Balancing - important or not?

[RandomWords]

[FONT=&quot]So, I ran across a personal trainer the other day; and we were talking about fitness – as personal trainers do. During said conversation, he stressed the importance of balancing during weight lifting – and how he saw many weight lifters who focused on their agonist but paid no or little attention to their corresponding antagonists which leads to over imbalances and eventual injuries; to correct the over-training he suggested to work the antagonists two or three more times per week over the agonist. [/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]So questions:[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]What are your overall thoughts on a balanced approach? Do you do it yourself and if so – do you train the antagonists at the same weight you did your agonist?[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Has anyone here had experience with over-training in such a manner (by not training their antagonists) that has caused them to have imbalances and injuries?[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Anyone have any other personal experiences or results in regards to this?[/FONT]

 

[Zivic]

[FONT=&quot]So, I ran across a personal trainer the other day; and we were talking about fitness – as personal trainers do. During said conversation, he stressed the importance of balancing during weight lifting – and how he saw many weight lifters who focused on their agonist but paid no or little attention to their corresponding antagonists which leads to over imbalances and eventual injuries; to correct the over-training he suggested to work the antagonists two or three more times per week over the agonist. [/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]So questions:[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]What are your overall thoughts on a balanced approach? Do you do it yourself and if so – do you train the antagonists at the same weight you did your agonist?[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Has anyone here had experience with over-training in such a manner (by not training their antagonists) that has caused them to have imbalances and injuries?[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Anyone have any other personal experiences or results in regards to this?[/FONT]

are you asking if when I train arms do I train biceps and triceps?
or do I work my back and my chest?
I would think your trainer guy should focus on the people that never train legs and only upper body... that is probably the only antagonist/agonist pairing worth talking about.

for the way most people lift/train, it is a non issue. most people are wasting their time and would be better off skipping a couple meals a day in terms of their overall fitness/conditioning

 

[z1ggy]

No but generally speaking you see the typical bro's at the gym going chest & biceps over and over again. So those people might have issues because of an imbalance of chest to back, or bicep to tricep...

But overall no not really any issues for me...

 

[RandomWords]

are you asking if when I train arms do I train biceps and triceps? or do I work my back and my chest? I would think your trainer guy should focus on the people that never train legs and only upper body... that is probably the only antagonist/agonist pairing worth talking about.

Legs versus upper body isn't an agonist/antagonist pairing - though yes, I agree you should work both... biceps and triceps are. A routine that focuses on balancing and would work out both agonist and its antagonists would be something like:

Day 1: Back and chest

1. Bent over rows vs. D/B Flat Bench Press
2. Deadlifts vs. Parallel Dips
3. Incline D/B Press vs. Lat Machine Pulldowns
4. Low Rows vs. Incline D/B Flys

Day 2: Hamstrings, Quads and Calves

1. Squats vs. Leg Curls
2. Jump Squats vs. Lunge Squat combo
3. Leg Press vs. Leg Extensions
4. Standing Calf Raises vs. Seated Calf Raises

Day 3: Shoulders and Traps
1. Seated D/B Press vs. D/B Shrugs
2. Lateral Raises vs. Upright Rows
3. Behind The Neck Presses vs. Front Dumbbell Raises

Day 4: Biceps, Triceps and Calves
1. Standing Barbell Curls vs. Bench Dips
2. Seated Dumbbell Curls vs. Kickbacks
3. Hammer Curls vs. Tricep Pushdowns
4. Calf Presses vs. Donkey calf raises

There are a number of routines that use this principle such as: Charles Poliquin’s “German Volume Training” or “GVT”

Just looking for peoples thoughts on it; if they work out with this in mind or not and if so - what they think of this approach - basically what I asked.

 

[TallBill]

Heavy compound lifter here, I guess my exercises create balance without much extra planning effort.

