Why do all the bodybuilding routines I find use heavy weights and low reps?

[ArkI5]

I've been trying bodybuilding for a month and a week now and I've made some okay strength gains and I've gone up by about 1.5kg. However, my strength gains appear to have stalled so I was thinking of changing up my routine. I've been looking for a new one and I have found some that sound quite promising from reviews but they all promote 3 sets, 4-6 reps for most exercises (mainly compound exercises) and 2 sets, 10-12 for a few isolation exercises (which there are only around two per workout) and I was wondering how that makes sense for bodybuilding because I thought the whole idea was to chase hypertrophy? I've been recommended stuff like Jason Blaha's Novice 2.0. but that has the same deal with heavy weights and low reps. I'll do that if that's what'll help me gain more mass but it just seems to conflict with the whole idea about using lower weight and higher reps to build bigger muscles. Michael Matthews' 'Push Pull Legs' routine is an example of a routine I was looking at.

TL;DR: I'd really appreciate it if someone could help explain why these bodybuilding routines use heavy weights and low reps, despite the idea that you need to use lower weights and higher reps to build mass. Also some good bodybuilding routines recommendations would be cool too. Thanks!

[bLinkMoore]

You don't need to use low weights and high reps to build muscle. Anything between about 3 reps and 25 reps will build very similar amounts of muscle--which isn't to say that they should be used exclusively. Mixing rep schemes is going to give you the most benefits

[SuffolkPunch]

You could use All Pros Simple Beginners Routine which has reps from 8-12 if you have some particular reason to dislike low reps and don't want the free strength improvements that come with typical 5 rep novice routines... that would kinda contradict your complaint about strength gains stopping.

If you want to understand the reasoning, I've already laid that out in detail in the size vs. strength sticky thread.

[CommitmentRulz]

despite the idea that you need to use lower weights and higher reps to build mass.

There are a lot of goofy ideas out there...

- The earth is flat
- Man never landed on the moon
- You need to use lower weights and higher reps to build mass

[CommitmentRulz]

despite the idea that you need to use lower weights and higher reps to build mass.

There are a lot of goofy ideas out there...

- The earth is flat
- Man never landed on the moon
- You need to use lower weights and higher reps to build mass

[health4life24]

All reps and weights have their place in building muscle.

[WolfRose7]

All reps and weights have their place in building muscle.

can't be right... how we can have a magic trick to gain 20lbs of muscle in 6 weeks if all reps and weights work???

[WapanCakes]

Clearly you haven't heard of AllPros, 531, the Viking's BareBones series, etc.

The better question is: why do STRENGTH routines have heavy weights and low reps?

[Squid24]

Clearly you haven't heard of AllPros, 531, the Viking's BareBones series, etc.

The better question is: why do STRENGTH routines have heavy weights and low reps?

Cause I can only count to 5, so might as well make them heavy lifts....

[TheUnderdog83]

Clearly you haven't heard of AllPros, 531, the Viking's BareBones series, etc.

The better question is: why do STRENGTH routines have heavy weights and low reps?

This. Studies have shown higher and lower reps both build muscle, but lower reps build strength better.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/25853914/

[health4life24]

can't be right... how we can have a magic trick to gain 20lbs of muscle in 6 weeks if all reps and weights work???

I mean strength and hypertrophy go hand in hand. Hence all reps have their place, low reps and high reps. Versus simply sticking to just one rep range.

[ArkI5]

You could use All Pros Simple Beginners Routine which has reps from 8-12 if you have some particular reason to dislike low reps and don't want the free strength improvements that come with typical 5 rep novice routines... that would kinda contradict your complaint about strength gains stopping.

If you want to understand the reasoning, I've already laid that out in detail in the size vs. strength sticky thread.

My complaint with strength gains stopping was that I didn't really realise how much weight I should be adding onto the bar each week when doing bodybuilding compared to lifting for strength. I'm lifting to build mass but obviously I still need to be getting stronger to get bigger which is why I "complained" about strength gains stopping. My only complaint with doing lower reps and heavier weights is that the heavier the weight the less I can actually feel the right muscle working. For example today I did bench press for 6 reps and I couldn't feel my chest working anywhere near as much as I when I use a more moderate rep range.

[ArkI5]

This. Studies have shown higher and lower reps both build muscle, but lower reps build strength better.

Out of interest then why do people do higher reps when you can get all the same benefits as doing lower reps + building more strength faster?

[ArkI5]

There are a lot of goofy ideas out there...

- The earth is flat
- Man never landed on the moon
- You need to use lower weights and higher reps to build mass

It's a learning process lol.

