Should exercise be followed by rest?

My brother lifts weights every day at the gym, until he is exhausted.
I'm not sure this is a good idea. It seems to me that when you weight
lift, you are sending signals to your muscles to grow, but that also
means they need undisturbed time to grow. Plus when you lift big
weights you break down some muscle tissue, and it needs time to
repair.
But has anyone studied this? Is weight lifting 3 times a week better
than 5 times a week?
I've also talked to a runner, who has run in a 50 mile race, and he
does not believe in resting at all as part of his training regimen.
Intuitively though, it seems to me that he's wrong.
CM

Dnia 2008-03-01 COHENMARVIN@lycos.com napisa³(a):
> My brother lifts weights every day at the gym, until he is exhausted.
> I'm not sure this is a good idea. It seems to me that when you weight
> lift, you are sending signals to your muscles to grow, but that also
> means they need undisturbed time to grow. Plus when you lift big
> weights you break down some muscle tissue, and it needs time to
> repair.
> But has anyone studied this?

A bit, but the moment when more training turns into too much training
isn't clear cut by no means. It very much depends, and on so many
conditions, that it's impossible to tell how much is too much.

Thought from your description it looks like your brother is overdoing
things.

> Is weight lifting 3 times a week better than 5 times a week?

No, IMHO. Five times would be better for most people most times.

> I've also talked to a runner, who has run in a 50 mile race, and he
> does not believe in resting at all as part of his training regimen.
> Intuitively though, it seems to me that he's wrong.

Even if you train daily, you rest for 23 hours between workouts.
Actually I happen to believe, that training daily is best, as long as
someone adjusts the volume and intensity of training to his recovery
abilities, which differ a lot even for the same person at various times.

But one should be aware of overtraining and be able to recognize early
symptoms. Taking things lightly from time to time or even a complete
rest for several days to a week normally works fine. When month isn't
enough to "feel normal" things are getting serious, but it rarely
happens to amateurs.

--
Andrzej Rosa 1127R

<COHENMARVIN@lycos.com> wrote in message
news:2f25f9bb-74a2-41df-b17f-fe2a6f7c2473@z17g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
> My brother lifts weights every day at the gym, until he is exhausted.
> I'm not sure this is a good idea. It seems to me that when you weight
> lift, you are sending signals to your muscles to grow, but that also
> means they need undisturbed time to grow. Plus when you lift big
> weights you break down some muscle tissue, and it needs time to
> repair.
> But has anyone studied this? Is weight lifting 3 times a week better
> than 5 times a week?
> I've also talked to a runner, who has run in a 50 mile race, and he
> does not believe in resting at all as part of his training regimen.
> Intuitively though, it seems to me that he's wrong.
> CM

This depends on how he is training. He could be training chest day 1, back
day 2, legs day 3, shoulders and tris day 4, bis and forearms day 5 and he
would be getting all the rest he needs.
Running is a far cry from weight training. Most cardio exercise is best done
6 days a week for athletic fitness. In the tour de france on the riders days
off they go for easy century rides (100 miles). Most Cat I, Cat II, and
Professional bicyclists ride 400 miles a week.

On Mar 2, 8:42*pm, "Homer Simpson" <homersimp...@springfield.com>
wrote:
> <COHENMAR...@lycos.com> wrote in message
>
> news:2f25f9bb-74a2-41df-b17f-fe2a6f7c2473@z17g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
>
> > My brother lifts weights every day at the gym, until he is exhausted.
> > I'm not sure this is a good idea. *It seems to me that when you weight
> > lift, you are sending signals to your muscles to grow, but that also
> > means they need undisturbed time to grow. *Plus when you lift big
> > weights you break down some muscle tissue, and it needs time to
> > repair.
> > But has anyone studied this? *Is weight lifting 3 times a week better
> > than 5 times a week?
> > I've also talked to a runner, who has run in a 50 mile race, and he
> > does not believe in resting at all as part of his training regimen.
> > Intuitively though, it seems to me that he's wrong.
> > CM
>
> This depends on how he is training. He could be training chest day 1, back
> day 2, legs day 3, shoulders and tris day 4, bis and forearms day 5 and he
> would be getting all the rest he needs.
> Running is a far cry from weight training. Most cardio exercise is best done
> 6 days a week for athletic fitness. In the tour de france on the riders days
> off they go for easy century rides (100 miles). Most Cat I, Cat II, and
> Professional bicyclists ride 400 miles a week.

Too much?
As the last responder said, you can train that much as long as you
train different bodyparts. That would be a lot for a novice trainee,
however, under any circumstances.

"Christianiron.com" <daveyarnell144@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:2f0a8829-24bd-474c-af12-1f0bff4c231f@e25g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
On Mar 2, 8:42 pm, "Homer Simpson" <homersimp...@springfield.com>
wrote:
> <COHENMAR...@lycos.com> wrote in message
>
> news:2f25f9bb-74a2-41df-b17f-fe2a6f7c2473@z17g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
>
> > My brother lifts weights every day at the gym, until he is exhausted.
> > I'm not sure this is a good idea. It seems to me that when you weight
> > lift, you are sending signals to your muscles to grow, but that also
> > means they need undisturbed time to grow. Plus when you lift big
> > weights you break down some muscle tissue, and it needs time to
> > repair.
> > But has anyone studied this? Is weight lifting 3 times a week better
> > than 5 times a week?
> > I've also talked to a runner, who has run in a 50 mile race, and he
> > does not believe in resting at all as part of his training regimen.
> > Intuitively though, it seems to me that he's wrong.
> > CM
>
> This depends on how he is training. He could be training chest day 1, back
> day 2, legs day 3, shoulders and tris day 4, bis and forearms day 5 and he
> would be getting all the rest he needs.
> Running is a far cry from weight training. Most cardio exercise is best
> done
> 6 days a week for athletic fitness. In the tour de france on the riders
> days
> off they go for easy century rides (100 miles). Most Cat I, Cat II, and
> Professional bicyclists ride 400 miles a week.

Too much?
As the last responder said, you can train that much as long as you
train different bodyparts. That would be a lot for a novice trainee,
however, under any circumstances.

Good point on the novice trainee. I had never thought of that. And there are
a lot of "trainers" out there that are glad to put novices on advanced
training schedules.

