Swimming verus Weight Lifting

<[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

I love swimming and have no interest in doing less of it. But ... if
someone's goal is to live as long as they can, and they can control
what they eat, then isn't lifting weights a quicker way to achieve
longevity?

I'm sure you will build more muscle lifting than swimming, and that
added muscles burns calories and makes it easier to stay thinner. And
if you lift with any intensity, particularly with the legs, it's a heck
of a workout for your heart. Possibly better than doing laps at a
sub-maximum threshold for longer periods of time. Two sessions of half
an hour per week is all it takes. I tried lifting and swimming but it
was too much.

Anybody disagree wtih this assessment?

Eric

I have only a limited interest in adding years to my life.
But I do want to add life to my years.
To this end, I swim 1500m a day at about 80% of max (I'm too old to face the
aches, pains and injuries of going flat out all the time).
This gets my heart and circulation going without any vein bulging or eye
popping stresses.
I can stick with this regime because I love swimming - I haven't found any
other form of exercise that has held my interest over the last 60+ years.

Joskin

Absolutely disagree. Unless you are doing light weights continuosly
over intervals similar to swimming intervals you are not doing an
aerobically adequate workout. Plus swimming keeps your muscles much
more supple.

Swimming and Cross Country skiing are the best.

The advantage goes to swimming do to the rythmic breathing required.

I'm 50 y/o and do train weights but would never consider weights as a
substitute.

[email hidden] says...

Quoted message said:

I love swimming and have no interest in doing less of
it. But ... if someone's goal is to live as long as
they can, and they can control what they eat, then isn't
lifting weights a quicker way to achieve longevity?

Quoted message said:

I'm sure you will build more muscle lifting than
swimming, and that added muscles burns calories and
makes it easier to stay thinner. And if you lift with
any intensity, particularly with the legs, it's a heck
of a workout for your heart. Possibly better than doing
laps at a sub-maximum threshold for longer periods of
time. Two sessions of half an hour per week is all it
takes. I tried lifting and swimming but it was too
much.

Quoted message said:

Anybody disagree wtih this assessment?

I don't know about the longevity issue. It's true that
additional muscle mass burns more calories and helps control
your weight, but that matters only if weight is a problem
for you.

Weight training may be better for you in some specific
respects, such as bone strength and perhaps testosterone
levels, but I don't think doing it exclusively would extend
your lifespan. More likely the opposite, I would think.
I'm not aware that weight training has a reputation for
being of particular benefit to the CV system.

I don't understand why you found doing both to be too much.
Do you mean doing them on the same day is too much?

ekurth said:

I love swimming and have no interest in doing less of it. But ... if
someone's goal is to live as long as they can, and they can control
what they eat, then isn't lifting weights a quicker way to achieve
longevity?

I'm sure you will build more muscle lifting than swimming, and that
added muscles burns calories and makes it easier to stay thinner. And
if you lift with any intensity, particularly with the legs, it's a heck
of a workout for your heart. Possibly better than doing laps at a
sub-maximum threshold for longer periods of time. Two sessions of half
an hour per week is all it takes. I tried lifting and swimming but it
was too much.

Anybody disagree wtih this assessment?

Eric

replacement <> complement

--Mike

Michael Edey said:

On

replacement <> complement

--Mike

Yes, they compliment each other. You don't have to swim the days your
push weights. Swimming stretches you and is a great exercise. It will
add years and keep you healthy.
Weight training is also great for you, and adds years to your life.

Both a better than just doing one.

"Joskin" <[email hidden]> wrote in
news:[email hidden]:

Quoted message said:

I have only a limited interest in adding years to my life.
But I do want to add life to my years.

sounds right to me ;^D

and FWIW, I lift and swim...but if I had to give up one
or the other, the decision's a no-brainer: it would be
weightlifting

--

Mark Vaughan

<[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Absolutely disagree. Unless you are doing light weights continuosly
over intervals similar to swimming intervals you are not doing an
aerobically adequate workout. Plus swimming keeps your muscles much
more supple.

Swimming and Cross Country skiing are the best.

The advantage goes to swimming do to the rythmic breathing required.

