Me and my freind were talking about lifting and the subject of lifting for strenght rather than size came up. Now If you worked your arms twice a week and one day was lifting for strength and the other was lifting for size would you get both. Now by my logic that would mean you'll get stronger slower than if you just went for strength and you will also get bigger slower than if you just lifted for size. But as I have discovered logic doesn;t always have the right answer for this kind of stuff.
Will this work?
- Thread starter Fishstick
- Start date
One problem with this is overtraining. Usually you go heavy weight low reps for size, and moderate weight higher reps for strenght. What I do personally is start off with a weight I can do 6 times and do threee sets of it and I keep that weight untill After a few weeks I can push it up 10 times for 3 sets, then I add enough weight to drop myself back down to 6 reps again. Only training that body part once a week, but every week is targeted slightly different and you are getting both. Remeber the more you keep your body guessing the better. just like doing different exercises changing reps and weight will do the same thing so your body wont adapt. I usually go up about an average of 5-10lb over a months period. so I will start off the first week with say a weight of 160 bench, and usually I can do about 6 reps week one 8 reps week 2 and 10 week 3 then I would add 5 or 10lb week 4 dropping me back into the 6 rep range. This is just an example sometimes I have seen less gains than this or even none. Just how I do it. but if you train the same muscle 2 times per week I would only do it for 2-3 weeks then go back to training once a week for a week or 2 just so you dont overtrain.
Since strength is about neural learning, extremely heavy weight and low reps are what you want. Generally, with enough volume, you can gain strength and size.
A fun concept to play with is wave loading. There's a few ways to use wave protocols. Instead of the typical 3X8, you'd go 1X8, 1X6, 1X3, 1X6 or you could the other way 1X3, 1X6, 1X8, 1X6. Starting heavy and working towards lighter weight would be better for increasing strength. If you know your 1 RMs, keep at 80%+ for continual strength gains. Quite a few strength athletes-power lifters, strongmen, oly lifters incorporate a lot of heavy triples, doubles, and singles.
A fun concept to play with is wave loading. There's a few ways to use wave protocols. Instead of the typical 3X8, you'd go 1X8, 1X6, 1X3, 1X6 or you could the other way 1X3, 1X6, 1X8, 1X6. Starting heavy and working towards lighter weight would be better for increasing strength. If you know your 1 RMs, keep at 80%+ for continual strength gains. Quite a few strength athletes-power lifters, strongmen, oly lifters incorporate a lot of heavy triples, doubles, and singles.
mike100 said:i have no clue what you want. do you want to get bigger? get stronger? or do both? just tell me what you want and i'll tell you how to get it
I'm really just concerned about getting stronger. I sure as hell won't mind getting bigger and if I could do both thats great too but main concern is strength.
no I've also been told heavy+low reps for bulking. For toning and strength (although shouldn't you gain strength doing either?) I've been told many reps+sets+moderate weight.
Well, for size, there are a couple things that you should incorporate:
The flex-through the range of motion, concentrate on flexing the muscle
Longer tempo-use a slower eccentric motion and slower concentric motion (2 second up and 3 second down)
Failure-Use one set that brings you to concentric failure
As far as sets and reps go, there's not really locked in emphasis, but the perferences I have are-
5X6@3-4 movements per muscle group, 4X6@4 movements per muscle group, 5X8@3 movements per muscle group
I would tend to use the 4X6 for larger muscle groups (back, legs) and the 5X8 for smaller muscle groups (biceps, delts).
I would use more reps when going for size than I would for strength. I would also work in the 70-80% range for size.
However, something that I have found even more effective than staying with a strict set/rep setup is loading and deloading.
For strength, a 4 week block might look like
Week 1-3X5
Week 2-3X5, 3X4
Week 3-3/2/1/3/2/1
Week 4-3X3
For size, it might look like-
Week 1-3X8
Week 2-3X8, 3X6
Week 3-8/6/4/8/6/4
Week 4-2X8, 2X5
The last train of thought I'd like to cover is pyramiding, it's effective and less boring than straight sets. For size, a single wave might look like this-
1X8, 1X6, 1X4 or you could do a rapid wave, which would look like this-
1X8, 1X4, 1X8, 1X4, 1X10
The other day in class, we used a 5X8 for compound movements and a 6X10 for isolation movements, staying 1 rep short of failure, it was fairly high volume and moderate intensity. I got a really good pump and had a bit of soreness the next day-good stuff.
The flex-through the range of motion, concentrate on flexing the muscle
Longer tempo-use a slower eccentric motion and slower concentric motion (2 second up and 3 second down)
Failure-Use one set that brings you to concentric failure
As far as sets and reps go, there's not really locked in emphasis, but the perferences I have are-
5X6@3-4 movements per muscle group, 4X6@4 movements per muscle group, 5X8@3 movements per muscle group
I would tend to use the 4X6 for larger muscle groups (back, legs) and the 5X8 for smaller muscle groups (biceps, delts).
