Josh

I've come across discussions on hi weight low reps vs low weight hi reps, and learned that we need to do both of them with the reason that they target different muscle types available in our bodies, thus by doing both of them we can improve all muscle types, thus achieving optimal training.

But I've also read elsewhere that hi weight low reps scheme produces strength and not size/mass, while low weight hi reps scheme produces size/mass and not strength. I am not sure whether this is because of the different muscle types addressed, any explanation?

If above is true, does this mean if my main goal is to gain mass then I should concentrate more on doing low weights with more reps in my exercises? In fact, why should I cycle to the other scheme if I'm not that interested in becoming very strong? Or is mass so related to strength that eventually I have to work on strength as well if I want to continue gaining mass, thus like it or not I have to revert to hi weight low reps as well to gain more mass?

- Josh

Lightman009

You've got it mixed up. When you do High reps low weight, your going for more strength and cut then size. Low reps, high weight yields more muscle mass and bulk.

Just Shut Up and LIFT.

Josh

Hm..that's not what I read, or at least understand. I read that volume training aims to increasing size while increase in strength is not optimal; reverse, HIT style training aims to increasing strength while increase in size is not optimal. Now I interpreted volume training as high reps low weight, and HIT training as high weight low reps. Maybe my interpretation is not correct? Or maybe my reference is wrong?

- Josh

ponyboy

According to the ACSM, optimal rep range for gaining musular strength is anywhere from 3-9 repetitions. How many works best can depend on a number of factors. As for size, generally when a muscle increases in strength the fibers in the muscle grow (hypertrophy) and this causes the increase in size. Lower weight and higher reps actually builds muscular endurance.

pumpchaser

My own experience and reading suggests medium weight, medium reps of 8-15 per set. Medium reps put more emphasis on the muscle tissue vs. a greater emphasis/strain on ligaments, tendons and joints using higher weight. Medium resistance combines well with medium/high reps to create the best synergy and intensity on the tissue itself rather than on the ligaments, tendons and joints as experienced with heavy weights, which also translates to higher chances of injury. Medium and higher reps make injury unlikely if prefaced by a couple of warmup sets, and create a superior burn and pump in the tissue itself.

You'll end up plenty strong, without much injury risk if resistance is continually increased using medium reps.

There's some truth that using heavy weights creates a more powerful look, but if you've worked up to serious weight over years with medium reps that your ligaments have aclimated to, you'll have the same effect IMO. As far as using heavy weights for low reps for variety in workouts from time to time, it would help a little but to me the injury potential outweighs the marginal benefits, unless you're one of those who never seems to get injured.

SJ69

Generally low rep (1-5) are used to produce the greatest increase in strength which is usually accompanied by an increase in mass.
Medium reps 6-12 are most often used for gains in mass.
12-30 reps are more of a "toning" type workout in general. High reps are also used to achieve a pump and sometimes in cutting routines.

"I don't like small cars or real big women, but somehow I always find myself in 'em" - KR

pmech

ooooooohhhh.....You said the Dirty "T" Word, I am telling

Saturday Fever

Goodness, folks.

There are 3 methods to gaining strength:

1. Maximal Effort Method. Lifting, obviously, as much weight as you can. If you don't train heavy, you don't get strong.
2. Dynamic Effort Method. Lifting low weights as FAST as possible. This isn't even done for reps. You do low reps (1-3) with very submaximal weights, but you lift the weight FAST.
3. Repetitive Method. Lifting submaximal weights for reps. This doesn't mean loading 20% of your 1RM and doing 20 reps. This means working within the guidelines of something like Prilepin's Table, where you're working in what is truly between 70-90% of your 1RM.

Now onto gaining size. SIZE IS DIET. If you don't eat enough, no rep range will make you grow. Likewise, if you eat a TON, you will gain regardless what routine or rep range you're doing.

So, in conclusion, if you want to grow, eat. If you want to get stronger, train. And train correctly.

yay.

pumpchaser

Diet's a huge factor, but you can't simply distill it down to 3 of your very own favorite theories. Those 3 points are too doctrinaire, and it's best to follow general tenets rather than absolutist dogmas, things aren't that exact. For example, one of the most effective methods is to do max. work in minimum time. However, this doesn't mean only using light weights, not at all.

Saturday Fever

For size, diet is THE factor. If you think you're right and I'm wrong, ask the established bodybuilders on this site.

