Please Scroll Down to See Forums Below
5x5 or 10x3
- Thread starter wootoom
- Start date
InTraining
New member
I have found the higher reps(8-15) with slower negatives(2-3 seconds) to be best for mass gains...I did the 5x5 program for awhile and switched to this method a few months ago and I'm making really good size gains...
Of course occasionally I will lift with lower reps(around 5-6) just to maintain or try and increase strength in those rep ranges
Of course occasionally I will lift with lower reps(around 5-6) just to maintain or try and increase strength in those rep ranges
I started the 3 sets of 10 reps with the same weight about 2 years ago and havent looked back since. I met a huge guy (6'2.5" @ 280lbs) in the gym and that is what he preached. I actually spotted him one day, the first i had ever seen him. I touched the bar on his 17th rep of 315. Needless to say we trained together for the next 6-8 months. At the time, i could get 315 for a single set of 10. So, whatever you can handle for 10 is where i would start. Our goal was to get 50 reps with 315 in 5 sets. I never got it while we trained together, but now i can get it in fewer sets. However, at the start i was getting like a set of 10, 8, 6. To say the least i learned a lot from him.
wnt2bBeast
New member
bignate73 said:
i agree as well..mix it up a little then go back to 3x10..i
intraining-
do you think your new growth is because of the xtra strength you gained while doing 5x5?
wnt2bBeast
New member
nope routines are relative..cant say that 5x5 vs 3x10 is going to put more muscle on you..the only thing you can do is try it out and see if it works for you..but if youve been doing 3x10 for 3 years i would definitely give 5x5 a chancewootoom said:
USA_CrazyOx
New member
InTraining said:
I'm just wondering...whats the logic/science behind the thought that a lower set higher rep routine (like this 3x10 y'all are talkin about) will better improve your mass gains, and that a lower rep higher set (5x5) will better improve your strength gains?
Also, whats the logic behind "mixing things up" to improve gains (in general), is that sort of in the same lines as "shocking the muscles", because I never really understood that either, especially if you're already doing something thats workin'.
....so many people..... saying so many different things about weight lifting...
wnt2bBeast
New member
id go along with this as wellcwick0 said:
InTraining
New member
wnt2bBeast said:intraining-
do you think your new growth is because of the xtra strength you gained while doing 5x5?
Most definitely man....I followed the 5x5 program for like 6 months and got a pretty decent base of strength that has carried over today when I am going more for hypertrophy
wnt2bBeast
New member
sweet!!!InTraining said:
InTraining
New member
USA_CrazyOx said:I'm just wondering...whats the logic/science behind the thought that a lower set higher rep routine (like this 3x10 y'all are talkin about) will better improve your mass gains, and that a lower rep higher set (5x5) will better improve your strength gains?
Also, whats the logic behind "mixing things up" to improve gains (in general), is that sort of in the same lines as "shocking the muscles", because I never really understood that either, especially if you're already doing something thats workin'.
Different things work for different people...fiber makeup(might get flamed for that) can determine what kinds of gains you will get with different rep ranges...people can say "training for fiber type is false" all they want but in the end all that matters is experience....and in my experience i have found higher reps to be better for hypertrophy
Mixing things up and shocking a muscle are totally different...shocking a muscle is IMO a false concept, the idea being to do so many different things and somehow confuse the muscle into growing...except muscles only know resistance...
