Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Good articles! Sort of makes one think about their own routines and training strategies. My goals are not so much about size but more about symmetry. And keeping the muscles that I already have. My usual routines are 2 sets per exercise and about 10-14 sets per muscle group. I am doing a loosely adhered to 5 day split. Also riding a bike almost daily.
It sounds like for my own goals, lighter weights will be fine.
I watch a lot of the AthleanX videos. Very informative even when he is sometimes a bit long winded.
In one of those posted articles, and some others, even range-of-motion requirements have been proven to be outdated. There is NO NEED to use full-range-of-motion. I proved that to myself many decades ago. I had been doing exactly what the orthodoxy was preaching. Then I came across some assessments or observations (won't call them "studies" exactly because in those days they probably didn't meet the requirements) that said, in a nutshell, you really just needed to work the "hard part" of the exercise. The easy part didn't add anything and just took up time and made you tired in a a way you didn't need to be.
Yep. That was it. Was able to do a whole lot more and really made progress after that. Did not lose any size or strength either.
I read through all the studies that had links. The study titled, "A critical analysis of the ACSM position stand on resistance training: Insufficient evidence to support recommended training protocols," seemed to have the most in-depth research. There conclusions stated:
• Choose a range of repetitions between three and 15 (e.g., 3-5, 6-8, 8-10, etc.).
• Perform one set of each exercise.
• After performing a combination of concentric and eccentric muscle actions, terminate each exercise at the point where the concentric phase of the exercise is becoming difficult, if not impossible, while maintaining good form.
I did not see any support for doing more reps than 15.
Most of us will disagree with only one set but the research tends to support this. BTW, I typically do 5 sets of bench press, squats, and pullups.
In one of those posted articles, and some others, even range-of-motion requirements have been proven to be outdated. There is NO NEED to use full-range-of-motion. I proved that to myself many decades ago. I had been doing exactly what the orthodoxy was preaching. Then I came across some assessments or observations (won't call them "studies" exactly because in those days they probably didn't meet the requirements) that said, in a nutshell, you really just needed to work the "hard part" of the exercise. The easy part didn't add anything and just took up time and made you tired in a a way you didn't need to be.
Yep. That was it. Was able to do a whole lot more and really made progress after that. Did not lose any size or strength either.
So, you do quarter squats and half-bench presses? What about deadlift? Do you do full range of motion with this lift?
Op, I live with shoulder pain and actively lift since 1982.
I have literally two things to mention to you:
1. bad form
2. not concentrating.
That's it. Every time I get sideminded, I'll hurt my shoulder.
As of light weights/heavy weights... What is your goal? Here's classic examples:
1. light weights, lots of reps. Good diet, of course:
2. heavy weights, less reps
So you want what?
As of that shoulder, again. I feel, personally, that it does not really matter. As far as I am staying concentrated and in good execution form, weight is irrelevant.
Oh, and don't DROp wights. As in - fast release. That's destined to end in injury. Always controlled release.
If only one set and 3-15 reps is adequate then a person could easily do a full body workout in one session. And full range of motion? I don't doubt anything from ACSM but a lot of it sure sounds counter intuitive. Or counter to what has been done multiple times in the past.
For me, I am thinking still the two sets per. One set to warmup and one set to failure. I always notice the second set with a given weight is easier than the first. Your results may vary.
My own goal is lower body fat, trimming and toning and overall health and fitness. Sort of like the smaller greek statue.
My shoulders have given me problems for years. I went to school years ago and so I know my form is good. It is the left shoulder today but it has also been in the right shoulder. If I get a cortisone shot I am pain free for a long time but not sure that is a good plan because after several shots over many years the pain still finds its way back.
I have read studies that show that lifting lighter weights to fatigue and more reps gets about the same results as lifting heavy. Anybody doing it this way? (men's health)
I have recurring pain in my shoulder that limits what I can curl and press. Doctor said something last time about not giving me any more shots and I sort of agree. If the pain is masked, I might do more damage.
Anyway my plan is to do just that. Lift lighter weights for more reps to fatigue. I am hoping I can strengthen my shoulder that way and eventually lift pain free.
Who has experience with this method?
I start out on an exercise with a moderately-light weight and go for higher repetitions, to get warmed-up. Then I do a set with medium-heavy weight, followed after a rest, by weight as heavy as I can put up, for 6 to 10 repetitions. I get a benefit from all these sets.
I do something similar with running. I trot around for awhile, as my warmup. Then I go for a distance run, at as hard a pace as I can sustain. After resting for 20 minutes or so, I do some sprints. If you watch high-level runners as they train, the sprinters often run longer distances than they would in competition and the distance runners do quite a few series of sprints.
i used to lift heavy weights. Overtime I noticed that my strength was not long standing, i would tire. More bothersome for me was the fact that functionally that approach did not make sense anymore. How many times in your life will a person lift 300 pounds.
About 15 years ago I transitioned to supersetting. I lift a weight that I can easily handle early but as the reps add up that weight becomes heavy. I lift probably only an hour a week because cardio is my chosen exercise. My muscle strength has improved greatly, in regards to longevity. For example, i can do back to back supersets with minimal breaks, like bench press, bent over row and situps.
There's no "Should". You don't get arrested for not doing it. Zeus wilt smite thee not. All the serious non-opinion, not trying to sell something data, and I mean all the data for a very long time, indicates no difference between higher weight, lower reps & lower weight, higher reps. Even if gains are slightly faster with heavier weights *** there is no official deadline *** for when you have to achieve "X" strength gain. Just keep lifting for a lifetime, which is the desired protocol anyway, and you'll always reach your max.
The salient component in all this is taking muscles to max fatigue, or failure, if you prefer the term. The reps vs weight scheme in most examinations of the subject has been optimized between 5 and 15 reps but if you go to 16 or 18 or 20 reps it's not like you're that far behind. Just keep adding weight as you go along.
I will leave yet another link to a fantabulous analysis on the subject. I have also noticed that if you read a dozen articles on the subject many of them will quote of refer to this one eventually
Another thing is that, for me, lifting heavier for long periods of time almost always results in overuse injuries. I worked out for many years in a gym with several men/women who were professional bodybuilders and these folks almost all did not lift super-heavy all the time. Their biggest reason was injury prevention and keeping things "fresh" for them in the gym by mixing up the weights and reps.
So, you do quarter squats and half-bench presses? What about deadlift? Do you do full range of motion with this lift?
There is a guy in my current gym that we all call "Quarter Rep" because every single one of his exercises are performed using only about 25% range of motion. Many guys will snicker and put him down. And wouldn't you know it, the guy has a great physique. We obviously don't know his diet, cardio or "other" variables, but I have thought to myself that guy must know something the rest of us don't!
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
My Study
