More aerobic or weightlifting?

PhoenixRisin'

PhoenixRisin'

New member
I weigh 344lbs and have been doing the treadmill for 1 month now (30min for first week 1 hour for last 3), i have alot more energy and was thinking to start lifting weights. What would be most benificial: adding another 30 min per day on the treadmill or lifting weights 3 times per week. I know if I lift heavy it will build muscle, what if I did high reps, low weight, would that be better for weight loss? I am a newbie as far as weightlifting goes, my main goal is the weight loss. Ideas.............or should I push myself, add the 30 min a day treadmill and do weights? Ugh.
 
Last edited:
Why either adding another 30 min per day on the treadmill or lifting weights 3 times per week? Why not a combo of both.

Actually, one isn't better than the other to lose weight (fat). It's more what you enjoy doing.

Remember, the more muscle you have the more fat you'll "burn".



It's the yellow stuff you want to get rid of, not the red stuff. So the only way you're going to keep the lean muscle you have is lifting 3 X a week fairly heavy. Not single reps, but around 8 - 10 reps or so without too much rest between sets and working the larger muscle groups.

And no, you don't have to do a ton of ab work. You'll "burn" more fat around your waist doing squats than you will doing situps (if anyone still does those).

Put another way what a pound of fat looks like:



Lose a few of those and you'll be a much smaller and healthier person.
 
Darth Pooh said:
Why wouldn't people do situps? They can be very beneficial if done correctly.
Click to expand...

Doc never said you shouldn't do situps, but as an exercise intended to perform isolation work on your abdominal muscles, they are sorely inadequate. Too much involvement of other groups, such as the hip flexors. This is the main reason why they have, as implied, fallen out of favor with most "enthusiasts".

Also, the Quadriceps are a much larger muscle group than the Abdominals, and therefore any comparison between exercises, with one targeting the Quads and one targeting the Abs, must result in an acknowledgement that those targeting the former will "burn" more calories than those targeting the latter, all other factors being equal. Given that there is no means by which you may "spot reduce" fat in specific areas, this would make exercises targeting the Quads superior to those targeting the Abs in terms of effectiveness in stimulating (Abdominal) fat loss.

The squat, specifically, recruits more than just the quads. Many muscle groups, in fact, including the entire core ("abdominal") region.
 
Last edited:
I have a question to Doc's post. If one was to lift weights 3 times a week but didn't do cardio as much (this because they weigh roughly 165lbs --> and want to lose a little more weight/look lean, roughly 10lbs or so) would this slow the weight loss process? due to the fact that they're lifting more days than they are doing cardio?

Doc Bunkum said:
Why either adding another 30 min per day on the treadmill or lifting weights 3 times per week? Why not a combo of both.

Actually, one isn't better than the other to lose weight (fat). It's more what you enjoy doing.

Remember, the more muscle you have the more fat you'll "burn".

It's the yellow stuff you want to get rid of, not the red stuff. So the only way you're going to keep the lean muscle you have is lifting 3 X a week fairly heavy. Not single reps, but around 8 - 10 reps or so without too much rest between sets and working the larger muscle groups.

And no, you don't have to do a ton of ab work. You'll "burn" more fat around your waist doing squats than you will doing situps (if anyone still does those).

Put another way what a pound of fat looks like:

Lose a few of those and you'll be a much smaller and healthier person.
Click to expand...
 
veenie said:
I have a question to Doc's post. If one was to lift weights 3 times a week but didn't do cardio as much (this because they weigh roughly 165lbs --> and want to lose a little more weight/look lean, roughly 10lbs or so) would this slow the weight loss process? due to the fact that they're lifting more days than they are doing cardio?
Click to expand...

The answer to your question is a simple matter of calories in versus calories out. No, it will not slow your progress, provided you your calories eaten are less than your basal requirement + your calories expended in exercise. Which is to say, you are maintaining a suitable calorie deficit.

But why drop cardio, really, unless you're having trouble eating enough calories to avoid losing weight too fast?
 
It's because I started off at 220lbs and went down to 160lbs over a course of 6 months. But unlike the OP, I didn't really consider lifting weights at all, pretty much cardio 4-5 times a week. So I actually have lost weight, but would like to lose more fat at this point. That's why I wanted to know what would happen if I slowed down on the cardio and did more weights to get toned etc. For the past 5-6 weeks or so, I gained about 5 lbs and thought I'd gain another 5lbs back so that I can restart everything and get down to my goal of 150lbs by getting some weight on and lifting again. (My height is 5'8).

So with this in mind, would slowing down cardio benefit me? harm me? and just keep lifting heavy?
 
Also, the Quadriceps are a much larger muscle group than the Abdominals, and therefore...
Click to expand...