I'm 50 y/o and do train weights but would never consider weights as a
substitute.

There are plenty of ways to achieve cardiovascular health without
steady-state aerobics such as swimming. Web search Tabata Protocol and
similar.

For me, when I was younger, I had no interest in weights and loved
swimming, and running and bicycling as well. I still enjoy all three
when I do them but, as I've gotten older, my emphasis has shifted to
primarily weights with a little of the others only. It's all too easy
to lose strength and muscle as you age and, again voicing just my own
opinion here, some combination of strength training with minimal
aerobics is what's best as one ages. I keep my weight training focused
on low reps and heavy weights, much the way a competitive powerlifter
trains, because it simply makes me feel better. I combine this with
regular joint health warmups and post exercise flexibility work, and get
in the pool for a few minutes once or twice a week just because I still
enjoy it, do some very brief strength/endurance session with weights,
and by all measure I'm as aerobically fit or better than I ever was
(resting pulse in the 40's, etc.), although certainly I'm much less fit
in terms of swimming.

Just my opinion - if you want to swim well, swim regularly. If you're
after "health," whatever that means to you, there are many viable
options.

-S-

You said it lot better than I did, Steve.

Since loss of muscle is such an issue as we age, I was thinking maybe
weight training is more useful for health than aerobic activity. I've
never visited "Tabata Protocol", but I'm also a big believer in
anaerobic workouts as a way to maintain cardiac health. My knowledge
and experience there
comes from reading about the "SuperSlow" weight training protocal.
When people talk about doing "cardio", it's almost absurd. As if one
could take one's
heart muscle out and put it on the treadmill. People seem to have lost
sight of the fact that the only way to exercise the heart is through
the skeletal muscle.
And what more dramatic way to put the body, heart and all, unders
stress and thereby make it stronger than by weight training? When I
was training at a local facility doing "SuperSlow", I had gotten such
good anearobic fitness that I literally could not elevate my heart rate
all that high doing sprint 50's.

I see no point in weight training with low weight to enhance swimming.
What is swimming other than many reps at low resistance? If you're
going to
lift like that, might as well stay in the pool. And I found it
impossible to weight lift INTENSELY and also swim and get enjoyment out
of the whole process.

Your comment that as we age it may be best to increase weight training
and limit cardio is really the idea I was trying to float.

Eric

<[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

You said it lot better than I did, Steve.

Since loss of muscle is such an issue as we age, I was thinking maybe
weight training is more useful for health than aerobic activity.
I've
never visited "Tabata Protocol", but I'm also a big believer in
anaerobic workouts as a way to maintain cardiac health. My knowledge
and experience there
comes from reading about the "SuperSlow" weight training protocal.
When people talk about doing "cardio", it's almost absurd. As if one
could take one's
heart muscle out and put it on the treadmill. People seem to have
lost
sight of the fact that the only way to exercise the heart is through
the skeletal muscle.

I don't see the point in condemning the concept of traditional
cardiovascular exercise - it works very well for very many people, and
it worked well for me from my mid-20's to my mid-40's.

It's worth nothing that someone who primarily trains with weights can
find a place for traditional cardio in their program, e.g., I find a bit
of steady-state aerobic activity, e.g., swim, bike, run, brisk walk, can
help when I'm trying to drop a few pounds. A steady diet of lifting and
nothing else will tend to encourage your body to get bigger - might be
more muscle, might be more fat, usually some combination thereof, but
some people, me included, don't want to get any bigger. For that goal,
traditional cardio can work better than high-intensity interval-type
training. The whole reason Tabata was "discovered" was as a way of
allowing weight lifters interested in gaining muscle to remain in good
cardiovascular condition without interfering with increases in muscle
size. (For the record, I'm all of 150 lbs. at 5' 8".)

Quoted message said:

And what more dramatic way to put the body, heart and all, unders
stress and thereby make it stronger than by weight training? When I
was training at a local facility doing "SuperSlow", I had gotten such
good anearobic fitness that I literally could not elevate my heart
rate
all that high doing sprint 50's.

