Rep Ranges?

[BUTTERYGOODNESS]

What amount of reps are best for size and which for cutting body fat? I know lower is more strength and mass and higher reps for helping lose fat but what are some more specific numbers?

Also what are lifting methods best for mass and for cutting? like drop sets or other lifting techniques. Any and all input would be greatly appreciated.

[fishizzle0927]

the last time i dropped a bunch of bf before my current cycle, i did all excersizes with reps of 20 15 12 then 2 sets to failure.( even squats and deads!!!) lots of vomiting but shreds fat. when i go heavy i usually stay in the 4-6 rep range.... hope that helps?

[Gucks]

rep range doesnt make as big a dif as guys used 2 think, just from reading MD they say 60% of ur 1rm to failure for 4 sets is best. personally though, im on the fench about that. i go 6-10 rep range for bulking depending on exercise, for cutting i would say 12-15 and do 5 sets instead of 3/4. ive never done a big cut, this is just what ive read. good lcuk buttery expecting another 9ibs down this week :P

[MACHINE5150]

the last time i dropped a bunch of bf before my current cycle, i did all excersizes with reps of 20 15 12 then 2 sets to failure.( even squats and deads!!!) lots of vomiting but shreds fat. when i go heavy i usually stay in the 4-6 rep range.... hope that helps?

^^^^This

Gucks.. no offense but you are wrong.. rep ranges do matter.. lower reps build strength faster guaranteed.. look up my add 50lb to your bench program, try it out and see..

just click on my name and look at threads started by me to view it

[BUTTERYGOODNESS]

rep range doesnt make as big a dif as guys used 2 think, just from reading MD they say 60% of ur 1rm to failure for 4 sets is best. personally though, im on the fench about that. i go 6-10 rep range for bulking depending on exercise, for cutting i would say 12-15 and do 5 sets instead of 3/4. ive never done a big cut, this is just what ive read. good lcuk buttery expecting another 9ibs down this week :P

lmao damn another 9 would b insane! lol

[BUTTERYGOODNESS]

ive always thought this
1-4 primarly strength ( but comes with size)
4-8 (mass)
8-10 or 12 ( kind of muscle gain mixed with leaning)
12+ leaning

[Shroud83]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but higher reps of anaerobic exercises do not "burn fat". Your metabolism burns fat, and, to a lesser degree, cardio burns fat. (More importantly cardio increases your metabolism, which burns fat). I can't say I would recommend lifting any differently when cutting than bulking, as long as your goals are the same.

-Shroud

[fishizzle0927]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but higher reps of anaerobic exercises do not "burn fat". Your metabolism burns fat, and, to a lesser degree, cardio burns fat. (More importantly cardio increases your metabolism, which burns fat). I can't say I would recommend lifting any differently when cutting than bulking, as long as your goals are the same.

-Shroud

correct me if im wrong..........

lifting heavy burns more calories per movement than cardio.
and essentialy what your saying is a set of 50 does the same as a set of 5........ right?

[Gaspari1255]

I cannot buy into this whole "high reps" burns fat theory. Diet and Cardio is about the only remedy to burn fat and get shredded.. Whether I am bulking, cutting, or maintaining, I am also changing rep ranges (usually between 5-10reps, Unless I am doing a drop set or a burning out at the end).

Take Person A and Person B for example. They have the same height, weight, bf%, and metabolism. Person A keeps his reps in the 12-20 range and does very little cardio, Person B keeps his reps in the 5-10 range and does a lot of cardio. You're going to tell me that they are both gonna shread fat equally and in the same amount of time? Not a chance in hell...

[Gaspari1255]

correct me if im wrong..........

lifting heavy burns more calories per movement than cardio.
and essentialy what your saying is a set of 50 does the same as a set of 5........ right?

Do you expext to maintain muscle by doing a set of 50? Why not do a set of 8 and then do some HIT cardio?

[fishizzle0927]

so higher reps do what? condition the muscle? also what is considered cardio, maintaining a certain heart rate for an extended period of time? where do plyometrics fit in, yoga and you burn cals in your sleep right?...... these all burn cals which burn fat so in theory the more you do the more you burn....or no?

[Gaspari1255]

^^^^This

Gucks.. no offense but you are wrong.. rep ranges do matter.. lower reps build strength faster guaranteed.. look up my add 50lb to your bench program, try it out and see..

just click on my name and look at threads started by me to view it

I couldn't agree more. But where is there proof that higher reps (15+) burn fat?

