3 ms·

Hold on. I know what you're trying to say, reps at 5-10 will give you strength benefits. But there's a nuance you're missing that's quite relevant to the disc

Hold on. I know what you're trying to say, reps at 5-10 will give you strength benefits. But there's a nuance you're missing that's quite relevant to the discussion. There are different metabolic options for the muscle, since different muscle cell types behave differently and metabolize differently. There is power, strength and endurance, broadly speaking, with a lot of overlap of course depending on your movement speed, resistance and volume. Which is why that at above around the 5-10 range you mentioned, you begin to touch into the endurance/hypertrophy area. Your comment about 1-2 reps not being good for beginners is questionable, though. It depends what you're training for. 1-2 reps is good or bad, but it all depends on what percentage of your max output you're attempting. a 1-2 rep range at something like an 85-90% of 1 RM isn't particularly offensive or dangerous, but it might not be optimal programming-wise if that is All you do. But it'll give you more strength increase faster than doing 8 reps. Your "there is no such thing" comment is wrong, though. I have in front of me Practical Programming for Strength Training by Mark Rippetoe, and there is a whole chapter that discusses the three muscle fiber types, twelve characteristics, and their relation to rep ranges. There is a continuum of strength v. hypertrophy, and the rep-range of 5 and below being optimally useful for strength training. Sure, any rep range really where you're not doing cardio will lead to both strength and hypertrophy, Especially for an amateur, but there is a rapid fall-off at either end of the scale (low rep = more strength increase / higher rep = endurance + muscle hypertrophy). In short: it's nuanced and I think your 5-10 number is again, a sort of "bodybuilding mentality" seeping into popular discourse, instead of a "good rule of thumb."

balfirevic 6y ago
> 1-2 rep range at something like an 85-90% of 1 RM [...] will give you more strength increase faster than doing 8 reps. It will give you more strength if you measure how much you can lift in a 1-rep set. It will give you less strength if you measure how much you can lift in an 8-rep set. The key false dichotomy here is strength vs. hypertrophy. They are not in opposition, bigger muscle is a stronger muscle. To be as strong as you can, you need to do two things: 1) Get the biggest muscles you can. 2) Get practice in the rep range you are interested in being tested. As good as Mark's books are, a lot has been researched and discovered since. For rep ranges in particular, this is a good article (backed by research): https://www.strongerbyscience.com/hypertrophy-range-fact-fiction/ https://www.strongerbyscience.com/hypertrophy-range-fact-fic...
- mancerayder 6y ago
  No, it's not a false dichotomy at all, or the first two pages of Google results on the topic are all wrong, powerlifting competitors are wrong (they should be doing 5x12 instead of 5x3, 5x1, 5x5 and many other rep schemes), Starting Strength as well as Practical Progamming for Strength Training are wrong and Rippetoe is a hack, my trainer (an olympic weightlifting competitor) is wrong, Alan Thrall's entire YouTube channel is false, and someone can make millions of dollars by showing that hypertrophy and strength are really one in the same and that there aren't three types of muscle fibers. This would have a huge impact in the fitness world if you were right. I don't think that's the case.
  - balfirevic 6y ago
    To be clear, neither I nor Greg Nuckols (author of the article I linked) claim that muscle fiber types aren't real. In any case, if you or anyone else reading this are interested in learning more, here are some additional links: - Size vs. Strength: How Important is Muscle Growth For Strength Gains? - https://www.strongerbyscience.com/size-vs-strength/ https://www.strongerbyscience.com/size-vs-strength/ - Training Based On Muscle Fiber Type: Are You Missing Out? - https://www.strongerbyscience.com/muscle-fiber-type/ https://www.strongerbyscience.com/muscle-fiber-type/ - Eddie Hall doing 10-rep sets when training for his 500 kg deadlift: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eKPgu8JMY8k https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eKPgu8JMY8k (which were explicitly called out as an important part of his training here: https://www.joe.co.uk/fitness-health/how-eddie-hall-trained-to-pull-the-monster-500kg-world-record-deadlift-72993 https://www.joe.co.uk/fitness-health/how-eddie-hall-trained-... )
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]

balfirevic 6y ago

> 1-2 rep range at something like an 85-90% of 1 RM [...] will give you more strength increase faster than doing 8 reps. It will give you more strength if you measure how much you can lift in a 1-rep set. It will give you less strength if you measure how much you can lift in an 8-rep set. The key false dichotomy here is strength vs. hypertrophy. They are not in opposition, bigger muscle is a stronger muscle. To be as strong as you can, you need to do two things: 1) Get the biggest muscles you can. 2) Get practice in the rep range you are interested in being tested. As good as Mark's books are, a lot has been researched and discovered since. For rep ranges in particular, this is a good article (backed by research): https://www.strongerbyscience.com/hypertrophy-range-fact-fiction/ https://www.strongerbyscience.com/hypertrophy-range-fact-fic...

mancerayder 6y ago
No, it's not a false dichotomy at all, or the first two pages of Google results on the topic are all wrong, powerlifting competitors are wrong (they should be doing 5x12 instead of 5x3, 5x1, 5x5 and many other rep schemes), Starting Strength as well as Practical Progamming for Strength Training are wrong and Rippetoe is a hack, my trainer (an olympic weightlifting competitor) is wrong, Alan Thrall's entire YouTube channel is false, and someone can make millions of dollars by showing that hypertrophy and strength are really one in the same and that there aren't three types of muscle fibers. This would have a huge impact in the fitness world if you were right. I don't think that's the case.
- balfirevic 6y ago
  To be clear, neither I nor Greg Nuckols (author of the article I linked) claim that muscle fiber types aren't real. In any case, if you or anyone else reading this are interested in learning more, here are some additional links: - Size vs. Strength: How Important is Muscle Growth For Strength Gains? - https://www.strongerbyscience.com/size-vs-strength/ https://www.strongerbyscience.com/size-vs-strength/ - Training Based On Muscle Fiber Type: Are You Missing Out? - https://www.strongerbyscience.com/muscle-fiber-type/ https://www.strongerbyscience.com/muscle-fiber-type/ - Eddie Hall doing 10-rep sets when training for his 500 kg deadlift: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eKPgu8JMY8k https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eKPgu8JMY8k (which were explicitly called out as an important part of his training here: https://www.joe.co.uk/fitness-health/how-eddie-hall-trained-to-pull-the-monster-500kg-world-record-deadlift-72993 https://www.joe.co.uk/fitness-health/how-eddie-hall-trained-... )

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]