Can Reps Below 5 Maximize Muscle Growth?
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 28 ก.ย. 2024
- In this video, we'll evaluate the research exploring if repetitions between 2-4 can maximize muscle hypertrophy.
Schoenfeld et al. split 19 trained men into a heavy or moderate group. Both groups trained exercises for 3 sets & 2 mins of rest between sets, 3x per week for 8 weeks. The heavy group used a 2-4 rep-max load (RM) each set, the moderate group a 8-12RM.
Increases in vastus lateralis & elbow flexor thickness favor the moderate group, triceps thickness increases were similar between both groups.
Weiss et al. split 44 untrained men into a low, moderate, or high rep group. All groups trained 4 sets of the back squat with 6 mins of rest between sets, 3x per week for 7 weeks. The low rep group used a 3-5RM load each set.
The moderate rep group a 13-15RM load, the high rep group 23-25RM load. Increases in quadriceps thickness were similar between all three groups. Mangine et al. divided 33 trained men into an intensity or volume group.
Both groups trained 4x per week for 8 weeks. The intensity group performed exercises for 4 sets of 3-5 reps with 90%1RM and 3 mins of rest between sets.The volume group 4 sets with 10-12 reps with a 70%1RM and 1 min of rest.
Increases in rectus femoris, vastus lateteralis, pectoralis major, and triceps brachii cross-sectional area were similar between both groups. Also, Increases in lean leg mass were similar between both groups, but increases in arm mass were greater in the intensity group.
A limitation of this study was the intensity group used 3 mins of rest between sets, while the volume group used 1 min.
In our rest interval video, we show the research suggests with compound exercises, 2.5+ mins of rest between sets was superior for building muscle versus rest intervals of 1 min or less.
Schoenfeld et al. split 17 trained men into a strength or hypertrophy group. Both groups trained the same exercises 3x per week for 8 weeks. The hypertrophy group trained each exercise with 3 sets of 10 reps & 90 secs of rest between sets. The strength group trained each exercise with 7 sets of 3 reps & 3 mins of rest between sets.
Increases in biceps thickness were similar between both groups.
Like the previous study, the strength group used a 3-min rest interval while the hypertrophy group used only a 90-sec rest interval.
Also, the researchers justified equating volume load by suggesting volume load was strongly correlated to muscle growth. But, evidence indicates with all else equal, reps between 5-35 produce similar muscle growth. In this range, volume load would be different, suggesting volume load is not strongly correlated to hypertrophy. Also, we have research indicating more sets generally result in more growth.
So, the strength group was probably an advantage with the more sets.
Campos et al. split 27 untrained men into a low, intermediate, or high rep group. Both groups trained exercises 3-4x per week for 8 weeks.
The low rep group trained each exercise for 4 sets with a 3-5RM load & 3 mins of rest between sets. The intermediate group 3 sets with a 9-11RM load & 2 mins of rest between sets. The high rep group 2 sets with a 20-28 RM load & 1 minute of rest between sets.
Increases in vastus lateralis type 1, 2a, & 2b fiber cross-sectional were similar between the low & intermediate group.
Equating volume load & the use of different rest intervals between groups are again potential confounding factors.
Chestnut and Docherty split 19 untrained men into 4RM group or 10RM group.
They trained 3x per week for 10 weeks.
The 4RM group used sets of 4 reps with an 85%1RM load & 3 mins of rest between sets. The 10RM group used sets of 10 reps with a 70%1RM load & 2 minutes of rest between sets.
Increases in cross-sectional area for the middle & lower portion of the upper arm were similar in both groups. Again, equating volume load and the use of different rest intervals are maybe confounding.
So, the overall evidence suggests reps below 5 are effective for building muscle.
Of the 5 studies finding this, 4 either had the low rep group perform more sets and/or the low rep group used longer rest interval. These are probably confounding factors. It is clear reps between 2-4 can build significant muscle.
