To the Cluster style HST'ers

jww13

New Member
To those of you who use cluster-style HST, how many total reps do you aim for throughout your cycle?

Also, how many reps can you usually get in 1 set at your final weight? (do you ever go heavier than your 5 RM?)

thanks
 
Um cluster style
sad.gif
that might be what I do?? I start off 15rm go to 12rm 10, 8, 5 then depends on what i feel like doing sometime another 5 but usually 3rm then maybe a week of negatives depending on how i feel or if i want to try and increase stregth maybe more at the lower weights. But as for 1 set thats french to me
laugh.gif
.
 
-my last cycle i did 20 total reps for the compound excersizes and 10-15 reps for the isolation, training every other day, 3x a week.

this cycle i aim for 15 total reps for compound and 12 reps for isolation, training every day, 6x a week.

the latter approach is working much much better for me. whether its the increase in volume or doubling the frequency.. or a combination of both, i dont know, but im going to continue to train this way, or close to it.

-i am planning to work with heavier than my 5rm this cycle. i dont know how much heavier i will go because i am going to play it by ear and see how i feel/respond to it as i go.
 
[b said:
Quote[/b] (Reven @ April 12 2005,11:53)]Um cluster style  
sad.gif
 that might be what I do?? I start off 15rm go to 12rm 10, 8, 5 then depends on what i feel like doing sometime  another 5 but usually 3rm then maybe a week of negatives depending on how i feel or if i want to try and increase stregth maybe more at the lower weights.  But as for 1 set thats french to me
laugh.gif
.

I believe he's speaking of the style where work is kept constant and you do whatever rep/set combo you need to reach it.  So if you're working with your three rep max and you need to hit 20 reps, you'd do seven sets.

Once I'm done SDing I'm going to do a cluster style HST cycle aiming for 20 reps.  First two weeks are one set of twenty reps, the second two are two sets of ten reps, the third two are 4 sets of five reps.  I'm following this up with two weeks where one day a week I'll be doing straight five reps for four sets, and two days a week I have a partner so I can do negatives. Most people seem to aim for a higher rep range.

Most of the objections I've seen against this type of training make little sense. They bring up overtraining, but if someone can handle the volume they can handle it. That's an individual factor. They criticise people who aim high and end up doing low reps high sets. Something to this as TUT gets hard to manage and keep at adequate levels. The mention the inconvenience of the workouts and how long they'd take. Well, if someone's got the time, what does it matter?

Personally the only thing that worried me was TUT and over training, which is why I'm aiming for twenty reps of each exercise. If the five rep range provides adequate TUT when in the standard HST cycle, there's no reason why it wouldn't work in a cluster style. To me that's the catch with this method. You have to be able to handle the chosen volume but it's probably best not to go below the five rep max on anything because of TUT considerations.
 
I found out through about 3 cycles of clustering, 20 works great for me. To save time in the heavier weights I drop the number of exercises and concentrate on the big compund lifts.
 
I'd be more concerned about whether the type 2bs would be recruited..

Since those are recruited at the beginning of a set with loads > 80-85% of 1RM, I don't see how they can be recruited during most of a cluster HST cycle.

It's true that the more you "force", the more you stress your CNS, but it's also true that the more you force, the more you recruite the high threshold fibers.

And from what I've understood, not all fibers of one particular fiber types have the same threshold. Some 2Bs can have a higher threshold than other 2Bs, so unless you force a lot you will not recruite them.
 
[b said:
Quote[/b] (Heavy Duty dude @ April 13 2005,7:48)]I'd be more concerned about whether the type 2bs would be recruited..

Since those are recruited at the beginning of a set with loads > 80-85% of 1RM, I don't see how they can be recruited during most of a cluster HST cycle.

Some 2Bs can have a higher threshold than other 2Bs, so unless you force a lot you will not recruite them.
HDD, I'm not sure what you are trying to point out here but I THINK I disagree.

If you are concerned with recruitment of a type of fiber which only recruits, as you say, at > 80-85% RM, then this applies to HST in general not whether you cluster the reps or not. The progression in clustering is the same as standard HST (at least how I do it, which BTW I don't do the european version)so pretty much the intensity (%RM) time points are the same.
 
