Toning Workout, is this any good?

[BilltheAnt]

Is this workout any good for toning your body.

All workouts are done with dumbbells weighing 10lbs.

Incline chest fly (15-20 reps)
Arnold Press (15-20 reps)
Upright Row (15-20 reps)
Iron Cross (15-20 reps)
Bicep Curls (15-20 reps)
Tricep Extension (15-20 reps)
Abdominal Curls (15-20 reps, done holding one dumbbell)

Cycle through workout 3 times, with a 2 min rest between cycles.

My Goals: To drop from 20% body fat to around 14% body fat as quickly as possible. Basicly I want to get rid of the saggy flab on my chest and have a flat stomach.

So is this a good workout or have I been wasting my time for the last two weeks.

 

[Danger_Dave]

wasting time.

There is no such thing as a workout for "toning" perse.

Low weight high reps just helps with endurance, slightly, you "tone" by losing fat. You lose fat by eating less and doing low reps HEAVY weights and some HIIT.

also, the best way to lose fat and increase metabolism for the hours after exercise is to do the exercises which work the most muscles. Compound exercises. Squat, dead, bench, B-O rows, pullups, military press...

look for a fbw.

 

[Danger_Dave]

you know, those who posted on your workout about whether maxim workouts were good or not gave you good advice back in july. why didn't you do it?

 

[malkore]

AZN Dave is right...your workout doesn't 'tone'. you can't control muscle shape...only size. shape is determined by genetics (and may change with size, but again you don't have any direct control over muscle shape).

Toning really means "losing body fat, to show off the muscle underneath the fat". So toning is more about your diet to shed fat, than it is about your weight training routine. Granted you need sufficient muscle mass to 'show off' in the first place, but looking 'toned' is about low body fat, not specific rep ranges, exercises, or using a puny weight like 10lbs.

 

[BilltheAnt]

I KNOW WHAT TONING MEANS!

Do you really think that I would even be here if I didn't know what the difference was between losing fat and gaining muscle.

This is what really annoys me about this forum, everyone here thinks that if someone asks a question then that person has no clue about fitness. Almost every answer I have ever got has been a lecture about how "toning is a myth", "muscle weighs more than fat" or "fat doesn't turn into muscle". The only reason I wrote "tone" was because I didn't want to write "lose fat so the muscle is more visible". You see, it was a simple shorthand substitution to use the word "tone" instead of that sentence. The problem is that most of you people are so full of yourself that you think that you are masters of fitness. And I know that some of you are personal trainers, but that doesn't give you the right to talk to other people like thay are children.

Oh and by the way, that Maxim thread is a complete waste of time, since the people who posted each believed that their way of doing things was 100% right, and the whole thread turned into an argument.

I don't want you to think that I can't take criticism. I can take criticism as long as it is constructive.

I asked if I had made a good workout, I would have liked an answer rather than someone copying and pasting a generic comment.

 

[Typhon]

It's not the fault of other members if they think you don't have a clue if all the evidence in your post points to that.
The people responded with answers that reflected your original post, if they patronised you it's your own fault. If you know what you're talking about then don't use words like 'tone' because they mean f**k all and don't post a routine that sucks balls.

 

[Typhon]

The only reason I wrote "tone" was because I didn't want to write "lose fat so the muscle is more visible".

You could have just used the word 'cutting'

And IMO, no your workout isn't well suited for that, you'd be better advised sticking to high weight low reps and sticking to compounds to retain as much muscle as possible while in a deficit. Pretty much what AZN Dave said

 

[Karky]

On the tone thing. You don't want to tone, you want to cut. You just used the wrong term. Also, you can't tone, but you can BE toned (which is basicly the same as being defined)

 

[benelson101]

The problem is that most of you people are so full of yourself that you think that you are masters of fitness. And I know that some of you are personal trainers, but that doesn't give you the right to talk to other people like thay are children.

not the greatest way to get the masters of fitness onside. you posted the generic, pop question about losing weight, with the same question that gets asked and re-asked, and so you got the generic answer. since a high percentage of people on this site do have a good depth of knowledge, they dont need watered down questions.

I don't want you to think that I can't take criticism. I can take criticism as long as it is constructive.

angry red face? capitals? i think we got a live one here.

most would suggest you search the forum for other peoples cutting routine and compare it to your own first. plus the masters need your diet and also drop the isolations, they ARE a waste of time when cutting/toning

 

[Danger_Dave]

I KNOW WHAT TONING MEANS!

Do you really think that I would even be here if I didn't know what the difference was between losing fat and gaining muscle.

This is what really annoys me about this forum, everyone here thinks that if someone asks a question then that person has no clue about fitness. Almost every answer I have ever got has been a lecture about how "toning is a myth", "muscle weighs more than fat" or "fat doesn't turn into muscle". The only reason I wrote "tone" was because I didn't want to write "lose fat so the muscle is more visible". You see, it was a simple shorthand substitution to use the word "tone" instead of that sentence. The problem is that most of you people are so full of yourself that you think that you are masters of fitness. And I know that some of you are personal trainers, but that doesn't give you the right to talk to other people like thay are children.

