women's beginning workouts

With the help of Alyssa who is the scoobysworkshop weight loss success story this year, I came up with two womens beginning workouts.  One uses resistance bands and the other uses just dumbbells.  Please check them out and tell me what you think!

The workout is tough even for men - by burpees 10 minutes.

May be a little tweaking with the minutes will improve the workout.  Else, it's good to go.  May be not as beginner, but intermediate.

Awesome, I'll have to send a link to my sister who is always afraid of becoming too bulky - just like Scooby addressed in the introduction to the womens workouts. I'll see what she thinks.

I hope there end up being videos on the subject so the masses will find out!

I don't understand how "my workouts" don't respond to those principles as much as yours do. Would you mind to explain?

Anyway, it seems you didn't get it: the two programs I suggested weren't thought as new programs (so it doesn't matter if there're already balanced programs in your website); they were thought as modifications of your own programs. In fact, they're based on the same principles: they are simple programs designed for women that can be done at home, require minimum (cheap) equipment, require minimum time, serve for weight loss and produce basic strength gains - they're even based on the same pieces of equipment!: I made it clear that people could either do Pull-ups (if they have access to a "Pull-up bar"), do Pull-downs with resistance bands, or don't do a vertical pull at all (just a horizontal pull) - so they don't really require a "Pull-up bar" at all.
 
You say that in order to make them accesible to everyone, there're some compromises that have to be made. The thing is, that's not a valid argument to make them unbalanced. Seriously, to make them simple doesn't equate to make them unbalanced; to make them balanced doesn't equate to make them less simple. What makes you think that my programs are more complicated, anyway? The two programs I suggested are more balanced than yours (see my previous post) and are as simple as yours: they have the same number of (simple) exercises, require the same amount of time and require the same (cheap) pieces of equipment. In fact, they can even be more simple than yours: if you took the "core exercises" out of them, they would end up having less exercises, so they would require even less time. I really don't understand how are these workouts less probable to get done than yours.

You also say that if your programs required a "Pull-up bar", then most of the people targeted would dismiss them. Now, the thing is, with that same argument you shouldn't propose a workout that requires dumbbells. What makes you think that people is not willing to get just one "Pull-up bar", but is willing to get more than one pair of dumbells? Then again, the two programs I suggested don't require a "Pull-up bar" at all: they could be done with dumbbells or resistance bands. In fact, as I knew it would prevent many people from adopting them, they were thought to be done without such bar. Anyway, I really don't understand how is a dumbbell program more probable to be adopted than a program that only requires a demountable bar.

I think you should read again my post.

That said, your post doesn't say anything about any of the many issues I addressed:

1) the upper body work is not balanced: in the dumbbell program, you have a vertical and a horizontal push but no pull; in the resistance band program, you have a horizontal push but no pull whatsoever (see number 2). This lesser work for the back not only results in submaximal strength (and muscle mass) gains; it could led to relatively weak muscles. The relative weakness of those muscles, as with any other muscle, could led to imbalances, which in turn could led to submaximal performance, pain and injuries. This is shoulder insurance, Scooby.

Again, the fact that you want to keep those programs simple is not a valid reason to keep them unbalanced; but even if it was, you can balance them without making them any less simple: you just have to add a horizontal pull in both of them (the Resistance Band Rows are not real rows - see number 2. You could add Dumbbell Rows and Resistance Band Rows, respectively) and a vertical pull in the resistance band one (you could add Pull-downs) or remove the vertical push from the dumbbell one. If you want to keep the same number of exercises, just take the Biceps Curls out of both, and the Side Raises out of the resistance band one (see number 3). It will be more balanced, but as simple.

2) the adduction (retraction) of the scapulae during the whole movement of Push-ups and (Resistance Band) Rows is not only unnecessary (tell me one valid reason why you would do so); it minimizes the work of many of the muscles of the back. Again, this lesser work for the back not only results in submaximal strength (and muscle mass) gains; it could led to relatively weak muscles. And again, the relative weakness of these muscles could led to imbalances, which in turn could led to submaximal performance, pain and injuries. I insist: this is shoulder insurance, Scooby.

Anyway, the rows portrayed hardly are rows. The form is wrong.

3) the addition of Biceps Curls in both workouts, and of Side Raises in the resistance band one, is not only unnecessary (again, tell me one valid reason for their inclusion) - the upper body movements are enough stimuli for biceps and lateral deltoids to produce strength (and muscle mass) gains; it also is useless, as they won't have any possitive effect at that point of the training. They will only put an unnecessary stress on an unadapted joint. Anyway, the time they require could be used for other necessary or more useful exercises.

