- 47,248
- 96,790
- Joined
- Mar 19, 2013
Used to be sets of no more than 5 when I was going heavy.
Now it's 4-5 sets of 10, low weight.
STAY/GET BACK IN SHAPE VOL 3.0 -- A New Niketalk = A New Thread
- Thread in 'General' Thread starter Started by cincoseisdos,
- Start date
Used to be sets of no more than 5 when I was going heavy.
Now it's 4-5 sets of 10, low weight.
- 35,369
- 77,811
- Joined
- Dec 27, 2014
I'm def going to start experimenting with a little lighter resistance and really try to maximize time under tension.
GreenNGold89
formerly bbllplaya23
- 6,575
- 2,119
- Joined
- Apr 5, 2005
Been doing about 4 sets of 8-10 at lighter weight recently but man I much prefer doing heavy weights at 3-5 reps.
- 35,369
- 77,811
- Joined
- Dec 27, 2014
Been doing about 4 sets of 8-10 at lighter weight recently but man I much prefer doing heavy weights at 3-5 reps.
Yeah heavy weights make me feel more accomplished, but my lats been stupid tight lately.
- 12,827
- 27,905
- Joined
- Aug 9, 2014
So what the article is saying is that high reps/low weight or low reps high weight doesn’t really make a difference , right ?
- 35,369
- 77,811
- Joined
- Dec 27, 2014
I think in regards to muscle growth. I'd like to read it though if anyone has the full text.
If you're a competitive powerlifter, obviously you need bigger weights.
- 2,557
- 1,423
- Joined
- Jun 7, 2014
On my heavy days 5 sets 1-3 reps..light days 4 sets 5-6 reps
GreenNGold89
formerly bbllplaya23
- 6,575
- 2,119
- Joined
- Apr 5, 2005
My back was stupid sore and I got a sports massage. **** hurt but man I felt like a new person.
- 30,232
- 40,547
- Joined
- May 25, 2004
I pull heavy always and usually no more than a 5x5. If I’m going heavy heavy it’s doubles or triples.
- 944
- 1,810
- Joined
- Jul 22, 2012
Whatever nSuns tells me to do, I do.
- 10,957
- 19,975
- Joined
- Dec 13, 2018
Upending conventions about how best to strength train, a new study finds that people who lift relatively light weights can build just as much strength and muscle size as those who grunt through sessions using much heftier weights — if they plan their workouts correctly.
Strength training has long been dominated by the idea that to develop a physique like that of Charles Atlas or even Zac Efron, we — and I include women here — must load our barbells or machines with almost as much weight as we can bear.
In traditional weight training programs, in fact, we are told to first find the heaviest amount of weight that we possibly can lift one time. This is our one-repetition maximum weight. We then use this to shape the rest of the program by lifting 80 to 90 percent of that amount eight to 10 times, until our affected arms or legs shake with fatigue.
This approach to weight training is very effective, says Stuart Phillips, a professor of kinesiology at McMaster University in Hamilton, Ontario, who has long studied muscles and exercise. It builds muscle strength and size, possibly, many experts believe, by sparking a surge in the body’s production of testosterone and human growth hormone.
But many people find lifting such heavy weights to be daunting or downright unpleasant, which can discourage them from taking up or continuing with a resistance-training program, Dr. Phillips says.
So in recent years, he and his colleagues have been looking into the effects of a different type of weight training, which employs much lighter weights hefted through as many as 25 repetitions.
Since 2010, his lab has published several studies in which volunteers followed either the traditional regimen using heavy weights or an alternative that employed much slighter weight stacks. In general, the lifters’ results were comparable.
But those studies had been small and featured volunteers who were new to the gym, potentially skewing the outcomes, Dr. Phillips says. Almost everyone who takes up weight training shows significant improvements in strength and muscle size, making it difficult to tease out the impacts of one version of training versus another.
So for the new study, which was funded by the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada and published this month in the Journal of Applied Physiology, he and his colleagues recruited 49 young men who had been weight training for a year or more. (The scientists plan to study women and older people in future studies.)
All completed tests of strength, fitness, hormone levels and muscular health, then were randomly divided into two groups.
One group was assigned to follow the standard regimen, in which weights were set at between 75 and 90 percent of the man’s one-repetition maximum and the volunteer lifted until he could not lift again, usually after about 10 repetitions.
The other volunteers began the lighter routine. Their weights were set at between 30 and 50 percent of each man’s one-repetition maximum, and he lifted them as many as 25 times, until the muscles were exhausted.
All of the volunteers performed three sets of their various lifts four times per week for 12 weeks.
