you do not need HEAVY weight/ Low reps to GROW muscle

[tjzippy]

your right, a lot of people might not need heavy weights to grow. but whats so wrong with being strong.

people can also grow from doing madcows. texas method etc.

you say your a bodybuilder you don't care about strength etc.

but when a situation arises which calls for you to be strong, and your not, guess what.... your ****ed

i love when im helping family members or friends with stuff and they ask me to move fridges on my own, because they know i can, i would hate to look like i could ,and not be able to. but that is my veiw and im sure the majority of bodybuilders wouldn't agree


one more point. your cns controls every single movement you make. train it efficiently

[JaredPunch]

but when a situation arises which calls for you to be strong, and your not, guess what.... your ****ed

i love when im helping family members or friends with stuff and they ask me to move fridges on my own, because they know i can, i would hate to look like i could ,and not be able to. but that is my veiw and im sure the majority of bodybuilders wouldn't agree

you need an average level of strength for those things and I don't think anyone can look like they could have that strength but don't, because bodybuilders after all are strong, it's not like they can't lift a television but still look muscular and strong, this is just impossible since muscle size goes hand in hand with strength. If you have a muscular chest you have a strong chest, period. On the other hand you might have a strong chest but not so muscular.

I don't think any bodybuilder who lifts with high reps and build muscle would look strong but not be able to help his family move furniture, pick up heavy things.

[kbread]

I think people are overcomplicating this way too much. If you want greater hypertrophy but less strength, train in the 8-12 rep range. Is it as satisfying as hitting a new 5RM almost every week and seeing your strength skyrocket? For me personally, not at all. I would rather train in low reps on the compounds and see progression weekly. I spun my wheeels trying to progressively overload everything in the deemed "bodybuilding rep range" and now that I train for strength and then do "fluff" accessory work in higher rep ranges, it is so much more satisfying. This is because progression is visible and I am not going to be doing a bodybuilding show any time soon..

Plus, when people say "I grew a half an inch on my bicep by doing 30 rep sets the last 2 weeks" it is probably just cellular swelling causing a perma"pump" making the muscle appear larger. The take away message is: Progressive overload is achieved in a plethora of ways, not just with adding weight to the bar. While OP progresses by doing more volume in less time, adding reps, adding sets, I prefer to just add weight to the bar so I eventally look like a badass when I squat 405 and deadlift 5 plates. Strength training is more satisfying and visible in its progress... and you gain some considerable size too

At least you admit that you lift heavy to impress other guys in your gym. Most of you lie and say you're doing it 'for yourselves'.

[mtb4life95]

Eric Helms had a great video on this. Talked about how it's really overall volume(total reps), and intensity that matter.

[krysix]

If he adds 50 lbs to his 1rm and you only add 25 he could easily be doing the same or more than you for 10 reps is his point I think.

It doesn't matter unless you are a powerlifter really, but this is the general mindset when telling a new lifter to "build a base" or focus on getting the compound lifts up. If you take two guys with the same lifts and one only does sets of 10 and the other only does sets of 2, the sets of 2 guy is most likely going to get stronger faster as not only is he loading more on a regular basis but having most likely lower volumes allows his to train this lift more frequently as well.

There really is no one is better or the best, just that the stronger you are the stronger you are. As for the rep work, if all you ever did for everything was sets of 2, then yeah your 10 rep might suffer simply because you have not been training in that rep range or anywhere near it, but if you are a halfway smart lifter you would have been doing other exercises with higher reps to compliment your strength work from the get go, so not only are you stronger faster but that "endurance" component will still be there from your accessory lifts.

Again there is no "BEST" way, only best for YOU.

yeah, I know his point. But my point is that a guy training with high reps will be stronger in high reps than the one training in low reps. So that example wouldn't be real and the guy doing low reps maybe added 50 lb to his 1rm but only 25 to his 10RM and the one doing high reps may only added 20 lb to his 1rm but added 35 to his 10 rm. I think that if you do a sensible program with high reps (high frequency, enough volume, deloads after overreaching...) it will get you stronger in the high rep range than the other guy cause the body adapts to the specific stimulus (SAID principle) even if there is carryover.

if you check Kelei's routine log you could see that guys doing it are doing good strength progress not doing a single set with more than a 10rm. I also used routines with only high reps in a couple of beginner friends and they progressed just fine, they did not need SS. Ofc if you give them a bro split with 1xweek frequency, no planned progression, too much volume for their stage, too big weight jumps, ****load of useless exercises, etc they won't progress very much.

