What's so bad about low weights/high reps?

JNick77

I always was taught that I would need a spotter to use large barbells and I don't know anyone at my gym to ask to spot me and I can't afford a trainer. I don't know where to begin.

Learn the lifts and you don't need a spotter. You really only need a spotter when you you're attempting a weight or reps that you're unsure of. You can always ask somebody else lifting nearby for a spot. Most people don't mind.

RedHeadDevotchka

Lifting heavy is what helps you build the muscle. You may have noticed some stuff lifting light weights, but nothing compares to what it feels like when you lift heavy!!!
I used to hate lifting, and I can't get enough now. Just jump in and you'll see why it's awesome. Ya I didn't give any pertinent info, but you should just do it bc it's awesome.

DavPul

This really surprised me, because all my weight training is done at home with small dumbbells -- I've never gone higher than 5lbs. -- and I still see a noticeable difference in my arms and thighs. There is definition where there wasn't any before, and I feel stronger and more fit.

Wait till you see how fast you'll get noticeable results with 15 and 20 lb dumbbells! 3x the benefits, in 1/3 of the time!!! Would you rather spend 15 mins doing 4 sets or 20 reps with something that weighs less than your purse or would you rather lift something a little bit heavier and be finished after 3 sets of 8 reps? I don't know about you, but I don't want to workout one second longer than I have to.

JNick77

This really surprised me, because all my weight training is done at home with small dumbbells -- I've never gone higher than 5lbs. -- and I still see a noticeable difference in my arms and thighs. There is definition where there wasn't any before, and I feel stronger and more fit.

Wait till you see how fast you'll get noticeable results with 15 and 20 lb dumbbells! 3x the benefits, in 1/3 of the time!!!

You really hit on a good point with the time comment. You can definitely get faster workouts in. The other arguement about maximal strenght training verus high-rep training is time investment.

Think about the time you put into exercise as a financial investment with a guaranteed return on investment. If you were going to invest $1,000 in something and your ROI was guranteed would you invest that $1,000 in something that returns 10%, 25%, 50%, or 90%? The obvious answer is 90% because it's guranteed, no risk. That's another reason for choosing "heavy" lifting verus high-rep endurance stuff. You physically get more out of it in the same amount or less time. You want more endurance then go run, jog, spring, pull / push a sled, swim, rock climb, medicine ball work, etc.

drgndancer

I'm a runner, and no expert on weights, but it seems to me that what you're doing now is effectively really inefficient cardio. No exercise is "useless"; it all gets you moving and is better than nothing, but it seems like you'd get more results out of either real cardio like HITT, running, or swimming, or lifting heavier. A combination of cardio and lifting is probably your best overall bet for weight loss and general fitness.

lyttlewon

What are you trying to accomplish?

If you want more endurance then low weights high reps are OK. If you are wanting to build muscle, heavy weights are the thing to do. Endurance will only go so far though, after a bit you HAVE TO up your stress or your body isn't enduring any more, it is maintaining.

Awkward30

So in honesty, light weights at high reps might be enough to at least not lose much muscle in a calorie deficit

Actually, not for that either. It's been proven that maximal strength training is also better for this while on a calorie deficit. There's little reason to focus on high reps for compound movements and really most movements in-general. There are some strength training applications for high reps but they're usually only used with isolation exercises of small muscle groups and generally more in bodybuilding than anything.

I agree with what you said. I never said light weights would be superior, I said it could be sufficient to not lose much muscle. Note the excessive use of qualifiers because I don't know of any study that has really shown that statement to be untrue. In fact, this brand new study showed that with only aerobic training, participants had no statistically significant change in lean mass, while losing fat mass. These were sedentary, untrained individuals, but still... I've looked and can't find a lick of proof that you can't maintain muscle using high rep. Please send me a citation for this if you have one, as I'd be super interested to read it.

