interesting thread

Well...if I look at this is an simple mans eyes and not a labcoat eyes...here is how I see it.

30-60 reps per training session equals a medien rep range of 45 per training session if you go on the average spread between high and low study of rep range.

The only disadvantage that I could see with 20 or 30 reps is the quote "right now effect" that Mikey has spoken about in the past...i tend to agree with that theory.

So we know LOAD is also a huge factor...so what I derived from looking at LOAD and HST is this.

HST does not get HEAVY until the 5's...for most people.

So for example you don't get as much MU recruitment from the 15's or 10's at all.

Possibly you don't get MAX MU recruitment until last week of 10's and then early 5's.

So if we know you don't get as much MU recruitment until the last 4 to 5 weeks of HST then we know we are lacking somewhere and that would be in Metabolic work.

This is were I would think the study is the greatest and makes since.

I think there has to be some form of metabolic work...althought Max-stim shows that maybe there doesn't have to be?

So what I derive from this study is this...if you are not using 75 to 85% of your 1 rep max considerably most of the time then you better have sufficient TUT or reps to feel the gap. This is were I would think 45 reps per training session would be ideal..(don't know its seems high too though).

But of course when you start getting very heavy you can't go that high with reps...but (its ok) from my understanding b/c LOAD is much higher.

IT kind of reminds me of WATERBURY'S recommendations. ( I know he is not popular here...but he recommends the 24 to 50 reps protocal per full body routine)

Basically saying 24 reps are heavy weights 50 reps are lighter reps...(in a nutshell).

Great discussion...I would love to see Bryan jump out of the cave and pop in on this one.
 
joe muscle
(quote)
So we know LOAD is also a huge factor...so what I derived from looking at LOAD and HST is this.

HST does not get HEAVY until the 5's...for most people.

So for example you don't get as much MU recruitment from the 15's or 10's at all.

Possibly you don't get MAX MU recruitment until last week of 10's and then early 5's.

if you read this bit it explains that in the submax range you can either rep out "which i do in the 15s" or as dan has recomended lift quicker.




(quote)
On the other hand, when using submaximal resistance, the size principle dictates that motor unit recruitment and firing rates are probably far from maximal until the muscle is near fatigue or unless the repetitions are performed with the intention to execute the movement very quickly.
 
<div>
(Fausto @ Jun. 15 2007,13:16)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE"> <div></div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">Intensity: &quot;The studies reviewed in this article show that there is a remarkably wide range of intensities that may produce hypertrophy. Still, there seems to be some relationship between the load (or torque) and the rate of increase in CSA.&quot; This is not linear, but seemed to peak around 75%. &quot;Thus, the results of this review support the typical recommendations with intensity levels of 70–85% of maximum when training for muscle hypertrophy, but also show that marked hypertrophy is possible at both higher and lower loads.&quot;</div>

I see...Morgoth...I was kinda busy and I only remembered the comments vaguely when I responded, and I was responding to Sci's comments, anyway all things considered it is a fairly comprehensive study IMO.
wink.gif
</div>
I wasn`t being a dick. I simply pointed out that the study is well worth reading in its entirety, as its something actually well put together, unlike some stuff that has zilch in common with reality;).

And among the about one hundred per day:I want to grow big with no fat in 2 days, critique my routine threads that are swamping the board lately, this one is genuinely valuable...so ramp up the engines guys, and someone please drag Bryan here from Podfitness
smile.gif
)
 
<div>
(faz @ Jun. 14 2007,22:06)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">joe muscle
(quote)
So we know LOAD is also a huge factor...so what I derived from looking at LOAD and HST is this.

HST does not get HEAVY until the 5's...for most people.

So for example you don't get as much MU recruitment from the 15's or 10's at all.

Possibly you don't get MAX MU recruitment until last week of 10's and then early 5's.

if you read this bit it explains that in the submax range you can either rep out &quot;which i do in the 15s&quot; or as dan has recomended lift quicker.




(quote)
On the other hand, when using submaximal resistance, the size principle dictates that motor unit recruitment and firing rates are probably far from maximal until the muscle is near fatigue or unless the repetitions are performed with the intention to execute the movement very quickly.</div>
Right...if I am understanding you correctly it just leans toward our view that if you are not using your 6 to 8 rep max then basically anything above that you have to hit failure or (near failure to get max MU).

Given we are talking about this and supposedly SD if it works correctly changes all of this...which SD in my opinon is a topic that is still very unclear looking at the research.

The only advantage to higher reps IMO is the right now effect.

