D
Deleted member 123722
Guest
As many of us already know, studies have shown that whether you use 30% of your 1RM or 70% of your 1RM, gains are virtually the same, so long as you take your sets to or close to failure. So one may conclude that using either method is best for bodybuilding for the long term. But let's think about this further:
A six-rep set won't get you as much of a pump as a 12-rep set.
If a pump responsible for sarcoplasmic "growth," via metabolic stress, then wouldn't we be missing out doing lower-rep sets? One way to that I've learned to get a pump with six-rep sets, is to do more sets: like five sets of six, which is a total of 30 reps. But does this achieve the same as three sets of 12, which his 36 reps?
A six-rep set will be more strenuous on your joints/tendons than a 12-rep set.
I find that extension movements are more prone to pain than curling movements; so in this thought experiment, lets take one-arm overhead dumbbell triceps extensions.
A six-rep 35lb dumbbell extension will certainly put more stress on your elbows than a 12-rep 20lb dumbbell extension; even with proper warm up, you can feel the tension on the elbow much more. In fact, many people like to warm up with cables before doing skull crushers and others movements, so they can get away with using less weight.
Most injuries seem to come from using heavier weights.
From all the tears I've seen on video, and the stories shared by the pros, injuries were caused by using heavy weights. Although it is certainly possible to tear a bicep or blow out your back doing some simple chore at home, like picking up a couch, virtually all of the videos I've seen of gym injuries have been with heavy sets.
Conclusion:
So with all this being said, wouldn't it make more sense for bodybuilders not to do heavy sets at all, and just stick to the "safer" 8-12 rep rage? Of course the term "heavy" is also relative, so it is hard to determine it for each person, but the six-rep range I would consider "heavy."
However, lately I've been experimenting with lower-rep sets, doing the 4-5 sets of 6-8 reps, but I'm using super-short rest periods of 45 seconds to a minute max, with ample warm up sets; so the "heavy" weight I'm using, is actually much lighter than what I could be using, had I rested longer. In this way, I get a pump, but I also don't have to fatigue myself as much doing higher rep set for exercises that would tax my CNS. I for one love to push hard, but I also love the pump, so in this way, I get the best of both worlds, without getting injured. I've never been injured before (aside from a 130lb dumbbell dropping on my big toe), and I don't plan on it, either.
I got this idea watching Jay Cutler, who said in a video that he uses very short periods, and thus, has to use "heavier" weights and more sets to get that volume. He also said, if he can't do eight reps, he doesn't touch it.
The reason why I ran into Jay, is because I was researching who are the least injured bodybuilders out there, and it seems to me, those who are least injured trained not as insanely heavy as those who are utterly destroyed today—Branch/Ronnie/Dorian etc. We see guys like Dexter, who I don't think has ever gotten injured at all, pumping along in their 50's lol. So there must be something to that kind of training.
So, doesn't it make sense that the safest ways to workout would either be to do higher-rep sets with longer rest periods, or lower-rep sets with shorter rest periods to make the weight "relatively" heavy, so in both cases you get the same "volume" in the end without the risk, instead of using heavy ass weights with longer rest periods, as if we were powerlifters, trading super-intensity for less volume in the end?
Just some thoughts to throw out there.
A six-rep set won't get you as much of a pump as a 12-rep set.
If a pump responsible for sarcoplasmic "growth," via metabolic stress, then wouldn't we be missing out doing lower-rep sets? One way to that I've learned to get a pump with six-rep sets, is to do more sets: like five sets of six, which is a total of 30 reps. But does this achieve the same as three sets of 12, which his 36 reps?
A six-rep set will be more strenuous on your joints/tendons than a 12-rep set.
I find that extension movements are more prone to pain than curling movements; so in this thought experiment, lets take one-arm overhead dumbbell triceps extensions.
A six-rep 35lb dumbbell extension will certainly put more stress on your elbows than a 12-rep 20lb dumbbell extension; even with proper warm up, you can feel the tension on the elbow much more. In fact, many people like to warm up with cables before doing skull crushers and others movements, so they can get away with using less weight.
Most injuries seem to come from using heavier weights.
From all the tears I've seen on video, and the stories shared by the pros, injuries were caused by using heavy weights. Although it is certainly possible to tear a bicep or blow out your back doing some simple chore at home, like picking up a couch, virtually all of the videos I've seen of gym injuries have been with heavy sets.
Conclusion:
So with all this being said, wouldn't it make more sense for bodybuilders not to do heavy sets at all, and just stick to the "safer" 8-12 rep rage? Of course the term "heavy" is also relative, so it is hard to determine it for each person, but the six-rep range I would consider "heavy."
However, lately I've been experimenting with lower-rep sets, doing the 4-5 sets of 6-8 reps, but I'm using super-short rest periods of 45 seconds to a minute max, with ample warm up sets; so the "heavy" weight I'm using, is actually much lighter than what I could be using, had I rested longer. In this way, I get a pump, but I also don't have to fatigue myself as much doing higher rep set for exercises that would tax my CNS. I for one love to push hard, but I also love the pump, so in this way, I get the best of both worlds, without getting injured. I've never been injured before (aside from a 130lb dumbbell dropping on my big toe), and I don't plan on it, either.
I got this idea watching Jay Cutler, who said in a video that he uses very short periods, and thus, has to use "heavier" weights and more sets to get that volume. He also said, if he can't do eight reps, he doesn't touch it.
The reason why I ran into Jay, is because I was researching who are the least injured bodybuilders out there, and it seems to me, those who are least injured trained not as insanely heavy as those who are utterly destroyed today—Branch/Ronnie/Dorian etc. We see guys like Dexter, who I don't think has ever gotten injured at all, pumping along in their 50's lol. So there must be something to that kind of training.
So, doesn't it make sense that the safest ways to workout would either be to do higher-rep sets with longer rest periods, or lower-rep sets with shorter rest periods to make the weight "relatively" heavy, so in both cases you get the same "volume" in the end without the risk, instead of using heavy ass weights with longer rest periods, as if we were powerlifters, trading super-intensity for less volume in the end?
Just some thoughts to throw out there.
Last edited by a moderator:
