The Best Rep Range for Muscle Growth Isn’t What You Think
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 25 ก.ค. 2024
- Alpha Progression App: alphaprogression.com/HOUSEOFH...
FREE Bench Press E-Book: www.houseofhypertrophy.com/fr...
Timestamps:
0:00 Intro
0:50 Part I: Deconstructing the Data
3:49 Part II: Limitations
6:13 Part III: What Does This Information Mean?
9:28 Part IV: Changing Rep Ranges Delays Plateaus?
11:14 Part V: Summary
References:
Carneiro et al. - link.springer.com/article/10....
Schoenfeld et al. - pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28834...
Lopez et al. - pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33433...
Schoenfeld et al. (Soleus Data) - pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32342...
Beats:
1) 528hz heaven playboi carti type beat 2022 (prod. yungrowdy) - • [SOLD] 528hz heaven pl...
2) LUCKI x Playboi Carti Type Beat - "ATARI" (prod. asuna) - • Video
3) DON TOLIVER X TRAVIS SCOTT TYPE BEAT ~ ANGELS ABOVE (prod. theskybeats) - • [FREE FOR PROFIT] DON ...
4) Angelic Pluggnb x Summrs x Autumn x Twinuzis Type Beat "TrenTwins" (Prod. Fedia) - • [FREE FOR PROFIT] 💐 An...
5) HOME - Resonance - / home-2001 - กีฬา
Hey All, I hope the video was interesting! :) Feel free to check out the Alpha Progression App: alphaprogression.com/HOUSEOFHYPERTROPHY
Timestamps:
0:00 Intro
0:50 Part I: Deconstructing the Data
3:49 Part II: Limitations
6:13 Part III: What Does This Information Mean?
9:28 Part IV: Changing Rep Ranges Delays Plateaus?
11:14 Part V: Summary
Is this reps per set or total reps per exercise??
i may not be an untrained woman age 58 with a bmi of 27, but i appreciate your work❤
😂😂😂 Thank you dude
Never ask a woman her bmi.
What are you wearing?
@@AnnhilateTheNihilist
Goddamn simps have ruined it for everyone
1965 Gen X OG September 4
I actually think this could be your most important video to date. Most people seem to forget that studies will report mean differences between groups but don't consider that there could be huge inter-individual variation in responses. Like you said near the end, studies give us a great place to start from, but experimentation is required on the individual level.
This video should make you sceptical when you see trainers using the exact same style of training (rep range, frequency, proximity to failure, etc) with all of their clients. They are probably doing a lot of them a disservice.
Yes, but a problem with all these studies, is that they use untrained people.
Everyones body reacts completely different after their first 2-3months of training. For example your body needs it's nervous system to get used to the intensity. That's why high reps are better for new people to grow their muscles. Once they get used to going to or close to failure, thus intensity, they can lower their reps and be as effective. The reason why a lot of people can't start with high reps, is because they lack the cardio for it.
So how you train in the beginning is not AS important, just listen to your body. After a couple of months you can choose your style high/low reps. One better for strength the other for endurance. Muscle growth will be very very similar and less individual on the rep range and more universal.
As mentioned in this video, we see the same thing in trained individuals as well. I think unless your cardiorespiratory fitness absolutely sucks, most exercises are going to be fine with high reps right from the start. For those new to lifting, I'd probably program 50% of their work in the 6-15 rep range, 25% below this range, and 25% above. That gives them a good mix. @@axlvanaudenhove6564
There are so many reasons you get anomalies that you can’t infer anything from just one or two data points, hence the need for a mean.
Most people don't realise that averages can mean almost anything... there could be a peak like a N or M or an upside down V, it could be divided in the middle, it could be the highest picked number or it can have an extreme curve like a V or a U... lots of people use averages to manipulate the answer in their favor.
@@axlvanaudenhove6564not really. If ur refering to how u gain the 10-20 'newb' pounds but then have to readjust to gain after that your not taking into account water... your muscles will grow at the same rate throughout. As long as u ain't at ur max... but the 10-20 newb pounds is just water filling muscles u didn't typically use before.... I hear what ur saying about how u must always trick ur muscle, but day 1 is you also tricking ur muscle by doing something new. Based on what ur saying untrained people actually give more accurate results because their not already used to a specific routine that needs to be changed which could affect the study
Mental fatigue is often overlooked, and doing the same number of repetitions gets boring over time affects the connectivity between mind and muscle which alters results.
This is why I switch up .. 20 + per set ... and sometimes 12 to 15 reps for 4 sets or 5 sets
This video couldn't have been more perfectly timed! I started train about 2 years ago, doing everything at higher rep ranges. But about 3 months ago i started doing heavier weight for less reps, much better results...for me at least.
