It’s hard for me to not notice when people are doing things wrong in the gym. Sometimes what I see is people doing exercises with really bad form; other times it’s just some ridiculous exercise. But there’s a third area of “wrong” that’s equally hard to ignore, and that is the issue of intensity, or effort.

What I see most often is people talking too long between sets. They do one set, and then they talk for five minutes, or longer. Sometimes – as ironic as this is – I see it happening between trainers and their clients. The amount of time spent between sets is of critical importance. It should be as brief as possible. Keeping the rest time brief allows the heart rate to stay elevated, which causes improvements in cardiovascular fitness and helps reduce body fat. Brief rests also cause the working muscles to more dramatically improve their strength, endurance and visible development. It also helps keep the body warm, thereby reducing the risk of injury. All of that is lost, when the rest between sets is too long.

I realize that many people use the gym time to socialize; not everyone is as serious about getting results as I am, and people have different priorities – I understand. But often it’s these same people who complain about not getting the results they expected. There’s a price to pay for everything, and if you want the “prize” of a sculpted body, you have to step up to the plate.

Another kind of “not enough” intensity that I often see, is people not coming to the gym often enough. Frequency is a critical component in making improvements in the body’s fitness level.  For best results, a message needs to be sent to the body (the muscles, the cardiovascular system, and the metabolism) that “exercise is a frequent thing”. This causes the body to adapt by preparing itself for the demands of the soon-to-occur next workout.

These adaptations include changes in the way the body stores excess calories; if the body knows that workouts are infrequent, it will store excess calories as body fat (i.e. long-term storage); but if the body knows that workouts are frequent, the body will store excess calories as glycogen (i.e., short-term storage). This single adaptation, therefore, causes the body to get leaner.

Another adaptation that occurs with frequency is that the body “learns” to use body fat as fuel more easily than it would if exercise were infrequent. Numerous studies have shown that unfit people burn more glucose and less fat, than fit people, when exercising. This situation is remedied by increasing the frequency of exercise. Super-fit people break into fat-burning mode sooner in the workout, than do unfit people, who typically cross that threshold much later, if at all. This is why novices who rarely exercise, and then exercise too hard when they do finally workout, get noxious. Their blood sugar drops too far (they become hypoglycemic) because their bodies’ don’t know how to use fat as a fuel. This process is only “learned” with frequency.

Also, in terms of muscle gains, frequency is vital. When a muscle is exercised, it is stimulated to adapt to that “stress” as a preparation for the next such episode. Typically, this occurs over a period of about two days. In other words, let’s say that you start at point zero. Within two days of your last workout, your conditioning level rises to a level one. If the next workout happens shortly after the previous workout, you will be able to build on your level one, and possibly push it to level two. Later, with frequency, you can push it to level three. However, if you wait too long before your next workout – 5 days or longer, for example – you will have returned to level zero again. Now your second workout will only bring you back to level one. This happens all the time. Stopping and starting, with week-long periods between workouts, has people going from level one, back to zero, back to one, back zero – endlessly.

Another kind of “intensity mistake” I often see (or hear) is the person who has a combination of overzealousness, and inconsistency. He (or she) comes into the gym and just beats themself into the ground. In other words, they workout too hard, considering that they are not yet prepared for that degree of effort. The next day, they’re very sore, complain that they can barely walk, or worse – they may have injured their shoulder or their back. Then they stay away from the gym for a couple of weeks, until the soreness has diminished. But I assert that more damage has been done than is apparent. The psyche has been sent a subconscious message that equates exercise with soreness and pain. This is neither a healthy, nor an accurate representation of exercise. In fact, it’s a misrepresentation of exercise. Unfortunately, this may ultimately cause one to lose enthusiasm for exercise, when the fact is they simply exercised improperly (i.e. too much intensity, too soon).

I’m often skeptical, and perhaps even worried, when I hear someone “bragging” – or least verbally celebrating – the fact that they “had a really intense workout yesterday”. Workouts don’t bestow their benefits on a per workout basis. They bestow their benefits over a period of time. In other words, the pattern of exercise is what causes the body to make changes. The frequent and consistent pattern of regular, sensible, proper exercise, over a period of time, is how the magic of fitness happens. Frequency and consistency are FAR more important than intensity. In fact, the intensity should be no greater than the frequency and consistency will allow. If you can’t maintain that level of intensity every day, week after week, then it’s too much intensity for you – at this point in time.

Celebrating a single workout suggests that it was “an event” for you. A single workout should not be a big deal, but a matter of course – like showering and brushing your teeth. You wouldn’t rejoice a single shower, right? It’s part of the big picture, which – again, over time – produces results. Placing too much emphasis on a single workout is not the right mind-set for someone who’s in it for the long haul – and the long haul is the only way to do fitness right. It’s a lifestyle – not a once in a while thing.

The “right” intensity of workout should be – first and foremost – regular, frequent and consistent. The more frequent, the better – even if it means a shorter workout each time. The body responds best to frequency.

Second – the workout effort should be such that it’s comfortable, both physically and mentally. It should be only slightly more challenging that what one is otherwise accustomed to. More effort than that is unproductive, and potentially injurious.  It should be of moderate intensity, but non-stop.  Don’t use weights that are too heavy for good form, and – ideally – alternate exercises in circuit fashion, to maximize the cardiovascular benefit.  This is also very time-efficient.

As the body adapts and becomes stronger, you can slightly increase the amount of weight used, or add a set here and there, or add some reps. But keep it reasonable. No need to set a record at each workout. Remember – you’re going for a cumulative result.

Eventually, if you’ve been consistent – if exercise and good nutrition have been a daily part of your life for a period of time, and you’ve been gradually increasing your efforts along the way – you will likely find yourself having a decent physique.  Using a stop-and-start method, or talking too much during your workouts, will fail to produce any significant results.  You might as well skip it all together.

It’s no mystery – there’s lots of evidence of this in the gym. Look around, and you’ll see that the best physiques belong to those who rarely miss a workout; they workout 5 or 6 days per week; their intensity is always moderated (not too much, and not too little); and they don’t waste much time between sets. It’s just a part of their lives.

The Surreal Journey of Getting Ripped for a Bodybuilding Contest

Please excuse me for departing from my usual theme of biomechanics, but I thought it would be interesting to discuss this phase of my diet, as I am currently in the count-down for two bodybuilding competitions.  For those who are unaware, this will be my final year of competing.  It will be the culmination of a competitive career that began 35 years ago, when I was just 16 years old (…I began training at the age of 14).  At the time of this writing, the first of these final two contests is less than two weeks away; the second contest is about five and a half weeks away.

The Dietary Phases of Bodybuilding Preparation

Preparation for bodybuilding competition typically goes through two phases – a “bulking” phase and a “cutting up” (or getting lean) phase.  The difference is primarily in the diet.