[fishizzle0927]

Do you expext to maintain muscle by doing a set of 50? Why not do a set of 8 and then do some HIT cardio?

50 is extreme for the story is all.....

why do supersets then? just to elevate the heart rate or burn the muscle?

[Gaspari1255]

so higher reps do what? condition the muscle? also what is considered cardio, maintaining a certain heart rate for an extended period of time? where do plyometrics fit in, yoga and you burn cals in your sleep right?...... these all burn cals which burn fat so in theory the more you do the more you burn....or no?

I think the amount of actual calories burned doing lower reps (6-8) vs. the amount of calories burned doing higher reps (15+) is so miniscule that it wouldn't really have any impact on the physqiue, in terms of lowering bf% and conditioning.

[Gaspari1255]

50 is extreme for the story is all.....

why do supersets then? just to elevate the heart rate or burn the muscle?

To be honest, I feel that the majority of people do them just to "feel" the pump and burn a lot more. Also, shocks the muscle. Only time I find myself doing them is when I am in a rush and don't have much time due to work, class, etc..

[BUTTERYGOODNESS]

so would you agree that lower reps like 5 or 6 build more mass then say 10-12

[fishizzle0927]

10-4 good buddy. true that on the pumps.... i guess i just find it hard to believe that the pain and suffering some of us go through to get that extra rep is all for miniscule gains. and that my friend is what makes us individuals...........

[BUTTERYGOODNESS]

10-4 good buddy. true that on the pumps.... i guess i just find it hard to believe that the pain and suffering some of us go through to get that extra rep is all for miniscule gains. and that my friend is what makes us individuals...........

but wouldn't minuscule gains 1000 times over result to be something to recognize?

[fishizzle0927]

^^^^ thats my opinion

so would you agree that lower reps like 5 or 6 build more mass then say 10-12

^^^^^ and also my opinion

[BUTTERYGOODNESS]

i agree, anyone else agree or have a differing opinion

[Gaspari1255]

Different strokes for different folks. Let's wait for one of the more knowledgable guys to chime in here and give their two cents (Fireguy, Nark, Marcus, etc)

[dec11]

the last time i dropped a bunch of bf before my current cycle, i did all excersizes with reps of 20 15 12 then 2 sets to failure.( even squats and deads!!!) lots of vomiting but shreds fat. when i go heavy i usually stay in the 4-6 rep range.... hope that helps?

weight lifting does NOT shred fat! cardio does

[dec11]

rep range doesnt make as big a dif as guys used 2 think, just from reading MD they say 60% of ur 1rm to failure for 4 sets is best. personally though, im on the fench about that. i go 6-10 rep range for bulking depending on exercise, for cutting i would say 12-15 and do 5 sets instead of 3/4. ive never done a big cut, this is just what ive read. good lcuk buttery expecting another 9ibs down this week :P

no offence kiddo but you;re only 18 and not experienced enough to advise ppl. weight reps make sod all diff to fat burning, they work off two different energy systems

[dec11]

What amount of reps are best for size and which for cutting body fat? I know lower is more strength and mass and higher reps for helping lose fat but what are some more specific numbers?

Also what are lifting methods best for mass and for cutting? like drop sets or other lifting techniques. Any and all input would be greatly appreciated.

1-6 strength
7-12 strength/growth
13-20+ growth/endurance

basic guideline

[amcon]

full rep ranges, unless 1- your hurt. 2-you are working on a specific range (example: getting the bar off you chest for bench press) 3- or your a ***** trying to impress only your self

as for the amount of reps 3 - 20 is ok depending on what you would like to do compaired to your goals...
strength = lower reps
putting on size = getting the muscle pumped
cut = diet

[dec11]

^^^^ thats my opinion



^^^^^ and also my opinion

hypertrophy can be acheived at different rates across all the ranges

[Gaspari1255]

hypertrophy can be acheived at different rates across all the ranges

Exactly, more so related to how short your rest time is between sets, not how many reps you are doing.

