T Nation

Growth Stimulation Cutoff for Heavy Weights?

Arthur Jones once said
Best results will always be produced by the minimum amount of exercise that imposes the maximum amount of growth stimulation

Wouldn’t that be a one rep Maximum? We all know no real bodybuilders get big doing one rep so then we start upping the reps and dropping the weight and the problem becomes where is the cut off line?

1 Like

The cut off is 6 reps.

1-5 for strength

6+ for size

1 Like

I’m curious how that cut off was determined ?
Scott

Scientists studies the training of athletes for years. Then other scientists studies their work, and the next generation of athletes. After like 50 years they figured it out pretty well.

Use lots of rep ranges.

Then what’s the TUL for strength vs. TUL for size? Are genetics also part of all of this, that is, it might vary from one individual to another based what genetics each inherited?

About 3-20 seconds for strength, depending on how many reps you’re doing.

More than 20 seconds for mass.

Genetics are going to make people a little different from each other. To account for this find your One Rep Max in a lift. The do a set to failure with 80%. If you get less than 5 reps with 80% you’re an explosive, low rep guy and you should do slightly less reps per set, or Less TUL. And if you get more than 5 reps you’re an enduring guy, and you should do slightly more reps per set, or longer TUL.

The cut off line may keep going up and up as muscles adapt new changes!
That’s where science steps in, I suppose, maybe we should be able to figure out after days and years in training that what is our “point of fatigue” and “stimulus threshold”.

Then there’s tempo, force, load and velocity as well which should be taken into consideration!
please correct me anywhere if I’m wrong

1 Like

Yes!

Faster Up, more force, more strength

Slower Down, more muscle damage, more mass

Different loads man different reps

After a time, maybe as short as 6 weeks, training gets less effective as you adapt to it. It stops “changing” you. So you should make planned adjustments to keep training working for you.

1 Like

Scientists studies the training of athletes for years. Then other scientists studies their work, and the next generation of athletes. After like 50 years they figured it out pretty well.

== Scott ==
You would think so but then something comes along and changes all that . Arthur Jones promoted going to failure and most everyone has followed suit and now Ellington Darden says stop short of failure ! I question all this stuff because last years studies get over written with today’s study. How to build muscle fluctuates like the wind.

Thats completely true

1 Like

Maybe my sources are very small but I think the studies don’t fluctuate much, they stay same over the time! isn’t it?

1 Like

We exists in very different circles, as most of what I’ve seen promoted AGAINST going to failure and only employing going to failure in VERY limited circumstances.

1 Like

Many ways work. It can seem like they’re all contradictory and random, and that they all invalidate each-other.

But that’s because you’re just looking at one small piece, not stepping back and seeing the big picture, and how all these different pieces fit together.

You should run one of Christian Thibadeau’s routines. He is really good at putting all the different stuff together. Just a month of training would allow you to experience several different effective techniques, let you get a feel for how many reps to do per set, and how to balance frequency and volume.

1 Like

Also… total work volume plays a role in the equation in a given session.

Some studies have shown working loads as low as 40% of 1Rm can stimulate hypertrophy in untrained indviduals.
While the optimal range found in advanced lifters landed in the 70% to 80% range of 1 Rm.

Everything works, until it doesn’t.

I think that was from Dan John.

Maybe Abe Lincoln. Which ever one sounds smarter.

1 Like

Yup. And things that worked back then don’t just suddenly stop working when we find new things that work.

Reference

image

image

1 Like

Who is that?

I’m gonna feel like a goof for asking if its a young Dan John.

Pat Casey, and then a ninja edit with Bruce Randall.

Pat was the first man to bench press 600lbs.

In a t-shirt.

With a bench that looked like this

image

And Bruce bulked his way up to 400lbs before cutting down to 200lbs and crushing some bodybuilding competitions.

We’ve known how to build muscle and strength for DECADES, to say nothing of the centuries spent engaging in regular physical exercise and eating animal flesh. It’s only in the interest of people trying to make money to make this stuff seem more complicated than it is.

6 Likes