lifting weights from heavy w/less reps to light w/more reps...

[ludemasta]

I wondering starting sets with heavy weights than go down to lights is effective to bulild up strength and mass ..especially doing he incline bench and straight bar curls....

[bobo_007]

i think thats called reverse pyramiding

start off heavy with few reps

then go lighter with more reps

but personally, id just lift heavy around the 4-8 range, keep everything constant and then when u lift more iron, u know u'll get stronger and bigger

[Poppa Pump]

going heavy to light isn't as effective as a standard pyramid. Start with lighter weights, and build up in weight, and down in reps. It allows you to safely go down to low reps...good stuff. It's used by pretty much every pro on squats. Peace

[NYCGambit]

I used to pyramid and recently changed to heavy for 3 - 4 work sets. I like to get 8-10 reps first set and by the last set at least 6.

I do sometimes do stripsets on the last workset.

Very pleased with the results on the new workout plan.

Adam

[Kane Fan]

I agree with Poppa Pump
regular pyramids are better I feel
(low weight high reps -> high weight low reps)

[ludemasta]

guess works different for everyone.....but I feel doing heavy first going down to light builds stength a lot faster.

[Fanatikk]

I disagree with the light to heavy theory. If the idea is to lift as much weight as you can to pull the most muscle fibers...then it would seem that you could lift more weight on your first set than on your fourth set. So this means if you start off heavy...you're constantly pulling the most muscle fibers in each set. Now if you start light you're not pulling a lot of fibers until you get into your later sets. Here's something about this from johnberardi.com


Rackin' it

Q. I just read how IFBB Pro Chris Cormier goes up the rack in one set of alternate dumbbell curls, going from 35's to 95's. When I try going up the rack in a similar fashion, I can't even use anywhere near my top weight by the time I get to it. Who's the freak here, me or Cormier? And do you think this a method worth using?

A. Training this way is certainly is novel, but let's not commit the error of mistaking novelty for effectiveness. So let's evaluate the program as well as the person performing it with some objectivity.

First, we're talking about Chris Cormier, one of the top three or four bodybuilders in the world today. Since it's no secret that the top pros have unbelievable genetics and also use a few extra "supplements" on top of their Tribex, we have to realize that these guys probably can tolerate workloads in the gym that would crush the average natural trainee and that might even topple the average steroid user. So we must be careful when looking at the training routines of these top pros.

With that said, I'd like to next discuss whether or not this program itself has any merit. Lets talk about volume. If Chris truly goes through the rack from 35s to 95s then he must hit each of the weights along the way. Well, that's 13 sets per arm or a total of 26 sets of curls that day. Assuming each set is about 60 seconds in duration, that's about 26 straight minutes of biceps curls. That's a long set; perhaps too long.

Now, if Chris can actually perform curls with 95-lb dumbbells, not only is he a super stud, but those first few sets with the lighter dumbbells must be a real joke for him. So he must be the king of inefficiency and waste a lot of time using weights that are way too light. Either that or he must go to failure on each set. The problem with the first approach is that if he doesn't go to failure then the first few sets are a waste and he may have to actually go and do more biceps work after this monstrous "set". And the problem with the second approach is that the lighter weights are probably so light that he cant get to failure or at least he has to do dozens of reps to get there. Can you say boredom? So either way, he's probably wasting a lot of time lifting what would be, relatively speaking of course, girly weights and he's probably spending upwards of an hour doing his biceps workout. This doesn't seem very efficient or effective to me.

Next, from metabolic and neuromuscular standpoints, going "up the rack" in this fashion isn't very beneficial at all for motor unit recruitment, muscle size, or muscle strength. Muscle fatigue with physical activity occurs in part due to the accumulation of metabolic by-products such as lactic acid and the hydrogen ion (makes the muscle acidic), due to the depletion of other cellular constituents such as ATP and phosphocreatine, and potentially due to disruptions in ion (sodium, calcium, potassium) balance across the cell. So by doing dozens of reps with light weights that will lead to the aforementioned changes, by the time you get to the big weights, these cellular changes would prevent the ability to achieve a maximal force production.

