My take on muscle fiber and how it relates to YOU

[I dont work at Ballys]

Ok so all my training experience and certification with NASM has taught me absolutely jack **** about fiber type and its ability to be manipulated through training. I've always been interested in the case by case genetic ratios of Type I/Type IIa/b in the individual and have done some online research to see what could be discovered. (in actuality, type IIb is only found in small animals and is so glycolytic that it is white in nature, which attributes to the animals pale color of the meat. It is Type IId that is found in humans)

So I was inspired by the thread about "slow twitch training will bring out visible striations in the body" to find out more about this topic, and, sparing all the obvious facts about fiber type, I will share what i've read.

Everyone is born with a specific ratio of fibers in each muscle of their body. There are however, ranges that can be generally accepted for certain muscles that can be applied. For example, the vastus medialis (knee extensor), for the average to well-trained athlete, is composed of on average 46% Type I, 43% Type IIa, and 11% Type IIb. The corralation of muscle strength is directly related to the cross-sectional area of these fibers, which was represented as 11% of the total make up.

The gastrocnemius, (calf muscle) was discovered to contain between 60-80% slow twitch fibers in the average untrained runner, while an elite runners gastro contained 92% slow twitch at the highest of the study. The fibers of both fast and slow twitch fibers were found to be larger in the trained athlete.

So can slow twitch fibers be trained to grow? and can the ratio of slow to fast twitch fibers in a muscle be altered? The answer to both of these questions is yes. Slow twitch fibers contain thousands of capillaries, which supply the muscle with oxygen, and it has been found that through training, the amount of capillaries will multiply, thus making the muscle more efficient. The fast twitch fiber can also grow through training, but the amount of oxygen will remain unchanged, thus affecting the ratio of "fiber diameter to capillary"

"Endurance exercise increases the demands on nutrient supply and waste removal, but also stimulates the growth of more capillaries. Endurance training improves the delivery and removal function of this fantastic network of vessels. The total number of capillaries per muscle in endurance-trained athletes is about 40% higher than in untrained persons. Interestingly, this is about the same as the difference in VO2max between well-trained and untrained people. In contrast, strength training tends to decrease the capillary to muscle fiber diameter ratio. This occurs because muscle fibers grow in diameter, but the number of capillaries essentially remains unaltered."

What i'm saying is that through the proper training of the muscle, it can adapt to what is being imposed upon it, but the goal is to find the most efficient way to train the muscle at hand to make it do what you want. This plays into our rep schemes and sets as well as time under tension. The slow twitch fiber will always be firing, but it is only when heavier resistance is imposed upon the muscle, that the fast twitch fibers will come into play.

"Specific athletic groups may differ in the control of the motor units. Top athletes in the explosive sports like Olympic weightlifting or the high jump appear to have the ability to recruit nearly all of their motor units in a simultaneous or synchronous fashion. In contrast, the firing pattern of endurance athletes becomes more asynchronous. During continuous contractions, some units are firing while others recover, providing a built in recovery period. Inital gains in strength associated with a weight training program are due to improved recruitment, not muscle hypertrophy."

In order to provide "strenth gains" to the slow twitch fibers, a rep scheme between 20-40 must be implimented to stimulate it to the point of growth. Will this bring out the "striations" that has been discussed time and time again? I'm still not sure, but the evidence points that it may...

Now lets say you go on a 10 mile run, and your legs are sore as **** the next day, and compare that to a 1 hour heavy weight lifting session. Does the soreness corralate to the protein synthesis? it does not.

"Study also shows that fiber type has no effect on protein synthesis and additional amino acid supplementation in the human body. Also stating that muscle protein synthesis increases within a few hours after a bout of strenuous exercise and remains elevated for at least 24 hrs returning to normal at after approximately 72 hrs.

So after its all said and done, I believe that the body is extremely capable of altering its genetic composition through the proper training of the specific athlete. It's important to know how prone each muscle is to different types of training in the body, based on its composition and goals. (another example, the tricep is composed of on aveage 90% fast twitch fiber.)

An interesting website that might shed some light on specific ratios in YOUR body is, http://www.fitstep.com/Advanced/Tips...fiber-type.htm

I'll go ahead and cite my resources too, like any good "research paper" should.

Discuss!!

http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/art...?artid=1193118

http://users.rcn.com/jkimball.ma.ult...M/Muscles.html

http://biology.plosjournals.org/perl...l.pbio.0020348

http://home.hia.no/~stephens/musfacts.htm

jp.physoc.org/cgi/reprint/563/1/203.pdf

[CoQ10]

Interesting...

I have read studies suggesting periodically using extremely high reps can lead to an increase in size in very experienced trainees, but nothing totally conclusive...

