Assuming you're using the same weight, is there any difference in muscle growth between the following:. 2x12 = 24 total reps. 3x8 = 24 total reps

Assuming you're using the same weight, is there any difference in muscle growth between the following:

2x12 = 24 total reps
3x8 = 24 total reps
4x6 = 24 total reps

Same weight, same total reps with the difference being the total reps divided into more sets.

  1. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Post the obviously unsh00ped version you triplemoron

  2. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    yes

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      What then?

  3. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    https://www.data-drivenstrength.com/articles/rir-and-muscle-growth

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      >....group training with an estimated 5-7 RIR saw the same muscle growth as a group training to failure

      Still reading but seems to align with what I'm experiencing. RIR I assume is "reps in reserve" since the dipship 'researcher' was too much of a fucking idiot to even include the definition of the acronym.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        Most articles tend not to define abbreviations that are common enough in the field that everyone with a basic level of background knowledge knows what they are.
        If you didn't know what RIR is all that means is that you were not in the authors' target audience.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      From one of the studies
      >Twenty-five untrained men participated in the 8-week study.
      I hate this shit so fucking much.

      >....group training with an estimated 5-7 RIR saw the same muscle growth as a group training to failure

      Still reading but seems to align with what I'm experiencing. RIR I assume is "reps in reserve" since the dipship 'researcher' was too much of a fucking idiot to even include the definition of the acronym.

      How long have you been training for/how strong are you?

  4. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    What about rest time then?

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      Let's say 60-90 seconds

  5. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Depends on what the intensity is. If the 12 is just 70% of your 1rm then 6s are going to be ~55% which is just going to be way too easy, given a standard execution.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      /thread

      big weights + high intensity = muscle growth. it’s not rocket science literally a moron can do it

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      /thread

      big weights + high intensity = muscle growth. it’s not rocket science literally a moron can do it

      Since you guys can't read, I explicitly stated "ASSUMING THE SAME WEIGHT". Not doing 70% 1RM here and 50% 1RM there.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        Intensity changes/decreases as you reduce reps. A 12 RM (assuming you are going to failure) is around 70% of a 1 RM. Using 70% then as a baseline you might be looking at an intensity decrease of 3% per rep reduced from then on, so 8 reps would be around 58% and 6 would be 52% of a 1RM.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        Quit being a double moron and lurk moar.
        If you can do 12 reps of a given weight, do you think it benefits you in any way what-so-ever to do 6 and stop?

  6. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    1-5 = strength
    8-12 = strength + muscle grow
    15-20 = muscle grow (more pump than 8-12 but less strength)

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      That's pertaining to different percentages of one rep max. You're not going to do 15-20 reps (per set) at 90% of 1RM

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      this is fucking retarded
      How do you increase strength without growing muscle?
      You do realize that ceteris paribus, the only difference between one muscle which is weak and one which is strong is cross-sectional area because of higher myofibril number, right?

      There is no valid mechanistic argument that supports doing "Volume" to build muscle.
      The two things that determine strength are motor unit recruitment, which is partly genetic but is also trained by heavy (>90% max load) movements, and muscle cross-sectional area. Whatever allows you to increase your max load consistently over a long period of time will make you bigger and stronger.
      doing 12's and 20's is worthless because by definition lifting something for 10-20 reps is a submaximal load. 1-6 reps is the ideal for building muscle because it allows taxing the muscle belly in a way that induces satellite cells to produce additional muscle, by definition of the stress placed on the muscle by the load.
      A muscle that's loaded over 10-20 reps is loaded metabolically, but not loaded mechanically in the same sense that peri-maximal loading mechanically stresses the muscle belly in the 1-6 rep range.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        Counterpoint: when I train high weight low reps, my lifts get higher faster
        But when I train low weight high reps, my muscles get bigger faster.
        Can your "science" explain that?

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          Deeper tears in the over all muscle at higher weight. It likely also takes more recovery when using that much force. Light weight high rep calls on different muscles fibers that when hit again and again in rapid succession break easier but also repair easier. I dunno, I’m contemplating this, if the cocoa pebbles protein is really worth 100 burgers, and if I need to shit at the same time.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      >do 6-7 reps
      >enter gains time space continuum and absord all gains of those around me in a 54 mile radius

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous
        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous
          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            Kek

            I can't tell if thats a human or just a very realistic looking sexdoll

            All women are sex dolls

            • 2 months ago
              Anonymous

              >All women are sex dolls

  7. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    >same weight
    why would you use the same weight for sets of 6 than you do for sets of 12? obviously in this fake scenario the sets of 12 are better, but IRL when you do smaller sets with more breaks between it's so you can lift closer to your 1RM

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      I know this goes against dogmatic laws of IST I'm trying to investigate the hypothesis that total volume is more important than reps pure set. From what I've read, form and "good" sets and form are more important that strictly adhering to a reps-per-set program. I am more than happy to be proven wrong but I have yet to hear a compelling argument.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        Sorry fucked that post up. No proofreading.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        Goddamn you are a fucking retard.

