Total Rep Volume and Rep Ranges

Discussion in 'Hypertrophy-Specific Training (HST)' started by thegentleman1981, Oct 23, 2012.

  1. dempsey

    dempsey Member

    I'd repeat the heavier weights.

    15s 45/50/55/60/65/65
    10s: 55/60/65/70/75/75
    5s: 70/70/75/75/80/80

    Although I'm surprised that your 10rm and 5rm are only 5lbs apart?
  2. thegentleman1981

    thegentleman1981 New Member

    Thanks dempsey,sounds good.
    The RBE lasts longer the higher the weight. So that makes perfect sense.

    10RM to 5RM: keep in mind its 5KG NOT LBS.
  3. thegentleman1981

    thegentleman1981 New Member

    Tommorow will be my first session. I am excited.

    Just for example I post my finally bench cycle. The other exercises are done the same:

    15´s: 50,55,55,60,60,65
    10´s: 55,60,65,65,70,75

    I think of adding back off sets what alex suggested in the 5´s. Perhaps 80%of the weight used and repping out till it burns or rep speed slows down. Think thats sound.

    Also I will see If a lenghten the 5´s. If possible yes, but I think it would be wiser to plan a cycle of 2´s or 3´s afterwards and zig zag again like in the ranges before. Still overreaching will be a point for sure when I train at my 5RPM more sessions in row. But first lets concentrate on the 15´s and 10´s.

    My measure will be LBM on my BF scale. I measured yesterday in the morning after toilet and will do again when the cycle is over.
    I am not a fan of taking measurements,because they can vary depended of what you have eaten,the water and salt content. On the scale I can calculate my BF and LBM more accurately (although not perfect). But its a tendency.

    The second measure will be "strength" gains when retesting my maxes after the cycle.
    I know that HST is not strength specific regarding the 1rpm.
    But a bigger muscle results in an increase in sarcomer or sarcpoplasmatic elements which are linked to a better performance in the tested rep ranges.

    I am excited and will update this thread. Not each session but at least after the cycle of 15,10 and 5´s and of course the results.

    I appreciate the number of views on this thread. I hope everyone can learn from this.

    Thank you again AlexAustralia and Totentanz for the support.

    Last edited: Dec 3, 2012
  4. Sci

    Sci Well-Known Member

    start a training log, with before and after pics preferably.
  5. thegentleman1981

    thegentleman1981 New Member

    Thanks Sci.
    For a training log I post to unregulary. So I want to share my impressions in this thread.

    Today was the first days of 15´s.

    Like its often written-its really hard. Especially the second set.
    I wanted to take 1 min rest periods but lenghten them to 2-3min. otherwise I would have gotten trouble on the second set. The ramp up of the 5´s will be heaven.
    Hardest was benching-but the bench was always a troublepoint in my training. Dumbbell press, row and leg curl went the most easiest.
    I will see how long I keep the second set but i plan to keep it the whole 15´s cycle.
    In the worst case I will not be able to complete all 15´s in the second set. Think thats not a problem though as long as the weight goes up.
    Only still afraid of overreaching-so I will have a great dinner tonight.
  6. T-man

    T-man New Member

    If you can't get the 15 reps without stopping, do myo-reps to get them all.
  7. Totentanz

    Totentanz Super Moderator Staff Member

    If you have to rest more between sets, that is fine. Who cares if you finish the second set on 15s. It doesn't really matter. I only do two sets on a few lifts when doing 15s and just do one set on everything else, otherwise I'm ready to puke by the end of the workout.
  8. thegentleman1981

    thegentleman1981 New Member

    Thank you for the answers guys.
    I think the second set might be good in getting more volume in. If the load is suffcient (who knows anyway) then more volume might be a andvantage for growth.
    Even if the second set is terminated before 15 reps,the last reps are still effective in the sense of Blade.

    So I think more sets have their value. Be it more work overall or regarding effective reps.
    But of course most important is the load increase over the cycle.