During the bulking phase, we eat as many calories as we can – with an emphasis on both protein and “high-glycemic” carbs.  The objective here is to use the insulin produced by the high-glycemic carbs to force the dietary protein into the muscle.  Although high-glycemic carbs (starches and sugars) tend to make us increase our body fat storage, they also help considerably in making a muscle bigger (…assuming it has been stimulated by heavy weight training).  If you try to stay lean all year, by avoiding starches and sugars, you’ll seriously compromise your ability to gain muscle.

Genetics plays a bit of role here: some of us stay relatively lean during the bulking phase, despite eating a high-carb diet.  Others, however, tend to gain quite a bit of body fat during this phase.  On the flip side – those of us who gain very little body fat during this phase, also tend to gain less muscle, than do our more body-fat-prone counterparts – who tend to gain considerably more muscle during this phase.

During the diet phase, the objective is to lose as much body fat as possible, so that the clarity of the muscle will be maximized.  We call this “definition”, or – in the extreme sense – getting “ripped”.  During this phase, it’s unlikely we’ll gain much – if any – additional muscle.  As mentioned above, without having as much insulin being produced, it’s more difficult to force as much protein into the muscle, and this results in less new muscle being developed.  However, it often appears that we’re gaining muscle during this phase, simply because the muscles we have at that point start to become more pronounced.  This is because the layer of fat that has been covering the muscle is being reduced, which allows better visibility of the muscle.

This is what’s going on with me right now.  My weight is dropping at the rate of about 2-3 pounds per week, but it appears that I’m larger.  In fact, I am now about 12 pounds lighter than before I started the diet phase.

How Body Fat Gets Reduced

Body fat is stored fuel.  Let’s call it “money in a savings account” – for the time being.  During a fuel demand – when you exercise or otherwise increase your level of physical activity – your body goes through a bit of a sequential search for fuel.  The first place it searches is the blood stream, where – typically – glucose is swimming around.  Let’s call this “money in your pocket”.  If there is plenty of money in your pocket, there’s no need to go to the savings account – right ?  If you’ve eaten plenty of food, it’s likely there’s plenty of money in your pocket (fuel in the bloodstream).  That’s why you won’t lose any body fat until you reduce your intake of calories.  The only way to force your body to resort to its stored fuel, is by creating a shortage of fuel (calories) obtained from recently eaten food.

Calories are found in protein, carbs and fats – however, the two primary “fuel” calories are carbs and fats.  Protein is not typically used as a fuel in the body.  Theoretically, it could be used as a fuel, but it requires much more processing (in the body) in order to become useable as a fuel.  Protein is, instead, used mostly for tissue maintenance.  As “fuel” – that can be burned to produce energy and movement – the body prefers the calories that come from carbs and fats.  But these two aren’t equal players.

At first, it might seem that fat is “worse” than carbs, because fats have 9 calories per gram, and carbs only have 4 calories per gram.  However, some (not all) carbs have one problem that over-rides the fact that they have fewer calories per gram – they make the body produce insulin.  Calories can easily be spent, whether they come from fats or carbs, but insulin cannot be peddled away on a Lifecycle.  Insulin is not a “spendable” calorie.

Insulin tends to block fat loss (i.e., protects body fat), and also helps facilitate additional fat storage – even when there’s a calorie shortage.  As an example, a person could eat 1,000 calories per day, and lose very little body fat – if those thousand calories are comprised partly (or mostly) of foods like rice and pasta.  On the other hand, a person could lose MORE body fat, while eating 1,500 calories per day – if those calories are void of starches and sugars.

Foods that contain starches and sugars are considered “high-glycemic” carbs; they include potatoes, rice, bread, sugar, many (but not all) fruits, most cereals, etc.  ”High-glycemic” refers to a scale called “The Glycemic Index”, which rates foods between 1 and 100, and whose rating is above 70.  The higher the rating, the more likely it is that food will produce an insulin rise in your body.  ”Low-glycemic” carbs are the ones that typically rate below 30 or so (these include most vegetables, high-fiber legumes, berries, etc.).

So the trick is to first reduce or eliminate the high-glycemic carbs, and eat primarily the low-glycemic carbs (from veggies), plus protein and a little bit of fat.  Then, little by little, you reduce the calories from those sources too.

Body Fat and Glycogen

Assuming you have now eliminated all the starches and sugars from your diet, and are eating only protein foods, a little bit of dietary fat (from nuts, olive oil, meat, dairy), and vegetables – your body will find itself in need of using its stored fuel, to make up the difference between what you’re burning (to fuel your workout, as well as your other daily activities) – and what you’re eating.

Your body has two “savings accounts” of fuel – body fat and “glycogen“.  Glycogen is carbohydrate that we have stored in our muscles (and, to a lesser degree, in our liver).  Unfortunately, we cannot direct our bodies to burn ONLY body fat.  When a body senses a shortage of fuel, it will pull from both of these sources.  Naturally, we’re happy about the fact that our body fat reserves are being “spent”; but we’re not so happy about the fact that our glycogen reserves are also being spent.  Why?  Because glycogen contributes quite a bit of size to our muscles.

The average muscle is said to be about “70% water” (by weight).  This is a reference to the fact that a normally hydrated muscle….one that is holding a normal amount of glycogen….is holding “X” amount of water, with that glycogen.  Therefore, when we lose muscle glycogen – by having spent it as part of the fat loss process – we lose a percentage of our muscle size.  Or so it seems.  Naturally, this is very disconcerting to a bodybuilder – especially when he (or she) is preparing for competition.  We don’t want to lose ANY muscle size; in fact – we want more muscle, not less.

Sorry to be the bearer of bad news.  You cannot lose body fat without losing some glycogen, and therefore some muscle size.  Further, the lower your body fat gets, the more glycogen you lose.  Actually, to be more precise, the more glycogen-depleted you become, the more you will burn body fat…which is good.  But, as you lose more glycogen, your muscles become more dehydrated and smaller.  The apparent muscle-size loss is temporary, but this is where it becomes a mind game for a bodybuilder.

Getting Lean vs. Getting Ripped

I learned a long time ago that getting ripped requires “under-cutting”, and then coming UP to your contest weight.  Most people diet down to their contest weight – and they never really get ripped.  Getting ripped requires digging deep.  It requires putting your body into a temporary state of crisis, and then bringing it back.

In 1982, when I was preparing for the Mr. California contest, I was determined to be “shredded” (another descriptive for being super lean).  I dieted very strictly, and ignored the fact that I was getting smaller and smaller.  This – it turns out – was remarkably wise.  I don’t know how, at such a young age (22), I was able to stick so steadfastly to the plan, without fearing that I was “over-doing it”, and losing too much muscle.  But somehow, I was unflinching.  Yes – I most certainly entered that deep, dark place.  At times, it seemed like I was a walking zombie.  But I did what I had planned to do – to force every ounce of fat from my body, by undercutting my weight, and then carb-loading up to a healthier and fuller weight by contest time.

