Why are multi-joint compound exercises better?

[_XYDREX_]

What is the reason why multi-joint compound exercises are better?

It is generally accepted that for muscle mass & strength, using compound multi-joint exercises that involve several muscle groups at once is better than using isolation moves for each individual muscle separately. I am interested in hearing from people why they believe this to be the case.

Below is a list of reasons why this might be the case, together with an argument against it.

1/. More weight can be handled. Obviously using many muscle groups at once allows you to handle more weight for the exercise.. But logically this means that effort per muscle group must be 'watered' down in a sense, since we have limits to our respiratory system, CNS etc.. If all our efforts were concentrated into each muscle individually using isolation moves, it may seem logical we should be able to hit them harder & generate stronger muscular contractions without for e.g. getting puffed out.

2/. Hormone response. It has been measured that doing heavy compound moves boosts your levels of testosterone & hgh. Isolation moves dont tend to do this very much at all. However the effects of this are not clear. Test levels for e.g. are very erratic, your levels throughout the day fluctuate wildly. While it has been measured that instantaneous levels are boosted for a few hours or so, it has not been proven that your average levels over the very long run will increase. It could very well be that initial peaks induced may be matched by troughs later on neutalizing the effect. Plus the magnitudes of these boosts, although measurable, are not very significant. For example people on hrt dont experience much difference from varying their dosages +/- 10%, yet these are the magnitudes of the naturally induced boosts. Hormone levels in general must be raised much higher for this to be the predominant effect.

3/. Rate of glycogen depletion. This is one I have been thinking may be a good explanantion, although I dont know if there are any studies supporting it. If there are, please point me to them. By using many muscle groups at once, the total rate of glycogen depletion is higher. This may send a stronger signal to the brain that muscle size should be increased in order to increase the number/size of glycogen storage units. However this argument seems fitting only for sarcoplasm, not so much for myofibrillar hypertrophy or strength increases.

Please state which factor/s you think is/are important, or if there any others you may know of, or contribute to any of the explanations above. I actually have a couple more but I have to think about them some more. Hopefully this can kick off some ideas for now.

[KyleAaron]

There's a review of the scientific studies of various aspects of resistance training here (pdf).

In regards to isolation vs compound exercises, what it says is basically that the compound exercises quite simply take more out of you, they're a bigger stress to the body.

Now, the whole theory behind "progressive overload" or "progressive resistance training" is that your body wants to stay more or less as it is now, so you have to do something drastic to shock it. If you do (say) one-armed bent over dumbell rows and dumbell curls, you're exercising the same muscles as in chinups. But chinups will take more out of you than rows and curls.

The review also mentions the hormonal stuff, but doesn't address your question of whether that has actually been shown to make much difference. Who knows, honestly - my instinct is, not much. I mean, a spike in testosterone for a minute or two, so what.

Anyway, so much for the sciencey stuff. I think in more day-to-day terms. So I think of time, ease, function and flexibility.

Time? Well, I don't want to live in the gym, nor do most beginners. So we want exercises where we can work the most muscles in the shortest time. That's compound exercises. It's just quicker to do (say) 30 total reps of chinups than 30 reps of one-armed bent over dumbell rows and 30 reps of dumbell curls. If I do (say) bench, squat and deadlift, I have worked just about every muscle in my body. At 2 warmup and 3 work sets each, that's 15 sets in all - unless I'm extremely strong and thus need big rest periods, I can do that in 30 minutes, leaving 10 minutes for a warmup, and 10 minutes for a cooldown and stretch - or maybe 20 minutes for some cardio, or whatever I like. Or maybe I can take an extra 10 minutes of rest, or yakking to mates in the gym.

Compounds are just more time efficient.

Ease, by this I don't mean the workout itself is easy. It's hard, obviously. I mean that I don't have to be an exercise genius to manage it. In a mainstream gym, dumbells will go up in units of 2.5kg/5lbs. It can be hard to manage and measure progression. I might be able to do 10 reps with 10kg in a curl, but only 1-2 reps with 12.5kg. How then will I do a progressive overload? There are techniques, but it means we're getting fancy.