    Next session will be on friday.
    Thank you for the interest.
  9. HST_Rihad

    HST_Rihad Active Member

    Hi, Alex, I guess that's a little more devastating than the 3 straight sets of 5's. I'm not even doing 3 sets, but 2. Can you do that cluster thing 3 times a week when on 5's? How much do you rest after each mini-set? Looks like myo-reps. Do you do that for bench press too? Then how do you consider the effort required to rack the bar on and off each time, or do you use a spotter to assist you?
  10. Jester

    Jester Well-Known Member

    Please don't take offense from my repetition, but you are spending far too much energy focusing on the minutiae, the details that don't matter for someone at your stage of lifting. You've found a strong program and you've only just done the first workout of a program that has 24 per cycle. Stop trying to plan your exercise down to the last breath. Move the weight, eat the food, the size will come.

    Myo-reps are typically done around the 8-10RM load range. Cluster reps can be done at any rep range/or load range, if you prefer to think of it that way. The heavier the weight you use, the more time you'll need between clusters. I currently use clustering for my chins, I do somewhere in the space of 20-25 reps, and currently I'm working at what is around my 5RM (I've been pushing it up and up over the last couple of months). For that weight, I probably take about 3mins between clusters, so doing chins take me around 25-30mins. It sounds like a lot of time but it's working magnificently for me, and no matter how you separate the reps (into clusters, sets, myo-reps, whatever) when you are working at 5RM range, you HAVE to rest in between exertions. I do that load of volume because I'm fairly well trained, I like feeling exhausted and it keeps me hungry, carb friendly and builds some measure of endurance.

    Clustering is merely removing the (somewhat arbitrary) structure of a set-rep matrix and placing the focus upon 'work done'. It could be described as 'doing as many reps as you can, one shy of failure, in as many sets as it takes to complete a rep target for the given load'. Presently, I'm up to adding 31.5kgs to my BW (~115kgs) for my chins, there's no way I can do a 5x5 for that. +31.5kgs is my 5RM, maybe my 2x5RM, it's not my 5x5RM. But I still get ~20-25 reps done with it in my session, it's just done in clusters rather than 'sets'. I'm progressing much more thoroughly than I have using a set-rep matrix.

    The downside of clustering is that if you want to maintain a rep target across rep-ranges (ala across lighter and heavier weights), be prepared to spend an hour working out for two exercises once you get heavy. I'm not attempting to add size to my chest at present, were I to do so, I would almost certainly use clusters at a load in the 2-5RM range. Doing that and chins would take me an hour. Given that I find isolation exercises to be near-ineffective beyond a metabolic effect (joints, glycogen storage - ala high rep work), that wouldn't bother me in the slightest.

    It's all about progression as well. For someone in the 3rd or 4th cycle, a rep target of 20-25reps might be too high. 12-15 reps is still highly likely to produce significant growth at that point. I've merely added volume because I've spent over a decade lifting now and I find that;

    a) More reps at a heavier weight makes me stronger, and clustering produces less fatigue than sets-reps

    b) The stronger I get, the bigger I get (over time)
    Totentanz likes this.
  11. HST_Rihad

    HST_Rihad Active Member

    Thanks, a great posting. But don't you think that you're missing the last effective repetition or two each round? I mean, given a 5RM weight that you've decided to cluster, you likely go 3-3-3-... wouldn't 4 reps be more effective size-wise?
  12. Jester

    Jester Well-Known Member

    The # of reps per cluster isn't planned or pre-determined, it's whatever I can actually do pre-failure. Doing 4 reps isn't more effective than doing 3 reps in a cluster, I'm looking at accomplishing a certain # of reps in total. Some days I get them done 5-5-5-4-4 (for example), other days I'm feeling crap and I might need 5-4-4-3-3-3-3 (again, for example).

