Total Rep Volume and Rep Ranges

Shouldn't you be training at 12-14reps of your 1RM, or even using negatives as the primary basis rather than 30-60reps if you're using this study as your guide ... ?
 
"Overall, moderate volumes (≈30–60 repetitions per session for DER training) appear to yield the largest responses." An exception to this is with very high loads (90% 1RM or 120% to 230% 1RM with eccentrics) where high rates of growth have been shown with volumes as low as 12-14 repetitions per session. To date, relatively few studies have directly compared the effects of different volumes of work on the hypertrophic response as measured by scanning methodology." The paucity of data clearly warrants further research.
Click to expand...

Preceded by ...

Results
No relationship could be found between frequency of training and the increase per day in muscle cross sectional area. When the intensity was plotted against the rate of increase, a weak tendency was found for the rate to increase with increasing intensity. The highest rates of increase tended to occur around 75% of 1RM. When volume was plotted against the rate of increase, greater gains in muscle mass were seen initially with increasing volume while there were diminishing returns as the volume increased further. The highest rates of increase tended to occur with 30-60 repetitions per session.
Click to expand...


But then when I read the conclusion summary it says:

For the total volume or duration of activity, the results suggest a dose-response curve characterised by an increase in the rate of growth in the initial part of the curve, which is followed by the region of peak rate of increase, which in turn is followed by a plateau or even a decline. It is recognised that the conclusions drawn in this paper mainly concern relatively short-term training in previously untrained subjects and that in highly trained subjects or for training studies extending for several months, the dose-response trends and the hypertrophic effects of different modes and types of strength training may be very different.
Click to expand...



All this says to me is that lighter loads need more repetitions to induce hypertrophy and that heavier weights induce more hypertrophy.


And then there's this:

Training Implications and Recommendations: For your typical "dynamic external resistance", recommendations are given for "Moderate load slow-speed training", "Conventional hypertrophy training", and "Eccentric (ecc) overload training". These three modes are denoted as suitable for beginners, novice-well trained, and advanced-elite, respectively. For the "Conventional hypertrophy training" for the novice to the well trained, they recommend an 8-10RM load (75-80% 1RM), with 8-10 reps to failure or near failure, 1-3 sets per exercise, progression from 1–2 to 3–6 sets total per muscle group, moderate velocity (1-2 seconds for each CON and ECC), 60-180 seconds rest between sets, and 2-3 sessions per muscle group per week
Click to expand...

Which at worst appears contradictory to much of the information in their own study, or at best reads as a highly speculative derivative of the results.

Consider comparing the low and high points of their recommendations; 10RM load, 10 reps per set, 1 set per muscle group and twice per week. and then 8RM, 8 reps, 6 sets per muscle group, three times per week.

That's an extraordinary difference in workload.

Their own study says that 30-60reps produced the most hypertrophy, except for 90% 1RM and 120-230% eccentrics, so why not use the result which actually produced the most hypertrophy ... ? Granted this isn't the actual study, and just a cut&paste of the most relevant paragraphs but still. It's disconcerting that they then make this statement
You often hear statements like "eccentric training produces the greatest muscle hypertrophy". "This review demonstrates that given sufficient frequency, intensity and duration of work, all three types of muscle actions can induce significant hypertrophy at impressive rates and that at present, there is insufficient evidence for the superiority of any mode and/or type of muscle action over other modes and types of training in this regard." In fact, the data suggest that pure eccentric training is inferior to both concentric and eccentric+concentric training, though this is still a subject of debate rather than a scientific certainty.
Click to expand...
- so which is it?


Furthermore, the recommendations they have appear to be completely at odds with the training methods used by just about anyone who naturally (without chemical assistance) puts on significant muscle mass, including a significant # of lifters on this site.




And I guess the last issue I have with this study, beyond ancedotal experience (mine and reported by others here, elsewhere) is that it's still just one study and somewhat at odds with other studies. So which do you/we follow and how does one determine where the weight of authority falls?
 
In the example HST routine Bryan has 2 exercises for major muscle groups, and usually 1 or 2 sets. In his example, you would have 3 sets of 10 total for chest, 3x/week. So that would be a total weekly volume of 90 reps for chest.

