2 ms·

Yeah definitely, I didn't mean to imply that the weight/rep ranges don't matter, just that the specific number you can do within that range on a particular set

Yeah definitely, I didn't mean to imply that the weight/rep ranges don't matter, just that the specific number you can do within that range on a particular set isn't so important as long as you're reaching failure. If you're doing the 5-8 range for strength and your form breaks down after 4 on the last set, just note "cool, I did 4 today" and stop, rather than trying to do more with bad form or feeling discouraged that you didn't reach an arbitrary number.

lostapathy 7y ago
A big trap a lot of people fall into is worrying about whether they are training for strength vs hypertrophy before they are strong enough for it to really matter. Sure, those big body builder types you see won't be as strong as competitive power lifters, but they are a heck of a lot stronger than the average gym goer. Every huge guy is pretty strong, and every super strong guy is going to be pretty big. It's not exactly the same topic, but Mark Rippetoe gets to the spirit of it "My opinion about barbell rows is as follows: fuck barbell rows. Really. Fuck them. Stop wasting time worrying about barbell rows and get your deadlift up to 500. By then you'll have your own opinion and you won't have to worry about mine." Until you get to the point of at least a 350lb squat and 400lb deadlift, it's far more useful to just stick with a program you can stick with than worry about optimizing it based on what "professional" athlete you want to be like.
- jbc1 7y ago
  /r/fitness got heaps in to Starting Strength like 5 years ago where they recommended it to basically every beginner lifter and there were a bunch of before and afters from it of dudes t-rexing themselves when their primary (often only) goal was looking good. It doesn't make sense to perform routines that don't aim to achieve the results you want and the routine you're most likely to stick with is the one that promises the results you want, has people who have done it and achieved the results you want, and is created by a guy who has the results you want.
red2awn 7y ago
I don't think it is necessary to reach failure every workout, in fact I find it detrimental to your gains.
- danenania 7y ago
  Yeah, I know there are different takes on this. Going to failure or near-failure (I stop when I can't maintain proper form) has been working for me so far, but I think the point still holds that what matters is how much you've taxed your muscles, whether that's to failure or 90% of failure or 80% or 50%, not the precise number of reps you've done.
  - lostapathy 7y ago
    Actual failure is a good way for a lot of people to lose confidence, and that carries over more and longer than leaving one rep in the tank.
- aries1980 7y ago
  I think this is specific to person, age, other aspects of life e.g. level of stress and sleep quality that affects recovery. If you go to failure but you can train that main muscle group on the same week, I think you are fine as ideal set number for intermediate athletes are between 12-20 per muscle group (according to Dr. Mike Israetel @ Juggernaut Method).

lostapathy 7y ago

A big trap a lot of people fall into is worrying about whether they are training for strength vs hypertrophy before they are strong enough for it to really matter. Sure, those big body builder types you see won't be as strong as competitive power lifters, but they are a heck of a lot stronger than the average gym goer. Every huge guy is pretty strong, and every super strong guy is going to be pretty big. It's not exactly the same topic, but Mark Rippetoe gets to the spirit of it "My opinion about barbell rows is as follows: fuck barbell rows. Really. Fuck them. Stop wasting time worrying about barbell rows and get your deadlift up to 500. By then you'll have your own opinion and you won't have to worry about mine." Until you get to the point of at least a 350lb squat and 400lb deadlift, it's far more useful to just stick with a program you can stick with than worry about optimizing it based on what "professional" athlete you want to be like.

jbc1 7y ago
/r/fitness got heaps in to Starting Strength like 5 years ago where they recommended it to basically every beginner lifter and there were a bunch of before and afters from it of dudes t-rexing themselves when their primary (often only) goal was looking good. It doesn't make sense to perform routines that don't aim to achieve the results you want and the routine you're most likely to stick with is the one that promises the results you want, has people who have done it and achieved the results you want, and is created by a guy who has the results you want.

red2awn 7y ago

I don't think it is necessary to reach failure every workout, in fact I find it detrimental to your gains.

danenania 7y ago
Yeah, I know there are different takes on this. Going to failure or near-failure (I stop when I can't maintain proper form) has been working for me so far, but I think the point still holds that what matters is how much you've taxed your muscles, whether that's to failure or 90% of failure or 80% or 50%, not the precise number of reps you've done.
- lostapathy 7y ago
  Actual failure is a good way for a lot of people to lose confidence, and that carries over more and longer than leaving one rep in the tank.
aries1980 7y ago
I think this is specific to person, age, other aspects of life e.g. level of stress and sleep quality that affects recovery. If you go to failure but you can train that main muscle group on the same week, I think you are fine as ideal set number for intermediate athletes are between 12-20 per muscle group (according to Dr. Mike Israetel @ Juggernaut Method).