Continuous vs Cluster Reps

RAMROD

New Member
if hypertrophy is the goal, is there an advantage to continuous reps vs clustering or max-stim? does inducing fatigue with non-stop typical reps, cause a deeper stimulation, or is the overall load all that matters, whether continuous, clustered, or 1 MS rep at a time.

phisiologically speaking, what is the difference between continuous reps or 1 rep at a time concerning stimulating hypertrophy
 
I'm curious myself to see what information people can share on this subject. I'm assuming continuous reps is good for improving your cardiovascular system although I know the subject is about the effects on hypertrophy.
 
I think what matters most after load is time under tension. However you can increase that, do it. For instance, if you can do more reps without achieving substantial fatigue then do so (cluster, M-S). Or, if you can hold the weight for a time after the set then do so. Etc.

I've recently begun to end the set with a static hold on full extension on the overhead press and I've seen a marked improvement in progress. I've even done a few short ROM reps at the top to help the lactic acid accumulation. I used to just do the reps and move on to the next exercise. But whatever you do, increasing TUT will make a difference.
 
True dat. Also the total workload is a factor to consider. Fatigue management (clustering) can help you get a given load the distance wanted.
In a fatigue induced load, you may have a lesser total workload because of the fatigue, so it's not exactly like comparing equal systems.
I think MS works because of total workload. I mean, 20 reps of 80% 1rm is nothing to sneeze at. Consider the fives. You work heavy, but with 3 sets rather than two. Yet you may move the same poundage totals in the 15's with two sets, or even more.
I have to guess that given even workoads, the continuous would win out. But since that's not probable, and the clustered workloads are going to be using heavier weights, what is going to happen? Strength.
Given the lower poundages of the fatigue method, with the addition of lactic acid buildup and glycogen depletion, a host of other processes, I personally suspect that there is much value to fatigue management in the long run, despite it's tendency to develop strength over hypertrophy; we're all about bigger numbers in the final analysis. Big weights, big bodies.
But...wasn't HST designed to manage CNS burnout? How long can we use something that puts us against the wall quite often, (in the immediate) as compared to a system that only puts us into the wall every two weeks?
I am clustering a few things at this time...in sets around 5-8 reps, and NOT for everything. (mostly just chest) And not continuously, either. I don't want to shorten my cycle any more than I have to.
 
Yeah...clustering and max-stim seems like a great way to get alot more load on the muscle while managing fatigue. question is, if doing MS or cluster exclusively, are you mssing anything as far as stimulating hypertrophy.

Does lactic acid, fatigue, or failure produced by continuous, non-stop reps, offer anything towards muscle growth, that fatigue managed reps [MS/Cluster] do not?

I would luv to perform all my reps in MS or cluster exclusively. I just want to make sure I'm not missing out on a needed componant of hypertrophy.
 
I think that load and TUT are king. Fatigue is a limiting factor. The more fatigue you accumulate, the less load you can lift and the less often you can lift it. So even if fatigue can induce some growth, it's overwhelmed by its negative effect on our ability to lift the bar and thus to load the muscle. The same goes for temporary muscle failure. It is also a limiting factor.

If, on the other hand, you want to train to fatigue or to TMF for the purpose of improving you ability to do reps, you may want to look at HIIT instead. I've been doing power cleans with the Tabata protocol on off days. It is brutal but I've improved my ability to do reps dramatically. In three weeks from the beginning of this cycle to now in the 10s, I've improved from about 20 reps per workout to about 40 for each exercise I do. Bear in mind that I was doing 20 reps with less than my 15RM and now I'm doing 40 with my 10RM or close to it. Granted, I cluster all of it but I don't care, I'm doing more and I see no significant fatigue accumulation.

Lactic acid has a different purpose in HST. It serves to promote tendon repair and whatnot. I don't know if it causes any significant growth. Perhaps there's more information about that in the FAQs.
 
Not really related to clustering or MS, but in regard to fatigue, I've had greater hypertrophy gains when pushing to "near-fatigue" on each set rather than stopping at the defined rep range.  And I've tried it both ways.

For example, in the 15 rep range, I will max out to 15+ reps up to the limit where my form can stay absolutely consistent.  Same for 10's and 5's.  Of course, this occurs most often early in each meso-cycle at sub-max weights.  

Check out the section on drop sets and high rep sets in the FAQ.  I believe this explains some the muscle physiology that's occuring under these conditions.

I will admit that I've seen the best gains early in the cycle, so perhaps I'm sacrificing potential gains during the heavier 5's due to overall increased fatigue/CNS issues later on.