J Appl Physiol. 2012 Sep 27. [Epub ahead of print]
Effects of Aerobic and/or Resistance Training on Body Mass and Fat Mass in Overweight or Obese Adults.
Willis LH, Slentz CA, Bateman LA, Shields AT, Piner LW, Bales CW, Houmard JA, Kraus WE.
Source
1Duke University Medical Center.
Abstract
Recent guidelines on exercise for weight loss and weight maintenance include resistance training as part of the exercise prescription. Yet, few studies have compared the effects of similar amounts of aerobic and resistance training on body mass and fat mass in overweight adults. STRRIDE AT/RT, a randomized trial, compared aerobic training, resistance training and a combination of the two to determine the optimal mode of exercise for obesity reduction. Participants were 119 sedentary, overweight or obese adults who were randomized to one of three 8-month exercise protocols: 1) RT: resistance training; 2) AT: aerobic training; and 3) AT/RT: aerobic and resistance training (combination of AT and RT). Primary outcomes included total body mass, fat mass and lean body mass. The AT and AT/RT groups reduced total body mass and fat mass more than RT (p<0.05), but they were not different from each other. RT and AT/RT increased lean body mass more than AT (p<0.05). While requiring double the time commitment, a program of combined AT and RT did not result in significantly more fat mass or body mass reductions over AT alone. Balancing time commitments against health benefits, it appears that AT is the optimal mode of exercise for reducing fat mass and body mass while a program including RT is needed for increasing lean mass in middle-aged, overweight/obese individuals.

megleo818

Not an expert, but low weighst/high reps makes me tired, high weights/low reps makes me energized.

kmsairam

I'm doing New Rules and I love it. Never thought I would. I'm only 4 weeks in and can see noticeable results. And Im getting stronger each week. Try it!

dad106

I do a mixture of both.. and really it's up to you.

There are some people one here that are die hard heavy lifters and anyone who doesn't lift like them is wasting their time. Then their are others who are in the camp of light weight/high reps.

I think goal mainly, is to get to failure. As long as you reach that with strength training, then you should be good.

JNick77

There are some people one here that are die hard heavy lifters and anyone who doesn't lift like them is wasting their time. Then their are others who are in the camp of light weight/high reps.

What we do is a preference for sure. But like some of us have mentioned befor and in other threads, there is scientific research and results behind maximal strength training. Not trying to be a **** but there are certain facts that are simply undisputable because of the work behind them.

marysue1965

I used to lift heavy weights , but stopped because my arms & shoulders starting looking like a mans. so now i use 8 ib weights, goal is for high reps & no more than 10 lb weights. plus i'm already really strong, so its all good, i just won't use heavy weights anymore , i want to define, not build more muscle.

lyttlewon

I used to lift heavy weights , but stopped because my arms & shoulders starting looking like a mans. so now i use 8 ib weights, goal is for high reps & no more than 10 lb weights. plus i'm already really strong, so its all good, i just won't use heavy weights anymore , i want to define, not build more muscle.

Pfft. I don't care if I have man arms. It might balance out my GIGANTIC BOOBS.

obsidianwings

The first person to answer you got it in one, I absolutely agree.
I do recommend new rules of lifting for women. I am about halfway through this right now, I am finding it great. WHen I have finished I am planning on starting a 5 day split routine, but this was definitely a good choice to start with.

steph0924

to read later

GiddyupTim

There is nothing "wrong" with doing low weights/high reps. It is a proven way to achieve your fitness goals. There is science to back this up (see links below). Both light/high reps or heavy/low reps are good. Both work. Personally, I find that low weights/high reps are difficult and I prefer to do higher weights/low reps, but that's just me. Everyone is different. Do what feels best for you and your fitness goals.

http://www.webmd.com/fitness-exercise/news/20120427/high-reps-with-low-weights-builds-muscle-too

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healthnews/9229304/Light-weights-better-than-heavy-for-building-muscle.html

http://www.tsbmag.com/2012/05/02/study-reveals-high-repslow-weight-effective-in-building-muscle/

