Is less more or is more more?

[TeaKwonDo]

As I'm collecting underpants, there seem to be two different camps of exercise philosophy: less is more, and more is more.

Less is more: NF's Steve Kamp. Following his travel log is proof that you can get results from every other day bodyweight workouts built on a few sets of basic, but progressive functional movements with less than 15 reps each.

More is more: Crossfit, Bodyrock, etc. Massive reps for time, high volume at the highest weight you can manage. Rip-roaring results.

And then there's Grease the Groove, which kind of fits in both camps at once.

So here I am, sitting with increasingly worse carpal tunnel (my right thumb is semi-numb) that I think might come from upping my pushups and assisted pullups, but still wanting to make progress, I'm at a loss. Agh.

[empeg9000]

Not sure. I have been doing a somewhat less is more. I do BW workout 3X a week but I do 100 push ups and 20 assisted pull ups. I do walk almost every day but that's it. I feel like i have been making huge gains. However I was really out of shape so I guess it probably depends on where you are. I am sure better people than I will have a good response.

[Bean]

My two cents worth - I think it depends on what you like and how your body responds.

The less is more option is pretty good since it allows the body some recovery time between exercise sessions. Definitely, when doing heavy lifting, this is not negotiable. Most of the experts agree that lifting every day is singularly bad, you have to rest. Either do 3xweekly or 2 days on 1 off for heavy lifting.

I think bodyweight works a little differently - if you look at serious gymnasts, they train 6 days a week throwing their bodyweight around all the time.

That being said - Crossfit also has a limit, only in this case it is time.

Doing more and more push-ups will not really make you strongly - it just increases your endurance. You have to make the push-ups more difficult to make progress - e.g. 1 hand, close hands, raised legs etc. Similarly, on assisted pull-ups, more is not more. You need to make the sets you can do more difficult by reducing the assistance.

But, if you are injured, then you need to rest said appendage and rather focus on other exercises until the numbness goes away.

This should however prove to be an interesting debate.

[empeg9000]

Doing more and more push-ups will not really make you strongly - it just increases your endurance. You have to make the push-ups more difficult to make progress - e.g. 1 hand, close hands, raised legs etc. Similarly, on assisted pull-ups, more is not more. You need to make the sets you can do more difficult by reducing the assistance.

I agree. I originally started doing 100 push ups so I could get to 3 sets of 20 push ups. Now I am doing decline push ups to make then harder then I will move onto diamond. I am doing 20 assisted pull ups because I was trying to get to a pull up. I can't do a pull up yet but I can do a single chin up. So I do that wait a little do another. Then when I am wiped out I do some assisted pull ups. It's working for me so far.

[Knightwatch]

FWIW, a lot of folks would put things like Crossfit and BodyRock in the "less" category, at least in terms of pure volume. Intensity, it can certainly be more.

The idea with CF and BR (at least as I understand the latter) is that you don't need a fully stocked gym overflowing with gear, or to hit every mucsle group from a multitude of angles the way the musclemags were pushing for a couple decades. A few simple, multijoint movements done with focus will do the job just as well.

For instance, back in my generic bodypart split days, I'd spend about 90 minutes in the gym, and hit 1 primary and 1-2 secondary muscle, each with 1-3 exercises of 3-4 sets of 10-12 reps. We're talking a few hundred reps over 5 or 6 different exercises on average, and then cardio, usually of the slow n' steady variety.

Compare that with, say, the iconic CF workout "Fran", where you do a total of 45 reps each of two movements, and are usually done in anywhere from 3-10 minutes. And when I say you're done, I mean you're done. Sure, there are "big" Crossfit workouts with lots of reps, but they tend to be rare, with the order of the day generally being hard and fast.

So yes, that style is "more" in terms of intensity (though many CFers confuse intensity with being frantic, which is unfortunate), but less in terms of time and volume.

Both have their place, but it's allll about your goals. If they're undefined, then neither will get you there. If they are defined, either one can get you there, but one possible more effeciently than the other.

[Hermione Gainser]

FWIW, a lot of folks would put things like Crossfit and BodyRock in the "less" category, at least in terms of pure volume. Intensity, it can certainly be more.