Barbells with compound movements, that 2.5kg jump is okay. It's hard for some exercises like overhead press, but for bench or deadlift, it's okay. If I can deadlift 100kg for 10 reps, I should be able to manage 8 reps with 102.5kg. So I can progressively overload myself more easily.

Function, here we're looking at whether the motion in the gym is similar to some motion in day-to-day life. Pick something heavy off the ground, well that's a deadlift. Get up off a seat, that's a squat. Go up some stairs, that's a lunge. And so on. But bicep curl? Tricep kickbacks? Knee extension? These are not so much used in day-to-day life, or rather when they're used, not much strength is needed.

This ties into ease for beginners. If an exercise movement feels natural, they're more likely to get the technique right, and more likely to stick with the gym as a whole.

Where they do have difficulties with the technique, usually that reflects a particular tightness or weakness they have - for example, rounding the back and/or leaning forward at the bottom of a squat has to do with tight and/or weak glutes/hams, very typical for modern sedentary Westerners.

You have to work your weaknesses more than your strengths if you want to improve. Doing the compound exercise encourages you to work on your weakness, while going to an isolation movement lets you ignore or work around your weakness.

Part of this is also the weights totals. Let's say I can do dumbell flies with 30kg and one-armed row 25kg for 10 reps each. Is my back in balance with my chest in strength terms? Who knows, not me. But then let's say I can bench press 100kg and deadlift 80kg - okay, now we know for sure my back is weaker than my chest, and most of us know we don't want that. Thus, doing compound exercises lets us know better if our various bodyparts are in balance in strength terms.

Lastly there's flexibility. This is something that's not talked about much on bodybuilding forums. But decent flexibility helps your lifts and improves your quality of life. It's not good to grunt when we bend to tie our shoelaces, to have a stiff back, to wake up with our shoulders around our ears and our necks in pain, to have such tight chest and shoulders that you can't reach your hands back to hold the squat bar.

Doing compound exercises for the whole body improves flexibility. The bottom of the bench press, the first pull of the deadlift, all these sorts of things - they do a lot more for flexibility than curls or kickbacks or knee extensions.

So with or without the science stuff, and ignoring for the moment the years of experience of people which tell us compounds work well, I think there are a lot of good reasons to prefer compounds over isolation movements, at least for formerly sedentary beginners.

[Cheesin]

I honestly never knew about number 3. But to be honest, I think compounds are important, but I honestly like isolation movements more for smaller body part growth. I even like to finish off my days with "isolating machines", even for chest and back. Reason being my respiratory endurance is way lower than my muscular endurance. It's actually probably boardering unhealthy.

We all know compounds exaust the hell out of you, and that has it's ups and downs. You've pretty much listed them in your first question. I.E. You use more muscles, but, in doing so you don't hit the targeted muscle group as hard as possible. And like you said, these probably have a greater effect on cns recovery than isolations.

Now, even though I love isolation movements, I would never abandon compounds, specifically because of the fact that more muscles are used at once (increased frequency), and because I'm afraid of losing strength in these. But I think a person could make gains on a machine only routine, believe it or not, but it would probably have to be super high volume.

[VoxExMachina]

Funny that a thought provoking post like this gets two replies, but the "how high do the dumbbells go in your gym" gets dozens.

bump

[Al Swearengen]

Definition:

Compound exercises in weight training are those that involve more than one joint and muscle group.



it's simple really have you ever tried to work all your body parts with isolation's only? probably not and do you know why, well because it's impossible to do that you have to use compound movements to hit all muscle groups you have no choice because of how we're made. which is why these threads get so little interest from veterans because it's a moot point.

compound movements are better because they are the only way to hit all muscle groups and then there's the time it would take if you could hit all groups with isolation lifts you would be in the gym all day for many days a week i would imagine.

[whiteboyy09]

good information

[Austin109]

interesting idea. this is just my opinon. i dont know enough about the details of this to say with any acuracy.

it seems that even though a load may be supported by many muscles there are sections of a compound lift were certain muscles must maintain almost all of the weight. while you may not get a true full ROM you would certainly stress your chest quite a bit more for those few seconds you are fully supporting 300lbs per rep of bench than a full ROM 40lb db flye.

that make any kind of sense?

