When you do high reps (lower weight), like 10-15 on bench, squat, etc how many more calories do you burn compared to low reps (high weight) 5-7 range on those same lifts?
I realize everyone is different and it depends on the weight because energy is a function of mass yada yada yada, but relatively speaking, how many more calories do you burn through doing high reps (endurance lifts if you want to call it that) than low reps (hypertrophy/strength lifts)
|
-
11-14-2004, 07:13 PM #1
Calories burnt from High reps vs Low reps
-
11-15-2004, 10:21 AM #2
-
11-15-2004, 01:11 PM #3
- Join Date: Apr 2003
- Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
- Age: 55
- Posts: 1,073
- Rep Power: 707
Originally Posted by cannibustacap
If you want to doing something as cardio, choose a real cardio exercise like running, treadmill, bike, etc.
-
11-15-2004, 03:01 PM #4Originally Posted by cannibustacap
High reps release both growth hormone AND test. Low reps only stimulate test release.
High reps develop the "endurance" aspect of the muscle, including the mitochondria. This is where the real "calories burned at rest" comes from.
If one has large joints as many overweight people do, high reps assure that the muscles, not the joints are bearing the load of the exercise.
-
-
11-15-2004, 04:34 PM #5
More Info:
Defiant1
Can you please elaborate on this point:
"If one has large joints as many overweight people do, high reps assure that the muscles, not the joints are bearing the load of the exercise."
Would the opposite be true for a thin person?
Not flaming just want more info on this. I find it intriguing. Thanks.
-
11-15-2004, 04:51 PM #6
An easy way of putting this is such:
The more reps you do, the more cardio vascular the exersice becomes. Say ur doing curcit training, thats an arobic routine, which burns more calories than an anreobic exersice... does that answer ur ?I feel the way of something beyond but I don't see what I can feel,
if vision is the only validation then most of my life isn't real
-
11-16-2004, 01:34 PM #7Originally Posted by AssToGrass
-
11-16-2004, 03:01 PM #8
- Join Date: Sep 2004
- Location: here, there, Canada
- Age: 41
- Posts: 15,875
- Rep Power: 808
good question; i don't know what the difference would be (i.e., if at a certain point it spikes up or whatnot). but it's generally best to NOT associate lifting w/ cardio, otherwise you'll get all muddled up.
Originally Posted by Defiant1
Neither affects testosterone/gh release by any statistically signifigant amount. You want test/gh release - go sleep.
And since I know you'll want to argue with this, the ONLY people who perpetuate that myth are bodybuidlres with 0 science behind them. I once believed it and argued it out with my sport's doctor, so he proved it to me by showing me my test levels before/after intense lifting - guess what - no statistically signifigant changes. There's 0 docuemented proof of an effect (unless you count the BS on **** like abcbodybuilding and bodybuilding.com where you have people writing stuff lke 'heavy lifting causes test levels to 8x'.
/awaits typical response from defiant1<->
-
-
11-16-2004, 03:51 PM #9Originally Posted by $AJ
So....your doctor gave you a blood test, had it read and gave you the results before and after your workout huh?
*cough*bull*****cough*
G-G-G-Gosh $AJ, school me with your wisdom!! Garsh gee golly gee!! I don't understand this fancy "si-ance"...I gets alls my info from abcbodybuilding and bb.com from guys like you!!
http://www.aussiebodies.com.au/news/...ne+surging.htm
http://www.beezodogsplace.com/Pages/...creasingGH.pdf
http://www.cbass.com/NEWEVIDE.HTM
http://www.pponline.co.uk/encyc/1024.htm
Not to mention the eastern europeans made exercise related hormone release an art.
I stopped with links because it was too easy, If they are not adequate there were plenty of them.Last edited by Defiant1; 11-16-2004 at 03:54 PM.
-
11-16-2004, 03:58 PM #10
- Join Date: Sep 2004
- Location: here, there, Canada
- Age: 41
- Posts: 15,875
- Rep Power: 808
let's see, what am I going to believe, bunch of suspect stuff you pull out, or both my sport's doctor and the endochonrologist i saw, who's fairly respected and noted in her field, who both agree there's no impact on test/gh release. (and the only reason the sport's doctor tested me was because we're friends and I've helped him w/ investments before and he wanted to prove me wrong; the endochronologist just basically laughed at me when I posed to her hte same question).
so yea, let me think abotu this one
and i can find 1000002 different articles on google abotu it, but guess what - out of 2 respected endochronologists I know (one who is my doctor here and another from a porsche board i met) both agree - training has no statistically signifigant impact.
but hey, whatever, go back to your 50000sets for biceps.Last edited by $AJ; 11-16-2004 at 04:00 PM.
<->
-
11-16-2004, 04:12 PM #11Originally Posted by $AJ
Why would a conventional endocrinologist know about exercise related hormone release? Doctors know what they study, and retain what they use. Most educated users of this site know more exercise related physiology info than "doctors". What class, pray tell, would they have talked about "weight lifting and hormone release"?
Sports doctor sounds like an oxymoron.
Go back to your 1/2 set for chest lest you overtrain, done with 1/4 range of motion, lest you get injured.Last edited by Defiant1; 11-16-2004 at 04:15 PM.