Well, correct me if I'm wrong but it is not only the load that affects whether you recruit the 2Bs or not. It's also how close you get to failure.

If you use a light weight, say 60% of your 1RM, you're unlikely to recruit the 2Bs at all if you do say only 5 reps.

In HST, there is a minimum of "intensiveness" - meaning how close to failure you go-. Whether the 2Bs are always recruited during an HST cycle I am not sure, but the point with cluster HST is that the level of "intensiveness" is so low that the 2Bs are probably not recruited during most of the workouts.

Also, Bryan never said for instance to split a set of 15 reps in 3 sets of 5. What he says is that if it's getting too hard, which means that the 2Bs have been recruited, you can stop the set and do the reps that you didn't do in another set. That's different.

On another hand it's true that cluster HST might optimize the hypertrophy of the 2As, and that overall you may grow more.
 
Ahhhh I see the distinction and where there is some confusion here. If you are shooting for 20 reps during your 15RM weight you wouldn't break up the 20 reps into sets of 5, not necessarily because of fiber recruitment (also recruitment is a CNS and metabloic issue not a tissue specific issue anyway), but because there wouldn't be any advantage to not inducing the metabolic pathways of ERK 1/2. Clustering is only a means of keeping TUT/TUL/VOLUME/ or whatever you want to call it, consistent throughout the entire cycle, taking that one variable out of the mix.

My clustering is a bit less complicated than most think, I simply aim for a rep count, if it takes me 1 set, great. If it takes 5, so be it, but I always stop short of true concentric failure.

Typically I hit at least the number of reps dictated, 15, 10, 5 in the first set (sometimes more) it isn't until the subsequent sets that I need to do more clusters to acheive my rep count. See what I'm saying.

So again I am not sure where there would anything different recruitment wise.

As far as recruitment, and someone correct me if am wrong here.
1. Above 80% 1RM all fiber types are recruited.
2. I think you might be a bit confused, or perhaps I am, on the importance of the IIb isoform.

Muscle fiber characteristics of competitive power lifters.
Fry AC, Webber JM, Weiss LW, Harber MP, Vaczi M, Pattison NA.
Human Performance Laboratories, The University of Memphis, Memphis, Tennessee 38152, USA. [email protected]
To examine the skeletal muscle characteristics of power lifters, 5 competitive power lifters (PL; X +/- SE; age = 31.0 +/- 1.5 years, squat = 287.7 +/- 15.7 kg, bench press = 170.5 +/- 17.7 kg, and deadlift = 284.2 +/- 7.5 kg) and 5 untrained control subjects (CON; age = 27.3 +/- 3.3 years) served as subjects. Isokinetic squat force and power was greater (p < 0.05) for the PL at all bar velocities (0.20, 0.82, and 1.43 m;pd s(-1)), as was vertical jump height and estimated power. Muscle biopsies from the vastus lateralis m. revealed significant differences for percent fiber type (PL, IIA = 45.5 +/- 1.6%, IIB = 1.3 +/- 0.8%; CON, IIA = 33.4 +/- 3.1%, IIB = 12.0 +/- 2.4%); percent fiber type area (PL, IIA = 51.8 +/- 1.6%, IIB = 1.3 +/- 0.8%; CON, IIA = 43.5 +/- 3.4%, IIB = 12.4 +/- 2.6%); and percent myosin heavy chain isoform (PL, IIa = 59.5 +/- 6.1%; CON, 46.5 +/- 2.5%). Muscle fiber characteristics were significantly correlated (r = +/- 0.61) with numerous strength and power measures for the PL. These data illustrate the muscle fiber characteristics necessary for the maximal force production requirements of power lifting.