The same thing happened in 1986, when I was preparing for the Mr. America competition.  I dieted so hard, that my cheeks hollowed out, and I got that drawn “concentration camp” look to my face.  Before each of these two contests, I was approached by friends who were seriously concerned, and asked if I was “okay”.  One person actually said I looked “terrible”, and then I won first place in my division of Mr. America a week later (after carb-loading, of course).  Looking “drawn” and depleted a week or two before a bodybuilding contest, is a normal part of getting ultra lean.

The Abyss

That Deep, Dark Place – is a combination of extreme physical fatigue, hunger, concern that you’re losing “too much” muscle, and a change of brain function.  It’s a self-imposed period of calorie deprivation and intense physical demand, intended to maximally reduce one’s level of body fat, but which – unfortunately – also produces both physical and psychological challenges.

During this period, there is a shift in the way life is perceived.  I’m sure some who are reading this article know exactly what I’m talking about.  Frankly, I find it interesting – both, the fact that our brains think differently when they’re hungry, as well as the fact that millions of people probably experience that type of brain hunger on a daily basis – due to economic conditions or other circumstances unrelated to bodybuilding. In any case, if there is a way to get super ripped without going through that Deep, Dark Place – I don’t know about it.  It is a right of passage.

I don’t necessarily dread going through this pre-contest suffering.  It’s definitely not easy, but – ironically – there are aspects about it that I like.  For one thing, it makes me feel more deserving of a prize.  For another, I feel that it is a sort of threshold that few people have the courage to cross.  So those of us who do, are members of a unique – and somewhat elite – community.  I also like analyzing the shift in perspective.  Suddenly, it seems that things become more black and white. Pretense becomes more obvious.  It’s almost as if Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs kicks in, and things separate into the “important” and the “unimportant”… the things of consequence, and the things that are not of consequence.  That’s the good part.

The bad part is that it plays havoc with one’s mood.  It tends to cause a loss of confidence, at a time when we need the most confidence.  It also causes a drastic reduction of one’s energy level, precisely when we need the most amount of energy – so that we can train super hard.  At a time when we need to be the most motivated, we feel the least motivated and the most tired.

I’m in that place right now.  Some days I feel good – physically and mentally – and other days not so much.  Some days I feel that I’m right on track; other days I’m not so sure.  Fortunately for me, I have a historical reference.  I can look back and recall what I’ve done in the past, and reflect on how it worked back then.  But even still, this phase of the diet messes with one’s mind, in addition to being physically difficult.  The trick is to rely on your plan, and not re-evaluate it every day.

The Facts

Those who know me, know that I cling to factual information and logic, when the tendency might be to make emotional decisions.  Here are some basic bits of information that help me survive this phase.  I think they will help others as well.

1. Holding back on one’s diet, because one is afraid to diet “too much” (i.e., lose too much weight), is a bad strategy.  When one is leaner, they look bigger on stage – ironically.  A person who weighs 185 lbs., and is ripped, will appear bigger (in addition to being better overall), than he would at 195 lbs., not ripped.

2. Too many people wrongly believe they’re “holding water”, when – in fact – they’re still too fat.  Often, we hear bodybuilders talking about “getting dry” – a reference to the somewhat foolish notion that losing one’s water is the key to getting “razor sharp”.  So, they take a diuretic or stop drinking water – or both.  This is a big mistake.  The end result is that they are still “too fat”, but then also dehydrated – which causes dizziness, cramping and a further loss of muscle size.  Stop blaming water, and diet harder.

3. Most people look better 2 or 3 days after a bodybuilding contest.  This demonstrates that they didn’t carb-load enough before the contest.  Make this part of the plan.  Diet hard; ensure that you have reduced your body fat as much as possible; ensure that you are carb-depleted; and then carb-load for 2, 3 or even 4 days before your contest (depending on how depleted you are).

4. There are two things, primarily, that contribute to muscle size: fiber thickness (i.e. protein) and glycogen (and the water that it holds).  When it seems that you’re losing too much muscle, remind yourself that you’re not losing fiber thickness; you’re only losing water (from the muscle), which can easily be brought back with sufficient carb-loading.

5. As long as your protein intake is high, and you continue lifting heavy, you are ensuring that your muscle fibers have what they need to maintain their thickness.

6. You cannot get ripped without experiencing a temporary muscle shrinkage.  Don’t be afraid of it.  Go with it.  Allow it to happen.  Stick with your plan.  What matters is that you look your best on the day of the contest; how you look in the weeks that come before the contest, matters very little (…for someone whose goal is to compete successfully in a bodybuilding contest).

Don’t allow yourself to make an emotional – or an irrational – decision, while dieting for a contest.  Cling to the facts above, and you’ll maximize the odds of doing well in your show.  Avoiding that Deep, Dark Place – when the diet gets really rough, the workouts get super tough, and the mind starts to plays tricks on you – will only result in you looking less good on the day of your competition.  By the time your diet phase starts (usually 12 weeks out, or so), forget about gaining new muscle.  Think ripped.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Note: I am not advocating that everyone pursue this path.  There are certainly more reasonable dietary plans, for those interested in “everyday fitness”.  This strategy is intended exclusively for those who are trying to prepare optimally for bodybuilding competition.  However, a less drastic version of this method could be effectively employed by those with more moderate weight loss goals.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Doug Brignole, at age 22

The two primary ingredients of any productive fitness program are knowledge and motivation.  Other ingredients – like having access to the right equipment, one’s ability to afford a good diet, and one’s genetics – play smaller roles.  Finding the right equipment and having access to proper nutrition are actually sub-categories of “knowledge and motivation”.  Genetics, on the other hand, is a lottery.

For the moment, let’s assume that most of us can afford to buy the food we need, we can access the necessary equipment, and we have relatively good genetics.  When we don’t blame those other factors, we can clearly see that the make-or-break factors are KNOWING what to do, and having the MOTIVATION to do it.

Most fitness programs fall apart in one or both of these categories.  I have seen many people who could easily afford to buy the proper food, have access to excellent exercise facilities, and often have enviable genetics, yet they FAIL to significantly improve their level of fitness, because they did not:

1.  Use Proper Training Methods, for their given goal (as outlined in my previous article)…and/or they did not…

2.  Exercise Frequently enough, Consistently enough, or Intensely enough – due to a lack of motivation.

Motivation is Misunderstood

Motivation is technically NOT the same thing as discipline.  In the simplest of terms, motivation is the incentive to do something.  It’s a driving force.  It compels us to act.  Conversely, discipline is the idea of doing the “right thing” despite not wanting to do it.  Certainly, there are times when motivation and discipline overlap.  But people who reach high levels of success at something – whether in fitness, sports, business, education, etc. – are driven.  They WANT to do it.  They may even be obsessed with it.  This is very different than having someone fighting everyday with a nagging little voice that says, “don’t do the right thing…do the wrong thing instead”.  Motivated people are on fire.  Discipline – at best – minimizes consequences.  Motivation propels people to greatness; discipline breaks bad habits.  Discipline is good, but motivation is golden.

How Does Motivation Happen ?

Some people just seem to have it – don’t they?  It might make you wonder whether they were born with it, or if they developed it.