I see no point in weight training with low weight to enhance swimming.
What is swimming other than many reps at low resistance? If you're
going to lift like that, might as well stay in the pool. And I found
it
impossible to weight lift INTENSELY and also swim and get enjoyment
out
of the whole process.

This last statement is again, I think, an overstatement. I recommend
Pavel Tsatsouline's book, "Power To The People!' - it's basic program is
2 sets of 5 reps each, using only 2 exercises, but done with heavy
weights, e.g., you perform your 5 reps with a weight that, at most, you
could lift for 7-8 repetitions before failure. This sort of training
goes very well with a program focused primarily on an aerobic activity
like swimming. There are many variables in the lifting of weights. For
an endurance athlete, lifting a few heavy, short sets with long rest
periods between will encourage strength without overly taxing the
athlete and still allowing plenty of aerobic work to be done. Here's a
link to that book:

http://www.kbnj.com/ptp.htm

It's also worth noting that there is a place for high-repetition weight
work for endurance athletes. Everyone is different - for me, the
purpose of weight training as it regards my endurance sports was to make
me overall stronger and more resistant to injury, but there is plenty of
evidence that high-rep weight work is effective for some endurance
athletes. I don't know much about weight training specifically for
swimming, but I've read about it for running and, while none of what was
recommended seemed interesting to me, I don't think that means it
doesn't work out well for some people.

Quoted message said:

Your comment that as we age it may be best to increase weight training
and limit cardio is really the idea I was trying to float.

Here I agree with you completely - the only constant is change, and
training like you'r 20 when you're 50 may work for some but for most I
think the switch to primarily strength training does a better job of,
overall, fighting the aging process in a useful way.

These are just my opinions - I try to keep up on the reading and
research on these things, and the only reasonable thing to say is that
there are many ways to get to any specific goal - there is no one road
that leads to Rome. Each person needs to pay attention to the results
they're getting from their training, try to learn from others, and be
prepared to make major or minor adjustments as the months and years go
by.

-S-

Quoted message said:

Eric

Steve Freides said:

There are plenty of ways to achieve cardiovascular health without
steady-state aerobics such as swimming. Web search Tabata Protocol and
similar.

Thanks for posting this. It lead me to about an hour of reading on
the subject which was very interesting. I recently embarked on a
program which also eschews what people generally think of as "cardio"
(including me) and I was a little skeptical. But now I feel better
about it--it seems there's a lot of support for the idea.

Dave Clary/Corpus Christi, Tx
Home: http://davidclary.com

Quoted message said:

You said it lot better than I did, Steve.

Since loss of muscle is such an issue as we age, I was thinking maybe
weight training is more useful for health than aerobic activity. I've
never visited "Tabata Protocol", but I'm also a big believer in
anaerobic workouts as a way to maintain cardiac health. My knowledge
and experience there
comes from reading about the "SuperSlow" weight training protocal.
When people talk about doing "cardio", it's almost absurd. As if one
could take one's
heart muscle out and put it on the treadmill. People seem to have lost
sight of the fact that the only way to exercise the heart is through
the skeletal muscle.
And what more dramatic way to put the body, heart and all, unders
stress and thereby make it stronger than by weight training? When I
was training at a local facility doing "SuperSlow", I had gotten such
good anearobic fitness that I literally could not elevate my heart rate
all that high doing sprint 50's.

I see no point in weight training with low weight to enhance swimming.
What is swimming other than many reps at low resistance? If you're
going to
lift like that, might as well stay in the pool. And I found it
impossible to weight lift INTENSELY and also swim and get enjoyment out
of the whole process.

Your comment that as we age it may be best to increase weight training
and limit cardio is really the idea I was trying to float.

Eric

You're forgetting about the different muscle fiber types.

"Steve Freides" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

<[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

You said it lot better than I did, Steve.

Since loss of muscle is such an issue as we age, I was thinking maybe
weight training is more useful for health than aerobic activity. I've
never visited "Tabata Protocol", but I'm also a big believer in
anaerobic workouts as a way to maintain cardiac health. My knowledge
and experience there
comes from reading about the "SuperSlow" weight training protocal.
When people talk about doing "cardio", it's almost absurd. As if one
could take one's
heart muscle out and put it on the treadmill. People seem to have lost
sight of the fact that the only way to exercise the heart is through
the skeletal muscle.