[ArkI5]

Clearly you haven't heard of AllPros, 531, the Viking's BareBones series, etc.

The better question is: why do STRENGTH routines have heavy weights and low reps?

I think I'm going to give that Viking's BareBones one a try, thanks! I guess it kinda uses the same idea as German Volume Training with loads more reps but lighter weights?

[SuffolkPunch]

My complaint with strength gains stopping was that I didn't really realise how much weight I should be adding onto the bar each week when doing bodybuilding compared to lifting for strength. I'm lifting to build mass but obviously I still need to be getting stronger to get bigger which is why I "complained" about strength gains stopping. My only complaint with doing lower reps and heavier weights is that the heavier the weight the less I can actually feel the right muscle working. For example today I did bench press for 6 reps and I couldn't feel my chest working anywhere near as much as I when I use a more moderate rep range.

Feel doesn't mean that much. You can feel the muscle working by holding a pressup position without moving. Strength on the other hand is very meaningful for reasons I'm not going to repeat - you can read the thread I mentioned.

[HeMB]

Think about that in this way: why the majority of bodybuilders use high reps?

[FaIIen]

Out of interest then why do people do higher reps when you can get all the same benefits as doing lower reps + building more strength faster?

Volume still has to be equated. You'll have to do more sets if reps are lower, I.e, longer sets are more time efficient for hypertrophy.

Single joint exercise aren't well fit for heavy weights.

[HeMB]

Volume still has to be equated. You'll have to do more sets if reps are lower, I.e, longer sets are more time efficient for hypertrophy.

Single joint exercise aren't well fit for heavy weights.

That's the answer to my previous post: because higher reps are more optimal for size gain.

The volume has to be equal - higher reps will get you there faster/easier.

3x10 vs 10x3? Yeah, do the latter, cuz studies shows they induce the same hypetrophy. But good luck completing that soon..

[sooby]

Out of interest then why do people do higher reps when you can get all the same benefits as doing lower reps + building more strength faster?

many reasons

- It's a rep range they've never trained in before which may stimulate gains
- A break from grinding heavy reps
- Easier to accumulate more volume, perhaps more time efficient (think doing 3 sets of 8 instead of 8 sets 3)
- Possibly less risk of an injury and form breakdown, less prone to cheating
- In certain exercises, gets the blood flowing in the muscles, stimulating enhanced recovery
- Possibly easier on the joints although overuse injuries still possible with higher volume
- Certain exercises just aren't really meant to go really heavy on due to high risk and don't really provide any benefit that can be justified.

Both have a place in training.

[ZoranM]

1. My complaint with strength gains stopping was that I didn't really realise how much weight I should be adding onto the bar each week when doing bodybuilding compared to lifting for strength. I'm lifting to build mass but obviously I still need to be getting stronger to get bigger which is why I "complained" about strength gains stopping.

2.My only complaint with doing lower reps and heavier weights is that the heavier the weight the less I can actually feel the right muscle working. For example today I did bench press for 6 reps and I couldn't feel my chest working anywhere near as much as I when I use a more moderate rep range.

1. Beginner routines makes you think that, but there are no numbers universaly set in stone. Everyone is different. You add more to the bar when you are ready, when you feel you are ready. It doesn't at all have to be each time, or each week.

2. Bodybuilding and strength training ARE different. Even at a beginner level, there is no reason not to do higher rep ranges. You develop your "feel" early on. The bulk of all rep ranges in bodybuilding is over 5 reps, often way over 5. Feel is everything or becomes everything eventually.

[OldFartTom]

Cause I can only count to 5, so might as well make them heavy lifts....

I always train barefoot, then I can count to 11 reps

[WolfRose7]

I mean strength and hypertrophy go hand in hand. Hence all reps have their place, low reps and high reps. Versus simply sticking to just one rep range.

Sarcasm doesn't translate well on the Internet I guess...

I agree

[Squid24]

I always train barefoot, then I can count to 11 reps

My rubber flooring has not come in yet, so I will not be doing that...

[Luca2]

many reasons

- It's a rep range they've never trained in before which may stimulate gains
- A break from grinding heavy reps
- Easier to accumulate more volume, perhaps more time efficient (think doing 3 sets of 8 instead of 8 sets 3)
- Possibly less risk of an injury and form breakdown, less prone to cheating
- In certain exercises, gets the blood flowing in the muscles, stimulating enhanced recovery
- Possibly easier on the joints although overuse injuries still possible with higher volume
- Certain exercises just aren't really meant to go really heavy on due to high risk and don't really provide any benefit that can be justified.