Motivation is – at its root – an emotion.  However, it’s an emotion that is influenced by logic.  It’s a zeal that overcomes us, when we find a situation where the cost – as we view it – is greatly outweighed by the reward.  It’s like being offered a Mercedes Benz for the cost of Toyota.

It’s a bit of an over-simplification to say that we tend to gravitate toward the things that we love, or away from things we hate.  For example, a person may be compelled to participate in a fitness program because he (or she) HATES being fat.  They may be compelled to participate in a fitness program because they LOVE to be fit.  Or both, simultaneously.  However, most people who fail in their fitness pursuits would say – wholeheartedly – that they “love to be fit” and “hate being fat”.  So clearly that’s not the whole story.

The fact is that there’s a cost to everything, and that factors into the equation.  So, while someone might hate being fat and love being fit, the cost – in terms of effort and sacrifice – may seem much greater than the reward, to that particular person.

Ultimately, the cost vs. reward system – the way we view it, and how it affects us psychologically – is what compels us to either be motivated, or not.

Magnifying the Value & Decreasing the Cost

In my previous article, I spoke about three physical categories that are influenced by exercise: health, appearance and function.  The degree to which we value each of these attributes, plays a role in our level of motivation.

There is also a fourth category which compels us to exercise – fun.  I did not mention it in my previous article because it (“Exercise in Futility”) was about selecting the right tool for the job – i.e., using the proper method of exercise for your desired outcome.

“Fun” (enjoyment of movement, exercise, sport, etc.) can certainly influence a person’s health, appearance and function, depending on the kind of activity a person considers enjoyable, but it’s not quite the strategic sculpting tool that other forms of exercise are.  Of course, there are those who could never fathom of exercise – of any kind – as ever being fun, and their point of view – as unfortunate as it may be – still deserves consideration.  They wrestle with the concept of motivation as much, or more, than anyone else.  Nevertheless, “fun” is one of the four ways people find the motivation to exercise, and so it bears mentioning here.

Genetics

There is no denying that we all respond differently to exercise, as well as to diet.  Unfortunately, some people get a lesser response than others, given the exact same amount of effort – based on differences in our individual bio-chemistry.  This “difference in required effort” factors into the equation, which registers in our brains as “X cost in exchange for Y reward” – on which we then decide, or are compelled, to act.  The better we respond to exercise, the more motivated we become.

However, regardless of this difference, we ALL get some response from exercise and diet, and we must value that.  Instead of comparing how much of a result you get, as compared to how much of a result “Charlie” or “Sally” get for their effort, we need to focus on how much better off we are, than we would be, if we were not putting in any effort at all, or as much effort.

Of course, it’s important to ensure that your body is working normally – before embarking on your fitness goal.  So, if you suspect that you might be under-producing thyroid (for example), or that you might be “insulin-resistant” (i.e., pre-diabetic), or that your hormones are being produced in insufficient amounts, you should have a physician check your levels.  If your body is not working optimally, and you toil away at the gym with little progress, it will feel like you’re spinning your wheels in mud, as you push on the accelerator.

Ultimately, don’t be unrealistic about what kind of results you should be getting.  We tend to use the genetic elite as our role models, and we expect – and believe we deserve – the same kind of results “they” get from X amount of exercise.  Be sensible in your expectations, and you’ll be pleased with the results.

Recommendations

Here are some of the things I’ve learned over the years, in terms of how best to maximize the odds of staying consistent, and advancing toward one’s goal:

1.  Consistency and frequency are more important than intensity. You can only make so much progress per workout.  So killing it in the gym, is like trying to get a sun tan all in a day – you’ll only burn (or get injured).  But more importantly, the body always responds much more favorably to consistent efforts, even if the intensity is moderate.

2.  Keep the workout intensity within your emotional tolerance. You don’t want to create a negative association with the concept of exercise.  Exercise should always be comfortable – if not enjoyable.  That way, you won’t burn out, and you won’t hate exercise.  Unfortunately, too often people think that exercise MUST be intense, or there will be no benefit.  That simply isn’t true.  So why push it, when you don’t have to?

3.  When people say they “hate exercise”, it’s only the intensity they hate. There is an intensity level is that comfortable for every person.  If you hate the treadmill, for example, ask yourself how you would feel about it if you did it half as long as normal, and at half the speed.  You’ll quickly realize that you can easily find a speed and duration that is not worthy of your hate.  Don’t do too much, too soon.  Let your body get accustomed to low intensity, and then gradually increase it a tiny bit each month.

4.  It’s okay to not FEEL like exercising. Do your workout anyway, but just go easy.  People often think that there is something wrong with them, if they never feel like exercising.  But, just like Pavlov’s dogs, once the body is taught to expect exercise at a certain time of day, you will begin feeling “in the mood” to exercise at that time.  Always start your workouts gently – and if you begin to feel like that you want to increase the intensity a little later, than do so.  But if you don’t, just stay with the gentle intensity.  Eventually, the process will become less and less onerous.

5.  Keep your workouts short. How short?  As short as you want – but don’t skip it.  Ten minutes a day is a good place to start.  Later, you can go to 15 or 20 minutes.  Eventually, you MAY want to extend it to 30, or 40 – or even 60.  But don’t do that just because you feel you should.  Do it only if you truly feel that it’s within your physical and emotional comfort zone.

6.  Try to designate a particular time of day as your official workout time.  Again, just like Pavlov’s dogs, our bodies adapt to habits.  If you workout at the same time of day each time, you’re more likely to feel “in the mood”, than if you workout at a different time each day.

7.  Don’t compare yourself to others. This is a common mistake.  It does not matter what someone else does for their workout.  We all have different abilities and tolerances.  Stay within your comfort zone.  Give yourself credit that you’re doing the workout at all, instead of trying to meet some arbitrary standard.  If you push yourself harder, just because you think others are setting the standard that you should meet (or because you’re so competitive that you have to beat the standard), you’ll hate the workout, and/or you’ll get injured.

8.  Most “bodyweight” exercise are simply too hard. I’m referring to exercises like pull-ups, push-ups, parallel bar dips…and even abdominal crunches done on the floor (squats are okay).  These exercises require that you move much more weight than you would select, if you were doing a similar exercise on a machine.  If you can’t do 10 to 20 repetitions comfortably on any exercise, you either shouldn’t be doing it, or you should do a version of that which allows you to use a lesser resistance.  Again, don’t think of yourself as a wimp.  Do what you can do comfortably, and give yourself praise that you’re exercising (moving your body, within your limits) regularly.  That’s what matters.

9.  Visualize the improvement. Keep your goal in mind, and imagine yourself getting closer and closer to it.  The more clearly you can visualize it, the more excited you’ll feel knowing that you’re moving towards it, and the more consistent you’ll be.  When I was 18 years old, I traced over a photograph of myself taken a year earlier, and then I enhanced it – the way I wanted to look.  I left certain features alone – like the wrists, the knees, the ankles, the hip bones, the head, etc., because they typically don’t change (they’re part of one’s bone structure).  That allowed me to still recognize it was me, but a bigger and better version of me.  I then framed it and put in the table where I ate every day, and imagined myself getting closer to that every day.