As most of the studies did, you may have to perform more sets than usual and ensure longer rest intervals to achieve this. In most studies mentioned here, strength gains were greater for low rep groups. If your priority is strength gains, but you would like some hypertrophy, using reps between 2 to 4 is probably effective. If your goal is hypertrophy, to err on the side of caution, it's probably sensible to ensure most training is done in the 5-35 zone.
Music:
Lakey Inspired - Blossom
/ lakeyinspired
major problem about the first study is they used 2 minutes of rest time which is bad for heavy-low-rep sets. yes its also not optimal for moderate weight either but heavier loads require more rest time.
Iv been watching videos in the strength space weekly, for over a decade. I dont think you will grow to be one of the most profound strength training resources on YT. I KNOW, you will. Keep it up!
That honestly means a lot to me, thank you!
@@HouseofHypertrophy seriously man, you're up there with Jeff Nippard when it comes to great science based content.
You are very underrated, I hope I can help by liking all your videos
Thank you! that helps a lot :)
You have one of the best and most informative TH-cam channels out there. I wish you good fortune. Thank you for sharing your learnings, Dhimant.
It's no problem, thank you for your kind words my friend! :)
If your goal is hypertrophy, then using heavier weights is pointless if you have to do more sets and increase rest time in order for everything to balance out, because although you may experience higher strength gains, it may come at the cost of higher risk for injury and long-term muscle joint pain, all without the benefit of saving time.
That's potentially a good point. One of the studies by Schoenfeld et al. (comparing 7x3 to 3x10) found a few subjects in the 7x3 group were experiencing joint related issues.
what then when u are progressive overloading and eventulally are doing sets of 10 with the same weight as a 5 rep set? its the same weight.....
Injury comes from not warming up properly, using weight that you cannot handle, doing more work than you can recover from and having reached your growth limits and are trying to go beyond them. Using drugs compounds this.
You don’t actually have to do more sets. If you do the math you’ll see that no matter what rep range you use if it’s taken close to failure it’s the exact same performance drop off each set. Your performance measures muscle recruitment/fatigue. Example I could do 1 set of a max or a set of 30. Either way I’m losing 10% on the intensity scale next set. Meaning if I wanted to get 4 reps for example instead of 90% intensity I’d be using 80%. Instead of getting 30 reps with 50% intensity I’d be getting 20 reps. And if I wanted to get only 4 reps I’d have to increase the intensity by 30%. In which case I’m at 80%. See it’s the same. You can do this math at literally any rep range comparison it’s always the same surprisingly
The reason these studies get results opposed to this is because the heavy group isn’t actually using 90%+ intensity. If you were you wouldn’t be able to get straight sets of whatever rep range. If they loaded up 90% intensity and did 2 reps 2 RIR then yeah you’d be able to get a 3x2 but it’s unlikely they did that considering how bad people are at tracking their RIR and you’d have to do the same in the other group. If the other group was going 0 RIR each set then it wouldn’t be a proper comparison
The only way to get the same amount of reps each set 0 RIR is by dropping the weight each set
@@KurokamiNajimi Probably, my opinion about things have changed since I originally made this comment. However, I suspect that we must consider more than just the math.
For example, biological factors such as muscle fiber types as well as fatigue, recovery, oxygen, additional muscle recruitment etc.. Overall, I do think that using less weight may be more beneficial in many cases, because even if one uses heavier weight in order to break down the muscle faster, they may do so at the cost of potential injury (which may be permanent) as well as longer recovery times.
If the goal is to grow stronger, then I might decide to go heavier. I think that the general consensus is that lighter weights can produce hypertrophy, especially at beginner levels. I have even heard pro body builders say that they do not need heavy weights in order to produce results.
This stuff is good. Keep making them. The nice thing is that your videos are quality and timeless.
Thank you for the kind words, I will keep doing my best :)
I'm glad I've found your channel. Great video!
