LIGHTER WEIGHTS TO BUILD MASS?

[johnsar]

Hi
Let me first start by saying I am 51..been working out naturally for quite some time.

Lately I'm seeing information about lifting lighter weights and still gaining mass.
For example, for chest, I recently watched a video,,I wont mention his name... where he suggests doing 4 sets. First set for 20 reps...Followed by 2 working sets of 10...followed by the last set of 15..... doing isolation movements first.. to pre -exhaust the muscle.

Followed by dumbell presses, where you come out very wide at the bottom of the movement. I've heard this is bad for the shoulders, and he even mentions that because you are using lighter weights it shouldn't cause shoulder problems.
He was saying you dont need to lift heavy to gain muscle...you just need to work the muscle hard..
He seems very knowledgeable and is in great shape. I dont know if he is natural or not. But I figured I would give it a try and my joints might thank me for it.

Needless to say 2 weeks or so into it I abandoned it because I was losing mass. I went back to lifting heavy and slowly but surely am gaining again.

Now yesterday Im thumbing through a fitness magazine and low and behold, it states the very same thing. "You can gain muscle without heavy weights" You just have to fatigue the muscle.


I just wanted to hear opinions on this....as anyone found this to be true?

Thanks for your opinions

John

 

[justhere4comm]

I have never seen this.

Diet first and foremost. If you don't know your maintenance calories and increase them accordingly. You will not grow.

Nutrition first.

I don't have the post count to offer you links to caloric intake calories, but someone here will.

What is your body type? Body Fat Percent?
What you are describing is fine for cutting, but not bulking.

Are you supplementing?

I do:
-Pyramids
-Reverse pyramids.
But never just light and high reps.

Once in a while I will even do 3 x 10s to go heavier.

-3 reps 10 sets
Weight is heavy enough to not reach exhaustion.

But heavy, and it's the total reps over more sets that matters, not many reps and many reps.

Also have been reading about and considering BFR. Blood Flow Restrictive training.
I await other input from senior members on this. Not to hijack. And your question.

 

[jakz]

No, no, no. I am sorry, I don't beleive in training with light weights. Heavy weights and high intensity and volume will = growth. Lighte weights are for deloading. I'm NOT saying the light weight thing is wrong, but it us all about overload for me.

 

[johnsar]

Exactly what I always thought...Thats why the video didnt make sense to me. Then to see the same thing in a magazine, had me really scratching my head.

Thanks

 

[jakz]

I know at a time some old pros were giving Kai and Phil a hard time aboit their training methods. Light weights do work, but again, heavy weights have stood the test of time.

 

[justhere4comm]

Volume. (I.e., More sets.)

Compound Movements.
- squats, dips, etc.

Diet (caloric surplus)
- eat clean too

Rest

Recovery

Tempo

Train to failure

 

[PaulBlack]

I think the general consensus is around 65%-85% loads (say of 1RM) will be more optimal for the masses to gain size and strength. (check Prilipens chart for hypertrophy not necessarily for strength)

https://www.t-nation.com/training/prilepins-table-for-hypertrophy

Certain muscles of the body may respond differently too ie: usually forearm or calf training seems to respond better to lighter higher reps.
Long distance runners seem to be leaner, while sprinters seem to have rather large quads. Both BW exercises, so maybe force requirements play a role.
If one is going to lift with say 30%-40% loads, perhaps using some force or speed along with the lighter loads may help!?

 

[808LIFE]

If you look at all the great bodybuilders through the last 25 years, it's apparent that the thickness and depth of the muscle is only achieved through heavy weight. With the exception of the current Mr O in Phil, but he's so gifted with genetics he puts muscle on by just looking at weight. But for us mere mortals the only way to build that thick dry looking muscle is to lift to complete failure. I absolutely believe that you need to have a workout partner to truly get yourself to grow. A workout partner is there on those last 2 -3 reps that you normally wouldn't attempt without a spot. All the old school bodybuilders always trained with a workout buddy. Some people can train alone and push themselves to that point of exhaustion but these are the genetic freaks and there aren't many who can do this. Great example of muscle building is Dorian Yates. This guy didn't have the greatest genetics but his training style with his work ethic pushed him above some of the most genetically gifted bodybuilders in a golden age of the sport. His training style is the perfect example of the type of intensity one needs to train with. If you haven't watched Blood And Guts I suggest you watch it.
And if course proper rest and surplus in calories is an absolute must. But the intensity of the training and the frequency is the most important aspect IMO.

 

[210LBS]

I disagree with most of the posts above. I believe (just based on my opinion and experience) that heavy weights and lighter weights can build mass. I've done workouts with heavy and light weights and have had success. While I do prefer heavier weights when bulking and lighter weights when cutting, both are good. Keep in mind that it's not easy to adjust to doing high reps from low reps with heavy weights. Doing 5X5 squats is a lot different from widowmakers. I find heavy weight low reps usually coincide with volume training and higher reps often coincide with high intensity.