On Sat, 01 Mar 2008 07:19:14 -0800, COHENMARVIN wrote:

> My brother lifts weights every day at the gym, until he is exhausted.
> I'm not sure this is a good idea. It seems to me that when you weight
> lift, you are sending signals to your muscles to grow, but that also
> means they need undisturbed time to grow. Plus when you lift big
> weights you break down some muscle tissue, and it needs time to
> repair.
> But has anyone studied this? Is weight lifting 3 times a week better
> than 5 times a week?
> I've also talked to a runner, who has run in a 50 mile race, and he
> does not believe in resting at all as part of his training regimen.
> Intuitively though, it seems to me that he's wrong.
> CM


There have been studies on this. For nearly everyone, 48-72 hours of rest
is required between workouts for a given muscle/muscle group in order to
avoid over-training. But that does not mean working out only 3 days per
week. Working upper-body on Mondays, Wednesdays, and Fridays, and working
lower-body on Tuesdays, Thursdays, and maybe also Saturday or Sunday (but
not both), will provide sufficient rest for each muscle group, but will
still mean hitting the weight room 5 or 6 days each week.

Cardio, like running, is a different thing. It is entirely possible to do
training runs 5 or 6 days per week. If You are preparing for a race (as
apposed to running for general health or weight loss), it might even be a
good idea. One day a week of rest from running may be a good idea. Some
people may find 1 or more days of rest absolutely necessary. Others,
however, might find that they get better results by going 7 days per week.

In article <pan.2008.03.08.22.20.43.779989@rocketNOSPAMmail.c om>,
Shava_X <voodopeople@rocketNOSPAMmail.com> wrote:

> On Sat, 01 Mar 2008 07:19:14 -0800, COHENMARVIN wrote:
>
> > My brother lifts weights every day at the gym, until he is exhausted.
> > I'm not sure this is a good idea. It seems to me that when you weight
> > lift, you are sending signals to your muscles to grow, but that also
> > means they need undisturbed time to grow. Plus when you lift big
> > weights you break down some muscle tissue, and it needs time to
> > repair.
> > But has anyone studied this? Is weight lifting 3 times a week better
> > than 5 times a week?
> > I've also talked to a runner, who has run in a 50 mile race, and he
> > does not believe in resting at all as part of his training regimen.
> > Intuitively though, it seems to me that he's wrong.
> > CM
>
>
> There have been studies on this. For nearly everyone, 48-72 hours of rest
> is required between workouts for a given muscle/muscle group in order to
> avoid over-training. But that does not mean working out only 3 days per
> week. Working upper-body on Mondays, Wednesdays, and Fridays, and working
> lower-body on Tuesdays, Thursdays, and maybe also Saturday or Sunday (but
> not both), will provide sufficient rest for each muscle group, but will
> still mean hitting the weight room 5 or 6 days each week.
>
> Cardio, like running, is a different thing. It is entirely possible to do
> training runs 5 or 6 days per week. If You are preparing for a race (as
> apposed to running for general health or weight loss), it might even be a
> good idea. One day a week of rest from running may be a good idea. Some
> people may find 1 or more days of rest absolutely necessary. Others,
> however, might find that they get better results by going 7 days per week.

I have never seen a study which shows 48-72 hours of rest are required
between workouts for a given muscle group. Do you have some cites?

As well, as running uses the same muscle group how do you reconcile the
contradictory advice you have just given this guy?

I'm an olympic-style weightlifter. I regularly do 2-3 workouts per day
doing just 3 basic exercises - snatch, clean and jerk and front squat. I
make my best gains when I add frequency. And yes, I've tried doing just
three workouts per week and progress stalls.

--
Keith

On Sat, 08 Mar 2008 16:48:05 -0600, Hobbes wrote:

> In article <pan.2008.03.08.22.20.43.779989@rocketNOSPAMmail.c om>,
> Shava_X <voodopeople@rocketNOSPAMmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 01 Mar 2008 07:19:14 -0800, COHENMARVIN wrote:
>>
>> > My brother lifts weights every day at the gym, until he is exhausted.
>> > I'm not sure this is a good idea. It seems to me that when you weight
>> > lift, you are sending signals to your muscles to grow, but that also
>> > means they need undisturbed time to grow. Plus when you lift big
>> > weights you break down some muscle tissue, and it needs time to
>> > repair.
>> > But has anyone studied this? Is weight lifting 3 times a week better
>> > than 5 times a week?
>> > I've also talked to a runner, who has run in a 50 mile race, and he
>> > does not believe in resting at all as part of his training regimen.
>> > Intuitively though, it seems to me that he's wrong.
>> > CM
>>
>>
>> There have been studies on this. For nearly everyone, 48-72 hours of rest
>> is required between workouts for a given muscle/muscle group in order to
>> avoid over-training. But that does not mean working out only 3 days per
>> week. Working upper-body on Mondays, Wednesdays, and Fridays, and working
>> lower-body on Tuesdays, Thursdays, and maybe also Saturday or Sunday (but
>> not both), will provide sufficient rest for each muscle group, but will
>> still mean hitting the weight room 5 or 6 days each week.
>>
>> Cardio, like running, is a different thing. It is entirely possible to do
>> training runs 5 or 6 days per week. If You are preparing for a race (as
>> apposed to running for general health or weight loss), it might even be a
>> good idea. One day a week of rest from running may be a good idea. Some
>> people may find 1 or more days of rest absolutely necessary. Others,
>> however, might find that they get better results by going 7 days per week.
>
> I have never seen a study which shows 48-72 hours of rest are required
> between workouts for a given muscle group. Do you have some cites?
>
> As well, as running uses the same muscle group how do you reconcile the
> contradictory advice you have just given this guy?
>
> I'm an olympic-style weightlifter. I regularly do 2-3 workouts per day
> doing just 3 basic exercises - snatch, clean and jerk and front squat. I
> make my best gains when I add frequency. And yes, I've tried doing just
> three workouts per week and progress stalls.


"some cites"? Pick up just about any NSCA text book. Not only will You
find roughly the same recommendation, but also a list of several studies
that the recommendation is based on.