That said I still think combining rep ranges could be good for hyperthrophy cause it's not linearly related to high rep strength, there are so many different variables (different fibers, metabolic stuff...) that could be important for optimal hyperthrophy and I have not the knowledge to understand.

[kbread]

yeah, I know his point. But my point is that a guy training with high reps will be stronger in high reps than the one training in low reps. So that example wouldn't be real and the guy doing low reps maybe added 50 lb to his 1rm but only 25 to his 10RM and the one doing high reps may only added 20 lb to his 1rm but added 35 to his 10 rm. I think that if you do a sensible program with high reps (high frequency, enough volume, deloads after overreaching...) it will get you stronger in the high rep range than the other guy cause the body adapts to the specific stimulus (SAID principle) even if there is carryover.

if you check Kelei's routine log you could see that guys doing it are doing good strength progress not doing a single set with more than a 10rm. I also used routines with only high reps in a couple of beginner friends and they progressed just fine, they did not need SS. Ofc if you give them a bro split with 1xweek frequency, no planned progression, too much volume for their stage, too big weight jumps, ****load of useless exercises, etc they won't progress very much.

That said I still think combining rep ranges could be good for hyperthrophy cause it's not linearly related to high rep strength, there are so many different variables (different fibers, metabolic stuff...) that could be important for optimal hyperthrophy and I have not the knowledge to understand.

So you are saying that if Ronnie Coleman had started with 10 reps or higher and never done low reps he'd have the same strength on that rep range as he does now with the powerlifting 'strength base' that people who disagree with you say is important?

[KyleMQuinn]

Saying that you're a bodybuilder so you don't care about strength. Look at the weights professional BBers are throwing up, they could compete in powerlifting too and do well, especially Coleman. Lee Priest himself now lifts heavy as fuark and uses a low rep range. If that's your only argument for it I think you just don't like to work too hard

[SolidOakie]

you need an average level of strength for those things and I don't think anyone can look like they could have that strength but don't, because bodybuilders after all are strong, it's not like they can't lift a television but still look muscular and strong, this is just impossible since muscle size goes hand in hand with strength. If you have a muscular chest you have a strong chest, period. On the other hand you might have a strong chest but not so muscular.

I don't think any bodybuilder who lifts with high reps and build muscle would look strong but not be able to help his family move furniture, pick up heavy things.

I have personal experiences where someone has seen my bench and commented about how they thought I would be able to lift more. They always started their sentence with, "Don't take this the wrong way, but." And I didn't take it the wrong way, because my goal was to LOOK strong. I wasn't actually strong, though.

I am impressed with everyone's comments regarding the subject but my two cents is this; I spent years in the gym spinning my wheels in the 8 to 10 rep range. Granted, my training as a whole wasn't up to par as it is now, but you would think even with a poor diet and drinking heavily in my 20's I would be able to progress past 185 (for reps) in a years time. (Lifting 3 times per week)

The last time I checked my max was 235. This week I did 300. I know my body and don't think this would have been possible without the 5x5 routine I committed to a couple months ago

[krysix]

So you are saying that if Ronnie Coleman had started with 10 reps or higher and never done low reps he'd have the same strength on that rep range as he does now with the powerlifting 'strength base' that people who disagree with you say is important?

Yes, that's what I think and I know many (knowledgeable guys) think like me.

If you use a sensible program (THIS IS VERY IMPORTANT) you won't stall on high reps, its harder to progress because adding 2.5 kg to a high rep range increases much more the total workload (very little microloads could help) that adding the same amount in low reps and besides high reps are harder for the body since there must be endurance adaptations apart from strength (neural) ones. but adding 2.5 kg to low reps don't increase your high rep strength that much, maybe you have to add 7.5 kg to your 1rm to increase your 10rm 2,5 kg and that means that it can take you 3xtimes more to add weight to high reps and be progressing at the same speed (don't take numbers very seriously). When you are lifting very high weights even 1 extra rep means a huge progress and it can take a while. And as far as I've read as you get very advanced the difference between endurance and strength gets higher and you can't improve both at the same time since one adaptation will restrict the other (the muscle can't have the distribution of fibers optimiced for endurance and strength at the same time for example).

And I repeat I'm talking about strength, not hyperthrophy and it's my own personal opinion from what I read form several knowledgable guys and my own logic cause I believe very much in the SAID principle, I could be wrong ofc. It's hard to test this since few bodybuilders in their careers don't experiment with every single training programm and you can`t exactly isolate the results of each one and they lift for hyperthrophy, not high rep strength alone. High volume routines with low reps may be the best for mass and many bodybuilders would thrive doing low rep routines but that does not deny my argument about high rep strength.

