Is there a point to lifting "heavy" if you are natural?

[JasonBourne22]

I never get a significant burn or pump when i may do a heavy set of db curls of say 6-8 reps. I just "lift" it up (with proper form), but still dont get a deep pump.

im simply talking about maximum muscle breakdown methods. This obviously depends if you are into strength or having a bb'er physique. Strongmen are big "bulk" on a frame, but thats what they train for and i understand. But, these strength guys would look like shit on a bb stage. no striations/seperation/v taper, etc etc.

Contrarily,

if i do a moderate weight set of 12-15 reps, I feel the pump and burning much more pronounced. Anybody here into high volume training?  You know how your quads feel when you do a dropset of leg extensions til u burnout? I like that feeling on whatever part im training.

I prefer high volume training, for me its the only way I get a pump. The lowest reps I do for anything is 8, however I do 8 sets of 8! By the end the weight has usually dropped a good 30% from the original set. Most often I base my sets off of a 100 rep scheme (4 x 25, 5 x 20, 3 x33, 1 x 100 etc....) deep burn and pump from hell! Then I eat like a horse 

[JasonBourne22]

it's all about fiber recruitment and breakdown, you recruit and breakdown more muscle fibers lifting heavy, i do agree with you on the 20 rep squats though, absolutely brutally hard work, 15 reps on upper body work is just a waste of time though.

I'm gonna have to disagree with you. Yes lifting heavy does recruit and breakdown muscle fibers, but how can you say that after a 50 rep set of squats that you haven't recruited any muscle fibers. If nutrition, rest, and all other factors are consistant you will grow regardless of how "heavy" the weight is as long as the intensity is there.

[Ursus]

Thanks Goudy. I like your posts on training too. Big fan of the 5x5? I am. It's a good fail-safe when all else frustrates you.

Also, solid build on you in the pics you posted.

I believe Mars or M8 would say something along the lines of "thick as a *&^", or some such.

Thanks for the kind words.

Haha yes they have said it a few times

5x5 is tried tested and proven. One problem i have is that too mnay people try to start too heavy on it. I believe it works wonders on compound movements

[Fatpanda]

I'm gonna have to disagree with you. Yes lifting heavy does recruit and breakdown muscle fibers, but how can you say that after a 50 rep set of squats that you haven't recruited any muscle fibers. If nutrition, rest, and all other factors are consistant you will grow regardless of how "heavy" the weight is as long as the intensity is there.

why would the body build thicker muscle fibres if you keep the weight low 

burn or not the body does not do something it does not have to.

[Ursus]

50 rep squats while it will take tremendous strength is also an endurance feat compared to a 15rmax

The book 'superathletes' deals with a guy who worked up to 100kg x 100 reps...Ironically his squat was noth 'that impressive' around 440lbs if i recall correctly

[Boost]

How do Milos' Giant sets fit into this equation?

[Fatpanda]

How do Milos' Giant sets fit into this equation?

all drugs 

[JasonBourne22]

why would the body build thicker muscle fibres if you keep the weight low 

burn or not the body does not do something it does not have to.

Because your tearing down the muscle fibers with resistance as well a higher endurance which stimulates different fibers that lower rep training does not normally hit. Which with proper nutrition the body will recover and thus add new muscle tissue. Heavy lower rep training i.e. under 10 or 12 reps stimulates growth without question. However, most people assume that you can't build muscle with lighter weights and high reps and its just not true. There are so many pathways to hypertrophy and to many people miss out on higher rep training benefits. Try it, maybe it just works for me and "all" my clients and no one else.

[JasonBourne22]

all drugs 

yes, most of his clients are probably all drugs. But, that doesn't mean those giant sets don't work, just not on a daily basis if natural, its almost impossible to recover.

[Fatpanda]

Because your tearing down the muscle fibers with resistance as well a higher endurance which stimulates different fibers that lower rep training does not normally hit. Which with proper nutrition the body will recover and thus add new muscle tissue. Heavy lower rep training i.e. under 10 or 12 reps stimulates growth without question. However, most people assume that you can't build muscle with lighter weights and high reps and its just not true. There are so many pathways to hypertrophy and to many people miss out on higher rep training benefits. Try it, maybe it just works for me and "all" my clients and no one else.

any weight over 65% of your 1RM stimulates protein synthesis - however not optimally. pump/burn sets cause the muscle to increase capilirisation and become more efficient at buffering lactic acid, and regenerating/storing gylcogen/atp - nothing more

the increase in muscle fibre size comes from the load itself - if this does not increase neither will muscle fibre.

