got enough durring practice. Now things are different.

Basically my offseason workout is planned as:
1. Squats
2. Chest press
3. Leg press
4. Rows
5. Deadlift
6. Lat pulldowns
7. Hamstrings(I've got a bum one)
8. Abs

I'm trying to do these MWF and conenctrating on major muscle groups instead of individual ones. I play basketball for 2 or 3 hours on Wednesday's. I wanted to add bike time in there, but with work I just can't fit in Tuesday's and Thursday's currently nor weekends. Normally I have no trouble fitting in riding time as I don't lift weights during the racing/riding season, but this fall and early winter lifting time is replacing the riding.

I view it like this. Some times we blur the line between "Power" and "Strength".
Velocity

Any truth in the notion that higher numbers of reps with lower wieghts is sufficient for muscle tone and fat loss? I'm looking for health, fitness and endurance through cycling and weight training, not bulk or racing form necessarily.

Watchman posted: "My workouts are pretty unconventional, but work very well for me in acheiving my goals, for someone else with different goals and fitness level, they would not be successful.
Back to the original question, what is the goal of the day?"

Yes, it seems that Watchman, not the "elite" mind-bogglers understands the exercise.

Had Watchman not stated his 2 cents, I was going to announce that it's best vary the "focus" of your workouts from day to day if increasing "benefits" are to be gained by the "exerciser".

However, since no goals were stated in the original post, I thought it best to simply advise to change the order of the routine - so as to "keep it interesting?"

KB, you and M, whom I consider the "Barney Fife" of all cyclists simply suffer from too much "book learnin'".

Not much about either of your answers, reflects an interest in addressing the post at hand.

Common sense seems to be making some headway here, trying to be "perfect" in your training can make life a little boreing.