Which form of doing sets is better?

R

robcataus

0
Most people seem to just divide their exercises evenly and do 3 sets of each before moving on to the next exercise. I find that doing one set, wait a minute and then move on to the next exercise (and so on), before cycling back to the first exercise (3 times total) is best. Are there any advantages with just doing three sets with ~1 minute break in between? I feel like I'd get less out of it because I'd be more tired for the 2nd/3rd set opposed to cycling through exercises where any given body part gets longer time to rest in between being worked again.

For example:

If my workout consisted of benching, pull-ups, dumbbell curls, and pushups, would it be smart to do:

bench X10, pull-up X10, push-ups X60, dumbbel curls X10, and repeat 3 times (with one minute in between)

or

bench X10, bench X8, bench X6, pull-ups X10 (and so on)?

I'm fairly strong considering my lack of working out, but I have no idea how to work out efficiently. Any suggestions?
 
The benefit of doing consecutive sets is the ability to fatigue more muscle fibers of the muscle group worked. So on your second and third sets, some fibers that usually work the most and early on in the exercise are fatigued requiring other fibers that don't get called upon often to work. This causes more calories to be burned and more development of the entire muscle.
I would also cut your rest time down to 30 secs or less using consecutive sets. If you were to do a circut like you described, I wouldn't rest the minute inbetween different exercises but rather move from one exercise to the next with little to no rest. This will keep your heart rate up allowing for a higher caloric burn.
I am assuming that you are working out to be fit and maybe lose some body fat as opposed to trying to build muscle size.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top