Guest viewing is limited

Mass responses from low reps

redline2101

Member
Ive been trying to keep my reps between 8-12 for mass, but ever since I switched to 1-5 for every set, just massive weight (for me), thats when i've been getting the mass AND strength gains. Is it possible my body just responds differently? If so I think i'm going to change my routine.
 
I think its mostly associated with the strain, via force on the body. Lifting something heavier forces the body to adapt, and the hormonal output increases to meet the high demand. Its a surge in test, and GH from what I gather. This is why heavy squats are notorious for adding size to your body as a whole, not just your legs.
 
a 3-5 rep range is what most guys i know use when either trying to gain mass/weight or are in off season and trying to gain stength before going into a training cycle for powerlifting.
 
redline2101 said:
Ive been trying to keep my reps between 8-12 for mass, but ever since I switched to 1-5 for every set, just massive weight (for me), thats when i've been getting the mass AND strength gains. Is it possible my body just responds differently? If so I think i'm going to change my routine.
Click to expand...

Hypertrophy, as a general rule, is a function of load + TUT. You can increase either of these variables to grow. If you've always done high reps, low weight, the body adapts to that stimulus over time and growth will slow. But since you've now switched the stimulus - you're going to see some nice new growth here.

Remember, over time your body will adapt to this scheme as well. Then it may be time to switch back to higher reps to avoid stagnation.
 
Oh alright, I didn't even think about my body adapting. Ive hit plateus before and I think this might be the factor I didnt consider, as I do a routine for months at a time.
 
Dragon13 said:
:wtf1:

Don't even know where to start with this. Why don'y you explain why it would be water and glycogen weight gained, and we'll go from there?
Click to expand...


Bigger Muscles = more water, more glycogen:439: LOL, but I see where you were going with the question.


I myself went from a 3x10 training routine to a 5x5 hybrid and ive had awesome gains, possibly due to changing the stimulus, possibly due to heavy squats and deads and the effects they have on GH output.... But also a while back i came across an old article (from Arnolds day) discussing how a 4-6 rep range is best for both hypertrophy and strength. Now I know science is constantly evolving, but something to think about.

Also i have noticed that my muslce are much harder and fuller looking than when doing a higher rep range.
 
SamuraiSid said:
Bigger Muscles = more water, more glycogen:439: LOL, but I see where you were going with the question.


I myself went from a 3x10 training routine to a 5x5 hybrid and ive had awesome gains, possibly due to changing the stimulus, possibly due to heavy squats and deads and the effects they have on GH output.... But also a while back i came across an old article (from Arnolds day) discussing how a 4-6 rep range is best for both hypertrophy and strength. Now I know science is constantly evolving, but something to think about.

Also i have noticed that my muslce are much harder and fuller looking than when doing a higher rep range.
Click to expand...

Sarcoplasmic hypertrophy, typically, is a result of water and glycogen-other sarcoplasm constituents. Myofibrilar hypertrophy, for simplicity, is a result of the addition of structural and contractile proteins. Stimulus by intensity of load, typically, shifts the hypertrophy into either direction.
 
Dragon13 said:
Hypertrophy, as a general rule, is a function of load + TUT. You can increase either of these variables to grow. If you've always done high reps, low weight, the body adapts to that stimulus over time and growth will slow. But since you've now switched the stimulus - you're going to see some nice new growth here.

Remember, over time your body will adapt to this scheme as well. Then it may be time to switch back to higher reps to avoid stagnation.
Click to expand...

Less concise, but even more correct (accurate).
 
russy_russ said:
Sarcoplasmic hypertrophy, typically, is a result of water and glycogen-other sarcoplasm constituents. Myofibrilar hypertrophy, for simplicity, is a result of the addition of structural and contractile proteins. Stimulus by intensity of load, typically, shifts the hypertrophy into either direction.
Click to expand...

Yet virtually all training will result in both types. Too many people make the mistake of thinking certain types of training result in only sarcoplasmic or only myo- hypertrophy.

This is also why training with both higher reps with "lighter" weight and lower reps with heavy weight will result in the best gains. If increasing either variable in the hypertrophy equation will work... why not increase both?
 
As indicated above, one needs to understand the difference between hypertrophy and hyperplasia.

Has hyperplasia finally been scientifically proven to occur? I thought it was simply an unproven possibility.
 
Russy-Russ was describing hyperplasia and we don't do that, our muscles only hypertrophy, unless you are some kind of human/cat mix, in that case, I loved you in Avatar.
 
VolcomX311 said:
Russy-Russ was describing hyperplasia and we don't do that, our muscles only hypertrophy, unless you are some kind of human/cat mix, in that case, I loved you in Avatar.
Click to expand...

I was actually arguing with someone over that exact same thing the other. Hyperplasia has not been proven in humans, right?
 
Reps of 1-7 in cycles of 7 produce(d)(s) ALL of my strength/mass. High reps are for when I want to train for muscular endurance.
 
VolcomX311 said:
Russy-Russ was describing hyperplasia and we don't do that, our muscles only hypertrophy, unless you are some kind of human/cat mix, in that case, I loved you in Avatar.
Click to expand...

No. I was describing hypertrophy.
 
Dragon13 said:
Yet virtually all training will result in both types. Too many people make the mistake of thinking certain types of training result in only sarcoplasmic or only myo- hypertrophy.

This is also why training with both higher reps with "lighter" weight and lower reps with heavy weight will result in the best gains. If increasing either variable in the hypertrophy equation will work... why not increase both?
Click to expand...

You are correct, sir.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top