Iba a ir al gimnasio, pero hice ejercicio en casa con videos.

Elon.io is an online learning platform
We have an entire course teaching Spanish grammar and vocabulary.

Start learning Spanish now

Questions & Answers about Iba a ir al gimnasio, pero hice ejercicio en casa con videos.

Why is it iba and not fui at the beginning?

Iba is the imperfect form of ir and is used here to express an intention or plan that didn’t end up happening:

  • Iba a ir…I was going to go… (but in the end, I didn’t).

If you said Fui al gimnasio, that would mean I went to the gym (and I actually did it).

So:

  • Iba a ir al gimnasio, pero hice ejercicio en casa…
    = I was going to go to the gym, but (instead) I exercised at home…

The imperfect (iba) highlights that it was just a plan/ongoing intention that got interrupted or changed.

Isn’t iba a ir strange or repetitive, since it’s like “was going to go”?

It might sound repetitive in English, but in Spanish this structure is completely normal and very common.

Pattern: imperfect of ir + a + infinitive

  • iba a ir = was going to go
  • iba a comer = was going to eat
  • íbamos a salir = we were going to go out

This is how Spanish often talks about past intentions or near future in the past. The repetition of ir (one conjugated, one infinitive) is just how the grammar works, and it doesn’t sound weird to native speakers.

Could I just say Iba al gimnasio, pero hice ejercicio en casa instead of iba a ir al gimnasio?

You can, but the meaning changes slightly.

  • Iba al gimnasio can mean:

    • I used to go to the gym (habit in the past), or
    • I was on my way to the gym (in some specific context).
  • Iba a ir al gimnasio specifically means:

    • I was going to go to the gym (I had the plan/intention).

In your sentence, the point is that you intended to go but didn’t. For that, iba a ir is the clearest and most natural option.

Why do we say al gimnasio and not a el gimnasio?

In Spanish, a + el contracts to al.

  • a + el gimnasioal gimnasio

This contraction is mandatory (you can’t say a el gimnasio in normal standard Spanish).

It only happens with a + el and de + el:

  • a + elal
  • de + eldel

It does not happen with la, los, las:

  • a la casa (not ala casa)
  • de las clases (not dlas clases)
Why do we use pero here and not sino?

Pero and sino both can be translated as but, but they’re used differently.

You use sino mainly when:

  1. The first part is negative, and
  2. You are correcting or replacing that first part.

Examples:

  • No fui al gimnasio, sino que hice ejercicio en casa.
    I didn’t go to the gym, but (rather) I exercised at home.

In your sentence, the first part is not negative:

  • Iba a ir al gimnasio, pero hice ejercicio en casa…

Here you’re not correcting a negative statement; you’re just contrasting what you planned with what you actually did. For that, Spanish uses pero.

Why is it hice ejercicio and not something like hice ejercicios or ejercité?

Hacer ejercicio is a very common expression meaning to work out / to exercise (in general).

  • hice ejercicio = I exercised / I worked out

Some notes:

  • ejercicio is usually singular when you mean exercise in general.
  • hacer ejercicios (plural) is more like doing specific exercises, for example in a book or a workout routine:
    • Hice ejercicios de gramática. – I did grammar exercises.
    • Hice tres ejercicios de abdominales. – I did three ab exercises.

Ejercitar exists, but for “to work out” people almost always say hacer ejercicio in everyday speech, especially in Latin America.

Why is hice in the preterite and not hacía ejercicio?

Hice is the preterite of hacer and is used for completed actions in the past.

Here, hice ejercicio en casa refers to one specific workout session that you finished. That’s why the preterite is natural.

Hacía ejercicio (imperfect) would be more like:

  • describing a habit in the past:
    • Cuando era joven, hacía ejercicio todos los días. – When I was young, I used to exercise every day.
  • or describing an ongoing action that was happening when something else occurred:
    • Hacía ejercicio cuando me llamaste. – I was exercising when you called me.

In your sentence, you’re telling what you actually ended up doing (a specific completed workout), so hice fits best.

Why is it en casa instead of a casa?
  • en casa = at home / in the house
  • a casa = (to) home (movement toward home)

Your sentence is about where you exercised, not where you were going:

  • hice ejercicio en casa – I exercised at home.

If you said iba a ir a casa, that would mean I was going to go home. Different idea.

So en casa is correct because you’re describing the location of the action, not movement.

Why is there no article before casa? Why not en la casa?

Spanish often uses casa without an article when it means “home” in a general, personal sense:

  • Estoy en casa. – I’m at home.
  • Voy a casa. – I’m going home.

When you say en la casa, it usually sounds more like in the house, referring to a particular physical house as an object, not home in the personal sense.

In this context, en casa = at home is more natural than en la casa. Both are grammatically correct, but en casa is what people normally say for at home.

Why is it con videos and not con unos videos or con los videos?

In Spanish, you don’t always need an article when you’re talking about things in a non-specific, general way.

  • con videos here means using video workouts / workout videos in general.
  • con unos videos would emphasize some particular videos (like “with some videos I found”).
  • con los videos would usually refer to specific videos that were already mentioned or known to both speakers.

Since the idea is just “I exercised at home using videos” (no need to specify which ones), con videos without an article is natural and common.

Is videos spelled with or without an accent? I’ve seen vídeos too.

Both videos and vídeos exist, but usage varies:

  • In most of Latin America, people typically write videos (without an accent).
  • In Spain, you often see vídeos (with an accent on the í).

Both forms are recognized, but for Latin American Spanish, videos (no accent) is the more common spelling. The sentence you have is perfectly normal for Latin America.

Could I say hice ejercicio en mi casa instead of en casa?

Yes, hice ejercicio en mi casa is grammatically correct and clear.

However, there’s a nuance:

  • en casa = at home (neutral, what you naturally say most of the time).
  • en mi casa = at my house (slightly more specific; might be used if you’re contrasting with someone else’s house).

Everyday speech usually prefers en casa when you’re talking about your own home and there is no need to contrast it with another house.

What’s the difference in pronunciation between iba and iva?

In most of the Spanish-speaking world (including Latin America), b and v are pronounced the same.

So:

  • iba and a hypothetical iva (which isn’t a word here) would sound the same.

That’s why it’s important to learn the correct spelling from context:

  • The verb ir in the imperfect is iba, ibas, iba, íbamos, iban (always with b).
Is there a more colloquial way in Latin America to say gimnasio, like “gym”?

Yes. While el gimnasio is the standard term, many people, especially younger speakers and in informal contexts, also say:

  • el gym (pronounced more or less like yeem or jim, depending on accent)

Example:

  • Iba a ir al gym, pero hice ejercicio en casa con videos.

This is informal and very common in conversation, social media, etc., but el gimnasio is always safe and correct in any context.

Can I change the word order, like Iba a ir al gimnasio, pero en casa hice ejercicio con videos?

Yes, that word order is also grammatically correct and natural. Spanish word order is somewhat flexible, especially for adverbial phrases like en casa.

Some acceptable variations:

  • Iba a ir al gimnasio, pero hice ejercicio en casa con videos.
  • Iba a ir al gimnasio, pero en casa hice ejercicio con videos.
  • Iba a ir al gimnasio, pero hice ejercicio con videos en casa.

They all mean basically the same thing; the differences are minor shifts in emphasis. The original version is probably the most straightforward.