high or low reps?

[dnale48]

i am wanting to ge some opinions on this. every one seems to be set on low reps heavy wieght. but nobody remembers old school training like arnold once did. 4 set 15-20 reps. sure worked for so whats the deal?

[Powrlftr]

High reps are for endurance or with short rest periods for definition.

[Warrior]

I just posted on a question like this at IBB...

Depends on the muscle group, your genetics, ability to tollerate increased lactate levels and so forth. Higher reps and increased intensity from decreased rest intervals, drop sets, supersets, and so forth do stimulate the most growth... partially by completely draining all ATP/CP stores and literally demanding the muscle to grow bigger... adapt.

Longer rest intervals and lower reps with heavier loads are better for strength since you allow the muscle to fully recover (usually takes 90-120 seconds, depending on the intensity of the set) as well as less strain on the CNS. Taking your time helps you mentally deal with the stresses... you give yourself time to regroup and get refocused rather than continued bashing. Plus the only way to get use to heavy loads - is to use them.

Which is better for maximum hypertrophy? BOTH! You would be short changing yourself without a more wholistic approach to training for increased gains. The higher intensity training will give your muscles the required training stimulis to increase its ATP/CP capacity, give the higher endurance fibers a good workout and increase your endurance to training - like your tollerance to a burn from lactic acid... which is more of a motivational adaption than physical. The lower reps and longer RI's help keep you getting used to heavier wieghts, strengthen your connective and fully tax your fast-twitch muscle fiber composition.

In addition to all that - using a wholistic approach, training both ways, it will keep you from getting bored which can in itself lead to a state of overtraining and limit progression.

You can alternate workouts or construct training macro cycles. In one cycle you would focus on high intensity training for 8-10 weeks then brutal strength for 8-10 weeks. This is the basis of periodization.

[Danielle]

i am wanting to ge some opinions on this. every one seems to be set on low reps heavy wieght. but nobody remembers old school training like arnold once did. 4 set 15-20 reps. sure worked for so whats the deal?

they way people trained 20 years ago is sooo much different than it is now........they didnt know as much as the BB's do now (supplements, diet, etc.)

:::::getting ready to get flamed::::::.....lol..........but i dont think that Arnold would be able to get a pro card today..........truthfully i dont think that he could compete with the pro's now-a-days..................its on a totally differnet level now.........

[groverman1]

Warrior is the man, can't explain it any better than that.

[strongNlean]

arnold would definately get a procard today, he weighed in at 240 or so and was good symmetrically.

[Ammar]

Danielle, we all make mistakes so I will let this one slide jk

As for the reps thing, I mix mine up. Sometimes I will do 3 heavy sets with low reps then the last set do lighter weight for 12-15 reps. Its always good to build up your muscle endurance because it will help build up your strength.

[GetMeRipped]

Arnold could still be the man if he took large amounts of the sauce... Warrior said it better then anyone..

Low reps of 6,4,2 = bulking and weightgain with strength.
High reps of 12,10,8 = cutting, definition and muscle growth.

[Warrior]

If you have the last issue of Ironman magazine (might still be on newstands) there is a good article on linear vs nonlinear periodization. Linear being how I mentioned above - changing volume/intesity over larger macro cycles. Nonlinear relating to changing intensity in smaller microcycles (like every other workout or so).

He explains how linear benefited trained athletes the most according to one study on football players. But football players also, obviously, engage in high volume/intense training while on the field. So indirectly they would still be using a nonlinear approach to periodization.

Personally I think a nonlinear approach is best... and so did that author in the Ironman article. Alternating intensities between workouts. And anyone familiar with the writings of Tudor Bompa (the father of periodization) can recall him agreeing as well. Especially when training for a greater aerobic capacity.

---> Hopefully I didn't ramble and that wasn't too confusing...

[DNoMac]

I'm gonna give the nonlinear approach a shot for a few months, it makes sense, plus it will serve as a little bit of cardio...

[Warrior]

I'm gonna give the nonlinear approach a shot for a few months, it makes sense, plus it will serve as a little bit of cardio...

I usually follow that path. It keeps your endurance up and the muscle growing IMO. I do it a lot for arms latley. I will do a traditional day for arms using a basic positions of flexion approach and then every other or every second workout I will do one of those crazy EDT days - where you do two 20 minutes supersets working opposing muscle groups... my arms feel like they were severly beated by Barry Bond's with his slugger for a few days after... which is why I don't see how the linear approach would work for that... its just too much intensity for every workout... but I have yet to experience a better pump than what I get from those EDT days... my arms need the beating for me to really feel like they will respond... so I alternate with POF using a nonlinear approach to periodization.

The Dr Squat, Fredrick Hatfiled's (ISSA founder) Holistic training (found in his book "Hardcore Bodybuilding) follows the same approach. Using POF, GVT and then a day full of Giant sets (a holistic day)... worked into one macro cycle. Alternating between three different intesities every workout.

[dnale48]

[QUOTE=:::::getting ready to get flamed::::::.....lol..........but i dont think that Arnold would be able to get a pro card today..........truthfully i dont think that he could compete with the pro's now-a-days..................its on a totally differnet level now.........[/QUOTE]
are u kidding me. arnold didnt slin, IGF, or growth hormone back in those days. and he it still IMO the greatest ever, even compared to the new age guys.

[dnale48]

dammit quote f%cked up

[ANicley]

I have been a Therapist for 4 years and found that in most cases muscle responds to 4-10 rep ranges for short peroids such as 3- 4 months then have to change things a bit.

[AnabolicBoy1981]

When you are juicin as heavily as Arnold you'll be huge with high or low reps. Don't compare yourself to pros.

[dnale48]

When you are juicin as heavily as Arnold you'll be huge with high or low reps. Don't compare yourself to pros.

most of the guys on here that do believe in low reps do juice as heavily as arnie