Awesome to hear, thank you very much :)
Alot more sets. I don't need the study on this cause I've tried it. Rest periods between sets isn't about time it's about ability to do another set. All things being equal if over all set number and fatigue is the same so will be growth. Because hennenman said so pretty much. You can only fatigue a muscle fiber so far before it stops contributing. So it does not matter. Whether heavy or light once the fibers taxed it is done. When I started lifting 30 years ago , it was in the 4 to 6 range. I grew well for many years. But eventually the limits of my connective tissue began to catch up. So I used more reps and continued to grow. Now I'm old and I use even more reps , mostly to maintain . With age comes wisdom , hopefully . At this rate I'll be pressing 225 in sets of 30 when I'm fkn 80. But I'll be doing it nonetheless , possibly in a bath robe and slippers .
And a pocketful of Werthers in that tattered robe. Ha!
@@GUITARTIME2024 I'll be going to the grocery store in a bath robe . Balls dragging on the floor , no teeth , fuzzy slippers and coupons for whey protein . While people constantly tell me to close the robe , but I can't hear them .
@@correctpolitically4784 lol ! Freebird!
There is a case for short rest times. I bench then do a set of chins. The weights and reps are less than if I had a longer rest but when you switch back to conventional sets and rest times the weights and reps climb real quick!
Gold video, thank you
No problem! great to hear :)
excellent and intriguing.
Thank you! and yep, it definitely is an intriguing area. Hopefully we get more research avoiding any potential confounding factors :)
Thank you bro! Good job!
Thank you :)
Excellent!
Do you plan to cover weekly training volume for muscle groups in next videos?
Yep, I will soon be making a couple of videos on this :)
Good work.
Thank you so much!
Question, when you say 10 reps "to failure", does that mean absolute failure, like no more reps in the tank? If so, I would question whether it's representative of the average gym regimen. I remember reading that it's best to only do ~20% of sets to failure, not all of them. I wager doing all your sets only to failure might have its own significant effect on the outcome.
Yeah, 10 reps to failure means to complete failure. Though it's never really clear if the studies truly implement this, it could just be volitional falure (when the subjects does not want to perform any more rep).
In any event, you certainly don't have to train to failure for max adaptations: th-cam.com/video/4OIsnpVs7Kc/w-d-xo.html
Building muscle? Hypertrophy and Strength training have different goals .although training for strength results in muscle size increases. Training for size as the primary goal results in muscle growth but doesn't produce strength to the same levels. This channel seems only to be concerned with Hypertrophy exclusively and not strength gains.
Maybe you could do video about back training? For lats and trapezius. Or something like best exercises series.
Yep, at some point I'll make an ultimate guide to building the back (as I did with the triceps) :)
@@HouseofHypertrophy thats nice to know, ultimate guide sounds fun :D. Very usefull channel with no bullshit. Keep going!
Reps below 5 one is really starting to risk injury. A serious injury can knock you out of the gym. If you are not a paid athlete under supervision should probably not drop below 10 reps. You will get big and strong staying in the double digit range. Former college conditioning coach
When I did reps about 6 and below I did them to failure and hurt myself. ✋
Interesting. One of the papers in this video (the Schoenfeld et al. one that compared 7x3 to 3x10) also reported that 3 individuals in the strength group (3 reps) suffered joint-related injuries.
So far doesn’t this all seem to indicate that “somewhere in the middle” (ie avoiding the extremes) is more optimal, as it balances safety, Hypertrophy, and strength, while also providing lactic acid tolerance training? Any research on just doing one or two sets of 20 reps to or close to failure, once or twice a week only? I’d be very curious of this kind of program’s results.
In the middle is certainly fine! Unfortunately I'm not aware of any research exploring 1 or 2 sets of 20 performed 1x or 2x a week :(
Just do 8-12 reps 3 sets thats what soviets and europeana been doing since decades ago for offseason athlete training aka muscle gaining
what i have found if you lift 80%+, you need around 5min rest intervals with compounds with lower volumes with lower amount of exercises pending if you lift 2 or 3 sessions per week. the higher the weight, the more rest you need and the less volume and exercises. those studies to me were a lil skewed. they still have the higher intensity people doing more sets and exercises, when you do higher intensity with more weight you can't do more volume, the higher weight intensity will crush you more than the lighter weight so you can't do more sessions and exercises with more sets, you have to cut it down, i really didn't see that with these studies so, to me, it wasn't equally balanced. you can do high volume or high intensity, you can't do both, these studies had them doing both. just my observation.
