Heavy to light or light to heavy when doing weights?

Femilaxx1xo

I’m new to lifting. My goal is to lose weight. Should you start from heavy weights with low reps and work your way up to light with low reps or light weights with high reps and work your way to heavy weights with low reps? I hope I’m making sense.

Thank you x

kshama2001

Or you can do light to heavy and then work your way back down

Ex:
10 pounds 10 reps
15 pound 8 reps
20 pounds 5 reps
15 pound 8 reps
10 pounds 10 reps

That's called a Diamond Pyramid.

Here are more pyramids: https://www.verywellfit.com/how-to-do-pyramid-weight-training-workouts-3498553

jdog022

I would think of it differently. Prioritize compounds and then throw in some accessories after. Compounds will be more weight moved regardless of going heavy vs light. It’s also good to mix up rep ranges every so often. Periodization. Weekly or monthly etc

vanityy99

I started with 8lbs, 10 reps until I reached 100 total (idk the right terms are) , five times a week and noticed results three weeks in.

Silentpadna

Femilaxx1xo wrote: »

I’m new to lifting. My goal is to lose weight. Should you start from heavy weights with low reps and work your way up to light with low reps or light weights with high reps and work your way to heavy weights with low reps? I hope I’m making sense.

Thank you x

It really depends on what you are trying to accomplish while lifting. You mention that your goal is to lose weight. With that in mind, I would recommend that you lift in a manner that preserves the most muscle possible the most efficiently.

As @jdog022 mentions, compound movements are best for that because each movement works an entire kinetic chain. I would avoid things like arm curls and crunches and things like that unless they are accessories to compound lifts.

There are a gazillion programs out there, but for it to be effective it needs to be a progressive overload system. You can do that using heavy or light weights, but there must be effort (for you technical folks out there, it has to be enough to disrupt homeostasis, which is an event that causes your body to need to recover and adapt).

acpgee

I like to work to failure which means heavy to light.

acpgee

Oh but I started lifting in the Arnie era when isolation was key. My workouts are still stuck in that era. The general recommendation now that compound moves are the norm is probably different.

psychod787

I would suggest training for hypertrophy even when loosing weight. If you have a significant amount of weight to lose you might gain a small amount of lean mass.

psychod787

acpgee wrote: »

I like to work to failure which means heavy to light.

RPE of 0-1 on non compound. 1-3 on heavy compounds.

psychod787

Would also include iso and compound.

jdog022

psychod787 wrote: »

acpgee wrote: »

I like to work to failure which means heavy to light.

RPE of 0-1 on non compound. 1-3 on heavy compounds.

RPE of ten is failure. 1 would be barely trying.
Also training to failure consistently is unnecessary

Keto_Vampire

*thinks people are confusing Rate of Perceived Exhaustion (RPE) with reps...dyslexia/internet alphabet abbreviation soup

Yes, going to failure is usually unnecessary (ok on a final set for a workout). Leaving a few reps in the tank after a set is a smart way of achieving progressive overload (one can simply do more sets or more reps overall/more volume, etc.) and potentially avoiding injury

psychod787

Keto_Vampire wrote: »

*thinks people are confusing Rate of Perceived Exhaustion (RPE) with reps...dyslexia

Yes, going to failure is usually unnecessary (ok on a final set for a workout). Leaving a few reps in the tank after a set is a smart way of achieving progressive overload (one can simply do more sets or more reps overall/more volume, etc.) and potentially avoiding injury

When working accessory muscles, most of them can take much more volume from my experience and reading vs compound. I would never recommend taking heavy compounds to failure. Too much risk of injury imho. Sorry RIR...