In the realm of weight-lifting for overall strength & fitness (as opposed to bodybuilding), there are 6 moves that are really the only essentials that are needed:
- Squat -- quads, core
- Deadlift -- hamstrings, core
- Bent-over rows -- biceps, shoulders, upper back
- Pull-ups -- biceps, lats
- Overhead press -- triceps, shoulders
- Bench press -- triceps, chest
Each of them are compound moves, so they work more than one muscle group at a time, which means more workout in less time than isolation moves -- notice that there aren't any curls of any kind in this list (bicep, hamstring, preacher, etc.) or extensions (tricep extensions, skullcrushers, etc.).
There are plenty of variations available to each of these exercises, but these are the fundamentals.
There are also a few myths and misconceptions as well, which we tend to either forget or are simply ignorant of, particularly as we get older. When we were teenagers, our metabolisms were sky-high so we could eat anything and everything and not worry. Not so much the case as most of us have crested that 30 barrier
The TLDR summary:
- Lift weights using compound moves for maximum efficiency, effectiveness, and balance.
- Lift an amount of weight per exercise that's heavy enough to where you achieve failure of proper form and routine at about 8-10 reps in per set.
- Aerobic exercises are good, but not the be-all-end-all of exercises.
- Eat at an appropriate amount for your body size and activity level
- Be patient. You didn't gain all this weight overnight, so you're not going to lose it any faster.
- Make it a lifestyle, not a temporary fix
Weight loss comes from eating less than we burn, but there's a lower limit to that. Our bodies will not let us subsist on less than what is essential for survival (called BMR, or basal metabolic rate). Weight loss also does not occur on a linear progression, but an exponential one: the less we have to lose, the slower the rate of loss goes, and as we approach our physical limit, the rate of loss slows more and more (again, because we have less to lose).
Muscle-mass gain comes from eating
more than we burn. So you can probably see the conflict that occurs when someone says "I want to lose fat but build muscle. How do I do that?" Beginners cannot do this effectively. They can increase
strength while on calorie deficit (strength being not just a physical manifestation but also
neurological), but adding mass is well-nigh impossible (muscles need fuel and material in order to increase mass; if the body is burning most of it for just daily operations, there's none left over for adding material to muscle bulk).
Optimum fat loss while retaining lean tissue comes from weight-lifting. Not cardio. This is another myth (I know it sounds odd coming from me, of all people, but bear with me a moment). Cardio -- or more accurately, "aerobic exercise" -- burns calories, yes. But that level and type of activity causes the body to burn whatever it can get its proverbial hands on, and that includes lean tissue.
AKA: muscle
There is such a huge push toward cardio activities because of what amounts to the effects of immediate satisfaction. You work hard, you sweat a lot, you're breathing like you're going to die....therefore, you've obviously done some good! With weight-lifting, you're sore, but you didn't sweat nearly as much and you're not out of breath. Therefore, you must not have worked as hard to burn fat.
This is wrong.
Aerobic activity aids the cardiopulmonary system (hence the term "cardio") and improves endurance, but as a sole method of fat loss, it's not as efficient as pure weight-lifting.
"Toning" and "getting toned" are bad words and should never be used. Ever. They're used typically by women who fear "getting bulky" and therefore relegate themselves to stripped-down half-effort workouts which end up being more of a waste of time than an effective workout. Women do not have the hormonal capability to "bulk up." Yes, they can get more athletic and lean, but the She-Hulk look comes from "additives" that we shall not discuss here.
So, now that I've overloaded everyone with this stream-of-consciousness, how do we figure out what an appropriate amount of food is? I mentioned calorie deficit above and how there's a limit because it's not a linear progression. One of the most common traps that catch people is undereating, because they figure that if they maintain a daily calorie deficit of 500 in order to lose 1 lb. a week, then a daily deficit of 1000 would result in 2 lbs. a week, right?
WRONG
The body is smarter than that, and won't allow us to make that extreme a shocking change. It will react by slowing the metabolism to preserve every ounce of fuel storage we have because so little food over an extended period of time signals famine. Smaller calorie deficits trick the body into burning off just a little bit of extra fat over time while still being fed appropriately and sufficiently, and that long-term approach is what works.
Obviously, each body is different in food intake requirements. It depends primarily on our gender, age, height, and current weight. There are a number of on-line calculators available, and most will provide slightly different results. The idea is to take those results as mere estimates because computers aren't jacked directly into our metabolisms to calculate real-time burn (yet....).
BMR is what the body burns just to stay alive -- heart beating, cells processing, lungs breathing, etc. Absolutely no one -- male, female, old, young -- should be eating below their BMR. For me, at 5'8", 40 years old, and weighing 158, my BMR is about 1600 (it's actually probably actually a bit higher in reality). From that lowest limit, we then have to calculate our regular daily burn, known as TDEE (total daily energy expenditure). This is what we'd burn on an average day: waking up, brushing teeth, going to work, watching TV, etc.
For me, I'm probably around 2000 since my daily routine is usually pretty sedentary. So if I wanted to lose fat just from diet alone, I should be consuming around 1700 calories and expect a pretty slow rate of loss because that's just barely over my BMR.
And this is where exercise comes in. Because I have such a narrow window of opportunity, adding exercise and increasing my calorie burn is the only way I can more effectively manage my intake vs. output. If I run about 4 miles, that's approximately 500 calories burned, which would put my TDEE for the day at around 2500. That gives me opportunity to increase my food intake to around 2000-2200 calories and still expect a reasonable weight-loss rate but also bearing in mind that the loss won't be just restricted to fat cells, but also muscle tissue. This is why most long-distance runners are so lean and lanky, and you never see elite marathon runners who also look like tanks.