High Reps for hypertrophy

[ama]

Posted by Expensive Urine: Thu Apr 06, 2006 5:02 pm

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Quote:

I don't agree EU. I use high rep training for legs & I've found it works better for me. 20-30 rep range going to failure & I'm absolutely broken at the end.

Make no mistake about it, I never dissed high rep training for legs. Ama summed it up nicely saying everything has a place in training, it just depends how you sequence it. It also depends on goals, stage of training, blah blah blah. Shit, I might even use high rep training for legs as a recovery thing for my next leg workout (probably not as high as 40+ reps, maybe not even 20+) if my legs took a beating in the previous workout. But just going back to what you were saying before about high-rep training working for you. What methods do you use to measure the difference?

Quote:

"Size principle" doesn't mean jack. It's all about experimenting & mixing it up I believe.

As said before, one of THE primary requirements for hypertrophy, is the load on the bar. Meaning, how much weight you use, overtime, will determine how big you are and how big you will get in the long run. You will not grow much bigger if you use the same load year around. You have to overload yourself to grow and that means putting the weight on the bar, long term. (ie- getting stronger overtime). There are other things you can do to increase overload such as increasing volume, decrease rest periods, decrease workout period (another bullshit claim, that you must keep your work out within so-and-so minutes to produce the best results or that cortisol issue), ect ect.

Anyhow, this "increasing the weight on the bar, overtime" business links nicely with Size Principle of muscle fiber recruitment. (I assume you're familiar with different fiber types, slow twitch(ST), fast twitch(FT), hybrids, ect.) During isometric and concentric contractions, there's a specific order by which muscle fibers recruit themselves to achieve a specific task, ie lift a weight. Small motor units those that contain slow twitch (ST) fibers have lowest firing threshold and recruited first. If that doesn't lift the weight, larger motor units are recruited, FT-A and FT-B or FT-IIa, FT-IIb in order to lift that weight. There are other situations when FT's are recruited before ST's but i'm not going to discuss it now. So, by that Size Principle, if you're doing an exercise that is low in intensity, you might only recruit ST fibers. Likewise, if you're performing an exercise that is high in intensity you will be able to recruit ST+FT-A+FT-B. In terms of power output and such, ST have the lowest, FT-B have the highest. If you're not recruiting FT-A's and FT-B's you're not giving them a reason to grow. Why should they? This is another reason why doing high rep crap during your "cutting" phases might be all together retarded assuming you're a natural lifter. If you're not rectruiting muscles that provide most of the bulk you're going to lose them, especially if you're in a calorie deficit.

Just going back to that 40+ rep leg press thing, it is considered to be LIGHT when compared to say, a 3 RM leg press. The intensity of 40+ rep leg press is lower than intensity of 3RM leg press. Most people who have tried high reps will jump on my case and tell me that I'm fucking nuts in order to think that, because when they do those 40+ reps on leg press they nearly shit themselves silly. Well, what they tend to experience is intensiveness (which is different from training intensity which is a function of 1RM) which is defined is a momentary ability, in other words, how hard you're working even though the training intensity is low. I could go to a gym, grab a pink dumbbell and do a 1000 arm curls. Yes, I will feel tired. Yes, I will feel fatigued, Yes, I will feel the burn but will that shit do anything for hypertrophy? Probably not, because psychological effects of the mind do not dictate physiological effects and the fact that only ST fibers will be recruited during that particular activity. You can f*ck around with ultra-high reps, 60+, 100+, hell even 200+, but you'll simply elicit different adaptations that may not be specific for hypertrophy training. Don't get me started on genetics because that determines muscle fiber composition within each and every one of you.

I agree with you on the fact that you have to mix it up or whatever, which is where periodization comes in. It mixes shit up for you.

I really don't want to trash AMA's log, so maybe start a new thread and we'll go from there or something.

_________________

ExpensiveUrine: I was joking about the hooker, I like my meat fresh.

Spitterkat: i kno

ExpensiveUrine: ?

[ama]

Very intensive post EU, had to read a few times to come to grips with the point you were trying to make. :grin: :grin: :grin:

How about intensity? Higher reps, the way I do them, is just high intensity over a prolonged period. It doesn't mean that I lift a light weight though...such as 1 plate on the legpress @ 100 repetitions. 120kgs is more than enough of a heavy weight to encourage muscle growth at high volume.