Both have a place in training.

This. I would add that dividing your training into hypertrophy blocks with lots of volume and higher reps, and strength blocks with lower reps and higher intensities (higher weights) starts being a really good idea once you get to the intermediate stage. This is because, past a certain point, prolonged strength training can be taxing on your connective tissues; conversely, prolonged volume blocks can hurt your motivation to train and desensitize you to the hypertrophy stimulus.

The above, however, is pretty much a non-issue for beginners. As a beginner, likely the best approach is to have a mix of lower and moderate rep ranges. Routines like Fierce 5 do a good job of that.

[Orlando1234977]

Nearly all hypertrophy is a result of muscle cells getting stronger. All cells strengthen via the same process, whether it's lower endurance threshold cell or a higher. It stands to reason if the goal is muscle hypertrophy, the optimal repetition range would be the one that's able to exhaust (not simply recruit), the largest spectrum of cells to include the largest fibers. Hence the moderate rep range. If the goal is 1 rep max strength, it stands to reason exhausting cells with a higher endurance threshold that aren't contributing to the goal 1 rm output isn't the most efficient, hence the lower rep range protocols. They all strengthen and hypertrophy via the same processes, the difference relates to what you are targeting. There's overlap, but we're talking about optimal.

[sooby]

This. I would add that dividing your training into hypertrophy blocks with lots of volume and higher reps, and strength blocks with lower reps and higher intensities (higher weights) starts being a really good idea once you get to the intermediate stage. This is because, past a certain point, prolonged strength training can be taxing on your connective tissues; conversely, prolonged volume blocks can hurt your motivation to train and desensitize you to the hypertrophy stimulus.

The above, however, is pretty much a non-issue for beginners. As a beginner, likely the best approach is to have a mix of lower and moderate rep ranges. Routines like Fierce 5 do a good job of that.

https://www.instagram.com/p/BlaF2Rzndz4/

I found this study/survey pretty interesting and relevant to this thread.

According to this, 50% of the volume of bodybuilders was in the 7-9 rep range. However, about 25% of the volume was still in the 4-6 rep range as well as about another 25% in the 10-12 rep range. So bodybuilders still train in what would be considered the lower rep range, depending on how you would define "lower". It lends credence that you should train in a variety of rep ranges.

If you multiply the number of exercises used x number of sets you can even see that the bodybuilders did anywhere from 12-20 sets per body part for the most part. Which is ironically the amount of sets that is recommended. Obviously at times, they quite possibly took this higher, maybe around 25-30+ sets a week. Just an assumption here but based on the data, they probably did on average around 20 sets per bodypart.

Meanwhile we got novices over here posting workout routines with 30 sets of chest and 5 sets of legs .... all with 10+ reps cuz muh hypertrophy range.

Now, we don't know if these bodybuilders are natty or or not, and these are presumably advanced lifters as well so it really puts it into perspective that if even advanced lifters aren't generally exceeding 20 sets per body part, then a novice REALLY has no business in doing the same either.

It also would have been interesting to see a breakdown for each major body part.

[Luca2]

^ This is so interesting, thanks for posting. On spread.

It's good to get a sense of what actual competitors are doing as the "volume debate" rages (not sure if you've followed the aftermath to the latest Schoenfeld volume study - Mike Israetel and Lyle McDonald have recently debated the evidence on the Revive Stronger podcast).

Also, yeah, I do feel apprehensive about discussing higher volume recommendations on here in general given that this forum is mostly geared to the people who least need higher training volumes!

[sooby]

^ This is so interesting, thanks for posting. On spread.

It's good to get a sense of what actual competitors are doing as the "volume debate" rages (not sure if you've followed the aftermath to the latest Schoenfeld volume study - Mike Israetel and Lyle McDonald have recently debated the evidence on the Revive Stronger podcast).

Also, yeah, I do feel apprehensive about discussing higher volume recommendations on here in general given that this forum is mostly geared to the people who least need higher training volumes!

I've heard about the debate in bits and parts. Apparently Lyle is tearing everybody a new a-hole over that chit like he always does lol ...

Everybody is different which is true in a sense, some people legit may need higher volume or grow better in certain rep ranges. But I refuse to believe that it's so different to the point where some novice needs 30 sets of chest to grow lol where most would see growth doing probably 8-12 quality, hard sets.

[HeMB]

where most would see growth doing probably 8-12 quality, hard sets.

I think that's a big deal when speaking about someone who 'needs' high volume. I mean, often those people (and just people in general) lift with poor technique and end up doing less actual, productive volume so they need more garbage volume.