This response is true. If you use low weight and high reps you will get stronger, just not as quickly as if you use high weights and low reps. It has been claimed in the past that when you do high reps with light weights you are doing "endurance" training, rather than strength training. But, now many experts believe the distinction is not so clear cut, and that you have to get to really high reps to be not building strength but improving your endurance (over 100 reps).
For a detailed and interesting discussion of this issue, go to the blog Trainingscience.net.
I think the reason so many people stress high weight/low rep training here is because you will get more definite results faster and because so many women were, in the past, so afraid of weight lifting that they used ridiculously light weights.

sleepytexan

you cannot increase the size of a muscle with low weights and high reps. all you can do is increase that muscle's endurance. It will not get "long and lean", either; that is a myth.

If you want to reshape your body, you must increase your muscle mass. In order to increase your muscle mass, you must lift heavy. If you can lift it more than five sets of five, it's not heavy enough.

BTW, stronglifts.com is a lot more efficient than NROL4W. NR has a lot of fluff, and some downright silly things, especially after the 1st phase. It's not a bad starting point if you have never lifted, though.

I don't like that it ditches squats in favor of jumpy little girly moves. Never ditch squats.

JNick77

you cannot increase the size of a muscle with low weights and high reps. all you can do is increase that muscle's endurance. It will not get "long and lean", either; that is a myth.

If you want to reshape your body, you must increase your muscle mass. In order to increase your muscle mass, you must lift heavy. If you can lift it more than five sets of five, it's not heavy enough.

You can't? Tell that to bodybuilders...

Re-shaping your body or body re-composition is more diet driven than anything. To increase muscle mass you must increase calorie consumption. Assuming your diet is appropriate you can add mass with either method of training.

Yes high rep can make you stronger but it's not the same kind of strength. Maximal strength training trains the muscle fibers differently. Addtionally, it also trains the nervous system differently which high rep training does not do. All around the strength you gain this way is just better all-around.

arwen3

Ok... This is something that I consistently argue with people about. I suppose it depends on the body because we all build& hold differently, but I am an absolute subscriber to the low weight high rep idea... It is ABSOLUTELY the only way I've found to build long muscles for myself. I get grilled about this. People always tell me I won't bulk up, but they're wrong. I've done it! If I get into the theory of "if you can do 12 reps, up your weight" my arms get huge.. Now, that said, I've found a balance. I do a variety of workouts with low weight and a lot of yoga. I have just gone back to the gym for straight weight training in the last few weeks. I will not do a full workout of, for instance, biceps and triceps, because I know I bulk there. But I'll do legs, back, chest... All on separate days.

MoreBean13

I used to lift heavy weights , but stopped because my arms & shoulders starting looking like a mans. so now i use 8 ib weights, goal is for high reps & no more than 10 lb weights. plus i'm already really strong, so its all good, i just won't use heavy weights anymore , i want to define, not build more muscle.

Hmmm....I guess I would stamp this with "Results not typical"
I've been lifting pretty heavy for months, and I don't think I look like a man at all. I'm starting to notice some muscle definition I've never had as the fat comes off, and I like what I see. Most women don't have enough testosterone to build significant muscle (I think the number is something like 1/16 of the testosterone of a man, but I wouldn't stand behind that number) and to BUILD muscle at all you would have to be eating t a caloric surplus. There is a short period of time right when you start where you can build a little bit of muscle, but in the long run it's not really significant. Also, when you start there is a period of time when your muscles get 'swole' from a workout, where they will look firmer and bigger as the fibers are sort of encapsulated with fluid to protect the muscle during repair. Many, many people mistake 'swole' for muscle growth (as it FEELS like muscle growth- it can be confusing) I suspect that is what you were experiencing.

One of the biggest benefit of lifting heavy is the hormonal response that helps drive fat loss- you won't get much of that from low weight-high reps. By lifting light, you're forfeiting some fat loss you could be achieving during the same amount of time spent. But if it works for you, keep on keepin' on.