Muscle fiber characteristics and performance correlates of male Olympic-style weightlifters.
Fry AC, Schilling BK, Staron RS, Hagerman FC, Hikida RS, Thrush JT.
Human Performance Laboratories, The University of Memphis, Tennessee 38152, USA. [email protected]
Biopsies fro the vastus lateralis muscle of male weightlifters (WL; n=6; X +/- SE, age=27.0 +/- 2.1 years), and non-weight-trained men (CON; n=7; age=27.0 +/- 2.0 years) were compared for fiber types, myosin heavy chain (MHC) and titin content, and fiber type-specific capillary density. Differences (p<0.05) were observed for percent fiber types IIC (WL=0.4 +/- 0.2, CON=2.4 +/- 0.8); IIA (WL=50.5 +/- 3.2, CON=26.9 +/- 3.7); and IIB (WL=1.7 +/- 1.4, CON=21.0 +/- 5.3), as well as percent MHC IIa (WL=65.3 +/- 2.4, CON=52.1 +/- 4.2) and percent MHC IIB (WL=0.9 +/- 0.9; CON=18.2 +/- 6.1). All WL exhibited only the titin-1 isoform. Capillary density (caps.mm(-2)) for all fiber types combined was greater for the CON subjects (WL=192.7 +/- 17.3; CON=262.9 +/- 26.3), due primarily to a greater capillary density in the IIA fibers. Weightlifting performances and vertical jump power were correlated with type II fiber characteristics. These results suggest that successful weightlifting performance is not dependent on IIB fibers, and that weightlifters exhibit large percentages of type IIA muscle fibers and MHC IIa isoform content.

Muscular adaptations in response to three different resistance-training regimens: specificity of repetition maximum training zones.
Campos GE, Luecke TJ, Wendeln HK, Toma K, Hagerman FC, Murray TF, Ragg KE, Ratamess NA, Kraemer WJ, Staron RS.
Department of Biomedical Sciences, College of Osteopathic Medicine, Ohio University, Irvine Hall, rm 430, Athens, OH 45701, USA.
Thirty-two untrained men [mean (SD) age 22.5 (5.8) years, height 178.3 (7.2) cm, body mass 77.8 (11.9) kg] participated in an 8-week progressive resistance-training program to investigate the "strength-endurance continuum". Subjects were divided into four groups: a low repetition group (Low Rep, n = 9) performing 3-5 repetitions maximum (RM) for four sets of each exercise with 3 min rest between sets and exercises, an intermediate repetition group (Int Rep, n = 11) performing 9-11 RM for three sets with 2 min rest, a high repetition group (High Rep, n = 7) performing 20-28 RM for two sets with 1 min rest, and a non-exercising control group (Con, n = 5). Three exercises (leg press, squat, and knee extension) were performed 2 days/week for the first 4 weeks and 3 days/week for the final 4 weeks. Maximal strength [one repetition maximum, 1RM), local muscular endurance (maximal number of repetitions performed with 60% of 1RM), and various cardiorespiratory parameters (e.g., maximum oxygen consumption, pulmonary ventilation, maximal aerobic power, time to exhaustion) were assessed at the beginning and end of the study. In addition, pre- and post-training muscle biopsy samples were analyzed for fiber-type composition, cross-sectional area, myosin heavy chain (MHC) content, and capillarization. Maximal strength improved significantly more for the Low Rep group compared to the other training groups, and the maximal number of repetitions at 60% 1RM improved the most for the High Rep group. In addition, maximal aerobic power and time to exhaustion significantly increased at the end of the study for only the High Rep group. All three major fiber types (types I, IIA, and IIB) hypertrophied for the Low Rep and Int Rep groups, whereas no significant increases were demonstrated for either the High Rep or Con groups. However, the percentage of type IIB fibers decreased, with a concomitant increase in IIAB fibers for all three resistance-trained groups. These fiber-type conversions were supported by a significant decrease in MHCIIb accompanied by a significant increase in MHCIIa. No significant changes in fiber-type composition were found in the control samples.

Lastly, as pointed out in the last study I posted. When training for hypertrophy any and all fiber types will hypertrophy to some degree. HST whether training traditionally or using cluster reps is training for hypertrophy so why even be concerned with fiber types. We should be concerned with the events that training with high reps or high load bring about, not what type is recruited when doing so.
 
[b said:
Quote[/b] ]
However, the percentage of type IIB fibers decreased, with a concomitant increase in IIAB fibers for all three resistance-trained groups. These fiber-type conversions were supported by a significant decrease in MHCIIb accompanied by a significant increase in MHCIIa.