As for Your allegation that the advice to run almost daily but leave a day
or two for rest with resistance training is contradictory, You are wrong.
Those two suggestion do not contradict each other. While running may
'work' the muscles of the legs, hips, and core to a degree, it is a
completely different 'work' from resistance training. Apples and oranges
have more similarities than the effects on lower-body muscles from running
and resistance training.

In article <pan.2008.03.09.00.49.52.500433@rocketNOSPAMmail.c om>,
Shava_X <voodopeople@rocketNOSPAMmail.com> wrote:

> On Sat, 08 Mar 2008 16:48:05 -0600, Hobbes wrote:
>
> > In article <pan.2008.03.08.22.20.43.779989@rocketNOSPAMmail.c om>,
> > Shava_X <voodopeople@rocketNOSPAMmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> On Sat, 01 Mar 2008 07:19:14 -0800, COHENMARVIN wrote:
> >>
> >> > My brother lifts weights every day at the gym, until he is exhausted.
> >> > I'm not sure this is a good idea. It seems to me that when you weight
> >> > lift, you are sending signals to your muscles to grow, but that also
> >> > means they need undisturbed time to grow. Plus when you lift big
> >> > weights you break down some muscle tissue, and it needs time to
> >> > repair.
> >> > But has anyone studied this? Is weight lifting 3 times a week better
> >> > than 5 times a week?
> >> > I've also talked to a runner, who has run in a 50 mile race, and he
> >> > does not believe in resting at all as part of his training regimen.
> >> > Intuitively though, it seems to me that he's wrong.
> >> > CM
> >>
> >>
> >> There have been studies on this. For nearly everyone, 48-72 hours of rest
> >> is required between workouts for a given muscle/muscle group in order to
> >> avoid over-training. But that does not mean working out only 3 days per
> >> week. Working upper-body on Mondays, Wednesdays, and Fridays, and working
> >> lower-body on Tuesdays, Thursdays, and maybe also Saturday or Sunday (but
> >> not both), will provide sufficient rest for each muscle group, but will
> >> still mean hitting the weight room 5 or 6 days each week.
> >>
> >> Cardio, like running, is a different thing. It is entirely possible to do
> >> training runs 5 or 6 days per week. If You are preparing for a race (as
> >> apposed to running for general health or weight loss), it might even be a
> >> good idea. One day a week of rest from running may be a good idea. Some
> >> people may find 1 or more days of rest absolutely necessary. Others,
> >> however, might find that they get better results by going 7 days per week.
> >>
> >
> > I have never seen a study which shows 48-72 hours of rest are required
> > between workouts for a given muscle group. Do you have some cites?
> >
> > As well, as running uses the same muscle group how do you reconcile the
> > contradictory advice you have just given this guy?
> >
> > I'm an olympic-style weightlifter. I regularly do 2-3 workouts per day
> > doing just 3 basic exercises - snatch, clean and jerk and front squat. I
> > make my best gains when I add frequency. And yes, I've tried doing just
> > three workouts per week and progress stalls.
>
>
> "some cites"? Pick up just about any NSCA text book. Not only will You
> find roughly the same recommendation, but also a list of several studies
> that the recommendation is based on.
>
> As for Your allegation that the advice to run almost daily but leave a day
> or two for rest with resistance training is contradictory, You are wrong.
> Those two suggestion do not contradict each other. While running may
> 'work' the muscles of the legs, hips, and core to a degree, it is a
> completely different 'work' from resistance training. Apples and oranges
> have more similarities than the effects on lower-body muscles from running
> and resistance training.

I have the "Essentials of Strength and Conditioning Text" NSCA text.
I've read the position papers as well. Again, where is any research
actually proving this assertion? Show it to me in the text and please
don't confuse a position paper with actual research. I have numerous
other texts which suggest more frequent training and, again, in the real
world athletes train the same muscles everyday. Track and field,
weightlifting, gymnastics, etc. And intensely. Motor learning takes
precedence over hypertrophy training. Your problem is you confuse what
bodybuilders do (train hypertrophy) with performance training, where the
legs, hips and core have to be trained daily. That is the apples and
oranges - your ignorance, not mine.

As for the other - how is it apples and oranges in the case of olympic
style weightlifters. Naim Suleymonoglu, considered by many the greatest
weightlifter ever, lists some of his actual training in his book The
Pocket Hercules and a various times in his career he would perform near
maximal squats 5 times daily on M-W-F and 3 times daily on T-Th-Sa. He
was using loads exceeding three times bodyweight! You don't think this
works the 'muscles'.

I've worked with freestyle wrestlers right to the olympics. They do
between 2 and 4 whole body workouts daily, if you consider rolling a
full-body workout.

Your advice is good - for bodybuilders. But it isn't good for someone
who may just be wanting to train and get stronger, more endurance, etc.
And it certainly doesn't answer the question of why you offer two
different types of advice.

As for the apples and oranges have more similarities comment, please
explain at a contractile tissue level what the difference is between
running and weightlifting? Not a motor unit level - at a contractile
level what is the difference? Feel free to get technical - I'm a honours
student in kinesiology. I've also run two marathons and have national
and provincial records in both powerlifting and weightlifting, so I have
some practical experience with both running and squatting.