Same reason I've always used dropsets and rest-pause as a main method. You get the best of both worlds - heavy training and light weight pump-inducing sets - all in one. One approach I love, is a heavy set of 6-8ish reps to failure; reduce the weight by about 30-40% and rep to failure again; wait 8-10 seconds then rep to failure again with that same weight. You'll get quite a few reps on the dropset for a sick pump, then after the rest-pause obviously just a few.
You'll usually see it this way.. a person going from higher reps will do well once changing to heavy weights for less reps & vice versa. Good to implements both ways of training especially once you hit advanced lifter stages
7:02 This is gold! It is a extremely important point that rarely comes out and it can have major consequences on the way we interpret and use the information given by science and to not take science as a new kind of religion with the same symptoms of current creeds. Great work mate!
I've just started out going to the gym and this is very insightful!
i love this channel so much i wouldnt care if you did less visual and even more frequency of uploading the content is so good
This must be one of the most underrated channels out there
One reason that I can anecdotally share with you is that higher rep ranges
can give you a better "mind-to-muscle" connectivity for those having problems
contracting their muscles under extreme loads.
Lighter loads also allow one to have proper form, better tempo, and allow for a cleaner full ROM.
That's true! though it's currently ambiguous as to whether the mind muscle connection truly helps to build more muscle in the long-term :)
@@HouseofHypertrophy But have you seen the Bronze Era muscle control freaks?
One of them could literally do a wave with his spinal muscles from the bottom to the top and reverse.
There's also those who can isolate their abdominal tendon, or have half their abs visible while everything else is vacuumed, and one could do both at the same time.
There's also a yoga practice where you do pretty much an ab wave, isolate left side, then just the middle, then the right, all from a stomach vacuum, looks pretty crazy.
@@mintoness62you could’ve just linked that video 😂
@@HouseofHypertrophyMuscle growth is irrelevant if the risk of injury is high. 8-12 risk of injury isn't worth an extra 5-10% muscle growth, injuries kill gains, not rep ranges. Imo 25-30 to failure is the best rep range
Yeah ik lol @@spaz468
Crazy informative video as always bro
I think higher reps on isolation/single joint movements like curls is easier on the joints and tendons and lower reps on compounds such as squats where cardio is more likely be the limiting factor, because so many muscles are in use.
This is good practice. Echoed by Dr Mike.
Did you know that even if you go 1rm (100%) on a compound lift such as the squat.
The prime moving musces (quads, glutes, adductors) are only working at ~60-80% of their max. This is a indication to go heavy on compounds as long as form is kept!
Bad form even leads to a decrease in muscle activation of the prime movers.
During isolation exercises such as leg extension, the isolated muscle has close to 100% efficiency (at least in trained athletes).
This is a indication to go ligther and them as you said.
yes going real heavy on curls can lead to injuries, and its also better to really feel it and squeeze the muscle which is harder to do at low rep ranges. Once you hurt your elbows it is hard to do any upper body work
Great work as always!
People seem to often neglect that different loads (and therefore rep ranges) preferentially target different muscles within the same exercise (quad vs glute activation in the squat, light vs heavy). This also varies considerably person to person based on anthropometry.
Love your animations, man!
50yo...this year I began experimenting with blowing past the the 8-12 rep range using lighter weights and improving form. I count 1-2-3-1, 1-2-3-2, 1-2-3-3, 1-2-3-4, each concentric and eccentric. I've found counting this way made it simple for me. Started with just pushups, then chinups, then switched everything to 15-30 reps. Best shape of my life
Ohh I do the same, counting in sets of 4 or 5 helps me hit more I feel like
Quite the beast!
Very good videos, they are very informative and entertaining
Amazing video! It is a really intriguing topic. For me, I do two low-rep sets and then a back off set with a lighter weight on a handful of exercises. I don’t know if any science can support it but I thought it might be a good way if you want to include high and low rep sets.
Thank you dude, and I think that approach can be a great way to go about things. There's not a ton of research on this specifically, but there is somewhat related data that I'll describe in future videos :)
It Is Sir👌🏿!
you should start doing videos on nutrition bulking and cutting would love your take on these topics for optimum muscle gains
Great channel, I really appreciate the videos one of the best qualities I have ever seen.
I would appreciate research on abs hypertrophy, I know it's about body fat but I want to see what I can do to make it bigger, of course other than steroids.
love your work, ty
Great content as always. However, let me share something with the knowledge I have absorbed these past years. What help me a lot effort-wise in my workouts (bc most of the time I thought I did not do enough) was to speak with my coach at the time and he gave me this very simple approach: Take a day or two, proper warm-up and go through each exercise of the plan and figure out what is your RM in each exercise, take notes! And then, train at 70% for example, aiming between 8 to 15 reps. If you don't see almost any development in a month, maybe lower the % and go for more reps Or vise-versa.