Excellent thread though.
 
Has any one come across any studies comparing perceived work load, i.e., the fatigue route, versus actual work load regardless of time intervals between sets? I remember some as to strength but don't specifically recall any dealing strictly with hypertrophy.

Personally, I employ a technique that is probably somewhere in between clustering and Max Stim. For example, if my goal is 8 reps of a lateral raise and I only can continuously do 6 reps, I will hold the DB's by my side for a few seconds until I can execute the 7th rep and do the same thing, with probably a slightly longer hesitation, until I can get the 8th rep. Obviously I am going beyond my rep max on these sets so it always toward the end of my HST cycle.

BTW, I have found doing each rep range each week to be better for me than to do 2 weeks of a certain rep range, then 2 weeks of the next lower rep range, etc. Currently I am getting close to the end of a routine meant for hypertrophy and utilize 12 reps and 8 reps. So Monday and Tuesday I do 12 reps and Thursday and Friday do 8 reps in a body split style so I hit each body part twice per week. This seems to be working nicely for me at this point in time but, who knows, maybe next year I will be back to 12 full body workouts per week. I will wait for my body to start communicating to me when a time for change is near.     
cool.gif
 
i like the idea of clustering to reach specific goals. i sometimes use a cluster method when training chest, i hit the 3 working sets and then i do a lighter set and rep out with as many reps i can manage and cluster the reps until i cant lift any longer. prolly aint the best thing for hypertrophy but boy does it get the blood in.
 
Icars, I see nothing wrong with that as long as it isn't a steady day-to-day routine. In fact, I think it is ideal a week or two before beginning an SD. It gives your muscles something to really rest about.
biggrin.gif
 
Just to back up some points made by Martin:

<div></div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">The more fatigue you accumulate, the less load you can lift and the less often you can lift it.</div>

Quite right, and because of that, Max-stim in many ways helps tremendously, so does clustering and pulse strectch or static holds, those are techinques thaqt enhance TUT and lead to an extra bit of hypertyrophy when other avenues are exhausted.
 
<div>
(Old and Grey @ Nov. 27 2007,13:56)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">Icars, I see nothing wrong with that as long as it isn't a steady day-to-day routine. In fact, I think it is ideal a week or two before beginning an SD. It gives your muscles something to really rest about.
biggrin.gif
</div>
Perhaps, I am misunderstanding your statement, but this seems to suggest that you don't favor doing Max-Stim or clustering as a day-to-day routine. If so, then what are your thoughts on this?
 
Nav, what Icars was referring to is not Max Stim nor pure clustering, in my opinion. I have no problem with either of those two methods. My interpretation of what Icars was suggesting was using pure HST followed immediately by a set that works the muscle to absolute concentric failure. That, if my interpretation is correct, is fine for the short term, especially before an SD, but is a sure-fire way to kill growth if used day in and day out. In fact, it was exactly that type of training that lead Bryan to formally put forth some of the principles he collectively calls HST and to refute many of the principles of HIT. I don't believe that either Max Stim or Clustering encourage going to absolute failure day after day after day. If I am mistaken and they do encourage that, then I would say that I would not be in favor of using them every day.
sad.gif


If the above is not confusing enough, let me know and I will try to make it even more confusing.
biggrin.gif
 
<div>
(Old and Grey @ Nov. 28 2007,11:47)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">Nav, what Icars was referring to is not Max Stim nor pure clustering, in my opinion. I have no problem with either of those two methods. My interpretation of what Icars was suggesting was using pure HST followed immediately by a set that works the muscle to absolute concentric failure. That, if my interpretation is correct, is fine for the short term, especially before an SD, but is a sure-fire way to kill growth if used day in and day out. In fact, it was exactly that type of training that lead Bryan to formally put forth some of the principles he collectively calls HST and to refute many of the principles of HIT. I don't believe that either Max Stim or Clustering encourage going to absolute failure day after day after day. If I am mistaken and they do encourage that, then I would say that I would not be in favor of using them every day.
sad.gif


If the above is not confusing enough, let me know and I will try to make it even more confusing.
biggrin.gif
</div>
you interpreted it correctly! the only thing is, im training each bp once a week at the moment so knocking out the last set of each exercise to failure isnt going to create too many cns issues.
to clarify my view on these two methods i feel clustering and max stim are an ideal way to finish off a cycle or extend it rather than use them every workout
 
Go to the Max-Stim website and read.