The idea with CF and BR (at least as I understand the latter) is that you don't need a fully stocked gym overflowing with gear, or to hit every mucsle group from a multitude of angles the way the musclemags were pushing for a couple decades. A few simple, multijoint movements done with focus will do the job just as well.

I agree with this. I'm not as familiar with CF but I used to do a lot of BR. It's basically body weight (or around the house found object weight) workouts that can come with a cardio twist, should you desire one (think reps for time challenges).

I base my workouts on how much recovery I feel like I need. I tried more days--too much. I do 3 lifting days and some zumba for sh*ts and giggles. That's enough for me.

Then you have people like Spezzy.. endless energy they need to drain. I believe she trains (or did) daily!

so, get your goals, try things and see how you feel. But definitely rest up that injury first.

[nickls]

Like Knightwatch said, it all comes down to your goals.

However, the current belief and Nerd Fitness philosophy is that higher intensity, lower volume workouts are better for building muscle and burning fat.

The major reason to do high volume in reps or amount of time per week is if you are working on your endurance. At a certain point, if you are trying to do a large number of push-ups or pull-ups in a row, you will be relying more on muscle endurance than muscle strength.

[KillerGriller]

Marathon training breaks down in a similar way; High Mileage or Less Mileage & More Rest? Many people have success with upping their mileage but when I tried it I ended up a broken, sweaty mess. My body has always responded better with more opportunities to rest, it may be as much mental as physical but it was still a noticeable phenomenon.

If your body can handle a beating every day then give it a try but if not go with fewer workouts/more rest and make the workouts count.

[161803398874989]

As for "less is more" vs. "more is more": it depends. Allow me to explain, but I'd like to define some terminology first:

-Intensity: amount of force produced (lifting a weight at 90% of your maximum is high intensity, lifting a weight at 20% of your maximum is not)

-Volume: defined here as sets*reps, so the total amount of repetitions you perform.

It's about providing an adequate stimulus to drive adaptation. Sounds complex, I know. It really isn't, though. What you want is to stress your body to the point where it will say: "Wow, that was hard! I'll better get ready for next time!" When I say "stress your body" I do not necessarily mean CF-style stressing where you end up broken at the end of the session. It's about using the correct intensity and volume to force your body to get better at what you want to get better at.

If you want to get strong (low volume high intensity), you're best off with a low volume high intensity program.

If you want to get endurance (high volume low intensity), you're best off with a high volume low intensity program.

A mix between these two is possible as well, but you'd have to scale volume and intensity properly. So for something exactly in between you get medium volume at medium intensity.

The correct intensity and volume lie on a bell curve:

The middle represents the optimal stimulus: where you want your intensity and volume to be. This will force your body to adapt maximally while not inducing extra stress that takes longer to recover from, but doesn't do anything for adaptation. If you go higher in intensity or volume, you get on the right side of the curve, which means diminishing returns. The stress is too high, so your body starts using different systems to compensate and is more fatigued all over, so it takes longer to get fully adapted (note: I'm well aware there is something as the dual factor theory, but let's keep it simple). So more is not more in this case. On the other side, less stress means your body doesn't think "wow, this was hard!", so your body doesn't adapt, it just goes back to where you were before the "workout".

Now, this sweet spot is determined by your goals and how your body responds. If you want to get strong, you're best of on a low volume high intensity program, but exactly how low the optimal volume and how high the optimal intensity are is determined by your body's response. However, the general location for most people is the same (within a few reps or percentage points), so stick with the general recommendations. Only experienced people know their body well enough to determine their exact optimal volume and optimal intensity.

In short, you have to practice that which you want to get good at and make sure you neither do too little nor too much. Simple, no?

These are just the basics, but the bell curve model along with the dual factor model I mentioned allows you to understand a TON about training. If I were to go into that, this post would become really huge and would be more of an article.

As for your other question:

So here I am, sitting with increasingly worse carpal tunnel (my right thumb is semi-numb) that I think might come from upping my pushups and assisted pullups, but still wanting to make progress, I'm at a loss. Agh.

Stop being stupid and go see a doc.

[Good Row G]

Love this thread, since it's one of the things I'm pondering and would love an answer to. All ears.

[TeaKwonDo]

Yegads, this answers questions I've had for years. I wasn't sure about the difference in training for muscle endurance vs strength, especially in regards to body recomposition/fat loss. Thanks for the graph and explanations, 161803398874989.