This helped me a lot to now worry so much about if I was putting in the effort (bc you are based on the % of RM) and also verify that in between changes of % will be needed. Hope this helps for some of you, blessings ;)
one of the best videos regarding fact and logical conclusion based advices 👍👍👍
One thing ive learned is that you need to focus ok the negatives of your workout as well. No matter the rep range, if you slow down and let those muscles burn longer each rep you will feel the difference!
I thought this was common knowledge by now. Yes, the eccentric part of exercise is more stimulating than concentric.
The more i watch your videos, the more i understand that every single body is different and you need extensive experimentation to achieve complete efficiency. We really need to treat the journey as a life style.
There will always be differences, but the further in your fitness journey, the less difference. The scientific studies around fitness are very misleading because of the subjects being new to lifting. If you want the information closer to the truth, you need to find fitness influencers that follow the science and combine it with experience. Also if they are actually natural and huge, they have valuable information.
Because like the problem here is this. Everyones body reacts completely different after their first 2-3months of training. For example your body needs it's nervous system to get used to the intensity. That's why high reps are better for new people to grow their muscles. Once they get used to going to or close to failure, thus intensity, they can lower their reps and be as effective. The reason why a lot of people can't start with high reps, is because they lack the cardio for it.
New people don't know their limits yet en might do 8 reps when they can do 12. The optimal rap amount would be 12 reps (2 in reserve for optimal training + recovery). If you stop at 8, you barely get stimulus to your muscle. If you do 27 and you could do 31, the problem wouldn't be as big. 4 reps short on 31 is not as problematic as 4 reps short on 12 obviously.
@@axlvanaudenhove6564 Makes sense, thanks for the reply.
My problem with influencers is that they live for this, generally have good genetics, and the data sample is VERY small.
when i first started working out i just had a 8 pound/3 or 4 kilo steel bar and i just repped until i got muscle fatigue then my arms hurt for a day or two and i'd do it again. like around 100 reps then soon i could get to like 150 etc. and my arm muscles got huge in under a year, but lifting with other kids at school i couldn't lift as much as much skinnier guys.
This is directly up my alley, so well, that I'm wondering if you're watching me....
I was working out for about a year before I decided to run an ultramarathon and quit weightlifting and focused solely on cardio. Once it was finished I had lost a ton of mass. Previously, I was building using high rep range (12-20 depending). Since your video on regaining lost mass, I figured I would have fun and try the 5x5 plan using a upper/lower split and put on mass just as well while saving time in the gym, albeit only 25-30 minutes. So far, I'm 4 weeks out from the ultra, after taking a week off recovering, after 3 weeks I'm bigger than I was before losing the mass to begin with but, this COULD explain why I'm seeing more gains. Perhaps I respond better to a lower rep range. I've deliberately avoided it because of the proclivity to injury and I am a family man. But I'm already pulling more weight than ever, I surprised myself last night at the gym at how much stronger I am and I'm able to maintain a
5x5s are the ultimate for strength and mass imho. I have been working out for decades and 5x5 or 35x etc, gave me the biggest and muscle gains.
Perhaps you have ever heard of muscle memory? 😂
@@bushidofreakz yeah, that's why I went with 5x5 but my mass is greater now than it was before I started training for the ultra. I was at 94lbs SMM, dropped down to 90.3lbs and I'm currently at 96lbs SMM
Great video as always. The only thing I don't understand with this type of study is they don't compare the same volume.
They do 3 set for each training method. about 90 reps for the high and 30 reps for the low.
Add 2-3 set on the 8-12 rep range and I think we will greater results but it will still be 50 to 60 reps.
perfect video at perfect time
Your narrating got much better over the years
Thank you so much! I'm still trying to get better at it but it's nice to get a compliment haha :)
it is certainly very interesting to say the least and I appreciate your work on this. That being said, it frustrates me that seemingly 100% of all "studies" are done with "untrained" folks. I would argue that taking anyone "untrained" and doing any exercise, even ineffective/inefficient stuff is going to produce results. I've been training nonstop for 40+ years now. I'd love to know if I'd do better with higher or lower reps. Of course at my age it's getting easier to do lighter weights for more reps as I age and try to avoid injuries.
I have been doing a 5x5 program starting at 80% 1RM for the past 4 months. I just changed over to a 12x4 program at 60% 1 RM. I think I will stick with this for about 4 months before I change it again.
Would love to see content on strength again. Maybe about %Velocity loss for both strength and hypertrophy?
Im gonna give high rep range a try starting tmr ..been 4x10 for as long as i can remember!!
59 trained male here!!
Hope it goes well! :)
New lifters especially need to learn that its not all about rep range .. it's how difficult any paticulour exercise is made via weight going through a set rep range.. also warm up sets followed by working sets honesty and hard work is how one maximises and stimulates muscle growth..
