ExcelMale
Menu
Home
What's new
Latest activity
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
Latest activity
Videos
Lab Tests
Doctor Finder
Buy Books
About Us
Men’s Health Coaching
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More options
Contact us
Close Menu
Forums
General Health & Fitness
Workouts & Routines
Can we gain mass with light weight and high repetitions?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Guided_by_Voices" data-source="post: 229782" data-attributes="member: 15235"><p>I think this is a really important set of points and I will add a different variable. I spent the early years of my strength pursuits using the Arthur Jones/Mike Mentzer/Ken Leistner approach of working up to a max set of some number of reps (usually under 10) and trying to achieve the absolute max intensity possible on the top set, not just going to failure but using things like forced negatives and drop sets. I was stronger than the average person (which is not saying much) training that way but I never really made the kind of progress that in retrospect I should have. ( I was on no exogenous anabolics at that time.) Then around 2010 I ran across Pavel Tsatsouline and Steve Justa who advocated for not going to failure but rather doing more sets/higher volume at weights that while “heavy” did not require grinding out reps to complete the set. The basic principle is that the benefits of max effort sets come with the downside of longer recovery time ( I needed on average 4 days of recovery per body-part when I was doing max effort) whereas short-term gains will be less using the submaximal effort approach but that is counterbalanced by the benefits I list below.</p><p></p><p>Since switching to that type of approach, with many tweaks and variations since then, I am much stronger overall than I was before (i.e. I can lift much more at 95% than my previous 1 rep max) especially in upper body movements, and I have strength through a much wider variety of movements. There are a lot of set/rep schemes that I have used but I generally keep the reps under 10 unless I am rehabbing something so 8 sets of 3, 15 sets of 1, or 5x5, with various progression schemes that oscillate between slightly higher weight vs. high total volume, all while never getting to the point where I have to grind out a rep, is the basic pattern. I would highlight the following benefits for those who may be interested :</p><p></p><p></p><ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">With this approach, here is no excuse for anything other than perfect form, and not bouncing/throwing the weight. This alone will be joint-friendly. Many people allow their form to degrade as they approach failure, whether that be 2 reps or 30 reps, so “lighter” does not necessarily guarantee safer.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">The reduced systemic stress enables much greater breadth of activity. I now do four types of presses per week, which would have been impossible before due to the front-delt and tricep recovery required.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">The volume I now do is astronomical compared to what I did before which obviously increases time under tension.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">I find this approach to be much more rehab-friendly. I have had to rehab both shoulders, an elbow and my back during the time I’ve been lifting this way and I find that I lose less strength and heal more quickly with this approach.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Plateaus are less likely to lead to over-training. This alone has been a huge benefit as burn-out and strength loss was a big problem previously. I have found that my strength gains are actually more of a step-function than a linear increase, and I now plan my loading patterns and expectations around that.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Once you get used to stopping short of grinding out reps, it is surprisingly easy to tell whether you have gotten stronger.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">A lot of strength research uses programs somewhat similar to a 16 week powerlifting progression, which I did many of, however I have found that to really tell if a program works, it takes about 18 months or so, IOW long-enough to ensure that injury, burn-out, holidays, vacation, sickness, stress, de-loads, etc. will not derail the approach. Another thing that became apparent to me when evaluating over a longer timeline, is that real, sustainable gains happen more slowly than most people think, and it is important to think long-term rather than in short bursts.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">The mental “psych” required is much less for a 95% lift that a 100% lift, another factor reducing the risk of systemic burn-out.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">The role of the nervous system seems to be undervalued in comparison to muscle adaptation, and higher sets at slightly sub-maximal weights seem to have a major benefit. It is almost as if you are training the nervous system as much as inducing muscle growth, which is likely why this type of training is common among Olympic lifters.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">I find that I can do the descent part of the lift under much greater control if I am not attempting maximal weights, and the research is pretty clear that the negative is at least, if not more, important than the ascending part of the lift.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">The mentality that only the max effort lifts are really promoting adaptation can lead to a lot of insidious problems, like pushing too hard when you can feel an injury lurking. Farmers, construction workers, and gymnasts are examples of people who are often very strong but are not known for doing constant max-effort activity, but who rather do very high volume at heavy but sustainable levels.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Especially for those not on TRT, constant max-effort work is likely to lead to greater hormonal stress as well. A poster on another forum (Chilln) had a theory which I think has a lot of merit which is that a lot of people start lifting in their youth when their hormones are high, but then keep right on with the same type of (unsustainable) stress level into an age where their hormones decline, which leads to a downward cycle of overall burnout.