I see what you're saying. Interesting though, there is data showing that the higher repetitions you perform (so lighter loads), the more muscle damage and subsequent recovery duration required, meaning that heavier loads might not actually be more fatiguing (pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30036284/ + physoc.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.14814/phy2.13457). However, in terms of loading to the joints and tendons, I think heavier loads are likely more taxing, so this could relate to what you're saying :)
@@HouseofHypertrophy the cns is what i am referring to most, which is more important for firing up the muscles in the first place. those electrical impulses get destroyed more with heavier weight more than lighter weights to failure. yes, lighter is fine with failure and it does create a lot of fatigue, but not so much with the cns vs 80%+. i like it all, and i agree with you and certain parts of the studies,,, but the bros got it right after all of these years since the 1930's-50's with the 8-12 rep range for hypertrophy. thanks for the response and in depth videos. you do an excellent job.
i use to train @4rm,,,
This comment contains nine words consisting of at least three symbols.
thank you soo much for all these great posts!!!...
I will always support you.
you gonna blow up one day man. Keep up the good works
No problem! thank you for your kind words, I appreciate your valuable support! :)
I was just thinking of doing lower rep training for strength and couldn't find adequate info on hypertrophy, but here you are! Plus I love that you're uploading more frequently now, I can tune in more often
Haha, that's great to hear! thank you for the support :)
You must complete a phd in this area.
Haha, maybe one day!
The way you convey legit fitness info is pretty much among the best on YT. Thank you for rocking these and sharing such quality information.
Thank you dude, that's very kind of you! :)
How about hybrid reps? Low reps for a first set, medium for the next two and high reps for the final two?
Yeah, I think that can work!
Hepburn did this in the 50's
@@bigfoot14eee99 okay I will look that up.
great stuff would love a comprehensive video on the best RIR/RPE for Hypertrophy or the difference between failure and non failure
Yep! I plan to make a small series of videos on training to failure (somewhat like I'm currently doing with rep ranges). In them, I aim to cover as many areas as possible (various RIR vs failure, trained lifters vs untrained lifters, training to failure with light load vs heavy loads, etc.)
Tree fiddy reps is key
Aaaahhhhh
This was the one I should've started with!🤣 Your videos are absolutely fantastic!
Thank you dude!!!
Awesome video as usual!
Awesome to hear, thank you :)
Amazing work!
Thank you :)
What about in the case of using rest pause sets?
There's not much research exploring this, so it's difficult to say. I do plan to make a vid on it at some point, and a vid on cluseter sets too.
If mechanical tension is the main contributing factor, then why wouldn’t the higher loads be better?
Higher loads do not mean more mechanical tension, I explain why at the 32:39 timestamp in this video: th-cam.com/video/pNOb7jockSg/w-d-xo.html
@@HouseofHypertrophy Ah! Thanks. Still trying to get through all this material…
Interesting thing I’ve caught onto lately is whether you do a 1 rep max or a set of 30 you end up with the same level of muscle fatigue measuring by your performance on the following set. It’s a 10% loss either way. To get 4 reps on either of these you’d be using 80% intensity for the 2nd set. You can go on strength level or something and look at the calculator chart after plugging in any number you’ll see what I’m talking about
Why not just mix reps, low on compound high on iso simple
Yep, that can definitely work, and I think most folks do this :)
@@HouseofHypertrophy i started doing this from 2nd this month, 5x5 on big 3, 12-15 on rest of the workout, lets see how it works
@@Rajdweep how is it going brah
@@allrounderplaya5957 not so good,started a job and now i can barely train 5days a week