Alternate Sets

[bigshoulders]

Does anyone do alternate sets?
For example:

Chest set ..90 sec...back set...90 sec...chest set...90 sec...back set etc

This is the way I have worked out for the last two or three years and have got great results.

I think it is good because you get to rest the bodypart that just got hit while using the rest to hit another bodypart.

But I've never heard of anyone working out like this (I'm sure there are some people), and don't know why not.

 

[Rodja]

It's a style that really fits antagonistic training (e.g. chest/back), but most people do not train in that fashion.

 

[jcp2]

The original muscle media wrote an article about this. I used to do it for arms and i have done it for chest/back. It is a good approach i always thought.

 

[cord195148]

For an advanced way to incorporate these into a complete program, check out ScottAbel.com. It's called MET.

 

[bigshoulders]

Thanks for the replies, have checked out those links.

Those are reasons to follow this technique, what reasons are there not to do alternate sets when you are doing 2 bodyparts in one day? I can't think of any

 

[buuzer0]

I do this all the time, saves time in the gym. Works best when there's barely anyone there though, as you'll need to go back and forth between different stations.

Like, if it's legs/shoulders day, I'll do a set of squats, then a set of forward shoulder dumbell raises, then some shrugs, then back to squats until i've done 3 or 4 sets.

Biceps/chest day I'll do bench and then a set of curls, etc.

Triceps/back are easy to alternate.

Sometimes I'll do incline crunches while I'm resting a muscle.

I don't know of any disadvantages to it, makes my workouts more intense and saves some time. Win/win in my opinion!

 

[jcp2]

You are supposed to stay stronger this way and not get as tired. So if you do a set of icline, than 90 seconds later do bent rows, than 90 seconds later do another set of incline you should be stronger at the inlcine. It is supposed to be effective like this as you go through you entire workout. I felt it was, but could have been placebo, i definately did not know my body as well at 23 as i do at 32.

 

[buuzer0]

It feels like I'm wasting precious time if I sit there resting after doing a set while a totally unrelated muscle could be getting worked. Related to this, see this thread where MrKleen73 broke down a split that makes sense to me, and works perfect with doing these alternating sets, IMO.

http://anabolicminds.com/forum/training-forum/131471-each-body-part.html

Here's the part that I took and made my routine lately:

I also really like this split.
Chest \ Biceps
Legs \ Shoulders
Back \ Triceps
off

YOur arms get used a lot and can handle more frequency of training. Hitting the chest and then the triceps is redundant in the same workout. Your triceps are pumped and swole by the end of your chest workout. So they get one good indirect workout there then you do the biceps which are nice and fresh so you can really pound them then. Then when you hit your back your biceps get pumped and have another great indirect workout, but your triceps are fresh so you can totally blast them again too. It just makes the amount of time in the gym more efficient in my opinion.You can also do a few less sets for them because they are getting trained more frequently meaning they need less sets workout to achieve the same amount of volume. That can afford for one more exercise on the other body part, or a few extra sets on the major body part either way stillmaking the use of time in the gym more efficient. That of course is my opinion and is not the oly way to go. I have made gains using both ways.