-
11-16-2004, 04:30 PM #12
-
-
11-16-2004, 04:40 PM #13Originally Posted by $AJ
and I don't want no **** out of you over it
not to discredit your medical friends or anything
but I've heard doctors say some serious **** about lifting and I'm largely unimpressed...
now after an injury I'm all ears! but just general lifting I'm iffy about who's advice I take
-
11-16-2004, 04:49 PM #14
- Join Date: Mar 2004
- Location: Melbourne - Australia
- Age: 40
- Posts: 14,485
- Rep Power: 1776
Originally Posted by Kane Fan
"Excuse mee doctor, i think i know a LIIIITTLE bit about medicine.."My journal http://forum.bodybuilding.com/showthread.php?t=5662511
-
11-16-2004, 04:55 PM #15
-
11-16-2004, 06:02 PM #16
-
-
11-16-2004, 06:55 PM #17
Well one of the articles says that you should do at least 3 sets to boost hormone levels.
Another says that during the course of a few studies testing the difference between doing one set or three sets there were no significant differences detected.
Another article says that burn is correlated to circulating GH levels. It cites some researchers in Japan doing some tests on adding a high rep set at the end of a high intensity low rep workout to boost GH.
The last one cites Coach Van Commenee of the UK Athletics Jump and Multi-events coaching fame who asserts that you need to train at a high percentage of 1RM to release hormones.
So like many things in bodybuilding it remains a mystery wrapped inside an enigma. Read and take what you want as the gospel. To each his own. Peace.
No difference between 1 set or 3 sets article.
http://www.cbass.com/NEWEVIDE.HTM
Do at least 3 sets article
http://www.beezodogsplace.com/Pages/...creasingGH.pdf
High intensity low rep with an extra low intensity high rep set promotes GH - burn correlates to circulating GH
http://www.aussiebodies.com.au/news/...ne+surging.htm
This one is mostly about sports specific training, Coach Van Commenee comments on hormone release in the middle.
http://www.pponline.co.uk/encyc/1024.htm
-
11-16-2004, 07:22 PM #18
It's funny how you guys will beleive random articles but will not beleive someone who has directly seen a testosterone test before/after workouts. Just because most doctors don't know ****, doing a test such as this is direct evidence that even the dumbest of doctors is still credible.
That being said that only proves the testosterone side of the argument, who knows about gh. Besides that if you're already growing with what your doing then who cares either. High reps never worked for me, when I started doing low reps/sets I sarted gaining in both strength and size a hell of a lot faster.
-
11-16-2004, 07:43 PM #19
- Join Date: Mar 2004
- Location: Melbourne - Australia
- Age: 40
- Posts: 14,485
- Rep Power: 1776
Originally Posted by Nolan
all scientific **** aside, do what u know works for you, and if u r getting good results with that, who cares what doctors and scientists have proved in some irrelevant study???
This is one of the reasons i have big respect for diamonddelts actually ( i know i dont show it ) he uses methods that work for him instead of relying on what he reads in articlesMy journal http://forum.bodybuilding.com/showthread.php?t=5662511
-
11-19-2004, 09:39 AM #20
-
-
11-19-2004, 08:31 PM #21
-
11-19-2004, 10:57 PM #22
I'll interupt just a second to throw in a thought on the actually topic. The total calories burned relates directly to the work done. If you lift 100 pounds 5 times it takes the same work as lifting 5 pounds 100 times. The long term effects will differ between the types of workouts, but for a given lift they would be even.
-
11-19-2004, 11:14 PM #23
-
11-20-2004, 01:26 PM #24
Ok, basically the optimal calorie burning rep-range is going to be the one that you produce the most work in - work in the physical sense, i.e. applied force x distance moved.
Work = force x distance. Any given exercise performed with uniform technique will have constant distance, so work done is proportional to weight moved x number of reps.
Let's run through a realistic example - bench press.
Joe benches 75kg for 10 reps. He benches 90 kg for 3 reps.
a) 75 kg for 3 reps:
Work is proportional to 75 x 10 = 750.
b) 90 for 3 reps:
Work is proportional to 90 x 3 = 270
So the work done is almost 3 times more in the 10-rep range for Joe. Of course, different people are stronger (relatively) in different rep ranges.
The work done per set is going to be maximal when the product of weight x reps performed is maximal. I'd guess that for most people this would fall somewhere in the 8 - 14 rep range.
Now, whether maximal workload is required for optimum hypertrophy, is another question. Although the issue is complex, hypertrophy appears to be a result of maximising the time spent under tension per muscle above a threshold tension - i.e. producing as much work as possible in as little a time as possible with a weight heavy enough to induce the hypertrophy response.
Techniques used to achieve this include drop-setting, super sets, rest-pauses and short rests between sets. However, the merits of these techniques must be critically weighed against their impact on recovery time and the negative effects of pushing the central nervous system close to failure. This really is only the tip of the iceberg!
-
-
11-22-2004, 04:10 PM #25
Similar Threads
-
RedDragon's Max-OT Journal
By RedDragon in forum Workout JournalsReplies: 131Last Post: 11-24-2004, 07:23 AM -
Matt's workout progression journal log...
By $w33t$p()t in forum Workout JournalsReplies: 2Last Post: 03-04-2004, 04:51 AM -
I'm gonna join the fun
By jay1514929 in forum Post Your Pictures and Introduce YourselfReplies: 178Last Post: 05-19-2003, 09:04 AM -
Would I Burn More Calories and Get Cut Faster While Doing This....?
By Woodson in forum Losing FatReplies: 2Last Post: 04-22-2003, 06:14 PM
Bookmarks