which training plan is better?

[jerjereni]

If you google "28 days to get sick pack"you will see their training plan like this

M Cardio abs.
T Chest
W Cardio abs
And so on.

(1 complete rest day and no leg day)

Compared to

"30 days to get a sick pack" ( also from google)

Their training plan goes something like 5 days straight you will do cardio in the morning and then workout at night (including legs) and you have 1 complete rest day and 2 days of just cardio.
Oh and every start of the workout they have abs workout.

My concern is that even though the point of this is to cut belly fat which is my problem which one of these can still help me retain the most muscle overall. So that i wont just become a skinny guy.
my trouble area is my belly.

I am 25 yo
5'11
208lbs
22 Bfp

[novastepp]

Muscle gain and fat loss are both almost exclusively governed by diet. You should be creating a solid diet first.

In regard to the question, which training set-up is better between the two: my answer is the second one, "30days to get a six pack". It isn't training without legs and hitting the cardio if needed; of course both of those come after diet.

[hellomycognomen]

Reducing caloric intake will be superior in weight reduction than doing cardio IMO. Go to any gym and look at the treadmill section and you will see that's where the majority of fatties are located. So your diet needs to be the priority if you want to see your abdominal section.

Building muscle is not rocket science, design a weight lifting program that challenges you, make sure you hit each body part, progress over time, and allow for rest and recovery in between sessions.

Im not sure I understand what you mean by "looking skinny" as the fastest way to look like you have gained 10 lbs of muscles is to lose 10 lbs of fat. Ive seen plenty of "skinny" guys that weight 170lbs that look like they are 200 because they are shredded and ripped.

[73rr]

It's all about diet if u want abs brother! O and a thread on here called (so u want abs)

Or I think that's what it is called. I will look up and make sure it's the right thread

[73rr]

^^^to my last post. Yes the thread is called so.....you want abs.

Read it, do it, understand it! Helped me ALOT

[jerjereni]

Muscle gain and fat loss are both almost exclusively governed by diet. You should be creating a solid diet first.

In regard to the question, which training set-up is better between the two: my answer is the second one, "30days to get a six pack". It isn't training without legs and hitting the cardio if needed; of course both of those come after diet.

I asked this question because when i used to run marathons my diet was not that solid however my mid section was already a bit toned but my other muscle groups was small even though i am working out i retained the body of a typical runner. Specifically a marathoner not a sprinter.

Right now i have more muscle mass than before, even though my diet is a bit decent my mid section is still lacking because my cardio is only minimal because im having a hard time doing HIITs because my legs are always sore.

My training plan

M Legs
T Shoulders
W Rest
Thu Legs Back
Fri chest tri
Sat rest
Sun back Biceps

Which is why i wanted to change my training plan.

Feel free to comment
Thank you

[jerjereni]

Reducing caloric intake will be superior in weight reduction than doing cardio IMO. Go to any gym and look at the treadmill section and you will see that's where the majority of fatties are located. So your diet needs to be the priority if you want to see your abdominal section.

Building muscle is not rocket science, design a weight lifting program that challenges you, make sure you hit each body part, progress over time, and allow for rest and recovery in between sessions.

Im not sure I understand what you mean by "looking skinny" as the fastest way to look like you have gained 10 lbs of muscles is to lose 10 lbs of fat. Ive seen plenty of "skinny" guys that weight 170lbs that look like they are 200 because they are shredded and ripped.

Sir please comment on my aforementioned post
Thanks

[jerjereni]

^^^to my last post. Yes the thread is called so.....you want abs.

Read it, do it, understand it! Helped me ALOT

Thanks Man! Ill look for it!

[hellomycognomen]

Sir please comment on my aforementioned post
Thanks

Your question perhaps unbeknownst is loaded and contains a contradiction. If I hear you correctly that your goal is to lose belly fat so as to attain a more visible 6 pack then the second workout would IMO be better. This choice is only due to the fact that it incorporates more cardio times, and thus will lead to a greater amount of calories burned. However this is dependent on time so Im assuming the cardio times of the programs are comparable. However the contraction lies in the additional goal of muscle retention. Research supports that muscle fibers have the potential to change and adapt to the stimulus being placed upon them. So doing a lot of low intensity long duration cardio will favor slow twitch and could potentially lead to an overall reduction of the fast twitch fibers, which are the ones most capable of growth. Just compare a distance runner to a sprinter and the difference becomes obvious. Additionally the minimal calories burned by the low intensity long duration cardio can easily be reduced via diet. So its my opinion that for your goal there are far superior options, such as caloric restriction, moderate weight training, and HIIT cardio, with limited use of low intensity long duration cardio.

[jerjereni]

Your question perhaps unbeknownst is loaded and contains a contradiction. If I hear you correctly that your goal is to lose belly fat so as to attain a more visible 6 pack then the second workout would IMO be better. This choice is only due to the fact that it incorporates more cardio times, and thus will lead to a greater amount of calories burned. However this is dependent on time so Im assuming the cardio times of the programs are comparable. However the contraction lies in the additional goal of muscle retention. Research supports that muscle fibers have the potential to change and adapt to the stimulus being placed upon them. So doing a lot of low intensity long duration cardio will favor slow twitch and could potentially lead to an overall reduction of the fast twitch fibers, which are the ones most capable of growth. Just compare a distance runner to a sprinter and the difference becomes obvious. Additionally the minimal calories burned by the low intensity long duration cardio can easily be reduced via diet. So its my opinion that for your goal there are far superior options, such as caloric restriction, moderate weight training, and HIIT cardio, with limited use of low intensity long duration cardio.

I forgot to mention that for the 2nd option, the cardio is only limited to 30 mins with a certain target heart rate.

For the 1st option you will turn to HIIT for 30 mins as well.

[hellomycognomen]

I forgot to mention that for the 2nd option, the cardio is only limited to 30 mins with a certain target heart rate.

For the 1st option you will turn to HIIT for 30 mins as well.

30 min of HIIT depending on how its done could be equivalent to 2-3x the same time as low intensity long duration cardio. But I beginning to think that what you are looking for is for someone to give you an answer you want to hear instead of telling you how it is.

-Cheers