Need some clarification on 5's

E

EL_VIEJO

New Member
I was going to post this under the "Number of Reps" thread, but decide to post it separately. Let me give a little background - I'm 55 yrs. old. I've trained with weights off and on (unfortunately more OFF than ON) for most of my adult life.
I never made any significant gains in muscle mass. I did make relatively good gains in strength, however. My method of training? Low reps, relatively heavy weights - under the mistaken belief that this was the best road to muscle mass. I readily admit that I paid no attention to diet, protein, or other supplements and I now understand that that played a major role in my lack of progress with hypertrophy.

I got back into weight training about 4 months ago. About 2 months ago I found HST, took a 20 day SD, and started the program. Tomorrow I start week 2 of 5's and herein lies my question. Everything I've read over the past 4 months says that the optimal rep range for hypertrophy is 8-15 reps. No matter how much the 'experts' disagree on other things, they all seem to agree on this point. So, my question is this: Why are we spending 4 weeks of an 8 week cycle doing sets of 5 reps in a program that is hypertrophy specific?

I'm not trying to be overly critical as I'm am following the program and seem to be making gains (and haven't done particulary well on my own in the past), but I think this is a legitimate question .
 
There is no optimal rep range for hypertrophy. Assuming you aren't doing anything retarded like 30 rep sets, etc.
 
Thanks for your response, Totentanz.

"There is no optimal rep range for hypertrophy".

That doesn't seem to be the consensus from what I've been reading at T-Nation, BB.com, etc., etc.

I'm going to stick with HST for this cycle and another cycle to see what results I get. One of my past mistakes was not giving a program sufficient time to adequately judge the results. I can tell you that I'm not getting the pump from the 5's as I was from the 15's and 10's. Then again, I'm not absolutely sure that a pump is necessary for growth. Any comments on whether a pump is important for growth?
 
Not because it is popular that it is also true. There is no such thing as an optimal hypertrophy rep range. There is, however, a load threshold below which there is no growth response. Between this threshold and maximum voluntary strength (1RM) and beyond, hypertrophy can and will occur. It all depends on your particular sensitivity to the load. The growth response does not diminish as the load increases. On the contrary, the growth response is proportional to the stimulus. The stimulus in this case is direct mechanical load on the muscle. The greater it is, the greater the growth response.

What is the "pump"?
 
<div>
(EL_VIEJO @ Oct. 20 2007,18:54)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">Thanks for your response, Totentanz.

&quot;There is no optimal rep range for hypertrophy&quot;.

That doesn't seem to be the consensus from what I've been reading at T-Nation, BB.com, etc., etc.

I'm going to stick with HST for this cycle and another cycle to see what results I get. One of my past mistakes was not giving a program sufficient time to adequately judge the results. I can tell you that I'm not getting the pump from the 5's as I was from the 15's and 10's. Then again, I'm not absolutely sure that a pump is necessary for growth. Any comments on whether a pump is important for growth?</div>
Have you read the HST article and the HST faqs yet? This whole issue is addressed by Bryan in the faqs.

The pump is not necessary for growth.

For growth, load is king. Reps doesn't matter. If you do 8 reps with 30 seconds of rest between each rep, using your 5 RM for the load, wouldn't you think that would cause more growth stimulus than a standard set of 8 reps using your 8 RM?
Not according to the popular &quot;8-12 reps is optimal for hypertrophy&quot; crowd. Even though doing 8 reps with your 5 RM will cause more strain than 8 reps with your 8 RM, somehow the 8 RM reps causes more growth? That doesn't make any sense at all.

BB.com, t-nation, etc are not good places for information. You may as well pick up a BBing mag and use that information. It's mostly bunk.

Again, read the faqs and the articles. You're not the first person to ask this sort of question, in fact, you're probably at least the 1000th person to ask this. Which is why this has all been covered in the past and posted in the faqs.
If I get time later and I'm feeling generous, I might dig up links to the specific faqs that you should read.
 
