High rep, low weight has to be worth something, right?
GuybrushThreepw00d
Posts: 784 Member
So I'm stuck at home this weekend, unable to get out to the gym. However I have a incline sit up bench and a pair of 8kg (17.5lb, so total weight for the 2 is 35lb) dumbells that I've started using. The weights a lot loss than I do down the gym, but I've gotta be able to do something with them haven't I?
Tips appreciated, I'm started with 22rep bench presses and am planning on doing 5 sets before moving onto some other presses and curls.
Tips appreciated, I'm started with 22rep bench presses and am planning on doing 5 sets before moving onto some other presses and curls.
0
Replies
-
Do pushups till complete exhaustion. Then use the lighter dumbbells. That will make them "feel" a lot heavier. You can also do lunges and prisoner squats to get a good workout.0
-
Started with some straight, incline and decline pushups... But not till exhaustion, I'm pretty much finished now, but will test your theory before I completely finish0
-
do a complex
http://www.t-nation.com/free_online_article/sports_body_training_performance/screw_cardio_four_complexes_for_a_shredded_physique
i think the tumminello complex would work with dumbbells
and uuugghh please dont be one of those guys who just does upper body stuff. do some freaking squats and deadlifts. boys need an *kitten* too ya know0 -
boys need an *kitten* too ya know
lol0 -
Do this metabolic routine instead. I'm probably a little stronger than you and I only use 30 lb dumbbells on this. It's 36 mins and you dont need a bench, just about 5 feet of space to work in.
http://www.menshealth.com/mhlists/high-intensity-circuit-routine/goblet-squat.php#slidetop0 -
High rep. low weight workouts build muscle endurance while lower rep higher weight workouts are better for building strength. I think both types of workouts can have a place in your routine. Definitely better than nothing at all!0
-
The most recent studies are saying that low weight/high rep is as effective as high weight/low rep as long as you work your muscles to exhaustion, regardless of which you choose.0
-
.0
-
What number is considered "high" rep? I do 15 or 20 depending on the exercise. I'm not exhausted after the first set but I'm pretty wiped by the third. I've heard it said that high rep is for burning calories and losing weight, and low rep for bulking up. Still true?0
-
The most recent studies are saying that low weight/high rep is as effective as high weight/low rep as long as you work your muscles to exhaustion, regardless of which you choose.
Lulz0 -
The most recent studies are saying that low weight/high rep is as effective as high weight/low rep as long as you work your muscles to exhaustion, regardless of which you choose.
Lulz
Lulz right back at you. Look it up.0 -
do a complex
http://www.t-nation.com/free_online_article/sports_body_training_performance/screw_cardio_four_complexes_for_a_shredded_physique
i think the tumminello complex would work with dumbbells
and uuugghh please dont be one of those guys who just does upper body stuff. do some freaking squats and deadlifts. boys need an *kitten* too ya know
Meshayup...
The goal with stuff that is less than 50% of max weight is more conditioning. In that sense, you aim to do the most amount of work to fulfill a goal or set range during the least amount of rest.
Work hard, short rest intervals, make you sweat.
Try some Bulgarian Split Squats, I train all my clients on this exercise.0 -
The most recent studies are saying that low weight/high rep is as effective as high weight/low rep as long as you work your muscles to exhaustion, regardless of which you choose.
perhaps it's true. but wow you'd have to spend so much more time working out doing it the high weight low rep way. besides that isn't it possible that you'd start to feel it in your joints more than your muscles if you and would have to stop before you got to the point of muscle exhaustion?0 -
The most recent studies are saying that low weight/high rep is as effective as high weight/low rep as long as you work your muscles to exhaustion, regardless of which you choose.
Effective in what way? Building muscle and/or strength? I guess all those bodybuilders and powerlifters and strongman competitors in the world have been doing it wrong all along. Just lift pink dumbbells until your arms get tired and you'll get there much easier!0 -
The typical MFP fitness enthusiast is probably not going to be in the same situations as strongman competitors.
