Thread: For gaining strength

All three.

One increases the load during a single movement (weight).
One increases the overall volume on the muscles working (sets).
One increases the time under tension or the net force for a single period (reps).

Depends really on how you define strength.

Like ponyboy said all three are important.

But my personal opinion is that of all three, increasing the weight for the same number of reps is the most important one if you are a beginner or intermediate.

I agree all 3 if your doing all 3 properly you'll get stronger eventually that's a fact

Originally Posted by ponyboy

All three.

One increases the load during a single movement (weight).
One increases the overall volume on the muscles working (sets).
One increases the time under tension or the net force for a single period (reps).

Depends really on how you define strength.

Ponyboy,

Volume Resonders and Non-Responders

While some individuals do well when the volume is increases other don't.

Casey Burgner Olympic Lifter

One of the best examples of a strength athelte that is non-responder to increased volume training is Casey Burgner.

Higher Volume Longer Recovery Time

Research show higher the volume increases the need for recovery time.

"You can train hard or long but not both." Vince Gironda

That means as intensity goes up, volume goes down.

How Much Volume?

So, increasing the overall volume is questionalble.

Kenny Croxdale

Originally Posted by Kenny Croxdale

Ponyboy,


While some individuals do well when the volume is increases other don't.

So, increasing the overall volume is questionable.

Kenny Croxdale

Do you see why this doesn't make sense?

If you think that volume is questionable for gaining strength, then I'd suggest posting something beyond generic examples and one isolated individual.

I think for the most part weight. but as said, it depends on the person.
Most strength programs are based around set reps and sets, but added weight throughout.
I have always followed this until lately. I have been going to mmy max or just short of it until I could add a rep.
ex. I had a max bench of 295. I started to work up to triples of 265, and a double of 275.
so I worked up to a triple of 275 and doubled 295, and maxed at 315.
This approach worked well for me for a while. It was definitely good to change it up from what I was used to. I m a fan of trying different techniques because everyone responds differently.

Do All 3 and eventually they will get you there.

Originally Posted by ponyboy

Do you see why this doesn't make sense?

If you think that volume is questionable for gaining strength, then I'd suggest posting something beyond generic examples and one isolated individual.

Casey Burgner

Casey Burgner isn't a generic example. Burgner is a specific example.

USA Weightlifting Coach Mike Burgner

In a USA Weightlifing Club Coach Certifiation Class that I attened, Mike Burgner went over the information regarding his son, Casey being overtrained with too much volume at the Coloroda Springs Olympic Lifting Center.

Mike Burgner then went on to discuss how some individuals do well with high volume and while others go backwards.

Here's Burgners contact information.
MIKES GYM IS LOCATED AT:
32067 Via Vera
Bonsall, Ca. 92003
phone: 760-941-5852 760-941-5852
cell: 760-535-1835 760-535-1835

e mail addresses:
mikeburgener@mac.com

Like Casey Burgner, I do better with higher intensity training sessions rather than high volume sessions.

My best lifts at 210 lbs in powerlifting are: Squat 562 lbs, Bench 380 lbs and Deadlift 617 lbs.

Those are two specific (not generic examples).

I will provide you with some additional information later.

As a strength coach myself, I that that some respond well to high volume while other don't. Google me for more background information.

Kenny Croxdale

Although I think to some extent all three components you listed are important, increasing the load you are handling is clearly the most important. Strength is a measure of force production capabilities of a muscle at a given velocity. So, to increase maximal strength (I'm assuming that's what you mean) where you are moving a very heavy load at a relatively slow velocity, you need to work with increasingly heavier loads.

Now, you also have to consider that lifting heavier loads leads to higher volume training sessions. It's not that you are doing more total repetitions, but the load you are lifting is factored into the volume equation as well. For exaxmple, if lifter A moves 100 pounds for 3 sets of 10, and lifter B moves 200 pounds for 3 sets of 10, who has performed a greater volume of work? It's clearly lifter B; he has done twice the amount of work as lifter A. So, as a by-product of getting stronger, you do increase training volume whether you realize it or not.

powerlifting style 5x5 is a great way to increase strength!

Originally Posted by geagleiam

What is most important for gaining strength- insreasing the weigth, the sets or the repeatings of an exercise? What is your personal opinion? Thank you in advance for your attention.

eating alot and the right foods....