 

[Zivic]

Legs versus upper body isn't an agonist/antagonist pairing - though yes, I agree you should work both... biceps and triceps are. A routine that focuses on balancing and would work out both agonist and its antagonists would be something like:

Day 1: Back and chest

1. Bent over rows vs. D/B Flat Bench Press
2. Deadlifts vs. Parallel Dips
3. Incline D/B Press vs. Lat Machine Pulldowns
4. Low Rows vs. Incline D/B Flys

Day 2: Hamstrings, Quads and Calves

1. Squats vs. Leg Curls
2. Jump Squats vs. Lunge Squat combo
3. Leg Press vs. Leg Extensions
4. Standing Calf Raises vs. Seated Calf Raises

Day 3: Shoulders and Traps
1. Seated D/B Press vs. D/B Shrugs
2. Lateral Raises vs. Upright Rows
3. Behind The Neck Presses vs. Front Dumbbell Raises

Day 4: Biceps, Triceps and Calves
1. Standing Barbell Curls vs. Bench Dips
2. Seated Dumbbell Curls vs. Kickbacks
3. Hammer Curls vs. Tricep Pushdowns
4. Calf Presses vs. Donkey calf raises

There are a number of routines that use this principle such as: Charles Poliquin’s “German Volume Training” or “GVT”

Just looking for peoples thoughts on it; if they work out with this in mind or not and if so - what they think of this approach - basically what I asked.

the legs vs upper was a joke.... but really the only imbalance that will be an issue in the typical gym goer (though only possibly in aesthetics)

For the most part, I don't train opposing muscle groups on the same day. generally I am focused on one part per day. I do train bi's/tri's on the same day.

as long as you are hitting each body part there isn't a whole lot of reason to be a stickler about hitting them on the same day.

questions like this may be just for discussion purposes, but I feel if they are really being discussed, you are trying too hard. this 'fitness' stuff isn't all that hard. what one does in the gym is a distant 3rd to one's genetics and diet. it is important, but I am pretty confident there are plenty of areas outside of the gym that will have much more impact on one's success than hitting agonist and its antagonists muscle in a workout

 

[SP33Demon]

I think it really only matters for chest and back because you're moving some serious weights with those 2 groups and the shoulder is so dam intricate. Since my shoulder isn't 100% I almost always superset accessory back exercises in with bench which helps with labrum inflammation in keeping the joint loose and keeps blood flowing to my rotator to keep it nice and warm. I used to split the two groups up but now advocate back and chest on the same day. We also rarely ever do exercises for little muscles like tri's/bi's since they're hit with many other compound accessory movements (chins, close grip bench, etc). That's just inefficient use of time for strength unless you're bodybuilding. I'll sometimes hit hammer curls along with abs as a finisher but it's just to get blood flowing.

 

[alkemyst]

Heavy compound lifter here, I guess my exercises create balance without much extra planning effort.

Correct.

Balancing is really only important if you want truly functional muscle mass/strength.

If you just want to work bi's and chest, so be it.

 

[RandomWords]

what one does in the gym is a distant 3rd to one's genetics and diet

The genetics and diet aren't an issue for me. I have both down. Sometimes I crave "real" food - which for me means I want steak over other types of meat. Just working out a plan for a routine to bring some consistency - since usually my workouts consist of what exercises (always changing) I feel like doing that day (I will hit all the muscle groups still). As I was looking, this seemed like a good approach to take.

functional muscle mass/strength.

functional muscle mass/strength and longer lasting gains are far more important to me than looking pretty so to speak or gaining strength quickly.

 

[alkemyst]

This 'fitness' stuff isn't all that hard. what one does in the gym is a distant 3rd to one's genetics and diet. it is important, but I am pretty confident there are plenty of areas outside of the gym that will have much more impact on one's success than hitting agonist and its antagonists muscle in a workout

Training is VERY IMPORTANT. You can't just take anabolic steroids and become an Adonis/Arnold.

WTF?

 

[alkemyst]

The genetics and diet aren't an issue for me. I have both down. Sometimes I crave "real" food - which for me means I want steak over other types of meat. Just working out a plan for a routine to bring some consistency - since usually my workouts consist of what exercises (always changing) I feel like doing that day (I will hit all the muscle groups still). As I was looking, this seemed like a good approach to take.



functional muscle mass/strength and longer lasting gains are far more important to me than looking pretty so to speak or gaining strength quickly.

lasting gains are limited.

If you have the gift, just go heavy and do the monster lifts.

Eat Rinse Eat Repeat Eat

Grow.

 

[Zivic]

Training is VERY IMPORTANT. You can't just take anabolic steroids and become an Adonis/Arnold.

WTF?

over the years I have been to a lot of gyms. I see people now at my gym that I saw 15-20 yrs ago. they have not accomplished squat (bad pun). they train every week, yet over the years have only managed to get fatter.

for those people, they can stay home and eat less cupcakes

I did say training is important.... and even with steroids/training/diet, nobody here is going to become arnold. I figured you'd know that.

