Training for size

[AhMadKooL]

There are no absolutes. The best method is to train in different ranges at different periods of time as they can work synergistically and drive gains to far better levels than sticking to one range. That said, sets/reps are really just a way of breaking up work. There is a time compoent too.

I'd recomend reading these two links and you will really get a much better understanding of training. Probably better than anyone else in your gym.

This is a longer thread but very comprehensive on training theory. It will take a bit of time to get through but you should really do it and save yourself from a ton of misinformation out there. It can get a bit science-like but work through it:
http://forum.mesomorphosis.com/showthread.php?t=8500

This is more on point to your question and is shorter but you'd do well to read this and the above:
http://forum.mesomorphosis.com/showpost.php?p=50&postcount=5

I didn't quite understand the second link:
"explosive strength will still train at times with higher reps and experience some sarcoplamic hypertrophy"
does this mean that for strength training you have to go for higher reps?

My question is for strength training do you go for higher reps or lower?

And for Size training also is it higher or lower reps?

 

[Tweakle]

there is no 'size' training prescription, some people's muscles will get bigger from volume training while some people will flatten out and get smaller & weaker. It's your genetic response to resistance training and only you can find out what works.

I've watched an ifbb pro who do 20+ sets of light iso work and obviously he is huge from it. Everyone else in the gym who trains like that is frail and weak.

as a general reccomendation 4-6 reps of compound exercises, for 3-6 work sets depending on your intensity and frequency should work as well as anything else for most people.

 

[psychedout]

Training for size comes down to a few things IMO.

First, reps anywhere between 4 and 8. Secondly, compound movements, maybe with some isolation to bring up lagging bodyparts, but a program should not be structured around it. Thirdly, frequency -- train everything twice a week. Maybe even 3 times, although in this cause the intensity will be varied from workout to workout.

Fourthly, and perhaps more than anything, is food and protein. If I am training and eating 5000 cals a day and 300 grams of protein, I will grow even if I do exclusively singles. But if I restrict calories, I might gain strength, but not size.

 

[ben.stanton1]

hey guys, im the mate of razE's.

Atm im at the gym for (hopefully) no longer then 1h 20 mins, should be less but ive thrown in ab's in my upper body routine instead of lower body and now it goes a bit longer.

I do 6 sets, in reps of 12 then 10,8,6,12,12 with increasing intensity from 5 (from my 1st 12 reps) up to 10 - failure (from my last 12) with 1 min breaks between sets except for my last 12 i go straight from the second last 12 to the last no break and change the excercise but not the weight (then again - change on consideration of exercise). but i do drop weight on second set of 12 (so your 6 set is the heaviest).

so for e.g. if i was doin bi's (just example) i could do dumbell curls 12x10kg, 10x12.5kg, 8x15kg, 6x17.5kg, 12x15kg, 12x30kg (z bar curls or other exercise), hopefully failure on last few reps of the muscle group.

with this routine in a session i could knock out bi's,tri's,chest, shoulders, back and abs in about 80-90 minutes, everything gone to failure (hurting by end hehe nice) and thats done twice a week 5 times a fortnight or so if spaced right.

Now this is a bit of a rip off of Bill Phillips 'Body for life" routine, i did it for about three weeks then had to stop unfortunetly and now just using the routine for my upper body. Now it's working for me, im cutting up and getting bigger, im at a size where i dont want to get muich bigger, just work on endurance and strength aswell as speed power etc etc. But my question is, with the intensity and reps im doin, is this the best (by opinion and documentation) for size? what about endurance whats ppl's opinions and what is everyone actually doin? and what about strength, isnt it smaller reps higher weight the idea of the power/strength by high weight low reps just the idea naturally makes sense, either way, this new guy at the gym could use a little opinion to give me a hand along with my training...

Thanx fellaz
PS Sorry if all this has been brought up before and is documentated, it just seems debatable by everyone.