Any benefit to high-rep training?

[volfan98]

Hello all, i've been working out for about 4 years now and i've always been told that the 5-8 rep workouts were the only way to build size and strength. I've recently moved and my new workout partner wants me to try a high (12-15) rep workout with him for a while. Will I get anything out of this or should I convince him to stick with the heavy weight, low rep workout?

Thanks!
Matt

 

[Tom Treutlein]

Progress will give you the results. 8-12 rep range is usually ideal for size, though. 3-6 for strength, more or less. Above 12 is towards endurance, but you can still make some progress. Thing is, you've been at it for 4 years, so you shouldn't expect much from that rep range.

 

[Sebass67]

I HATE IT...We are on it for football now and i am really considering jumping off. We will see. As a shock it better provide something.

 

[volfan98]

That's what I was thinking. Maybe the shock factor by itself will do something for me. We'll see. I'm not liking it so far - I don't feel like my muscles are sore the next day like they used to be.

Matt

 

[Tom Treutlein]

There's no such thing as "shocking" a muscle.

 

[Bulldog_10]

After 4 years of the same routine...your body is begging to be in the 12 rep range. Stick with 8-12.

 

[Tom Treutlein]

Why is it begging to be in that range? Are you saying you can shock the body?

 

[Bulldog_10]

Why is it begging to be in that range? Are you saying you can shock the body?

You can only do the same routine for so long before it should be changed. 4-6 weeks is the usual...after 4 years...something seriously needs to be changed. Bro, you should seriously read about periodization. I feel like a recording...

 

[Tom Treutlein]

Right, but if you're constantly making progress with a routine there isn't a need for it to be changed. If you were to be on a routine, for let's just say 4 years, and constantly be making progress (having one or two month plateaus here and there, maybe more, maybe less) then it doesn't need changing. Periodized or not, you're body will adapt to the progressingly heavier load. At least, that makes sense to me.

 

[Bulldog_10]

Right, but if you're constantly making progress with a routine there isn't a need for it to be changed. If you were to be on a routine, for let's just say 4 years, and constantly be making progress (having one or two month plateaus here and there, maybe more, maybe less) then it doesn't need changing. Periodized or not, you're body will adapt to the progressingly heavier load. At least, that makes sense to me.

Tell that to your joints and your brain.

And just think, if you hit one or two month plateaus lets say twice per year (being generous)...that's 4-8 months of training wasted. And what would blast you through that plateau? You think somehow you'd just hit a plateau and then start making gains again without changing anything?

 

[Tom Treutlein]

Well, I guess a 1 or 2 week layoff (which is recommended here and there for any descent training program) or even a period of lighter lifting would help break through that plateau. I guess that is periodization then. I just looked at a sample idea of a periodization macrocycle, and I don't think all of that has to be done. You're going to plateau either way, even if you follow those principles.

 

[WalkingBeast]

Id say I got the bulk of my gains off of 12-15 reps, especially in the beginning. As I got more advanced I started to incorporate the full spectrum of rep ranges into all of my routines. That type of instinctive training seems to yeild the best results for me overall. Thats 12-15 reps to failure though. Id definately reccomend it. You can always try it for a while and see how it works out. Ultimately I mix it up, doing all my sets to failure in just about every rep range.

 

[coolcolj]

High reps are good for building work capacity for lower rep work