I mean most guys here train for 30 reps...but honestly...and we are being HONEST...the FAQ and HST says in the literature that 1 set is sufficient you can do 2 if you like. So if we followed it by the guidelines compeletly after warming up we might would be doing 10 reps per muscle group or 30 a week.

Now I am a BIG HST advocate...its changed my training life and views...but there is no way I believe that low of volume will do it for me?

Even the flow chart and graph that Dan posted earlier this year leaned more towards studies show multiple sets and reps.

The problem with that is full body training...you just cant train every muscle group 3 times a week at 40 to 50 reps...you will overtrain.

Hence why Bryan and even told me before in the past that for a veteran lifter like myself and others a upper lower split is idle for more volume and recovery...(however I just don't have time for that)

I love hst 3 days a week b/c it works so well for family and career for me but the more research I read I think twice a week is just as good and maybe even better for some who like the more volume.

Great discussion keep it coming...
 
when he was talking about 1 set ,that was to faliure if im not mistaken,so if you reach faliure there is no point in going any further because all fibres are engaged.

also about doing 30 reps etc are you counting warn up sets drop sets etc its all work.
 
I understand 30 reps to be 30 work reps???

For example I did 30 reps yesterday on hammerstrength wide chest.

I sat down put a 45 pound plate on each side and did one set of 10 reps...real easy.

Did another set of about 5 to 7 reps real easy...and then one more set of 5 reps real easy to make sure my joints were loosened up.

I then put 3, 45 pound plates on each side and did 3 sets of 10 reps...for 30 work reps.

That how I have always understood it...correct or incorrect???
 
From Dans site...i couldn't get the graphs to post. Very intersting to say the least!

Dan I hope you don't mind???

Posted: Fri Mar 02, 2007 9:07 pm    [b]Post subject: New Review on Training [/b]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sports Med. 2007;37(3):225-64.

The influence of frequency, intensity, volume and mode of strength training on whole muscle cross-sectional area in humans.

Wernbom M, Augustsson J, Thomee R.

Lundberg Laboratory for Human Muscle Function and Movement Analysis, Department of Orthopaedics, Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Goteborg University, Goteborg, Sweden.

Strength training is an important component in sports training and rehabilitation. Quantification of the dose-response relationships between training variables and the outcome is fundamental for the proper prescription of resistance training. The purpose of this comprehensive review was to identify dose-response relationships for the development of muscle hypertrophy by calculating the magnitudes and rates of increases in muscle cross-sectional area induced by varying levels of frequency, intensity and volume, as well as by different modes of strength training.Computer searches in the databases MEDLINE, SportDiscus(®) and CINAHL(®) were performed as well as hand searches of relevant journals, books and reference lists. The analysis was limited to the quadriceps femoris and the elbow flexors, since these were the only muscle groups that allowed for evaluations of dose-response trends. The modes of strength training were classified as dynamic external resistance (including free weights and weight machines), accommodating resistance (e.g. isokinetic and semi-isokinetic devices) and isometric resistance. The subcategories related to the types of muscle actions used. The results demonstrate that given sufficient frequency, intensity and volume of work, all three types of muscle actions can induce significant hypertrophy at an impressive rate 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. Tentative dose-response relationships for each variable are outlined, based on the available evidence, and interactions between variables are discussed. In addition, recommendations for training and suggestions for further research are given.

Excerpts From the Discussion

Frequency

Quote:
For quadriceps training with dynamic external resistance, the largest rate of gain in CSA (0.55% per day) was noted in the study[84] with the greatest training frequency (12 sessions per week). However, it should be noted that (i) this study lasted for only 2 weeks; (ii) the intensity was 20% of 1RM; and (iii) the training was performed in combination with partial vascular occlusion. Therefore, the results from this study should be viewed with caution when considering the application of extremely high frequencies in more conventional training. Furthermore, it is interesting to note that there was no training difference in the mean rates of increase in CSA between two and three sessions per week for DER.

For elbow flexor training with dynamic external resistance, the greatest rate of increase in CSA (0.59% per day; 17.7% total increase in CSA) was observed in a study[128] with a frequency of four times a week. The second, third, fourth highest increase in CSA rates noted were 0.42%, 0.38% and 0.32% per day, respectively. These three studies[125,126,132] used a frequency of three times per week. However, with the exception of these three studies, the average values suggest that there is relatively little difference between training the elbow flexors two or three times per week, in terms of the rate of increase in CSA (0.18% per day for both frequencies).