Mmh.. interesting. I thought that the IIA tended to convert to 2Bs, and I to IIA. So it seems to be more complicated than that..


[b said:
Quote[/b] ]
If you are shooting for 20 reps during your 15RM weight you wouldn't break up the 20 reps into sets of 5, not necessarily because of fiber recruitment (also recruitment is a CNS and metabloic issue not a tissue specific issue anyway), but because there wouldn't be any advantage to not inducing the metabolic pathways of ERK 1/2.

No, you got me wrong. My explanations are probably not very clear.

What I mean is this: the IIBs are recruited either during the entire set if the load is > 80% of 1RM, or toward the end of a set if it is < 80% of 1RM.

In other words, if you do 3 sets of 5 reps with your 15RM, you would not recruit your IIBs, while you would if you did one set of 15RM.

So staying very far from failure like in cluster HST decreases the chances that the IIB be recruited.


[b said:
Quote[/b] ]
Muscular adaptations in response to three different resistance-training regimens: specificity of repetition maximum training zones.
Campos GE, Luecke TJ, Wendeln HK, Toma K, Hagerman FC, Murray TF, Ragg KE, Ratamess NA, Kraemer WJ, Staron RS.
Department of Biomedical Sciences, College of Osteopathic Medicine, Ohio University, Irvine Hall, rm 430, Athens, OH 45701, USA.
Thirty-two untrained men [mean (SD) age 22.5 (5.8) years, height 178.3 (7.2) cm, body mass 77.8 (11.9) kg] participated in an 8-week progressive resistance-training program to investigate the "strength-endurance continuum". Subjects were divided into four groups: a low repetition group (Low Rep, n = 9) performing 3-5 repetitions maximum (RM) for four sets of each exercise with 3 min rest between sets and exercises, an intermediate repetition group (Int Rep, n = 11) performing 9-11 RM for three sets with 2 min rest, a high repetition group (High Rep, n = 7) performing 20-28 RM for two sets with 1 min rest, and a non-exercising control group (Con, n = 5). Three exercises (leg press, squat, and knee extension) were performed 2 days/week for the first 4 weeks and 3 days/week for the final 4 weeks. Maximal strength [one repetition maximum, 1RM), local muscular endurance (maximal number of repetitions performed with 60% of 1RM), and various cardiorespiratory parameters (e.g., maximum oxygen consumption, pulmonary ventilation, maximal aerobic power, time to exhaustion) were assessed at the beginning and end of the study. In addition, pre- and post-training muscle biopsy samples were analyzed for fiber-type composition, cross-sectional area, myosin heavy chain (MHC) content, and capillarization. Maximal strength improved significantly more for the Low Rep group compared to the other training groups, and the maximal number of repetitions at 60% 1RM improved the most for the High Rep group. In addition, maximal aerobic power and time to exhaustion significantly increased at the end of the study for only the High Rep group. All three major fiber types (types I, IIA, and IIB) hypertrophied for the Low Rep and Int Rep groups, whereas no significant increases were demonstrated for either the High Rep or Con groups. However, the percentage of type IIB fibers decreased, with a concomitant increase in IIAB fibers for all three resistance-trained groups. These fiber-type conversions were supported by a significant decrease in MHCIIb accompanied by a significant increase in MHCIIa. No significant changes in fiber-type composition were found in the control samples.

[b said:
Quote[/b] ]
Lastly, as pointed out in the last study I posted. When training for hypertrophy any and all fiber types will hypertrophy to some degree. HST whether training traditionally or using cluster reps is training for hypertrophy so why even be concerned with fiber types. We should be concerned with the events that training with high reps or high load bring about, not what type is recruited when doing so.

I'm not sure I agree. In this study, all the subjects go to failure, which guarantees that the IIBs receive a TUT. This is different from doing say 5 reps with a 15RM.


