Building muscle means working to failure, which is where the "no pain, no gain" thing should come from. Some recent studies indicate that you can get as much out of a one-set routine as a three- or four-set routine if you work to failure. You also must know your body well enough to know the difference between muscle failure and ripping tendons and ligimants.
An added benefit of adding muscle, I'm not talking Arnold here, is that it takes more calories to maintain, therefore it increases your metabolism and helps you lose extra fat. Exercise not only burns calories while you are doing it but also for a period afterward because it increases your metabolism.
It is not worthwhile to work to failure very often. "Maxing out" should only occur once in a great while due to the taxing it gives your central nervous system. Working near your maxes at every workout will wear you out in very little time and your gains will stall.
I personally subscribe to a "periodization" program of training where during a given week there's a heavy (Mon), light (Wed), and medium (Fri) day. It's more of a powerlifting strength-training type of workout and it'll wear you out fast if you're going full-bore during every workout. Mondays, for instance, I'm working very close to my maxes at the final sets of an exercise (let's say squats for example). Wednesdays are lighter, less overall volume, and working at maybe 70% of my max on squats. Friday I'm doing a bit more work at lighter weights then a couple sets at a near-max weight, then back down to a lighter weight.
The idea here is that fatigue is an 'accumulated' thing. 'Fitness' lasts longer than 'fatigue', but for that fitness to be apparent you can't be excessively fatigued. If you work at near-max weights during every workout, you will run yourself into the ground (I've made this mistake myself) and your fatigue doesn't have a chance to rebound. If you periodize, those light days and weekends off give your body some time to recover and be ready for a hard Monday workout. Then it eases through a bit (but there's still a good training load on Wed) until Friday where you're pushed hard again. Obviously different things work for different people (as much in weight training as in G.O.L.F.) so definitely experiment but don't be afraid to change programs if the results are not what you desire. And if you want big results...eat big!
It is not worthwhile to work to failure very often. "Maxing out" should only occur once in a great while due to the taxing it gives your central nervous system. Working near your maxes at every workout will wear you out in very little time and your gains will stall.
I personally subscribe to a "periodization" program of training where during a given week there's a heavy (Mon), light (Wed), and medium (Fri) day. It's more of a powerlifting strength-training type of workout and it'll wear you out fast if you're going full-bore during every workout. Mondays, for instance, I'm working very close to my maxes at the final sets of an exercise (let's say squats for example). Wednesdays are lighter, less overall volume, and working at maybe 70% of my max on squats. Friday I'm doing a bit more work at lighter weights then a couple sets at a near-max weight, then back down to a lighter weight.
The idea here is that fatigue is an 'accumulated' thing. 'Fitness' lasts longer than 'fatigue', but for that fitness to be apparent you can't be excessively fatigued. If you work at near-max weights during every workout, you will run yourself into the ground (I've made this mistake myself) and your fatigue doesn't have a chance to rebound. If you periodize, those light days and weekends off give your body some time to recover and be ready for a hard Monday workout. Then it eases through a bit (but there's still a good training load on Wed) until Friday where you're pushed hard again. Obviously different things work for different people (as much in weight training as in G.O.L.F.) so definitely experiment but don't be afraid to change programs if the results are not what you desire. And if you want big results...eat big!
Listen up guys, Matt knows his stuff. This is Dual Factor Theory explained. I got a feeling a large number of people on this forum won't be able to train like us 'young guns'...well, not to begin with anyway.
Core stability is important, but no amount of Swiss Ball and Bosu Ball work will give you the strength gains you get from a solid free weight training program. I’m of the opinion that you can't have a weak core (or Traverse Abdominals or whatever you like to call it) and still squat 300lb or power clean 200lb with proper technique. Those guys on the long drive tour are undoubtedly very strong species. Of course, all this isn't mandatory if you just want to have a knock about and stay injury free.
I recently saw a man that gave me golf specific exercises. One of them is the ONE LEGGED SQUAT. This one is pretty difficult... especially since I have a problem with the right SI Joint. I was told that this would help me, however, along with some other exercises for hip, leg, and foot stability.
In their studies... something like 90% of golfers had some instability when moving laterally into the LEFT(lead)LEG.
Listen up guys, Matt knows his stuff. This is Dual Factor Theory explained. I got a feeling a large number of people on this forum won't be able to train like us 'young guns'...well, not to begin with anyway.
Core stability is important, but no amount of Swiss Ball and Bosu Ball work will give you the strength gains you get from a solid free weight training program. I’m of the opinion that you can't have a weak core (or Traverse Abdominals or whatever you like to call it) and still squat 300lb or power clean 200lb with proper technique. Those guys on the long drive tour are undoubtedly very strong species. Of course, all this isn't mandatory if you just want to have a knock about and stay injury free.