The results of Vikne et al.[79] and Wirth et al.[134] are remarkably similar despite using different muscle groups and training modes. In both reports, two and three sessions per week yielded almost twice the
increase in muscle CSAwhen compared with one session, with no apparent further advantage for three versus two sessions.


Intensity

Quote:
Thus, the results of this review support the typical recommendations with intensity levels of 70–85% of maximum when training for muscle hypertrophy, but also show that marked hypertrophy is possible at both higher and lower loads.


Volume

Quote:
That said, figure 11, for the total repetitions for DER training of the elbow flexors, suggests a dose-response curve where greater gains in muscle muscle thickness were demonstrated with increasing volume (or duration) of work, but with diminishing returns as the volume increases further. Overall, moderate volumes (&amp;#8776;30–60 repetitions per session for DER training) appear to yield the largest responses.


Rest Naturally very interesting to me and although they go rather deeper than what I am posting here they show some very interesting thoughts

Quote:
Upon closer examination, it appears that when maximal or near-maximal efforts are used, it is advantageous to use long periods of rest. This is logical in light of the well known detrimental effects of fatigue on force production and electrical activity in the working muscle. If high levels of force and maximum recruitment of motor units are important
factors in stimulating muscle hypertrophy, it makes sense to use generous rest periods between sets and repetitions of near-maximal to maximal efforts.  
 
<div>
(Joe.Muscle @ Jun. 15 2007,16:53)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">I understand 30 reps to be 30 work reps???

For example I did 30 reps yesterday on hammerstrength wide chest.

I sat down put a 45 pound plate on each side and did one set of 10 reps...real easy.

Did another set of about 5 to 7 reps real easy...and then one more set of 5 reps real easy to make sure my joints were loosened up.

I then put 3,  45 pound plates on each side and did 3 sets of 10 reps...for 30 work reps.

That how I have always understood it...correct or incorrect???</div>
i couldnt say correct or not because im not sure if they meant work sets or all sets in the article,IMO i count all sets.
 
Nobody counts warmup sets, WTF? Yes, joe that's 3 sets you did + a your warm-up which is necessary to get your body ready for the REAL workout.

Yes 3x10 work sets is typically counted as 30 total reps.
 
<div>
(Joe.Muscle @ Jun. 15 2007,12:27)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">From Dans site...i  couldn't get the graphs to post. Very intersting to say the least!

Dan I hope you don't mind???</div>
Why would I mind?

Like I've said and Morgoth has just reiterated, I find this one study to be very valuable and have talked with Mathias on many many occasions and like Morgoth, I see so much more in there than just volume.

Another interesting point I feel I have to bring out in Mathias' behalf is this review only included visible (MRI) changes and did not look at molecular or fiber level CSA changes. In essence it included what most BBrs care about, how big is my muscle gonna get.
 
<div>
(scientific muscle @ Jun. 15 2007,06:30)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">Nobody counts warmup sets, WTF?  Yes, joe that's 3 sets you did + a your warm-up which is necessary to get your body ready for the REAL workout.

Yes 3x10 work sets is typically counted as 30 total reps.</div>
Cool...that how I have always counted it as well!
 
<div>
(scientific muscle @ Jun. 15 2007,23:30)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">Nobody counts warmup sets, WTF?  Yes, joe that's 3 sets you did + a your warm-up which is necessary to get your body ready for the REAL workout.

Yes 3x10 work sets is typically counted as 30 total reps.</div>
i count warm up sets because when i am doing my 5s 3sets,i start out with my 15rm and do 14reps then i use my 10rm and do 9 reps then i do my max 5s and after that i do a drop set with my 15rm,so nearly all my sets including my warm ups are near maximum so i count the total workload.
 
Morgoth

<div></div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">Wasn`t being a dick. I simply pointed out that the study is well worth reading in its entirety, as its something actually well put together, unlike some stuff that has zilch in common with reality</div>

Rightly so...besides I never said you were, I read the whole thing and what Joe posted too, but at the time...between work...I guess my attention span wasn't too great!
laugh.gif
I forgot and ADD
laugh.gif


By the way that is a real cool study that Joe posted. Intersting enough I have just kinda overhauled my programm this way,
lab coat...here I go again:

I was originally doing 3 x week for two weeks as per HST prescription, trying to keep 30 reps by means of supersets...but suddenly I saw the need to drop down to twice p/week...however I decided...since I am dropping the frequency p/week, I am going to increase the mesocycle length.

iow - I now do two workouts p/week, but will be doing each mesocycle for three weeks instead of the normal two.

