Why do people put on muscle after lightweight/high reps?

alexrosader

RunRutheeRun wrote: »

how light are we talking here? and how many reps?

15-25 rep range 30-45 second rests

Unknown

This content has been removed.

heybales

yvanvillegas wrote: »

RunRutheeRun wrote: »

how light are we talking here? and how many reps?

15-25 rep range 30-45 second rests

So pretty much circuit training style then.

http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/training/weight-training-for-fat-loss-part-1.html

heybales

AnvilHead wrote: »

blackcomaro wrote: »

Im not here to argue with you. Im no good at pasting articles and things but.... i have read it. You have got to shock the body...otherwise it says i know you... you do 5 sets of twelve or whatever. Keep you body guessing.... think your strong how strong is your mind.
I guarantee only the strong can push through the pain of high reps!

I'm pretty sure most reputable trainers/researchers quit believing this 1960's Joe Weider "Muscle Confusion" stuff a long time ago.

True - if they ever believed it.

But muscle confusion is thrown around in all these fad programs, just like the HIIT labeled being slapped on anything you do intense.

People just repeating what they hear without understanding what it means - but it sounds good when they stop making progress on the bar for any number of reasons. "need muscle confusion to keep progressing, though I have to lower the weight to do that!"

JB035

rainbowbow wrote: »

VintageFeline wrote: »

blackcomaro wrote: »

One last point then im out... so if your a women and used to walking in heels all day. You think low reps are going to build your calfs??? Thats my 2cents.

Dancers. Gymnasts. Major calves. Didn't lift a weight until two years ago.

calf size mostly comes down to genetics. it's why we always joke about men skipping calf day and getting calf implants.

I was a gymnast for 8 years (high level competitor training 25+ hours a week). I have normal sized calves.

The thing about gymnastics is that it trains within multiple modalities. Some movements require immense strength, some require stabilization, some require power, some require endurance, some require agility, etc. Training this way (called "functional training") is very effective for an overall fit body. As opposed to training for aesthetics (making the muscle larger in size) they've trained for functional skills.

If you look at male gymnasts for example, they look visually ripped. But in all actuality they are relatively small in body size compared to a bodybuilder for example. Why? Because of their training style.

you'll notice as mentioned above, this is why i personally think it's so important to train on a periodized program.

Perfect example!

alexrosader

heybales wrote: »

yvanvillegas wrote: »

RunRutheeRun wrote: »

how light are we talking here? and how many reps?

15-25 rep range 30-45 second rests

So pretty much circuit training style then.

http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/training/weight-training-for-fat-loss-part-1.html

15-25 rep range 30-45 second rests on ONE MUSCLE GROUP or ONE movement, I'd say 15-20 sets

Nightfly01

silenieuxevo wrote: »

There's something here that that also plays a factor in all of this. It's not always about the speed/quantity of reps, slowing down the reps at a mid-high weight will also gain some large benefits, this is done through forcing the muscles to work longer and harder during that time.
i can throw out 12 reps easy, but if i slow it down to 3 seconds fighting gravity going down and 1 second going up this fatigues the muscles much quicker because they're forced to do more work. This lengthens the eccentric contraction of the muscles in question, this won't be true for everyone, but for many people it is very true.

Try it for yourself in a few workouts, you'll feel the effects much faster than doing quick reps

silenieuxevo wrote: »

There's something here that that also plays a factor in all of this. It's not always about the speed/quantity of reps, slowing down the reps at a mid-high weight will also gain some large benefits, this is done through forcing the muscles to work longer and harder during that time.
i can throw out 12 reps easy, but if i slow it down to 3 seconds fighting gravity going down and 1 second going up this fatigues the muscles much quicker because they're forced to do more work. This lengthens the eccentric contraction of the muscles in question, this won't be true for everyone, but for many people it is very true.

Try it for yourself in a few workouts, you'll feel the effects much faster than doing quick reps

Time under tension is important. Much of the muscle damage if you will does come from the eccentric portion. With that being said the rep/set range that you haven't done in a while may be helpful. I have been doing starting strength 3x5 for a while. I kind of am out of shape and am tired of having a sore lower back. I am going to lower the weight, increase reps and have more variety.

Z_I_L_L_A

I flirt with different rep ranges. I've done as high as 50 rep sets for 4 sets. I've done heavy sets with 3 to 5 reps. I get more out of the super high reps than the lower reps. Actually getting bigger, I've measured. I agree time under tension is the cause. But seeing how I switch around each week from super hi, to hi to medium, to low reps keeps my muscles confused. But hey what do I know, I'm old school and all of us old guys are using outdated stuff,lol. Oh wait it is the same stuff, you guys just gave it a new name that sounds cool, all technical and all. Using lighter weight and higher reps gives me a break and my old joints thank me. Shawn Ray said he could get a better workout with lighter weight by flexing while lifting. Of course I'm a power lifter thats converting to BB. Another thing it's hard to take advice about muscle size and strength from a internet, youtuber, science lifter with a manbun that weighs 130 lbs.

PikaJoyJoy

yvanvillegas wrote: »

So all my life I've been told (and eventually told myself)that I can't leave the gym without hitting some low reps and heavy AF weights, I COULDN'T LEAVE THE GYM WITHOUT doing this, I know it's an ego thing. However once spring comes across I start dieting and lift lightweights in the 15-25 rep range and noticed myself getting leaner or "bigger" in comparison to my bulkier or "softer" look. Am I like hallucinating or something? Probably I am lolol

You just answered your own question in the bolded. You are getting leaner and the muscles that you slowly gained prior to the cut are showing.

