All of them, I use just about all the rep ranges during workouts.
i find heavy singles work well for me with assistance work in the 5+ range.
The 80% rep test doesnt seem to work for me. when i used to do alot of low weight high rep work i could do around 8 with 80%. now i can do like 3 but 80% now is what 100% used to be when i was doing lower weight higher rep type stuff.
also i am about 25 lbs heavier.
although i said high reps dont work well for me, i forgot to mention tht my triceps and delts work better in the 8-12 reps range.
[quote]rander wrote:
i find heavy singles work well for me with assistance work in the 5+ range.
The 80% rep test doesnt seem to work for me. when i used to do alot of low weight high rep work i could do around 8 with 80%. now i can do like 3 but 80% now is what 100% used to be when i was doing lower weight higher rep type stuff.
also i am about 25 lbs heavier.[/quote]
Your old max may have been higher that you thought when you where doing higher reps. It’s easy to under estimate your 1 RM when you test it. If you have done several 1 single reps near your max, it’s normal to reach fatigue which would prevent from actually making your real 1 RM, that’s why I said it might take a few workouts. Having a workout partner helps. And it’s easier to test on some exercises than others.
In general single joint exercises work best, but you can use it for presses, rows and pulldowns. Any exercise where there is no risk if you fail. I would not recommend it on the squat, dl or leg press because of the risk. Use the leg extension and leg curl to estimate the rep range for lower body.
[quote]goya wrote:
rander wrote:
i find heavy singles work well for me with assistance work in the 5+ range.
The 80% rep test doesnt seem to work for me. when i used to do alot of low weight high rep work i could do around 8 with 80%. now i can do like 3 but 80% now is what 100% used to be when i was doing lower weight higher rep type stuff.
also i am about 25 lbs heavier.
Your old max may have been higher that you thought when you where doing higher reps. It’s easy to under estimate your 1 RM when you test it. If you have done several 1 single reps near your max, it’s normal to reach fatigue which would prevent from actually making your real 1 RM, that’s why I said it might take a few workouts. Having a workout partner helps. And it’s easier to test on some exercises than others.
In general single joint exercises work best, but you can use it for presses, rows and pulldowns. Any exercise where there is no risk if you fail. I would not recommend it on the squat, dl or leg press because of the risk. Use the leg extension and leg curl to estimate the rep range for lower body. [/quote]
what risk?
For me 3-5 but 8-12 for arms. I think this is because my strength goes down massively for each rep I add for example I would do a pullup + 30% bw and then do under 4-5 reps with bodyweight So the stress is just decreased by so much from every little bit of volume I add.
[quote]austin_bicep wrote:
what risk?
[/quote]
Failing on the squat a 1 rep max attempt can be tricky. If you have a lot of experience and good spotters go for it. But it’s not for everyone especially not beginners.
But it’s just easier to do it on the leg extension and leg curl, it will give you the info you want.
[quote]dez6485 wrote:
Spry wrote:
1-3 reps have made me huuuuuuuuuuge! OK, at least I’m bigger than I was.
I think it is best to train for strength gains not size gains.
Stronger ALWAYS EQUALS Bigger
Bigger sometimes equals stronger
The first makes much more sense. You get two things for the price of one.
Oh, my last workout every week is a lighter one with reps in the range of 5-8.
I’m thinking the science behind this working for me is:
Early in the week do 1RM on the big lifts. Growth hormones, test, etc. gets released because of these heavy training.
Later in the week, with all this anabolic crap floating around doing some more bodybuilder style rep ranges means I grow huuuuuuuuuuuuge!
you work up to 1rm every week? what kind of method(s) do you use to continually make progress/keep from plateauing?
[/quote]
I’m a n00b. I have not hit a plateau yet. I’ve been reaching for a bigger 1RM each week for 5 weeks now. I will admit that this plan wont continue to work for me forever but I plan to keep this up until end of this year.
I have gone from:
Bench 65kg to 80kg
Squat 80kg to 95kg
Dead 100kg to 140kg (just hit this last week. It hurt!)
This week I’m focusing on getting my squat to 100kg.
