study showing lbm gain using low rep v high?

[Bish83]

There was a study done by Kraemer (sp?) that compared low reps (5-8) medium reps (10-15) and high reps (25+) but i can't see if he has put up the lbm gained after the study. To my knowledge doing high reps would make it kinder on smaller ligaments/joints (thinking skull crushers) or possibly play with intensity. But if there was a study that showed a huge difference between 5 rep sets and 10 on lbm gained id understand why every bb'ing forum i visit states rep ranged of 8-12 reps.

Is there a study showing a lbm comparison?

 

[pyrobatt]

The only problem with this is everyone has a different response to different rep ranges. 8-12 works for most people and easier on joints. Some can only stimulate growth from 12+ and on the other hand some can only grow with 3 to 5. Experiment and find what works for you

 

[hvactech]

I've recently starting doing 12-15 on compounds with max power days thrown in...it allows me to lower weight with better form used. Max power days is great to judge max lifts to calculate 1rm and build strength, for me atleast.

 

[drewsicle3210]

I've recently starting doing 12-15 on compounds with max power days thrown in...it allows me to lower weight with better form used. Max power days is great to judge max lifts to calculate 1rm and build strength, for me atleast.

How often are you doing max power days?

 

[hvactech]

How often are you doing max power days?

Just started a few weeks ago. So far I'm doing a 3 day split with a max bench day for now....once my joints heal up ill add in squat power days aswell

 

[PaulBlack]

What I have learned to watch over the years is...
-Studies, many times, involve untrained individuals that will respond very well to any training or stimulus, right off the bat.
-The more one seems to become accustomed to loads and or the stimulus, the harder it can be, to get an easy response to that stimulus. Sometimes those studies do not carryover well to the more trained individuals.
-Eating (for me) has always had a direct influence on mass gains.
-That said I seemed to do fine with reps anywhere from 3-20 for mass gains, if I was eating enough. Multi sets (3-8) of course, for the lower reps (1-8)

-Prilipen's table, is another marker I have used...
Invalid Link Removed

As one poster said, YMMV and it may very well impact how well you do by how much your head is into said sets/reps/W/O.

 

[WormyJackal]

What I have learned to watch over the years is...
-Studies, many times, involve untrained individuals that will respond very well to any training or stimulus, right off the bat.
-The more one seems to become accustomed to loads and or the stimulus, the harder it can be, to get an easy response to that stimulus. Sometimes those studies do not carryover well to the more trained individuals.
-Eating (for me) has always had a direct influence on mass gains.
-That said I seemed to do fine with reps anywhere from 3-20 for mass gains, if I was eating enough. Multi sets (3-8) of course, for the lower reps (1-8)

-Prilipen's table, is another marker I have used...
Invalid Link Removed

As one poster said, YMMV and it may very well impact how well you do by how much your head is into said sets/reps/W/O.

Nailed it.^ for me if I eat 500-1000 cals over maint I do fine with low, medium, and even in the "high" range reps and grow. When I first started lifting I went for "low and HEAVY". I grew...but hurt myself a couple times. Being more experienced now I throw low and heavy routines in my workouts from time to time, but mostly medium range(10-12)