[JasonBourne22]

any weight over 65% of your 1RM stimulates protein synthesis - however not optimally. pump/burn sets cause the muscle to increase capilirisation and become more efficient at buffering lactic acid, and regenerating/storing gylcogen/atp - nothing more

the increase in muscle fibre size comes from the load itself - if this does not increase neither will muscle fibre.

Well, I guess until you try it you will never know my friend. Now, will you build ultra mega strength from high rep training with weight as heavy as you can go for desired reps. NO! But that is not the point in bodybuilding. Strength does not equal muscle, and muscle does not equal strength. Now, that being said I still use the heaviest weight possible for the desired rep range, however you wont see me squat more than 225, bench 185 etc... If you actually use the muscle properly, not just throwing weights around, you wont need weights much heavier. I laugh so hard when new clients  come to me say oh I can press 120's for reps on incline, and then I put them in the proper form for "chest" training, and suddenly that weight drops to the 50's or 60's before they can move back up. There is a big difference between "lifting" weights, and actually "training" with weights.

[Fatpanda]

Well, I guess until you try it you will never know my friend. Now, will you build ultra mega strength from high rep training with weight as heavy as you can go for desired reps. NO! But that is not the point in bodybuilding. Strength does not equal muscle, and muscle does not equal strength. Now, that being said I still use the heaviest weight possible for the desired rep range, however you wont see me squat more than 225, bench 185 etc... If you actually use the muscle properly, not just throwing weights around, you wont need weights much heavier. I laugh so hard when new clients  come to me say oh I can press 120's for reps on incline, and then I put them in the proper form for "chest" training, and suddenly that weight drops to the 50's or 60's before they can move back up. There is a big difference between "lifting" weights, and actually "training" with weights.

i have tried it, and yes i got gains, untill i burned out my cns.

however i disagree all things being equal - muscle does equal strength.

have you read the other threads discussing this? there are studies that compare the two methods - lots, and the lower reps always come out on top.

however good luck, i am glad you are geting results, however i believe that sooner or later your gains will stall, and remain that way untill you move past the 225 squat/185 bench.

[JasonBourne22]

i have tried it, and yes i got gains, untill i burned out my cns.

however i disagree all things being equal - muscle does equal strength.

have you read the other threads discussing this? there are studies that compare the two methods - lots, and the lower reps always come out on top.

however good luck, i am glad you are geting results, however i believe that sooner or later your gains will stall, and remain that way untill you move past the 225 squat/185 bench.

Welll ok, good luck to you as well. Are you a bodybuilder, have you competed. I have, took 5th place at my first show in the novice division. Not bad for being the smallest and youngest one up there @ 176 and only 21 then. I guess we will agree to disagree but I will also ask are you a personal trainer? or have you gone to school to learn or are you just citing studies you have read in magazines or internet? Cuz everthing i'm telling you is from my own personal experience with myself and my PT clients. Basically what I have found is that tearing it up in the gym, regardless of rep range, muscle is built with food. Its funny how people can get stronger but not bigger until they are eating the food reuired to recover and add mass.

[Zach Trowbridge]

Welll ok, good luck to you as well. Are you a bodybuilder, have you competed. I have, took 5th place at my first show in the novice division. Not bad for being the smallest and youngest one up there @ 176 and only 21 then. I guess we will agree to disagree but I will also ask are you a personal trainer? or have you gone to school to learn or are you just citing studies you have read in magazines or internet? Cuz everthing i'm telling you is from my own personal experience with myself and my PT clients.

Not trying to anwer for him, but the fact that he can read and understand the studies he's referencing would lead me to believe he has some background in the subject.