-C10

[Carmen0857]

Good post, I am also NASM certified, and yea they teach you nothing about fiber types, I am also interesed in it though. I think it is definatley predetermined wether an athlete will be a better endurance athlete or a better power/strength athlete, which is directly related to your %s of each fiber. I know for a fact that I am all fast twitch, I am a fast sprinter/high jumper and I have terrible (muscular) endurance for the amount of running I do.

I don't beleive you can actually change the types of fibers, but I think you can train in a way that will help create greater oxygen flow to the typeIIa fibers that will make them act more like tyoe Is and vice versa.

For building mass, each muscle has some of each fiber type, this is why it is important to train in all of the rep ranges:

1-3 (explosive) Power (I think thes would be Type II B???)
1-5 (heavy) Strength (also Type II B??)
6-14 Hypertrophy (Type II A???)
15+ Muscular Endurance (Type I)

[joseph`]

ive been doing 20 rep workouts and ive been growing heaps weired :S every body is unique and special in its own right

[MrSinister]

i tried to read but blew my fuse..

mix reps, its the only sensible thing to do...

[krogtaar]

i ran cc and track in hs and college, dont know if you can change the number of muscle fibers, but training endurance over many years will def increase efficiency of slow muscles. also, good endurance athletes tend to not be bullky at all, so that cappilary growth info kinda surprised me. cardiovascular effiiency is what seems to make the difference

[all pro]

Ok so all my training experience and certification with NASM has taught me absolutely jack **** about fiber type and its ability to be manipulated through training. I've always been interested in the case by case genetic ratios of Type I/Type IIa/b in the individual and have done some online research to see what could be discovered. (in actuality, type IIb is only found in small animals and is so glycolytic that it is white in nature, which attributes to the animals pale color of the meat. It is Type IId that is found in humans)

So I was inspired by the thread about "slow twitch training will bring out visible striations in the body" to find out more about this topic, and, sparing all the obvious facts about fiber type, I will share what i've read.

Everyone is born with a specific ratio of fibers in each muscle of their body. There are however, ranges that can be generally accepted for certain muscles that can be applied. For example, the vastus medialis (knee extensor), for the average to well-trained athlete, is composed of on average 46% Type I, 43% Type IIa, and 11% Type IIb. The corralation of muscle strength is directly related to the cross-sectional area of these fibers, which was represented as 11% of the total make up.

The gastrocnemius, (calf muscle) was discovered to contain between 60-80% slow twitch fibers in the average untrained runner, while an elite runners gastro contained 92% slow twitch at the highest of the study. The fibers of both fast and slow twitch fibers were found to be larger in the trained athlete.

So can slow twitch fibers be trained to grow? and can the ratio of slow to fast twitch fibers in a muscle be altered? The answer to both of these questions is yes. Slow twitch fibers contain thousands of capillaries, which supply the muscle with oxygen, and it has been found that through training, the amount of capillaries will multiply, thus making the muscle more efficient. The fast twitch fiber can also grow through training, but the amount of oxygen will remain unchanged, thus affecting the ratio of "fiber diameter to capillary"

"Endurance exercise increases the demands on nutrient supply and waste removal, but also stimulates the growth of more capillaries. Endurance training improves the delivery and removal function of this fantastic network of vessels. The total number of capillaries per muscle in endurance-trained athletes is about 40% higher than in untrained persons. Interestingly, this is about the same as the difference in VO2max between well-trained and untrained people. In contrast, strength training tends to decrease the capillary to muscle fiber diameter ratio. This occurs because muscle fibers grow in diameter, but the number of capillaries essentially remains unaltered."

What i'm saying is that through the proper training of the muscle, it can adapt to what is being imposed upon it, but the goal is to find the most efficient way to train the muscle at hand to make it do what you want. This plays into our rep schemes and sets as well as time under tension. The slow twitch fiber will always be firing, but it is only when heavier resistance is imposed upon the muscle, that the fast twitch fibers will come into play.

"Specific athletic groups may differ in the control of the motor units. Top athletes in the explosive sports like Olympic weightlifting or the high jump appear to have the ability to recruit nearly all of their motor units in a simultaneous or synchronous fashion. In contrast, the firing pattern of endurance athletes becomes more asynchronous. During continuous contractions, some units are firing while others recover, providing a built in recovery period. Inital gains in strength associated with a weight training program are due to improved recruitment, not muscle hypertrophy."

In order to provide "strenth gains" to the slow twitch fibers, a rep scheme between 20-40 must be implimented to stimulate it to the point of growth. Will this bring out the "striations" that has been discussed time and time again? I'm still not sure, but the evidence points that it may...

Now lets say you go on a 10 mile run, and your legs are sore as **** the next day, and compare that to a 1 hour heavy weight lifting session. Does the soreness corralate to the protein synthesis? it does not.

