Light versus heavy weight

Old and Grey

Old and Grey

Super Moderator
Staff member
I rarely start topics these days but this one seems to be crying to be posted.

A lot of people believe that to have a nice body you need to use heavy weight and low reps. That may be true for strength training but not to build an aesthically pleasing body. Think of all the athletes in the Olympcs and who has the best bodies. My vote goes to the gymnasts. The weight lifters are rather bulky and do not look very well in regular clothes. The gymasts have proportional bodies and look great when clothed. So, in my opinion, lift heavy with low reps if you want to be a Strongman and workout like a gymnast if you want the most aesthetically pleasing body. They work out with basically bodyweight, high reps and every day frequency.

Wait a minute O&G, you forgot that some Canuck named Bryan something-or-other developed a program to get the best of both worlds, HST. I think he actually knew what he was doing. High reps for joints and endurance, mid reps for hypertrophy and low reps for strength (although there is obviously a lot of crossover.) So guys, there is a reason for all rep ranges. Use them all and you can have a pain free, aethetically pleasing, strong body. And you don't have to workout 3-5 hours per day, every day of the week like the gymnasts or look like a swollen tick in clothes like the strongmen who lift in the 1-5 rep range and drink a quart of milk between sets or load up on steroids and ruin your long term health like the pros (unless that is your goal).

Now lets have some fun and piss some people off. ;)

I know many folks who have been very successful in their lifting believe one can shortcut HST to a better looking body by skipping the 15's. Of course, they may have different goals than I do and what they believe is undoubtedly true in the short term. But trust me on this, you will pay 20-30 years down the road if you plan on lifting for a lifetime. Constant heavier loads have to take their toll. If finely machined and fitted metal can fatigue and break down, so can bones and tendons. Strict form will slow down the process but will not completely overcome it. Do at least 1 week of 15's with every cycle and your body will thank you many times over when you are 68 like me (if only I had known when I was younger.) :(

You can most certainly disagree with my statements and perhaps you are right under your circumstances, but try and do it without calling me an asshole. I get enough of that at home. :o

O&G :cool:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
O & G:
It's great that you are so comitted to your training and self-experimentation at 68. I just turned 50 and have to be careful w/ my shoulders, elbows, and knees. It's not all related to my 35+ yrs of lifting, but it's probably all related to sports and thinking I could get away w/ any kind of training/playing in my teens and twenties.

Anyhow, I know you have been training at a high frequency for quite some time w/ good success. Are your main goals aesthetic in nature? What rep ranges do you implement in your cycles? Having done many styles of training over the years, I've learned that not frying my CNS w/ failure and beyond training (or super heavy training) allows mean to train at a higher frequency as you mentioned above. It also just leaves my body feeling better... tired and a little sore at times, yes. But not aching joints and feeling like I ran into a wall. And I think I feel better too when I'm training at a higher frequency as long as I allow adequate recovery.

As always, thanks for your insights. I think your topic can definitely generate some thoughtful discussion.
 
After more than a year of skipping 15's I started doing them again since my previous cycle, but not because of heavy weights (which they aren't) or joint problems, but because I've been extending my 5's weeks for a few more weeks (this does indeed speed up strength progress!), so my joints probably need some rehab work + some more time for muscles to decondition from higher loads. As I've been dieting for a while, I've been wondering if loads during 15's are heavy enough to prevent muscle loss, or I'd be better off eating at maintenance while doing 15's and then diet down during 10's and 5's?
 
Do at least 1 week of 15's with every cycle and your body will thank you many times over when you are 68 like me (if only I had known when I was younger.) :(
Click to expand...


