[fdw]

> You don't need more routines. You need the routine you'll do 50 or 100 times. Honest question from someone with just anecdotes and no data: Is it preferable to do the same routine regularly over different routines (equally often)? Last year, a friend sent me a link to https://darebee.com/ where I've been choosing different routines almost every time (or a program, which consists of different routines for each day). This seems to me more effective for me, but maybe it's just more motivation to do different things.

[Afton]

Goals goals goals. The implicit assumption is that your goal is to develop something specific over time. You want to get stronger, you want to get bigger, you want to increase your endurance, for example.

Since those specific goals are so common, they fade into the background. But if your goals are more or less one or more of those goals, then yes, do the same set of exercises 50-100 times (progressing weights/intensity/etc). That will stimulate improvements. Doing a bunch of different things every time is 100% better than sitting on the couch, but won't allow you to progress very much. You'll essentially only be progressing e.g. strength when you happen to overlap some motion with the right amount of increase to cause improvement.

But something that you'll do is better than a perfect thing that you'll get bored of and stop doing. Existence is the primary predicate and all that.

Incidentally, Starting Strength (the book) talks about this somewhat. He distinguishes between 'training' and 'exercising'. Training is about progressive overload. Exercise is about moving your body. If you want to change your body, you'll want to train.

[browningstreet]

Routines should be a mix of things you develop expertise and efficiencies at (say, compound barbell movements or heavy KB base movements), and other things that you aren't efficient at. Strength training (simply one modality) is about progressive overload. So, it helps to get better at some of your exercises, but it's also advantageous to stress your body in ways that you're not efficient at -- but, if that's all you're doing, you'll never truly push yourself because the progressive overload gains won't come.

My advice in the past is that 60% of your time in training should be for things you like and you're getting very good at. The non-compound movements have benefits, but unless you're competing at something, the benefits are across a broader impact spectrum.

How will this translate into a fitness routine? If you look at some of the 5/3/1 periodization routines, it'll be something like: bench press, shoulders/chest, lats, triceps. Doesn't matter as much which shoulder/chest or lat exercises, just take them to a proper RPE (search it).

Routines, in and of themselves, aren't super helpful if you don't understand some of the basic principles. For which some deeper resource -- a book, possibly -- is a wise investment.

[fdw]

Thank you (and also the responders, u/Afton and u/jnosCo) for your help!

While I have certainly a lot to learn on that topic, I feel like I haven't failed completely - of course all kinds of exercises come around again, and I'm increasing difficulty/number of sets. So there's room for optimization, but it's not a bad start, I think.

Thanks again :)

[jnosCo]

If we're talking about lifting, It's better to switch your routine after a while to avoid "plateauing", but not so often as to not be able to track progress and perfect form in lifts.

[Afton]

This is one of those 'true but' statements. I think it's actively harmful to provide it to beginners who don't have the context to understand what that means. Vanishingly few beginners are running a routine long enough or hard enough to suffer from this problem.