I look around the gyms I frequent and there is a reason I look better than the people around me (yes arrogant). some are there every day I am, yet they want to know:
"What do you eat? Dead babies?"
"How the hell do you get so damn big?"
"what are you doing that I'm not?"
"I weigh more than you and don't look anything like that"

The ignorant ones say:
"Well, If I used steroids I'd look like you"

I don't write anything down in terms of my training anymore. Contrast that with my diet -> I have to track every single thing I eat. I am conscious of every food choice I make throughout the day and week. My point is, consistency in the gym is probably the biggest thing about training... sure you need intensity, proper weights, at least half@ssed form etc... but antagonist/agonist in the same workout is so far down the list, it isn't even on the radar

let's say you train 2 hrs every day / 7 days a week. that's 14 hrs a week out of 168 hrs... that's less than 10%. just by the numbers, I think what one is doing over the 90% of the week they are not in the gym is going to have the biggest impact on their health/fitness

 

[Zivic]

The genetics and diet aren't an issue for me. I have both down. Sometimes I crave "real" food - which for me means I want steak over other types of meat. Just working out a plan for a routine to bring some consistency - since usually my workouts consist of what exercises (always changing) I feel like doing that day (I will hit all the muscle groups still). As I was looking, this seemed like a good approach to take.

I will just say, I think there are better



functional muscle mass/strength and longer lasting gains are far more important to me than looking pretty so to speak or gaining strength quickly.

when I read this, I get the feeling I am talking to a woman that doesn't want to lift weights because she "doesn't want to get too big". I think you have misconseptions about what is going to happen to you from training with weights.

the gains will only last as long as you keep doing what you are doing. if you stop training, you will lose them at some point, so not sure how one can steer you towards a program with longer lasting gains.

functional mass? Are you a football lineman eating 10k calories a day to keep your weight up? what is functional mass?

strength.... now this I understand. But what is functional? I used to bench upper 400's; is that functional? lately, I haven't had more than 250 on the bar, is that functional? Either way, I can lift more than my everyday daily needs require me to. I consider functional training for a specific sport.


Now the last part... looking pretty is what I tell people my goal is - seriously. the reality is, you would be damn lucky and could make a ton of money if you figured out how to unintentionally look pretty and gain strength quickly (short of drugs). looking pretty is a positive by-product of proper diet and training and I highly doubt you will all of a sudden stand back and say, yeah, I need to slow things down. I'm getting way too strong too quickly.

Rather than worry about agonist/antagonist muscle groups, just go to the gym, lift as much as you can for as many reps as you can and post back up in a few yrs. If you are still at it, I'll throw a new workout your way for some muscle confusion

 

[RandomWords]

just go to the gym, lift as much as you can for as many reps as you can and post back up in a few yrs

That's a chaotic mess. It's what I do now. It bothers me and doesn't relate really to what I'm trying to find out.

when I read this, I get the feeling I am talking to a woman that doesn't want to lift weights because she "doesn't want to get too big". I think you have misconseptions about what is going to happen to you from training with weights.

I do not know where you get that from. I know what happens when a female lift weights; and any female who lifts knows what happens when she lifts weights... I can see where this statement would come in on a thread of a person wondering about lifting as a newbie - reign your horses in and stop throwing insults.

the gains will only last as long as you keep doing what you are doing. if you stop training, you will lose them at some point, so not sure how one can steer you towards a program with longer lasting gains.

I think you're missing what I'm trying to convey, which happens when I don't take the time to view it as other people might: here's an article to help (hopefully it helps): http://jamesclear.com/slow-gains

functional mass?

That I took from the term used in a previous post. What is functional mass to me: mass that functions at its best in all ROM, not only in strength - but also stability and flexibility for whatever purpose you use it for. Not just to lift in a certain singular direction.

Now the last part... looking pretty is what I tell people my goal is - seriously.

Best way I could put it... and you can't deny that a lot of people lift for this sole purpose, which went with the context of that post. So yes. Really.

Rather than worry about agonist/antagonist muscle groups,

Worry - wrong term to use -
do I think this might be an optimal structured way to workout - yes;

did I want to see whether people have ran across it and their results with it - yes;

did I want to learn of people who have been lifting for years without taking into consideration (by accident or intention - their antagonists) having any issues with ROM, shoulders, hips which could be attributed to this - yes, and then some... (there might not be anyone at this age/point on here - I don't know)

do I want opinions on my diet and told to run rampant in the gym with no purpose or direction - no. I would have specifically asked if that were the case.