But, would you have listened when you were younger? ;)
 
I like relatively heavy loads, but I think I am going to do one week of 15s next cycle. It certainly couldn't hurt, and probably is wise for long term success.
 
smf, I strive for proportional growth with functional strength to back it up. I typically, in a 6 week cycle, will do 1 week of 15's, 2 weeks of 10's and 3 weeks of 6's. I no longer go down to 5's. I have 3 weeks (of 6's) left in my current cycle and then a 12 day SD and then two 4 week cycles on 15,10,6,6 with a week off in between. This is the best scheme I could come up with due to planned vacations. The 6's I do I could get another rep or two out of at what I call my max rep but choose to keep a little bit in the bank to stay motivated and keep my frequency at least 3 and preferably 4 times per week. I also do not want to lose strict form as that is when I get injured. For instance, at 185-190 pounds, I typically will do incline benches at 240 pounds (1 1/3X bodyweight for you formula guys) for 6 reps. I could load another 30 or so pounds on but then I would wiggle and squiggle the weight up, let the weight drop down instead of in a slow controlled manner of 2-4 seconds and undoubtedly strain a back muscle arching up so I keep the weight lower and safer.

Rihad, good plan on the 15's. And, I do not know of anything legal that allows you to diet and keep your strength up. I would either diet or bulk and only maintain when you are pretty close to your genetic max. I presume you will do fewer sets during the 15's so your caloric requirements should not vary much from your 10's or 5's. Time under tension and caloric burn rate should be fairly constant.

nislyj, lol, no of course not. I was immortal and smarter than a whip when I was 13 and just starting out. Interestingly though, the accepted protocol was 10 total sets of 8-12 reps 3 times per week back in the lare 1950's. Guys like Steve Reeves and John Grimek were my heroes. Oly lifting was the goal. Exercises were typically squat (2 sets), bench press (2 sets), deadlift, flyes, military press, clean and jerk, curl and french press. My bench was homemade out out 2X4's and the weights were made by Dan Laurie, the infamous circus strongman. Great days in my parents basement!

Sci, worst case is that it can't hurt.

Happy lifting in whatever style you choose. If it ain't fun, you won't do it for a lifetime.

O&G :cool:
 
Interesting post. Until today I'd have disagreed wit you about the gymnasts and suggested that sprinters would have been my ideal body shape. But, a quick 'google' has challenged this perception as they're not all as scrawny as I though (well, the British team might be, but the USA team certainly aren't.

I've often used a similar analogy to people who have asked me about losing weight and have been surprised when I suggest that long distance slow running isn't all its built up to me (in my opinion) and that shorter, more intense work outs will benefit them more. People are generally doubtful until you get them to see the body differences between a marathon runner or a sprinter.

Personally I love the 15 rep ranges but then I am quite easy and will trust the scientific studies. Getting people to move what's commonly (even if wrongly) perceived is the challenge. Agent K summed it up in MIB for me, 'A person is smart. people as dumb'.

So, if the 15s are focused mainly around the joints and initial stimulus after a SD, 10s the main focus of hypertrophy and 5 a cross over into strength, is the anything stopping you from prolonging the 10s instead of the 5s? And I don't mean literally, I mean any physiological reasons...
 
For bodybuilders being relatively lean is a big part of looking good, leanness probably has little to do with rep ranges (although higher-rep sets call for more glycogen into the muscle, making them buff, providing a "signature" look). Combining the two may do the trick: lower rep ranges to ensure increasing muscle tension requirements + higher rep sets to ensure some metabolically active work is done. Research has shown such a combination to be better than either one of them in isolation: http://thinkmuscle.com/forum/showth...ht-needed-for-hypertrophy&p=211523#post211523
 
I have to challenge O&Gs original argument using olympic athletes, as in error.
The main reason gymnasts look better than weightlifters is a matter of exercises, not rep ranges.

Gymnasts intensely strain their pecs, lats, arms and shoulders all the time. Olympic weightlifters mainly strain their legs, middle back and shoulders. So weightlifters have awesome thighs, traps and erectors. While gymnasts have awesome upper bodies. After all, gymnasts do chin-ups, dips and all kinds of upper body stuff. Especially the guys who specialize on the rings have great upper bodies.

Olympic Weightlifting is mostly lower body strength. Check out the thighs on any top Olympic weightlifter, they are massive.

And of course, there is the bodyfat factor.
 