I would be appreciated if you could also make a video on important factors for building strength and power
house of strength and power TH-cam channel ?
I remember doing 30-40 reps on many exercises during the lockdown,
didn't have dumbells with enough weight so :/
Not sure if switching rep ranges prevents a plateau but taking a rest week every so often does. Haven’t decided if it’s because it allows recovery or if it’s because of re-sensitization but I know it works. Switching to different exercises helps too. I’ve also found different muscles or at least certain exercises, prefer high reps over low reps and vice versa. Usually compounds work better for 6-12 reps while isolations typically like 10-20. That’s just me though.
Same for me , as long as it doesn’t turn into a marathon of set after sets .
@@wintertime331 Not sure what you mean exactly but if you keep intensity high you'll be done after 3-4 sets per exercise. IMO if you need more than that then you should take a look rep quality or rest time between sets. For example, even though I target 15-20 reps for cable side laterals I make sure to control the weight and use full range of motion. If you execute it properly you won't need much more than that to really feel it and trigger growth.
@@jessemurray1757agreed👍
we have pretty much the same philosophy ie lower reps on compound movements and higher reps on the more isolated. But you can go lower on some isolated movements depending on the muscle group. I do think changing rep ranges on occasion for short periods will help with plateauing but I don't believe it will work as well as giving yourself some time off. I also like to finish a work out with a higher rep burnt out set sometimes just to get a little extra pump and finish off the muscle
@@douglasjohnston1465well said👍
I do 3 sets for each exercise. First set 20 reps, second set 15 reps, third set 8-10 reps. For legs 3 sets 30, 20, 10 reps.
I remember when gyms first closed, loads of people saying they saw sudden gains just from doing exercise band and bodyweight work at home in high ranges. I think you nailed it: if you're stalled/plateaued then mix it up.
He literally explained how the study didn't show that mixing it up helps break plateaus
@@s1bhtk Sorry if I wasn't clear, emphasis was on "IF", I but I should have followed up with "if it ain't broke don't fix it". See 11:48 mark were he literally says that.
@@OneDougUnderPar yes, in that timestamp he says that if you're not seeing good gains with one rep range, trying another one might help, as we have seen in the study that different subjects might respond better to different rep ranges. If you're already training in a rep range that's good for you, however, the study showed that changing your rep range won't help, as talked about in 10:15.
I want a video about the trapezius muscle!
Whoo man, 80% for some 8-12s? I wish! 😅
I've spent a lot of time doing 8-12s, it's just solid for a lot of lifts. I am branching out and spending a little more time doing higher reps (usually 15-20). For some isolations it really makes sense. My elbows appreciate the higher reps for a lot of my triceps work. For a few lifts that I want to work on strength I'll do 3-5s, but that's only a select few these days (OHP and weighted chinups). Those lifts I'll break into heavy and light days (and sometimes just do some down-sets after my heavier work).
I do think 8-12 is still pretty easy to recommend to novices as its a reasonable balance of being able to find failure and have good technique. If you want a little extra technique practice without cutting into your recovery doing a top set slightly above your working weight for a few reps is quite helpful. On the other end of the spectrum, I probably wouldn't recommend high rep sets to a novice. It takes a lot of focus to really drive through the burn and hit failure...while keeping your technique squared away.
Ultimately, I think using measurements is the way to assess what's working and guide your programming. When something is getting stale, changing up a rep range is one of the easiest factors to adjust. I can usually get several PRs out of a new rep range that I'm not used to.
Late 30s male here. ~25 BMI / ~21 FFMI 💪
Great comment dude, thank you!
Interesting, might try high reps on light days/rest days just to see what happens.
When i was in my early 20's i worked out religiously and went from 130-185 it took years and my calves only grew to 15inches... life happened and i lost it all and was 140 pounds when i went back to the gym now at 31 and in a year i am now 186 (officially hit my heaviest bw just this weekend 😎😋) and my workouts have been the same cept i aint doing high reps for shoulders and calves but now just doing the same reo range as everyrhing else which is 8-12 and my calves are 17's. The lower reps let me do a pause when in high tension which i think helps a lot too
Dude we did almost the same thing. Cheers
Wonderful video! This cleared up a lot of thoughts on my mind i do wanna ask one question tho, mike mesor i believe said that only set to failure is sufficient for stimulating growth provided that set was taken to complete muscular failure (basically doing drop sets lowering the weight till you cant move the muscle anymore) do you believe in this training approach? As in do you believe it truly does optimise muscle growth and is one set for a particular muscle really enough
I think that approach will build muscle, but the literature indicates it's not going to be "optimal" - th-cam.com/video/1EHrp8-2Kg8/w-d-xo.html
I really really believe its the connection. You have to train your muscle, if you cant fire it, you cant train it. some people have trouble hitting hard with heavier weights because they are not used to control those. Lighter weights always give you more control without a doubt and more space to hit the target muscle. i often see this with clients in back training, they dont feel there back good with heavy weights in the beginning. But when i put them for example into an X3 set of bent over rows, they feel like a anatomy book and really have a shook look.. like holy f*** i feel everything. and there i go high up in reps, have a lighter movement curve and and they can squeeze so much more in.
what's lifting the weight if you "can't fire it"?