I don't see the point in condemning the concept of traditional
cardiovascular exercise - it works very well for very many people, and it
worked well for me from my mid-20's to my mid-40's.

It's worth nothing that someone who primarily trains with weights can find
a place for traditional cardio in their program, e.g., I find a bit of
steady-state aerobic activity, e.g., swim, bike, run, brisk walk, can help
when I'm trying to drop a few pounds. A steady diet of lifting and
nothing else will tend to encourage your body to get bigger - might be
more muscle, might be more fat, usually some combination thereof, but some
people, me included, don't want to get any bigger. For that goal,
traditional cardio can work better than high-intensity interval-type
training. The whole reason Tabata was "discovered" was as a way of
allowing weight lifters interested in gaining muscle to remain in good
cardiovascular condition without interfering with increases in muscle
size. (For the record, I'm all of 150 lbs. at 5' 8".)

Quoted message said:

And what more dramatic way to put the body, heart and all, unders
stress and thereby make it stronger than by weight training? When I
was training at a local facility doing "SuperSlow", I had gotten such
good anearobic fitness that I literally could not elevate my heart rate
all that high doing sprint 50's.

I see no point in weight training with low weight to enhance swimming.
What is swimming other than many reps at low resistance? If you're
going to lift like that, might as well stay in the pool. And I found it
impossible to weight lift INTENSELY and also swim and get enjoyment out
of the whole process.

This last statement is again, I think, an overstatement. I recommend
Pavel Tsatsouline's book, "Power To The People!' - it's basic program is 2
sets of 5 reps each, using only 2 exercises, but done with heavy weights,
e.g., you perform your 5 reps with a weight that, at most, you could lift
for 7-8 repetitions before failure.

Out of interest, what are the two exercises?

This sort of training

Quoted message said:

goes very well with a program focused primarily on an aerobic activity
like swimming. There are many variables in the lifting of weights. For
an endurance athlete, lifting a few heavy, short sets with long rest
periods between will encourage strength without overly taxing the athlete
and still allowing plenty of aerobic work to be done. Here's a link to
that book:

http://www.kbnj.com/ptp.htm

It's also worth noting that there is a place for high-repetition weight
work for endurance athletes. Everyone is different - for me, the purpose
of weight training as it regards my endurance sports was to make me
overall stronger and more resistant to injury, but there is plenty of
evidence that high-rep weight work is effective for some endurance
athletes. I don't know much about weight training specifically for
swimming, but I've read about it for running and, while none of what was
recommended seemed interesting to me, I don't think that means it doesn't
work out well for some people.

Quoted message said:

Your comment that as we age it may be best to increase weight training
and limit cardio is really the idea I was trying to float.

Here I agree with you completely - the only constant is change, and
training like you'r 20 when you're 50 may work for some but for most I
think the switch to primarily strength training does a better job of,
overall, fighting the aging process in a useful way.

These are just my opinions - I try to keep up on the reading and research
on these things, and the only reasonable thing to say is that there are
many ways to get to any specific goal - there is no one road that leads to
Rome. Each person needs to pay attention to the results they're getting
from their training, try to learn from others, and be prepared to make
major or minor adjustments as the months and years go by.

-S-

Quoted message said:

Eric

"diablo" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

"Steve Freides" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

<[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

You said it lot better than I did, Steve.

Since loss of muscle is such an issue as we age, I was thinking
maybe
weight training is more useful for health than aerobic activity.
I've
never visited "Tabata Protocol", but I'm also a big believer in
anaerobic workouts as a way to maintain cardiac health. My knowledge
and experience there
comes from reading about the "SuperSlow" weight training protocal.
When people talk about doing "cardio", it's almost absurd. As if
one
could take one's
heart muscle out and put it on the treadmill. People seem to have
lost
sight of the fact that the only way to exercise the heart is through
the skeletal muscle.

I don't see the point in condemning the concept of traditional
cardiovascular exercise - it works very well for very many people,
and it worked well for me from my mid-20's to my mid-40's.

It's worth nothing that someone who primarily trains with weights can
find a place for traditional cardio in their program, e.g., I find a
bit of steady-state aerobic activity, e.g., swim, bike, run, brisk
walk, can help when I'm trying to drop a few pounds. A steady diet
of lifting and nothing else will tend to encourage your body to get
bigger - might be more muscle, might be more fat, usually some
combination thereof, but some people, me included, don't want to get
any bigger. For that goal, traditional cardio can work better than
high-intensity interval-type training. The whole reason Tabata was
"discovered" was as a way of allowing weight lifters interested in
gaining muscle to remain in good cardiovascular condition without
interfering with increases in muscle size. (For the record, I'm all
of 150 lbs. at 5' 8".)

Quoted message said:

And what more dramatic way to put the body, heart and all, unders
stress and thereby make it stronger than by weight training? When I
was training at a local facility doing "SuperSlow", I had gotten
such
good anearobic fitness that I literally could not elevate my heart
rate
all that high doing sprint 50's.

I see no point in weight training with low weight to enhance
swimming.
What is swimming other than many reps at low resistance? If you're
going to lift like that, might as well stay in the pool. And I
found it
impossible to weight lift INTENSELY and also swim and get enjoyment
out
of the whole process.

This last statement is again, I think, an overstatement. I recommend
Pavel Tsatsouline's book, "Power To The People!' - it's basic program
is 2 sets of 5 reps each, using only 2 exercises, but done with heavy
weights, e.g., you perform your 5 reps with a weight that, at most,
you could lift for 7-8 repetitions before failure.

Out of interest, what are the two exercises?

-snip-

The main exercise is the barbell deadlift, the same movement done in
powerlifting competitions. This exercise is almost universally agreed
upon as the one that works more of the body than anything else. It also
has no negative portion, at least as done in competition, which makes it
the exercise of choice for getting stronger without getting bigger.

For a second exercise, there are many choices, IMHO. Pavel has chosen
the barbell side press, a one-armed movement - it can be done with the
same equipment as deadlifting, namely a weight set and a rubber mat. The
only thing you won't hit on this two exercise program is the chest and,
as Pavel says, nice chests belong on women. 🙂 Some folks do this
program using the deadlift and the bench press (more likelihood of
getting bigger), or even the squat and the bench press (even more
likelihood of getting bigger).

If you follow the link I gave, which I'll give again here:

http://www.kbnj.com/ptp.htm

you'll see an option to view the complete table of contents of the book.
One chapter lists the exercises Pavel discusses. It's interesting to
note that he doesn't spend the whole book or even most of it, just a
single chapter near the end, on how to perform the specific exercises he
recommends. The book is a primer on strength, and the program given is
purposefully simple and within everyone's reach.

I got into it when someone recommended it to me after I announced myself
on a weightlifting newsgroup as a swim/bike/run guy who'd suffered a
back injury and was looking for a way to strengthen my back without
getting bigger because I especially enjoy riding a road bike uphill and
there's a real price to be paid for any additional bodyweight there.
That was a few years ago and I'm proud to say that I've even set a few
age-group records in the AAU for the deadlift along the way. I still
weigh just what I did when I started but I'm probably a few pounds more
muscular and with a few pounds less bodyfat but I was never fat to start
with.

Sorry if that's more than you asked for - they say there's no zealot
like a convert, and lifting quite literally saved me from a wheelchair
so I get preachy on the subject.

-S-

"Dave Clary" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Steve Freides said:

There are plenty of ways to achieve cardiovascular health without
steady-state aerobics such as swimming. Web search Tabata Protocol
and
similar.

Thanks for posting this. It lead me to about an hour of reading on
the subject which was very interesting. I recently embarked on a
program which also eschews what people generally think of as "cardio"
(including me) and I was a little skeptical. But now I feel better
about it--it seems there's a lot of support for the idea.

Tabata is even old news at this point. I was just looking at a recent
issue of Outside magazine, which seems to regularly run features on
fitness, and they had an article touting the benefits of a protocol of
30 seconds of all-out exercise followed by 90 seconds of active
recovery. That's not quite a short as the intervals Tabata recommends
but it's very much along the same lines. I think part of why I enjoy
lifting heavy, short sets is for much the same reason - I feel like I
get a tremendous amount of 'fitness' or whatever you'd like to call it
from my short, intense lifting. If the intensity is below a certain
level, it continue to work the muscles but it just doesn't pack the same
punch in many ways that are hard to explain (at least I find them hard
to explain).