Last edited:
All good comments. I will try and address (not refute since I do not claim to be scientifically correct) each one:

Aderynglas. I consider sprinters as a close #2. There was a sprinter from Canada, I believe, that got disqualified for blood doping or something, that had an amazing body. Again it is in your definition of what looks good. Some people want to look like Magnus. Some want to look like Frank Zane. The only argument against extending the 10's instead of the 5's that I am aware of is that the 10's are more prone to the Repeated Bout Effect. The 5's you can continue for weeks but, at least in my case, the 10's do not get much benefit after 2 weeks. However, I have not done this in quite a few years and I think I will try 3 weeks this fall when I get back into 6+ week cycles just for snicks and grins. Thanks for the idea.

Rihad, I am told there are fairly recent studies, which I have not personally seen, that say doing 5's followed by 10's followed by 15's in the same day is superior to doing weekly sets of the same rep. Coincidentally, or not(?), for large muscles such as chest, no matter what rep range I am 'officially' in, I always do only one or two sets of incline benches and follow that immediately (no rest) with at least 15 reps of bodyweight dips and then 15 reps of deep pushups. My argument against repeating the same exercise multiple times is that some studies have shown that the Law of Diminishing Returns applies to bodybuilding. Some say the first set is worth 100%, the second set 50% and the third set only 25% of the first set. For me, switching exercises and not repeating the same moves seems to work better. Perhaps different moves recruit different muscle fibers and increase muscle hypertrophy. I do not know. Some studies have shown otherwise. In fact, you can probably find a study to support any program you want if you look hard enough. For the record, for 45 years I stuck to the 'standard' of multiple sets of the same exercise. It was not until I switched to single sets and then what I call Giant Sets of non-stop multiple exercises with the first set within the "rep range" and the following sets at 15 or so reps, that I started growing again. Maybe that way is only good for old farts whose bodies have had multiple decades of doing the same thing. Who knows? The point is, if you have stopped making the gains you want, try something new. This worked, and is still working, for me. Each cycle I add about 2 1/2 pounds to my 5 max incline bench. Doesn't sound like much but when you have lifted for 55 years and are 68, it sure seems pretty good to me. Of course, I am happy these day every time I wake up in the morning!

Sci

"I have to challenge O&Gs original argument using Olympic athletes, as in error.
The main reason gymnasts look better than weightlifters is a matter of exercises, not rep ranges."

I agree. Clapping your hands for 3 hours per day will not build a lot of muscle nor will running marathons or shooting air rifles. Exercise selection is important in anything you want to become good at. My point was more that the lighter weight and higher frequency was the contributing factor to their type of body. Had they done the same exercises once per week, they would not have accomplished the same thing even if they did 7X the volume in that one day or even split the total routine over 7 days devoting one day to each exercise. Gymnasts train for each type of routine, be it horse, rings, floor, etc., every day. It always come down to what it is you want to accomplish then choose the best exercises, program and diet to accomplish that. I doubt the gymnasts have the same diet as the weight lifters. I probably should have made multiple comparisons and not just to weight lifters. My mistake and thanks for pointing it out. Many times I will write something knowing what I am thinking but forgetting that the reader probably will not be thinking the same thing as me. That is why I made auto parts for a living instead of writing!

O&G :cool:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
The more I think about it, the more I realize how important bodyfat levels are to "looking good."

Check out this olympic weightlifter, not bad, since he is lean.

PyrrosDIMAS.jpg
 
Look at the size of those legs with low body fat on Sci's link. Holy moly.

Anyway, to put a face to these inane posts of mine, here is my facebook link. I don't do muscle shots as my wife would disown me. Click on 'Photos' and then click a photo to enlarge. The closest to seeing my actual body (in a relaxed, slumped position) is the one with the sailboat taken when I was a much younger 67 years and 8 months.

https://www.facebook.com/robert.tobey.5?ref=tn_tnmn

Anyway, as you can see, I am more the gymnast type than bulky strongman. I don't need to be critiqued as I am my own worst critic. Gentics are very small bones and I was always the skinniest kid in the whole school. I use to cringe when we had our annual weigh-in during gym class. I was as embarrassed as the fat guys. That is what started me in weight lifting. Not much to show for a half century of working out, (with some time periods off as well) but its all God gave me to work with.

