• Keep up to date with Ausbb via Twitter and Facebook. Please add us!
  • Join the Ausbb - Australian BodyBuilding forum

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.

    The Ausbb - Australian BodyBuilding forum is dedicated to no nonsense muscle and strength building. If you need advice that works, you have come to the right place. This forum focuses on building strength and muscle using the basics. You will also find that the Ausbb- Australian Bodybuilding Forum stresses encouragement and respect. Trolls and name calling are not allowed here. No matter what your personal goals are, you will be given effective advice that produces results.

    Please consider registering. It takes 30 seconds, and will allow you to get the most out of the forum.

Admin

Administrator. Graeme
Staff member
[FONT=&quot]In a recent study published in the Journal of Applied Physiology, Canadian researchers took 49 men who’d been weight training for the past two years. Already there are two key contributions by this study: It involves a larger sample size than most similar studies and subjects who would not just experience abunch of newbie gains to muddy results.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Half of the subjects were placed into a high-rep group (20 to 25 reps); the other in a lower rep group (eight to 12 reps). Each group trained four days a week for 12 weeks, where the overall amount of “work” they performed were similar. There also weren’t any significant differences between their diets. To really ensure that subjects lifted with true intensity (to “failure”, as it’s called), the researchers trained each subject individually and generally made sure the subjects really had nothing left in them by the end of a set.


[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]At the end of the 12 weeks, researchers tested the subjects’ thigh muscle and found that both groups built similar amounts of muscle. They also had similar increases in strength, a finding that challenges the idea that high-rep training doesn’t increase strength as effectively. Strength is a product of having both muscle and a nervous system that’s used to lifting a certain amount of weight. The paper explains that increasing your maximal strength is possible with high-rep training, as long as you also periodically lift with really heavy weight.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]And finally, one other interesting tidbit that came out of this study: Growth hormone and testosterone, which are thought to be big drivers of muscle gain, did not affect the results.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]So what’s the message here? One of the study’s authors, Stuart Phillips, a professor in the Department of Kinesiology at McMaster University says:[/FONT]
For the ‘mere mortal’ who wants to get stronger, we’ve shown that you can take a break from lifting heavy weights and not compromise any gains. It’s also a new choice which could appeal to the masses and get people to take up something they should be doing for their health.
[FONT=&quot]If you’re going to lift with the intention to get big and strong — whether it’s for 30 reps or for five reps — make sure that you work really, really hard.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Neither load nor systemic hormones determine resistance trained-mediated hypertrophy or strength gains in resistance trained young men [Journal of Applied Physiology][/FONT]
 
I'm glad this is getting exposure, but sadly the important parts will probably be missed. The problem is most people will only read the "lighter weights" part and not the part about having to train to "exhaustion."


Also, "lighter" doesn't mean light. You still have to use a level of resistance and style of performance that is challenging, and you still have to work hard. There are no shortcuts.

Regardless of whether you use heavier weight and lower reps/TUL or lighter weight and higher reps/TUL, your results will be proportional to the effort you put into your workouts.
 
Im glad it makes reference to both periodization and DUP.
Though as goosey mentions above, these are the two more important points that will be completely lost on "bros" or the uninformed.


Tim.
 
Then body weight excersises with get you soooo huge
youll be bigger then the hulk :cool:





(just kidding)
If light weights are good, and bodyweight exercises mage you bigger, does that mean as you get heavier you get smaller [emoji15] [emoji54] [emoji16] [emoji33]
 
Im glad it makes reference to both periodization and DUP.
Though as goosey mentions above, these are the two more important points that will be completely lost on "bros" or the uninformed.


Tim.

Hi Tim,

I hope you're in good health and training as you want to train.

I've been very familiar with this study, in addition to having personally communicated with its leading professor Dr Stewart (Stu) Phillips. Yes effort is what matters here whilst lifting only 30% or so of your 1RM. However please note, this study was not geared specifically for strength athletes but more specifically for bodybuilders. It may not have been included in this study, but Dr Stu goes on to say that if strength is your ultimate goal, then by all means you're gonna have to dip into those low reps lifting weights that are much closer to your 1RM.

So the emphasis on neuromuscular efficiency that I've used as an Olympic weightlifter over 30 years ago now, is still used by weightlifters today, as our human body is still our human body, irrespective of the passage of time.

With the very high reps (30 or so leading to muscular fatigue [rather than failure]), would be great, however it does have its limitations as one becomes more advance. The reason for that is volume of work and recovery. The aim (as you become more advanced), is to do as much work as your recovery would allow you to. That is why high frequency training has always been the bread and butter of Olympic weightlifters, and according to what I know now, it should also be the meat and potatoes of the modern day bodybuilder (who is not taking steroids). Hence, my recommendation to include so many positive factors under the one high effort training umbrella would be to take advantage of Myo-Reps. This protocol would allow for high frequency training; higher volume of work, the ability to have better recovery, all these whilst giving you the ability to choose between strength dominant training, hypertrophy dominate training, or bit of both depending on your personal goal.

Myo-reps even though modern, reminds me of the master Bulgarian coach Ivan Abadjiev. When you see a Bulgarian weightlifter lifting 1 rep after another 1 rep after another 1 rep (calling those reps "sets" of what Andy would like to call high effort), you'd come to realise that this giant of a coach knew the meaning of training at the highest possible level of effort, whilst cutting down/minimising on all these other reps that you'd need just to get to that 1 rep maximum weight. That's what you'd call paying attention to the lifter's CNS stress minimisation, whilst simultaneously adding to the lifter's recovering abilities. Mike Mentzer was on the right track when he advocated for a bodybuilder to remain on the mountain so to speak once he has reached that 8th or so reps, by taking as little time as would allow for even 1 more rep (depending on the initial number or reps done and weight used). Rest-pause, DC training, and/or Myo-Reps; I predict would be the protocols knowledgeable bodybuilders would choose for themselves for an optimal training method into the future.
 
Last edited:
If light weights are good, and bodyweight exercises mage you bigger, does that mean as you get heavier you get smaller [emoji15] [emoji54] [emoji16] [emoji33]

Operation (small)
Nah only thing that will make you smaller is counting them calories
 
Top