For hypertrophy I do best at lower weights in rep ranges of 8-15. The key for me is that the reps have to be performed in a slow and deliberate and I have to be concentrating on the muscle group(s) that I am training. Your results may vary.
I even write those exact words in my training journal. “Slow and Deliberate”. For me, it’s really important to maintain form through strict technique.
Thank you for the informative video.
Query:
I don't think I quite understand your objection to preventing plateaus:
After all, you explain that the average over the whole 24 week period comes from very different progress of the individual experimental versions.
But:
The graphs at 10:00 show not only the final results after 24 weeks, but also the intermediate results after 12 weeks and the development from then until the end, right?
That actually means that the development during the last 12 weeks continued practically unchecked compared to the first 12 weeks. Which means that the development of the test persons continued on average at an unrestrained pace.
@HouseofHypertrophy
Do you have any information on exercise order?
Intuitively I would usually do 1) heavy compound, 2) load under stretch, 3) volume for reps. Such as Bench Press, Chest Flies, Incline DB Press.
But I'm wondering if anybody has done studies on it
I think the unorthodox rep range was a consequence of the participants' ranges due to the constraint actually being 30% 1RM.
Do a video on myorep aka rest pause training
No matter how many times the ball bounces the individual gotta do the work to know what works. I wouldn't focus on optimum, jus try different variables without abandoning the basics.
I think the important thing to note here is that with whatever rep range you're training at, always train to failure or close to failure.
I think it's even more important to stress this for beginners. Trying to teach a novice to "keep 2-3 reps in reserve" is impossible. Getting to that point where I think "I could *maybe* do one more" and pushing through it almost always surprises me with like 5 more painful, but good reps. Going until I get 40% of the way through a rep and then start vibrating like I'm holding a jackhammer is the only way I ever KNOW I'm done.
What about the studies that show training to failure is less effective than reps in reserve?
@@derek96720 for most untrained individuals, reps in reserve doesn't mean anything. You won't know what being 2 reps from failure feels like without hitting failure.
@@Hyatice Gonna have to disagree there. When I started lifting, it only took a few weeks for me to know pretty well where my absolute failure point was. You start off going to failure, then the next time back it off a little. Periodically you need to go to failure to find that new baseline, but not every workout.
Not necessarily what Dr. Mike says
I am always extremely suspicious with muscle growth, we don't know if the individuals changed diets, stress levels, sleep and etc during each period. We need super hard deep digs into the processes that produced said drastic changes on individuales when they switch rep ranges. As you know, more data is needed.
yes those huge differences like losing muscle in 8-12 rep range is sus, i think a lot is mental (low rep range youre more worried about pulling or next set and you go easy, or high rep range you burnout cardio-wise or on the plus side, you push farther because each next rep isnt that hard compared to 8-12)
I believe that it is not only through muscle damage/fibrosis, but also through some proccess that widens the fibers (and makes them more resilient) that muscle grows.
You would get more damage from 6 to 12 reps; and you would get more widening through 25+.
Enough effective reps while minimizing fatigue (supraspinal CNS, calcium ion related) so that recovery mechanisms go toward adaptation and not repair is key. I’ve learned I don’t do well with high reps - takes me forever to recover and by the time I have everything has gone toward repair = no progress. 5-8 reps, to or very close to failure works great for me = progress pretty much workout to workout.
Having "light days" and "heavy days" or having a "strength" day and a "mass" day, are methods that many use, sort of a micro-periodization program.
I think the crucial takeaways from these studies is that adapatbility is inevitable and that their are ways around it and that the reason we have various ST protocols is because there are many ways to skin that proverbial cat.
My future program has one 3-5 rep day and one 8-10 rep day
Upper/Lower 4x
Fred Hatfield recommended both high rep and low rep range to train the different muscle -type fibers. This will train both slow and fast twitch muscles.
I am curious about the subjective and uncontrollable parts of these studies. It seems reasonable that different people will get closer to true failure at different perceived effort levels, I.e. different loads. Some people think really high weight and grinding out reps is reaching failure when in reality they are just not used to that level of force exertion. They would reach closer to failure at low weights and high reps since each individual rep doesn't feel as difficult, and therefore less "scary". Meanwhile others think the "burn" is too intense at high reps and consider that failure when they still have 8 reps in the tank.