[Marcus]

For me the key is progression. Every workout I'm either attempting to increase the weight or increase the reps, it doesn't matter whether that be 6 or 100 reps.

[ExpensiveUrine]

Higher reps, the way I do them, is just high intensity over a prolonged period. It doesn't mean that I lift a light weight though...such as 1 plate on the legpress @ 100 repetitions.

It's not high intensity. At 20+ reps the intensity (% of your 1RM) is LOW. I think you're referring to a psychological feeling that you feel during that particular set, ie- burn, pump. With 20+ reps or whatever, it's muscular endurance overlapping with endurance work, especially if you go higher in reps. And you know that endurance training is far from hypertrophy training. Adaptations are different. Adaptations are not general, they're SPECIFIC to the activity that you perform. Example, I tell a guy to bench press a certain weight for 60+ reps. After performing that same thing long-term, I put him on the same bench and test him for 1RM. His 1RM will be lower than if I was to train him within his 1-5RMs, in which case his new 1RM for bench would be higher. He would develop greater strength, because I'm training him specifically for strength. In other words, strength gains on muscular endurance or endurance will be minimal whereas strength gains will be larger when he trains specifically for strength. Does that make sense?

120kgs is more than enough of a heavy weight to encourage muscle growth at high volume.

You do know that the longer you do this sort of high-endurance rep training the better/much more efficient you become at that activity, which is the same thing I said in the above post about specificity of activity. Meaning, you'd be better at clearing lactate faster than me who trains below 20 reps for whatever exercise. You'd have larger mitochondrial density than me, that means you'll be able to convert chemical energy into mechanical energy for longer period of time, ie you won't fatigue as quickly as I will, ie muscular endurance.

Another thing, 120 is light for you because you weigh 120+ kilos. Whereas if you put a skinny endurance guy on a leg press and ask him to perform the same workload (which you have been adapting to for the past X-months of training), with that same 120 kgs he'll get jammed between the platform and the seat.

Why do you think they put 'optimal' hypertrophy range between 5-12 or 8-15 reps? If you work that out in terms of % of 1RM, it's around 60-80%.

And don't forget genetics. Clearly a polynesian male will have an advantage over a skinny white guy.

[Flex]

I'd have to agree with EU as far as high reps not eliciting major muscle gains. The kind of leg work you're doing would be great for a long distance runner but I just can't see it being of huge benefit to a bodybuilder. I agree that there is no ONE perfect or ideal training program or routine, and that it's always a good idea to change training reps/sets/exercises to "shock" muscle groups and keep the body from adapting to a certain training, however I wouldn't recommend a program like this to make up a major component of a bodybuilders training routine.

As EU pointed out, it's been shown in study after study that low reps effect Fast twitch or TypeIIb muscle fibers, while high reps effect slow twitch fiber recruitment.

Different muscle types respond differently to high and low reps. The soleus (long part of your calf muscle) is predominantly slow twitch muscle fibre and so responds best to high rep work.

Your gastroc (the higher thicker muscle on your calf) is fast twitch and responds best to low reps i.e. low reps on straight leg standing calf raise and donkey raises, and high reps on bent leg seated calf raise (if you ask me why that is you need to do a bit of research).

Another muscle that is predominantly fast twitch are the hamstrings which should be trained at high intensity (1RM intensity) with low reps for the best results.

If you really want to know whether low rep/high intensity training works better for muscular developement than high reps/low intensity training compare an olympic sprinter to a marathon runner.

If you're making muscle gains with your current training program you must either be extremely lucky, have an unusually high amount of slow twitch muscle fibers, or be on every "supplement" under the sun and making gains inspite of your training.

As you are off cycle at the moment it's highly possible that you have a high level of slow twitch fibres.

A basic way of figuring out your muscle fiber makeup is to take 85% of your 1RM and perform as many reps as possible.