<div>
(Totentanz @ Oct. 20 2007,19:51)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">The pump is not necessary for growth.</div>
I seem to remember Bryan saying that it's important to feel the &quot;stretch&quot; in the muscle in order to best induce conditions for hypertrophy.  I feel this most during the 15's and 10's, and not so much druing the 5's as someone else also mentioned.   For me, the &quot;stretch&quot; also seems to correlate with the pump after the set.
 
<div>
(Totentanz @ Oct. 20 2007,19:51)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">Again, read the faqs and the articles. You're not the first person to ask this sort of question, in fact, you're probably at least the 1000th person to ask this. Which is why this has all been covered in the past and posted in the faqs.
If I get time later and I'm feeling generous, I might dig up links to the specific faqs that you should read.</div>
O.K., O.K I'll re-read the articles and the FAQS. You don't have to shout.
biggrin.gif


<div></div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">BB.com, t-nation, etc are not good places for information. You may as well pick up a BBing mag and use that information. It's mostly bunk.</div>
Have YOU ever read T-Nation? I think it's a bit extreme to classify it as &quot;bunk&quot;. They have some very well educated and very experienced people writing articles there. I will admit that they go a little overboard on promoting their own products in many of the articles, but overall I think the quality of the information there is good. As a matter of fact, what attracted me to that website was the emphasis on compound exercises over isolation exercises..
 
It seems that many studies have been done on untrained lifters regarding rep range and every studies i've read all lead to the same conclussion.. Rep range has no significant bearing on strength or hypertrophy. I've searched for studies that use trained weight liftings but haven't been sucessful in finding one.. I've seen guys grow mass on 5X5 programs and i've seen guys increase strength off the wall doing 10-12 rep ranges.. I think it's more of an individual thing myself.. it just takes time finding what makes your body respond best..
 
What is critical for growth is the load used and the duration the load is applied. As Martin said the muscle tissue responds to mechanical stimulation but there is also a time dependancy involved, IOW doing one rep at 100% MVC (1RM) is not going to cause significant growth and yes, there is a threshold. This has been recently evidenced by a research group who saw that doing 4 sets of 5 maximal contractions is different than 4 sets of 7 but 4 sets of 10 didn't show much of a difference than 4 sets of 7. Again pointing out that there is a depndancy on the TUT and doing more than needed is not going to show much better results.

Is the pump sigficant, IMHO no, speaking of hypertrophy signalling alone.

Looking at your history specifically; there was nothing wrong with what you were doing, IE heavy training, but what may have been the limiting factor is the time factor. How long was the heavy load imposed? Was it sufficient?

I wrote an article called Sarcoplasmic Hypertrophy and Rep Range about 1.5 years ago, see thinkmuscle newsletter #31, (you can also find it posted on many other sites but if you can't locate it email and I'll send you a copy) in it I looked at several aspects that cause preferential sarcoplasmic hypertrophy versus myofibril. The concensus I came to was that all fractions are stimulated to elevate and this occurs in a rather set ratio. Yes, the ratio can be shifted very slightly but in no instance will only one fraction increase. So the whole idea that one can manipulate sarcoplasmic hypertrophy only via manipulating rep number doesn't wash.

Several years ago I put together a &quot;Best of Bryan&quot; so to speak and after reading it again lately I noticed something that many contunually overlook.

<div></div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">I know this doesn't contribute much to the thread, but its important to keep in mind that the relationships between load and volume are not static. For example, given sufficient load, adding more volume after gains have stopped is a legitamate strategy. Like wise, given sufficient volume, simply increasing the load is an obvious solution to stagnation.</div>

So I don't think that working the heavy side was your issue or rather I doubt that the lack of a pump was a contributor to your stalling, it simply is a matter of work (Time under tension) and the Tension itself.
 
The optimal rep range was born under the notion or idea that a muscle has to be under enough time under tension, and i've read something like 48-72 seconds of tension using say 8-12RM is sufficient for hypertrophy, and WHILE THAT DOES cause hypertrophy, doesn't mean it is the optimal rep range, there are MANY studies in which growth happens in ALL rep ranges, the most prevalent growth happening around 5-8 reps, even though there was still growth in the 8-12 rep range, not as much as the 5-8 range. but this doesn't mean that this is the optimal range either!
just because something works well, doesn't make it optimal. what HST does is use tension-based progression so that adaption is not still by using the SAME weight over and over, it is CONSTANT and protein synth is CONSTANTLY elevated which is the aim of hypertrophy. that being said, your overall strength has to increase for continued hypertrophy.
 