[NatMuscleBrit]

a 240lb bodybuilder tells you its ok to not lift heavy weight to GROW MUSCLE and everybody still argues, and goes on about powerlifting programs..lets see a powerlifter a strongman and a bodybuilder with simular weight looks like..

[grlight]

Dorian yates used 1 warmup sets and 1 heavy set 6-8.Seems low volume low reps worked quite well for him.

[JaredPunch]

I have personal experiences where someone has seen my bench and commented about how they thought I would be able to lift more. They always started their sentence with, "Don't take this the wrong way, but." And I didn't take it the wrong way, because my goal was to LOOK strong. I wasn't actually strong, though.

Strength is relatively, your muscle were propably capable of stronger feats but they weren't trained for it but if needed they would express all their strength potential i.e. when there's a rush of adrenalin and you need all your strength to save your or someone's else life.
Just like someone said: 5x5 train your muscle to be stronger in the 5's, 10x3 train your muscles to be stronger in the 10's. You get what your train for, you don't become "stronger per se" but better at expressing strength in the rep range and ROMs you train with. That also means strenght is rarely extrapolable, becoming strong on rowing and benching won't make you stronger on chin-ups unless you train for it.

[NatMuscleBrit]

Dorian yates used 1 warmup sets and 1 heavy set 6-8.Seems low volume low reps worked quite well for him.

he also did high rep isolation work
ncline barbell presses 1* 12
1* 10
1* 8
1 6-8
Hammer Strength seated bench presses 1* 10
1 6-8
Incline dumbbell flyes 1* 10
1 6-8
Cable crossovers 1 10-12

[Retardo-pex]

please, do not let me show you some underdeveloped people squatting and benching ridiculous amounts of weight but still looking like straws. Strength does not mean muscle growth that bodybuilders seek. Yes, your muscle will somewhat grow when training 5/3/1 and Westside etc. However, even the mentioned GVT is best suited for bodybuilder's goals and aims. Many people dismiss GVT although they have never even tried it and do not even understand how it works

Strength doesn't MEAN hugeness but obviously you understand the difference in eating for growth vs eating for a weight class based sport? Show me one person sqautting 800 lbs without a squat suit who is "a stick". How does one measure "potential projected growth" based on programming? If I am growing at a regular rate on program A, that doesn't necessarily mean doing nothing but swapping training styles will significantly improve that growth rate.

This boils down to a difference of opinion and nothing more, you insist that bodybuilders don't NEED to lift heavy. We are simply saying you would be selling yourself short to never ever train in an alternate rep range. Volume is king for hypertrophy but that doesn't mean you can't or shouldn't utilize everything in your tool belt to achieve your desired physique.

[Retardo-pex]

he did, he told me that as well. However, he said that his muscle mass came from bodybuilding training, not his powerlifting. He was only training powerlifting for the meets while spending majority of time training with higher reps and high volume

So in your mind when he was strength training specifically he gained zero muscle mass and then swapped to bodybuilding and went from 185 to 320 or so? I would agree with you that past a certain point that you need to get more specific to see gains at all on either end of the training spectrum. That does not mean you should always train this way or that it is optimal for every trainee at every stage.

The example game can be played both ways though. Stan Efferding and Matt Kroczaleski. On a smaller scale Layne Norton and Derek Charlebois. All guys with great physiques, competitive bodybuilders and powerlifters. Got that way from a combination of lifting styles and techniques. Again, I don't even really disagree with what you are saying, as I pointed out in first post, its just not an absolute like you present it to be.

[grlight]

he also did high rep isolation work
ncline barbell presses 1* 12
1* 10
1* 8
1 6-8
Hammer Strength seated bench presses 1* 10
1 6-8
Incline dumbbell flyes 1* 10
1 6-8
Cable crossovers 1 10-12

His low reps were his HIT set tho.The other ones just warm ups for that 1 heavy set.

[Quadzilla99]

You don't NEED them but then it becomes a question of efficiency. You still get results with a very wide range of protocols. However everything I've seen from experienced lifters and scientists tends to indicate that it's good to have both higher and lower tension training with both high and low numbers of reps per set.