Anyway, the point is that the higher the rep range, the sooner you will reach a limit where you can no longer progress.  For example, if you're doing 15-20 rep sets, the increment of weight you can add and maintain that repetition range is quite small.  However, working in the 3-8 range you can add a decent amount of weight and only sacrifice a rep or two.  In other words, the most amount of strength and hypertrophy potential lies in the lower ranges.

[thewickedtruth]

any weight over 65% of your 1RM stimulates protein synthesis - however not optimally. pump/burn sets cause the muscle to increase capilirisation and become more efficient at buffering lactic acid, and regenerating/storing gylcogen/atp - nothing more

the increase in muscle fibre size comes from the load itself - if this does not increase neither will muscle fibre.

it doesn't buffer the production of lactic acid as much as you lead it on to be but it does in a TINY scale... enough to get a few more reps out of it but not much more than that. Due to how lactic acid is produced, training in ANY WAY causes it's production on a large scale.

[leonp1981]

If you prefer training for the pump, Boonstack, try some supersets, with heavy weight and low reps, back and forth.  You can get a good pump going with bi's/tri's, chest/back, etc. using heavy weights. 

At the end of the day, it's what works for you.  If you prefer building the pump, and it gives you a sense of satisfaction when you leave the gym, then keep doing it.

[Tapeworm]

You're no slouch yourself, Tapeworm. You know your stuff too man. You've got some solid posts under your belt.

Yes, that is true. 

Training knowledge is definitely my weak point tho, so I appreciate you taking the time to write what you did.  Of course, if I don't make MuscleTech like gains, you'll be hearing from my lawyer.

[Tombo]

Yeah, as long as muscular failure is reached i suppose then hypertrophy will occur, pretty simple once you read up on it, some good points made in here

[JasonBourne22]

Not trying to anwer for him, but the fact that he can read and understand the studies he's referencing would lead me to believe he has some background in the subject.

Anyway, the point is that the higher the rep range, the sooner you will reach a limit where you can no longer progress.  For example, if you're doing 15-20 rep sets, the increment of weight you can add and maintain that repetition range is quite small.  However, working in the 3-8 range you can add a decent amount of weight and only sacrifice a rep or two.  In other words, the most amount of strength and hypertrophy potential lies in the lower ranges.

I'm sure he has some background or he wouldn't post at all. However, I don't buy into studies, I use what works for me and has worked for others. More than anything the biggest factor for me is to keep changing things up and never do the same workout twice. Be it rep range, weight, exercises etc... This way the body does not adapt to a specific type of training. I do lift in lower rep ranges, but as I posted before it would be like 8 x 8 or something. I just don't lift by my most peoples standards "heavy", when I go to the lower rep ranges I use full ROM and hard contractions at the top and lowering slowly or a little faster depending on the day and what I feel like doing. At the end of the day if you haven't eaten enough calories and protein to recover from said workout, you will not grow.

[JasonBourne22]

Yeah, as long as muscular failure is reached i suppose then hypertrophy will occur, pretty simple once you read up on it, some good points made in here

Thank you! You lift for the way you want to look. I used to lift heavy all the time, however I found myself looking bulky and not cut. When I started lifting lighter, controlling the weight more, the striations and vascularity really started coming through. I lost "bulk" but size wise I look bigger @ 188 lbs now then I did @ 208 then.

[Viking11]

Unless you have freaky genetics, the only way to get big (shameless plug) as a natural is to train very heavy- at least some of the time.

[Ursus]

Unless you have freaky genetics, the only way to get big (shameless plug) as a natural is to train very heavy- at least some of the time.

As a natty you need to work in a zone where it is challenging but easy enough you wont wear yourself out...hjnce teh beauty of cycling weights

[mitchyboy]

I agree that to achieve growth one must strive to become stronger. I also know that if you could do 20 reps with a given weight, and in the next few weeks with the same weight you can complete 21,22 or 23 reps, you've gotten stronger.   Maybe I'm missing something here. Bye the way, I work in a fairly low rep range myself, but also include pumping type, or higher rep finishing moves at the end of my workout.