[_XYDREX_]

interesting idea. this is just my opinon. i dont know enough about the details of this to say with any acuracy.

it seems that even though a load may be supported by many muscles there are sections of a compound lift were certain muscles must maintain almost all of the weight. while you may not get a true full ROM you would certainly stress your chest quite a bit more for those few seconds you are fully supporting 300lbs per rep of bench than a full ROM 40lb db flye.

that make any kind of sense?

Yes, that was going to be my next point in fact.
4/. Resistance distribution. Lets compare the squat & the leg extension and how they hit the quads. Leg extensions are pretty much continuous tension. Squats however will have a sticking point & a lockout. For a long time sticking points & lockout have been seen as disadvantages. Machines have been built to get around them like Nautilus machines. However I actually believe sticking points & lockouts are good thing, not a bad thing. Constant tension exercises in a sense dilute the contraction effort over the entire ROM of the rep. However, you have to 'blast' through a sticking point with a much stronger contraction, then the muscle gets a chance to recover even for a split second while moving away from the sticking point towards the lockout. Even if you make an effort to never fully lockout, you still have much less resistance near a lockout compared to near a sticking point. So the muscle recovers slightly, ready for the next intense contraction. So I believe a series of intense contractions, followed by moments of relative de-load if you like is superior to exercises which have roughly the same tension throughout the entire range of motion. I believe its no coincidence that the 3 best overall mass/strength builders (bench, squat, dead) all have a strong sticking point & a lockout.

[KurtyJ99]

You don't need no damn study from some guy that has never touched a weight in his life, just look at the people that are the best in the buisness, it's all too easy.

Compounds for the win.

[Tommy W.]

Theory and words all come into play with this subject all the time

Go ahead and do an isolation sesh then wait a few days and do a compound sesh with some good deadlifting

Report back

[MWheatley]

Yes, that was going to be my next point in fact.
4/. Resistance distribution. Lets compare the squat & the leg extension and how they hit the quads. Leg extensions are pretty much continuous tension. Squats however will have a sticking point & a lockout. For a long time sticking points & lockout have been seen as disadvantages. Machines have been built to get around them like Nautilus machines. However I actually believe sticking points & lockouts are good thing, not a bad thing. Constant tension exercises in a sense dilute the contraction effort over the entire ROM of the rep. However, you have to 'blast' through a sticking point with a much stronger contraction, then the muscle gets a chance to recover even for a split second while moving away from the sticking point towards the lockout. Even if you make an effort to never fully lockout, you still have much less resistance near a lockout compared to near a sticking point. So the muscle recovers slightly, ready for the next intense contraction. So I believe a series of intense contractions, followed by moments of relative de-load if you like is superior to exercises which have roughly the same tension throughout the entire range of motion. I believe its no coincidence that the 3 best overall mass/strength builders (bench, squat, dead) all have a strong sticking point & a lockout.

Great point but this obviously does not mean isolations have no place in a routine. I like to alternate between heavy and light routines each week for larger muscle groups such as back,chest,legs, and sometimes even shoulders.

[gomez26]

You don't need no damn study from some guy that has never touched a weight in his life, just look at the people that are the best in the buisness, it's all too easy.

Compounds for the win.

Theres a million reasons why looking at the best in the business wont mean jack for the average guy . He aint proving or disproving it, but knowing why can give us insights to adjust other stuff.

[KurtyJ99]

Theres a million reasons why looking at the best in the business wont mean jack for the average guy . He aint proving or disproving it, but knowing why can give us insights to adjust other stuff.

Listen, I have to be nice so I don't get banned.

But in the nicest way possible, the OP is not smart.

He is thinking quite backwards.

[Austin109]

he asked a question and used some pretty good reasoning. why is it stupid of him to ask why something is better?

[hehateme00000]

Its a good topic but if anyone is educated enough its clear that compound exercises are better in every way. Especially for people on this board, too many people do cheat curls with 35lb dumbells and dont bother to see that if they could deadlift 500 their arms would be big.

