resistance training rep ranges

Interesting how many of those correspond to strength. When they say "neural adaptation," are they referring to CNS strength gains or improved biomechanics from adapting to the movement patterns?

Think of it this way in a very basic 101 on muscles. The number of muscle fibres you have are genetic. You can't grow new ones. but you can improve the ones you have, both in the size, and in how they are able to work.... When the body is told to push something, electrical impulses tell the muscles to fire, and those existing muscles start to do work.

However, the catch is, when you're untrained, you're vastly underutilizing those muscles. Not all are firing, and those that do, don't fire to capacity.

CNS adaptation is the process of teaching the body to send stronger signals and those signals being able to utilize more muscles when doing work. The effect of this is being able to lift more, even at the same amount of muscle mass. And the best way to do that is, as per the diagram, very heavy weights.

this is why most EVERY beginner template is 5 reps or so. Because it's the best way to teach existing muscle mass how to work properly.

Great data Chris, thanks.

So if I do reps of 80 pushups, that is pure silliness. I"ll just use pushups for burnout.

I thought sarcoplasmic hypertrophy was optimized at around 12 reps... not 20. Keep seeing varying data on this. Clearly it isn't 8 so I'll keep moving toward 15-20 rep sets.

don't forget that strength should still be a core focus for anyone who is not elite level strength. you're not going to maximize size unless you are strong and work for strong.

i just can't see how maxing out something like pushups or pullups over 20 is 'silliness', 'madness', or 'death'. If I only did 20 pushups I wouldn't even get a burn at this point, and I am by no means a body builder.

Can someone explain to me an alternate strategy?

Doing >20 reps of something is inefficient at building strength, size, bone density, power, etc. It takes more time, hurts more, etc.

When you think about it, what do you think would be a better bench press progression plan for strength and size:

1) Load up 100 lbs on the bar every time you go to the gym and crank out as many as you can, forever.

2) Steadily increase the weight from one workout to the next.

Obviously 2 will be better. You're never going to get as big and strong benching 100 lbs forever as you would through progression. No one was ever able to bench 300 lbs by benching 100 over and over and over and then loading up 300 one day.

A better plan than endless pushups would be to do bench presses where you can easily increase the weight over time. If you can't do that for some reason, you can do weighted pushups, or pushup variations (such as one-handed) that steadily make each individual pushup harder to accomplish.

I did strength training for the previous 3 years. 1RM on bench was 300 lbs. Now I don't care about maxes any more. I will still do strength training though once in a while and mix it up.

Bodybuilder here... not a power lifter.

Interesting how many of those correspond to strength. When they say "neural adaptation," are they referring to CNS strength gains or improved biomechanics from adapting to the movement patterns?

Think of it this way in a very basic 101 on muscles. The number of muscle fibres you have are genetic. You can't grow new ones. but you can improve the ones you have, both in the size, and in how they are able to work.... When the body is told to push something, electrical impulses tell the muscles to fire, and those existing muscles start to do work.

However, the catch is, when you're untrained, you're vastly underutilizing those muscles. Not all are firing, and those that do, don't fire to capacity.

CNS adaptation is the process of teaching the body to send stronger signals and those signals being able to utilize more muscles when doing work. The effect of this is being able to lift more, even at the same amount of muscle mass. And the best way to do that is, as per the diagram, very heavy weights.

this is why most EVERY beginner template is 5 reps or so. Because it's the best way to teach existing muscle mass how to work properly.

What?!

Of course you can grow new muscle fiber. That's why Chris's data shows "myofibrillar hypertrophy". This means growth of new muscle fibers.

okay, just googled 'weighted pushups' and found references to using resistance bands instead (supposedly better, because it doesn't weigh you down at the bottom when you lack leverage). and fortunately, i already have one of those. I'll add that to my pushups and reduce my reps (a total win all around, since i hate long reps anyway).

Now I just need to figure out a cheap, safe, DIY way to increase pull up resistance...

Interesting how many of those correspond to strength. When they say "neural adaptation," are they referring to CNS strength gains or improved biomechanics from adapting to the movement patterns?

Think of it this way in a very basic 101 on muscles. The number of muscle fibres you have are genetic. You can't grow new ones. but you can improve the ones you have, both in the size, and in how they are able to work.... When the body is told to push something, electrical impulses tell the muscles to fire, and those existing muscles start to do work.

However, the catch is, when you're untrained, you're vastly underutilizing those muscles. Not all are firing, and those that do, don't fire to capacity.

CNS adaptation is the process of teaching the body to send stronger signals and those signals being able to utilize more muscles when doing work. The effect of this is being able to lift more, even at the same amount of muscle mass. And the best way to do that is, as per the diagram, very heavy weights.

this is why most EVERY beginner template is 5 reps or so. Because it's the best way to teach existing muscle mass how to work properly.

What?!

Of course you can grow new muscle fiber. That's why Chris's data shows "myofibrillar hypertrophy". This means growth of new muscle fibers.

negatory. Muscle fibre counts do not increase with training. existing fibres just get bigger.

proof: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/6520032

Bodybuilders and untrained sedentary folk have the same variance in muscle fibre counts. ie: bodybuilders do not have higher muscle fibre counts compared to untrained population.

edit: linked wrong study. fixed now.

When you think about it, what do you think would be a better bench press progression plan for strength and size:

oh, don't get me wrong. i understand it for bench presses, etc. that is, traditional body building type exercises. I'm having a harder time on more 'fitness' oriented resistance routines like the aforementioned pushups, pulls ups... or even something like crunches. Is doing 100 crunches not a good idea?

A better plan than endless pushups would be to do bench presses where you can easily increase the weight over time. If you can't do that for some reason, you can do weighted pushups, or pushup variations (such as one-handed) that steadily make each individual pushup harder to accomplish.

Unfortunately, I don't have access to gym equipment other than my body (resistance) and a total fitness resistance machine. I want to get a kettle bell, but money is ridiculously tight for me right now.

So I'm all about trying to sort out ways to (cheaply) introduce the concept of less reps... I'd love to shorten my morning pushup routine (I already have my feet higher than my head for additional weight... will look into the 'weighted pushups' you mention.

Unfortunately, I'd think to do things right (like weighted pullups) I'd probably need to buy equipment, which isn't an option.

That's why you change leverage (not sure if it's increased or decreased leverage): to make an exercise harder. Do decline pushups, diamond pushups, etc.