Heavy weights vs more reps

ndj1979

Down. I am 5'11 and was 205 lbs with a decent amount of flab when I started lifting and counting calories. Now I am around 180 lbs with both significant muscle gain and fat loss. It is not just "loss of fat making my muscles show" as many people would say, the increase in arm size proves that. And I am not sure what my bf% is...if I had to estimate I would say maybe around 18%

you lost body fat which exposed the existing muscle that you had….

You may have had some newbie gains from when you first started and those are showing as well…

You can't lose weight and build muscle at the same time, as they are diametrically opposed to one another. Losing weight means you create a negative energy balance; gaining muscle means you have a energy surplus…

Its like trying to say you can drive a car on an empty tank of gas…they are complete opposite..

Ms_Hiit

Personally, I find metabolic style workouts (cardio with lighter weights) more fun than heavy lifting. I was pleased with the results I got in my upper body when doing that style of workout but I didn't start seeing the changes I wanted to see in my lower body (glutes and thighs) until I started lifiting heavier weights with lower reps this past year.

DamePiglet

of course toning exists! . hah. Doing more reps with less weight, but still enough weight to be challenging, might not pack on a ton of muscle but it'll sure give you some definition!

if you are gaining muscle you are in a calorie surplus.

If you are losing fat you are in a calorie deficit..

its basic math and thermodynamics and all that fun stuff...
[/quote]

Thank you.

"Toned" generally means somewhere between mushy-jiggly and "cut".
Mostly, the focus is on the appearance, not the muscle strength.


It's subjective, of course, but there's no real reason to crucify someone for using the word.

Live2beFit92

"Toned" generally means somewhere between mushy-jiggly and "cut".
Mostly, the focus is on the appearance, not the muscle strength.


"It's subjective, of course, but there's no real reason to crucify someone for using the word."


Thank you!! In my original message I was just trying to share the different options and approaches of lifting the author of this thread could pursue.

ndj1979

"Toned" generally means somewhere between mushy-jiggly and "cut".
Mostly, the focus is on the appearance, not the muscle strength.


"It's subjective, of course, but there's no real reason to crucify someone for using the word."


Thank you!! In my original message I was just trying to share the different options and approaches of lifting the author of this thread could pursue.

I think you got called out for claiming to build muscle while in a calorie deficit….The OP is obviously new to lifting and might take this as truth and think that she could do the same, when in fact it is not possible.

You complain about getting crucified and then call someone the "white version of Serena Williams.." Interestingly ironic...

ndj1979

"Toned" generally means somewhere between mushy-jiggly and "cut".
Mostly, the focus is on the appearance, not the muscle strength.


"It's subjective, of course, but there's no real reason to crucify someone for using the word."


Thank you!! In my original message I was just trying to share the different options and approaches of lifting the author of this thread could pursue.

Way to be a man there! Bravo! You proud of yourself?

just checked out the "white girl Serena" pics and she is pretty shredded/hot…just saying….:)

Instead of slamming her, you might want to ask for some advice...

cmeiron

"1800-2000 cals for a 21yo male and you think you're magically gaining muscle? Please share your secrets because I'm sure many who've been working and lifting heavy things for years would love to listen."


.....Yeah haha. Not magically though. it's not about eating a "surplus" like you said, it's about WHAT you eat. Those 1800-2000 calories are packed with protein including lean meats, fish, nuts, whey powder, etc....I eat 150+ grams of protein daily. My calorie range & lifting routine combined allows me to both add muscle and lose weight so you can knock it all ya want but I'm sticking to it.

DamePiglet

"Toned" generally means somewhere between mushy-jiggly and "cut".
Mostly, the focus is on the appearance, not the muscle strength.


"It's subjective, of course, but there's no real reason to crucify someone for using the word."


Thank you!! In my original message I was just trying to share the different options and approaches of lifting the author of this thread could pursue.

Ooookay, lets take this down a bit.
Frustrations rise, but I find the best policy is to accept that MFP has users with all different goals.
People don't need to agree, but respect is the first step to productive discussion.

Also, cat gifs. I love 'em. But that's a different story.

Will_Thrust_For_Candy

Down. I am 5'11 and was 205 lbs with a decent amount of flab when I started lifting and counting calories. Now I am around 180 lbs with both significant muscle gain and fat loss. It is not just "loss of fat making my muscles show" as many people would say, the increase in arm size proves that. And I am not sure what my bf% is...if I had to estimate I would say maybe around 18%

you lost body fat which exposed the existing muscle that you had….