I am still dabling as to whether I can keep doing supersets..darn...they get real difficult if you know what I mean and three set...essentially means three supersets, hmmmmm.
rock.gif


But if it gets heavy I'll just alternate the second exercise in each superset.

Here they are in this order.

Squats (not supersetted, currently 15's so 2 sets)
Incline bench + Dips (weighted from week 2)
Chins (body weight at this point) + Pendlay rows
Military press + lateral raises
Incline d/b curls + Tricep pushdowns

Intention is to do 1 superset for 15's, 2 for 10's and 3 for 5's.

What do you all think
rock.gif
 
<div></div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">How do you tackle the super-sets?I`ll explain why I`m asking. </div>

Man...I am doing them with minmum rest in between sets, and take the rest after each one, sometimes I have to rest a little extra in between, but that is essentially how I do them.

Now on with the explanation...
laugh.gif
 
<div>
(Fausto @ Jun. 19 2007,16:44)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE"> <div></div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">How do you tackle the super-sets?I`ll explain why I`m asking. </div>

Man...I am doing them with minmum rest in between sets, and take the rest after each one, sometimes I have to rest a little extra in between, but that is essentially how I do them.

Now on with the explanation...
laugh.gif
</div>
I`m asking because even though that`s a trendy way to do supersets, and a good way to achieve fatigue, I`m not sure it`s the most useful for someone like us, who`s going for hypertrophy. Let me explain:you`ll probably run into CardioVascular limitations therefore limiting the ammount of work you can do. What I want to say is that assuming that you`re working hard enough(which in this case is a fair assumption, I don`t think you're a slacker), you simply won`t have the stamina to go from a heavy set of bench to a heavy set of chins(for example), and you may achieve less on the chins.

I think that supersetting would be better of with something like:1 set bench-1 minute pause-1 set chins-1 minute pause-1 set bench and so on(that`s merely an example, the rest intervals may vary according to ones stamina and between set recovery ability. I don`t believe that the age-old wisdom of going as quickly as possible between exercises to keep the pump strong has much use. There are positive adaptations from shorter rest intervals, but I`m not certain whatever benefit is to be derived from them is greater than the reduction in absolute performance you`ll get due to accumulated fatigue(primarily cardio-vascular fatigue), which means a probable reduction in volume. With the approach I`m suggesting you`ll still get time efficiency, and you`ll also get goodish recuperation for each muscle group(about three minutes between sets of the same exercise, you`ll probably be able to maintain weight and reps, without having to drop either, I think).

Then again, this is primarily theoretical wanking, and something that has improved my approach to training, YMMV
wink.gif
 
No not too theoretical for me, makes sense, specially since I am already getting winded on 15's,I'llplay along and see how it goes.

Having the minute rest or more in between sounds feasible and not having to drop it sounds even better.

Point taken,the only thing that it concernsme still is then having too many sets in a workout once I get to 5's, if it gets too timeously I'll split them into A/B and then take them as hard as possible!

You're right...I ain't no slacker! But am pushing 41 and somehow don't manageto get much sleep,which lets me down (5- 6 hours) and it is not because I can't...just don't get to it!
wink.gif
 
If you`re going for twice per-week-per bodypart sessions, why not do an upper/lower split?Say Monday-lower,Tuesday-upper, Wednesday-day off,Thursday-lower, Friday-upper?This is something that Lyle does for his bulking routine(feedback seems to be positive with that), you get the 2x per week action that you want, and you don`t have to spend your entire lifetime in the gym:).Oh, and for longer training bouts(beyond about 1h), try sipping on a carb-drink...Gatorade or 60g of dextrose in about a liter of water. It should help.
 
For what it's worth, by doing my little 15, 20 reps per day MS style across three or four exercises, I'm getting in between 80 to 100 reps per week, mostly all 85% 1RM (on exercises that don't harm my injury), and every rep is intense and in perfect form.

I like this b/c no wasted energy on warmups are required. I usually start with bench, and bam, go with 225, 230, or whatever number I happen to be using. Many will frown on this, but unless I'm shooting for a new PB, I don't warm up.

I realize that not everyone has a gym in their basement, and it's impractical to travel to the gym 4 to 5 times per week for a 20-minute workout, but for those that do have such a setup, it's worth a try.

Training this way allows you to hit muscle groups frequently, with heavy loads, whilst keeping the sessions relatively brief, and it won't burn you out. I'm sure many will think what I'm doing is foolish, but I've never seen it done quite this way before, and so far in my 4th week it seems to be serving me very well.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top