Why and Why Not to Ramp Up?

This question has been bothering me for a while. Why would I ramp up? And why would I do straight sets? On a bodybuilding perspective, doing straight sets would allow me to do 3x10 reps with y weight straight, but if I ramp up, I’d go for (0.7y)x10, (0.8y)x10, (0.9y)x10 and yx9 (hit failure). So , on a bodybuilding level, wouldn’t the straight set be better for hypertrophy since it provides more stimulus with more weight and more intensity?

On the other hand, ramping up gives more volume, combined with the final set (or two) to failure, could elicit greater hypertrophy gains? Or perhaps doing two warm-up sets of (0.7y)x8 and (0.8y)x8 and going out all out for (0.9y)x11 and yx7? Two high intensity sets now, but since the warm-ups would cause fatigue, would it not be better off doing a lighter warm-up and doing (0.9y)x13 and yx11?

So the question is, why is or why is not ramping up superior to straight sets, and if it is, what kind of ramping provides the greatest stimulation of the muscles for them to grow?

P.S. These numbers are only estimates. Not tested.

You are over thinking this by a long shot. it’s not rocket science (obviously cause have you ever seen a buff rocket scientist?)

L.O.L.

[quote]Lakkhamu wrote:
why is or why is not ramping up superior to straight sets[/quote]

Because without ramping you can’t turn weight lifting into algebraic equations. Without algebra in your weight lifting you can’t turn it into calculus. Without calculus you can’t over complicate the living shit out of one of them most simple things on planet earth.

pick shit up, put it down. Next time pick up more shit, or pick it up twice. Live long and prosper.

[quote]gregron wrote:
(obviously cause have you ever seen a buff rocket scientist?)[/quote]

Yes.

He works for NASA near Houston and looks like a house with a head.

Holy fucking shit

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]gregron wrote:
(obviously cause have you ever seen a buff rocket scientist?)[/quote]

Yes.

He works for NASA near Houston and looks like a house with a head.[/quote]

He must have been lying or something

[quote]gregron wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]gregron wrote:
(obviously cause have you ever seen a buff rocket scientist?)[/quote]

Yes.

He works for NASA near Houston and looks like a house with a head.[/quote]

He must have been lying or something [/quote]

He was pretty active in the church also.

Hey, it’s Texas. I heard there are dentists who lift weights here too. I personally don’t believe that one.

To the OP

I dont know try both and see what you like better?

If your smart enough to come up with all of that useless shit then Im sure you can figure out how to work trial and error

[quote]Professor X wrote:
Hey, it’s Texas. I heard there are dentists who lift weights here too. I personally don’t believe that one.[/quote]

I hear everything’s bigger in Texas,… even the Dentists I guess.

S

[quote]Lakkhamu wrote:
I’d go for (0.7y)x10, (0.8y)x10, (0.9y)x10 and yx9 (hit failure)[/quote]

Wow…

I sucked at algebra in school, how am I ever going to get HYUUGE now? :frowning:

I’d say straight sets

It doesn’t matter what’s supposedly “better for hypertrophy” if you don’t make enough progress with it.

As long as you don’t get your progress out via alternate routes, that is…

[quote]Lakkhamu wrote:
This question has been bothering me for a while. Why would I ramp up? And why would I do straight sets? On a bodybuilding perspective, doing straight sets would allow me to do 3x10 reps with y weight straight, but if I ramp up, I’d go for (0.7y)x10, (0.8y)x10, (0.9y)x10 and yx9 (hit failure). So , on a bodybuilding level, wouldn’t the straight set be better for hypertrophy since it provides more stimulus with more weight and more intensity?

On the other hand, ramping up gives more volume, combined with the final set (or two) to failure, could elicit greater hypertrophy gains? Or perhaps doing two warm-up sets of (0.7y)x8 and (0.8y)x8 and going out all out for (0.9y)x11 and yx7? Two high intensity sets now, but since the warm-ups would cause fatigue, would it not be better off doing a lighter warm-up and doing (0.9y)x13 and yx11?

So the question is, why is or why is not ramping up superior to straight sets, and if it is, what kind of ramping provides the greatest stimulation of the muscles for them to grow?

P.S. These numbers are only estimates. Not tested. [/quote]

Not tested?

Start training. Work on your approach until you are making progress at a good rate.
That tends to solve questions like this.

And what you used as an example for ramping is not what one would usually do (when using 9-10 reps per set).

You also forget that usually, one would ramp beyond the weight one can use for 3+ same-weight sets for the same number of reps.

Just mentioning that to confuse you a little more.

[quote]Lakkhamu wrote:
This question has been bothering me for a while. Why would I ramp up? And why would I do straight sets? On a bodybuilding perspective, doing straight sets would allow me to do 3x10 reps with y weight straight, but if I ramp up, I’d go for (0.7y)x10, (0.8y)x10, (0.9y)x10 and yx9 (hit failure). So , on a bodybuilding level, wouldn’t the straight set be better for hypertrophy since it provides more stimulus with more weight and more intensity?

On the other hand, ramping up gives more volume, combined with the final set (or two) to failure, could elicit greater hypertrophy gains? Or perhaps doing two warm-up sets of (0.7y)x8 and (0.8y)x8 and going out all out for (0.9y)x11 and yx7? Two high intensity sets now, but since the warm-ups would cause fatigue, would it not be better off doing a lighter warm-up and doing (0.9y)x13 and yx11?

So the question is, why is or why is not ramping up superior to straight sets, and if it is, what kind of ramping provides the greatest stimulation of the muscles for them to grow?

P.S. These numbers are only estimates. Not tested.[/quote]

ramp AND PUT MORE DISKS ON THE BAR

OR

no ramp AND PUT MORE DISKS ON THE BAR.

Mr. algebra told me that a dude who trains on the bench with 280lb is -very often- bigger than enother dude who trains with 180.
(i suspect that warming up is not very correlated to size,btw…)

ciao ciao

Mike

You’d need a lot of discs for that man… I’d go with plates, personally.

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]gregron wrote:
(obviously cause have you ever seen a buff rocket scientist?)[/quote]

Yes.

He works for NASA near Houston and looks like a house with a head.[/quote]

Dolph Lungren use to be pretty jacked too, and that guy is on a whole-different-level-smart.

[quote]Cephalic_Carnage wrote:
You’d need a lot of discs for that man… I’d go with plates, personally.
[/quote]

oh yes,plates,my english is not so good,sorry lol

Lol @ “discs”

[quote]buzza wrote:

[quote]Cephalic_Carnage wrote:
You’d need a lot of discs for that man… I’d go with plates, personally.
[/quote]

oh yes,plates,my english is not so good,sorry lol[/quote]

No worries. I had fun imagining you loading up an olympic bar with hundreds of DVD’s though :wink: