As usual and you’ll see this thematically in my answers, it depends on what your goals are. and what you’re trying to do, but for the most part I think it’s important to recognize… again don’t be dogmatic. Use both, why not use both, what’s the problem? There’s benefits to both.
I think if you’re looking for “bang for the buck”, doing an exercise that’s utilizing the largest number of muscles available, probably give you more outcome by virtue of caloric expenditure,and metabolic perterburance, and those kinds of things, and potentially muscle growth and strength. That’s not to say there isn’t a place for doing less integrated kind of activities that use less muscles that are more supported about, for example sitting on a machine or laying down on, something and so that you’re not…you know you can’t truly isolate a muscles. I don’t like that terminology as I don’t think you can do it, muscles don’t work in isolation they always work in concert, pulling on each other and bones.. so but you just biasing… you’re trying to make the bias that are more specific in one hand versus the other so like more HP than less integrated and again as always really there’s a place for both in your tool kit so why not use me benefits and cost of both but balanced no I tend to like my workouts wherein I usually start with a larger movement is more muscles more compound some movement and then I progressed to more isolated or rather more integrated type movements afterwards okay so there you go
I hope that answers a question. I’m sure it generates more questions and answers but that’s really the plan so we can start a dialogue a discussion. Look forward to hear from you the comments section below and I look forward to seeing you next time.