"Study also shows that fiber type has no effect on protein synthesis and additional amino acid supplementation in the human body. Also stating that muscle protein synthesis increases within a few hours after a bout of strenuous exercise and remains elevated for at least 24 hrs returning to normal at after approximately 72 hrs.

So after its all said and done, I believe that the body is extremely capable of altering its genetic composition through the proper training of the specific athlete. It's important to know how prone each muscle is to different types of training in the body, based on its composition and goals. (another example, the tricep is composed of on aveage 90% fast twitch fiber.)

An interesting website that might shed some light on specific ratios in YOUR body is, http://www.fitstep.com/Advanced/Tips...fiber-type.htm

I'll go ahead and cite my resources too, like any good "research paper" should.

Discuss!!

http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/art...?artid=1193118

http://users.rcn.com/jkimball.ma.ult...M/Muscles.html

http://biology.plosjournals.org/perl...l.pbio.0020348

http://home.hia.no/~stephens/musfacts.htm

jp.physoc.org/cgi/reprint/563/1/203.pdf

I guess you've never heard of the S.A.I.D. principle ? Specific*Adaption*to*Imposed*Demands
One of the adaptions the body makes is the addition of motor units. That's one of the major reasons the C.N.S. becomes more effecient. If you lift with explosive speed (olympic lifting) or with at least 80% of your 1 rep max (power lifting) your body will most likely add 2B motor units. If you train with slower speeds and lighter weights you will most likely get more 2A motor units. If you train fast/heavy for long periods of time your body will begin to replace 2A motor units with 2Bs. If you train slow/light for long periods of time your body will begin to replace 2B motor units with 2As. If you replace a type 1 motor unit with a 2B motor unit in time the fiber type will change to 2B. It's pretty much a given that bodybuilders have more 2As then power lifters and olympic lifters and that power lifters and olympic lifters have more 2Bs. There are at least 3 examples of champion bodybuilders who started out as competitive power lifters, Arnold, Ferrigno and Columbo. There are ways to combine the methods, Soviet mixed qualities. This is where Lou Simmons got the idea for West Side. In the end it's all about goals AND genetics. If you are naturally biased toward fast twitch you will NEVER be a world class endurance athlete and if you are naturally biased toward slow twitch you will NEVER be a world class power lifter. If you want to bodybuild you will probably have to use higher volume and slower rep speeds most of the time. If you want to be a power lifter you will probably have to use higher intensity and faster rep speeds most of the time.

[akaMarko]

i tried to read but blew my fuse..

mix reps, its the only sensible thing to do...

YEP!

[MoGeaYuglay]

mix reps. but progress in weights.

[I dont work at Ballys]

I guess you've never heard of the S.A.I.D. principle ? Specific*Adaption*to*Imposed*Demands
One of the adaptions the body makes is the addition of motor units. That's one of the major reasons the C.N.S. becomes more effecient. If you lift with explosive speed (olympic lifting) or with at least 80% of your 1 rep max (power lifting) your body will most likely add 2B motor units. If you train with slower speeds and lighter weights you will most likely get more 2A motor units. If you train fast/heavy for long periods of time your body will begin to replace 2A motor units with 2Bs. If you train slow/light for long periods of time your body will begin to replace 2B motor units with 2As. If you replace a type 1 motor unit with a 2B motor unit in time the fiber type will change to 2B. It's pretty much a given that bodybuilders have more 2As then power lifters and olympic lifters and that power lifters and olympic lifters have more 2Bs. There are at least 3 examples of champion bodybuilders who started out as competitive power lifters, Arnold, Ferrigno and Columbo. There are ways to combine the methods, Soviet mixed qualities. This is where Lou Simmons got the idea for West Side. In the end it's all about goals AND genetics. If you are naturally biased toward fast twitch you will NEVER be a world class endurance athlete and if you are naturally biased toward slow twitch you will NEVER be a world class power lifter. If you want to bodybuild you will probably have to use higher volume and slower rep speeds most of the time. If you want to be a power lifter you will probably have to use higher intensity and faster rep speeds most of the time.

of course i've heard of the SAID principle, lol. read this part again...it agrees with what you wrote.



What i'm saying is that through the proper training of the muscle, it can adapt to what is being imposed upon it, but the goal is to find the most efficient way to train the muscle at hand to make it do what you want. This plays into our rep schemes and sets as well as time under tension. The slow twitch fiber will always be firing, but it is only when heavier resistance is imposed upon the muscle, that the fast twitch fibers will come into play.

"Specific athletic groups may differ in the control of the motor units. Top athletes in the explosive sports like Olympic weightlifting or the high jump appear to have the ability to recruit nearly all of their motor units in a simultaneous or synchronous fashion. In contrast, the firing pattern of endurance athletes becomes more asynchronous. During continuous contractions, some units are firing while others recover, providing a built in recovery period. Inital gains in strength associated with a weight training program are due to improved recruitment, not muscle hypertrophy."