Most people are looking to improve posture, feel stronger, and have more energy throughout the day. In that sense, working the capacity of slower twitch muscle fibers in a strength training situation should yield benefits.
And for the people who are more intense, sometimes the best way to break a plateau is to do something you've never done before. For example, the famous Kroc Rows where you use high weight and momentum for many reps.0 -
Just do pushups and situps until you can't do them anymore. You can use the weights to do shoulder flys and tricep kickbacks.0
-
The most recent studies are saying that low weight/high rep is as effective as high weight/low rep as long as you work your muscles to exhaustion, regardless of which you choose.
perhaps it's true. but wow you'd have to spend so much more time working out doing it the high weight low rep way. besides that isn't it possible that you'd start to feel it in your joints more than your muscles if you and would have to stop before you got to the point of muscle exhaustion?
Hey there, it should be mandatory to exercise proper form in order to reduce risk of degradation. Focus on strengthening the core, and make sure to balance out exercises that work the entire body.0 -
The most recent studies are saying that low weight/high rep is as effective as high weight/low rep as long as you work your muscles to exhaustion, regardless of which you choose.
Lulz
Lulz right back at you. Look it up.
Oh that's right, someone, somewhere wrote it and published it on the net. I forget that means that it's true. Meanwhile, everybody actually involved in strength training for any amount of time knows that it's complete hogwash. I love "recent studies" arguments. Never fails to amuse me. I don't even need to read the Sunday comics after this one0 -
The most recent studies are saying that low weight/high rep is as effective as high weight/low rep as long as you work your muscles to exhaustion, regardless of which you choose.
Effective in what way? Building muscle and/or strength? I guess all those bodybuilders and powerlifters and strongman competitors in the world have been doing it wrong all along. Just lift pink dumbbells until your arms get tired and you'll get there much easier!
Why even use pink dumbbells? Save money and do 2x the reps while holding a paper clip in each finger. Recent studies have shown that paper clips are just as effective as heavy metal0 -
The most recent studies are saying that low weight/high rep is as effective as high weight/low rep as long as you work your muscles to exhaustion, regardless of which you choose.
Lulz
Lulz right back at you. Look it up.
Oh that's right, someone, somewhere wrote it and published it on the net. I forget that means that it's true. Meanwhile, everybody actually involved in strength training for any amount of time knows that it's complete hogwash. I love "recent studies" arguments. Never fails to amuse me. I don't even need to read the Sunday comics after this one
What is "Low weight"
Isn't it different for everyone?
There are benefits to training in the high rep range as long as there is progression.0 -
um.. no.. no studies say this..The most recent studies are saying that low weight/high rep is as effective as high weight/low rep as long as you work your muscles to exhaustion, regardless of which you choose.0 -
The most recent studies are saying that low weight/high rep is as effective as high weight/low rep as long as you work your muscles to exhaustion, regardless of which you choose.
Lulz
Lulz right back at you. Look it up.
Oh that's right, someone, somewhere wrote it and published it on the net. I forget that means that it's true. Meanwhile, everybody actually involved in strength training for any amount of time knows that it's complete hogwash. I love "recent studies" arguments. Never fails to amuse me. I don't even need to read the Sunday comics after this one
What is "Low weight"
Isn't it different for everyone?
There are benefits to training in the high rep range as long as there is progression.
"As long as there is progression". Sure, that's exactly the problem. Doing lots of high rep work is fine, it's better than sitting on the couch. It's good for just getting started and learning the moves and conditioning the body. However, doing high rep work does little for building strength. This means that progression stalls out very quickly. Then you get stuck doing the same weight forever. The whole goal of strength training is progression and high rep training is not conducive to this goal at all.0 -
My understanding is that mid and high reps will encourage the muscle to become engorged with blood (pumped) and cause the muscle fibres to split more (shredding) and then in recvery time the muscle increases in size because there are now more muscle fibres and more blood capillaries, whereas in lifting heavy the weight is carried across the muscle but also more on the connective tendons and the lifting is over a shorter period of time and a longer rest period between sets set so there is less blood pumping and less cardio effect.