--
Keith

Shava_X wrote:
> On Sat, 08 Mar 2008 16:48:05 -0600, Hobbes wrote:
>
>> In article <pan.2008.03.08.22.20.43.779989@rocketNOSPAMmail.c om>,
>> Shava_X <voodopeople@rocketNOSPAMmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On Sat, 01 Mar 2008 07:19:14 -0800, COHENMARVIN wrote:
>>>
>>>> My brother lifts weights every day at the gym, until he is exhausted.
>>>> I'm not sure this is a good idea. It seems to me that when you weight
>>>> lift, you are sending signals to your muscles to grow, but that also
>>>> means they need undisturbed time to grow. Plus when you lift big
>>>> weights you break down some muscle tissue, and it needs time to
>>>> repair.
>>>> But has anyone studied this? Is weight lifting 3 times a week better
>>>> than 5 times a week?
>>>> I've also talked to a runner, who has run in a 50 mile race, and he
>>>> does not believe in resting at all as part of his training regimen.
>>>> Intuitively though, it seems to me that he's wrong.
>>>> CM
>>>
>>> There have been studies on this. For nearly everyone, 48-72 hours of rest
>>> is required between workouts for a given muscle/muscle group in order to
>>> avoid over-training. But that does not mean working out only 3 days per
>>> week. Working upper-body on Mondays, Wednesdays, and Fridays, and working
>>> lower-body on Tuesdays, Thursdays, and maybe also Saturday or Sunday (but
>>> not both), will provide sufficient rest for each muscle group, but will
>>> still mean hitting the weight room 5 or 6 days each week.
>>>
>>> Cardio, like running, is a different thing. It is entirely possible to do
>>> training runs 5 or 6 days per week. If You are preparing for a race (as
>>> apposed to running for general health or weight loss), it might even be a
>>> good idea. One day a week of rest from running may be a good idea. Some
>>> people may find 1 or more days of rest absolutely necessary. Others,
>>> however, might find that they get better results by going 7 days per week.
>> I have never seen a study which shows 48-72 hours of rest are required
>> between workouts for a given muscle group. Do you have some cites?
>>
>> As well, as running uses the same muscle group how do you reconcile the
>> contradictory advice you have just given this guy?
>>
>> I'm an olympic-style weightlifter. I regularly do 2-3 workouts per day
>> doing just 3 basic exercises - snatch, clean and jerk and front squat. I
>> make my best gains when I add frequency. And yes, I've tried doing just
>> three workouts per week and progress stalls.
>
>
> "some cites"? Pick up just about any NSCA text book.

A text book is not a study. What studies did you read that say what
you're claiming regarding weight training, or are you talking out of
your arse?

> Not only will You
> find roughly the same recommendation, but also a list of several studies
> that the recommendation is based on.

Fine, then you'll have no trouble posting a few of these right here.

>
> As for Your allegation that the advice to run almost daily but leave a day
> or two for rest with resistance training is contradictory, You are wrong.
> Those two suggestion do not contradict each other. While running may
> 'work' the muscles of the legs, hips, and core to a degree, it is a
> completely different 'work' from resistance training.

How so, and why would the rest and recovery requirements be different?

> Apples and oranges
> have more similarities

Really? Can you make a list for us?

> than the effects on lower-body muscles from running
> and resistance training.



--
spammage trappage: remove the underscores to reply
Many people around the world are waiting for a marrow transplant. Please
volunteer to be a marrow donor and literally save someone's life:
http://www.abmdr.org.au/
http://www.marrow.org/

On Sun, 09 Mar 2008 08:35:52 -0600, Hobbes wrote:

> In article <pan.2008.03.09.00.49.52.500433@rocketNOSPAMmail.c om>,
> Shava_X <voodopeople@rocketNOSPAMmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 08 Mar 2008 16:48:05 -0600, Hobbes wrote:
>>
>> > In article <pan.2008.03.08.22.20.43.779989@rocketNOSPAMmail.c om>,
>> > Shava_X <voodopeople@rocketNOSPAMmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >> On Sat, 01 Mar 2008 07:19:14 -0800, COHENMARVIN wrote:
>> >>
>> >> > My brother lifts weights every day at the gym, until he is exhausted.
>> >> > I'm not sure this is a good idea. It seems to me that when you weight
>> >> > lift, you are sending signals to your muscles to grow, but that also
>> >> > means they need undisturbed time to grow. Plus when you lift big
>> >> > weights you break down some muscle tissue, and it needs time to
>> >> > repair.
>> >> > But has anyone studied this? Is weight lifting 3 times a week better
>> >> > than 5 times a week?
>> >> > I've also talked to a runner, who has run in a 50 mile race, and he
>> >> > does not believe in resting at all as part of his training regimen.
>> >> > Intuitively though, it seems to me that he's wrong.
>> >> > CM
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> There have been studies on this. For nearly everyone, 48-72 hours of rest
>> >> is required between workouts for a given muscle/muscle group in order to
>> >> avoid over-training. But that does not mean working out only 3 days per
>> >> week. Working upper-body on Mondays, Wednesdays, and Fridays, and working
>> >> lower-body on Tuesdays, Thursdays, and maybe also Saturday or Sunday (but
>> >> not both), will provide sufficient rest for each muscle group, but will
>> >> still mean hitting the weight room 5 or 6 days each week.
>> >>
>> >> Cardio, like running, is a different thing. It is entirely possible to do
>> >> training runs 5 or 6 days per week. If You are preparing for a race (as
>> >> apposed to running for general health or weight loss), it might even be a
>> >> good idea. One day a week of rest from running may be a good idea. Some
>> >> people may find 1 or more days of rest absolutely necessary. Others,
>> >> however, might find that they get better results by going 7 days per week.
>> >>
>> >
>> > I have never seen a study which shows 48-72 hours of rest are required
>> > between workouts for a given muscle group. Do you have some cites?
>> >
>> > As well, as running uses the same muscle group how do you reconcile the
>> > contradictory advice you have just given this guy?
>> >
>> > I'm an olympic-style weightlifter. I regularly do 2-3 workouts per day
>> > doing just 3 basic exercises - snatch, clean and jerk and front squat. I
>> > make my best gains when I add frequency. And yes, I've tried doing just
>> > three workouts per week and progress stalls.
>>
>>
>> "some cites"? Pick up just about any NSCA text book. Not only will You
>> find roughly the same recommendation, but also a list of several studies
>> that the recommendation is based on.
>>
>> As for Your allegation that the advice to run almost daily but leave a day
>> or two for rest with resistance training is contradictory, You are wrong.
>> Those two suggestion do not contradict each other. While running may
>> 'work' the muscles of the legs, hips, and core to a degree, it is a
>> completely different 'work' from resistance training. Apples and oranges
>> have more similarities than the effects on lower-body muscles from running
>> and resistance training.
>
> I have the "Essentials of Strength and Conditioning Text" NSCA text.
> I've read the position papers as well. Again, where is any research
> actually proving this assertion? Show it to me in the text and please
> don't confuse a position paper with actual research. I have numerous
> other texts which suggest more frequent training and, again, in the real
> world athletes train the same muscles everyday. Track and field,
> weightlifting, gymnastics, etc. And intensely. Motor learning takes
> precedence over hypertrophy training. Your problem is you confuse what
> bodybuilders do (train hypertrophy) with performance training, where the
> legs, hips and core have to be trained daily. That is the apples and
> oranges - your ignorance, not mine.
>
> As for the other - how is it apples and oranges in the case of olympic
> style weightlifters. Naim Suleymonoglu, considered by many the greatest
> weightlifter ever, lists some of his actual training in his book The
> Pocket Hercules and a various times in his career he would perform near
> maximal squats 5 times daily on M-W-F and 3 times daily on T-Th-Sa. He
> was using loads exceeding three times bodyweight! You don't think this
> works the 'muscles'.
>
> I've worked with freestyle wrestlers right to the olympics. They do
> between 2 and 4 whole body workouts daily, if you consider rolling a
> full-body workout.
>
> Your advice is good - for bodybuilders. But it isn't good for someone
> who may just be wanting to train and get stronger, more endurance, etc.
> And it certainly doesn't answer the question of why you offer two
> different types of advice.
>
> As for the apples and oranges have more similarities comment, please
> explain at a contractile tissue level what the difference is between
> running and weightlifting? Not a motor unit level - at a contractile
> level what is the difference? Feel free to get technical - I'm a honours
> student in kinesiology. I've also run two marathons and have national
> and provincial records in both powerlifting and weightlifting, so I have
> some practical experience with both running and squatting.