 

[RandomWords]

Here are some articles for people who aren't quite understanding the routine and subject I'm asking on:

http://www.flexonline.com/training/news/opposites-attack

http://www.toughenup.co.za/training-programs-advanced/agonist-vs-antagonist

http://www.fitnessandpower.com/trai...g-the-agonists-and-antagonists-in-one-workout

 

[Zivic]

That's a chaotic mess. It's what I do now. It bothers me and doesn't relate really to what I'm trying to find out.

not chaos.. figure out a split and train accordingly. doesn't have to be set in stone. listen to your body. that comes with time though

I do not know where you get that from. I know what happens when a female lift weights; and any female who lifts knows what happens when she lifts weights... I can see where this statement would come in on a thread of a person wondering about lifting as a newbie - reign your horses in and stop throwing insults.
in relation to your "chaotic mess" statement, I would venture to say you are kind of a newb. I am an @ss, but really, you are trying to reinvent the wheel with this discussion.



I think you're missing what I'm trying to convey, which happens when I don't take the time to view it as other people might: here's an article to help (hopefully it helps): http://jamesclear.com/slow-gains

i'll look at it when I find time



That I took from the term used in a previous post. What is functional mass to me: mass that functions at its best in all ROM, not only in strength - but also stability and flexibility for whatever purpose you use it for. Not just to lift in a certain singular direction.



Best way I could put it... and you can't deny that a lot of people lift for this sole purpose, which went with the context of that post. So yes. Really.

no doubt people go to the gym to look better/pretty.... but how many actually do? it is my goal now. I have no issue with looking good or others wanting to. the difference is, few of us actually do



Worry - wrong term to use -
do I think this might be an optimal structured way to workout - yes;

I will argue that it isn't... For example, if you are lifting hard/intense/heavy, you will not be able to do both back and chest in the same day. I will argue it would be better to split them up and give each their own day. also, if you don't do a bi/tri day, it would be hard to add them into another workout..... though you added them into a calf day. I think a lot of people just hit biceps with say chest and then add in tri's with back.

that is not to say it is bad, just don't think it should be what a split/plan should be based around.

did I want to see whether people have ran across it and their results with it - yes;

did I want to learn of people who have been lifting for years without taking into consideration (by accident or intention - their antagonists) having any issues with ROM, shoulders, hips which could be attributed to this - yes, and then some... (there might not be anyone at this age/point on here - I don't know)

do I want opinions on my diet and told to run rampant in the gym with no purpose or direction - no. I would have specifically asked if that were the case.

never told you to run rampant in the gym. if you need a step by step written plan, you are on the newb side of training. which is fine.

 

[SP33Demon]

Here are some articles for people who aren't quite understanding the routine and subject I'm asking on:

http://www.flexonline.com/training/news/opposites-attack

http://www.toughenup.co.za/training-programs-advanced/agonist-vs-antagonist

http://www.fitnessandpower.com/trai...g-the-agonists-and-antagonists-in-one-workout

If you're going for pure strength, ag/ant is a good way to do it. Our team does it and have noticed good gains but like I said before, it is more to help recovery and prevent injuries. I just hit a 20% increase in pause bench max (vs what I did at a meet in June) coming off an overuse injury and training with ag/ant helped take away benchpress pain that I would get from just doing chest alone. Something even as simple as chins/weighted chins with a vest/rows is all you need to do, and do them immediately after the chest or shoulder movement. Not only does it help with shoulder pain but you may see higher strength gains like our team. Also, for Overhead day we superset back in as well; overall we bench/OH twice a week which is an intense schedule, even with one heavy and one light day. But it depends on your goals which are probably not purely strength based.

 

[RandomWords]

If you're going for pure strength, ag/ant is a good way to do it. Our team does it and have noticed good gains but like I said before, it is more to help recovery and prevent injuries. I just hit a 20% increase in pause bench max (vs what I did at a meet in June) coming off an overuse injury and training with ag/ant helped take away benchpress pain that I would get from just doing chest alone. Something even as simple as chins/weighted chins with a vest/rows is all you need to do, and do them immediately after the chest or shoulder movement. Not only does it help with shoulder pain but you may see higher strength gains like our team. Also, for Overhead day we superset back in as well; overall we bench/OH twice a week which is an intense schedule, even with one heavy and one light day. But it depends on your goals which are probably not purely strength based.

Thank you!! Exactly the type of information I was looking for when I wrote this thread. It is greatly appreciated.