As far as strength and my "very own favorite theories" I think you should do your homework before you try to discredit mine. Or you can try to convince me that your knowledge far exceeds that of the following people:

Dr. Mel Siff
Yuri Verkoshansky
Dr. Prilepin
Dr. Michael Yessis
Dr. Fred Hatfield

There are not just 3 random theories I pulled out of the air because they sounded good. These are not even theories. They are based on real evidence that science has proven. The methods have been tested on thousands of athletes. Prilepin's Table, alone, was created after studies done across close to 5000 russian athletes.

Effective for what and what basis do you have for this claim?

Read Supertraining by Dr. Siff. It cites studies and research done by hundreds of the world's most respected and knowledgable people in the area of strength training, including his own works. It will open up your eyes.

yay.

Duncans Donuts

I don't think this is accurate, though I'm not entirely sure. I remember reading a study that indicated push-ups had one of the highest ratios of effort expressed (in terms of work done a second) related to amount of time, but it's typically not considered better than any kind of bar or dumbell press used to work the same muscles.

"in the howling bleeding nights, the dogs plunge into the Volga and swim desperately to gain the other bank. The nights of Stalingrad are a terror for them. Animals flee this hell; the hardest stones cannot bear it for long; only men endure."

pumpchaser

Again, you're simply off the mark thanks to your arrogance. Diet's key, that's obvious and was never part of this discourse until you brought it up.

You can drop theories, 3 key points, all the literature and research that you want, and while there's probably some merit somewhere, but there are many, many useful studies, some of which discredit other, equally viable theories. Sometimes common sense and experience in generous dollops trumps or parallels name dropping and research studies de jour delivered in much the same self righteous fashion used by bible thumpers who bore us with passage after passage in a father knows best fashion. Praise the lord Jimmy!

Duncans Donuts

I think it's safe to say that, given the dissension between "experts" in the field that nobody (anywhere) is even relatively close to knowing exactly what is best. Perhaps we should respect people with differing opinions instead of talking down to them. I think the level of respect between forum users, despite disagreement, is what seperates Ironmagazine from so many others.

"in the howling bleeding nights, the dogs plunge into the Volga and swim desperately to gain the other bank. The nights of Stalingrad are a terror for them. Animals flee this hell; the hardest stones cannot bear it for long; only men endure."

pumpchaser

Precisely, that's why i always preface that it's only an opinion; nothing's curved in stone unless you're a preacher or are with Hari Krishna.

SJ69

It's really not all that complicated.
Eat hard, lift hard = gains in strength and size.
Lifting 50% 1RM isn't liftin' hard (sure speed reps esp as in West Side, but you still have to lift heavy)
Ronnie said it best to paraphrase "Everyone wants to get big, but no one wants to lift heavy ass weights."

"I don't like small cars or real big women, but somehow I always find myself in 'em" - KR

largepkg

I want to lift heavy ass weights but heavy ass weights to me = pussy ass weights to you!

SquatBenchDead

Virtually every book I've read on the subject of strength traininghas been vague on the exact prescription for strength training with the exception of a couple.

Science and Practice of Strength Training - Zatsiorsky
Secrets of Soviet Sports Fitness and Training - Yessis
Power - Hatfeild
The Strongest Shall Survive - Starr
Power to the People - Tsatsouline
Designing Resistance Training Programs - Fleck and Kraemer
52 Week Football Training - Cook
Powerlifting - Groves
Serious Strength Training - Bompa and Cornacchia

You definately have to figure out what they are tring to say because they sure don't spell it out for you. The Strongest Shall Survive - Starr and Power to the People - Tsatsouline actually tell you what to do more than any of the others. These give the best insite on how to periodize weights, sets and reps. Though I feel there is a better way.

Get Strong @ WannaBeStrong.com

SJ69

It's all relative
Heavy ass weights = 85% to 100% of YOUR 1 rep max.
BTW YOUR 1 rep max will keep getting heavier for a long time.
To some degree most of us are guilty of judging the weight we use by comparing to others, but it's not really about that.
Instead, compare what you did this month to what you did last month.

"I don't like small cars or real big women, but somehow I always find myself in 'em" - KR

V Player

The absolute gospel. I cant count the number of teenie boppers and start ups on my other board who all they want to know is "what supps and what rep range for mass" without ever once ever asking for diet tips. Then the same type of people go and make gospel type proclamations on rep schemes like they KNOW, in all their 3 or so years of bodybuilding , that its THE ONLY way to go.