I was weightlifting about twenty=odd years ago and I remember the weightligters were always more slight than the bodybuilders but they could handle far more weight with good form.
It all depends on what your goal is - endurance, visual development or strength, but any exercise is better than wht I'm doing right now - sitting typing on a forum! I'm off to paint my shed.0 -
The most recent studies are saying that low weight/high rep is as effective as high weight/low rep as long as you work your muscles to exhaustion, regardless of which you choose.
Lulz
Lulz right back at you. Look it up.
Oh that's right, someone, somewhere wrote it and published it on the net. I forget that means that it's true. Meanwhile, everybody actually involved in strength training for any amount of time knows that it's complete hogwash. I love "recent studies" arguments. Never fails to amuse me. I don't even need to read the Sunday comics after this one
What is "Low weight"
Isn't it different for everyone?
There are benefits to training in the high rep range as long as there is progression.
"As long as there is progression". Sure, that's exactly the problem. Doing lots of high rep work is fine, it's better than sitting on the couch. It's good for just getting started and learning the moves and conditioning the body. However, doing high rep work does little for building strength. This means that progression stalls out very quickly. Then you get stuck doing the same weight forever. The whole goal of strength training is progression and high rep training is not conducive to this goal at all.
You said, " However, doing high rep work does little for building strength. This means that progression stalls out very quickly."
Progression does not always = strength.
Think of the many ways one can progress. Strength, endurance, hypertrophy, fat loss, calorie burning, more volume, shorter rest periods, longer intervals, etc.
So you can't assume that everyone is training for building strength.
This is MFP... most people just want to look better, feel better etc.
It's best to think about the possibilities, using the tools properly. High reps are a tool, they aren't for everyone, but a smart trainee can use them in a program with great results -- set a goal and shoot for it!!0 -
The most recent studies are saying that low weight/high rep is as effective as high weight/low rep as long as you work your muscles to exhaustion, regardless of which you choose.
Lulz
Lulz right back at you. Look it up.
Oh that's right, someone, somewhere wrote it and published it on the net. I forget that means that it's true. Meanwhile, everybody actually involved in strength training for any amount of time knows that it's complete hogwash. I love "recent studies" arguments. Never fails to amuse me. I don't even need to read the Sunday comics after this one
What is "Low weight"
Isn't it different for everyone?
There are benefits to training in the high rep range as long as there is progression.
"As long as there is progression". Sure, that's exactly the problem. Doing lots of high rep work is fine, it's better than sitting on the couch. It's good for just getting started and learning the moves and conditioning the body. However, doing high rep work does little for building strength. This means that progression stalls out very quickly. Then you get stuck doing the same weight forever. The whole goal of strength training is progression and high rep training is not conducive to this goal at all.
You said, " However, doing high rep work does little for building strength. This means that progression stalls out very quickly."
Progression does not always = strength.
Think of the many ways one can progress. Strength, endurance, hypertrophy, fat loss, calorie burning, more volume, shorter rest periods, longer intervals, etc.
So you can't assume that everyone is training for building strength.
This is MFP... most people just want to look better, feel better etc.
It's best to think about the possibilities, using the tools properly. High reps are a tool, they aren't for everyone, but a smart trainee can use them in a program with great results -- set a goal and shoot for it!!
What we are trying to say, but you are refusing to hear, is that no matter which of those measures of progress you're looking for, 20 rep sets will NOT get you there. N-O-T NOT NOT NOT. Watch my lips so you can see the words come out. NOT. GONNA. GET. YOU. THERE.
Those type of high rep sets don't lead to any sort of progression. They don't lead to any sort of change in the muscle. Essentially, it's cardio, but it doesn't involve a large enough base of mass to effectively raise your heart rate. You'd be better served running a mile and then doing 3 sets of a weight you can lift 10 times max.