 

[Robert5891]

I believe Bead Schoenfeld (hypertrophy specialist) did a study showin that anywhere between 30-70% of 1RM can induce hypertrophy given you take the muscle to failure in the exercise.

You can see the same gains from a pure hypertrophy standpoint, but you'll have to do a lot more reps overall with the lighter weight than you would with the heavier weight to reach concentric failure

 

[210LBS]

I believe Bead Schoenfeld (hypertrophy specialist) did a study showin that anywhere between 30-70% of 1RM can induce hypertrophy given you take the muscle to failure in the exercise.

You can see the same gains from a pure hypertrophy standpoint, but you'll have to do a lot more reps overall with the lighter weight than you would with the heavier weight to reach concentric failure

I agree with that. But I don't think it's necessarily the weight or reps but it's the time the muscle is under tension. That's why when I do high intensity training I only need 1 working set but in that 1 set my muscle is under tension for about 2 minutes straight through. It would be impossible to replicate that with more sets or heavier weights.

 

[justhere4comm]

3 to 4 reps controlled at heavy weight with more sets I think more effective in stimulating growth.

Just my 2

 

[PaulBlack]

You can see the same gains from a pure hypertrophy standpoint, but you'll have to do a lot more reps overall with the lighter weight than you would with the heavier weight to reach concentric failure

Which is probably fine with say curls, or even BP's, but given the choice for guys to do ultra high rep squats or deads, where the entire system is getting taxed, muscles, along with cardio respiratory effects, the game changes a bit for most trainees, as that kind of work can get pretty uncomfortable. So shorter, perhaps heavier work, gets it done quicker.

 

[Robert5891]

3 to 4 reps controlled at heavy weight with more sets I think more effective in stimulating growth.

Just my 2

Which is probably fine with say curls, or even BP's, but given the choice for guys to do ultra high rep squats or deads, where the entire system is getting taxed, muscles, along with cardio respiratory effects, the game changes a bit for most trainees, as that kind of work can get pretty uncomfortable. So shorter, perhaps heavier work, gets it done quicker.

Agreed.

Both systems can and do work, the research trials have shown as much. Some guys thrive on ultra-heavy, low rep work, while others see great gains with lower weight higher rep work. It's about finding which style of training your body can handle on a consistent basis and properly recover from.

The ultimate takeaway is to completely fatigue the muscle and maximize each working set and exercise to induce growth in the muscle and challenge it. It's two ways of getting to the same point. How you choose to get there depends on the individuals training preference and recuperation capacity.

 

[PaulBlack]

Yeah, for every 3-4 of us who feel heavier weight works best, there is someone to bend the graph against the wind.
This guy always comes to mind when I think low weight higher reps...

https://www.t-nation.com/training/serge-nubret-pump-training

For example, Serge always did 6 or more sets of 12 reps, using a weight for the first set he could likely lift for 20 reps. He also never went to true failure on any set and focused on keeping the pump throughout the workout. Using such a high volume combined with low rest periods meant he never went very heavy, something many bodybuilders' egos won't allow.

I have been at this for over a quarter century and truthfully, there seems to be no exact rules to follow, save for perhaps showing up and doing the work and repeat that on varied occasions.

 

[justhere4comm]

Agreed. Changing the game so the muscles cannot easily become too comfortable is great sound advice.

I think it was Arnold who spoke to muscle confusion theory. Or was that Joe Weider?

 

[Robert5891]

Agreed. Changing the game so the muscles cannot easily become too comfortable is great sound advice.

I think it was Arnold who spoke to muscle confusion theory. Or was that Joe Weider?

Weider was the first one to really promote the concept of periodization or muscle confusion, which has since been hijacked by Tony Horton and P90X.

 

[AntM1564]

Here is a good read about using lighter weights. In a nutshell, it can be as effective as anything else.

https://www.t-nation.com/training/tip-dont-neglect-light-weights-for-muscle-growth

 

[R1balla]

I go heavy on compound lifts, 8-12 on isolation

 

[johnsar]

Interesting.
I guess it makes sense when you think about it. I usually just stuck to the heavy weights, but I think i will start incorporating lighter weights in as well. Will give my achy Joints a break from time to time.

 

[R1balla]

I also mixed up the style and routine I'm on. Sometimes a normal split, others I do 5x5, DC, push pull...etc along with negatives, pyramid, reverse pyramid stuff like that.

 

[Matthew1237]

Studies have shown hypertrophy is possible with like 30% of your 1rm. It's definitely possible. No one can tell you a training style doesn't work because they all work. There's maybe a 5-10% in gains. I wouldn't even say that much, between the worst and best program.

