Thoughts on Low Reps Vs. High Reps

[Mike2319]

For a while now I've been sticking to that 8-12 rep range in just about every workout I do. I found myself plateauing too often. Just recently, other than changing up my routine when necessary, I started doing lower rep workouts. For example, I'll do 5 sets of anywhere from 4-6 reps benching, not including a light warmup. I figured I'd start adding lower rep workouts into my routine when I feel necessary. Starting today, I'm changing to a lower rep workout for the next few weeks to see how it goes. I'm fairly new to the gym (8-10 months taking things seriously). Another question I have is do you increase just as fast with heavier/ less reps? I understand this could change from person to person, so I'd like to here some of your ideas.

[Sh724]

Generally speaking higher weight/lower reps will increase your strength faster, lowerweight/higher reps will increase your ascetics faster

[Mike2319]

Generally speaking higher weight/lower reps will increase your strength faster, lowerweight/higher reps will increase your ascetics faster

Do you personally switch between the two, or do most people stick to one and dedicate their training type it?

[NZninja101]

Do you personally switch between the two, or do most people stick to one and dedicate their training type it?

I would strongly recommend looking up linear periodization, and conjugate periodization. These two things are basically the two camps of how basically everybody who is big and strong do things. Reading about these concepts as well as the perspectives of different people who've implemented or coached these types of setups would likely provide more value than a single post here could.


Regardless of the specific blend of strength, power, hypertrophy or even some other fitness goal you want to reach, it's basically universally true that there is a, 'range' to work within, rather than sticking to an absolute single rep range with virtually no variation. Different people have different opinions on what these ranges are but IMO if you're doing around 4-15 reps, (slightly heavier on compounds, slightly lighter on isolation lifts), for hypertrophy then you're on the right track.

[SuffolkPunch]

^ Yep

You can grow in a wide range of different rep ranges. You also adapt to one particular protocol (the repeated bouts effect) and it stops becoming effective. So you need variation to keep disrupting homeostasis.

Something like LP will ensure variation without radically changing all the time (you also need directed adaptation which is why you can't keep randomly switching from one thing to another).

[sooby]

it's not a question of either/or, DO BOTH if your goal is general strength and size.

[DrDumbbell]

Personally i prefer programs where you do a mix of rep ranges each day, rather than solely low reps or high reps.

When i was doing an upper lower, it prescribed 6-8 rep range for the big compounds (bench, squats, rows, deads etc) and then 10-12 or even 12-15 for isolations and smaller muscle groups. I found this worked well in terms of strength and size gains and stopped things from getting boring each workout.

[EjnarKolinkar]

I'm fairly new to the gym (8-10 months taking things seriously).

Nothing wrong with working in a variety of rep ranges. You can see that this is common in many of the intermediate programs in this forum. But remember the speed plates accumulate on the bar tends to slow the more training time you have under your belt. Just randomly changing rep ranges will create a need for adaptation. The question is will it create progression long term? This is why many of the respected intermediate programs seen in this forum, also come with a definition of their progression models, and goals suited to intermediates.

[Austin109]

After more than a decade of training clients I've found it to be a complex answer. There are two primary means of muscle growth - sarcoplasmic or myofibril. Those are brought on respectively by either metabolic (feel the burn!) or mechanical stresses (MOAR WEIGHT!) on muscle. Mechanical stress generally come from heavier sets in the 3-6 rep range and tend to cause more direct muscle fiber damage, and over time lead to more actual muscle tissue+support structures. Metabolic stresses from 12-20+ rep ranges tend to cause greater blood flow through the muscle, increase performance capabilities, and lead to more glycogen retention in the muscle.

In practice both work and they compliment each other beautifully. Personally I've found that gains from high volume workout programs tend to stagnate once you've maximized muscular retention capabilities and I basically stall out. I look good, but I stagnate. So personally I stick to heavier sets for longer stretches with breaks built in where I focus on high volume. In my experience it creates a slingshot effect where more strength leads to more metabolic demand because sets of 20 with 225 is a lot more taxing than a set of 135. Then when its time to kick back to heavy weight my body is better able to handle the intense demand after working on metabolic conditioning programs.

The most qualified person to see what you respond most favorably to is you. See what you grow more consistently with. I'm a big believer in your body and muscle fiber make up are different from mine.