If you want to make a case that an occasional high rep set will expand your capillaries, help with form, or any other pseudo-sciencey type thing, go ahead, I won't stop you. May help, probably won't hurt. But if you want to say that basing a working around 20 rep sets will do anything besides wear out your joints, it's wrong. Just plain wrong. It's always been wrong. Any study that tells you this is wrong.0 -
DavPul - I do agree that low reps heavy weight is the ideal for increasing strength and or explosive power, but how do you explain those people who workout with nothing but their own bodyweight and exhibit incredible strength? Or the yoga practitioner who can hold amazing postures that appear to defy gravity? What about the gymnast who is able to hold the crucifix on the rings.
Many of these have fine physiques but do not appear strong if placed against someone who lifts heavy, but no-one can say they do not possess strength.
Not trying to stir the pot - just my observation as someone who has lifted heavy 20+ years ago and now practises Yogaand body resistance exercises for strength and well being.0 -
OP: Look into body weight programs. Better than tiny dumbells.
This article explains the differences between heavy weight training and metabolic training as well as the benefits and draw backs of each:
http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/training/weight-training-for-fat-loss-part-1.html0 -
A recent study showed that you can trigger hypertrophy by doing 60% 1RM to fatigue. The to fatigue is the hard part... I, personally, don't have the patience to make low weights go to failure.0
-
Thanks BusyLady - I've saved your link to Favourites to give it a good read when I can.0
-
The most recent studies are saying that low weight/high rep is as effective as high weight/low rep as long as you work your muscles to exhaustion, regardless of which you choose.
Lulz
Lulz right back at you. Look it up.
Oh that's right, someone, somewhere wrote it and published it on the net. I forget that means that it's true. Meanwhile, everybody actually involved in strength training for any amount of time knows that it's complete hogwash. I love "recent studies" arguments. Never fails to amuse me. I don't even need to read the Sunday comics after this one
What is "Low weight"
Isn't it different for everyone?
There are benefits to training in the high rep range as long as there is progression.
"As long as there is progression". Sure, that's exactly the problem. Doing lots of high rep work is fine, it's better than sitting on the couch. It's good for just getting started and learning the moves and conditioning the body. However, doing high rep work does little for building strength. This means that progression stalls out very quickly. Then you get stuck doing the same weight forever. The whole goal of strength training is progression and high rep training is not conducive to this goal at all.
You said, " However, doing high rep work does little for building strength. This means that progression stalls out very quickly."
Progression does not always = strength.
Think of the many ways one can progress. Strength, endurance, hypertrophy, fat loss, calorie burning, more volume, shorter rest periods, longer intervals, etc.
So you can't assume that everyone is training for building strength.
This is MFP... most people just want to look better, feel better etc.
It's best to think about the possibilities, using the tools properly. High reps are a tool, they aren't for everyone, but a smart trainee can use them in a program with great results -- set a goal and shoot for it!!
What we are trying to say, but you are refusing to hear, is that no matter which of those measures of progress you're looking for, 20 rep sets will NOT get you there. N-O-T NOT NOT NOT. Watch my lips so you can see the words come out. NOT. GONNA. GET. YOU. THERE.
Those type of high rep sets don't lead to any sort of progression. They don't lead to any sort of change in the muscle. Essentially, it's cardio, but it doesn't involve a large enough base of mass to effectively raise your heart rate. You'd be better served running a mile and then doing 3 sets of a weight you can lift 10 times max.
If you want to make a case that an occasional high rep set will expand your capillaries, help with form, or any other pseudo-sciencey type thing, go ahead, I won't stop you. May help, probably won't hurt. But if you want to say that basing a working around 20 rep sets will do anything besides wear out your joints, it's wrong. Just plain wrong. It's always been wrong. Any study that tells you this is wrong.
You are actually wrong. Or at least not right. Even huge proponents of lifting heavy have to admit that you can't completely write-off intermediate and higher repetition work. http://www.leangains.com/2010/08/high-reps-vs-low-reps-for-muscle-gain.html
They cite primary literature here as well as representing the opinions of some of the big dogs of fitness.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.1K Introduce Yourself
- 43.7K Getting Started
- 260.1K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 419 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.9K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.5K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions