One thing that never fails to surprise new clients is how quickly workouts in a properly organized program become difficult.  It’s all too easy to become disheartened, as if you’ve failed somehow; as what was “easy” for you all of a sudden became alarmingly hard.

“What happened?”, you say, as if you caught a glimpse of physical mastery, only to lose it in a second…

What happened is that you crossed the line from neophyte to novice.  No longer are you merely floundering to master exercise technique; you’re now doing things that will actually reflect meaningful change in your body.  In other words, you’re actually doing productive exercise.

On the one hand, I can see why it’d be distressing: Culturally, we see images of fitness models smiling while pumping away at a 3 lb weight, form (and make-up) perfect.  While you, on the other hand, are barely keeping the bar in your hands; sweating, cursing, and trying not to think of how wonderful it would be to drop this ridiculous load onto your trainer’s foot.

On the other hand, you’re working with more effort than most trainees will ever muster.  And unlike the rest of them, you’ll actually see results.

It’s ok that you’re struggling.  No, you won’t have perfect form, though you should always strive for perfection in your technique. No, productive exercise won’t be pretty or pleasant, but you might just learn to enjoy it. 

Medhi writes, “The exercises you struggle with are the exercises you need to do.”

Truer words never spoken.

If you’re like most people, you tend to gravitate towards and perform exercises that “feel good” to you.  If you’re a guy, for example, you may enjoy performing barbell bench press or dumbbell biceps curls.  If you’re female, your preference may be more machine-based; say, hip abduction or hip extension.  Likely, every single foray into the gym involves a set or two of your favs.

Whatever the case may be, it’s a truism that you tend to avoid things you’re bad at in favor of things you’re good at.  But all you’re doing is creating weak points.

An example: You squat, for years; however, you avoid using full range of motion and instead choose to stop slightly above a 90 degree bend in your knees (not quite thighs to parallel).  Over time, your hamstring and hip flexor strength will begin to lag behind your quad and glute strength, since the hamstrings and hip flexors are not meaningfully engaged until you squat below parallel.  This can increase your chances of injury (via hamstring pulls, etc.).

Of course, if you do sufficient hamstring work, it’s not an issue.

But back to the point - it’s one thing to avoid exercises that you aren’t biomechanically suited for (e.g., if you’re long-legged or have arthritic knees, don’t squat).  But don’t avoid exercises simply because you don’t like them or don’t do them well.  Chances are you don’t do them well because you are weak in that particular muscle group or function (and in that case, you need to do them to avoid growing even more feeble).

So do those rotator cuff exercises, even if  they’re boring and you hate them.  Work your posterior chain (upper and lower); you know you need to.  Do what you hate and it just might make you a better athlete (and a better looking athlete, to boot).

Matt points to a highly compelling study in the American Journal of Endocrinology.  I think the title says it all:

Insulin-resistant muscle is exercise resistant.

Consider the study’s findings for a minute: Eating poorly is a double whammy.  Not only are you impairing your body’s ability to mobilize fat for energy (instead causing it to store that fat away for later), but you’re also impairing your body’s ability to generate more muscle, which would help to counteract those effects.

A quick primer on the concepts behind the study:

Insulin’s primary function is to regulate blood sugar levels by pulling sugar out of the bloodstream and into the cells.  Over time, too much ingestion of sugar (and things that break down into sugar - dietary carbohydrates) causes excessive levels of insulin in the blood, leading to insulin resistance.

Mitochondria are known as “the powerhouses of the cell”.  They literally supply the energy (ATP) that the body uses in all cellular functions (muscular contractions included).  If you think of muscles as the engine of the body, mitochondria would be the fuel tanks.  As you become more fit, your body creates more mitochondria (after all, more horsepower requires more fuel). 

At least, that’s what supposed to happen.  According to the study findings, if you’re already insulin-resistant (and obese), the mechanisms that code for mitochondrial proliferation are blunted (read: your body doesn’t produce mitochondria as easily).  The end result?  You (the insulin-resistant) don’t build muscle as well and find it harder to improve your fitness levels.  Yes, it’s a cruel, cruel world.

Just more reason for you to minimize the amount of sugar, starch, and grain in your diet if you’re looking to get the best results from your exercise program. 

Exercise is more a matter of quality, not quantity. In other words, it’s not how many exercises you do, or how long of a marathon workout you can sustain, but how much you put into each exercise, each rep.

One thing that often catches new trainees off-guard is the degree of effort required of them when they begin training “in earnest.”

Effort is essential, when you’re trying to maximize the results from your exercise program. It’s not necessary to work to gut-busting failure, per se, but it is necessary to work hard in order to stimulate your body into making the changes you want to happen (increased number of muscle fibers, greater muscle density, increased vascularization, etc.).

A quick example:

Today, I trained a client who worked so hard she couldn’t grasp her water bottle and had to cradle it in the crook of her elbow.

Working hard enough to stimulate change, but not so hard as to knock yourself out; that’s the essence of effort.

Thomas, my aforementioned gregarious meat monger, asked me today,”Is it better to use dumbbells or barbells?”

There isn’t a day that goes by that I’m not asked this exact question or some variant of it.  While it is true that there are different advantages to each training implement, the honest truth is this:

What you use doesn’t matter so long as you a) work hard b) consistently and c) with progression in mind*.

In other words, you could use barbells, if that’s what you have available.  Or use dumbbells.  Yes, dumbbells require more stabilization, but is that what you’re looking to train?  Moreover, does, say, more stabilization really even do anything above and beyond just “plain ol’ lifting”?

Here is the point - whatever advantages a given implement can deliver over another amounts to very little.  You won’t all of a sudden go from having a 13 inch arm to a 16 inch one by switching from barbells to dumbbells because of the “hypertrophic properties of multi-planar stabilization.”  Likewise, swapping out your kettlebells for a sledgehammer isn’t likely to magically make you punch any faster.  When proponents of these different training modalities compare and contrast the benefits you can receive from using their particular brand of equipment, what gets lost in the shuffle is that simply by using that training implement and paying attention to the three factors listed above will allow you to derive 99% of the benefits you can get from using the implement.

It isn’t the kettlebell/dumbbell/tire/milk jug/sandbag/Total Gym that you use.  It is that you actually use the thing.

*Nota Bene: A clarification of concepts is in order here;

Working “hard” means that you give forth a high degree of effort when performing exercises;

Consistency means that you train regularly enough so as to compound the positive response from each exercise bout (neither so often that your body can’t recover, nor so infrequently that you lose what you gained from each workout), and;

Progression means that you can do more this time than you could last time (either more weight, more reps, run faster, endure longer, etc.).

Digressions? Objections? Think I’m full of it and have a rebuttal? Post a comment.