The part of the basic HST program that I don't agree with, is the volue decreasing over a cycle. Doing 3 sets of 15s is a lot more volume than doing 3 sets of 5. Of course, since the load increases, this compensates some for the decreased volume.

However, the way most experienced HSTers go about it is to try maintain the volume throughout the cycle, so that the progressive loading is also a progressive workload. For example keeping total reps per body part the same, so 2x15, 3x10 & 6x5 during the cycle keeps total reps for body part at 30. I only do one exercise per muscle group generally, so I do all my sets in one exercise. A person doing 2 exercises for a muscle group each session would only need to do 1x15, 1 or 2x10 and 3x5 per exercise to get the same total volume for that muscle group.

Make sense?
 
Interesting.
I mentioned before that I am not sure how to compare rep ranges.
You can compare total reps,efficient reps and fatigue and tension.

In my HLM cycles I used the volumes of 2x15,3x10 and 3x5.
So I wonder were I should start.
 
Sci said:
In the example HST routine Bryan has 2 exercises for major muscle groups, and usually 1 or 2 sets. In his example, you would have 3 sets of 10 total for chest, 3x/week. So that would be a total weekly volume of 90 reps for chest.

The part of the basic HST program that I don't agree with, is the volue decreasing over a cycle. Doing 3 sets of 15s is a lot more volume than doing 3 sets of 5. Of course, since the load increases, this compensates some for the decreased volume.

However, the way most experienced HSTers go about it is to try maintain the volume throughout the cycle, so that the progressive loading is also a progressive workload. For example keeping total reps per body part the same, so 2x15, 3x10 & 6x5 during the cycle keeps total reps for body part at 30. I only do one exercise per muscle group generally, so I do all my sets in one exercise. A person doing 2 exercises for a muscle group each session would only need to do 1x15, 1 or 2x10 and 3x5 per exercise to get the same total volume for that muscle group.

Make sense?
Click to expand...

Got cha, wasn't aware it was a meta-analysis. It's a lot more palatable now :)


I'm still unconvinced that # of reps is as important as total workload but I might see if I can't get an actual copy of the meta analysis regardless. Speaking from my own anecdotes, I personally think 5 reps is at the top end of best hypertrophic response, and in general that clustering is superior by far to a set-reps matrix..

And back to 6x5 - a few things.

1. Why 6x5, why not 8x5 ala is 30 reps an arbitrary choice over 40 reps, 45, 35 etc ... ?

2. I still think gentleman1981 should be starting w/lower volume for the heavy rep range. He has a 'history' of poor recovery/fatigue/something at work that stops him progressing.
 
correct. but perhaos i do too less volume to progress good. but i doubt that-otherwise i would not build uo fatigue so fast durring a cycle and start loosing reps.

I think I will shoot for the 2 sets per exercise recommondation. That seems a good place to start.
 
Ah one more thing:

I have also seen that some trainees do the rep ranges in one week:
15 monday 10 wednesday 5 friday.

Do you ALex have some experiences with it? I think it depends how good your recovery ability is:
If you can really handle it well you might do the nomral 15/10/5 cycle without zig zagging.
If recovery ability is average you might do the 15/10/5 cycle but with zig zag.
If recovery is really bad you might zig zag in one week and do the 15/10/5 each week for 6 weeks but with the same load increasing set up like a normal HST cycle.

Perhaps because of my bad recovery the weekly 15/10/5 would be optionable.
I made the experience on 5x5 programms that when 5x5 got really tough and switching to 3x3 that I couldn´t increase the weight anymore and burned out.. So perhaps some weekly zig zagging regarding weight would suit me well.

What do you think?
 
15 10 5 results in more fatigue then the classic HST setup. Especially the week you do your 15RMs on Monday, 10RMs on Weds and 5RMs on Friday.
 
thegentleman1981 said:
Ah one more thing:

I have also seen that some trainees do the rep ranges in one week:
15 monday 10 wednesday 5 friday.

Do you ALex have some experiences with it? I think it depends how good your recovery ability is:
If you can really handle it well you might do the nomral 15/10/5 cycle without zig zagging.
If recovery ability is average you might do the 15/10/5 cycle but with zig zag.
If recovery is really bad you might zig zag in one week and do the 15/10/5 each week for 6 weeks but with the same load increasing set up like a normal HST cycle.