-S-

Steve Freides said:

"Dave Clary" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Steve Freides said:

There are plenty of ways to achieve cardiovascular health without
steady-state aerobics such as swimming. Web search Tabata Protocol
and
similar.

Thanks for posting this. It lead me to about an hour of reading on
the subject which was very interesting. I recently embarked on a
program which also eschews what people generally think of as "cardio"
(including me) and I was a little skeptical. But now I feel better
about it--it seems there's a lot of support for the idea.

Tabata is even old news at this point.

Yea, I did notice a lot of the articles I was reading (like those on
Bass's site) were dated. But it did open my eyes to some alternatives
which is good news because my feet don't handle distance running these
days. I am doing a spinning class a couple times a week taught by an
ass-kicking, 62 year old, woman instructor. And she cuts me NO slack
(despite the fact we've been married for 30 years!).

Now swimming is another matter--until I learn some technique, it's
more anaerobic for me! I think my best contributions to the sport
will be on deck with a whistle 'round my neck! :-)

Dave Clary/Corpus Christi, Tx
Home: http://davidclary.com

Question for the group....

Do you think it possible to a completely adequate
weight workout with dumb bells only?

"Dave Clary" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Steve Freides said:

"Dave Clary" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

On Sat, 1 Apr 2006 15:55:00 -0500, "Steve Freides"
<[email hidden]> wrote:

>
>There are plenty of ways to achieve cardiovascular health without
>steady-state aerobics such as swimming. Web search Tabata Protocol
>and
>similar.

Thanks for posting this. It lead me to about an hour of reading on
the subject which was very interesting. I recently embarked on a
program which also eschews what people generally think of as
"cardio"
(including me) and I was a little skeptical. But now I feel better
about it--it seems there's a lot of support for the idea.

Tabata is even old news at this point.

Yea, I did notice a lot of the articles I was reading (like those on
Bass's site) were dated. But it did open my eyes to some alternatives
which is good news because my feet don't handle distance running these
days.

Old news doesn't mean bad, of course. Lots of what's coming around
today in the world of strength training is what people where doing
50-100 years ago but became unfashionable over the last few decades.

Quoted message said:

I am doing a spinning class a couple times a week taught by an
ass-kicking, 62 year old, woman instructor. And she cuts me NO slack
(despite the fact we've been married for 30 years!).

Yeah, my wife will let me help her with training at home but there's no
way she'll take a class of mine any more - once burned, twice shy. 🙂

Quoted message said:

Now swimming is another matter--until I learn some technique, it's
more anaerobic for me! I think my best contributions to the sport
will be on deck with a whistle 'round my neck! :-)

Technique really does matter for swimming and much more than for running
or the bike. Of course, it matters there, too, just not nearly as much.
I'm one of those runners who, the first time he got in the pool -
alright, the first few years I swam - had such a poor kick, I could kick
furiously and not move forwards at all, and I even managed to go
backwards once in a while. That's both front crawl and breastroke kick.
It took me a long time to learn how to swim half-decently, and
half-decently is as far as I've gotten.

-S-

Quoted message said:

Dave Clary/Corpus Christi, Tx
Home: http://davidclary.com

<[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Question for the group....

Do you think it possible to a completely adequate
weight workout with dumb bells only?

Depends how heavy your DB's can be, but I'm pretty sure an 'adequate'
workout could be done with Dbs only, yes.

"diablo" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

<[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Question for the group....

Do you think it possible to a completely adequate
weight workout with dumb bells only?

Depends how heavy your DB's can be, but I'm pretty sure an 'adequate'
workout could be done with Dbs only, yes.

Krista Scott-Dixon has very good stuff on her web site, which says it's
for women but ought to be read by anyone lifting weights, IMHO. Her
site includes a dumbbells only lifting program.

http://www.stumptuous.com/cms/index.php

-S-