[quote]Professor X wrote:
Low would be anything under 25 reps per bodypart I guess.
How many total reps do you end up doing after 7-9 sets?
I don’t even know anyone who would only do 25 total reps per body part (assuming this is counting all exercises). Who is doing this in the name of “bodybuilding” or promoting growth?
I probably do between 60-70 total reps or more. That varies depending on the exercise and the weight used.
25 reps per body part is one way of training for strength only. Even less than this if someone is doing singles.
Most of us know that with sufficient volume, i.e- 60-70 reps per bodypart, a muscle will grow larger.
I wanted to see if anyone thought a muscle would grow larger even with lower volume as long extra calories are taken in.
Some of the “rules” of training that we follow are not written in stone.
For example, it is suggested that exercises be changed every 4-6 workouts, but some strong guys keep using the same exercises year after year and continue making gains.
So going back to the strength + calories question. If a guy squats 400 and works his way up to a 550 squat by using low volume (in other words, not the typical volume for bodybuilding) and eats a surplus of calories, will he gain muscular weight?
The extra calories have to be made into fat and or muscle. Do you think this guy would just get fatter and stronger or gain both fat and muscle?
If anyone is wondering why I am asking this question, basically a strong man competitor told me that he got big by only training maximal strength and eating alot. I wonder if his experience is a fluke or something that would probably work for most people.