As for the "bigger" part - you should check out the numerous threads on here with people who think they are getting "bulky" because they actually see their muscle definition.

alexrosader

Back and leaner than last fall at 1600-1800kcal daily

livingleanlivingclean

yvanvillegas wrote: »

Back and leaner than last fall at 1600-1800kcal daily

I'd hope you were shredded after subjecting yourself to such low cals...

jamesakrobinson

So I got a couple of those genetic testing kits done and they both came back with a result saying that I have a higher percentage of "fast twitch" (also called type II) muscle fibres. Some people are higher percentage of "slow twitch" (type I), and some are balanced between the two.

Fast twitch are the "power" muscles, slow twitch are the "endurance" muscles.

Fast twitch muscle fibres grow a bit bigger, and extensive testing has shown that power athletes almost universally have this genotype for majority fast twitch.
Long distance runners, bikers, and other endurance athletes most often have more slow twitch fibers.

If you know which one is dominant in you, you can optimize your training for the maximum results. If you have mostly fast twitch muscle, high intensity, low rep workouts, and HIIT cardio are your best bet. If you have more slow twitch muscle, then you are better served by higher reps and lower weights, and steady state cardio. If you happen to be balanced, you can choose to train for your preferred goal.

Athletigen has a service where you can take your raw data from one of the other genetic testing companies and import it for some targeted nutrition and training advice. I did and have gotten good results from it... I don't have any stake in any of the above, and as with anything YMMV but it certainly supports the idea that high intensity low reps is better for some, and high rep, lower intensity is better for others.

psuLemon

jamesakrobinson wrote: »

So I got a couple of those genetic testing kits done and they both came back with a result saying that I have a higher percentage of "fast twitch" (also called type II) muscle fibres. Some people are higher percentage of "slow twitch" (type I), and some are balanced between the two.

Fast twitch are the "power" muscles, slow twitch are the "endurance" muscles.

Fast twitch muscle fibres grow a bit bigger, and extensive testing has shown that power athletes almost universally have this genotype for majority fast twitch.
Long distance runners, bikers, and other endurance athletes most often have more slow twitch fibers.

If you know which one is dominant in you, you can optimize your training for the maximum results. If you have mostly fast twitch muscle, high intensity, low rep workouts, and HIIT cardio are your best bet. If you have more slow twitch muscle, then you are better served by higher reps and lower weights, and steady state cardio. If you happen to be balanced, you can choose to train for your preferred goal.

Athletigen has a service where you can take your raw data from one of the other genetic testing companies and import it for some targeted nutrition and training advice. I did and have gotten good results from it... I don't have any stake in any of the above, and as with anything YMMV but it certainly supports the idea that high intensity low reps is better for some, and high rep, lower intensity is better for others.

IMO, people are better off training a variety of rep ranges and styles to work on their weaknesses as much as their strengths to achieve greater balance.

heybales

So true.

Only benefit might be to someone that decides they are going to sacrifice a bunch of stuff in their life and what to be a body builder or power lifter because they have enjoyed some program briefly.

Might be good, since available now, to see if you have the genetic potential to even go that desired direction.

I've always wondered if I really do have a higher ratio TI fibers - or my endurance training has just prevented possibly a higher TII from being trained well enough.

Then again, I'm cheap, I mean thrifty, and have to much fun on the bike and running.

alexrosader

livingleanlivingclean wrote: »

yvanvillegas wrote: »

Back and leaner than last fall at 1600-1800kcal daily

I'd hope you were shredded after subjecting yourself to such low cals...

You bet I am!not as much as summer but Def finely leaner than last fall I'm only 148-150lbs 5'8 if I went 2500-2800cal daily I'd look like a donut

LiftHeavyThings27105

On the "different rep ranges" comment (...that people train a variety or rep ranges....) - absolutely agree. But, then again, it all depends on what your goals are.

I could not find the studies, but I promise that they are there, but there are studies out there that show that working a body part | muscle group in the ~5-rep range once a week and then working that same body part | muscle group in the ~12-rep range in that same week is a very good thing. So, you get power and you get hypertrophy for the body part | muscle group twice a week. Furthermore, you do the lower rep | higher weight early in the week and you do the higher rep | lower weight later in the week.

Please forgive my HORRIBLE wording to this and please excuse the lack of precise rep range. I am sure that someone has these studies saved. I will look for them.

Don't y'all just love a horribly phrased summary to scientific data?

ninerbuff

blackcomaro wrote: »

One last point then im out... so if your a women and used to walking in heels all day. You think low reps are going to build your calfs??? Thats my 2cents.

Look at obese people. Many don't walk in heels, aren't doing any reps, but progressive weight gain (resistance) over the years has helped build up their calves.

A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

jseams1234

ninerbuff wrote: »

blackcomaro wrote: »

One last point then im out... so if your a women and used to walking in heels all day. You think low reps are going to build your calfs??? Thats my 2cents.

Look at obese people. Many don't walk in heels, aren't doing any reps, but progressive weight gain (resistance) over the years has helped build up their calves.

A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

I'm in the "it's mostly genetics" camp with calves. I train the *kitten* out of mine and they are less than impressive. My wife never trains hers and they look like boulders. Her sisters, who don't work out at all are the same. Huge, impressive calves.