"Essentials of Strength and Conditioning" is one i do not have at present.
If You can find a copy of "Essentials of Personal Training" 3rd edition,
flip to part IV, Chapter 15 (Resistance Training Program Design). The text
You have should have a similar section. There You will find the
citations. They are not position papers. And as i recall, the NSCA's
standard operating procedures dictate that the position papers should be
based on research. So if You look closely in the foot notes of those
position papers, You should be able to find citations for the research the
position paper is based on.

Strength training, for *most* people, has the same requirements of rest as
hypertrophy training. While i am sure You can find a few people who have
had good results trying Naim Suleymonoglu training regimen, i am certain
that You would find far more who experienced over-training as a result of
it. What works for one exceptional individual will not necessarily work
for any one else. 1-2 days of rest in between working a muscle group is
appropriate for *Most* people. Exceptions to that are far more likely to
be athletes, but that does not change what is appropriate for *Most*
people. There are professional body builders who work out 3 or 4 hours a
day, on only 3 day each week, and still win competitions, allegedly
without chemical aids. Most people would not be able to win body building
competitions on that regimen even with chemical aid.

What are the "contractile" differences between a resistance workout and
running? Well, when You get right down to it, there are no difference
that might be called "contractile". Muscles contract. That is all they
do, and there is not much variety in the way a given muscle can contract.
The effect of that contraction might be a little different, for instance,
when the rectus femoris contracts, the result can be knee extension, hip
flexion, or both. But either way, the rectus femoris is contracting just
the same.

The difference is not in how the muscle contracts, it is in how the
activity impacts the muscle. And those are almost completely different.
That is why long distance running will never be the foundation (or a
major part) of a routine designed to improve leg strength (or size), and
while improved strength can benefit runners, resistance training will
always be secondary for runners. The most obvious difference would be
that running is usually a primarily aerobic activity (except when
distances are very short), where as resistance training is almost entirely
anaerobic. The difference go on from there, including the impact the
respective activities will have on individual motor units and muscle
fibers. That is why rest periods for distance running and resistance
training (strength or hypertrophy) are so different for the vast majority
of the population.

Dnia 2008-03-10 Shava_X napisa³(a):
> On Sun, 09 Mar 2008 08:35:52 -0600, Hobbes wrote:
>
> "Essentials of Strength and Conditioning" is one i do not have at present.
> If You can find a copy of "Essentials of Personal Training" 3rd edition,
> flip to part IV, Chapter 15 (Resistance Training Program Design). The text
> You have should have a similar section. There You will find the
> citations. They are not position papers. And as i recall, the NSCA's
> standard operating procedures dictate that the position papers should be
> based on research. So if You look closely in the foot notes of those
> position papers, You should be able to find citations for the research the
> position paper is based on.
>
> Strength training, for *most* people, has the same requirements of rest as
> hypertrophy training.

That simply is not true. If it was, both bodybuilders and athletes would
train similarly, but they do not for the most part.

> While i am sure You can find a few people who have
> had good results trying Naim Suleymonoglu training regimen,

His regimen was uncommon only because he trained so freaking heavy *and*
frequently. Otherwise it isn't anything special.

> i am certain
> that You would find far more who experienced over-training as a result of
> it.

I'm not either strong or tough, but I can train twice a day without
overtraining. Not starting from the day one, of course. It would take
me more than six months to train myself to that level, but I did it
several times. I didn't overtrain.

> What works for one exceptional individual will not necessarily work
> for any one else. 1-2 days of rest in between working a muscle group is
> appropriate for *Most* people.

To recover from what? Because it it crucial assumption, which you
obviously make and do not even see that it's an assumption.

Let's say that you need two days of rest to recover from six sets of 8
reps. Would you still need two days if you only did two sets of 8? How
about one set? How about one set short of failure? How about a warm-up
set? Would you still need two days of rest to recover from one warm-up
set?

[...]
> people. There are professional body builders who work out 3 or 4 hours a
> day, on only 3 day each week, and still win competitions, allegedly
> without chemical aids. Most people would not be able to win body building
> competitions on that regimen even with chemical aid.

So what? Chemical or not, gifted or not, bodybuilders train like
bodybuilders and their training shares a lot of similarities.

[...]
> always be secondary for runners. The most obvious difference would be
> that running is usually a primarily aerobic activity (except when
> distances are very short), where as resistance training is almost entirely
> anaerobic. The difference go on from there, including the impact the
> respective activities will have on individual motor units and muscle
> fibers. That is why rest periods for distance running and resistance
> training (strength or hypertrophy) are so different for the vast majority
> of the population.

So how about sprinters? Do they need to rest for days between every
sprint?