My goals are strength and a sixpack, and I've been lifting heavy things in conjunction with assisted upper-level bodyweight stuff. There's a huge mental portion as well; wanting to see results fast, getting frustrated when Fitday tells me I haven't eaten enough when I'm stuffed, looking at other peoples' workouts and feeling like I'm not doing enough (example: one lady on the Bodyrock Facebook group does three routines a day for FUN, and never has overtraining symptoms) or I'm stuck in forever-beginner mode because I'll have a week or two where my form is shit and I don't realize it until my body starts acting up--basically being a competitive dick with myself.

[Loren Wade]

Neither is more and both is more. I'm with KW, CF is definitely in the less is more camp. Either way, there are lots of roads to fitness. You kind of have to find yours, then you've found your "more".

[Zorch]

As I'm collecting underpants, there seem to be two different camps of exercise philosophy: less is more, and more is more.

Less is more: NF's Steve Kamp. Following his travel log is proof that you can get results from every other day bodyweight workouts built on a few sets of basic, but progressive functional movements with less than 15 reps each.

More is more: Crossfit, Bodyrock, etc. Massive reps for time, high volume at the highest weight you can manage. Rip-roaring results.

And then there's Grease the Groove, which kind of fits in both camps at once.

So here I am, sitting with increasingly worse carpal tunnel (my right thumb is semi-numb) that I think might come from upping my pushups and assisted pullups, but still wanting to make progress, I'm at a loss. Agh.

More is more. Until "More" begins to hamper your recovery/leads to sustained fatigue, at which point less becomes more.

Yes, I know that's not as specific an answer as you might like, but the short version is: Listen to your body. If you're not tired after a workout and have zero soreness the day after, more is probably more - you can work yourself a bit harder. If you're at the point where one workout still has you feeling significantly sore/drained to the point that it diminishes the quality of subsequent workouts, you're probably in less is more territory and backing off will probably leave you in better shape physically and mentally. Adjust accordingly and find something that you are comfortable with.

[161803398874989]

Yegads, this answers questions I've had for years. I wasn't sure about the difference in training for muscle endurance vs strength, especially in regards to body recomposition/fat loss. Thanks for the graph and explanations, 161803398874989.

My goals are strength and a sixpack, and I've been lifting heavy things in conjunction with assisted upper-level bodyweight stuff. There's a huge mental portion as well; wanting to see results fast, getting frustrated when Fitday tells me I haven't eaten enough when I'm stuffed, looking at other peoples' workouts and feeling like I'm not doing enough (example: one lady on the Bodyrock Facebook group does three routines a day for FUN, and never has overtraining symptoms) or I'm stuck in forever-beginner mode because I'll have a week or two where my form is shit and I don't realize it until my body starts acting up--basically being a competitive dick with myself.

My advice to you would be to start easy. Get on something like starting strength or stronglifts and don't do anything else.

[Sloth the Enduring]

Less is more iff you're ramping up the intensity and perhaps the frequency.

[oystergirl]

For me, I have found the greatest gains in strength, weight loss, over all body feeling good and reduction in injury which would prevent me from working out to be in the less is more camp. for the record, REAL body rocking aka Zuzana Lights zoww's are all under 15 minutes long and other than stretching and walking, that is all she does and that is definitely LESS in the time and volume/rep market. Most of her workouts are 10 minute challenges and they are amazing.

I did PX90 before I did this and I can't even tell you how hard that was for me to recover from. You have an injury already or your body is telling you something and you are not really listening. I also tried to Power through those signs and ended up screwing my shoulder up so badly that I couldn't work out for 6 freaking months.

Every single one of us is different. Is there proof that folks of Masai decent can run fast and far and do well eating blood, meat and dairy exclusively? yes. Is there proof that the amish can eat anything they want in their traditional diet including wheat and butter and walk 5 miles a day and lift heavy things? yes. Is it pretty obvious that we are all a blend of different genetic material and will be able to acheive health based on different protocols for exercise and nutrition? I think so

[Sloth the Enduring]

I really like Zuzanna's workouts. 15 minutes a day at a balls to the wall intensity gives a good training affect, but at a low enough volume that you can do it again the next day. It works really well for me.