[I dont work at Ballys]

Good post, I am also NASM certified, and yea they teach you nothing about fiber types, I am also interesed in it though. I think it is definatley predetermined wether an athlete will be a better endurance athlete or a better power/strength athlete, which is directly related to your %s of each fiber. I know for a fact that I am all fast twitch, I am a fast sprinter/high jumper and I have terrible (muscular) endurance for the amount of running I do.

I don't beleive you can actually change the types of fibers, but I think you can train in a way that will help create greater oxygen flow to the typeIIa fibers that will make them act more like tyoe Is and vice versa.

For building mass, each muscle has some of each fiber type, this is why it is important to train in all of the rep ranges:

1-3 (explosive) Power (I think thes would be Type II B???)
1-5 (heavy) Strength (also Type II B??)
6-14 Hypertrophy (Type II A???)
15+ Muscular Endurance (Type I)

I think what the research suggests is that we have the ability to increase the cross-sectional ratio of the fiber types, which is the basis of our strength adaptation capibility. The slow twitch fibers, through proper training, will increase their capillary count, thus becoming more efficient. If they are trained in the manner of hypertrophy, over time, they will increase in diameter, while the amount of capillaries will remain unchanged, thus "transforming" them into a less oxygenated fiber, (in terms of ratio to size)

[JCVP]

There is a image table inside Mark Rippetoe's Starting Strength book that shows the density of what fibers (or what type of hypertrophy occurs). I wish I could find a link to it; someone attached it on this board in a topic.

But it basically summed up that there were 2 types of hypertrophy. I forget the technical jargon, but basically one was bodybuilding hypertrophy, and the other was endurance hypertrophy.

In bodybuilding hypertrophy, new muscle fibers were being grown with very low to medium swelling of body fluids (5-12 reps best range for concentrated BBing hypertrophy). The endurance hypertrophy was described as basically "temporary swelling." By doing 20+ reps on sets, you received the best concentration of endurance hypertrophy, but it was basically false gains. The endurance hypertrophy was almost all plasma/body fluids & lactic acid that swelled up inside the muscle region, giving it the appearance of a bigger muscle. In reality, the swelling was the only action to occur. Granted, your endurance abilities do get better, and muscle mass gets slightly bigger, but if you were to stop training for 1-2 weeks, the fluids would drain and your training would be a waste.

Reps for some interesting links though. Thanks.

With BBing hypertrophy, the actual fibers are being built with minimal swelling, and you're actually building legitimate muscle. That's why most people lift in the 5-12 rep range to receive the best concentration of bodybuilding hypertrophy.

The table also suggested that doing 3 reps or less was neural gains, and minimal BBing hypertrophy. Same thing with 20+ reps - Maximal endurance hypertrophy & minimal BBing hypertrophy.

So you could in theory specifically train for ST-fiber development, but the type of training would rarely carry over to FT-fiber development, or bodybuilding hypertrophy. That's why the book recommended aiming in the 5-12 rep range for bodybuilding hypertrophy, minimal endurance hypertrophy, and minimal-to-medium neural gains.

I mean, you could specifically train in the 20-40 rep range for your entire life. But your training would have to be constant, no rest weeks, and not too tiring on the CNS in order to keep your "fluid-swelled" gains. With the other type of hypertrophy, the gains are more "felt" in the body, target more FT fibers, and FT fibers tend to bring out harder muscle mass. Usually endurance athletes tend to have soft muscle mass.

[I dont work at Ballys]

There is a image table inside Mark Rippetoe's Starting Strength book that shows the density of what fibers (or what type of hypertrophy occurs). I wish I could find a link to it; someone attached it on this board in a topic.

But it basically summed up that there were 2 types of hypertrophy. I forget the technical jargon, but basically one was bodybuilding hypertrophy, and the other was endurance hypertrophy.

In bodybuilding hypertrophy, new muscle fibers were being grown with very low to medium swelling of body fluids (5-12 reps best range for concentrated BBing hypertrophy). The endurance hypertrophy was described as basically "temporary swelling." By doing 20+ reps on sets, you received the best concentration of endurance hypertrophy, but it was basically false gains. The endurance hypertrophy was almost all plasma/body fluids & lactic acid that swelled up inside the muscle region, giving it the appearance of a bigger muscle. In reality, the swelling was the only action to occur. Granted, your endurance abilities do get better, and muscle mass gets slightly bigger, but if you were to stop training for 1-2 weeks, the fluids would drain and your training would be a waste.

Reps for some interesting links though. Thanks.

With BBing hypertrophy, the actual fibers are being built with minimal swelling, and you're actually building legitimate muscle. That's why most people lift in the 5-12 rep range to receive the best concentration of bodybuilding hypertrophy.