I don’t follow any ‘method’ per se. I just lift heavy shit. When I graduate from n00bversity I will have to do some more indepth research and come up with a more specific plan.
By the way my goals at the start of this strength gain phase of my mine were (at a BW of 70kg - I’m about 68.5 right now):
Bench - 85kg
Squat - 105kg
Dead - 140kg
so I’m getting close and will probably need to increase my goals as I’m gonna hit them way before the end of the year!
Over all 10 reps for me.
I’ve been trying 20’s lately.
I find I progress well from 4 reps to 7. At least for chest and biceps.
[quote]goya wrote:
I think it depends a lot on the individuals.
A test I like a lot is to take a few exercises (works best for single joint exercises), and measure your 1 rep max. Don’t use calculators that would defeat the purpose.
Once you have measured your 1 RM, wait at least 5 min (or do it on another day), take 80% of the weight and do as many reps as possible to failure.
Some people can only do like 4 reps with that weight while some rare exception do more than 20 reps. Average is around 8. And most 1RM calculators are based on this. There is speculation that people that do low reps have more FT muscle while people that do higher reps have more ST muscle. Also from what I have seen and read, this number does not change regardless of how you train and how much you train. But you might get slightly different numbers on different exercises.
Anyways the idea is that whatever number you get, you stick to that +/- 1 or 2 reps, but use a load large enough to stimulate gains. Obviously someone that can only do 4-5 reps with 80% 1 RM will need to use ridiculously light weights to do high reps. Not productive.
On the other hand someone that can do 15+ reps with 80% 1RM would probably do well with high reps since he can handle more weight at higher reps.
Now this part is very speculative, but is based on my experience. If you fall in the low rep end of the spectrum, high volume may not be for you. These individuals will tend to fatigue very fast, so lot of sets might not be beneficial. And if multiple sets are used, still stick to low reps. On the other end people with high endurance, might do better with more volume.
In my case, when I did the test for military presses. I found out that my 1RM was 20 pounds higher than what was estimated by the 1 RM calculator. But I was only able to do 5 reps with 80% of that weight. So the calculator was totally off in this case.
So I increased the load and lowered the reps from 8-10 to 4-6 and I have been increasing in shoulder size and strength ever since. It’s been 2 months since I made the changes and I have not reached a plateau yet, which is another positive.
So I think the load is more important than the # reps. Make sure you work at a high enough % of your max and adjust from there. [/quote]
It is crazy how this works. My friend can bench 225 for 11 and only bench press around 280, while I can only get it for 9 and I can bench 295. He can do soo many more reps than me while I tire out way faster. It doesn’t seem to affect me at all when I squat/deadlift tho.
is it worth discussing rep ranges without discussing density? Some people just might need to shorten their rest for a good pump or if they fatigue easy rest more.
Im a spastic for rest periods now. I just set myself a set-rep goal, a maximum rest period and try to do it all as quickly as possible if i can cut the rest down i do (im very impatient). Its less boring and gets the blood pumping. I think thats whats missing with the general “what works for you” attitude.
I am surprised by the answers here since I have found cycling different rep ranges over blocks of time is best for increased strength and size particularly on big lifts like the bench. Having said that I find high reps of heavy squats, 10 and up, seperate the men from the boys in terms of big strength and mass gains and also pain threshhold gains.
J
I tried to explain that in my original post. Sometimes low reps will work, but if you only do the low reps joint issues will come no matter how good you think you are.
High reps are also good for gaining mass, and you can get awefully strong in that rep range too.
Not the same 300lbs for 3x5reps than it is 300 for 2x 20reps.
[quote]goya wrote:
A test I like a lot is to take a few exercises (works best for single joint exercises), and measure your 1 rep max. Don’t use calculators that would defeat the purpose.
Once you have measured your 1 RM, wait at least 5 min (or do it on another day), take 80% of the weight and do as many reps as possible to failure.
[/quote]
I thought the test required you to test the 80% after doing the 1RM? I guess you’d get different results if you did the test in the two ways. Have you found this?