4) the addition of "core exercises" are, if not necessary, very useful in the context of these beginning workout. The people that will be doing these workouts are complete beginners (which means that they are completely untrained), so they will have an underveloped musculature that makes them prone to injure. The underdevelopment of the musculature of the abdomen, lower back and hips makes them particularly prone to lower back pain and injuries. It makes sense, considering that the other exercises of the program won't addressed this issue completely as there's little work for those muscles, to add a few more exercises to work them out. There're many simple exercises that you could add: Pull Throughs, (Single leg) Hip Thrusts, Pendulum Quadrupled Hip Extension, (Single leg) Reverse Hyperextensions, Bird Dog, Glute Ham Raises, to name a few.

What do you think about them?

I have some questions:

1) Why is there no pulling movement in the dumbbell workout?
2) Why should you limit the functional range of motion (why shouldn't you lock out)?
3) Why should you keep your scapulae adducted (why should you keep your shoulder blades pinched)?
4) Why are there Biceps Curls in the workouts?
5) Why are there Side Raises in the resistance band workout?

I have to insist with the, in my opinion, issues these workouts have:

1) There's no pulling movement in the dumbbell workout. This results in minimal strength and mass gains for the back. The relative weakness of the muscles of the back (as of with any muscles) can led to imbalances. This, in turn, not only will led to bad posture, but also to an injury prone physique - in this particular case, to shoulders and scapulae injuries.
2) It's said that you should limit the functional range of motion. The limitation of the functional range of motion in healthy people is not only unnecessary (unless you're working on an specific part of a lift, why would you do so?); it also is detrimental as it minimizes the work of the muscles. This not only results in submaximal strength and mass gains; it also can result in weak muscles (at certain points of such range), which in turn can led to an injury prone physique.
3) It's said that you should adduct (retract) the scapulae through out the upper body movements. The adduction of the scapulae during upper body movements is not only unnecessary (why would you do so?); it also is detrimental as it minimizes the work of many of the muscles of the back. This, again, results not only in submaximal strength and mass gains; it can also result in relatively weak muscles, which in turn can led to an injury prone physique.
4) There're Biceps Curls in both programs. The inclusion of Biceps Curls in these beginner programs is unnecessary, as the upper body pulling movement will be enough stimulus for the biceps (if more biceps stimulus is desired, a supinated grip can be used). That said, people would be better off using the time it requires to perform this exercise on other necessary (or more useful) exercises.
5) There're Side Raises in the resistance band program. The inclusion of Side Raises this beginner program is unnecessary, as the upper body movement will be enough stimulus for lateral deltoids for beginners. Again, people would be better off using the time it requires to perform this exercise on other necessary (or more useful) exercises.

I also think that it would be a good idea to add more work for the abdomen, lower back and hips as, in my opinion, the suggested exercises aren't enough to completely address the underdevolpment of such musculature that complete beginners tend to have (especially if they spend a lot of time sitting).

Next, on obsessively written Mars' posts: how I think this issues can be resolved...for the third time.

Edit: I know you're a busy person, Scooby. I just hope you consider my thoughts on this topic - I think I made a good point.

I didn't say that they should necessarily avoid them; I said that people would be better off using the time it requires to do Curls on other necessary (or more useful) exercises, such as Rows.

Then again, Scooby clearly implies in his response that he can't add Rows because that would somehow make the workouts less probable to get done. I really can't understand that; Rows respond to all the premises of the programs just as much as Curls do: they're simple exercises to be done at home that require minimum equipment - in fact, they require the exact same amount of equipment that Curls require. I think there's no need to argue why some kind of horizontal pull is necessary, nor why Rows are in general more useful (and convenient) than Curls. So, considering that Rows are necessary and Curls are not, and that Rows are more useful than Curls: if you're not going to add Rows to the workouts because you don't want them to get longer, then simply replace Curls with Rows. Seriously: if you have time to do Curls, you have time to do Rows. 

Anyway, I don't want to be a pain in the hat for Scooby; I just want him to seriously consider what I've said so far.

I also think it's good, but it still has some issues: not only the upper body vertical work isn't balanced, as it has a vertical push but no pull watsoever; the horizontal pull is almost useless as such because the scapulae are adducted through out the whole movement. I think that Scooby should balance the vertical work by either removing the vertical push or, better yet, adding a vertical pull (I've already suggested Pull-downs with resistance bands); and make the row a real horizontal pull by allowing the scapulae get back to the neutral position or, better yet, abduct (protract) during the eccentric part of the movement.


I agree (I was going to mention it, but didn't want to get too dense on this topic ). I think that Overhead Squats with resistance bands could be a good option.