Oh and by the way, that Maxim thread is a complete waste of time, since the people who posted each believed that their way of doing things was 100% right, and the whole thread turned into an argument.

I don't want you to think that I can't take criticism. I can take criticism as long as it is constructive.

I asked if I had made a good workout, I would have liked an answer rather than someone copying and pasting a generic comment.

Ok Mr. Master of Fitness. You want a good answer? YOU GOT ONE ALREADY. I told you what was what. Your workout, shown below:

All workouts are done with dumbbells weighing 10lbs.

Incline chest fly (15-20 reps)
Arnold Press (15-20 reps)
Upright Row (15-20 reps)
Iron Cross (15-20 reps)
Bicep Curls (15-20 reps)
Tricep Extension (15-20 reps)
Abdominal Curls (15-20 reps, done holding one dumbbell)

Cycle through workout 3 times, with a 2 min rest between cycles."

I asked if I had made a good workout, I would have liked an answer rather than someone copying and pasting a generic comment

Your Workout,
SUCKS ASS.

you asked:

Is this workout any good for toning your body.

NO, NO SUCH THING. STFU IF YOU ALREADY KNOW THIS

My Goals: To drop from 20% body fat to around 14% body fat as quickly as possible. Basicly I want to get rid of the saggy flab on my chest and have a flat stomach.

So is this a good workout or have I been wasting my time for the last two weeks.

it isn't ganna happen with the workout you posted. If you don't like the help you recieve, get lost.

 

[Danger_Dave]

Don't even start with your crap about how people only tihnk that what they do is correct and how you never get good advice. That's bull****. People go out of their way to help YOU.
I actually have doubt that you do know the difference between "losing fat and gaining muscle". You obviously have no idea of how to go about either of them.

Hmm, I also didn't address this part

You see, it was a simple shorthand substitution to use the word "tone" instead of that sentence.

tone is not a shorthand substitution for cutting or losing fat. You substitute things with their SYNONYMS, or words with the same meaning. Tone, and losing fat, are two different things. TONING is a MYTH.

The problem is that most of you people are so full of yourself that you think that you are masters of fitness. And I know that some of you are personal trainers, but that doesn't give you the right to talk to other people like thay are children.

No one here is arrogant or stupid enough to think themselves the master of fitness. I'm definitely not a personal trainer. I'm a 15 year old kid. But I can tell you that I sure as hell have the right to talk to you as a stupid child because you deserve to be spoken to as nothing higher than that. You obviously haven't taken the time to educate yourself in terms of fitness any more than the average child.

 

[Wrangell]

I KNOW WHAT TONING MEANS!

This is what really annoys me about this forum, everyone here thinks that if someone asks a question then that person has no clue about fitness. Almost every answer I have ever got has been a lecture about how "toning is a myth", "muscle weighs more than fat" or "fat doesn't turn into muscle". The only reason I wrote "tone" was because I didn't want to write "lose fat so the muscle is more visible". You see, it was a simple shorthand substitution to use the word "tone" instead of that sentence.

In my view, the definition of developing muscle " tone " actually has to do with the degree to which your muscles stay contracted while at rest - i.e you often see good muscle tone in many athletes vs generally poor muscle tone in very sedentary people.

So, in that context, " improved " tone is less a consequence of fat on top of the muscle ( i.e. being cut or defined ) and more a consequence of your muscle adapting to some form of progressive overload. So, in theory, if you hold body fat % constant ( or even bump it slightly ), you would nonetheless find some improvement in " muscle tone " in individuals who has exercised for extended period of time versus sedentary individuals. Exercise would have caused their muscles to have adapted to some improvements in either muscle speed, endurance, or strength ( size ), with improved tone simply being a secondary consequence of these primary adaptations.

So again, in this context, the " highs rep lead to definition " or " the high reps leads to ' toning ' " are clearly myths. The fact is, if you do hi reps with low resistance or low reps with greater resistance, you're going to see the same improvements in " muscle tone " IMO.

 

[Typhon]

In my view, the definition of developing muscle " tone " actually has to do with the degree to which your muscles stay contracted while at rest - i.e you often see good muscle tone in many athletes vs generally poor muscle tone in very sedentary people.

Muscles don't stay contracted during rest, if they do that then you've got cramp
The reason you see better 'tone' in athletes is because they probably have bigger muscles. Tone is simply a mix of muscle size and BF%

 

[Wrangell]

Muscles don't stay contracted during rest, if they do that then you've got cramp


The reason you see better 'tone' in athletes is because they probably have bigger muscles.

Tone is simply a mix of muscle size and BF%

Unless your muscles are in a state of severe atrophy, all skeletal muscles maintain some degree of contraction - even at rest.