Originally Posted by CowPimp

Although I think to some extent all three components you listed are important, increasing the load you are handling is clearly the most important. Strength is a measure of force production capabilities of a muscle at a given velocity. So, to increase maximal strength (I'm assuming that's what you mean) where you are moving a very heavy load at a relatively slow velocity, you need to work with increasingly heavier loads.

Now, you also have to consider that lifting heavier loads leads to higher volume training sessions. It's not that you are doing more total repetitions, but the load you are lifting is factored into the volume equation as well. For exaxmple, if lifter A moves 100 pounds for 3 sets of 10, and lifter B moves 200 pounds for 3 sets of 10, who has performed a greater volume of work? It's clearly lifter B; he has done twice the amount of work as lifter A. So, as a by-product of getting stronger, you do increase training volume whether you realize it or not.

Cowpimp,

Tonnage

The tonnage increased not the volume.

Kenny Croxdale

Originally Posted by Kenny Croxdale

Cowpimp,

Tonnage

The tonnage increased not the volume.

Kenny Croxdale

I'd say volume is a little more accurate than tonnage only because tonnage is only used in reference to volume of cargo on a ship. Volume is a measure of how much space something takes up.

Cowpimp probably just meant greater amount of net resistance.

Now, here's a question: If the same lifter did 100lbs for 3 sets of 10, but lifted in a 2-0-2 tempo, and lifted 200lbs for 3 sets of 10 in a 1-0-1 tempo, is the actual work (in a physics sense) the same?

Originally Posted by ponyboy

I'd say volume is a little more accurate than tonnage only because tonnage is only used in reference to volume of cargo on a ship. Volume is a measure of how much space something takes up.

Ponyboy

"Tonnage"

"The tonnage is the number of repetitions successfully performed multiplied by the weight lifted for each repetition." Olympic Weightlifting - QWA - Training Programs - Intermediate

Lifter A's Tonnage

100 lbs X 3 Set X 10 Reps =

100 lbs X 30 Reps = 3,000 lbs

Lifter B's Tonnage

200 lbs X 3 Set X 10 Reps =

200 lbs X 30 Reps = 6,000 lbs

Thus, Lifter B had performed more tonnage.

Volume

Which lifter is performing more volume? The lifter performing 3 Sets of 10 Reps or the other lifter perfoming 3 Sets of 10 Reps?

With that said, I am not a fan of tonnage.

Larry Mistric

One of the best 220 lbs powerlifter of the 1980s was Larry Mistric. Mistric squatted 820 lbs, placing him in the ranks of nationally rated elite squatter.

Mark Rippetoe (Starting Strength)

One of my lifting buddies back then was Mark Rippetoe. Rippetoe was a protege of Bill Starr. Starr's one of the best strength coahes around. Starr, former Olympic Lifter, was a proponent of tonnage...thus, so was Rippetoe.

Not Enough Tonnage

After Mistric punched out his 820 lbs squat, Rippetoe stated me to that Mistric did not do enough tonnage do what he did.

My reply to Rippetoe, "Someone forget to tell Mistric that."

All That Count Are Results

Mistric's lower volume and less tonnnage definitely worked for him.

Originally Posted by ponyboy

Cowpimp probably just meant greater amount of net resistance.

I understand how he might see it that way.

Originally Posted by ponyboy

Now, here's a question: If the same lifter did 100lbs for 3 sets of 10, but lifted in a 2-0-2 tempo, and lifted 200lbs for 3 sets of 10 in a 1-0-1 tempo, is the actual work (in a physics sense) the same?

Interesting quetion.

Kenny Croxdale

all 3 do you great plus protein preferably write feeding

I've been taught that the most important for gaining strength is your diet. Make sure you're getting a surplus of calories rather than a deficit. If you're diet is good then the strength should come. In my opinion though it doesn't make that much of a difference as long as you push yourself.

I can put up 225lbs a maximum of 9 times. I can also put up 265lbs a maximum of 3 times. If I rep 225lbs 4 sets 9 times or 265lbs 4 sets 3 times (obviously I don't get all reps on all four sets) I'm still pushing myself though. I don't think any of the factors make a difference in this scenario. For me it doesn't seem like a set number of weight, sets, reps, volume, etc work better then another as long as I'm pushing myself. Obviously if I rep 225lbs 4 sets 6 times as opposed to 225lbs 4 sets 9 times it makes a difference but it's because I'm not pushing myself if I do the first scenario. Maybe I'm wrong though, maybe there is a science behind it and I don't know it.

If I'm totally wrong, don't shoot me down people. Just say so....