You may have had some newbie gains from when you first started and those are showing as well…

You can't lose weight and build muscle at the same time, as they are diametrically opposed to one another. Losing weight means you create a negative energy balance; gaining muscle means you have a energy surplus…

Its like trying to say you can drive a car on an empty tank of gas…they are complete opposite..

What ndj said. It's a novel thing, all this science. Plus he also looks effing awesome, so he just might know what he's talking about. Just sayin'.

Dude is having some strong introductory posts. And jealous of a lady no less.

GeminiBridget

Here's a good article to read: http://www.womenshealthmag.com/fitness/weight-lifting-tips

GeminiBridget

"Toned" generally means somewhere between mushy-jiggly and "cut".
Mostly, the focus is on the appearance, not the muscle strength.


"It's subjective, of course, but there's no real reason to crucify someone for using the word."


Thank you!! In my original message I was just trying to share the different options and approaches of lifting the author of this thread could pursue.

Ooookay, lets take this down a bit.
Frustrations rise, but I find the best policy is to accept that MFP has users with all different goals.
People don't need to agree, but respect is the first step to productive discussion.

Also, cat gifs. I love 'em. But that's a different story.

Well said! There are so many people on these threads that seem to look for a reason to insult someone they disagree with. You can disagree with someone but there is no need to make negative and rude comments. It's rampant on here. I think it is much more productive to share your own advice and knowledge without being arrogant about it. The thing is, there will always be one study showing one way and another study showing an entirely different way. It's all about trying new methods and find which one will work for your body.

meshashesha2012

i personally prefer heavy weights/less reps

but now that i'm being more aggressive with my weight loss, i have to do a mix of both, so 1 workout a week heavy weights and 2 workouts a week with lighter weights.

BusyRaeNOTBusty

I do sets of 5 usually. I am trying to lose weight. I would like to preserve as much muscle as possible while doing so. The best way to preserve muscle while losing weight is to work in the strength range.

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

GeminiBridget

You do lighter weights with more reps to keep a lean look.

When will this myth die? That is a function of diet, not some magical reps range. Your muscles can't count.

Let me expound on my brief statement: When you lift lighter weights and more reps it does a better job of increasing the muscular endurance, lighter weights will not help you "tone" better than heavy weights. Heavier weights build the strength of your muscles and the size to a small degree, helping to increase your metabolism and burn fat, lifting heavier weights with fewer reps (8 to 12 on average) and working until you're fatigued is more effective at helping you reach your toning goals than lifting lighter weights.

ndj1979

Here's a good article to read: http://www.womenshealthmag.com/fitness/weight-lifting-tips

from the article:
"Lifting heavy weights with lower reps builds dense, lean muscle—but constantly upping the heaviness will exhaust your body fast. That’s why lifting lighter weights with more reps also deserves an invite to your muscle-boosting party."

why not just progressively add more weight as working in said rep range gets easier? So if you are doing 4 sets at 6 reps each when doing 4x6 gets easy then bump the weight up fiver pounds and keep repeating as such?

then you can focus on isolation movements with higher reps and a little lighter weights..

geebusuk

3x5 for me, mostly.

Taken from BodyBuilding.com

Sarcoplasmic hypertrophy (common in bodybuilding) involves the growth of the sarcoplasm (fluid like substance) and non-contractile proteins that do not directly contribute to muscular force production. Filament area density decreases while cross-sectional area increases, without a significant increase in strength. Myofibrillar hypertrophy occurs due to an increase in myosin-acting filaments. Contractile proteins are synthesized and filament density increases (Zatsiorsky 1995). This type of hypertrophy leads to increased strength production. Sarcoplasmic Hypertrophy Muscle fibers adapt to high volume training by increasing the number of mitochondria (organelles in the cell that are involved in ATP production) in the cell. This type of training also leads to the elevation of enzymes that are involved in glycolytic and oxidative pathways. The volume of sarcoplasmic fluid inside the cell and between the cells is increased with high volume training. This type of training contributes little to maximal strength while it does increase strength endurance due to mitochondria hypertrophy. Growth of connective tissue is also present with sarcoplasmic hypertrophy.