[Fatpanda]

Welll ok, good luck to you as well. Are you a bodybuilder, have you competed. I have, took 5th place at my first show in the novice division. Not bad for being the smallest and youngest one up there @ 176 and only 21 then. I guess we will agree to disagree but I will also ask are you a personal trainer? or have you gone to school to learn or are you just citing studies you have read in magazines or internet? Cuz everthing i'm telling you is from my own personal experience with myself and my PT clients. Basically what I have found is that tearing it up in the gym, regardless of rep range, muscle is built with food. Its funny how people can get stronger but not bigger until they are eating the food reuired to recover and add mass.

I have not competed, no, but i am a certified gym instructor - however only a small portion of my knowledge comes from the course i sat, the rest comes from reading a lot. Yes i have helped friends and fellow gym rats with some info on various things, however i do not believe that makes me qualified any more or less than you. As i said i am glad you are getting results, but lets look at some things.

1. you are 21, your test is through the roof right now, and anything you do will work.

2. At 21 i also believed that high volume sets produced hypertrophy and i did get bigger and stronger, however strength and mass gains quickly stopped.

3. i have at no point said high volume sets do not induce hypertrophy - the studies i am quoting show they do - however i am simply reporting what the studies have found and what i have found through personal experimentation over 13 years, that they are NOT optimal.

4. you are a personal trainer, at 21 how long have you been at this? surely you have come across someone who found the volume too taxing? or stalled in their gains? if not - you will, what will you do then 

5. i stand by my comments that pump sets and volume will only get you so far - you will at some point start losing strength i guarentee it.

Thank you! You lift for the way you want to look. I used to lift heavy all the time, however I found myself looking bulky and not cut. When I started lifting lighter, controlling the weight more, the striations and vascularity really started coming through. I lost "bulk" but size wise I look bigger @ 188 lbs now then I did @ 208 then.

the reason you looked more cut when you increased volume was due to burning more calories - not the magicial muscle producing properties of lighter weights 

it doesn't buffer the production of lactic acid as much as you lead it on to be but it does in a TINY scale... enough to get a few more reps out of it but not much more than that. Due to how lactic acid is produced, training in ANY WAY causes it's production on a large scale.

it buffers more lactic acid than low rep sets - that was mt point, no more no less. However the low rep sets also produce less lactic acid anyway 

[Fatpanda]

This study shows increased cortisol and gh with each passing set after 4 sets when doing 10 and 15 reps a set.

however when doing 5 rep sets - cortisol does not increase past a low base level - no matter the number of sets  

point: low reps/heavy weight sets produce less muscle eating cortisol than 10-15 rep sets  


Hormonal responses after various resistance exercise protocols.
 
[My paper] Ilias Smilios, Theophilos Pilianidis, Michalis Karamouzis, Savvas P Tokmakidis
Department of Physical Education & Sport Science, Democritus University of Thrace, Komotini, Greece.
PURPOSE: This study examined the effects of the number of sets on testosterone, cortisol, and growth hormone (hGH) responses after maximum strength (MS), muscular hypertrophy (MH), and strength endurance (SE) protocols. METHODS: Eleven young men performed multi-joint dynamic exercises using MS (5 reps at 88% of one-repetition maximum (1-RM), 3-min rest) and MH (10 reps at 75% of 1-RM, 2-min rest) protocols with 2, 4, and 6 sets at each exercise; and an SE (15 reps at 60% of 1-RM, 1-min rest) with 2 and 4 sets. Hormonal concentrations were measured before exercise, immediately after, and at 15 and 30 min of recovery. RESULTS: The number of sets did not affect the hormonal responses after the MS protocol. Cortisol and hGH were higher (P < 0.05) after the four-set compared with the two-set sessions in the MH and SE protocols. No differences were observed between the six-set and the four-set sessions in the MH protocol. Cortisol and hGH were higher (P < 0.05) than the MS after the SE and MH protocols, and only when four and six sets were performed in the latter. hGH was higher than the MH after the SE protocol, whether two or four sets were executed, whereas cortisol (P < 0.05) was higher after the SE protocol only when two sets were performed. Testosterone did not change with any workout. CONCLUSION: The number of sets functions up to a point as a stimulus for increased hormonal concentrations in order to optimize adaptations with MH and SE protocols, and has no effect on a MS protocol. Furthermore, the number of sets may differentiate long-term adaptations with MS, MH, and SE protocols causing distinct hormonal responses.