Thanks Leo. "Dual factor" meaning that you manage and plan around both 'fitness' and 'fatigue.' Versus "single factor" where you're only focused on the 'fitness' aspect and do not plan for overall lighter weeks where you drop weight across the board ('de-loading' in dual factor programs). If you're a beginning you really only need to worry about "single factor" because you'll see gains almost regardless of what you do.
As far as core work goes, all I really do are some assorted ab exercises. Like Leo mentioned, your core gets some very good stress from big compound exercises. You are forced to have core stability when you pulling 225 lbs. off the floor for a deadlift or squatting 250 lbs. This is why Leo has pretty much convinced me that wearing a lifting belt is more detrimental to progress rather than helpful because it lets you get away with having weaker abs (because it acts like strong abs by increasing inter-abdominal pressure and thus lower back support). It won't allow the same core development that lifting without a belt will.
Leo and I love this stuff so ask away with questions!
Working to failure and working your max are two different things. If I have to workout alone I can use an excercise as simple as pushups to get me to failure.
I very seldom attempt my single rep max because that's not really a goal of mine anymore. When I was 22, it was. Now I'm 37, and it's not. There are different ways to get to failure, like I think Matt pointed out. You can do heavy weight, few reps; lighter weight, more reps. Workouts vary as to the goal and should always include some regeneration time. I prefer short workouts so I do a lot of compound exercises as well.
EDIT: Wow. This Dual Factor Theory stuff sounds cool. I'm going to re-evaluate my workouts and see if this can help me out. I work at a school that specializes in treating obese teens and we have two personal trainers on staff. I'm going to see if they can put together a new routine for me. What I was doing sounds like it was a good pre-routine, routine. I started excercising again about 6 months ago and changed my diet as well. I've lost 35 pounds, four pant sizes and two belts. I carry my clubs for 18 and have no problem and the next day all feels good. Now maybe I can start going in a different direction. I left my original posts to show that I'm always open for learning and willing to admit that being Old Skool is sometimes foolish. Thanks, Matt.
EDIT: Wow. This Dual Factor Theory stuff sounds cool. I'm going to re-evaluate my workouts and see if this can help me out. I work at a school that specializes in treating obese teens and we have two personal trainers on staff. I'm going to see if they can put together a new routine for me. What I was doing sounds like it was a good pre-routine, routine. I started excercising again about 6 months ago and changed my diet as well. I've lost 35 pounds, four pant sizes and two belts. I carry my clubs for 18 and have no problem and the next day all feels good. Now maybe I can start going in a different direction. I left my original posts to show that I'm always open for learning and willing to admit that being Old Skool is sometimes foolish. Thanks, Matt.
I would first off suggest trying out a 'single factor' program. Take a good week off and then start it up. You should extract all the gains you can from this type of program before worrying about 'dual factor.' In single factor, the goal is basically to increase weight each week. Obviously at some point this isn't going to be possible but it will be for quite awhile. I have mine set up with a spreadsheet that tells me all the weights I should be using for a given week for each workout (after I input my maxes). Weeks 1-3 are lighter, I hit my given 'max' during week 4, then progress past it in the next several weeks.
Think about it: would you rather be adding weight to the bar each week or only every several weeks? Best case is every week. But for advanced lifters that won't be possible, so you have to include entire weeks where you 'de-load' your weights to allow for some dissapation of fatigue so you can keep progressing. But this is a good distance down the road for most people, myself included.
This really is great reading for people who are interested in this sort of thing. I'm a big fan of this school of thought because it not only makes good sense but so many people achieve good results. Shoot me a PM if you want some more reading material and sample programs. Be warned though that what I'm doing isn't exactly golf-specific but rather more of an overall strength-training program with 90% focus on major compound lifts and very little time spent doing 'beach' work. Naturally you can add flexibility training and whatnot to it but the original program was constructed for, shall we say, physical contact sports.
Another info packed post from Matt.
The whole idea of a well designed free weights program is that you develop transferable functional strength and power. Just because a squat or power clean doesn't resemble a golf stroke, it doesn't mean it won't add power to it. In fact, it's quite the contrary.
The reason why doing isolation work produce suboptimal results is the same reason why barbells work so well. The human body functions as a complete system -- it works that way and it likes to be trained that way. The 'Training Specificity' camp believes that you must acquire strength in a very similar way in which the strength will be used. However, it is the nervous system that controls the muscles, i.e. 'neuromuscular'. There is no such thing as neuromuscular specificity, and exercise programs must respect this principle the same way they respect the Law of Gravity.
Barbell and dumbell programs when properly performed are essentially the functional expression of human skeletal and muscular anatomy under a load. Balance between all the muscles used in the movement is inherent in the exercise because all the muscles involved contribute their anatomically determined share of the work. Free weights allow weight to be moved in exactly the way the body is designed to move it, since every aspect of the movement is determined by the body.
Unfortunately, most people don't know how to do barbell training correctly. And most people who claim to know how don't .
.
Hybrid Mode