Dan Moore has looked at every inch of your question and concluded that what you and I call &quot;fatigue&quot; is not a stimulus for hypertrophy. Mechanical strain - the effect of a load, is what initiates the entire muscle growing process. If you read the science article(s) on his website he puts altogether for you citing dozens of studies on the biology of hypertrophy. Time under tension is simply an expression of the reality that sufficient strain must be experienced and that since you can't lift 200% of your 1 RM it takes time to get all that straining done. I am familiar with TUT. It used to be called TUL (Time Under Load) for long ago in the 90's before th3 1ntern3ts was big a few guys at a gym in Greenville, SC put the pieces together. The method was once featured on mikementzer.com.

But I digress.

Lactic acid induces hGH/somatotropin release within the muscle but this appears to do little for gaining even bigger muscles. hGH does enhance protein retention in connective tissue however - one reason to do your 20's.

Studies have shown that going to failure is not a reliable way to add stimulus. It is possible, however, that if a lifter has been holding back to make his sets and reps then going to failure can add value. You can overtrain with to-failure training. The current torch holder of HIT, Ellington Darden, prescribes many workouts in his latest book that explicitly state &quot;Do not go to failure.&quot;

Do not forget recovery and nutrition. Lifting weights starts the assembly line. Without sufficient raw material nothing will get built. The more you stimulate, the more you must eat and recover. A question I propose to you is &quot;What is the maximum amount of muscle that a natural can gain in a week?&quot; Certainly stimulus is a variable. But there are other inputs - and constraints. What is the rate limiting step?
 
<div>
(Old and Grey @ Nov. 28 2007,08:47)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">If the above is not confusing enough, let me know and I will try to make it even more confusing.
biggrin.gif
</div>
I think you've made it all sufficiently confusing for me.
biggrin.gif


Cheers.
 
<div>
(Fausto @ Nov. 28 2007,04:57)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">Just to back up some points made by Martin:

<div></div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">The more fatigue you accumulate, the less load you can lift and the less often you can lift it.</div>

Quite right, and because of that, Max-stim in many ways helps tremendously, so does clustering and pulse strectch or static holds, those are techinques thaqt enhance TUT and lead to an extra bit of hypertyrophy when other avenues are exhausted.</div>
Do most of you guys feel that Max-Stim helps mitigate fatigue?  I've been on Dan's site and read his experiment regarding more TUT doing dumbell curls with Max-Stim, but I didn't have the same results.  Whether doing MS or consecutive reps, I still reached the fatigue threshold at about the same TUT using a 5 sec m-time.  Also, how would MS reduce fatigue anymore than just resting &quot;as needed&quot; after a certain number of consecutive reps?   Possibly with long m-times?   5 or even 10 second intervals would not seem to do it (at least for me).  Not knocking Max-Stim at all, but just curious to know what others have experienced in reference to fatigue...and hypertrophy.  Maybe I'm doing something wrong.
 
Also not to forget that even the old-time lifters used to use shock routines here and there, like &quot;railroads&quot; (up and down the db rack), drop sets, restpause and others. But even back then they knew not to overdo it. It was often suggested that a shock on a muscle should only be done once a week, maximum.
I'm just getting ready to study up on MS, but as I understood it, it required a percentage of your max, not your maxes. That, along with the M-time fatigue management I can see how it can be done consistently, as a cycle.
Clustering, OTOH, is done at the max state and IMO should be regarded as intense as shock training, and done sparingly. QP did his usual good job of describing the futility of something (failure training) as a hypertrophy benefit, but we also know that it will produce muscle for a little while.
The original question was for the difference between continuous reps or MS and clustering; but those two are different from each other, so we're talking about 3 separate systems, which leads to the question, &quot;what do you mean by continuous reps?&quot; Reps all the way to failure, we know are disadvantageous. HST has continuous reps to submax, which we know works due to SD, progression and the like. So it appears to me that we're really comparing (again) HST to MS. The clustering principle fits in with shock routines - a supplement to any system you're using. HST and MS can be done consecutively, clustering continuously would eat your CNS as quickly as HIT I would think. It would become HIT.
 
Clustering (and MS) can be utilized with sub maximal weights and follow almost all of the HST principles. Maximal weights can and should be used at times in all routines, including HST. Using clustering or MS are both excellent ways to prolong an HST cycle in all rep ranges coupled with maximal weights. The most difficult concept is interpreting the signals that your body gives you at any point in time to determine what would work best in the short term but also keeping an eye on your overall long term goals.
ghostface.gif
 
Back
Top