--
Andrzej Rosa 1127R

In article <obqfa5-gl5.ln1@bakters.bandit.home>,
Andrzej Rosa <bakters@yahoo.com> wrote:

> Dnia 2008-03-10 Shava_X napisa³(a):
> > On Sun, 09 Mar 2008 08:35:52 -0600, Hobbes wrote:
> >
> > "Essentials of Strength and Conditioning" is one i do not have at present.
> > If You can find a copy of "Essentials of Personal Training" 3rd edition,
> > flip to part IV, Chapter 15 (Resistance Training Program Design). The text
> > You have should have a similar section. There You will find the
> > citations. They are not position papers. And as i recall, the NSCA's
> > standard operating procedures dictate that the position papers should be
> > based on research. So if You look closely in the foot notes of those
> > position papers, You should be able to find citations for the research the
> > position paper is based on.
> >
> > Strength training, for *most* people, has the same requirements of rest as
> > hypertrophy training.
>
> That simply is not true. If it was, both bodybuilders and athletes would
> train similarly, but they do not for the most part.
>
> > While i am sure You can find a few people who have
> > had good results trying Naim Suleymonoglu training regimen,
>
> His regimen was uncommon only because he trained so freaking heavy *and*
> frequently. Otherwise it isn't anything special.
>
> > i am certain
> > that You would find far more who experienced over-training as a result of
> > it.
>
> I'm not either strong or tough, but I can train twice a day without
> overtraining. Not starting from the day one, of course. It would take
> me more than six months to train myself to that level, but I did it
> several times. I didn't overtrain.
>
> > What works for one exceptional individual will not necessarily work
> > for any one else. 1-2 days of rest in between working a muscle group is
> > appropriate for *Most* people.
>
> To recover from what? Because it it crucial assumption, which you
> obviously make and do not even see that it's an assumption.
>
> Let's say that you need two days of rest to recover from six sets of 8
> reps. Would you still need two days if you only did two sets of 8? How
> about one set? How about one set short of failure? How about a warm-up
> set? Would you still need two days of rest to recover from one warm-up
> set?

And there, as they say, is the rub.

Adaptation, work capacity and load.

And I agree, Naim's routine was freaky cuz he lifted so much weight at
that light bodyweight.

Plus he is one of the few people I know who has to narrow his grip in
the snatch so he doesn't smack himself in the forehead...

--
Keith

In article <pan.2008.03.10.05.31.32.657117@rocketNOSPAMmail.c om>,
Shava_X <voodopeople@rocketNOSPAMmail.com> wrote:

> On Sun, 09 Mar 2008 08:35:52 -0600, Hobbes wrote:
>
> > In article <pan.2008.03.09.00.49.52.500433@rocketNOSPAMmail.c om>,
> > Shava_X <voodopeople@rocketNOSPAMmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> On Sat, 08 Mar 2008 16:48:05 -0600, Hobbes wrote:
> >>
> >> > In article <pan.2008.03.08.22.20.43.779989@rocketNOSPAMmail.c om>,
> >> > Shava_X <voodopeople@rocketNOSPAMmail.com> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> On Sat, 01 Mar 2008 07:19:14 -0800, COHENMARVIN wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> > My brother lifts weights every day at the gym, until he is exhausted.
> >> >> > I'm not sure this is a good idea. It seems to me that when you
> >> >> > weight
> >> >> > lift, you are sending signals to your muscles to grow, but that also
> >> >> > means they need undisturbed time to grow. Plus when you lift big
> >> >> > weights you break down some muscle tissue, and it needs time to
> >> >> > repair.
> >> >> > But has anyone studied this? Is weight lifting 3 times a week better
> >> >> > than 5 times a week?
> >> >> > I've also talked to a runner, who has run in a 50 mile race, and he
> >> >> > does not believe in resting at all as part of his training regimen.
> >> >> > Intuitively though, it seems to me that he's wrong.
> >> >> > CM
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> There have been studies on this. For nearly everyone, 48-72 hours of
> >> >> rest
> >> >> is required between workouts for a given muscle/muscle group in order
> >> >> to
> >> >> avoid over-training. But that does not mean working out only 3 days
> >> >> per
> >> >> week. Working upper-body on Mondays, Wednesdays, and Fridays, and
> >> >> working
> >> >> lower-body on Tuesdays, Thursdays, and maybe also Saturday or Sunday
> >> >> (but
> >> >> not both), will provide sufficient rest for each muscle group, but will
> >> >> still mean hitting the weight room 5 or 6 days each week.
> >> >>
> >> >> Cardio, like running, is a different thing. It is entirely possible to
> >> >> do
> >> >> training runs 5 or 6 days per week. If You are preparing for a race
> >> >> (as
> >> >> apposed to running for general health or weight loss), it might even be
> >> >> a
> >> >> good idea. One day a week of rest from running may be a good idea.
> >> >> Some
> >> >> people may find 1 or more days of rest absolutely necessary. Others,
> >> >> however, might find that they get better results by going 7 days per
> >> >> week.
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> > I have never seen a study which shows 48-72 hours of rest are required
> >> > between workouts for a given muscle group. Do you have some cites?
> >> >
> >> > As well, as running uses the same muscle group how do you reconcile the
> >> > contradictory advice you have just given this guy?
> >> >
> >> > I'm an olympic-style weightlifter. I regularly do 2-3 workouts per day
> >> > doing just 3 basic exercises - snatch, clean and jerk and front squat. I
> >> > make my best gains when I add frequency. And yes, I've tried doing just
> >> > three workouts per week and progress stalls.
> >>
> >>
> >> "some cites"? Pick up just about any NSCA text book. Not only will You
> >> find roughly the same recommendation, but also a list of several studies
> >> that the recommendation is based on.
> >>
> >> As for Your allegation that the advice to run almost daily but leave a day
> >> or two for rest with resistance training is contradictory, You are wrong.
> >> Those two suggestion do not contradict each other. While running may
> >> 'work' the muscles of the legs, hips, and core to a degree, it is a
> >> completely different 'work' from resistance training. Apples and oranges
> >> have more similarities than the effects on lower-body muscles from running
> >> and resistance training.
> >
> > I have the "Essentials of Strength and Conditioning Text" NSCA text.
> > I've read the position papers as well. Again, where is any research
> > actually proving this assertion? Show it to me in the text and please
> > don't confuse a position paper with actual research. I have numerous
> > other texts which suggest more frequent training and, again, in the real
> > world athletes train the same muscles everyday. Track and field,
> > weightlifting, gymnastics, etc. And intensely. Motor learning takes
> > precedence over hypertrophy training. Your problem is you confuse what
> > bodybuilders do (train hypertrophy) with performance training, where the
> > legs, hips and core have to be trained daily. That is the apples and
> > oranges - your ignorance, not mine.
> >
> > As for the other - how is it apples and oranges in the case of olympic
> > style weightlifters. Naim Suleymonoglu, considered by many the greatest
> > weightlifter ever, lists some of his actual training in his book The
> > Pocket Hercules and a various times in his career he would perform near
> > maximal squats 5 times daily on M-W-F and 3 times daily on T-Th-Sa. He
> > was using loads exceeding three times bodyweight! You don't think this
> > works the 'muscles'.
> >
> > I've worked with freestyle wrestlers right to the olympics. They do
> > between 2 and 4 whole body workouts daily, if you consider rolling a
> > full-body workout.
> >
> > Your advice is good - for bodybuilders. But it isn't good for someone
> > who may just be wanting to train and get stronger, more endurance, etc.
> > And it certainly doesn't answer the question of why you offer two
> > different types of advice.
> >
> > As for the apples and oranges have more similarities comment, please
> > explain at a contractile tissue level what the difference is between
> > running and weightlifting? Not a motor unit level - at a contractile
> > level what is the difference? Feel free to get technical - I'm a honours
> > student in kinesiology. I've also run two marathons and have national
> > and provincial records in both powerlifting and weightlifting, so I have
> > some practical experience with both running and squatting.
>
>
> "Essentials of Strength and Conditioning" is one i do not have at present.
> If You can find a copy of "Essentials of Personal Training" 3rd edition,
> flip to part IV, Chapter 15 (Resistance Training Program Design). The text
> You have should have a similar section. There You will find the
> citations.

