If low weights/high reps is pointless...

I'm actually starting to question the 'lift heavy at all costs' thing too. Mainly because I just got another back spasm a few days ago, because I can't afford a trainer, and am doing the best I can do at home, and yeah, I made a mistake. So I'm going to wait and do some pilates and go very very slowly.

There's got to be a happy medium between doing so many reps you're prone to another kind of injury (from overuse, a million pushups can't be good for you either) and weight that's too heavy to be managed without risk (esp if you're over 30).

I understand that bikini competitors often work in a high rep range, fwiw.

I don't really think that's the majority of them. The better amatuer and pro winners usually workout in the 8-12 range even for prep.

And I saw a thread recently, with vids of a seriously jacked bodybuilder who was doing presses with a ridiculously low weight, and who said you could still get results if you focus on the eccentric part of the movement, can't remember who it was though

I do think that to prevent osteoporosis + get hotness, at least one day of definitely challenging lifting is important.

You're much stronger on the eccentric movement of any exercise than you are on the concentric. So going ridiculously low with weight would work to an extent if the movement was more isometric, but isometrics are more for strength and not for building a jacked body.

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

I always heard low weight + higher reps = shrinking. Higher weights + lower reps = enlarging muscles. Is that right? Like the difference in the legs of a sprinter (huge calves and thigh muscles) and a long distant runner ( leaner legs all the way).

this isn't true.

i lift at higher weights and my muscles have become so enlarged that i've had to increase my pant size from a size 20/22 to a comfortable size 14 jeans. i plan on continue to get so huge from weight lifting that i'll have to go all the way up to a size 6

if you want to lift heavy things then go for it. you wont get bigger unless you're eating that way. i've been eating at maintenance or slightly below so my fat loss has been steady without having to go super low in calories. maybe i'd get the same results with low weights higher reps, but those workouts take way longer than the high weight/low rep routines and ain't nobody got time for that




I'm a former athlete and I can confirm that I'm one of those women who can easily get bulky from weight lifting but that's only IF i'm eating more calories than i need. i spent a 6-10 months actively packing on weight and size for my sport and it was HARD work.

:flowerforyou:

I've seen routines including 3-6 x 15-25! Or even 6 sets of 5 at what must be 30% of rep max. (So like 4-5 exercises for just one 'body part', but worked to **** that way.) The weights are obviously higher than what a JM workout would use, but I was surprised!

I'm speaking of the best in the classes though, not just competitors who have routines. Here's Jamie Eason's:
http://www.bodybuilding.com/fun/jamie-easons-livefit-phase-1.html

TEAM BOMBSHELL FITNESS also adheres to moderate rep workouts to prep for shows (bikini, fitness and bodybuilding)
http://www.bombshellfitness.com/index2.php

Maybe so, but the guy I mean was really not concerned about strength, he wanted a good looking muscle, definitely..

Hate to tell you that practically all jacked bodybuilders built their muscle from PROGRESSIVE OVERLOAD (and probably some enhancement) and not light weight lifting. Would love to know who the bodybuilder is.

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

I don't lift heavy. I go to body pump 3 times a week, bodyattack 3 times per week (if i can fit it in), also do core workout (CXWORX) and I'm currently training for a half marathon. My body shape has definitely changed and I am much stronger that I used to be.

In the pump classes I use heavier weight than most other women in the class. So even though it is a high rep/low weight class you can use weights that really challenge you. I definitely don't use 5lb dumbbells. For example I use 27kg for the squat track, 17kg for the chest track. There are also lots of body weight exercises like pushups and lunges. I always do all the pushups on my toes. Only a few in the class will do more than a few pushups on their toes.

Last year I did a few Jillian Michaels DVDs, they are great workouts too, definitely a good place to start.

The first 3 photos are my before pictures.


20120522-205935 by paulineb251, on Flickr


20121007-203143 by paulineb251, on Flickr

I've seen routines including 3-6 x 15-25! Or even 6 sets of 5 at what must be 30% of rep max. (So like 4-5 exercises for just one 'body part', but worked to **** that way.) The weights are obviously higher than what a JM workout would use, but I was surprised!

I'm speaking of the best in the classes though, not just competitors who have routines. Here's Jamie Eason's:
http://www.bodybuilding.com/fun/jamie-easons-livefit-phase-1.html

TEAM BOMBSHELL FITNESS also adheres to moderate rep workouts to prep for shows (bikini, fitness and bodybuilding)
http://www.bombshellfitness.com/index2.php

Maybe so, but the guy I mean was really not concerned about strength, he wanted a good looking muscle, definitely..