10.  Always start at the beginning, when starting back up.  People have a tendency to want to immediately return to the level at which they were when they fell off the wagon.  Don’t do it.  If you haven’t been exercising for a few weeks – or longer – you’ve lost conditioning (which is probably obvious).  Trying to resume where you left off will not only make you feel weak, but you may actually get hurt.  It’s vitally important that exercise always be comfortable; use lighter weights and fewer sets.  Too much fatigue and too much next-day-soreness will only discourage you from finding that elusive motivation.  Start gently, and progress gradually.

11.  Find an enjoyable form of exercise.  This is a bit tricky, simply because what you might consider fun, might not produce the visible result you want.  Games like tennis, basketball, surfing, biking, hiking, etc., certainly work one’s cardiovascular system, and improve one’s health.  However, they may not produce the visible results you seek.  Nevertheless, if this is the ONLY way you’ll get off the couch, than it’s the way to go.

12.  Be patient.  “All good things come to those who wait”…“Rome was not built in a day”, etc.  Fitness is one of the those delayed gratification things.  Progress is gradual, by nature.  If you become impatient, you’ll reap very little reward, if any at all.  On the other hand, if you’re patient, and you’re consistent, and the frequency with which you exercise is (on average) 3 times per week – you will make progress.

Summary

There is no doubt that – to a degree – more is better (i.e., more intensity, longer duration, etc.) – in terms of results.  I workout an average of 8 – 9 hours per week, with – sometimes – insane intensity.  But I’ve learned to enjoy it – and you can too.  Of course, there are times when I dread exercising (like when I’m in the most strenuous final days of a diet, right before competition) – and this is where discipline is the more apt word.

But in general, I think the key is to strive for motivation, rather than discipline.  Strive to enjoy the process, because you allow yourself to do it at an effort level that is comfortable for you.  If you can do more next month, that’s great.  Progressive efforts are good, when you feel that you can do it comfortably.  But we all have good days and bad days, and there is nothing wrong with taking a few steps back (lessening the intensity) on those bad days.

Goals are also helpful.  Direction is essential.  Knowing what kind of result you want is critical, because it determines your exercise methods.  You might have a high school reunion coming up, or maybe a wedding, or a challenge amongst your friends, or a bodybuilding contest – and you want to be your best.  But those things will eventually pass, and you’ll have to learn how to find a level of effort that allows you stay consistent on an on-going basis.

Ideally, best results are achieved with more frequency – daily, or almost daily exercise sessions – but keep them short and sweet.  You’ll make more progress with a daily 20 minute workout, than you will with a two-hour workout once or twice per week.  It’s also easier, physically and psychologically.

The trick is to manage the intensity so that it’s comfortable, and to always be consistent – try to never skip a workout.  Also, try to ensure that you’re using the wisest method of exercise for your particular goal, so that you’re optimizing your progress with the least amount of effort.  Soon enough, working out will become a habit, and it will feel much easier as your body adapts to it.  Before long, you’ll be increasing the intensity without even realizing it, and you’ll actually miss the workout, if something prevents you from doing it.

In the end, you’ll reap all the benefits that are so valuable – improved health and confidence, better and longer quality of life, reduced body fat, stronger muscles and a better physique.  And those are certainly wonderful rewards.

The Consequence of Doing the Wrong Exercise to Reach Your Goal

Imagine that you want to arrive at a certain geographic destination, but you’re not certain of the route to take.  Although you know the general direction, you have no clue as to which roads would get you there.  So you buy a GPS, but you need to program it, before it can lead you to your destination.  You need to establish – specifically – your goal (the exact address) before that GPS can help you.  If you don’t know your destination, or you enter the wrong address, that GPS – no matter how good it is – will lead you astray.  That’s true about exercise as well.  Each exercise you do leads your body in a particular direction.  Do the right exercise, and it leads you in the direction of your goal.  But – do the wrong exercise, and you end up… somewhere… but no where near your intended goal.

For example, the other day I was in the gym, and I saw a person standing on a ball with one leg, while pressing a single dumbbell over her head.  Another observer came up to her and asked her, “…is that a core exercise?” – to which the woman responded, “yes”.  The observer then asked, “…is that a good one?” – to which the woman responded, “oh, yes!”.  And the observer seemed impressed.

This caused me to ask myself several questions.  First, how did the woman standing on the ball KNOW that this was “a good one”?  She said it with such conviction, yet she clearly did not have the appearance of someone who had spent much time in a gym, doing any kind of exercise at all.  And why did the observer ask that particular question?

Did the woman standing on the ball have any sort of reference or comparison between the result of this exercise, and the result of another exercise she had done before?  It’s doubtful.  Yet here she was “recommending” this exercise to someone, without even knowing if it produced any result at all, let alone her particular desired result.

Which brought me to my next question: what was her desired result (i.e., her goal)?  Although I didn’t ask her, I’ve been in the business long enough to know (35 years) that people generally do not clearly know what they want.  They think they know, but their goals are generally very broad, ambiguous, and often unrealistic.

When asked what their goal is, people (in the fitness arena) will often say things like, “to be more fit”…“to get rid of my flab”… “to feel better”… “to lose weight”… “to tone the back of my arms” or…“to look like you”.  So it’s relatively safe to assume that this woman, who – as I said before – was clearly not very fit, probably had one of these goals in mind.  Yet, this particular exercise that she was doing – i.e., standing on a BOSU Ball (1/2 ball) with one foot, while pressing a single dumbbell over her head – was probably one of the least likely to produce any of those results.  Nevertheless, she was spending time and energy doing it, and she was recommending it – enthusiastically.

The observer – in the meantime – asked about “core” because she’s been sold that idea by marketers.  What she needed – based on her appearance – was basic exercise: brisk walking (on a slightly inclined treadmill or outdoors), plus basic resistance movements like squats and rowing for the large (metabolically active) muscle groups; yet here she was asking the kind of question one might ask if they were preparing for particular sport.

How does this happen?

That’s the million dollar question.  How – or maybe WHY – are so many people doing exercises that will not help them achieve their goals?  There are three reasons.

1. People do not know have a SPECIFIC goal, or they have an UN-REALISTIC goal

2. People do not know WHICH exercises produce which results

3. Marketers’ want to constantly sell consumers “NEW” methods and new equipment – and this leads people astray

The average person does not understand how the body works, in terms of what produces fat loss, how fat comes off the body, how muscle is developed, and the various kinds of physical adaptations that result from different exercises and activities.  Obviously, this stuff is fairly complicated.

Consumers are thus easily mislead.  Marketers tell them (by way of advertisements, commercials, magazine articles, infomercials, etc.) that they can “have it all” – leanness, muscular development, agility, speed, balance, optimum health, power and endurance, sexual prowess and inner peace, if they just do “these simple exercises”.