I am convinced the differences in results are due to subjective perceived effort.
Fundamentally, we would need data to establish an association between subjects' perceieved effort and the gains they experience with a given load. I'm less certain this can explain all the individual differences, biology and inter-individual variability is probably a lot more complex. After all, we observe individuals differences with other training variables (more videos coming soon), and these rarely can be explained away with subjective percieved efforts.
@@HouseofHypertrophy fair. I shouldn't say I'm convinced, but rather, I believe it has a significant impact.
why are we not talking about the burn, some people get burn quicker and they cant handle the pain thats why they dont build more muscle , we need to focus on how to prevent burn more, the burn is weird af
my guess is with higher reps u stimulate better bloodflow so nutrients get better into muscle over time
As cycling is my main sport I do not train for hypertrophy, but for strength and fatigue resistance. As such I alternate every 2 weeks between high weight low rep (3x~5) and low weight high rep (3x~25)
One message i could get from this video is that not everyone could fit with the same training method
Very cool study design, but would really like to see it done over with trained (3+ years) individuals.
We know that anything works well for untrained individuals, including sets that are far away from failure. Interesting discussion and video though, cheers.
I have a question that might be out of the topic : How are participants selected in these studies and how can I volunteer to participate in studies like this
Look into local universities doing studies/independent studies.
They are selected randomly and involuntary...
I'd have to say I've noticed the same. I'm 37 and been training for 18 years. However, I've noticed an increase in muscle growth the minute I lower the weight and increase the reps. 30 reps on squads rather than 15 to 20 reps. Both trained to failure. The same in the arms chest and back. High reps produced better results. Tempo is always the same regardless of rep range.
The question becomes, how do you know your best rep range (at a certain time, I guess).
I have always thought that the intensity (weight) that's best for you is the one you feel most effective in. The one where you can do most work.
I noticed 40 years ago that when untrained I liked 4 x 8.
But when well trained I liked 6 x 5.
So, more intensity, fewer reps and more sets, when well trained.
But always 30+-2 total number of reps for an exercise.
Finding out which rep range you should be in might be the key to effective training.
But 27 .. 31 isn't my rep range. If I use a very light weight, I feel it at 40 reps. But need something like 80 reps for approaching failure.
But 80 reps sets aren't anything I have done enough to know if they build muscle!
I'm told Eugene Sandow and his contemporary trained like that, so maybe.
But that might have been just good business. A way of selling very small, easily transported dumbells. Who knows!
For example, it's said that Bobby Pandour refused to train with heavy weights and used 10-pound dumbbells instead.
15 gym sessions a month at age 46 is where I'm at right now and that's
3 x leg days
3 x chest days
3 x abs core days
2 x back days
2 x shoulder days
2 x arm days
This works for me I change up rep range, time under tension, weight load on each session to cover all areas.
1 hour solid training per session is more than enough if your cracking on.
My diet, sleep, lifestyle is at about 70% perfect and I know I'm only a couple a weeks away from peak condition for me at any time which is great as I can get to that for upcoming events occasions etc
And still be living a good life in the meanwhile out of the gym without to much obsession.
Pro boxers are only in peak condition during times of there imminent bouts.
Good luck trying to have a healthy rounded balanced lifestyle 100% of the time it's impossible.
Ultimately it's about being happy with yourself afterall.
Get yourself to a decent respectable condition thats realistic and maintain that would be my advice.
We're always gonna see imperfections etc in ourselves no matter how well we are doing.
Have fun out there life's to short 😁🍻😎❤🏖
question - what's the RPE when I switch to high rep (from 8-15 to 20 - 35 reps). normally I do RPE 8 for most sets and failure only last set. If I switch to high rep then the RPE should still be the same (in my case, it should be 8)?
Hey man when will you do a video about what science says about abs? I've never found any study where they measure hypertrophy results after doing certain excercises for abs
Hopefully in the next few months! There's very minimal data directly on ab hypertrophy, the study analyzed in this video (comparing free weights to machines) did look at rectus abdominis hypertrophy, (and it grew very little with compound exercises): th-cam.com/video/yPGXO_y0cis/w-d-xo.html
I'll have to dive into the research more, but I'm presuming there's going to be indirect clues there :)
In order for the graph at 3:00 to be meaningful you'd have to split it in 2. Those that started with 8-12 reps and those that started with 27-32 rep.
