What bodypart first?

Ask or answer questions, discuss and express your views

Moderators: Ironman, Jungledoc, ianjay, stuward

Post Reply
User avatar
Wouter
Associate Member
Associate Member
Posts: 551
Joined: Sun Sep 03, 2006 4:52 am
Location: Antwerp, Belgium

What bodypart first?

Post by Wouter » Fri Feb 02, 2007 12:53 pm

I've been following a full-body plan for a couple of weeks, but it says to constantly rotate the bodyparts you exercise. If you do quads first one week, you shouldn't do quads first another week.
But I think you should do legs first, because they're the largest bodyparts and they will give you the biggest boost in growth if you train them first.

User avatar
Ironman
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 3991
Joined: Tue Jun 06, 2006 11:40 am

Post by Ironman » Fri Feb 02, 2007 1:28 pm

I would do either chest, back or quads first. Because of how the lower back is used I prefer to put romanian deadlift after suats and rows. Direct shoulder and arm work and calf raises should go at the end.

User avatar
Stephen Johnson
Exalted Seer
Exalted Seer
Posts: 2097
Joined: Sun Mar 12, 2006 11:20 pm
Location: New York City

Post by Stephen Johnson » Fri Feb 02, 2007 5:14 pm

It depends on the exercises. I usually work legs first, but not when my routine includes pull ups for the back. The pull up for me is a demanding exercise. It is all I can do to get three sets of 7-10 reps when fresh, so I do them first. If I did a bunch of squats or deadlifts first, I'd have to head for the lat pulldown machine.

PaulP
n00b
n00b
Posts: 13
Joined: Thu Jul 27, 2006 8:40 pm

Post by PaulP » Sat Feb 03, 2007 2:17 pm

I am the same on pullups. I try for 3 good sets of 8-10. I am lucky to get one full set of 10. Sometimes having to put a 5lb stretch cord under my feet for set two and three and then extend sets by resorting to negatives to get a good working. pullups are not my thing I guess. I could not do them in the middle or end of a workout.

Scott Ismari
Novice
Novice
Posts: 86
Joined: Wed Dec 21, 2005 4:55 pm
Location: Illinois
Contact:

Post by Scott Ismari » Sat Feb 03, 2007 4:02 pm

On a whole body workout, I suggest starting out with legs since they are your biggest muscle group and take the most amount of energy. Back would be next, followed by chest , shoulders and arms. Since arms are used in every upper body move, they dont need as much direct attention and are the smallest group , easily tired out before you can hit your larger muscles if you place them first. The larger muscle groups will suffer.
Desire, Dedication, Discipline

Scott Ismari

Matt Z
Deific Wizard of Sagacity
Deific Wizard of Sagacity
Posts: 4505
Joined: Tue Apr 25, 2006 1:19 pm
Location: Pennsylvania
Contact:

Post by Matt Z » Thu Feb 08, 2007 1:05 pm

I agree. It doesn't make much sense to train arms before chest, back and/or shoulders. Likewise, I wouldn't recomend training calves before glutes, quads and hamstrings.

User avatar
TimD
In Memoriam: TimD
In Memoriam: TimD
Posts: 3129
Joined: Mon Dec 19, 2005 8:04 am
Location: Va Beach, Va

Post by TimD » Thu Feb 08, 2007 1:24 pm

Actually, guys, training in the opposite direcion does have it's place. It's not common, rightfully so, but I've seen many programs, especiall in an adaptative phase, that actually work the weakest then go on to the strongest. The idea is to "shore up" the weak links first off. You'll still get work on the bigger groups, just without the loading. For example, consider this complex , done non-stop with the same weight:
Barbells used, upright row, muscle snatch from floor, behind neck push press, , ood morning, bent row. You select a weight based on upright rows. Looks like the squat push presses will be a breeze right? Wrong It's a great way to shore things up. Granted, they might only be used for a two - three week period, but useful nontheless.
Tim

User avatar
Ironman
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 3991
Joined: Tue Jun 06, 2006 11:40 am

Post by Ironman » Thu Feb 08, 2007 2:37 pm

As far as calves, it's really just the soleus that shouldn't be trained before. I never isolate mine anyway, I think squats gets it just fine. I actually alternate squats and calf raises. Calf raises aren't very taxing on the CNS so even when you max out at low reps, you can recover enough to do another exercise with it. So you can do a squat, rest 1 minute, do calves, rest 3 minutes and squat again. It seems to be just as good as 4 minutes rest on straight sets. Where as something like chest and back together doesn't seem to work that way. So you squat and then get the gastrocs on the standing calf and there's half your lower body right there. I like to do that 1 day and then deadlift variations the next day. It's a nice way of splitting it up so you don't have that nasty marathon leg workout that almost kills you.

Matt Z
Deific Wizard of Sagacity
Deific Wizard of Sagacity
Posts: 4505
Joined: Tue Apr 25, 2006 1:19 pm
Location: Pennsylvania
Contact:

Post by Matt Z » Mon Feb 12, 2007 9:45 am

While seated calf raises isolate the soleus, standing and leg press calf raises also work this muscle along with the gastrocs. The only exercises I can think of that targets the gastrocs without assistance from the soleus muscles, are leg curls and similar knee flexion movements (unless you point your toes which eliminates gastroc involvement).

User avatar
Ironman
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 3991
Joined: Tue Jun 06, 2006 11:40 am

Post by Ironman » Mon Feb 12, 2007 12:04 pm

Ok, so there's another reason why I don't need to do seated. That's weird, you would think that would interfere with my squats.

Post Reply