Think I’m kidding?  Here are the headlines on one cover, of just ONE recent magazine (verbatim, including punctuation):

Amazing New Plan – Lose Your Gut !

Sculpt Your Whole Body in 10 Minutes a Day !

Look Better – Instantly !  (Leaner, Taller, Fitter)

The Easy Way to Hard Abs !

The Sex of Your Dreams (& Hers) !

125 Perfect Muscle Foods

Read This, Be Happy !

Honestly – do we really think it’s that easy?  Do we really believe we’ll reap all those benefits, that quickly, by following the advice of one single issue, of one single magazine?  And if this advice is so miraculous, how has it been kept secret for so long?

We’ve all seen headlines like that.  Many people SAY they don’t really believe them, but there they are, in the gym, doing the often-bizarre exercises recommended in those articles (…like standing on a ball, with one leg, while pressing a single dumbbell over their head).  They’re doing exercises that might make sense for the improvement of specific sports-related goals, but they are not getting any closer to their own, personal goal, as vaguely defined as it may be.  We need to be more skeptical about what we read and what we’re “sold” – and we need to be more well informed.  But more importantly, we need to be clear about our goal.

Identify your goal clearly and realistically.

It’s not as easy as it sounds.  We need to consider the following criteria:

1. Feasibility

2. Usefulness / Practicality

3. Proof / Efficacy

Your goal should be feasible.

Whether your fitness goal is to change your appearance in a particular way, or to improve your function, it should be something that is “do-able”.

When is a goal NOT realistic?  If you don’t have the right knowledge (or guidance) of how to train, or you don’t have the right equipment, or you don’t have the required discipline, or you simply don’t have sufficient time to devote to it (due to other obligations), then it’s likely that your goal is unrealistic.  These are the “tools” required for reaching your goal; you’re doomed to failure without them.

Also, if your goal is to reach a high level of physical development or extreme athletic performance, genetics will play a major role.  It’s unrealistic to expect to a very high level of physical excellence without having the benefit of good genetics – no matter hard you work.  Some “bad” genetics can be addressed with the help of a qualified endocrinologist (or other health care professional knowledgeable in matters of metabolism) – assuming it’s biochemical.  But issues related to muscle fiber type, bone structure, muscle shape and insertions, etc., cannot be altered.

And lastly, when you are pursuing more than one goal, and those goals conflict with each other – like trying to achieve maximum endurance AND maximum power AND maximum muscular development AND maximum leanness, simultaneously -  it’s unrealistic to expect optimum success in each category.

Case in point: Paddy Doyle (see photo below).  For those who don’t know this amazing Irishman, he holds 200 European and World Records in a variety of athletic events (including having done 2,521 one-armed push-ups in one hour).  Some consider him “The Fittest Man in the World”, but that depends – of course – on one’s definition of “FIT”.  No doubt he’s very strong and very enduring, and he’s obviously very “tough”, mentally speaking.  But if you didn’t recognize him, and you saw him walking down the street, you would likely be unimpressed.  He doesn’t look like someone who is remarkably strong, and he’s not super lean.  He is also – possibly – no more “healthy” (maybe not even “as healthy”) as someone who exercises regularly, but doesn’t hold any world records.  (For a complete list of Paddy Doyle’s incredible records, go here: http://www.recordholders.org/en/records/doyle.html )

The moral of this story is that being super healthy, very muscular, and extremely strong – each requires a different type of training.  It’s unrealistic to think that one type of training will achieve all three of those goals, maximally.  This leads us to the next criteria:

Your goal should be useful or practical.

This may be getting a little philosophical, but – theoretically – you should want to achieve something that has value to you, and that “value” is usually linked to something practical.  The three areas that are most influenced by “exercise” are health, appearance and function.  How much value a person places on each of these is an individual matter, but the amount of “value” one has for a goal, leads to motivation, and motivation is key to achievement.

Certainly, it’s practical to improve one’s health.  Few people would argue with being maximally healthy.  Appearance goals, however, start to get a little more ambiguous (hard to define).  There are many different interpretations of what constitutes “a good look”, but – clearly – many people place a high value on their appearance.  Of course, there are those who would argue that it doesn’t matter how one looks; it only matters what one can do.  But, no matter how you regard it, the way you look DOES affect many aspects of your life – whether you like it or not.

The final category is “function”, and here we have perhaps the most ambiguity, in terms of what constitutes “good function”.  To some, it means playing their sport better.  To others, it means rehabilitating an injury.  Still others are compelled to pursue what I call “strong man tricks” – i.e., to demonstrate unusual physical prowess, like doing handstand pushups, one-arm pushups, a certain number of pull-ups, perhaps even one-arm pull-ups, rope climb without the use of legs, etc.  Others like the idea of being “fit for whatever they might suddenly want to do”, be it surfing, boxing, mixed martial arts, etc.  And finally, there are those who pursue theoretical ideas about function – obsessively; they spend hours working on “balance” and “core”, with no real application in mind.  They just think it’s “essential”.  They never seem to need any proof that it’s really working (and therefore, worth doing), and they are apparently willing to trade away noticeable improvements in terms of their appearance.

No one can can judge the values of another.  “One man’s meat is another man’s poison”…”to each, his own”.  However, the thing to note here is this: each of the above three categories requires different kinds of exercise.  One cannot achieve optimum health, optimum muscularity and optimum athletic ability, with the same exercise program.  Certainly, one could do all three kinds of exercise.  However, that would not only require much more time, but many of those training methods conflict with each other, and would cancel each other out.  You would end up with a compromised benefit, somewhere in the middle (or worse) – despite all the effort.

My advice for most people (non-bodybuilders) would be to pick your goal on the basis of what is MOST practical to you.  As just one example, you could choose to achieve a reasonable level of each – i.e., relatively good health, a fairly lean and muscular look, and adequate strength / endurance to handle the activities you ACTUALLY do – while avoiding the risk of injury.  As another example, you could devote your training effort toward maximally improving your sports performance – never mind how you look.

Personally, what I find foolish is when people prioritize the kind of exercise that is most conducive to “strong man tricks”, and are then frustrated because they have not developed the kind of physique they had hoped for.  This is especially ironic when the benefit of this heightened physical prowess is rarely required in their day-to-day activities.  In other words, although a person likes the idea of being able to do 30 single-arm, pull-ups, the only time they can enjoy that benefit is when they’re actually doing 30 single-arm, chin-ups, in front of an audience (hopefully) at the gym.  That isn’t very practical, in my opinion.

The outcome of your goal should be measurable.

Whatever your goal, you should be able to KNOW whether or not your efforts are productive.  It’s not good enough to say that your exercises are THEORETICALLY improving something.  You should have the attitude that says, “I need to see or demonstrate a noticeable difference”.  If a trainer says “…this exercise is good for such-and-such”, you should be skeptical.  You should ask, “…where’s the proof that those who do this exercise, have that particular improvement?”  For example, if someone says, “…this exercise is good for the core”, you should ask, “…how do we know?”.  How is that demonstrated?  What is the distinct advantage of that, in absolute terms?