BTW, here are the results of the study:
[b said:
Quote[/b] ]
High-Rep (20-28RM)
Type-I ? pre = 3894 post = 4297 (10.3% increase)
Type-IIA ? pre = 5217 post = 5633 (8.0% increase)
Type-IIB ? pre = 4564 post = 5181 (13.5% increase)

Med-Rep (9-11RM)
Type-I ? pre = 4155 post = 4701 (~13.1% increase)
Type-IIA ? pre = 5238 post = 6090 (~16.3% increase)
Type-IIB ? pre = 4556 post = 5798 (~27.3% increase)

Low-Rep (3-5RM)
Type-I ? pre = 4869 post = 5475 (~12.4% increase)
Type-IIA ? pre = 5615 post = 6903 (~22.9% increase)
Type-IIB ? pre = 4926 post = 6171 (~25.3% increase)

Isn't it a bit surprising that the biggest difference between the low reps group and the medium reps group is in the IIA? The IIA are the fibers of strength endurance, and the IIB the fibers of maximal strength, isn't it?
 
[b said:
Quote[/b] ]So staying very far from failure like in cluster HST decreases the chances that the IIB be recruited.

Staying very far from failure? I guess there is some confusion about what Clustering is still. Loads increase just as in a normal HST cycle, we have just made the reps our control. So, that being said, I set my rep goal at 20-30 depending on the exercise and I do as many sets as it takes to get to 30. Each and every set is as much as I can do without reaching concentric failure, so it may look like this: 15, 10, 5 on one workout, but as load increases it may look like: 12, 9, 6, 3. Each set is just barely under the ceiling as far as failure is concerned. It makes my training simpler and I have suffered no ill effects from it as far as loss of size or strength. This method has also allowed me to use larger increments when increasing weight.
 
[b said:
Quote[/b] (Heavy Duty dude @ April 13 2005,3:21)]In other words, if you do 3 sets of 5 reps with your 15RM, you would not recruit your IIBs, while you would if you did one set of 15RM.

So staying very far from failure like in cluster HST decreases the chances that the IIB be recruited.
As Biz just pointed out, no one is doing this, at least not me and I think not Biz.
 
[b said:
Quote[/b] (Heavy Duty dude @ April 13 2005,3:21)]The IIA are the fibers of strength endurance, and the IIB the fibers of maximal strength, isn't it?
No I think you got it inversed.

IIb-Fast Fatique resistant
IIa-Fast Easily Fatiqued

In the general training section, under the hypertophy flow chart, somewhere near the bottom of page 1, I posted an image that shows differing types of fiber, their primary substrate use and I think it even listed alternative names. I haven't looked at it in awhile so I might be thinking of something else, my brain isn't as fatique resistant as it used to be. :)
 
Ok, I checked it and indeed I got it in reverse..  
dozingoff.gif


So you have to exchange the IIas and IIbs in what I said to understand what the hell I was talking about.. lol  :D

In any case if you guys don't stay too far from failure my point is somewhat irrelevant. I think however that with the "standard" cluster HST, there might be a problem in that regard, because they really stay too far from failure from what I recall.
 
Sorry kind of in a hurry
[b said:
Quote[/b] ]I believe he's speaking of the style where work is kept constant and you do whatever rep/set combo you need to reach it. So if you're working with your three rep max and you need to hit 20 reps, you'd do seven sets.
Ahh so this is very similar to what i did last cycle where you increase the amount of sets you do every rep range. I was unaware at the time that this is what it was called, I do do that often. Expecial with mainly compound routines. I'll have to read this post later.
 
[b said:
Quote[/b] (Reven @ April 13 2005,11:53)]Ahh so this is very  similar to what i did last cycle where you increase the amount of sets you do every rep range.  I was unaware at the time that this is what it was called, I do do that often.  Expecial with mainly compound routines.  I'll have to read this post later.
You do increase the sets, but only to a point. It's not just a matter of arbitrarily increasing sets. The goal is to keep total work, or volume, constant. So you set a total rep range for the whole cycle and do however many sets it takes to hit that. Say you pick 30 reps for the total, you'd do two sets of 15s, three sets of 10s, and six sets of 5s. The total work done in each microcycle is then 30 reps.

The problem with this method is that some people pick a range that's so high they can burn out from too much work, or the weights they're using to allow them to actually complete the total work in each microcycle are either too low so you don't get an effective weight increase across the whole cycle, or they're too high and they end up having to do 10 sets of 3 or sometimes even some 'sets' of one rep work, just to hit the total volume goal.