The way the body works, its clear to see compounds are the way to go. The only time it will ever do a tricep kickback, 1arm curl or reverse tricep extension is in the gym. Your body doesnt know its in the gym. It just knows it need to move some weight. And you can move the most weight with squats, deadlifts and bench.

[hehateme00000]

because u are training a movement rather than a muscle.

+1
good answer

[Opies]

because u are training a movement rather than a muscle.

Not really.

Training a muscle is exactly what bodybuilders should be doing. Training movements is for athletes and powerlifters.

You also don't need to do isolation exercises to train the muscle. It is just as easy with compounds. Just has to do with MMC and focus.

[morderstwo]

LMAO, he aint arguing that compounds aint better. He's trying to get ppl's opinion on why. Yeh it's more important to just know that they are, but its always good to know why coz there always somethin you can adjust one way or another & u can do so favorably if u know how shyt works. Its funny how guys get defensive.

[Nick1971]

Compound lifts are very time-efficient exercises and they work a lot of muscles for so few sets and reps. They are also typically the bread and butter exercises, and help to gauge overall body strength. Isolations are good to help with weak areas, however. This is one of those types of debates that could be very deep with a lot of discussion, but for me the above is most relevant.

[kitarpyar]

Funny that a thought provoking post like this gets two replies, but the "how high do the dumbbells go in your gym" gets dozens.

bump

That's because thinking takes time brah

[-Lucifer]

I just 5 star'd this thread.

[gomez26]

Listen, I have to be nice so I don't get banned.

But in the nicest way possible, the OP is not smart.

He is thinking quite backwards.

You wanna give us an example of forward thinking?

I gotta say, it is pretty interesting to think about why some things are better than others.
Fair enough it probably wont change too much since we just got to know that they are, we dont really have to know the reason why. But still its good to discuss as u learn other stuff in the process.

But it aint nowhere near as interesting as figuring why this would make someone get so pissed off that they have to control themselves from getting banned . Just coz someone else dared to ask the question . THIS is absolutely fascinating.

[KyleAaron]

Funny that a thought provoking post like this gets two replies, but the "how high do the dumbbells go in your gym" gets dozens.

This requires longer responses, even if not everyone could be bothered giving them.

Quality over quantity.

You don't need no damn study from some guy that has never touched a weight in his life, just look at the people that are the best in the buisness, it's all too easy.

The studies may be written by people who don't lift (we don't know either way), but they are studies of people who do lift. I don't have to be a champion race car driver to study how ordinary people drive, and how they improve their driving. I just have to study them.

The best in the business take drugs. So things are a bit different for them than for most of us.

Training a muscle is exactly what bodybuilders should be doing. Training movements is for athletes and powerlifters.

The OP didn't distinguish between them. Nor does it really make any difference for beginners, anyway.

Why do I focus on beginners? Because 75% of people new to the gym quit within one month, and 90% within three months. So at any time in the gym, almost everyone will be a beginner. The most important question is, "what gets a beginner results?" Because if they get through their first year of training with good results, they're very likely to stick with it. If they get no results in those first months, they quit, and the closest they come to lifting is saying "about three-fifty" in Gen Misc.

A beginner needs a solid foundation of strength, fitness and flexibility, a foundation upon which they can build in whatever way they want - physique change, strength improvement, better for some sport, whatever. It's a bit the way a carpenter's apprentice begins by planing wood. They may go on to be a cabinetmaker, a furniture maker, a framer, a wainwright, who knows - but they have to begin by planing wood. A beginner to resistance and cardio training is much the same - they have to begin in a simple way, so they can later on get fancy for their particular goals.

Today I saw a young woman who could only do one knee pushup, nor more than six bodyweight squats. If she were my client, would it matter that she wanted to be a fitness model, powerlifter, get stronger for netball, or what? Not at all. She can't do more than a single knee pushup and six bodyweight squats! She couldn't touch her toes. As for her fitness, let's not even go there - she smokes for a start. She wasn't obese, quite skinny in fact - but that's irrelevant, really.