If an exercise is believed to be good for a particular body part (or a particular function), we should be able to see clear examples of people WITH that benefit, who do that particular exercise.  We should also see clear examples of people WITHOUT that benefit, who fail to do that particular exercise.  This is a fact.  It’s reasonable for you to want this kind of proof that an exercise bestows a particular benefit, before you invest your time and effort doing that exercise.

The Wrap Up

Too many people are doing exercises that DO NOTHING noticeable, either to their appearance or to their function – because they are not matching their goal with the right exercises.  Of course, most exercises are better than just sitting on the couch, because they burn calories (although some not as much as others), but isn’t it better to do the exercises that produce the most amount of noticeable benefit, and that it’s in sync with your goal?  Why bother with exercises that produce a tiny little benefit, that you’ll hardly even notice, or will produce a benefit that you don’t need, or will work in opposition to your goal?

Whenever someone says, “…this is a good exercise”, you should always ask two questions: “for what goal?” and “where’s the proof?”.  All exercises are goal specific; they work for some goals, and not for others.  Any exercise worth your time and effort SHOULD produce a noticeable benefit.  If you’ve been doing an exercise that does not produce a noticeable improvement, it’s reasonable to assume that it’s either not a good exercise, or at least not a good one for your particular goal.

Be clear about what your goal is, and what it’s NOT.  You can’t have it all, so choose wisely.  Consider your available time, your ability to be consistent, the usefulness (i.e. value) of your goal, and the evidence of what works and what doesn’t – for your particular goal.

If your goal is to gain muscle and lose fat  - as is the case with most bodybuilders and the majority of Iron Man Magazine readers – don’t get sidetracked doing balance exercises (for example).  Unless you fall down often, or otherwise require exceptional balance for a specific sport, you don’t need dedicated “balance” exercise, and it will compromise your progress toward your primary goal of gaining muscle and losing fat (note: people’s balance still improves significantly with regular exercise).  Kettle Bell training is also not the best type of exercise for bodybuilding results (note: an article on Kettle Bell training is forthcoming).  Stay focused on your goal, stay on course with the proper exercises for your goal, and you will maximize the odds of reaching your mark.

There is a segment of the fitness population that believes that “ab crunches” are bad for the spine.  Of course, it doesn’t help that the name “crunches” sounds like something that would naturally result in damage.  But beyond this, there is a small ripple occurring in the fitness world – possibly instigated by a series of articles (and a book) by Professor Stuart McGill (who, by the way, is notable in his field, but mostly to a sports-specific and a sports-rehab market) – which suggests that the spinal movement involved in ab crunches creates three potential problems:

1. Wearing-out of the spinal discs due to repeated flexing of the spine

2. Herniation of the spine due to over-flexing of the spine

3. Permanent forward flexion in one’s posture due to over-strengthening of the abs, and repeated forward flexing of the spine

I disagree, on all three counts (with the exception of spines that are already injured and are therefore unable to function properly).  Here’s my rationale:

First – Some Basic Anatomy & Exercise Science

The function of any given muscle is to bring its “insertion” closer to its “origin” (i.e., its two ends) – thereby creating movement. When muscles shorten (contract or flex), they move a limb or other body part, by bending the joint that they pass. For example, when the biceps contracts, it bends the elbow (because it crosses that joint), which then moves the forearm. Every muscle in the whole body works this way.

The abdominal muscle (rectus abdominus) has its origin at the base of the ribcage, and its insertion at the pubic bone of the pelvis.   When the abdominal muscle contracts, it brings the ribcage toward the pelvis, or the pelvis toward the ribcage – which creates a curving (or rounding) of the spine.  As the abdominal muscle elongates (relaxes), it allows the ribcage and the pelvis to get farther away from each other – which creates (or allows) the arching of the spine.

It seems obvious that this design – the positioning and function of the rectus abdominus, and the fact that the spine (as a multi-faceted joint) bends forward, to the sides, and backward, as well as having rotation capabilities – is intended for movement in all those directions.  In other words, spinal flexion constitutes “normal anatomical function”.

Muscle shortening and elongation is the basis of “isotonic” exercise – which refers to muscle contraction that results in actual bodily movement.  When muscle contraction (tensing) occurs without shortening and elongation, it’s considered “isometric”, or “static tension” (when there is no movement at all) or “limited range of motion” (when there is very little movement) – and has been shown in numerous studies to be less effective at developing muscle, as compared to isotonic contraction.

In Reference to Item # 3 (above)

“Rounding the back” occurs when doing an abdominal crunch, but to consider this as “bad”, on the basis that our spine might stay rounded, is like saying that elbow-bending when doing bicep curls is bad, because we don’t want our elbows to stay bent.  Backs don’t stay rounded, just because rounding your back is part of the abdominal crunch, any more than elbows stay bent because they did so during a biceps curl.

The idea that a back would stay rounded, on the basis of having the abdominal muscle be “too strong” also makes no sense.  Muscles don’t stay in a constant state of contraction, regardless of how strong they are.  A relaxed muscle does not contract (or pull) at all, so an abdominal muscle that is super strong, but is relaxed, will absolutely not pull the torso forward permanently.

I certainly agree with the notion that muscles should be in balance.  So ensuring that one works their lower-back muscles, to counter-balance the strengthening effects of abdominal exercise, is wise.  This is no different than ensuring that one works their hamstrings, as well as their quadriceps; or ensuring that one works their upper back, as well as their pectorals.  But the idea of holding back the strengthening benefits of an exercise, on the mistaken belief that a strong rectus abdominus (ab muscle) will pull the torso forward during normal posture, is misguided.

In Reference to Item # 2 (above)

There is such a thing as having the back be “too rounded” during spinal flexion. In other words, one can over-flex (i.e. over-bend) their spine – which would cause the inside edges of the spinal discs to squeeze together, while the outside edges spread open – potentially pushing out the inter-vertebrel discs.  This is technically known as “herniation” of the discs.

This is most likely to happen when a person does any kind of lifting with a rounded back (e.g. deadlifts or bent-over barbell rowing), because the resistance that they are lifting (presumably from the ground) is essentially pulling the spine into an over-flex position.  But ab exercises are entirely different, because the resistance is coming from the opposite side of the direction that you’re facing. In other words, when the resistance is on the opposite side of your abdomen (you facing up / gravity pulling you back), it would require that the abdominal muscle alone “force” the spine into an over-flex position, and that’s almost impossible to do – even if one tries.  It’s about as unlikely to occur as hyper-extending your knees during a heavy leg extension. You would be lucky if you could even get into a full flex, let alone hyper-flex.