A "normal" person will average 5 reps, meaning that they have a normal distribution of fast, intermediate, and slow-twitch fibers. But a fast-twitch individual will go as low as 2 reps and a predominantly slow-twitch person will go from 12-20 reps. This isn't entirely accurate as current training adaptations can effect the result however should work for most people and most muscle groups. Figuring this out means that you can then focus on training at the right volume for your body type. If you have a predominance of fast twitch, you would train at low reps for size and strength, and if slow twitch, then higher rep work would be more suitable.

I also don't believe that you need to train to absolute failure with every workout or be completely stuffed when you leave the gym. Nor do you have to train until you are going to vomit or pass out. Vomiting has been said to result from a buildup of lactic acid which precedes the release of cortisol. If you're vomiting during training then your body is in a highly catabolic state. While you need catabolism for subsequent muscle repair and growth this is an extreme state to be in for any period of time and not wholly conducive to muscle development.

[poos_n_wees]

I'd have to agree with EU as far as high reps not eliciting major muscle gains. The kind of leg work you're doing would be great for a long distance runner but I just can't see it being of huge benefit to a bodybuilder. I agree that there is no ONE perfect or ideal training program or routine, and that it's always a good idea to change training reps/sets/exercises to "shock" muscle groups and keep the body from adapting to a certain training, however I wouldn't recommend a program like this to make up a major component of a bodybuilders training routine.

As EU pointed out, it's been shown in study after study that low reps effect Fast twitch or TypeIIb muscle fibers, while high reps effect slow twitch fiber recruitment.

Different muscle types respond differently to high and low reps. The soleus (long part of your calf muscle) is predominantly slow twitch muscle fibre and so responds best to high rep work.

Your gastroc (the higher thicker muscle on your calf) is fast twitch and responds best to low reps i.e. low reps on straight leg standing calf raise and donkey raises, and high reps on bent leg seated calf raise (if you ask me why that is you need to do a bit of research).

Another muscle that is predominantly fast twitch are the hamstrings which should be trained at high intensity (1RM intensity) with low reps for the best results.

If you really want to know whether low rep/high intensity training works better for muscular developement than high reps/low intensity training compare an olympic sprinter to a marathon runner.

If you're making muscle gains with your current training program you must either be extremely lucky, have an unusually high amount of slow twitch muscle fibers, or be on every "supplement" under the sun and making gains inspite of your training.

As you are off cycle at the moment it's highly possible that you have a high level of slow twitch fibres.

A basic way of figuring out your muscle fiber makeup is to take 85% of your 1RM and perform as many reps as possible.

A "normal" person will average 5 reps, meaning that they have a normal distribution of fast, intermediate, and slow-twitch fibers. But a fast-twitch individual will go as low as 2 reps and a predominantly slow-twitch person will go from 12-20 reps. This isn't entirely accurate as current training adaptations can effect the result however should work for most people and most muscle groups. Figuring this out means that you can then focus on training at the right volume for your body type. If you have a predominance of fast twitch, you would train at low reps for size and strength, and if slow twitch, then higher rep work would be more suitable.

I also don't believe that you need to train to absolute failure with every workout or be completely stuffed when you leave the gym. Nor do you have to train until you are going to vomit or pass out. Vomiting has been said to result from a buildup of lactic acid which precedes the release of cortisol. If you're vomiting during training then your body is in a highly catabolic state. While you need catabolism for subsequent muscle repair and growth this is an extreme state to be in for any period of time and not wholly conducive to muscle development.

nice post bro. yeah, high reps have their place in training, but in certain circumstances (like u said wit the calves). compare a lean bodybuilder who's trained wit heavy weights and low reps, with another lean bodybuilder who hasn't. same bodyfat, but the look is different. The former just looks HARD. And the muscles themselves are actually really, really hard when flexed.

[lazyone]

how hard is really hard????

[poos_n_wees]

how hard is really hard????

harder than yours

[lazyone]

hehehehe.....or hard like your chest

[poos_n_wees]

hehehehe.....or hard like your chest

Ooooorrr your calves (thas rite, I went THERE)

LOL rudedude. C u tonite

[Marcus]

I also don't believe that you need to train to absolute failure with every workout or be completely stuffed when you leave the gym.

