High vs Low reps and Muscle Definition

[djdante]

Hey all, been a while since my last post on here, I have been enjoying everyone else's questions and answers.

I've been weight training for about 5 years with a few small gaps in between. I don't know everything about weight training by a looong shot, but I'm not a complete newbie either.

I train 5 days a week, with a week off every month or two. I train now purely for physique, and to release tension in general, and because I enjoy working out.

I am carrying about 6-8 pounds of excess fat on me at the moment to help with the bulking phase, which I’m planning to let go of now that summer is almost here again.

I currently do a lot of low rep (4-6), high weight compound exercises for all my main muscle groups, training no longer than 50 minutes at a time since I read somewhere that long workouts can cause catabolic response in the muscles.

Strength-wise, this seems to have worked really well, as I have never before been stronger, and it has really helped me to blast through some barriers I had. HOWEVER I am of the impression that my muscles are softer and less defined than I remember than being back in the day when I was doing higher reps (around 10). Their general shape seems to have changed somewhat as well. It seems as though, if I’m not flexing a muscle, then it appear smaller than in the days when I was doing higher reps. I remember my muscles always feeling quite hard to the touch, even when I wasn’t flexing.

So my question is: Is this a possible outcome of doing lower reps? Or am I just imagining this? I seem to keep thinking that perhaps I aught to go back to the higher rep workouts. I don’t really need to be ‘bigger’, I just want to be better defined, which of course I understand also involves losing fat.

 

[NoLoveLost]

First thing that comes to mind:

I think sometimes it is a matter of keeping the routine "new" and not getting "stuck" doing a lot of the same. Your body can become too accustom to the same movements, and changing it up might be what you need to make more progress. Doing low reps of the same exercises may have helped you make some progress, and now you need to change it up to keep moving forward.

just a thought.......

 

[Ride_On]

I currently do a lot of low rep (4-6), high weight compound exercises for all my main muscle groups, training no longer than 50 minutes at a time since I read somewhere that long workouts can cause catabolic response in the muscles.

This will largely be the result of diet, but you probably don't need to be in there longer than an hour, so I'm sure what you're doing is cool. Post up your routine though.

Strength-wise, this seems to have worked really well, as I have never before been stronger, and it has really helped me to blast through some barriers I had. HOWEVER I am of the impression that my muscles are softer and less defined than I remember than being back in the day when I was doing higher reps (around 10). Their general shape seems to have changed somewhat as well. It seems as though, if I’m not flexing a muscle, then it appear smaller than in the days when I was doing higher reps. I remember my muscles always feeling quite hard to the touch, even when I wasn’t flexing.

So my question is: Is this a possible outcome of doing lower reps? Or am I just imagining this? I seem to keep thinking that perhaps I aught to go back to the higher rep workouts. I don’t really need to be ‘bigger’, I just want to be better defined, which of course I understand also involves losing fat.

It is not necessarily your imagination. Higher reps can tax the muscles in a different way and the exhaustion at that point can give you that "pump" feeling in my experience.

As you said, definition is going to be all about losing fat, which is all about diet. What is your diet like?

Seeing as you're bulking, it is highly unlikely that this is the case, but if your carb intake is very low, that would certainly have something to do with the "flat" feeling.

 

[djdante]

Okay, so after a bit of deliberation and since it was time to mix up my routine anyway, I've made the following choice.

1) Switch to 10 reps for 3 sets, give my muscles a bit of a change of pace and hopefully shock them into some growth
2) switch from 5 days a week weights with 0 cardio to 4 days a week weights and 2 days a week HIIT.
3) Reduce my caloric intake by 200 calories a day

Provided that my food quality and timing remains good, is this likely to be as good a plan as any for maintaining muscle while dropping some fat?

 

[x3malex]

Okay, so after a bit of deliberation and since it was time to mix up my routine anyway, I've made the following choice.

1) Switch to 10 reps for 3 sets, give my muscles a bit of a change of pace and hopefully shock them into some growth
2) switch from 5 days a week weights with 0 cardio to 4 days a week weights and 2 days a week HIIT.
3) Reduce my caloric intake by 200 calories a day

Provided that my food quality and timing remains good, is this likely to be as good a plan as any for maintaining muscle while dropping some fat?

Strength Training is different from Body Building. I do exactly the same thing you do, low rep, high resistance, compound exercises and I wondered why muscle growth wasn't happening that well. In the long run, strength training is purely for strength. Look at Jay Cutler (Mr Olympia), for ALL this exercises the min amount of reps is 8, some go up to 20, yet he benches in the 400s, while the max bench press is 700+lbs.

Body building should be targeting SPECIFIC muscle groups, with medium intensity (60-85% of your max rep) and medium reps:8-10. That gets the blood flowing and targets stimulation of the muscle FULLY.

Although it is unclear overall, why strength trainers are not so big, things such as sacroplasmic hypertrophy, having longer tendons, ligaments and joints can have a dramatic impact on your strength. Strenth training is for guys who don't exactly care how they look as long as they can outbench or kick your ass. Body building is mostly aesthetic.