Perhaps because of my bad recovery the weekly 15/10/5 would be optionable.
I made the experience on 5x5 programms that when 5x5 got really tough and switching to 3x3 that I couldn´t increase the weight anymore and burned out.. So perhaps some weekly zig zagging regarding weight would suit me well.

What do you think?
Click to expand...

15-10-5 per week seems to contradict the principle of progressive load (the 15s and 10s serve no purpose in this context, for hypertrophy), and frankly I can't see any difference to a HML scheme.


And I'll repeat again - it really sounds like you aren't eating enough.
 
AlexAustralia said:
15-10-5 per week seems to contradict the principle of progressive load (the 15s and 10s serve no purpose in this context, for hypertrophy), and frankly I can't see any difference to a HML scheme.


And I'll repeat again - it really sounds like you aren't eating enough.
Click to expand...

Thank you Alex. Well but zig zagging also does contradict the principle overload doesn´t it?

Regarding eating: I am currently at 186cm 93.5 kg heavy and 23%BF. I don´t starve;)
 
Zig-zagging when one rep range RM crosses into the lower threshold of the next rep range is not a problem, as the load is continuing to progress.

However doing your 15s (example) 75kgs on Monday, and then 100kgs as part of your 5s on Friday completely invalidates the de-conditioning (SD) that 'primed' the muscle for hypertrophy in response to the 15s and 10s.

You're essentially leap-frogging the hypertrophic response you would have had to the 15s if you expose the muscle to 5's rep-range at the same time.


Simply put, there's just no reason to do it.



Re: diet - fair enough, maybe it's a case of needing more protein. Sleep, stimulants, suppressants, hydration - any of these could be impacting on your fatigue & recovery.
 
Ok understand the zig zag issue know.

Of course diet can always be optimated but I really doubt that this is the problem. I also sleep 10 hours per night.

I really think its the CNS. I can do 10 or more reps with my 85%of 1rpm-so my CNS gets really drained when the weight gets heavy-so I think your idea with 2 sets is a good point.

Cool. So much good info. How would you handle the last week of each rep range cycle? I mean when I reach my 15rpm for example for 2 sets. Lets say i get the first one and in the second only 10. Should I wait and do the other 5 reps after some seconds of rest? Or should I avoid "failure" and repping out and do myo reps instead?

And what if I reach my 15rpm but can´t do it? Freak out?

Some guys also suggest to just increase each NEW hst cycle (after SD) by 5kg or so. But isn´it better to retest the new 15/10/5 maxima? Everything else is guess work and too much or too less.

Don´t want to overcomplicate this though.
 
Last edited:
At the end of your cycle, retest all of your maxes. Realistically you can just re-test the 5's, and do that first. However if you like, test your 10RM and 15RM after that. You're months away from that point though.

Wait and do the last 5 reps. Don't train to failure.
 
thank you alex again for your time and so fast reply.
ok so for example when i crank out the 15 reps on the last week and i do the second set: should I terminate it before failure and add the last reps after a break? Or when the first set was really all out quit the second set?

I just want to make the first cycle really right,
 
Just do the 15 reps, and if you're having a bad day, and can only manage (for example) 13 reps and 12 reps, then jot those down in your log and leave it be. You make up the last 5 (2+3) reps afterward if you like, but again - do not train to failure. Don't reschedule an extra session or anything like that.
 
Ok Alex. I think blade has written sth about stopping when rep speed slows down significantly. I can take this as a guideline.
Without stealing too much time of yours-I ram really thankfull for your input and time you spend on me-how important is is to make the total rep volume for each day?
 
thegentleman1981 said:
Ok Alex. I think blade has written sth about stopping when rep speed slows down significantly. I can take this as a guideline.
Without stealing too much time of yours-I ram really thankfull for your input and time you spend on me-how important is is to make the total rep volume for each day?
Click to expand...

On a scale of 1-10, it's probably about a 6 or 7 for any particular day, and a 9 or so if you were to consider the whole cycle length. i.e. a standard cycle has 24 sessions (6 sessions per rep range, 4 rep ranges). You would want to meet the total rep volume on ~ 21-22 of them at least. But it's not a big deal if you fall a rep or two short on a day here, a day there. We're only talking about one specific exercise on one specific day.


Stop stressing about it, just get down and do the work, the rest will come.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top