strength vs size, volume vs weight, and total cals (long)

Cr01502

Check this out.

http://www.t-nation.com/free_online_article/most_recent/4_reasons_youre_not_gaining_muscle

ninerbuff

I'm kind of thinking out load here, so bear with me. I know there's no such thing as a perfect routine. But I also know that I'm analytical enough and obsessive enough to continually over think things.

And so I bring you this thread. I've done a bunch of reading, and I'm trying to tie all the bits and pieces together. Here is the cliff notes of everything I've read:

- lower reps emphasize strength gains (generally accepted numbers seem to be in the 4-8 range)
- higher reps emphasize growth of new muscle tissue (6-10 reps seems to be the general consensus here)
- anything over 12-15 reps seems to be overkill, for lack of a better word... more than that and you'll see diminishing returns based on the time/effort you put in.

Before I go on, is that pretty accurate? Any issues with that? I assume those numbers assume 3-5 sets?

Pretty accurate. 12-15 reps or higher will work on muscular endurance, so things like competitive rowing, rock climbing, running, or any sport with repetitive movements will get benefit from muscular endurance training.

Now, a little background/perspective for you, in case it skews the conversation at all...
I'm not sure what the distinction is between a beginner lifter and an intermediate, so that kind of grays the conversation for me. From an experience standpoint, I'm probably a beginner. I did stronglifts most of last winter, and am currently doing full body workouts focusing on compound lifts 4 days a week. But physically I've always been above average - I'm stronger and faster than the "average" person, I can push myself harder/further, I pick up skills faster, I recover faster, etc. etc. So part of me says, "Just pick a beginner routine and do it." While another part of me says, "Figure out a routine that is more suited to your ability."

My first question has to do with strength gains. I've seen a lot of people talk about strength gains being neurological, not muscular... in that your body learns how to move more weight, rather than your muscles get stronger and allow you to move more weight. Is that true? Is there any significant muscle change that comes with added strength? Does this depend on how advanced a lifter you are?

True yes. Muscles can get "harder" from strength training. But remember that types of lifting may denote someone strong in one way, but not another. For example, someone may be able to deadlift 300lbs, but may have an issue of deadlifting a 300lbs rock off their lawn. Technique does make a difference which is why many smaller guys may be able to out lift bigger guys with the same type frame.

Next, for muscle growth (new tissue) to occur, a calorie surplus is required. I'm ignoring the relatively small gains that can be made by certain people under certain conditions... but generally speaking, for steady, longer term gains, a calorie surplus is required, correct? Can't build a house without the lumber, right?

Correct. To add muscle is to add weight and to add weight you need a surplus.

So for someone doing bulk/cut cycles, whose goals lie in both their strength-to-weight ratio AND simply looking better...
If strength gains are largely (if not entirely) neurological, and mass gains are largely physical, does it make more sense to do a high volume/low weight routine (by it's nature more geared towards muscle growth) during a bulk than it does during a cut? And conversely, does it make more sense to do a low volume/high weight on a cut?

Volume is important for muscle growth, but to encourage hypertrophy the muscle still has to be overloaded. If not, then long distance runners would probably have huge legs if they were on a calorie surplus.
Bulking/cutting has more to do with nutrition and calories than really anything else.

A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 28+ years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

jacksonpt

Bulking/cutting has more to do with nutrition and calories than really anything else.

Right... bulking = putting on weight, which requires a surplus. Cutting = dropping weight, which requires a deficit. But...

The purpose of bulking is to put on muscle. Putting on muscle requires (if I understand things correctly) hypertrophy, which most people agree happens in the 8-12 rep range.

So if you're bulking to put on muscle, doesn't it make sense to do a program centered on sets of 8-12 reps? A 5x5 program would be less effective if size was the primary goal?

Similarly, if you're cutting and on a deficit, you can't add new tissue. So a growth program would be inefficient, correct? However, you can work on neurological response (what Lyle refers to as rate coding in the link SS posted above).

Although I guess I'm making an assumption here. The same way you can condition/grow muscles with training, can you also condition rate coding?

ninerbuff

Bulking/cutting has more to do with nutrition and calories than really anything else.

Right... bulking = putting on weight, which requires a surplus. Cutting = dropping weight, which requires a deficit. But...

The purpose of bulking is to put on muscle. Putting on muscle requires (if I understand things correctly) hypertrophy, which most people agree happens in the 8-12 rep range.

So if you're bulking to put on muscle, doesn't it make sense to do a program centered on sets of 8-12 reps? A 5x5 program would be less effective if size was the primary goal?

Correct because you need enough reps for time/tension.

Similarly, if you're cutting and on a deficit, you can't add new tissue. So a growth program would be inefficient, correct? However, you can work on neurological response (what Lyle refers to as rate coding in the link SS posted above).

Although I guess I'm making an assumption here. The same way you can condition/grow muscles with training, can you also condition rate coding?