For me personally, I see this as a cop-out used by many people in the gym not to train hard. How many muscular naturals do you see in the gym that don't train to full intensity & to failure? NOT MANY. I'm talking standout naturals. Sure genetics play a part here as well & some people can get muscular eating shit & looking at a weight.

The prime example is training legs. How many people do you see on stage in New Zealand with poor leg development. LOTS. This is because training legs is hard. If you want big legs hit them hard & to failure. You might feel like spewing after this. You might feel totally fucked. But you will grow providing your are getting enough cals. Going to the gym & repping out three sets of 10 on the squat isn't gonna do it.

I have average white boy genetics, but I have a good work ethic. I train high intensity every workout & to failure. This might be high reps or low reps. I firmly believe if you want to put thick slabs of muscle onto your body as a natural you need to be training to failure & attempting to progress each workout.

[ama]

Ok. Well. You can have all the knowledge in the world about muscle growth. Slow and Fast twitch fibers and rah rah, but if high reps works for me, than as far as I'm concerned it is an effective way to build muscle.

If I am sore as hell the day after a workout using high reps, than what does that mean? It means that Iv'e ripped the muscle fibers doesn't it? And that means that the muscle is going to try and recover and rebuild itself bigger and stronger.

[ama]

I'd have to agree with EU as far as high reps not eliciting major muscle gains. The kind of leg work you're doing would be great for a long distance runner but I just can't see it being of huge benefit to a bodybuilder. I agree that there is no ONE perfect or ideal training program or routine, and that it's always a good idea to change training reps/sets/exercises to "shock" muscle groups and keep the body from adapting to a certain training, however I wouldn't recommend a program like this to make up a major component of a bodybuilders training routine.

As EU pointed out, it's been shown in study after study that low reps effect Fast twitch or TypeIIb muscle fibers, while high reps effect slow twitch fiber recruitment.

Different muscle types respond differently to high and low reps. The soleus (long part of your calf muscle) is predominantly slow twitch muscle fibre and so responds best to high rep work.

Your gastroc (the higher thicker muscle on your calf) is fast twitch and responds best to low reps i.e. low reps on straight leg standing calf raise and donkey raises, and high reps on bent leg seated calf raise (if you ask me why that is you need to do a bit of research).

Another muscle that is predominantly fast twitch are the hamstrings which should be trained at high intensity (1RM intensity) with low reps for the best results.

If you really want to know whether low rep/high intensity training works better for muscular developement than high reps/low intensity training compare an olympic sprinter to a marathon runner.

If you're making muscle gains with your current training program you must either be extremely lucky, have an unusually high amount of slow twitch muscle fibers, or be on every "supplement" under the sun and making gains inspite of your training.

As you are off cycle at the moment it's highly possible that you have a high level of slow twitch fibres.

A basic way of figuring out your muscle fiber makeup is to take 85% of your 1RM and perform as many reps as possible.

A "normal" person will average 5 reps, meaning that they have a normal distribution of fast, intermediate, and slow-twitch fibers. But a fast-twitch individual will go as low as 2 reps and a predominantly slow-twitch person will go from 12-20 reps. This isn't entirely accurate as current training adaptations can effect the result however should work for most people and most muscle groups. Figuring this out means that you can then focus on training at the right volume for your body type. If you have a predominance of fast twitch, you would train at low reps for size and strength, and if slow twitch, then higher rep work would be more suitable.

I also don't believe that you need to train to absolute failure with every workout or be completely stuffed when you leave the gym. Nor do you have to train until you are going to vomit or pass out. Vomiting has been said to result from a buildup of lactic acid which precedes the release of cortisol. If you're vomiting during training then your body is in a highly catabolic state. While you need catabolism for subsequent muscle repair and growth this is an extreme state to be in for any period of time and not wholly conducive to muscle development.

nice post bro. yeah, high reps have their place in training, but in certain circumstances (like u said wit the calves). compare a lean bodybuilder who's trained wit heavy weights and low reps, with another lean bodybuilder who hasn't. same bodyfat, but the look is different. The former just looks HARD. And the muscles themselves are actually really, really hard when flexed.

High reps and lower reps both have their place in training, neither of the two has precedence over the other.