    If I can get 4 reps done then I do it. If I don't quite have it and I need 3 clusters to cover what I could do in 2 clusters a few days before, so be it.
  13. thegentleman1981

    thegentleman1981 New Member

    Thanks alex. Tommorow or saturday will be the next session.

    Till the post!
  14. HST_Rihad

    HST_Rihad Active Member

    But isn't this what all seasoned natural lifters eventually end up doing? I mean, decreasing the frequency of loading a MG for the sake of increasing the per-session volume? I'm not sure if there's any difference between doing 2 sets 3 times a week, and doing 3 sets 2 times a week. Total weekly volume stays the same. It's the immediate load-response that's different. Bryan in his works says it is better to spread the volume evenly over a week. Following his words, it would be better to pick 2 sets 3 times a week, than 3 sets 2 times a week. However, thegentelman1981 has to train twice a week, so why not retain the weekly volume by doing 3 sets?

    AlexAustralia, you said that for your chin-ups you use clustering or, in other words, pick your 5RM load and do sets one shy of failure to reach a rep target of 20-25. That's actually quite a bit of volume at that load. Do you feel like you need to drop the frequency with that, or can you do that 3 times a week?
    Last edited: Dec 7, 2012
  15. thegentleman1981

    thegentleman1981 New Member

    I also think that there is a minimum threshold of weight and volume you need to reach for a session to create an effective bout.
    Blade has onced replied in a post that there is a difference if you devide your work on one day or more days.

    I think also advanced can hold a higher frequency but then the cycle would equal more a concentrated overreaching cycle if volume and weight is not modulated (HLM)
    I know Alex is not in favour of this HLM approach but fleck&kraemer showed the advantages compared to linear loading.
    Also Blade used a DUP routine with clients.
    So more ways to skin the cat
  16. Totentanz

    Totentanz Super Moderator Staff Member

    Are we talking about seasoned lifters here? How much do you guys squat, bench or deadlift in comparison to your bodyweight? I'm not asking to be a jerk, I'm saying that your relative strength compared to bodyweight is typically a good way to judge "training age."

    Alex's point, pretty sure, is that if you aren't a seasoned lifter, why are you worrying about what seasoned lifters are doing?

    Why over complicate things when people who are relatively early in their "training age" still can grow from something much simpler?
    Last edited: Dec 7, 2012
  17. HST_Rihad

    HST_Rihad Active Member

    Totentanz, that's because some people keep telling me that I will see much better results by increasing volume and dropping frequency to 2/wk.
    So I thought I'd ask to clarify that part.
  18. Totentanz

    Totentanz Super Moderator Staff Member

    Do you really think that you can improve your results beyond what is normally possible for someone early in their training age? There is a point of diminishing returns where the extra work is doing little to nothing to add to your results.

    So again... my point... doing less can be better. In fact, more volume, etc, burns more calories, puts more stress on your body, can hurt your immune system, sleep patterns, etc, which means it can actually compromise gains if you push volume too far. So why push it? If you are making gains, why push further when what you are doing is working?

    I guess for me it just doesn't make sense when something is working to say "well, this is working, so I better change what I am doing." When something is working for me, I stick with it until it doesn't work anymore and only then do I start making adjustments.
  19. HST_Rihad

    HST_Rihad Active Member

    "well, this is working, so I better change what I am doing." - LOL that was funny )) You see, I spent a year (don't ask me why) not growing in size or strength because I did heavy (for me) squats, bench, deads 3 times a week, not counting rows etc.. Apparently CNS fatigue was considerable so my whole body stopped responding to loads as a measure to protect itself. That was when I started hearing that advice. After I finally got rid of that self-inflicted crap and switched to the vanilla HST program did I start making progress again. Now it IS working with as much as (or as little as) 2 working sets irrespective of rep range.
  20. T-man

    T-man New Member

    I'm wondering if a lot of us (Tot excluded) continue to think that more is better? That more intensity, more volume, and more exercises must mean better results faster and forgetting that growth takes place on recovery days. I know I have a hard time with it.

Share This Page