Now Im NOT saying all teenagers do this, but a preponderance of them on my other board do. I always tell these kids to load up heavy and then not eat heavy and see what they get. Never had a taker to that challenge. Diet is the homeplate around which everything about bodybuilding revolves. Even if you're on juice.


Having said that, I always go 4-6 reps when bulking and 15-20 for toning and maintenance. With the right diet, of course. This is what has worked best for me over the course of the years. But thats just ME. As Duncans said "nobody (anywhere) is even relatively close to knowing exactly what is best."


My brother's and sisters, no truer words have ever been spoken. Period.

http://www.thestranglehold.com/images/pix/Batista.jpg
Someday....I will be like you....

Saturday Fever

Well, while we could argue all month about "exactly" what is best, I figured I'd just point out one small FACT, and then the general masses can stew over it or debate it all they want. But realize you're debating a FACT and unless you agree, you're debating is a waste of everyone's time.

The biggest bench pressers in the world, follow the studies of the folks I mention repeatedly. Siff. Verkoshansky. Zatsiorsky.

The biggest squatters in the world follow the studies of the folks I mention repeatedly. Siff. Verkoshansky. Zatsiorsky.

The biggest deadlifters in the world follow the studies of the folks I mention repeatedly. Siff. Verkoshansky. Zatsiorsky.

Coincidence? I think not. How else do you explain a guy who was weighed 218 pounds for the last 10 years who has taken his squat over 1000lb? Obviously he's training right, training the way Siff, et al taught, and he didn't cop out and use some lame excuse about "genetics" or being "genetically gifted." He did things right. And the end result? The first guy short of the super heavyweights to squat over 1000 pounds.

And yet his weight is always consistent? What does this blatantly and obviously tell us? Two things.

1) Size is all about diet.
2) Strength is all about training right.

But I said that in the beginning. Call me arrogant, call me an ass. But I'm right.

yay.

pumpchaser

Uh, what if you're not, or are partially right? Keep that research comin'..Praise God, Jimmy! Hari Krishna, Hari Rahma...

Saturday Fever

Like I said, you're wasting your time. Keep chasing that pump and reading FLEX.

yay.

SJ69

But quality size is about diet AND training.
Almost anyone can get big if they work hard enough at eating, but to get big and muscular you must train right and eat right.

"I don't like small cars or real big women, but somehow I always find myself in 'em" - KR

Duncans Donuts

You are probably right, but quite certainly arrogant.

"in the howling bleeding nights, the dogs plunge into the Volga and swim desperately to gain the other bank. The nights of Stalingrad are a terror for them. Animals flee this hell; the hardest stones cannot bear it for long; only men endure."

camarosuper6

Dynamic Effort Method seems only to be useful for sport specific training. It seems that fast reps would increase the risk of injury and only load the muscle mimimally, momentum playing much to strong a role.

That being said, diet is key to gaining mass and very important in gaining strength as well. Strength and Mass are related, although one can be strong and not "huge", and one can be huge, but not "strong" (at least by powerlifting standards). Still, there arent many huge guys that arent incredibly strong and vice versa. I think people try to play off strength in their quest to get big, when in fact, they should embrace it.

"TOLERANCE is the virtue of a man without convictions"

G.K.Chesterton


Boot Shine and Polish $15.
New Uniforms: $250
New gun and holster: $450
Looking like a stud in uniform: Priceless

Girl: Me and this new guy are getting kinda chummy.
Me: Good chummy? Like friends forever?
Girl: Ya
Me: Or Chummy like, spank my ass chummy?

PreMier

Doesnt someone who is right, have the right to be arrogant when talking bout their field of expertise?
If SF doesnt know his shit, then I dont know who does

P-side Inc.

"the post-workout high is more profound than any drug-induced rush imaginable." -Dante B.

P-funk

I couldn't agree more. Like I have said before.....What size?? Eat a ton of food and go pick something up. Size doesn't just happen, you have to eat for it. Train for pump all you want but it isn't magic.

http://pwtraining.blogspot.com/.....come and see what is on my mind!

Ivonne's Blog on Health and Wellness!

Looking for online training/coaching/consulting? --> Optimum Sports Performance

"In the beginners mind there are many possibilities, in the experts there are few."
-Buddha's Little Instruction Book