Did it in a chapter in my book with the same name. Couldn't find one
cite that had an abstract with research supporting the 'rest' position
they take. Just as there are no studies supporting their position that a
partial squat is safer on the knees. In fact the opposite appears to be
true. There is more evidence supporting a full squat being the safer
alternative, if the person has the flexibility to reach that position
without tilting their pelvis or rounding their back.

Don't get me wrong. If you are a personal trainer and simply training
someone for appearance, then there is some merit to their position. even
then, there are other ways, as many here could attest to. For personal
trainers bodybuilding training works well in the majority of cases. But
it is not the best way for an athlete to train.

Andrzej did a good job with the rest of your post in terms of potential
areas of concern. The problem I have with NSCA is they tend to take the
middle road or 'average' position. Mainly because it is the safest and
agreed on by the most members. But the simple reality is that resistance
training in North America is so heavily influenced by bodybuilding that
it is less than ideal for anyone who has goals other than hypertrophy.

--
Keith

"Hobbes" <khobman800@yahoo.ca> schreef:

> I have never seen a study which shows 48-72 hours of rest are required
> between workouts for a given muscle group. Do you have some cites?

True.

Most guys just go by feel.

I am at my biggest and strongest when i train each group 3 times in 2 weeks.

You know, A-B-A, B-A B.

But i did some weird things, such as 4 exercises each workout, usually front
presses, narrow grip pulldowns, tricep push downs, and the best for last,
cable rows.

I never count sets, and usually my rest in between is progressive. Workouts
last for 2 hours.

I freaked out a Rumanian guy once because he enjoyed watching me (DONT say
it...!)
saw me doing some cable rows with 120 kilos for 8 reps. He came up to me and
told me i did eleven sets...

So i HAD to another one, since 11 is kinda of an odd number.

The look on his face was priceless.

> I'm an olympic-style weightlifter. I regularly do 2-3 workouts per day..

Low volume, i think.

I have a strong suspicioun that over the course of a month, we both do same
amount of repetitions.

> doing just 3 basic exercises - snatch, clean and jerk and front squat. I
> make my best gains when I add frequency. And yes, I've tried doing just
> three workouts per week and progress stalls.

Next time you try it, do the same volume in a week, as you do with your
other schedule.

Not ideal for as guy like you, but i wonder what happens...

BTW, i am going to try training each muscle 3 times each week, with lower
volume..

Who knows?

--
Pete

"Hobbes" <khobman800@yahoo.ca> schreef:

> As for the other - how is it apples and oranges in the case of olympic
> style weightlifters. Naim Suleymonoglu...

1988.

I still have it on tape.

Just as Ben Johnson. The look in his eyes a few seconds beore the gun went,
gives me chills...

Both men are heros.

Naim is considered a Semi-god in Turky. Rumour has it he can eat for free
anywhere...

--
Pete

"Shava_X" <voodopeople@rocketNOSPAMmail.com> schreef:

> Strength training, for *most* people, has the same requirements of rest as
> hypertrophy training. While i am sure You can find a few people who have
> had good results trying Naim Suleymonoglu training regimen, i am certain
> that You would find far more who experienced over-training as a result of
> it.

Low volume is easy.

Which is why REAL men train like bodybuilders. Heavy weights, low-medium
reps, lotsa sets.

And lotsa hamburgers. REAL men dont eat vegetables...

Fiber? Fuck the fiber!

--
Pete

"Hobbes" <khobman800@yahoo.ca> schreef:

> precedence over hypertrophy training. Your problem is you confuse what
> bodybuilders do (train hypertrophy) with performance training...

Excuse me?

Bodybuilding as OPPOSED to performance training ?!?!?!

WTF ?!?!?

Tell me Keith, how do bodybuilders go from weighing 200 pounds to, lets say,
294 pounds WITHOUT getting a HELLUVA lot stronger ?!?!?

Would be nice if that information is shared. Lets get out in the open!


Pete

"Hobbes" <khobman800@yahoo.ca> schreef±

> Pocket Hercules and a various times in his career he would perform near
> maximal squats 5 times daily on M-W-F and 3 times daily on T-Th-Sa.

Reps and sets please!


Pete

"Andrzej Rosa" <bakters@yahoo.com> schreef?

>> Strength training, for *most* people, has the same requirements of rest
>> as
>> hypertrophy training.