Dan:Have a link to this study?
So, If i understand rigth, 4x7 or 4x10 is diferent than 4x5, but what is better?
Thank's
 
<div>
(cgutcu @ Oct. 21 2007,10:01)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">Dan:Have a link to this study?
So, If i understand rigth, 4x7 or 4x10 is diferent than 4x5, but what is better?
Thank's</div>
Originally Dr. Baldwin told me about it during personal correspondence but they have released the following.

Adams GR, Haddad F, Bodell PW, Tran PD, Baldwin KM.

Combined isometric, concentric and eccentric resistance exercise prevents unloading induced muscle atrophy in rats.

J Appl Physiol. 2007 Sep 13;


<div></div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">Subsequent to the completion of our previous study (37) noted above, additional observations have occurred impacting the thrust of the present study. First we have demonstrated that different contraction modes (i.e., isometric, concentric , eccentric ) of equivalent force output produce similar cell signaling outcomes (32) as well as degrees of hypertrophy (4) <u>suggesting that the variable of force rather than contractile mode is
likely a key factor in creating anabolic events in the loading of skeletal muscle </u>(32 ).</div>

<div></div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">In keeping with the programmatic goals of the NASA Human Countermeasure Research Program, one of the key aims of this study was to ascertain if
a combination of actions routinely used in muscle training with free weights and other training devices is effective in creating an anabolic state sufficient to offset the atrophy response that is typical of the hind limb suspension model.</div>

They used a 1 sec isometric, immediately followed by a 1 sec concentric and immediately followed by a 1 sec eccentric for each contraction. THis contraction was followed with 27 secs rest before the next contraction, IOW, one contraction every 30 seconds. This was done for 10 contractions per set.

In the manuscript version I have they do not point to the same as what Dr. Baldwin and I discussed but they do mention on page 8 that they had peviously used 4X5 in a pilot study and it did not compare to the response seen in this study using 4X10. They also do not mention the 4X7 that was discussed between Dr. Baldwin and myself.
 
<div>
(omega99 @ Oct. 20 2007,22:17)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE"><div>
(Totentanz @ Oct. 20 2007,19:51)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">The pump is not necessary for growth.</div>
I seem to remember Bryan saying that it's important to feel the &quot;stretch&quot; in the muscle in order to best induce conditions for hypertrophy. I feel this most during the 15's and 10's, and not so much druing the 5's as someone else also mentioned. For me, the &quot;stretch&quot; also seems to correlate with the pump after the set.</div>
Two totally different things. The &quot;stretch&quot; is referring to exercises where the muscle is in a stretched position during part of the exercise.
 
El Viejo- you're not the only &quot;old man&quot; here...I'm one year younger than you!
You may or may not grow in the fives as much as tens. BUT...you will increase strength. Let's say your newfound strength allows you to lift 10 lbs. per exersize in the 15's of the next cycle as opposed to 5 lbs.
That's 10x15x2=300lbs as opposed to 5x15x2=150 lbs.
You are now doing more work, moving more tonnage, sending more growth signals.
On another note, at our age, with lower hormone counts, hard bulking will usually just make you fatter. It's better to accept that gains will come slower than for these young pups, therefore use a slow bulk, cutting when you can't stand the sight in the mirror anymore.
Conocerle.
wink.gif
 
Quad,

Thanks for the response. Good to know there are some other old timers here. I plan on sticking with with HST for a while, because for the most part it makes sense to me. I was just wondering about the low rep sets considering what I've been reading and with my experience with low reps. My lack of growth in the past was probably due more to diet than anything else. I appreciate all of the responses and I'll continue to do the 5's.