Mixing things up would be to change a routine(exercises, # of sets, reps etc) in an effort to prevent a plateau and to keeping gaining
ghettostudmuffin
New member
Intraining, you are correct about muscles knowing only resistance. You are incorrect about shocking them though. The human body is a highly adaptable machine that will slow down or stagnate in the presence of repetition. Usually this happens because your body gets used to a movement and performs it more efficiently, thereby decreasing the growth stimulation it can provide. That's why if you keep doing barbell curls forever and stop getting gains, switch to alternate dumbell curls on an incline or something. This will in effect shock the muscles into new adaptation. Rep ranges definitely affect the body in different ways. i do believe in trainign for your fiber type. I learned this within months of first training when I was 14, only I did nothave the sense to utilize it because I though I had to do what otehrs think should work for you. Well, everyone's body repsonds differently to different stimuli. Just seeign the physical and mental differences between people should make it obvious that we al have different needs when it comes to training. Case in point, high rep squats absolute kill me. Anything over 5 tires me out, and 10 or more reps burn me out. Yet, I can do gradually increasing singles until I reach my working set of 6 hard non-max singles and rack the bar and have plenty of pep left over. I got this routine from a site about Doug Hepburn. This will be my staple squat routine for life, although of course I will break it up from time to time with other set and rep protocols. Same for benching, I like 10x3 ALOT. 10 sets of 3 reps. For both squats and bench I rest as long between sets as I feel I need and do not use the clock. I also try not to break more than a very minor sweat while doing these. If I break a sweat then I am probably moving between sets too fast. Both set and rep protocols work great for me as far as adding mass is concerned, as well as strength obviously. Also, I like to perform certain exercises with what Dave draper calls body thrust. I use a slight body heave on curls and it actually helps me get a stronger contraction. same for tricep extensions, shoulder presses and laterals, ham curls. I use a slight bounce on bench which helps my chest fire because my pecs do not respond to slow reps very well. Yet they get pumped and good contractions from slightly explosive pressing. I am very fast twitch and training with semi-explosive reps and high sets and low reps helps me build muscle and strength while taxing me less than other set rep routines. I threw out training the way others said I should awhile ago before I started lifting again recently. What do all the best say? You gotta figure what works best for YOU. I think you would benefit greatly from a 3-4 month stint of 5x5 or 10x3, or 6x1 or whatever. Many think you cannot gain good mass on low reps, but that is garbage. You can, but you have to do enough sets or total volume to get the mass to come along with the strength imo. 5x5=25 reps, 10x3 equals 30 reps. 6x1=6 reps, but I may do anywhere from 10-20 gradually increasing singles before I reach my working set weight. Old time super strong guys like Doug Hepburn, John DAvis and Norbert Schemansky trained like this and got hella strong and huge in the process so it does work. How well probably depends on you fiber type to some extent I would think.
InTraining
New member
"Shocking muscles" makes very little sense...since they only know resistance they aren't going to respond.."Hey! I don't remember this...we are doing a giant set of these exercises we must grow! etc"...there was a great thread about this a few weeks\months ago but thanks to the non-plat poor excuse for a search function I cannot find it....
Better than "shocking muscles" however is to alternate exercises...your example of BB curls is a valid one...picking from a pool of 2-3 compound exercises will prevent stagnation a whole lot faster than if one did the same exercise everytime
Alternating exercises also allows for greater strength gains....which is the key to growth IMO..
Better than "shocking muscles" however is to alternate exercises...your example of BB curls is a valid one...picking from a pool of 2-3 compound exercises will prevent stagnation a whole lot faster than if one did the same exercise everytime
Alternating exercises also allows for greater strength gains....which is the key to growth IMO..
Last edited:
wnt2bBeast
New member
im not too sure i agree with this "shocking" thing either..stagnation occurs because you are unalbe to increase the load..lets face it how much can you really add to bb curls using half way decent form?hence when you change exercises you may be able to increase the laod on the muscle and thats where this new growth comes from..its not really a shock..im all for changing exercises once it become difficult to add even the slightest amount of weight and or add 1 rep per workout..
Tactile
New member
I've been doing 5x5 for a couple of months now, and I've been making some good, consistent gains with it. I don't see it being a choice between 5x5 or 10x3 because your main exercise is the 5x5 one, and you choose two supplemental exercises with an 8-10 rep range. The logic being that you're working both types of muscle fibres within the same workout.
JohnRobHolmes
Well-known member
on the lines of "shocking muscles" or "confusing the muscles to grow" (thats a good one!) i agree that muscles only see resistance. they can see resistance in different positions, though. so when you change from palm down curls to palm up curls for example, the bi's will be closer to full contraction during the midpart of the curl where its hardest. my point is that muscles get used to a range of motion or path of motion as quickly as possible- AKA muscles get efficient with a familar ROM. for hypertrophy of muscles, this is not good. more efficient muscles need less mass to do the same work. i have experienced this personally with biking and climbing. after efficiency sets in, the only thing to keep the size up is to try new things the muscles (and more importantly the CNS) have not adapted to. up the weight, change the ROM, change the load angle, etc.