@HouseofHypertrophy are there any other studies comparing rep ranges like that that also show individual variation? I think this is super interesting if we all actually do respond to different ranges. I think it would make a good argument for doing a low rep set and a higher rep set on virtually every movement to cover all bases, and if it's wrong then the data at least suggests there's no downsides to this approach
As I understand it, body types i.e., mesomorph, endomorph, ectomorph respond differently to resistance training. I wonder if the body types affected the individual results in this study. That could be why the rep ranges are affective in both ranges, but each range lends better results pending body type. Any data on body types and muscle growth would be interesting to see. Maybe determine if there is in fact a correlation between rep ranges and body type.
We know that any rep range with a decent weight builds muscle, and we also know that heavier loads make you stronger (presumably neurologically). Furthermore, we know that higher tension builds more muscle, and thus heavier loads will generate more tension.
My theory is that people with less muscle at baseline will benefit more from higher reps, as it will enable them to (safely) accumulate more muscle mass, whereas those with more muscle and/or who are naturally stronger at baseline will benefit from prioritizing heavier weights, as the heavier weight enables them to generate more tension. Furthermore, I always wonder what role pain or injuries have in these studies, and if they end up skewing the data. Presumably, a person with less baseline muscle/strength will be more prone to pain or injury if they use heavier weights/lower reps, thus making it more difficult for them to achieve failure or progressively overload.
Training with heavier weights, aka lower rep range, will increase your strength more, put more load on your body and help strength your bones etc. more. Maybe high reps can stimulate muscle growth the same, but it would come at a cost. It would probably help your cardio more though.
Yeah, we can't discount the difference between individuals responses... because the "average" person in a study responds a certain way does not mean you will
Agreed :)
Very interesting.
Agreed! :)
@@HouseofHypertrophy but it's cursed knowledge, cuz I want to know what I respond better to, and the way to measure it is very slow.
What's the software you use for the animations of arrows and stuff? I'm developing video editing skills and your animation style is the one I most resonate with. Thanks for any help!
So I create the illustrations on adobe illustrator and edit them into animation format with VSDC editor :)
@@HouseofHypertrophy wow, I had no idea Illustrator could help with that. I'm already expert on Photoshop for images, and I'm now learning Adobe Premiere for video. I guess I need to look at Illustrator's capabilities for that as well. Very helpful information, thank you! I'll shout out to you when my future channel reaches 1M subs :D
Is it the number of reps or simply more time under tension that needs to change periodically for maximum growth?
It's all about intensity!!
Most people can't focus themselves to the required intensity mentality.
Not anyone can do high reps high intensity. That's why people pushes back against high reps like that because they can't hang !!
It could be the cns. Like how many motor units get recruited. How fats and hard they get recruited. As well as local and systemic fatigue. Or it could just be about the bout effect
Mike Mentzer taken to an extreme:
2-3 warmup sets, then single set of: super fast positive against gravity, hold at full contraction until FAILURE, then super slow negative return to start. Repeat until unable, then rest-pause (under 30 seconds) and repeat until impossible!
If that doesn't grow muscle, you're just not working hard enough!
8:06 yep, if no preference for rep range then split the difference, low risk and average reward. Experiment with one consistent rep range when gains reach/near plateau.
We need a standardized protocol to determine which rep ranges are most effective for an individual. This video just demonstrates we're all shooting in the dark
How bout doing three sets with low, medium and high reps?
Does this also mean less strength gain than if you did lower amount of reps with more weight?
What about the subjects diet and sleep?
The best study is the one we do on ourselves, and then get a sense of what really works, and that takes years to understand.
I’d wonder if some of the individual differences relate to subjects past experiences. We know people tend to respond better to novel stimulus and build some degree of tolerance to a rep range over time.
I don’t know how this study defines “untrained” but someone with a physical job, or who likes to hike or cycle is probably has more tolerance to high repetitions and low load already and thus might respond better to the lower rep range with greater load.
High reps are not bad.
I still think it's about time under tension.
I would have loved if they measured that also in this study.
The guy who hit 8-12 could been performing them too quickly or incorrectly at that weight
@@zenraloc Exactly what I meant.
The 20 rep guys might have kept it like 1 minute or more on TUT.
While if you perform a set of 12 faster, that's like 10 seconds.
Hi rep failure is brutal. That's why I don't go to high. Of course specific exercise matters too.
it's a different nervous system response, for example - for me there's no such thing as failure in the 30-rep range, I'll just be so tired by the time I do that many reps that fatigue itself will stop me, not muscle failure.
I've been doing ~20 reps on my 1st set. Then 5 to 10 on my 2nd set to failure. Then rest and do a drop set. Kills
Very interesting to hear, I think that approach can be great :)
l wish l'd trained with Mentzer style from day one😤 the more l trained diffrent systems the more l got lost in the systems..l summarize= HlT, Mentzer, Yates➡️🚀💪
I've been using/experimenting Mike's HIT split since mid August and it is going well.
Maybe its good to do both to train burst strength and endurance.