Myofibrillar hypertrophy occurs due to increases in the number of myosin/actin filaments (sarcomeres) inside the cell. This leads to increased strength and size of the contractile unit of muscle. Ultimately this means greater force production. This is often referred to as functional muscle, while sarcoplasmic hypertrophy is referred to as non-functional muscle. ATP and Muscular Growth as we said earlier, increasing the number of mitochondria in the cell means increased ATP production. ATP is required for protein synthesis to occur. Low levels of ATP will halt muscular growth as well as inhibit other metabolic functions that take place inside the muscle cell. Siff and Verkhoshansky have shown that it is possible to increase your muscles contractile unit faster than the mitochondria's ability to compensate for this growth. When actin/myosin filaments out grow the number of mitochondria, growth of elements besides the sarcomere is inhibited. The insufficient quantity of ATP results in the body's inability to promote protein synthesis.

The former is what most descripte as 'hypertrophy', while the latter is what people are generally talking about when they talk about strength gains from doing lower reps.

Doing more reps with less weight, but still enough weight to be challenging, might not pack on a ton of muscle but it'll sure give you some definition!

But you could get the same thing quicker by doing heavier weights (presuming we're talking muscular endurance more for 'more reps)?

I would prefer to lift heavy as I would like to gain strength but I am unable. Lifting lighter weights for 3 sets of 10 I am seeing some muscle gains and I'm hoping to see more by starting a bulk. There have been some studies saying that muscle gain is pretty much the same with either approach so it might be worth googling. It really depends on your goals though.

Why are you unable to lift heavy weights?
For the record, heavy doesn't mean doing a 500lb squat - it just means enough to tax you when you're doing a 5 rep set.

yogicarl

5 x 5 for me, progressive callisthenics. I find it more in line with my goals which is a high strength to weight ratio, low mass and a high level of body balance and spatial awareness.

If I went for higher reps and easier exercises I would be promoting stamina which, although a good thing in itself, is not my main focus for my needs.

Heavy or more reps - all depends on what you are doing it for.

EvgeniZyntx

of course toning exists! . hah. Doing more reps with less weight, but still enough weight to be challenging, might not pack on a ton of muscle but it'll sure give you some definition!

if you are gaining muscle you are in a calorie surplus.

If you are losing fat you are in a calorie deficit..

its basic math and thermodynamics and all that fun stuff...

Thank you.

"Toned" generally means somewhere between mushy-jiggly and "cut".
Mostly, the focus is on the appearance, not the muscle strength.


It's subjective, of course, but there's no real reason to crucify someone for using the word.

Not 100% on the muscle must require a surplus.

If you are gaining weight you are in a calorie surplus.

It is possible to gain muscle at a calorie deficit, it just depends on few variables such as total protein load, bf%, testosterone load, training history, etc. In general it is less than optimized but it does happen. You can't gain lots o moosels this way so, like the forest and trees thing, it is generally better to be at a (small) surplus during hypertrophy.

An individual having large stores of fat, training hard and eating close to maintenance with a diet providing the necessary amino acids will develop strength and muscle gains as long as training and metabolic needs do not exceed energy mobilization from lipids rates.

As far as rep ranges go. There is significant overlap - strength ranges will create hypertrophy and vice versa but a good program includes both over time. Also, if you are training for the first time from a high rep range to low, it is actually more important to take the time to build up ability to allow for joint adaptation, neuromuscular adaptation and get form very right. All this avoids injury.

Edit - fixed quotes, rep range note.

jimmmer

Well depends on the exercise...

For Squats, Bench, RDL I'm working around 6 reps (+/- 2 reps)

For Deads I'm working around 5 Reps (+/-)

Power Clean, Push Press, Pendlay Row: 3-4 Reps

Dips/Chins/Pull Ups/Front Squats/Bulgarian Squats: 6-10 reps

Calf Raises 15-20 Reps.

Depends on the nature of the exercise, really and the part of the body doing the majority of the work. Calves, for instance, respond better to more work. Using the same rep range for Power Cleans would be to allow technique to suffer as fatigue sets in and end up with a) crappy technique and b) increased likelihood of injury. You've just got to be sensible (or do a programme put together by someone who is sensible).

There's no one set rep range for everything. And doing some high rep work is good for getting blood flow to connective tissue and keeping endurance and conditioning up.