Very nice explanation, Focus.

My main problem with the standard sit up is the strain on the back. As someone with a bad back from years of heavy lifting when I was younger and didn't know better, I have to protect my back at all costs and sit ups aren't the ticket.

Much better to pick something where your back stays flat on the bench or mat and isolate the abs.

If you consider too that something like 2/3 of your bodyweight is carried above the hips, that means in effect that a 180 lb person doing sit ups is about the same as doing crunches with a 120 lb plate behind your head. The result is that you over develop the ab muscles and thicken the waist - something you really don't want to do.
 
Doc Bunkum said:
Very nice explanation, Focus.

My main problem with the standard sit up is the strain on the back. As someone with a bad back from years of heavy lifting when I was younger and didn't know better, I have to protect my back at all costs and sit ups aren't the ticket.

Much better to pick something where your back stays flat on the bench or mat and isolate the abs.

If you consider too that something like 2/3 of your bodyweight is carried above the hips, that means in effect that a 180 lb person doing sit ups is about the same as doing crunches with a 120 lb plate behind your head. The result is that you over develop the ab muscles and thicken the waist - something you really don't want to do.
Click to expand...


Hmmm, learn something new everyday... I do them once a week, two sets of twenty on my ab day (do abs twice a week). I do it on a decline bench while someone throws me a 6kg medicine ball over my head (I feel a really good burn with that).

However, if it is a popular opinion that they are not a good thing to do, what would be some good routines for my ab workouts? I currently do the captain's chair (on both days). Medicine ball side to sides (sorry I don't know the name of it). I do push downs (where I will lie flat on my back and lift my legs up in the air and have someone push my feet back down, again don't know the correct term). Crunches to the middle and sides. What else would be the most effective for ab work?

The reason I do abs on tuesdays and thursdays is because those are my HIIT days and I don't want to wear myself out prior to it.
 
Well, this is strictly my opinion, DP, but I'd say you have a pretty good ab routine going there.

When we're talking pure sit ups, I assume most people consider that being hooking your feet under some kind of support, then from a supine position with your hands behind the head, bending at the waist and bringing your elbows to your knees.

I say that is a back killer, and as someone else pointed out, not a true abdominal exercise - there's too many other muscle groups involved.

Not sure what equipment your gym has. But there's all types of specialized ab machines out there these days that will really give you a good burn and protect the back at the same time.

Hanging from a chinning bar and bringing the knees up to the chest with a light dumbbell between the feet, if needed, is a type of exercise I like. What this does is stretch and elongate the muscle, giving a sculpted, shaped look, instead of the boxy look that sit ups do.

If you don't know what I mean, look up some photos of someone like Frank Zane on the web. IMO, that's the pleasing look the general public likes - not the chunky look of the steroid freaks that you see in the mags.

IMO, as I said.
 
Ahhhh... ok, confused with the "situp" in question.

I actually do the captain's chair with a 3kg med ball between my legs. I love it! Just started that this week... prior to that I just did basic captain's chair.

I think sometimes I will hook my legs up with my buddy and we will pass each other the medicine ball and full go back to the floor but we need to keep the ball over our heads the whole time to work the obliques, that might be close to a situp and I might need to work something like planks into the game other than those.

Thanks for the input... I like writing out in words what I need to do and have people help me direct it. Good on you mate.
 
Thanks

Thanks all for the input. Looks like I cant go wrong either direction I take so I will challange myself and try to do the additional 30 min on the treadmill and a weightlifting routine 3 days a week. As far as the sit-ups controversy, I am in no jepordy of doing one in the near future, guess I will start off slow, do squats and leg lifts. Thanks all.:)
 
I'd just like to add my 2 cents, not that it's drastically different from any of the pennies above.

When you have a good deal of weight to lose, it ultimately comes down to burning as much energy as you can. Muscle loss isn't too much a concern so actual strength training for muscle maintenance isn't high priority.

This doesn't mean you should skip over weight training. It simply means your workouts should be geared more toward the metabolic side of things opposed to the neurologic. This is simply saying, these weight workouts would better suit your goals if they were comprised of more volume and density. Think higher reps, lighter weights, and less rest.

This doesn't mean you should be going out there and picking up the pink dumbells and blasting out 50-rep sets of bicep curls. You should still be emphasizing the core lifts that call on multiple joints and muscle groups.

Again, for right now, it's about caloric expenditure. Some muscle gain can occur too, even with this type of training since you are a) a novice, and b) carrying a good bit of extra fat.

I think someone stated above, but I'd be doing 2-3 total body sessions spread apart as best you can over the week.

Cardio is still important too. And above all is diet at this point.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top