The table also suggested that doing 3 reps or less was neural gains, and minimal BBing hypertrophy. Same thing with 20+ reps - Maximal endurance hypertrophy & minimal BBing hypertrophy.

So you could in theory specifically train for ST-fiber development, but the type of training would rarely carry over to FT-fiber development, or bodybuilding hypertrophy. That's why the book recommended aiming in the 5-12 rep range for bodybuilding hypertrophy, minimal endurance hypertrophy, and minimal-to-medium neural gains.

I mean, you could specifically train in the 20-40 rep range for your entire life. But your training would have to be constant, no rest weeks, and not too tiring on the CNS in order to keep your "fluid-swelled" gains. With the other type of hypertrophy, the gains are more "felt" in the body, target more FT fibers, and FT fibers tend to bring out harder muscle mass. Usually endurance athletes tend to have soft muscle mass.

Well I can certainly agree that training the rep ranges that will stimulate the FT fibers optimally will result in larger gains and better motor unit recruitment, my ultimate point is that the ratios of each muscle specific in the body should be trained slightly differently to provide the best results. Look at the contrast between the gastrocnemius and the triceps brachii, there is no logic in training these muscles the same way, even if the goal is to make both muscles grow. I would say medium to long rep ranges including long time under tension would stimulate the calf to grow much more efficient than the triceps, which would probably be stimulated the best through compound exercises such as CGBP and dips with lower to medium rep ranges and a more explosive concentric. Again this is all speculation on my part I am by no means an expert on this, im just trying to break down what i've read into applied science.

[JCVP]

I have another link here you may find of interest:

http://www.abcbodybuilding.com/anato...id=18&subId=47

They have compiled their "fiber" ratios in each muscle of the body. Now the thing is, they claim that the triceps only hold 67.5% FT(II) fibers, and the rest are ST. The study or data you read from your link that claimed it to be 90% FT may have come on a study of a powerful athletes with strong triceps, not necessarily the average training individual.

This is why I never try to train the body part for the fiber type. If you train in the 5-12 rep you are guaranteed to do this:

1) Max BBing Hypertrophy
2) Minimal-to-moderate neural gains
3) Minimal-to-small endurance gains

You're right about the soleus being ST dominant; they say it's 89% ST dominant in the Soleus. So it would be fairly smart then to say do a weighted jump rope for 30-50 reps to build up calves. But for use of practicality and for most trainees, will they actually go to the gym, lift weights in the 5-12 rep range, then set aside on their routine jump roping just to target the ST fibers - I doubt it. Would it be useful? Yes, but then the trainee might fear not getting bigger calves by doing a weighted jump rope, and they would probably scoff at the idea.

- To me, it seems like you can adjust a margin of your FT or ST fibers in your body in certain muscles to a certain % (just an example, maybe +/- 20%) . And without an expensive test to exactly determine your ratios, it's kind of pointless.

I know they have a self-lifting test where you try to see how many reps you can dish out at a reduced load, but you'll RARELY see anyone dish out 20+ reps at a reduced load to failure to really prove they're ST dominant. Heck, I'm probably ST dominant in most of my body and can probably barely dish out 7 reps at a 80% load.

It's good info that people should understand in my opinion, but not necessarily practice until we get more "defined" methods on applying it. It just seems better to stay in the 5-12 rep range to be safe.

[I dont work at Ballys]

I have another link here you may find of interest:

http://www.abcbodybuilding.com/anato...id=18&subId=47

They have compiled their "fiber" ratios in each muscle of the body. Now the thing is, they claim that the triceps only hold 67.5% FT(II) fibers, and the rest are ST. The study or data you read from your link that claimed it to be 90% FT may have come on a study of a powerful athletes with strong triceps, not necessarily the average training individual.

This is why I never try to train the body part for the fiber type. If you train in the 5-12 rep you are guaranteed to do this:

1) Max BBing Hypertrophy
2) Minimal-to-moderate neural gains
3) Minimal-to-small endurance gains

You're right about the soleus being ST dominant; they say it's 89% ST dominant in the Soleus. So it would be fairly smart then to say do a weighted jump rope for 30-50 reps to build up calves. But for use of practicality and for most trainees, will they actually go to the gym, lift weights in the 5-12 rep range, then set aside on their routine jump roping just to target the ST fibers - I doubt it. Would it be useful? Yes, but then the trainee might fear not getting bigger calves by doing a weighted jump rope, and they would probably scoff at the idea.

- To me, it seems like you can adjust a margin of your FT or ST fibers in your body in certain muscles to a certain % (just an example, maybe +/- 20%) . And without an expensive test to exactly determine your ratios, it's kind of pointless.

I know they have a self-lifting test where you try to see how many reps you can dish out at a reduced load, but you'll RARELY see anyone dish out 20+ reps at a reduced load to failure to really prove they're ST dominant. Heck, I'm probably ST dominant in most of my body and can probably barely dish out 7 reps at a 80% load.