High reps are worse for my joints than low reps.
I find it strange but its the way things are with me.
[quote]Boffin wrote:
goya wrote:
A test I like a lot is to take a few exercises (works best for single joint exercises), and measure your 1 rep max. Don’t use calculators that would defeat the purpose.
Once you have measured your 1 RM, wait at least 5 min (or do it on another day), take 80% of the weight and do as many reps as possible to failure.
I thought the test required you to test the 80% after doing the 1RM? I guess you’d get different results if you did the test in the two ways. Have you found this?
[/quote]
On some exercises yes but not by much. It’s more like 1 rep difference. I suppose the more work you did to find the 1 RM the more time you need to rest.
Doing a lot of increasing near max 1 rep sets can be taxing on the muscles. So if you do 1x95%RM,1x96%RM,1x97%RM and 1x98%RM, you might not be able to make the real 1 RM. This is an individual matter. If you recover very quickly and fatigue slowly it won’t have as much of an impact then if you fatigue quickly and it takes you a long time to recover between sets.
Similarly, if you don’t wait long enough after you determine your 1 rm to try the 80% RM, you won’t be able to do as many reps skewing the results.
Now that we are on the subject of reps, Charles Poliquin made an interesting observation.
I’m not sure if I agree with this but he said the higher your 1RM is (over time) the lower your reps will be for a given percentage.
I always thought that if you can bench 250 for 8 and max 300, then by the time you reached 500 x 8, your 1RM would be 600.
In other words, it would be exactly the same ratio.
According to Poliquin, If you ever did reach a 600 lb 1RM, your best for 8 would be more in the 400 lb. range, etc…
I know Poliquin’s a stud, but that sounds a bit far-fetched to me. What do you guys think?
[quote]MytchBucanan wrote:
Now that we are on the subject of reps, Charles Poliquin made an interesting observation.
I’m not sure if I agree with this but he said the higher your 1RM is (over time) the lower your reps will be for a given percentage.
I always thought that if you can bench 250 for 8 and max 300, then by the time you reached 500 x 8, your 1RM would be 600.
In other words, it would be exactly the same ratio.
According to Poliquin, If you ever did reach a 600 lb 1RM, your best for 8 would be more in the 400 lb. range, etc…
I know Poliquin’s a stud, but that sounds a bit far-fetched to me. What do you guys think?[/quote]
i think that has to do with what youre training for. most guys that train for a 600lb 1RM are not training in such a way that their 8RM is going to stay in perfect ratio.
when they are at that level, they are training their CNS to fire optimally for the 1 600lb rep, not 8 500lb reps. im sure that someone a bit more into that could give you a better explanation of that. it seems as though i get why it doesnt work the way you think it should, but i cant exactly articulate it well.
[quote]MytchBucanan wrote:
Now that we are on the subject of reps, Charles Poliquin made an interesting observation.
I’m not sure if I agree with this but he said the higher your 1RM is (over time) the lower your reps will be for a given percentage.
I always thought that if you can bench 250 for 8 and max 300, then by the time you reached 500 x 8, your 1RM would be 600.
In other words, it would be exactly the same ratio.
According to Poliquin, If you ever did reach a 600 lb 1RM, your best for 8 would be more in the 400 lb. range, etc…
I know Poliquin’s a stud, but that sounds a bit far-fetched to me. What do you guys think?[/quote]
There is an anecdote in which Fred Hatfield did a 1RM of 800lb+ and Tom Platz did a 1 RM of 600lb. Then they lowered the weights to 500lb to determine their RM at that load. Platz got 23 reps with the 500lb and Fred only got 6 reps.
But maybe Fred would have gotten 6 reps with 600 as well? Or he just did not really recover enough to do as many reps as he could have done rested. But the bottom line is that Fred was more of a low rep-er than Tom.
Now I am sure they both had different strength-endurance ratios. But I am not sure if it changed much throughout their career.
Maybe with steroids you can increase the amount of FT fibers over ST? Not sure if this is possible. But I am sure people that perform well in powerlifting already have plenty of FT muscle and are naturally better with high weights and low reps.