I did my 4th session of 5's today and as I approach my 5 RM it's getting increasingly more difficult. I had planned on doing 4 sets of squats, but was beat after 3. I did manage to complete 4 sets of weighted dips and cable rows, which tells me that I most likely underestimated my 5RM on those exercises.
 
I love the 5s - almost every cycle I get great strength and physical gains in the 5s. I do anywhere from 1 month to 2+ months in 5s, because I keep lifting heavier and heavier in the 5s.

In fact, I do the 15s and 10s just to prepare for what I know is coming in the 5s. I make sure I'm physically, mentally and mostly nutritionally prepared for the 5s.

Sure, I drop back 20 to 30% on weight loading after SD when I start the 15s, and the 15s whip my butt. I usually feel great after the 2nd week of 15s.

The 10s are a good precursor to the 5s. I can easily get gains in the 10s x 2 sets, but I don't push it. I don't want to try to accomplish so much in the 10s, because I know the 5s are going to be great. I usually add just enough weight in the tens I can manage without pushing the limit. Don't read that wrong. I'm still getting off good workouts.

I'm currently starting my second week of 10s today in this cycle, and I'm lifting about 10% below what I finished in the 5s last cycle. I have no idea what level the next 5s is going to take me to. I am eating like the proverbial horse and chucking down the good stuff, along with protein and glutamine.

I'm going to experiment by start loading the EAS Phosphagen HP (creatine monohydrate) towards the end of the week. I should be finished loading by the time I start next week in the 5s. I usually wait until I perceive my recovery rate is falling off before I start creatine. This time... I'm going into the 5s fully creatined. LOL

I reached weight levels in my last 5s x 3 sets that were astonishing to me ( that much change in that short time). I kept going and going like the energizer bunny. I never got any joint discomfort after 9 weeks in the fives.

I finally just decided to SD when I wasn't able to handle more weight each workout. I was still able to increase the weight each week, just not each workout.

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

Several things are very important if you want to get the most out of HST training.

You have an excellent training program with HST. Stay committed to it and make sure you understand it.

You must stay disciplined to do your training program consistently.

You must eat plenty of protein (1 gram x 1 pound of bodyweight daily), and nutritious food in quantity.

You must eat 5-6 small nutritious meals daily and you must stay with your nutrition program 24/7.

You must get plenty of rest between workouts.

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

Nuttin' to it but to do it.

Good luck
 
<div>
(Avi1985 @ Oct. 22 2007,16:58)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">I saw a study that shows that 15's best for sarcoplasmic hypertrophy and 5's best for myofibrillar hypertrophy.</div>
Can you reference the study for me please? I would love to read it.
 
EL_VIEJO, I'm a relative oldie too. Do give HST a proper chance. A lot of thought has gone into its inception and there are lots of folks here who can help you with any queries you may have.

The 5s are probably the most important part of the cycle as this is where the loads are heaviest and it is also the longest phase of the cycle. Great for growth!

BUT, you do need to ensure that you are eating well enough at this time: meaning around 500 cals over maintenance. You also need to ensure that you are doing sufficient volume to continue to trigger a PS response. This will depend on your current level of conditioning to exercise at this stage in your lifting career.

A pump is not so important; it is generally more likely to occur after higher rep, higher fatigue type sets. With lower rep sets you will generally get less of a pump but you will trigger growth as long as you have done enough volume with the load (as Dan mentioned earlier in the thread).

As the load gets closer to or exceeds your 5RM you will find it harder to complete sets of 5 reps. You still need to get a high enough rep total to trigger growth so you can always cluster smaller groups of reps, even doing singles to get your desired total if need be. This way you keep fatigue accumulation down which is a good thing as all your sessions at this stage in a cycle will be heavy.

NB. Once you have reached your 5RM workout, HST does not require that you then train to failure on every subsequent session with your 5RM (or higher loads). It is quite fine to cluster reps from the first set if need be. So, with your 5RM you could do sets of 3 reps but you might have to do 5 or more sets, depending on your conditioning, to get enough work done. Going to failure at a 3 x weekly frequency is a good way to cause your strength to drop off as fatigue accumulates so this is to be avoided as much as possible.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top