O&G :cool:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
It's hard to tell by those pics at that distance, but compared to the guy on the left you have a bigger arm, traps, and look fitter overall. Hope you don't have a beer belly like he does :)
 
Old and Grey said:
Look at the size of those legs with low body fat on Sci's link. Holy moly.
Click to expand...

Yeah, like I said, olympic weightlifting is all about legs and back/shoulders. Check out his traps too, it looks like an anaconda is resting on his neck! All weightlifters have massive thighs and traps, much larger than any gymnast. And all they do is low reps. :p
 
Sci said:
Yeah, like I said, olympic weightlifting is all about legs and back/shoulders. Check out his traps too, it looks like an anaconda is resting on his neck! All weightlifters have massive thighs and traps, much larger than any gymnast. And all they do is low reps. :p
Click to expand...

Big legs and traps but freakishly out of proportion to his arms and chest in my eyes. Again, it's all about what YOU think your goal should be or what pleases YOUR eye, not mine. In the mid 60's, a popular look in the eyes of the ladies was for a man to be at 6% or less bodyfat with no musclulature at all. Like a Frisbee player. Go figure.
 
Old and Grey said:
The only argument against extending the 10's instead of the 5's that I am aware of is that the 10's are more prone to the Repeated Bout Effect. The 5's you can continue for weeks but, at least in my case, the 10's do not get much benefit after 2 weeks. However, I have not done this in quite a few years and I think I will try 3 weeks this fall when I get back into 6+ week cycles just for snicks and grins. Thanks for the idea.
Click to expand...

I think I'll join you. Since I only have 3 years of training and of those only the last 6-12 months have been what could be deemed semi-serious in terms of frequency (x3/week) and diet orientated, I think an extra week of 10s would still have a significant impact on my hypertrophy. So I guess my next routine will contain 1 week 15s, 3 weeks 10s, 3 weeks of 5s and a week of testing my maxes before SD'ing again. I was thinking of maybe doing a cut but with this I think I'll bulk to get maximum gains and see what happens. Obviously I'll have to start body measurements too to check if its worth it or not, quite looking forward to it now.
 
Aderynglas, in my opinion, retesting for maxes is a bit of a waste of time when you should know your approximate maxes after each cycle anyway. Just add a little weight and guesstimate them and use that week SDing and then start your next cycle a week earlier. You will get much more benefit then retesting and refining something that is, at best, an estimate anyway that can change from day-to-day a bit just on how you feel, weather conditions, diet that day, etc. Obviously that would be different if it were your very first cycle, after a long layoff or coming back to HST from something else.

As for taping, I rarely do it. I find the mirror to be a better guage. With taping you rarely have an apples-to-apples comparison because your weight may have gone up or done and your bodyfat may be different or you are retaining water one day and not the next, etc. Taping has led me to a lot of frustration, especially when cutting. If I were to tape regularly, it would probably be at 3 month intervals and, hopefully, the same bf%. Otherwise I might be fooling myself one way or the other and either strut around like a rooster or sulk like a scolded dog. However, being a relative newcomer to lifting, it might be a good gauge for you. How is that for talking out of both sides of my mouth. Look out Obama, O&G for President!

O&G :cool:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
You're right I will know what my maxes will be at the end of the 5s, I guess there's still part of me that likes the challenge of testing my 1RMs since its something I very rarely do (last week was the first time for over a year). Guess I still can't beat the idea of beating myself silly to failure on my 1RM. ;)

Dropping it actually fits better with my works rota and holiday situation so I might just do that.

As for taping, that along with weight and bf% are the only real indicators of progress (read, hypertrophy as that's my goal). Surely what you see in the mirror can be affected by the same factors as the tape (water retention, weight gain, outside temperature, etc). So either way isn't idea on their own. Maybe I'll take pictures as well ;)
 
lol, you are correct. You can look quite a bit different depending on the mirror you are looking in on the same day. Depending on the amount of vertical angle and even what is behind you, one can make you look lean and the other make you look chubby. :rolleyes:
 
Great Post Old and Grey I really like your approach to being HEALTHY vs trying to look Healthy.

There are a lot of people in the fitness industry that look like they are in great shape but aren't.

As I have gotten older I have "tried" to be as in shape as I look and its easier said than done.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top