However, in this context, when I say ' tone ', I'm referring to what's called ' myogenic tone ' - which ( as i said earlier ) refers to the degree of your muscle tone ....at rest. And, as an example, you'd see changes ( improvements ) in this ' myogenic tone ' as the density of your muscles improve due to your muscles adapting to progressive overload.

So, in this context, ' tone ' has nothing to do with bf %. Although you're right, I think most gym rats still think the term ' tone ' is synonymous with fat %, being cut or getting defined - i.e as in the ' high reps with light weights leads to greater muscle defiintion / tone ' myth may - incorrectly - suggest.

 

[Typhon]

when I say ' tone ', I'm referring to what's called ' myogenic tone '

Could you explain this more? Is this an increase in muscle density due to myofibril hypertrophy? (just a guess)

 

[lifeissoccer]

I KNOW WHAT TONING MEANS!

Do you really think that I would even be here if I didn't know what the difference was between losing fat and gaining muscle.

This is what really annoys me about this forum, everyone here thinks that if someone asks a question then that person has no clue about fitness. Almost every answer I have ever got has been a lecture about how "toning is a myth", "muscle weighs more than fat" or "fat doesn't turn into muscle". The only reason I wrote "tone" was because I didn't want to write "lose fat so the muscle is more visible". You see, it was a simple shorthand substitution to use the word "tone" instead of that sentence. The problem is that most of you people are so full of yourself that you think that you are masters of fitness. And I know that some of you are personal trainers, but that doesn't give you the right to talk to other people like thay are children.

Oh and by the way, that Maxim thread is a complete waste of time, since the people who posted each believed that their way of doing things was 100% right, and the whole thread turned into an argument.

I don't want you to think that I can't take criticism. I can take criticism as long as it is constructive.

I asked if I had made a good workout, I would have liked an answer rather than someone copying and pasting a generic comment.

well it doesnt change the fact your an idiot.. you know that toning means losing fat to make muscle visible but u have no cardio?
very intelligent.

and u cant take constructive critsism .. azn dave was nice as hell abt that.

 

[Karky]

yeah, I agree.. but I must say, you don't have to do cardio to loose weight.

 

[Chillen]

well it doesnt change the fact your an idiot.. you know that toning means losing fat to make muscle visible but u have no cardio?
very intelligent.

and u cant take constructive critsism .. azn dave was nice as hell abt that.

One in fact does NOT need cardio to reduce body fat. In fact one can have cardio in their training program and not lose body fat. What is in fact intelligent is understanding the following:

The deficit diet is the ultimate fat burner without an equal.

Having cardio in a surplus diet: can equal weight gain and can erase the calorie and fat burning potential of cardio.


Chillen

 

[Danger_Dave]

In my view, the definition of developing muscle " tone " actually has to do with the degree to which your muscles stay contracted while at rest - i.e you often see good muscle tone in many athletes vs generally poor muscle tone in very sedentary people.

So, in that context, " improved " tone is less a consequence of fat on top of the muscle ( i.e. being cut or defined ) and more a consequence of your muscle adapting to some form of progressive overload. So, in theory, if you hold body fat % constant ( or even bump it slightly ), you would nonetheless find some improvement in " muscle tone " in individuals who has exercised for extended period of time versus sedentary individuals. Exercise would have caused their muscles to have adapted to some improvements in either muscle speed, endurance, or strength ( size ), with improved tone simply being a secondary consequence of these primary adaptations.

So again, in this context, the " highs rep lead to definition " or " the high reps leads to ' toning ' " are clearly myths. The fact is, if you do hi reps with low resistance or low reps with greater resistance, you're going to see the same improvements in " muscle tone " IMO.

actually, the above is what I learned from my biology teacher. Tone is technically defined as the number of muscle fibers still contracted while at rest, however, this isn't so much an aesthetic effect. I believe it improves posture and such. But you won't have constantly bulging biceps unless you are constantly flexing said biceps. As to athletes having better tone than sedentery people, I find this generally true as for myself and others I know who lift, after having done squats and dead lifts, the posture of my back is straighter all the time now, (I believe this to be an improvement in tone as my back is straighter because more muscle fibers are contracted while I'm "at rest"

However, I still stand to the fact that high rep does not lead to definition/toning. So we agree.

 

[Wrangell]

Could you explain this more? Is this an increase in muscle density due to myofibril hypertrophy? (just a guess)

I was thinking more along the lines of simply saying enhanced density - i.e better tone - is due to the growth of the contractile proteins in your muscles - namely the myosin and actin filaments that make up the myofibrils you mentioned above. So the bigger size of both these filaments that may exist and / or along with an increase in the number of these filaments, the blood capillaries within these filaments etc. etc. should result in improved muscle tone, strength and size.

And given I maintained that tone is but one result of your muscles adapting to overload - hypertophy would certainly be included as a means of adaptation.