Hypertrophy or strength?

Vailara

I understand that as a rule, people lift weights with a low number of reps per set for strength, a medium number for hypertrophy and a higher number for endurance. Up until now I've been doing sets of 5, and aiming for strength.

Up till now, I've been aiming for strength. But it occurred to me, that maybe my goal is hypertrophy rather than strength? I did want increased strength to help with day to day activities, balance, preventing falls, etc. But it's not like I'm going to enter any competitions, so I'm not sure how strong I really need to be.

Meanwhile, I've started thinking that if I'm trying to preserve muscle mass, then surely I should be aiming for hypertrophy as well? Also, I keep hearing about the importance of body recomposition - if I'm trying to increase my LBM, then wouldn't hypertrophy be the way to go? I just wondered what people thought - any ideas?

I'm not talking about looks, by the way, and I understand that any increase in muscle size is likely to be minimal or non-existent (older woman eating at a deficit). I just wondered if that should be my AIM, rather than strength.

HelloDan

Only you can answer the question as to what you want to achieve.

That said, it's not an exclusive relationship, you won't only get hypertrophy or only get strength, its just that by varying training, one will be a lot more predominant.

That's the simple version at least, without going into the science of different types of hypertrophy, and the fact that muscle tissue doesn't count reps and as you hit 6 (or any other arbitrary number) suddenly say right, now I'm going to do this instead.

Huffdogg

hypertrophy training is purely aesthetic. If you want strength for functional reasons, or to preserve LBM while dieting, lower rep, higher weight training is the wiser move IMO.

ilovedeadlifts

Only you can answer the question as to what you want to achieve.

That said, it's not an exclusive relationship, you won't only get hypertrophy or only get strength, its just that by varying training, one will be a lot more predominant.

This.

I typically focus purely on strength for the main lifts (squat, bench, deads, overhead). But I train my other lifts in higher rep ranges with the goal of hypertrophy. Because, well, 10 rep sets of squats suck.

alpha_andy

So you're referring to sarcoplasmic hypertrophy (increasing space between muscle fibers) vs sarcomere hypertrophy (creating actual new muscle fibers). Both of these will increase the size of your muscles. It is simply that one is optimized for mass and the other is optimized for strength.

The thing is - with sarcoplasmic hypertrophy (more reps - looking to optimize mass) you can lose it more quickly if you ever slow down or lift less often.

With sarcomere hypertrophy (less reps, training for strength), the muscle fibers that you gain are not as easily lost.

So one is purely about looks, the other is for long-term gains which you can keep more easily.

Train for both. Mix it up!

Vailara

Thank you all. What I'm wanting to achieve is to maintain muscle, while dieting and aging. That's my main aim. I'm an older woman, currently transitioning from obese to overweight. :laugh:

It just seemed to me that if hypertrophy is about growing muscle, then that might be exactly what I'm looking for to counteract muscle wasting. It makes sense, but ... isn't true, because the changes aren't as lasting? I have to admit I hadn't looked into this at all before as I thought it was all to do with bodybuilding, so this is very educational for me. I will look up more on sarcoplasmic and sarcomere hypertrophy.

Mixing it up sounds like fun. I think I will concentrate mainly on strength, as I've been doing, but maybe sometimes give myself a break with a lighter weight and more reps.

Cr01502

Only you can answer the question as to what you want to achieve.

That said, it's not an exclusive relationship, you won't only get hypertrophy or only get strength, its just that by varying training, one will be a lot more predominant.

That's the simple version at least, without going into the science of different types of hypertrophy, and the fact that muscle tissue doesn't count reps and as you hit 6 (or any other arbitrary number) suddenly say right, now I'm going to do this instead.

Yep.

A good program should have both. I usually do low reps on the main lifts and then do my accessory work in the hypertrophy range.

DavPul

Only you can answer the question as to what you want to achieve.

That said, it's not an exclusive relationship, you won't only get hypertrophy or only get strength, its just that by varying training, one will be a lot more predominant.

Another vote for this answer.

Also, it's not like you have to get married to one routine or way of training. I usually do 4-6 weeks of pure strength work followed by 4-6 weeks of pure hypertrophy work and spend most of the year mixing elements of both in my weekly workouts

ArroganceInStep

Only you can answer the question as to what you want to achieve.

That said, it's not an exclusive relationship, you won't only get hypertrophy or only get strength, its just that by varying training, one will be a lot more predominant.

That's the simple version at least, without going into the science of different types of hypertrophy, and the fact that muscle tissue doesn't count reps and as you hit 6 (or any other arbitrary number) suddenly say right, now I'm going to do this instead.

This is a solid answer.

It's much more complicated than "X reps = Y result". Find a plan that you enjoy and go with it.

For myself personally that's using a 5/3/1-esque program that varies the low rep ranges, and then hitting other movements for high rep work.