Accordingly yes. Whenever I did a cut cycle, I lowered my rep count and kept the weight high.

A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 28+ years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

jacksonpt

Bulking/cutting has more to do with nutrition and calories than really anything else.

Right... bulking = putting on weight, which requires a surplus. Cutting = dropping weight, which requires a deficit. But...

The purpose of bulking is to put on muscle. Putting on muscle requires (if I understand things correctly) hypertrophy, which most people agree happens in the 8-12 rep range.

So if you're bulking to put on muscle, doesn't it make sense to do a program centered on sets of 8-12 reps? A 5x5 program would be less effective if size was the primary goal?

Correct because you need enough reps for time/tension.

Similarly, if you're cutting and on a deficit, you can't add new tissue. So a growth program would be inefficient, correct? However, you can work on neurological response (what Lyle refers to as rate coding in the link SS posted above).

Although I guess I'm making an assumption here. The same way you can condition/grow muscles with training, can you also condition rate coding?

Accordingly yes. Whenever I did a cut cycle, I lowered my rep count and kept the weight high.

A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 28+ years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

Cool, thanks... I think I'm getting my head around all this!

jacksonpt

Regarding volume and muscle growth, is there significant difference doing 5 sets of 6 vs 3 sets of 10? Both total 30 reps. I'm thinking 3x10 would be better as there would be greater fatigue?

bahacca

I want to kiss you all right now. I've been wracking my brain trying to decide my best means of attack for getting rid of my blubber without sacrificing my muscle hiding beneath.
I'm currently at a deficit and plan to do low rep, high weight to keep what muscle I have(knowing with a cut some WILL go away, but at least I can minimize with training) and doing some cardio. Looks like I'm on the right track:-) This was a very informative read.

mmapags

bump

kiachu

I would not reduce load on a cut. I think that's a mistake honestly. I would reduce volume (or frequency if needed) if necessary while keeping load the same, and that's assuming you need to make any changes.

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

I'd reduce volume before I reduced load but I would never add to it. It can be a good gauge for lack of energy vs losing strength.

marketdimlylit

No idea but you sound like one hell of a guy.

That comment, with your picture.. really amused me haha

I don't mean that in a horrible way!
x

anemoneprose

Great thread, OP.

FWIW, and interested in your corresponders' thoughts on this, I've read in a bunch of places (including Lyle McDonald's site) that the best thing to do to hedge all your bets (for strength & size gains, injury prevention, etc) by rotating between rep ranges within any given week.

I.e., have 1 heavy day (3-6), 1 medium (8-12), and 1 light (10-15) (probably easier with a 3 x full-body or 2-day split routine).

Determinednoob

Great thread, OP.

FWIW, and interested in your corresponders' thoughts on this, I've read in a bunch of places (including Lyle McDonald's site) that the best thing to do to hedge all your bets (for strength & size gains, injury prevention, etc) by rotating between rep ranges within any given week.

I.e., have 1 heavy day (3-6), 1 medium (8-12), and 1 light (10-15) (probably easier with a 3 x full-body or 2-day split routine).

That is one way to do it, but working in multiple rep ranges in the same workout is another. Also as I kinda mentioned before, the difference is overstated and overthought when it comes to beginners.

Also overstated, in my opinion and exeprience with one 6.5 month cut, the danger of losing muscle is overstated IF you are lifting heavy, eating high protein, and not already lean (i.e. if you are above 10% bf for a man).

As for lifting on a cut, again, I lifted exactly the same. As was alluded to a few posts up, this told me exactly when my strength started to drop. I never got to a point where I dropped the weight I was lifting, but in my last week completing final sets of OHP and especially Bench with the weight I had been lifting got really difficult, like form breaking type struggle on my last Bench rep. I ended my cut there having dropped from low 20s BF to 12. (26lbs)

Jynus

Regarding volume and muscle growth, is there significant difference doing 5 sets of 6 vs 3 sets of 10? Both total 30 reps. I'm thinking 3x10 would be better as there would be greater fatigue?

you would do a routine like PHAT where you would do both weekly. the difference between the `strength`rep range and the `size`rep range is very overstated. you WILL get big doing 5 reps. you will get stronger doing 12 reps. muscle is muscle. type IIb hypertrophies in exactly the same way as Type IIx. So train both types to grow. I do a template 5 rep where I do upper, lower, legs split with hypertrophy based reps and movements. then on top of that, 2x a week I do starting strength template where i do 1 push 1 pull 1 legs where i work up to my 5 rep max and go full out.

Think of it this way, its NOT the fact youre doing 12 reps that grows you per se. doing 12 reps of 135lbs bench is NOT going to make anyone big. But doing 12 reps of 315 and now we are getting somewhere. but to get to 12 reps at 315, you need to be strong enough to push weights that heavy first. best way to do that is strength training. so the 2 go hand in hand.

michellekicks

bump because my brain can't absorb all this in one sitting :laugh:

marieteresa41

Bump