It's good info that people should understand in my opinion, but not necessarily practice until we get more "defined" methods on applying it. It just seems better to stay in the 5-12 rep range to be safe.

interesting site, but it looks a little "cheesy" and the sources that I provided have much more medical and scientifical credibility IMO. And it was the gastrocnemius muscle that was cited in the research, not the soleus.

Your'e also correct about the ability to manipulate the ratio being genetically limited, but the possibility to be born as an "endurance athlete" and be trained into a "sprinter" exist to some extent! How do I know this? I was a sprinter/jumper all through highschool track, and I was very good, not THE BEST, but always placed. Now I run marathons, am I the BEST at those? no, but i'm very good for my age. That's why this stuff intrests me so much. I also do heavy squats and deads, does this affect my running? yes. But am I excelling in both aspects of my goals? you bet.

Also the 80% 1RM test to determine fiber composition that you were speaking of was linked in my first post, http://www.fitstep.com/Advanced/Tips...fiber-type.htm

[all pro]

of course i've heard of the SAID principle, lol. read this part again...it agrees with what you wrote.



What i'm saying is that through the proper training of the muscle, it can adapt to what is being imposed upon it, but the goal is to find the most efficient way to train the muscle at hand to make it do what you want. This plays into our rep schemes and sets as well as time under tension. The slow twitch fiber will always be firing, but it is only when heavier resistance is imposed upon the muscle, that the fast twitch fibers will come into play.

No. If you train with lighter weights in the higher rep ranges as fatigue sets in the 2Bs will be used to keep the weight moving BUT the C.N.S. will not be firing them at thier maximum rate and the 2Bs are only good for maybe 3 reps before they are exhausted, therefore the 2Bs will not develop maximul strength training this way.

[I dont work at Ballys]

No. If you train with lighter weights in the higher rep ranges as fatigue sets in the 2Bs will be used to keep the weight moving BUT the C.N.S. will not be firing them at thier maximum rate and the 2Bs are only good for maybe 3 reps before they are exhausted, therefore the 2Bs will not develop maximul strength training this way.

Again i agree with you. What made you think that I felt that way?

[all pro]

Again i agree with you. What made you think that I felt that way?

Sometimes it's very confusing I may have missunderstood your possition. I use a different cut off point based on % of 1 rep max rather then the number of reps to determine the out come ie:
80% of 1 rep max = 2Bs recruited with the very first rep. That means 8 rep max weight or less. The only other way to recruit 2Bs with the very first rep and a lighter weight is with explosive speed.
From 60-80% of 1 rep max you get a mix of muscle fiber hypertrophie and noncontractile hypertrophie.
Less than 60% is noncontractile hypertrophie only.
I don't like using rep ranges because everyone is capable of doing more or less reps with the same % of 1 rep max based on thier own mix of fiber types.
65% of 1 rep max = 75% muscular endurance 25% strength
75% of 1 rep max = 50% muscular endurance 50% strength
85% of 1 rep max = 25% muscular endurance 75% strength
muscular endurance = hypertrophie of noncontractile protien
If you aren't confused yet, you aren't trying hard enough.

[Defiant1]

I agree with most of that, though you won't change your genetics, you are just adapting to imposed stress specifically as the body does.

Basically, all rep ranges are important for size.

To me, this is not news, but may be news to all of the "one answer fits all" people.


Something that is missed, is that one can train the ST fibers by just AVOIDING training the FT fibers.

What favors ST fibers?

Slow movements (low force)

Low load

Constant tension (ST fibers have longer myosin/actin cross bridge links and more collagen)

Sets of more than about a minute-i.e. high reps.


It is important to note a few things:

It is not "ST, FTa and x only". There is a gradient of muscle fiber types, basically from VERY low threshold ST endurance fibers (you know, the ones that control muscle tone *cough*) through the VERY high threshold FT POWER fibers that are ONLY activated at maximum FORCE....which does not happen at max load by the way.

And all kinds in between. In fact, there are hybrid fibers.

The ones that adapt for size the most are the FT type a, which are the FT fibers which have SOME endurance...why around 6-12 reps produce the most size in most muscles for most people.

Also, re: fiber types etc. EVERYONE IS DIFFERENT. That is why it is important to trust your instincts, and to try different rep ranges and speeds if a bodypart is not responding.

[I dont work at Ballys]

Excellent point about "hybrid" fibers, just because things are clumped into 3 catagories, doesn't mean they are all identical to eachother. You explained alot of what I was saying into an easier to understand paragraph. I did not mean that you will alter your genetics, but rather explore the potential of adaptation that our genetics offer. I think that as it relates to visibile striations being contributed to the stress imposed on different fibers is still up in the air. I believe a muscle that is trained to its maximum potential for size and strength will see the most visible results, but that the ratios determined by genetics will play in role in the way it is trained. Agreed?