</li> </ul><p></p><p></p><p>Ok, that’s my three cents. If someone is skeptical but wants to give it a try, start with a movement you aren’t emotionally attached to (for me that was pull-ups) and experiment with it.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Guided_by_Voices, post: 229782, member: 15235"] I think this is a really important set of points and I will add a different variable. I spent the early years of my strength pursuits using the Arthur Jones/Mike Mentzer/Ken Leistner approach of working up to a max set of some number of reps (usually under 10) and trying to achieve the absolute max intensity possible on the top set, not just going to failure but using things like forced negatives and drop sets. I was stronger than the average person (which is not saying much) training that way but I never really made the kind of progress that in retrospect I should have. ( I was on no exogenous anabolics at that time.) Then around 2010 I ran across Pavel Tsatsouline and Steve Justa who advocated for not going to failure but rather doing more sets/higher volume at weights that while “heavy” did not require grinding out reps to complete the set. The basic principle is that the benefits of max effort sets come with the downside of longer recovery time ( I needed on average 4 days of recovery per body-part when I was doing max effort) whereas short-term gains will be less using the submaximal effort approach but that is counterbalanced by the benefits I list below. Since switching to that type of approach, with many tweaks and variations since then, I am much stronger overall than I was before (i.e. I can lift much more at 95% than my previous 1 rep max) especially in upper body movements, and I have strength through a much wider variety of movements. There are a lot of set/rep schemes that I have used but I generally keep the reps under 10 unless I am rehabbing something so 8 sets of 3, 15 sets of 1, or 5x5, with various progression schemes that oscillate between slightly higher weight vs. high total volume, all while never getting to the point where I have to grind out a rep, is the basic pattern. I would highlight the following benefits for those who may be interested : [LIST] [*]With this approach, here is no excuse for anything other than perfect form, and not bouncing/throwing the weight. This alone will be joint-friendly. Many people allow their form to degrade as they approach failure, whether that be 2 reps or 30 reps, so “lighter” does not necessarily guarantee safer. [*]The reduced systemic stress enables much greater breadth of activity. I now do four types of presses per week, which would have been impossible before due to the front-delt and tricep recovery required. [*]The volume I now do is astronomical compared to what I did before which obviously increases time under tension. [*]I find this approach to be much more rehab-friendly. I have had to rehab both shoulders, an elbow and my back during the time I’ve been lifting this way and I find that I lose less strength and heal more quickly with this approach. [*]Plateaus are less likely to lead to over-training. This alone has been a huge benefit as burn-out and strength loss was a big problem previously. I have found that my strength gains are actually more of a step-function than a linear increase, and I now plan my loading patterns and expectations around that. [*]Once you get used to stopping short of grinding out reps, it is surprisingly easy to tell whether you have gotten stronger. [*]A lot of strength research uses programs somewhat similar to a 16 week powerlifting progression, which I did many of, however I have found that to really tell if a program works, it takes about 18 months or so, IOW long-enough to ensure that injury, burn-out, holidays, vacation, sickness, stress, de-loads, etc. will not derail the approach. Another thing that became apparent to me when evaluating over a longer timeline, is that real, sustainable gains happen more slowly than most people think, and it is important to think long-term rather than in short bursts. [*]The mental “psych” required is much less for a 95% lift that a 100% lift, another factor reducing the risk of systemic burn-out. [*]The role of the nervous system seems to be undervalued in comparison to muscle adaptation, and higher sets at slightly sub-maximal weights seem to have a major benefit. It is almost as if you are training the nervous system as much as inducing muscle growth, which is likely why this type of training is common among Olympic lifters. [*]I find that I can do the descent part of the lift under much greater control if I am not attempting maximal weights, and the research is pretty clear that the negative is at least, if not more, important than the ascending part of the lift. [*]The mentality that only the max effort lifts are really promoting adaptation can lead to a lot of insidious problems, like pushing too hard when you can feel an injury lurking. Farmers, construction workers, and gymnasts are examples of people who are often very strong but are not known for doing constant max-effort activity, but who rather do very high volume at heavy but sustainable levels. [*]Especially for those not on TRT, constant max-effort work is likely to lead to greater hormonal stress as well. A poster on another forum (Chilln) had a theory which I think has a lot of merit which is that a lot of people start lifting in their youth when their hormones are high, but then keep right on with the same type of (unsustainable) stress level into an age where their hormones decline, which leads to a downward cycle of overall burnout. [/LIST] Ok, that’s my three cents. If someone is skeptical but wants to give it a try, start with a movement you aren’t emotionally attached to (for me that was pull-ups) and experiment with it. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Share this page
Facebook
Twitter
Reddit
Pinterest
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Email
Share
Link
Sponsors
Forums
General Health & Fitness
Workouts & Routines
Can we gain mass with light weight and high repetitions?
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
Top