I would use more reps when going for size than I would for strength. I would also work in the 70-80% range for size.
However, something that I have found even more effective than staying with a strict set/rep setup is loading and deloading.
For strength, a 4 week block might look like
Week 1-3X5
Week 2-3X5, 3X4
Week 3-3/2/1/3/2/1
Week 4-3X3
For size, it might look like-
Week 1-3X8
Week 2-3X8, 3X6
Week 3-8/6/4/8/6/4
Week 4-2X8, 2X5
The last train of thought I'd like to cover is pyramiding, it's effective and less boring than straight sets. For size, a single wave might look like this-
1X8, 1X6, 1X4 or you could do a rapid wave, which would look like this-
1X8, 1X4, 1X8, 1X4, 1X10
The other day in class, we used a 5X8 for compound movements and a 6X10 for isolation movements, staying 1 rep short of failure, it was fairly high volume and moderate intensity. I got a really good pump and had a bit of soreness the next day-good stuff.
Last edited:
ok, so I'm gonna follow one of your ideas as you seem to know a LOT. I haven't got time at the mo but will put something together - probably the rapid wave you said = 1X8, 1X4, 1X8, 1X4, 1X10 but I may use 1X6 instead of 1X4 as that seems pretty low for mass? or would it be good to have variation?
Anyways, you answered the thing I'e been wanting to know for a while in saying "use the 4X6 for larger muscle groups (back, legs) and the 5X8 for smaller muscle groups (biceps, delts)". I was kinda using the same number of reps for everything because wasn't sure how different muscle groups should be treated.
Anyways, you answered the thing I'e been wanting to know for a while in saying "use the 4X6 for larger muscle groups (back, legs) and the 5X8 for smaller muscle groups (biceps, delts)". I was kinda using the same number of reps for everything because wasn't sure how different muscle groups should be treated.
Well, I think you'd be fine with the reps of 4 on the rapid wave to gain size just fine. It's like if you take the traditional 3X10 method but reverse it to 10X3, then you have the same amount of volume (30 reps total) but with the lower reps per set, you can use a lot more weight, so that the intensity (closeness to 1RM) is high. Plus, with the way rapid waves are set up you get a nicely aggressive so that you cover a wide spectrum of recruitment and this is important for muscle growth.
But pyramiding has no set in scheme, so you can tailor it to how you want. There's really no wrong or right way. However, it is generally accepted that size goals, start heavy and work up-1X10, 1X8, 1X6 or 1X8, 1X6, 1X4 and visa versa for strength goals (in the case of single waves). Just for kicks, let's say I was doing a chest/biceps day, it might look like this-
A)bench:1X3, 1X6, 1X3, 1X6, 1X10
B)1 arm incline db press:1X10, 1X8, 1X6 (last set to failure)
C)cable flyes:5X8-2 second pause at the full squeezed concentric (last set to failure)
D)bb curl:2X6, 2X5, 1X10
E)seated inc hammer curls:2X8, 2X6, 1X5 (last set to failure)
F)reverse curl:1X12, 2X10 (last set to failure and slightly cheated)
This kind of set up would add strength to go with the show. As you can see, I'm more of a fan of wave pyramiding. It allows you to be creative, vary the tension, and not lock yourself into a certain set/rep scheme.
But pyramiding has no set in scheme, so you can tailor it to how you want. There's really no wrong or right way. However, it is generally accepted that size goals, start heavy and work up-1X10, 1X8, 1X6 or 1X8, 1X6, 1X4 and visa versa for strength goals (in the case of single waves). Just for kicks, let's say I was doing a chest/biceps day, it might look like this-
A)bench:1X3, 1X6, 1X3, 1X6, 1X10
B)1 arm incline db press:1X10, 1X8, 1X6 (last set to failure)
C)cable flyes:5X8-2 second pause at the full squeezed concentric (last set to failure)
D)bb curl:2X6, 2X5, 1X10
E)seated inc hammer curls:2X8, 2X6, 1X5 (last set to failure)
F)reverse curl:1X12, 2X10 (last set to failure and slightly cheated)
This kind of set up would add strength to go with the show. As you can see, I'm more of a fan of wave pyramiding. It allows you to be creative, vary the tension, and not lock yourself into a certain set/rep scheme.
Last edited:
I've put together my new routine and worked my biceps today. It felt like a good workout. I did, with a 1X10, 1X8, 1X6, to failure set, the dumbell curl, hammer curl and barbell curl. When I'd finished I wished I'd done more but then I'm always like that after a workout.
I won't completely hijack this thread by listing my new workout routine, but may put it up elsewhere later to see what you think.
Thanks for your help evo.
I won't completely hijack this thread by listing my new workout routine, but may put it up elsewhere later to see what you think.
Thanks for your help evo.