She needs to have basic strength, fitness and flexibility before she can worry about "am I training a muscle, or training a movement? Will this rep range create more endurance or strength or hypertrophy?" Let's get her to around 30 full pushups, 50 bodyweight squats, run a couple of miles however slowly without stopping, that sort of thing. Then we can see.

This sort of deconditioned sedentary person is very common. And this sort of person, the beginner who makes up 90+% of mainstream gym membership, they need a basic foundation of strength, fitness and flexibility, and they want to achieve it in a few workouts each week, under an hour each.

That's most easily achieved by a basic programme of compound exercises - for the quite weak and unfit, beginning with bodyweight, and only after a month or so moving onto weights.

[pFuzzz]

Briefly touched on time efficiency just as a matter of convenience...

What about time efficiency as it relates to increase in cortisol levels?

[Karaim]

Another reason (aside from the many mentioned above) is that there simply AREN'T isolation exercises for many muscle groups. How do you isolate the lats? You really can't. What about the chest? Flys. But it's pretty hard to build a nice chest with just flys.

Additionally, isolation moves only hit a muscle from one angle. But for bodybuilding purposes, it is important to hit a muscle from different angles. Thus leg extensions may work to train the quads, but eventually a different exercise will be needed.

Furthermore, isolation moves don't necessarily train a muscle to do all the functions it was designed to do.

[morderstwo]

Another reason (aside from the many mentioned above) is that there simply AREN'T isolation exercises for many muscle groups. How do you isolate the lats? You really can't. What about the chest? Flys. But it's pretty hard to build a nice chest with just flys.

Additionally, isolation moves only hit a muscle from one angle. But for bodybuilding purposes, it is important to hit a muscle from different angles. Thus leg extensions may work to train the quads, but eventually a different exercise will be needed.

Furthermore, isolation moves don't necessarily train a muscle to do all the functions it was designed to do.

You can do single joint movements for the lats using a pullover machine, chest using pec-dec. Not so much flys coz elbow rotation is involved.

Briefly touched on time efficiency just as a matter of convenience...

What about time efficiency as it relates to increase in cortisol levels?

I agree for the whole body, time factor is most important. But the original question still has relevance if you're talking about bringing up a weak point, say one muscle group.

[SquatTilYouDrop]

Worse thing fitness/bodybuilding ever did was categorize exercises as compounds and isolations.

They both have their respective places. Seriously silly to debate the merits of one over the other since they both serve different purposes.

[feltmann]

Worse thing fitness/bodybuilding ever did was categorize exercises as compounds and isolations.

They both have their respective places. Seriously silly to debate the merits of one over the other since they both serve different purposes.

Its funny how people are still clinging to the idea that the OP was arguing to choose one over the other. Trying to figure out reasons why something is more effective gives you insights on the bigger picture, it doesn't mean you then have to choose once & for all eternity & never do the other again.

Yeh it aint practical to train the whole body using just isolations to even make a comparison for the sake of interest. Probably over 80% of all people who train long term don't train every muscle in the body. They'd like to if they had the chance, but most are too busy & are not prepared to invest the time & effort. Im not talking about the extreme chest-&-bi-only group of people, but many just do minimum maintenance work for most of the body & focus on say shoulders & arms or whatever interests them the most. It aint ideal, but thats reality. So to hear the other 20% rise up in fury at just bouncing ideas around is hilarious.

[Al Swearengen]

again it doesn't come down to gh release or which one makes you work harder and not even heavier loading of one verses the other it comes down to the fact that there are over 320 pairs of muscles in the average human body, have fun trying to isolate them in an efficient and timely manner then get back to me. it's a moot point and doesn't matter so just use both and rest assured you're doing the best you can.

[Opies]

The OP didn't distinguish between them. Nor does it really make any difference for beginners, anyway.

I wasn't replying to the OP. Someone commented that compounds are better because they train a movement instead of muscles, but I argue that is not true, and almost opposite of the truth. Only athletes and power lifters should be training movements. For a bodybuilder it is always about training the muscle, and both compounds and isolations can do this effectively, neither one being better than the other