If you want to keep it simple, the sweet spot is the 8-12 rep range.
http://www.higher-faster-sports.com/...ionalmyth.html

Link doesn't support what you're saying. From that link:

"For growth purposes the best "bang for your buck" rep range is arguably 6-8, or about an 80-85% max load, as it gives the ideal combination of recruitment and metabolic fatigue."

[scullin]

a 240lb bodybuilder tells you its ok to not lift heavy weight to GROW MUSCLE and everybody still argues, and goes on about powerlifting programs..lets see a powerlifter a strongman and a bodybuilder with simular weight looks like..

[SuffolkPunch]

Link doesn't support what you're saying. From that link:

"For growth purposes the best "bang for your buck" rep range is arguably 6-8, or about an 80-85% max load, as it gives the ideal combination of recruitment and metabolic fatigue."

Yep, sorry that was a typo.

[Jasonk282]

Layne norton, stan efferding, Dan green and kroc all dispelled this no heavy weight BS.


Continue to argue...lol

[xxx_jfb_xxx]

www.youtube.com/watch?v=m8wZNGL4iA4

Obviously Kai is on some serious vitamins but this is the theory I like to work with.

(I tried to get it to show up so you didn't have to leave the site. Someone please tell me how to make it show up as a video & not a link?)

[scullin]

[

Obviously Kai is on some serious vitamins but this is the theory I like to work with.

(I tried to get it to show up so you didn't have to leave the site. Someone please tell me how to make it show up as a video & not a link?)

Kai was being a cheeky kent with that one though. Later he came out with vids of him pressing over 400lbs behind the neck press.



and heavy inclines

[StrongAthlete]

Yes, that's what I think and I know many (knowledgeable guys) think like me.

If you use a sensible program (THIS IS VERY IMPORTANT) you won't stall on high reps, its harder to progress because adding 2.5 kg to a high rep range increases much more the total workload (very little microloads could help) that adding the same amount in low reps and besides high reps are harder for the body since there must be endurance adaptations apart from strength (neural) ones. but adding 2.5 kg to low reps don't increase your high rep strength that much, maybe you have to add 7.5 kg to your 1rm to increase your 10rm 2,5 kg and that means that it can take you 3xtimes more to add weight to high reps and be progressing at the same speed (don't take numbers very seriously). When you are lifting very high weights even 1 extra rep means a huge progress and it can take a while. And as far as I've read as you get very advanced the difference between endurance and strength gets higher and you can't improve both at the same time since one adaptation will restrict the other (the muscle can't have the distribution of fibers optimiced for endurance and strength at the same time for example).

And I repeat I'm talking about strength, not hyperthrophy and it's my own personal opinion from what I read form several knowledgable guys and my own logic cause I believe very much in the SAID principle, I could be wrong ofc. It's hard to test this since few bodybuilders in their careers don't experiment with every single training programm and you can`t exactly isolate the results of each one and they lift for hyperthrophy, not high rep strength alone. High volume routines with low reps may be the best for mass and many bodybuilders would thrive doing low rep routines but that does not deny my argument about high rep strength.

Adding 2.5kg to your 10RM is much harder and take more time than adding 2.5kg to your 5RM.

[supramax]

Dorian yates used 1 warmup sets and 1 heavy set 6-8.Seems low volume low reps worked quite well for him.

One word: STEROIDS!

[scullin]

One word: STEROIDS!

Please. The high rep guys take the same stuff.

[krysix]

Adding 2.5kg to your 10RM is much harder and take more time than adding 2.5kg to your 5RM.

Yes, that's exactly what I said

[xxx_jfb_xxx]

Kai was being a cheeky kent with that one though. Later he came out with vids of him pressing over 400lbs behind the neck press.



and heavy inclines

Still pretty slow, good reps.

[supramax]

Please. The high rep guys take the same stuff.

No doubt about it.

[Sway12]

So fking confusing seeing threads like this.

I jump between routines constantly because of the conflicting information.

Brb Stronglifts 5x5, seems legit, strength = size right?
notice Mehdi doesnt even look big..... neither does anyone I've seen who runs the program...

Brb switch to bro-split
"Strength progression will be slower so progress will be slower"

Dont know waht to do anymore. Still dont look like i lift after 6 months training and can only bench 60kg... do i even need to bench more to get bigger?

[jobronze]

The damnest thing the last few years. Anytime I added high frequency high rep bw training, I made visible gains. There is definitely something to high reps with short rest.

Frankly all your muscle fibers come into play to complete sets when you do "density" training. A 5 minute chin up challenge, a 20 rep squat set, etc

OP references to something like "myo-reps" protocol or any rest-pause type training.