Why, you know, I've been curious about the optimal rep range this week. In your previous video, you mentioned that the 8-12 rep range is ideal, but there are times when I can't manage to complete 8 reps in my later sets (e.g., 12 reps, 10 reps, 8 reps, 6 reps, 5 reps). I'm wondering if my training is still effective or not.
If you can't complete it, then lower the reps on the first sets don't go 12,10,8 rather go 10,8,8 or 8,8,8
That's perfectly fine!
You may be confusing me with someone else (or misintepreted something), but I've never said 8-12 reps is "optimal", rather I've always noted average growth is similar across a wide spectrum of rep numbers (6-35)
Hope this helps!
I would say, in general, it's not a problem if your reps fall off gradually between sets. When you start programming different rep ranges between workouts and are trying to stay within a rep range, it's probably worth adjusting the weight to keep it in range. So if you doing 10-12s and you know you'll be below 10 on the third set, then do that as a down set. Now, how volume factors in might be a trickier problem. I tend to side with less volume as long as things are moving in the right direction (and slowly add volume as necessary, while keeping effort high per set). You kinda have to find out what works and stick with it until that gets stale, then adjust. Thankfully early on almost everything (reasonable) works. When gains slow down, is when you really have to learn how to adapt your training. 💪
For heavy exercises (Squat, bench, press, etc) I do something I call "Independent Sets", this is that each set progresses in weight independently. So If I reach 160 in the first set and I do 7 reps (my target), I increase the weight next time only in the first set. And the same with other sets. So a typical training day for me, may look like this 1st: 160 7reps 2nd: 155 6 reps, 3rd: 150 7 reps.
This way I stay very close to my target rep range for that specific exercise and it feels mentally easier to do knowing that your first set is your heaviest one.
@@HouseofHypertrophy Thank you for your clarification. I appreciate your response. I think I may have misunderstood from a previous video where you defined a set as a bout of repetitions between 8 to 12. My apologies for any confusion. I'm not a native English speaker, so that might have contributed to the misunderstanding. I now understand that you've always emphasized the wide spectrum of rep numbers (6-35) for muscle growth. Your videos have been really helpful, and now I'm confident that my training is effective. Keep up the great work!
I've been reading some old Børge Fagerli articles recently. He suggests testing a movement with a 1RM then sets to failure of 80% to test for muscle fibre type, and I think Menno has agreed with this. He caveats that this test is for testing specific movements or muscle groups, as factors like previous endurance adaptations, neurotransmitter imbalance, nervous system, etc. could account for this disparity. I think something similar is happening in this study.
I'd like to know more about those tests! Where can I find them?
@@TheExcelsiorFiles I'd imagine Børge has it in detail in his online course, but I found it on his old blog (though I think he's deleted it now, I had to use Wayback Machine to find it). The article itself was "Better Chest Training" which was specifically for the chest, but I don't see why it can't be applied to other muscle groups.
Menno mentioned it in one of his podcasts (I can't remember which) and clarified the researchers meant it for isolation exercises so it could be applied for specific muscles, though Børge seems to use them by exercise.
@@drno62 That's brilliant, thanks! It's a topic I've never read anything about but can see has a lot of potential validity for many, many lifters.
Also worth noting that women(which were used in this study) generally can do much more reps with a higher percentage of their 1RM than men can.
Indeed. Muscle fiber make up is always a very important factor. Being a former sprinter , i logically find that reps up to 8-10 ( occasionally up to 12 ) work best for me. Two other factors seem to have an effect on my traing as well : speed of the reps ( explosive on the concentric , ' normal ' on the eccentric ) and not going to failure when that speed noticeably lessens. Instead doing (an ) extra sets.
He showed how the muscle fiber make up of the soleus had no effect on what rep ranges worked best for it..
@@s1bhtkbut soleus is a weird one... maybe it isn't comparable with other muscles, need more on this topic.
@@marcoerbifori8683 fair enough, but the guy is saying "indeed" and proceeds to say things that were disproven in the one case actually shown in the video lol
@@s1bhtk on his side, is hard to match with scientific researches, you can claim everything and for sure finding some research that confirm your point. It's a long and difficult process converting them to actual training.
The confounding variable here = intensity. Some people don't really push to failure or 1 RIR in low rep ranges. It's possible that they only achieved a high level of intensity at the higher rep ranges. For others, the opposite could be true (they can be intense for 10 reps but not 30, solely due to mindset/motivation, even with less weight). We cannot assume all participants trained with equal intensity in the various rep ranges.
Interesting i might switch it up and do 1 set low reps high weight and 1 set lower weight higher reps and see what happens in some months
Could be that these individual differences in hypertrophy reflect individual tendencies towards how they actually train. Some people like to push harder in certain rep ranges etc. but, this may not be true.
Across time? How much time do you mean 12 weeks?