In general, I believe that the extreme ranges of motion should be abbreviated. A muscle does not need the beginning 10%, nor the final 10% of the range of motion, in order to reap maximum benefit. I think the center 80% range of motion is the most valuable – and the most safe.  However, this depends – in part – on the resistance curve of the particular exercise one is doing.  For example, if one is doing a standing barbell curl, it’s safe to allow one’s arms to go all the way to straight (full extension); but allowing one’s arms to go fully straight on a preacher barbell curl is not safe, because the resistance curve of that exercise is such that there is still quite a bit of opposing resistance at full elongation, and it might cause the elbow to hyper-extend, or cause excessive strain to the biceps tendon.

Likewise for abdominal exercise.  Extreme arching (or extreme curling of the spine, if one is able actually achieve that, although it’s highly unlikely), is not only not necessary, but also increases the risk of herniation.  The issue, therefore, is the DEGREE of movement.  Let’s not throw the baby out with the bathwater.  Just because it’s not good to over-flex or over-arch one’s spine, does not mean that one should not move their spine at all, as some suggest.

The goal should be to move the spine (during ab exercise) enough to garner the proven benefits of isotonic exercise, but not so much as to pinch the vertebrae (which still allows quite a bit of movement).  Therefore, don’t arch your back too far when doing crunches (on a ball, for example).  And don’t pull forcefully on your neck, when curling forward.  Allowing the typical degree of spinal flexion that normally occurs while “flexing” one’s abs during a crunch, is perfectly safe – I firmly believe.  It is within the safe range of motion.

In Reference to Item # 1  (above)

Believing that normal joint movement “wears-out” the joint, reminds me of the adage “a ship in a harbor is safe, but that’s not what ships were built for”.  Certainly, crashing a ship against another ship is bad, but that is not “normal” wear and tear.  “Sailing” is what ships were built for – and it is “normal” usage, despite the fact that sailing might expose the ship to a small degree of risk.  Conversely, keeping it in a harbor – i.e., disallowing normal usage – is unnecessary and unproductive.  Further, we don’t skip other normal isotonic exercises (like leg extensions, triceps pushdowns, etc.) because we’re concerned that we might be wearing out the joints, do we?

I agree with the elimination (or restriction) of movements that are not anatomically correct, or require an excessive (unsafe) range of motion.  In fact, this is precisely the reason that I discourage people from doing overhead presses (and certain other exercises).   But spinal flexion (as in ab crunches) is anatomically correct, and within the safe range of movement.

Worrying about “wearing out” the spinal discs by simply moving them, is like being worried that you’ll wear out your teeth by chewing with them.  I would never consider avoiding chewing.  But I would certainly avoid grinding my teeth at night, as it would constitute unproductive and improper usage.  Eating is part of life.  It’s a safe and normal means of survival – even though it might result in a small amount of “wear and tear” on one’s teeth, over the years.  The same can be said for spinal flexion.

In Conclusion

Eliminating ab crunches entirely leaves only plank-type exercises, and other static, or limited-range exercises, which are mostly isometric – and are thus inferior to isotonic, for the purpose of achieving visible abdominal development (note: they are useful, however, in certain sports training, if the goal is to be able to maintain a rigid or “stiff” torso while being hit by a 300 lb. lineman on the football field, or in some Mixed Martial Arts applications).

If isometric exercise were equally good as isotonic exercise (or “better-than”, as some proponents of “no crunches” would have us believe), then it would be logical for us to do ALL of our exercises isometrically.  Can you imagine doing only “static” exercise for all our body parts?  Not curling – just holding a barbell with a bent arm – for example.  Not doing triceps pushdowns – just holding a triceps bar static, in one position.  Not pedaling a bike – just half squatting against a wall, without movement.  I’m sure you get the point.

The function of the rectus abdominus – by definition – is to bring the ribcage and the pelvis closer to each other, upon contraction.  Therefore – just as the function of the biceps is to bend the elbow, and we “work” our biceps by bending the elbow against resistance – the way to “work” the ab muscle is to perform its anatomical function (i.e. flexing the spine) against resistance .  In fact, this is the reason why the “hanging leg raise” is not a particularly good abdominal exercise – because the movement is not consistent with the rectus abdominus’ designated function.  It produces movement of the legs (at the hip joint), rather than of the spine.  During a “hanging leg raise”, the abdominal muscles primarily stabilize the torso, while the hip flexors perform the greater part of the movement.  By definition, an exercise must perform its function, in order to reap maximum benefit.

Frankly, I enjoy the feeling of my abdominal muscles contracting (flexing) and alternately stretching (elongating), during ab crunches.  It feels very much the way my biceps do during a curl, or the way my triceps do during a cable pushdown.  I strive for – and achieve – a deliberate and forceful muscle contraction (resulting in spinal flexion), followed by muscle elongation (resulting in spinal arching), with each repetition.

I also enjoy the wonderful development I’ve achieved from ab crunches – whether I do them by lying on the floor or on a semi-incline bench, or by kneeling on the floor with a cable overhead, or by sitting on a bench with a cable coming from behind.  I have no back problems at all.  I’m 51 years old, and have been doing various forms of ab crunches for over 35 years.

I’m also extremely sensitive about how my body feels during exercise, inordinately analytical, very well-read on the subject of anatomy and biomechanics, and very pragmatic.  I would be one of the first people to cry “foul” – in reference to an exercise – if I felt, or sensed, or thought logically, that something was anatomically incorrect, or unnecessarily strenuous to the body, while doing a particular exercise.

I believe that the hypothetical concern about hurting one’s spine by doing abdominal crunches, has much less of a place in the realm of reality, than does the harm of doing no abdominal exercise at all.  By eliminating over-flexing and over-arching the spine (staying within the 80% range of motion – avoiding the last 10% at each extreme), one can safely perform abdominal crunches, without any concern for their spine, and enjoy the reward for their effort – i.e., beautifully developed abdominal muscles.

As I’ve said in the past, training for “fitness” and “bodybuilding” is one thing…. and training for “sports” is another.  What improves sports performance does not necessarily improve the physique.  Further, each sport requires specific training strategies, for the improvement of that particular sport.  ”Exercise” is not a catch-all.  My focus is on exercise analysis for the purpose of maximizing bodybuilding results (i.e. visible improvements), while minimizing injury risk.

One final word – abdominal exercise of any kind is NOT the key to a fat-free midsection.  In general, people spend far too much time doing abdominal exercise, under the mistaken belief that they can “spot reduce” the fat on their gut.  It’s not going to happen.  A strategic eating plan, cardio exercise, and the overall calorie-spending benefit of resistance training (i.e., enhanced metabolic activity) will gradually reduce the body fat level as a whole, including that of the midsection.

Ab exercises should be done with the same type of frequency, resistance and repetitions, as one would use for any other muscle (biceps, triceps, etc.) – because it works the muscle – not the fat.  I recommend 4 – 8 sets of abs per workout, twice per week, for 15 – 20 reps per set, with appropriate resistance.

For more information on a good strategy for a getting lean and muscular midsection, check out my other article, entitled: “Waist Not: The Dos and Don’ts of Getting a Lean Midsection”: http://www.ironmanmagazine.com/blogs/dougbrignole/?p=36.