S
ShowKidd
Guest
personally i often question whether or not a 3x10 is as effective as picking a weight that you would fail at about 15 reps on the first set,keeping the same weight for the next 2 sets but failing at about 12,10, or (12,10,8,). the reason why i think the first example isn't as effective as the second one is because you have to pick a weight that you wouldn't reach FAILURE on the first set or probably the second, you need be able to last till the last set and still bang out the full 10. but with a set/rep scheme like 15,12,10 or 12,10,8 you are picking a weight that you would FAIL at on the FIRST set and obviously the last 2 sets as well because you wouldn't be able to repeat that number of reps 2 or 3 sets in a row if you truly went to failure on the first set, so the reduced number of reps allows you to keep the same weight but still hit failure.
one more thing i would like to point out is 3x10=30 reps, and you are not hitting failure on the first 2 sets and maybe not even on set 3. the 12,10,8=30 reps as well but you are hitting failure each time so wouldn't you also believe that to be more effective?
also so for people that like doing 4 sets like me especially when you are on cycle and can handle the volume 15,12,10,8 or 12,10,8,6 would also work great IMO.
one more thing i would like to point out is 3x10=30 reps, and you are not hitting failure on the first 2 sets and maybe not even on set 3. the 12,10,8=30 reps as well but you are hitting failure each time so wouldn't you also believe that to be more effective?
also so for people that like doing 4 sets like me especially when you are on cycle and can handle the volume 15,12,10,8 or 12,10,8,6 would also work great IMO.