Then they returned to the lab to have muscle strength, size and health reassessed and their hormone levels re-measured.
The results were unequivocal. There were no significant differences between the two groups. All of the men had gained muscle strength and size, and these gains were almost identical, whether they had lifted heavy or light weights.
Interestingly, the scientists found no connection between changes in the men’s hormone levels and their gains in strength and muscle size. All of the men had more testosterone and human growth hormone flowing through their bodies after the workouts. But the degree of those changes in hormone levels did not correlate with their gains in strength.
Instead, the key to getting stronger for these men, Dr. Phillips and his colleagues decided, was to grow tired. The volunteers in both groups had to attain almost total muscular fatigue in order to increase their muscles’ size and strength.
That finding suggests, Dr. Phillips says, that there is something about the cellular mechanisms jump-started in muscle tissue by exhaustion that enables you to develop arms like the first lady’s.
This data does not prove, though, that one approach to lifting weights is necessarily better than the other, Dr. Phillips says.
“But some people will find it much easier or less intimidating” to lift lighter weights, he says, even though they need to complete more repetitions in order to tire their muscles. They also may experience fewer injuries, he says, although that possibility has not yet been tested.
For now, someone hoping to strengthen his or her muscles should choose a weight that feels tolerable and then lift it repeatedly until the effort of the final lift is at least an eight on a scale of one to 10, Dr. Phillips says. “There should be some discomfort,” he says, “but the dividends on the back side” in terms of stronger, healthier muscles “are enormous.”
Beruseruku Desu
Supporter
- 12,529
- 26,343
- Joined
- Oct 10, 2018
skimmed through the study real quick. these were the lifts they were testing their 1 rep max on.
- 10,957
- 19,975
- Joined
- Dec 13, 2018
Well, what they are really saying that use the weight that you can use for maximum intensity. Lighter versus heavier is relative, so to speak. They've simply done more research to check and see what actually happens, a better case study.
Last edited:
- 10,957
- 19,975
- Joined
- Dec 13, 2018
For the past year and a half, I have been working with 4/25 rep scheme, for a total of 100 reps on one exercise, most notably squats and leg extensions. My vertical is solid after such, and I get a ridiculous pump in the glutes and quads after doing do. The sets go 135 for 25, 185, 205, then 225. I then hit the leg extension for 4x25 with the 250lb stack. I dig high reps due to the immediate return of a great pump.
Last edited:
- 43,425
- 42,998
- Joined
- Oct 10, 2013
Ultimately it’s finding the best amount of resistance vs reps. Everyone is stuck on doing 10x3 or 6x4 or whatever. The “risk v reward” is the amount of wear your body takes v the benefit you receive. It’s not the same for every exercise let alone muscle group. Efficiency to your goal and minimal wear
Last edited:
- 6,846
- 5,940
- Joined
- Jun 11, 2014
I've been doing something similar to this on the 2nd round of PPL every week
do a 20-15-12-10-8 rep scheme tho
def. great for hypertrophy
- 47,248
- 96,790
- Joined
- Mar 19, 2013
This rep scheme is sick. Was doing it for a minute
- 10,957
- 19,975
- Joined
- Dec 13, 2018
Really great. Damned impressive.
- 6,846
- 5,940
- Joined
- Jun 11, 2014
for sure.
one of my friends bought that athleanx complete program and he has that scheme for most movements
aNYone
Supporter
- 28,697
- 33,703
- Joined
- Dec 31, 2012
Gonna try this.
- 32,349
- 30,166
- Joined
- Feb 24, 2013
Hm that sounds great for a hyper leg day.
I was doing 25-20-15-10 on squats before I switched to my routine to a PPL 6 days a week with a heavy and hyper leg day.
Think I might go back to that on the hyper days.
Beruseruku Desu
Supporter
- 12,529
- 26,343
- Joined
- Oct 10, 2018
im surprised most of yall dont use the RPE scale to determine your working sets. its a great tool if you use it properly
- 10,957
- 19,975
- Joined
- Dec 13, 2018
I first got hip to this down at the University of Texas during a visit a few years back. Watching the sessions in the training room, they had the kids hitting these rep goals, which in turn improved their overall 40 times. Schools like this are a great case study as to what actually works, as their training and diet are controlled by the staff. You also get a good idea about recovery, and how that stimulates muscular strength and growth. Another good study to see are the NFL combine training programs. They run for about twelve weeks, and the results are undeniable.
- 47,248
- 96,790
- Joined
- Mar 19, 2013
I remember learning about this pyramid scheme back in highschool. Has you feeling like a real sav after
- 30,232
- 40,547
- Joined
- May 25, 2004
Never seen that many words in this thread.