[dec11]

this is all very basic but needs to be learned so you can cycle your training to suit goals

you could have a,b,c workouts: wk1 a, low rep heavy
wk2 b, medium rep moderate
wk3 c, high rep light

or cycle 6wks heavy, 6wks moderate, 6wks light



you should chop and change it around like above, you can train lightly forever but you cant train heavy forever
listen to your body, alot comes with experience

[dec11]

Exactly, more so related to how short your rest time is between sets, not how many reps you are doing.

yep, importantly pointed out also

[pebble]

Really? Cardiovascular exercises at intensities of say 60% of one’s heart rate reserve [(220-age - resting HR)x intensity (.6) + resting HR] does not burn as much fat as one would think. It is only about 26% of total calories coming from fat. The primary method of fat oxidation is fuelling your body at rest when hypocaloric. Cardio's biggest benefit is creating that caloric deficit (glycogen used needs to be replaced therefore CHO ingested go through glycogenesis to be stored in the liver and muscle) This means the body needs to fuel the rest of its major organs, which by the way are much more responsibly for metabolic demand than muscle, will utilize adipocyte lipolysis and beta oxidation.

Diet is the biggest factor in reducing body fat. You can do all the cardio you want, but if you are still hypercaloric you will be gaining weight.


As for the debate about reps and energy systems, higher rep ranges do not utilize fat. It is an anaerobic exercise that produces lactate as a result of buffering metabolic acidosis - result of CHO in the absence of O2 (anaerobic glycolysis). It is that simple. However, this does create a deviance from homeostasis that result in metabolic disturbances, but so does using lower rep ranges that alter the ATP-PCr energy system. To add to that lower rep ranges result in more micro trauma to the sarcolemma and myofilaments that ultimately need to be repaired stronger than they originally were. Both increase metabolic activity post exercise.

The best bet to maximize cardio’s direct fat loss effect is a short stint of very low intensity cardio post resistance training. RT causes the release of catecholamine’s and hormones (HGH, epinephrine, and norepinephrine are of most interest) which are known to promote lipolysis. We also know that RT uses glycogen (muscle, plasma, liver) during RT (explained above). This promotes a very favourable environment of beta oxidation (fat oxidation - use). If you do some light cardio trying to keep your HR under 130 (due to sympathetic vs parasympathetic nervous system and endocrine response) you will increase the amount of fat you are burning compared to cardio at other times of the day [It is very similar to fasted cardio in the morning, but with larger driving force for lipolysis (getting the fat of the adipocytes)].

So hypertrophy is the goals?
Well not all rep ranges are created equally as has been suggested here. Yes time under tension (TuT) is very important but, not all tension is created equally do to the fibre types it stimulates. Higher rep ranges (12-15+) do not provide enough tension to elicit enough of a response form type 2 fibres (which grow the most). This rep range will act on fibre type 1 which has little room for growth as it is not their primary role (postural and continuous movements).


Moving to lower rep ranges 1-5 also causes a problem. This time we have plenty of tension, but not as much time under that tension. We are stimulating the right fibres, typ2, but not for a long enough period of time (generally want about 40 seconds). This is where shorter rest can help, but the problem is time is not completely additive so less hypertrophy can be experienced here.

The sweet spot really is 6-12 because it provides the best combination of time and tension as the stimulus to drive adaptation.

Things get a little more confusing when you remember that not all hypertrophy is created equally. The two primary types are sarcoplasmic hypertrophy (SH) (muscle cell fluid, enzymes, and glycogen primarily) and myofilament hypertrophy (MH) (growth of the contractile components of the muscle – actin, myosin …). The higher the reps the more likely you are to promote a higher ratio of SH. The lower the reps the more likely you promote a higher ratio of MH. One other point to note is that SH is normally a softer muscle, whereas MH is denser.

Well this post just got really long so I am going to cut it here.


EDIT -

Hypertrophy can be seen at all rep ranges with a proper diet and training, but the quality and quantity will differ.

[dec11]

Really? Cardiovascular exercises at intensities of say 60% of one’s heart rate reserve [(220-age - resting HR)x intensity (.6) + resting HR] does not burn as much fat as one would think. It is only about 26% of total calories coming from fat. The primary method of fat oxidation is fuelling your body at rest when hypocaloric. Cardio's biggest benefit is creating that caloric deficit (glycogen used needs to be replaced therefore CHO ingested go through glycogenesis to be stored in the liver and muscle) This means the body needs to fuel the rest of its major organs, which by the way are much more responsibly for metabolic demand than muscle, will utilize adipocyte lipolysis and beta oxidation.

Diet is the biggest factor in reducing body fat. You can do all the cardio you want, but if you are still hypercaloric you will be gaining weight.


As for the debate about reps and energy systems, higher rep ranges do not utilize fat. It is an anaerobic exercise that produces lactate as a result of buffering metabolic acidosis - result of CHO in the absence of O2 (anaerobic glycolysis). It is that simple. However, this does create a deviance from homeostasis that result in metabolic disturbances, but so does using lower rep ranges that alter the ATP-PCr energy system. To add to that lower rep ranges result in more micro trauma to the sarcolemma and myofilaments that ultimately need to be repaired stronger than they originally were. Both increase metabolic activity post exercise.