[de_barathrum]

There is a gradient of muscle fiber types, basically from VERY low threshold ST endurance fibers (you know, the ones that control muscle tone *cough*)

no defiant, you must be mistaken. only n00bz who spend all of their time in the misc. section believe in tone.

btw good thread. maybe this will help some people open their eyes a bit, and provide some good discussion.

[Defiant1]

Excellent point about "hybrid" fibers, just because things are clumped into 3 catagories, doesn't mean they are all identical to eachother. You explained alot of what I was saying into an easier to understand paragraph. I did not mean that you will alter your genetics, but rather explore the potential of adaptation that our genetics offer. I think that as it relates to visibile striations being contributed to the stress imposed on different fibers is still up in the air. I believe a muscle that is trained to its maximum potential for size and strength will see the most visible results, but that the ratios determined by genetics will play in role in the way it is trained. Agreed?

Agreed. That is why cookie cutter advice and routines don't work. And feel DOES matter.

Case in point: If your triceps are high % FT, and your pecs are high % ST, then low rep compound chest work is just going to work your triceps.

I definately think that different development looks different. Meaning, it is likely possible to "tone", "striate" etc via different training protocols.

I post about this **** all the time. You will probably feel like me when you see 25 threads tomorrow about how none of it is true.

[spirit3530]

Agreed. That is why cookie cutter advice and routines don't work. And feel DOES matter.

Case in point: If your triceps are high % FT, and your pecs are high % ST, then low rep compound chest work is just going to work your triceps.

I definately think that different development looks different. Meaning, it is likely possible to "tone", "striate" etc via different training protocols.

I post about this **** all the time. You will probably feel like me when you see 25 threads tomorrow about how none of it is true.

Negged for using tone...

[dkfan9]

repped
very interesting info

[HawkLifter55]

repped
very interesting info

x2

[wimp2pimp]

about this link: http://www.fitstep.com/Advanced/Tips...fiber-type.htm

it states that finding what types of muscle fibers i have for a particular body part can tailor my routine to maximize my genetic potential.

What do you guys think he means?

Is he saying that if you want to recruit all your muscle fibers in the muscle, that your best bet would be to perform a rep range that correlates best with what kind of fibers consist in that muscle part?

So by recruiting most of the fibers, you are actually making the most fibers grow, and in turn, the muscle gets bigger versus recruiting only a fraction of that muscles fibers?

If so, high reps would work for all body parts to recruit every fiber, because if you continue doing the reps, eventually you will recruit every fiber, since slow gets recruited first, and as you get more tired, fast gets recruited right?

Now what about drop sets? Drop sets uses all the weight ranges, but arent they useless? Why?

And I'm guessing the only drawback to that is it's less efficient training, since you would need to spend more time due to the higher amounts of reps right? But if you don't want to go through the hassle of trial and error to see what each body part best responds to, why not just do a lot of reps?

[JCVP]

Think of it this way:

8-12 reps targets MAXIMUM BBing Hypertrophy, Small Endurance Gains
5-8 targets MEDIUM BBing Hypertrophy, Small Neural Gains
1-3 targets MAXIMUM Neural gains, Small BBing Hypertrophy
15-20 targets FAIR BBing Hypertrophy, Fair Endurance Hypertrophy
20+ targets MAXIMUM Endurance Hypertrophy, little BBing Hypertrophy, little neural gains

I really wish I had that Rippetoe table picture. It shaded areas in for each type of targeted cause with a darker box representing a better attainment of that certain type of goal. If you lift in the 5-12 rep range, and hit all spectrums of that range, you SHOULD aim for a great amount of BBing hypertrophy, small endurance, and small neural gains. This is what most BBers want unless a sport or activity points them to aim for endurance &/or powerlifting.

There are certain FT fibers you cannot tire because the initial load isn't heavy enough. These FT fibers are suppose to activate on the first rep of the "heavy" load, and then other fibers are recruited to complete the 6-8 rep set for example. By just doing endurance, you will not be exercising this "strength" FT fiber because the initial load wasn't heavy enough.

I'm not saying this is set in stone.

- If your body has a high amount of ST fibers, then you try to follow the guidelines above, you won't see amazing results right off the bat. It's because your current body has a high composition of endurance fibers, and would benefit from endurance training. It will take time to convert more fibers into FT-dominant through training and a well-supplemented diet with protein for muscles to grow.

[all pro]

about this link: http://www.fitstep.com/Advanced/Tips...fiber-type.htm

it states that finding what types of muscle fibers i have for a particular body part can tailor my routine to maximize my genetic potential.

What do you guys think he means?

Is he saying that if you want to recruit all your muscle fibers in the muscle, that your best bet would be to perform a rep range that correlates best with what kind of fibers consist in that muscle part?