Skeletal muscle gets bigger and stronger when the maximum amounts of motor units are recruited. This type of recruitment of what are called high threshold motor units only occurs when maximal weights are handled or you train to the point that the low threshold units fatigue and the high threshold ones take over. In this second scenario, however, the muscle may fatigue and stop producing force before the high threshold units take over and get challenged. Therefore if the muscles are fatigued by going "up the rack", by the time you get up to your true max weight, you may be too fatigued to produce enough force for a constant and progressive overload. Thus maximal motor unit stimulation is prevented and growth is compromised. While some growth may also be associated with enhanced muscle metabolism, the goal should be to create a training environment in which there is maximal recruitment and metabolic fatigue.

A much better strategy then would be to go "down the rack", starting with your max weight so that you can fully overload the high threshold motor units at the start of the exercise and then work your way down, activating the other lower threshold motor units and create metabolic fatigue. These will more likely stimulate better strength and size increases. If Chris grows from the "up the rack" method, he truly is an amazing genetic specimen.

[bobo_007]

an impressive, fluid essay, unusual for the teen board

congrats

[Kane Fan]

I went to highschool with a girl named Berardi
it's quite similar to my name so I used to bump into her a lot cus they would send her stuff they ment to send me and vice versa
she was a girl named Nicole and I was (and still am) a male named Rob so I dunno wtf was wrong with the peopl ein the office but...

anyway I disagree with the heavy to light theory being better
I find it easier YES EASIER to go in heavier weights if I work up to it slowly ala Pyramids
almost as if the first few sets are progressive warmups
especially with reguard to reps at a given weight
maybe after a light 135 lb warmup set I could go for say 250 lbs and get 1 or 2 reps, but if I pyramid up to it I can get more like 4 5 6 something like that

also insofar as I know Powerlifters tend to use a Pyramid when they test for a new max I could be wrong about most of them using it but I know a lot of them say that's how they do it
they might do larger bumps then a bodybuilder would and are only looking for 1 rep but the princible is the same

highly important in pryamiding
once you are down to 8 reps and under per set, stretch between sets
nothing insane, 2 or 3 "sets" of 8-10 seconds stretching the muscles being worked
helps me a lot with reps

[Fanatikk]

Kanefan...yeah, I tend to agree to the point that, yeah a few warm up sets are good to get your blood flowing and that'll probably give you the ability to lift your heaviest. But I wouldn't go more than a couple of warm up sets then I'd lift heavy and pyramid down..oh well, to each his own. I guess, all I can say to ludemasta is read all you can and try a few approaches. Stick with what works best.

BTW I didn't know this was the teen board??

Hey, maybe that Berardi chick is related to johnberardi. Anyway, a great website for anyone who wants to learn more about nutrition and how to eat to build mass..or to cut.

[Kane Fan]

where does he or did he live

I do like a 15 or 12 rep first set
(when I Pyramid)
then I go down to 10 (or 12 if I started at 15)
then down by 2 reps each time down to usually 4
so like
15 12 10 8 6 4
or 12 10 8 6 4
and it goes pretty well for me
I add 5-20 lbs depending
per set

[Cppg]

I would note that the reason muscle fibres grow is because the fibres are put into a situation where they need to recruit more mitochondria so that more energy can be expended to provide enough force to lift the weight.
This situation is far more likely to occur if you wear down the muscle first with a lower amount of weight and then manage as much weight as you can.
The body then aims to match the contrived force with new muscle fibres. So I would say forcing heavier weight is better.

Unless there's some rationale against hypertrophy?

[TheViking1992]

I would note that the reason muscle fibres grow is because the fibres are put into a situation where they need to recruit more mitochondria so that more energy can be expended to provide enough force to lift the weight.
This situation is far more likely to occur if you wear down the muscle first with a lower amount of weight and then manage as much weight as you can.
The body then aims to match the contrived force with new muscle fibres. So I would say forcing heavier weight is better.

Unless there's some rationale against hypertrophy?

Strong 13 year bump...