Hate to tell you that practically all jacked bodybuilders built their muscle from PROGRESSIVE OVERLOAD (and probably some enhancement) and not light weight lifting. Would love to know who the bodybuilder is.

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

Thank you for the links, that's really helpful!

The workout I described is one done by someone who's placed, though not at the top of the top yet. I was inspired by what she did, body before I knew how. Which was, actually, working from a base built by Starting Strength type stuff, and only later did the kind of route I described, probably for prep, yes. She also does a modification of 5/3/1 in there too.

http://i.imgur.com/mc1I6.gif
http://givemevelocity.blogspot.ca/

Ok my history tells me it is Kai Greene, as I say, picked up from a thread here. I think the context was he was just wanting people to focus on form, moreso than just weight, to correct an unhelpful emphasis. Most definitely lifting heavy most of the time, I would think.

@Pauline: you look great!

Honestly, you're going to find people for and against low weights/high reps, you're going to find people for and against high weights/low reps, and you're also going to find countless studies from countless sources for and against both as well. The fact of the matter is, you're exercising, and that's all that really matters. You're lifting weights, you will build muscle. With the lower weights, you won't get as strong, and you won't build as much. But you will still get a nice tone, and you'll definitely get what it sounds like you're looking for. If you just want to tone a little as you lose weight, you're going to get the job done. The exercise you do should always feel challenging. If it feels challenging, it's fine. If you're using weights that you don't feel at all, I mean you definitely need something heavier, but there's nothing wrong with low weights so long as you feel a challenge. Just keep up the exercise, watch what you're eating, basically... continue doing what it sounds like you're already doing. Most importantly, do what works for you.

Anyone who says low weight/high reps won't change your body is silly. That being said, I'm gonna start lifting heavy for FASTER results and because I've reached that point in my fitness level where low weights aren't challenging for me anymore. HOWEVER I still roll my eyes at people who say low weight/high reps won't change anything because I know from experience that it will lol. It all depends on your personal goal. We are all here for different reasons, we all have different bodies, and we're all at different points in our "journey" so I don't know why everyone goes around saying one work out is better than another. Just do what you think is best for YOU because everyone on MFP thinks they are an expert lol.

I always thought the lower the weight and more reps turned it into more of a cardio like work out. just a little more targeted. i obviously know little lol

I get a little tired of people repeatedly saying LIFT HEAVY over and over and over.
Just because that's what someone told them?
Lift light and do it a bunch of times worked for me.
I took weight lifting (olympic lifts) in college. To get ready for our competitions (not against others, against our previous best -- ie, progress), we'd lift 60-70 percent of our max, but do it 20 times.
After college, I started officiating football. To stay in shape, I had a 204-lb barbell set with a 5' bar.
On days when I didn't have a game, I'd do two sets of 20 of a multitude of lifts.
A few high school kids asked me where I worked out, and they were stunned when I told them 'my patio.'
So ... yes, light weights and lots of reps works.
It's worked for me for almost 50 years, 48 to be exact.
That approach may not be in vogue for the younger set.
You know, the people who can't be told there are other ways to do things????

Er, many of us lift heavy because we do it and it works for us? I was under the impression from years of what "people told me" that light weights + high reps would "tone and not make me bulky" until I actually did TONS of research and realized this was hardy the case... and was explaining much of why I wasn't really achieving too much "toning"; I lost more inches, at the same amount of calories and cardio, lifting heavy... and lifting heavy has more benefits to bone density, stabilizing hormones, etc. Not to mention, I drop inches much more quickly when lifting heavy + low reps... which is why so many people recommend it to the the constant influx of people on MFP going, "I'm impatient to lose weight! I want to take diet pills! Ahhh!"

Again, as others have said... lifting low weights at high reps is hardly useless. Hell, I do something like it for a warmup before heavy lifting. But lifting heavier with lower reps is going to be achieving more for me than doing just the "warm up" for a halfhour.

Think of it in terms of Physics;
Lifting weights require work and energy as well as time and power. The amount of work it takes to carry a bag up the stairs is the same as it takes to carry a bag straight up a 90 > angle (though this isn't possible). The amount of work is the same, but the amount of exertion felt is a lot different.
In physics, power is the rate at which work is performed or energy is converted. Power is the amount of work performed during a period of time. So in conclusion, it doesn't matter if you're doing high reps/ low weight, or high weight/ low reps, because in the end the amount of work done is the same. What changes is the amount of time and the effort in that time that's been exerted.


I'm 17 and am taking Physics, when I read this, this is the idea I came across. I'm sorry if I didn't explain it well or if I'm completely wrong .This is just the idea that came to my mind when reading this.