 

[justhere4comm]

Trying this pre and post PCT. 1 week light then normal for 4 weeks and back light for 4 weeks. We will see what this brings.

Goal is to drop below 15% body fat.

 

[enraged_chris]

Heavy is a very relative term... you still need to lift a heavy enough weight to stimulate muscle fibers in the rep range you produce. Personally I powerlift but have noticed the most anabolic results followed by heavy main work followed by relatively heavy compound movements and then some isolation movements to exhaustion... I'm already pretty fatigued by the end of the workout so the weight isn't "heavy" but while I am training it feels "heavy" and is further stimulating muscle tissue.

 

[PaulBlack]

Studies have shown hypertrophy is possible with like 30% of your 1rm. It's definitely possible. No one can tell you a training style doesn't work because they all work. There's maybe a 5-10% in gains. I wouldn't even say that much, between the worst and best program.

And this may very well be the absolute truth. I know if one uses less weight, then they most likely have to use more reps to get the muscle better worked.
Also, as far as "studies" many studies are done with subjects not very advanced, or not even really reg lifters. Which I think can skew the work/findings a little, since any training on a novice shows improvement, whilst a seasoned veteran, needs to have perhaps a differing or higher level of stimulation, since he is more adapted to training.
And yes many different ones work, at least some of the time. The thing most trainees want from my experience is, which one will give the most bang for the buck. We know BW exercises work, but if one has access to weights, many (not all) choose to use some kind of outside resistance.

 

[compudog]

I think style of lifting is important, according to the lifter's stage of development. In other words, if a lifter only has limited strength, then focussing on posterior chain lifts like deads and squats is going to put the most mass on them. Once a lifter gets strong though, maybe BB style is better. I think "heavy" is important in both cases, but it's not the same heavy... A heavy squat might be something over 400 lb, but a heavy leg extension is an entirely different thing. A heavy squat might mean a single, double, or triple. A heavy set of leg extensions will probably always be 10 reps at least... So "heavy" has a different meaning, depending on the lifting style.. However, in regards to the question, I think in any case it's probably difficult to add mass with light weights, and probably impossible for a beginner working on building a strength base.

 

[Robert5891]

And this may very well be the absolute truth. I know if one uses less weight, then they most likely have to use more reps to get the muscle better worked.
Also, as far as "studies" many studies are done with subjects not very advanced, or not even really reg lifters. Which I think can skew the work/findings a little, since any training on a novice shows improvement, whilst a seasoned veteran, needs to have perhaps a differing or higher level of stimulation, since he is more adapted to training.
And yes many different ones work, at least some of the time. The thing most trainees want from my experience is, which one will give the most bang for the buck. We know BW exercises work, but if one has access to weights, many (not all) choose to use some kind of outside resistance.

The Schoenfeld study he's referring to was accomplished with resistance-trained individuals.

 

[PaulBlack]

The Schoenfeld study he's referring to was accomplished with resistance-trained individuals.

Yeah, don't get me wrong, I am on board with the pretty much anything can work philosophies of training, I just feel that "optimal" for the average trainee, seems to be what most people end up doing or following, since there is probably the most success rates behind those specific styles.

 

[EMPIREMIND]

Op I would look into mountaindog training

 

[BEAST73]

I have been working out with Light weight for the last 17 years now, and It can build Muscle Mass..
But it depends on the Person Genetics,Diet, and Workout Routines..

 

[double s]

IMO, the best thing to do it switch it up, 5-8 rep range, then down the road 12-15..it is all about shocking the system, muscle confusion.

 

[briandward1]

Do it all. Come up with a workout plan for a muscle group and increase the weight used week over week. I have been having good luck with the following scheme:
Week one: everything is 4x12-15 (fatigue at 12-13, failure at 14-15) first sets go to fatigue, last time failure. Week 2: 4x10-8 week 3 4x8-6. Week 4 15,12,10,8,6. That way you are working in progressive overload and basically all rep ranges traditionally known as effective for hypertrophy.

 

[BennyMagoo79]

There are two ways to stimulate stress induced adaptation (gainz): metabolic overload and tension overload. The former requires that you exceed (or come close to it) your body's ability to supply ATP by overloading training volume (weightxreps) while the latter requires that you exceed (or come close to) your body's ability to recruit motor units by increasing your 1RM.

Lifting at a lower percentage 1RM only works if you can overload your weekly volume. So if u can smash out 10x10 with 80kg but fail 10x20 with 40kg then 80kg is better for overloading volume. Conversely, it is unlikely that you could achieve 10x5 with 160kg if 10x10 with 80kg is a max effort.

Lifting at 4-6rm is a great way to stimulate both types of adaptation. For example, once it becones possible to lift a given weight for 5x6, one may manipulate for metabolic adaptations by decreasing rest intervals for the same protocol every week.