[ExpensiveUrine]

If I am sore as hell the day after a workout using high reps, than what does that mean? It means that Iv'e ripped the muscle fibers doesn't it? And that means that the muscle is going to try and recover and rebuild itself bigger and stronger.

Yeah, except the fact that the cause of DOMS is yet to be known. There are several theories/hypothesises that try and pin point exactly what the f*ck is going on. You can not say that when you experience DOMS is it strictly due to muscle damage. It's simply one of theories presented and the evidence for that is not strong. I can show you studies that even contradict it. Recent research is leaning towards connective tissue and it's inflammation in order to justify the cause of DOMS. That being said, DOMS is not a requirement for growth nor does it show any relevance. Even if there is muscle damage during DOMS (it can also be present without DOMS), I doubt it'll be as severe as when training in 6-12 rep range, most likely even less.

Train your legs once a week and you'll probably experience DOMS everytime you train them. Increase the frequency of leg training, and DOMS stop or decrease significantly and my muscles will still grow. Why?

DOMS doesn't tell you anything about growth.

[Flex]

If I am sore as hell the day after a workout using high reps, than what does that mean? It means that Iv'e ripped the muscle fibers doesn't it? And that means that the muscle is going to try and recover and rebuild itself bigger and stronger.

When I go for a two hour run my muscles are sore as well. As EU stated DOMS or any kind of muscle soreness caused by training doesn't necessarily mean your muscles are going to grow bigger and/or stronger. Your muscles are going to adapt to suit the requirements of your training. If you are training your slow twitch muscle fibres through high rep work you are still going to get soreness and growth, however it is going to be growth of slow twitch muscle fibres. Slow twitch muscle fibres are weaker, and smaller(denser) than fast twitch, and utilise ATP at a slower rate than Fast twitch hence providing less explosive power.

If you follow a high rep training program like what you are doing at the moment for a significant length of time your body will develop very strong slow twitch muscle fibres. Hence you will have greater endurance. This will cause you 1RM weight to actually decrease. While you think you may be steadily getting stronger by being able to do more reps and sets and increase your weights (i.e. 100 reps on 120kg leg press might increase to 100 reps on 140kg), your one rep max weight will be decreasing as your body is getting more efficient at high rep work and less efficient at explosive exercise.

To put it simply - You will have less explosive power and lower strength levels, and your muscle size will actually be smaller than what it would be if you had followed a lower rep protocol for a similar length of time.

[ama]

If I am sore as hell the day after a workout using high reps, than what does that mean? It means that Iv'e ripped the muscle fibers doesn't it? And that means that the muscle is going to try and recover and rebuild itself bigger and stronger.

When I go for a two hour run my muscles are sore as well. As EU stated DOMS or any kind of muscle soreness caused by training doesn't necessarily mean your muscles are going to grow bigger and/or stronger. Your muscles are going to adapt to suit the requirements of your training. If you are training your slow twitch muscle fibres through high rep work you are still going to get soreness and growth, however it is going to be growth of slow twitch muscle fibres. Slow twitch muscle fibres are weaker, and smaller(denser) than fast twitch, and utilise ATP at a slower rate than Fast twitch hence providing less explosive power.

If you follow a high rep training program like what you are doing at the moment for a significant length of time your body will develop very strong slow twitch muscle fibres. Hence you will have greater endurance. This will cause you 1RM weight to actually decrease. While you think you may be steadily getting stronger by being able to do more reps and sets and increase your weights (i.e. 100 reps on 120kg leg press might increase to 100 reps on 140kg), your one rep max weight will be decreasing as your body is getting more efficient at high rep work and less efficient at explosive exercise.

To put it simply - You will have less explosive power and lower strength levels, and your muscle size will actually be smaller than what it would be if you had followed a lower rep protocol for a similar length of time.

Hmmm. Interesting but I still disagree.

You have your theoretical approach and I have my practical.

And once again, I do not follow a high rep program or a low rep program, I do both. Whatever it takes to shock my body into new levels of growth. Also, I think it doesn't really matter what you do in the gym as long as your in there consistently, its what you do out of the gym that affects your muscle growth.

And, 1 rm's are ok and fun to see how strong you are and all but when it comes to building muscle, pretty much anything under 5-6reps is a waste of time.