You have to pick a reasonable number is all I think there is to it, and one that allows you to use your five rep max for at least one or two sets preferably, which should give sufficient time under tension for the load to be effective at causing trauma. As for the total reps you should choose if you want to use this approach, it's an individual thing. I'd pick a lower number like 20 total reps for each microcycle because for the last couple of months I seem to be burning out easier than I used to. Some people may be able to go higher because their CNS is just more resistant to burn out, or they may be on steroids.

In fact, thinking about this last night I was considering the idea that this would be an interesting approach to training while on steroids. Incorporating a two week steroid cycle into an HST cycle during the heavier work with a number like 30 or 40 for total reps might be an effective approach. High volume, high weight, well tracked through the cycle to allow for a drop in volume during PCT.
 
wow.gif
8-->
[b said:
Quote[/b] (xahrx @ April 14 2005,4
wow.gif
8)]
Incorporating a two week steroid cycle into an HST cycle during the heavier work with a number like 30 or 40 for total reps might be an effective approach.  High volume, high weight, well tracked through the cycle to allow for a drop in volume during PCT.
sorry for stupid question
we are talking about reps per exercise
or per bodypart ?
 
[b said:
Quote[/b] (ZMT @ April 14 2005,12:21)]
[b said:
Quote[/b] (xahrx @ April 14 2005,4<!--emo&amp;
wow.gif
)]
Incorporating a two week steroid cycle into an HST cycle during the heavier work with a number like 30 or 40 for total reps might be an effective approach.  High volume, high weight, well tracked through the cycle to allow for a drop in volume during PCT.
sorry for stupid question
we are talking about reps per exercise
or per bodypart ?
Per exercise.
 
yshemesh brought this up in the &quot;Trying to understand DOMS and HST&quot; and since it is directly related to this conversation, I will repost it here.

[b said:
Quote[/b] ]i want to put another issue on the table, that has something to do with this intensity/failure. the new wave on the board of clustering and stopping the set when you start slowing down, anything to avoid fatigue. i tried it for a few weeks.

first, i'd think it's much less helpful for added strength benefits, correct ? ( yeah i know it's HST, but still )
when i stopped trying to avoid fatigue so much, i realized i could lift much more than i was. once, in the middle of a set, i was thinking, let's see where i can take this. the weight started to slow down at 5, but i kept pushing and i got 10 !!
and yeah i was still able to keep up with frequency.

i'm NOT saying clustering doesn't work. just that it promotes wussiness !!!!!!!!!! if not done correctly.

1. It's not new wave to stop the set when the rep speed slows down, this is in the HST FAQ &quot;rep speed&quot;. Also using a rep count has been talked about before, way back.
2. Clustering reps does not keep you anymore distant from failure than does traditional HST Rep/Set practices.
3. Clustering actually allows greater RM to be done, since you are more willing to work with fewer consecutive reps during your work weight.

Maybe someone can explain to me why they think Clustering, BTW I prefer the term &quot;working to a rep count&quot; instead of Clustering, keeps you distant from failure.

As Biz and I have mentioned, it's not that we take the 15 RM cycle and do 4 sets of 5, or the 10 RM and do 5 sets of 4, this is ludicrous and wouldn't keep within HST principles.

For example, again, let's say you do 3 sets during your 5's, your first set let's say you hit all 5, then the second only 4, and on third you get only 3, now most would say good enough that's it, but with working to a rep count, I would then do at least 8 more reps, with the same weight. Those 8 additional reps might come out as another set of 3, then 3, then 2, because I do not hit true concentric failure.

Make sense :)
 
What does clustering do to your rep maxes. In other words, my incline bench 5 rep max is 235 which I can do for 3 sets of 5 - under normal HST. My second and third sets are real grind it out sets where on a good day I might be able to get 6 reps and others I barely get 5(I only work this close to total failure at the end of the 2nd week of 5's).
With clustering, do I up my max to 240 or higher? I can probably get it on the 1st set but each set after that I'm sure I would not get 5 reps
OR
Do I stay at 235 and after my 1st set, stop working so close to failure and just do more sets until I get my target reps in?
Thanks,
Firm
 
Back
Top