This story is taken from the manual, GQ”‘s flagship newsletter, offering useful advice on style, health and more four days a week. Sign up here to get it delivered to your inbox.
Ever since humans first lifted heavy objects and put them down again, the debate has continued over whether it is better to train your body: lifting light weights for high reps or lifting heavy weights for low reps.
“I wish I could get better hypertrophy results with higher weights,” says powerlifter and Ph.D. Layne Norton. GQ“Because then I can sit here and feel smug about it.” But that doesn’t seem to be the case, he says.
Norton cites Stuart Phillips, a professor in the Department of Kinesiology at McMaster University, who he also considers to be one of the world’s best protein researchers. Phillips was one of the first to discover that low-intensity training near failure can produce results similar to high-intensity training to failure when it comes to promoting hypertrophy (muscle growth) and muscle protein synthesis.
In layman’s terms, you don’t have to carry heavy weights to reap the benefits. However, you will need to keep the functional trainer firmly in place until that is done. feel It’s so heavy that I’m on the verge of not being able to lift it after a few more tries.
The data on this debate has been trending in this direction for about 15 years. The original literature on strength and resistance training “wasn’t very great,” Norton says. This is because they did not understand why they should be standardized. Therefore, early studies on strength training that compared high and low loads are completely unhelpful. This is because both groups train infrequently to near failure. One group simply lifted less weight.
Assignee is just one variable
Now, from Norton’s perspective, research is clear that when controlling for “proximity to failure,” there is no statistical difference between low reps and high weights compared to the reverse.
This is not always understood. A few decades ago, it was common to focus on low rep ranges for strength development, medium rep ranges (6-15) for muscle building, and high rep ranges for muscular endurance. You still see that advice today, and Norton himself told people exactly that.
In fact, he still thinks that focusing on medium reps to build muscle is a good general principle, even if the scientific reasoning is wrong. “Actually, this is actually good advice. The resistance is low enough that it doesn’t scare you as much as handling really heavy weights, but it’s heavy enough that you’re closer to failure. It takes less than a minute to do a set,” he says. It takes much longer to lift light weights and fail.
Progressive overload does not necessarily mean weight gain
A related concept for increasing effectiveness with power racks is “progressive overload.” The idea is that you need to increase the difficulty of your workouts to continue building muscle strength. One way (but not the only way) to “progress” is to gain weight.
“In progressive overload, the word ‘load’ makes people focus on the weight on the bar,” Norton says, but adding more reps is also a form of progressive overload. Adding “hard sets,” or sets that bring you closer to failure, is also a form of progressive overload.
Note: It’s difficult to increase numbers on all three major lifts (bench, deadlift, and squat) at once. Advanced lifters looking to make further progress may consider “volume cycling,” a term coined by scientist and exercise expert James Krieger. Progressively overload a specific muscle group for a period of 3-4 months, while putting all other lifts back into “maintenance mode” and switching targeted muscle groups after that period.
#higher #weights #higher #reps