The best bet to maximize cardio’s direct fat loss effect is a short stint of very low intensity cardio post resistance training. RT causes the release of catecholamine’s and hormones (HGH, epinephrine, and norepinephrine are of most interest) which are known to promote lipolysis. We also know that RT uses glycogen (muscle, plasma, liver) during RT (explained above). This promotes a very favourable environment of beta oxidation (fat oxidation - use). If you do some light cardio trying to keep your HR under 130 (due to sympathetic vs parasympathetic nervous system and endocrine response) you will increase the amount of fat you are burning compared to cardio at other times of the day [It is very similar to fasted cardio in the morning, but with larger driving force for lipolysis (getting the fat of the adipocytes)].

So hypertrophy is the goals?
Well not all rep ranges are created equally as has been suggested here. Yes time under tension (TuT) is very important but, not all tension is created equally do to the fibre types it stimulates. Higher rep ranges (12-15+) do not provide enough tension to elicit enough of a response form type 2 fibres (which grow the most). This rep range will act on fibre type 1 which has little room for growth as it is not their primary role (postural and continuous movements).


Moving to lower rep ranges 1-5 also causes a problem. This time we have plenty of tension, but not as much time under that tension. We are stimulating the right fibres, typ2, but not for a long enough period of time (generally want about 40 seconds). This is where shorter rest can help, but the problem is time is not completely additive so less hypertrophy can be experienced here.

The sweet spot really is 6-12 because it provides the best combination of time and tension as the stimulus to drive adaptation.

Things get a little more confusing when you remember that not all hypertrophy is created equally. The two primary types are sarcoplasmic hypertrophy (SH) (muscle cell fluid, enzymes, and glycogen primarily) and myofilament hypertrophy (MH) (growth of the contractile components of the muscle – actin, myosin …). The higher the reps the more likely you are to promote a higher ratio of SH. The lower the reps the more likely you promote a higher ratio of MH. One other point to note is that SH is normally a softer muscle, whereas MH is denser.

Well this post just got really long so I am going to cut it here.


EDIT -

Hypertrophy can be seen at all rep ranges with a proper diet and training, but the quality and quantity will differ.

haha, cut and paste at its best

[pebble]

It is not. That is just general information.

And did you really read the quality of sentence structure or flow? That would be torn apart by editors.

EDIT - But thanks for thinking it is article worthy.

[dec11]

It is not. That is just general information.

And did you really read the quality of sentence structure or flow? That would be torn apart by editors.

EDIT - But thanks for thinking it is article worthy.

ok then, so what are your credientials? find it hard to believe someone stores and regurgitates all that so easily

[pebble]

I hold internationally recognized training certs (exercise physiologist and strength coach) and have worked with high level athletes (NHL, NFL, CFL, and many collegiate hopefuls), and in rehabilitation fields.

And you shouldn't be surprised. Many people have forgotten more than I will ever know.

[dec11]

I hold internationally recognized training certs (exercise physiologist and strength coach) and have worked with high level athletes (NHL, NFL, CFL, and many collegiate hopefuls), and in rehabilitation fields.

And you shouldn't be surprised. Many people have forgotten more than I will ever know.

fair enough but im guessing laymans terms is the way to go

[fishizzle0927]

weight lifting does NOT shred fat! cardio does

so if by doing sets to failure and limited rest between sets, is it fair to say you can acheive cardio that way with an elevated heart rate for "x" amount of time?

[dec11]

so if by doing sets to failure and limited rest between sets, is it fair to say you can acheive cardio that way with an elevated heart rate for "x" amount of time?

no, your body will be running on a diff energy system

[fishizzle0927]

well then i retract all previous argument........and wave my white flag

[Gaspari1255]

It sounds like the thesis of this thread is that some of you guys are too lazy to do cardio and are looking for substitutes. Sorry, it doesn't work like that. Cardio is a royal pain in the ass, but i'm up 8am every morning on an empty stomach doing it. There is no alternative.

[dec11]

It sounds like the thesis of this thread is that some of you guys are too lazy to do cardio and are looking for substitutes. Sorry, it doesn't work like that. Cardio is a royal pain in the ass, but i'm up 8am every morning on an empty stomach doing it. There is no alternative.

ditto, i feel your pain lol