> That simply is not true. If it was, both bodybuilders and athletes would
> train similarly, but they do not for the most part.

Many athletes more or less mimic the way boduilders have trained for
decades.

They realized that getting bigger doesnt mean getting slower. Ask Holyfield.

>> While i am sure You can find a few people who have
>> had good results trying Naim Suleymonoglu training regimen,

> His regimen was uncommon only because he trained so freaking heavy *and*
> frequently.

Anabolic steroids increase recovery time in between workouts!

:Otherwise it isn't anything special.

>> i am certain
>> that You would find far more who experienced over-training as a result of
>> it.

> I'm not either strong or tough, but I can train twice a day without
> overtraining.

I can train 100 times a day without overtaining. Each traing consist of 1
exercise, one set, one rep.

Lets say a dumbell row with 100 pounds.

Freides is getting an erection.

: Not starting from the day one, of course. It would take
> me more than six months to train myself to that level, but I did it
> several times. I didn't overtrain.

I believe it.

>> What works for one exceptional individual will not necessarily work
>> for any one else. 1-2 days of rest in between working a muscle group is
>> appropriate for *Most* people.

Yes.

> To recover from what?

The damage. The microtraumas. More volume, is more damage though.

: Because it it crucial assumption, which you
> obviously make and do not even see that it's an assumption.

> Let's say that you need two days of rest to recover from six sets of 8
> reps. Would you still need two days if you only did two sets of 8?

Nope! Butmore than one third of that 2 days, though...

How
> about one set? How about one set short of failure? How about a warm-up
> set? Would you still need two days of rest to recover from one warm-up
> set?

Makes a lotta sense.

> [...]
>> people. There are professional body builders who work out 3 or 4 hours a
>> day, on only 3 day each week,

Only the stupid ones.

Working out everyday for about 2 hours or so would probably work better.

> So what? Chemical or not, gifted or not, bodybuilders train like
> bodybuilders and their training shares a lot of similarities.

> [...]
>> always be secondary for runners. The most obvious difference would be
>> that running is usually a primarily aerobic activity (except when
>> distances are very short), where as resistance training is almost
>> entirely
>> anaerobic. The difference go on from there, including the impact the
>> respective activities will have on individual motor units and muscle
>> fibers. That is why rest periods for distance running and resistance
>> training (strength or hypertrophy) are so different for the vast majority
>> of the population.

> So how about sprinters? Do they need to rest for days between every
> sprint?

Like you said.

If they would do 70 sprints each day they would probably lie in bed for a
week. Which is 70 a week.

Do 10 and the next day you can 10 again. Which is 70 a week

Pete

"Hobbes" <khobman800@yahoo.com> schreef±

> And I agree, Naim's routine was freaky cuz he lifted so much weight at
> that light bodyweight.

Because other guys who weigh 59 kilos have longer arms and legs.

If they would lift the same, they would lift more.

Lets say a guy has legs 2 inches longer and arms 2 inches longer.

Than 200 pounds overhead indone in the same time means he generated more
power, if power is weight multiplied by distance divided by time.

If he uses 30 pounds less, he still has developed the same amount of power,
if that bar with 30 pounds less is lifted 4 inches higher in the same amount
of time, and of course, if 30 pounds in this equition equals trhe 4 inches
which was just a rough ballpark figure from my part.

But thats a secret. Dont tell the Chinese.

BTW, i cant wait untilits August. There will be some serious lifting, Keith.

There are rumours that the Chinese have some some new, state of the art,
undetetctable stuff...

> Plus he is one of the few people I know who has to narrow his grip in
> the snatch so he doesn't smack himself in the forehead...

Exactly my point!


Pete

In article <47d7d8fb$0$53389$dbd4f001@news.wanadoo.nl>,
"Uncle Bob" <unclebobrules@gmail.com> wrote:

> "Hobbes" <khobman800@yahoo.ca> schreef:
>
> > precedence over hypertrophy training. Your problem is you confuse what
> > bodybuilders do (train hypertrophy) with performance training...
>
> Excuse me?
>
> Bodybuilding as OPPOSED to performance training ?!?!?!
>
> WTF ?!?!?
>
> Tell me Keith, how do bodybuilders go from weighing 200 pounds to, lets say,
> 294 pounds WITHOUT getting a HELLUVA lot stronger ?!?!?
>
> Would be nice if that information is shared. Lets get out in the open!
>
>

Stronger, but we've seen the bodybuilders compete in things like the
Superstars compeition. They couldn't do diddly-boo, even getting beat in
the weightlifting competition by track and field athletes.

If the goal is to get stronger there are better ways than training like
a bodybuilder.

--
Keith

"Hobbes" <khobman800@yahoo.com> schreef±

> Don't get me wrong. If you are a personal trainer and simply training
> someone for appearance, then there is some merit to their position.

How does one train to improve his appearance.

: even
> then, there are other ways, as many here could attest to. For personal
> trainers bodybuilding training works well in the majority of cases. But
> it is not the best way for an athlete to train.

What atlete.

Gymnast. Speed skater. Boxer perhaps. Tennis player.

> Andrzej did a good job with the rest of your post in terms of potential
> areas of concern. The problem I have with NSCA is they tend to take the
> middle road or 'average' position. Mainly because it is the safest and
> agreed on by the most members. But the simple reality is that resistance
> training in North America is so heavily influenced by bodybuilding that
> it is less than ideal for anyone who has goals other than hypertrophy.


Define bodybuilding training.

Pete

In article <47d7d989$0$32509$dbd4f001@news.wanadoo.nl>,
"Uncle Bob" <unclebobrules@gmail.com> wrote:

> "Hobbes" <khobman800@yahoo.ca> schreef±
>
> > Pocket Hercules and a various times in his career he would perform near
> > maximal squats 5 times daily on M-W-F and 3 times daily on T-Th-Sa.
>
> Reps and sets please!

Depends, but for the most part we are talking singles or doubles,
between 3 and 5 sets.

Earlier in his career he would do up to 5 or 6 reps in some assistance
exercises for up to 5 sets, but at the stage I'm referring to its all
low volume.

--
Keith

"Hobbes" <khobman800@yahoo.com> schreef±

>> Tell me Keith, how do bodybuilders go from weighing 200 pounds to, let