So by recruiting most of the fibers, you are actually making the most fibers grow, and in turn, the muscle gets bigger versus recruiting only a fraction of that muscles fibers?

If so, high reps would work for all body parts to recruit every fiber, because if you continue doing the reps, eventually you will recruit every fiber, since slow gets recruited first, and as you get more tired, fast gets recruited right?

Now what about drop sets? Drop sets uses all the weight ranges, but arent they useless? Why?

And I'm guessing the only drawback to that is it's less efficient training, since you would need to spend more time due to the higher amounts of reps right? But if you don't want to go through the hassle of trial and error to see what each body part best responds to, why not just do a lot of reps?

From Fitstep:

To find the predominant fiber type in a particular muscle in your body, you can try the following test.

Find your one rep max for an isolation exercise for that muscle group.
Take 80% of it and do as many reps as possible.
If you can do only 4 to 7 reps with it, you have mostly Fast Twitch fibers in that muscle.
Around ten reps is the typical mix for a muscle.
Doing 15 to 20 or more reps will be mostly Slow Twitch fibers.
By knowing what type of muscle fibers you have, you can tailor your training towards developing them to their maximum potential.

Fred Hatfield stated this same test in an article years ago. It may or may not be helpfull because as Defiant1 has all ready pointed out there are many sub groups between fast and slow. If you only train your strongest links in the chain then the weakest links will cause a plateau. That's 1 of the main reasons that periodized programs are so effective. Doing only high reps as you have suggested won't work because you have to do more than just recruit a fiber to make it adapt and the C.N.S. plays a part in this. To keep this simple I'm only going to use the 3 basic fiber types as an example. I'm going to use bench press as an example because it's a big, basic compound and seems to be everybodys favorite. Test your 1 rep max, load 80% on the bar and if your average you do 8 reps. You only did 1 set, you couldn't do a second set for 8 reps, if you tried you only get 4-6 reps. You haven't fatigued any of your muscle fibers maximally BUT you have fatigued the C.N.S. Toward the end of the set the 2Bs are running out of fuel and the C.N.S is not firing at it's maximum rate due to fatigue all though it will attempt to fire the 2As at the same firing rate as 2Bs to compensate. At the end of the set you've hit the 2As pretty hard but what about the 2Bs ? At 80% the 2Bs where fired with the first rep but unless you were using an explosive contraction speed they weren't fired at they're maximum rate and therefore never developed maximum tension. Type 1s haven't even broken a sweat. If you train like this you'll be waiting a week before you train again and not because the muscles need it but because the C.N.S. needs it. So much for 1 set to failure. Now let's look at the other end of the spectrum, Chad Waterbury's 10x3. He uses 2 work outs per week The first 1 is 10 sets of 3 reps at 80% with a fast contraction speed. The 2Bs are being fired at thier maximum rate and therefore develop maximum tension, at least for the first few sets. As fatigue sets in the 2As and type 1s will have to pick up the slack. You get 2 days off and then you load 70% of your 1 rep max and do 3 sets of 10 reps. You won't get much help from the 2Bs on this work out so type 1s and 2As are going to have to get the job done. Now let's look at the total volume. 1x8x80% = 640 per week. 10x3x80 = 2400 + 3x10x70 = 2100. For a total of 4500 per week. It shouldn't be to hard to figure out which way will get you more size and strength. You can do the same thing with a body part split. A heavy compound in the 1-8 rep range followed by a light isolation or 2 in the 8-20 rep range. You can not train exclusively in 1 range and expect complete development. You have 3 primary fiber types. TRAIN THEM ALL !!!

[Uriel_da_man]

Slight case of overthinking in this topic, but hey I think it's a step in the right direction. Now we only have to take a few more thousand steps like that to drag us out of the hole the "squats + food" crew got us in...

[all pro]

Slight case of overthinking in this topic, but hey I think it's a step in the right direction. Now we only have to take a few more thousand steps like that to drag us out of the hole the "squats + food" crew got us in...

The squats + food approach works just fine for a newBs/beginners. It was done to combat the 3-6 day body part splits that are totally WRONG for someone who hasn't built up the work capacity or strength base to use them effectively. I don't train for bodybuilding, I train for performance but even still I understand that there are times when I'm going to have to train more like a bodybuilder or use mixed qualitys training to get the job done. I've used a lot of Bill Starr's programs and I would recomend them to anyone for mass, speed, strength and power. But they aren't all 5x5, compound only programs.
http://forum.bodybuilding.com/showthread.php?t=809027
I only listed a few of his prgrams in this thread. Starr allways ajusted the program as the lifter advanced but a lot of people who are pushing the 5x5 and Mark Rippetoes 3x5 don't seem to be aware of that. There is NO 1 size fits all program.