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          total volume is the same, what changes is intensity across all of those numbers you gave. your question isn't about volume/workload/tonnage, its about intensity.

          Illiterates aren't welcome here. Fuck off back to plebbit.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        total volume is the same, what changes is intensity across all of those numbers you gave. your question isn't about volume/workload/tonnage, its about intensity.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        you are an idiot, please watch a few videos about the basics of weight training before trying to engage in conversations about the topic

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          Whatever retard. My sets approach infinity reps and my weight approaches zero. Learn basic calculus

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            getdafuckouttahere with dat shit, no one falls for your gnomish schemes anymore math man

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          total volume is the same, what changes is intensity across all of those numbers you gave. your question isn't about volume/workload/tonnage, its about intensity.

          Goddamn you are a fucking retard.

          Feel free to link me your proofs. More than happy to be proven wrong.

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            like I give enough of a shit about some halfwit dyel on an anime fitness forum to do his fuckin research for him
            yeah miss me with that gay shit

            only thing you get from me is swear words, belittlement and sneed

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            The proof is trivial if you know the definitions.

            • 2 months ago
              Anonymous

              like I give enough of a shit about some halfwit dyel on an anime fitness forum to do his fuckin research for him
              yeah miss me with that gay shit

              only thing you get from me is swear words, belittlement and sneed

              Please be quiet then.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                You don't know the definitions, so you'll never understand the proof.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                Shhhhhhh

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        stop compromising, you're trying to make your work outs easier. if you are using a weight with which you can do 2x12, then you are in the "endurance" intensity range. it doesn't matter if you break it up in shorter sets, you are not going to get strength gains unless you increase weight.

        imagine doing a 5x5 work out with the same weight you could do 1x25 with. does that sound like you'd get any gains ?

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          >imagine doing a 5x5 work out with the same weight you could do 1x25 with. does that sound like you'd get any gains?
          Definitely not but that's an extreme example and I don't believe anyone would argue for it.

          https://breakingmuscle.com/the-benefit-of-increasing-training-volume-for-hypertrophy/

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        You are more or less correct, disregard those dyels who think autistic counting will make them big.

        The real blueprint for growth goes like this:
        a) few good warm up sets, maximum range of motion, weight going up
        b) couple of sets close to PR, until fail
        c)few perfect form sets, higher volume, weight going down
        Volume also depends highly on muscle size and how isolated it is.

        All this 3x12, 4x6 shit is retarded and for weak men; can’t grow like that unless on gear.

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          Post body

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        You could get stronger moving submax weights as long as you are moving them with violent speed. And continue doing sets until the bar slows down. But that's a nervous system adaptation and not really a muscle builder. 12 sets of 3 at 60% would need to look way different, faster reps and lower rest than 3x12 at the same weight

  8. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Only reps that matter are the tough ones you grind out, all the others are just to get you to those reps.

  9. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    I don't think your muscles can tell a difference. I think putting X amount of load on your muscles for X number of reps will do a certain amount of damage to them, regardless of the rep/set scheme.
    Is there a difference between doing 8 reps, then 6, then 4, vs 3x6 with the same weight? I don't think so.
    Anecdotal, but I get the best results from straight sets.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      In the last case, where the reps are divided into more sets, you have the ability to put more weight on the bar than you could in the first case with fewer sets. That's the advantage.

  10. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    You get better gains by doing rep sets you enjoy doing. If you dont like doing 15-30 and prefer 6-8 or whatever, do them the majority of the time and progress with weight and cycle in some higher rep sets every once in a while

  11. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    >that thousand HWD [HUGE WHITE DICK] stare

  12. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Shut up pussy and go do 90% RM 5x5 deadlifts/bench. If you won't adhere to my demands within the next 15 minutes, then you are DYEL forever.

  13. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    more consecutive reps more strain on the muscle more tears more builds more muscle

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      more consecutive reps increases metabolic load and reactive oxygen species in a muscle
      higher loading causes mechanical strain on the muscle

  14. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Motor boating tiny titties is fun because it tickles the girl more.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      You can't motorboat tiny titties. Boobs need to be medium size or bigger to get a good motorboat. Otherwise you're just putting your face into a sternum

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        Whatever man, the laugh does something more than diamonds. It is primal.

  15. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Not maxing out on every lift.

    Ngmi

  16. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    I have found higher reps lower sets tend to lead to more gains, I made great squat progress when I did the meme super squats program and did a 1x20 for my back squat.

  17. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    I think there is no real difference for amateur weight lifters like us. I think high rep vs high weight might make a difference for elite level weight lifters who want to optimize for hypertrophy or strength.

    There is a good breakdown on the state of this research if you search "Metis and Bodybuilders Astral Codex Ten"

  18. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Yeah, big time. X weight for 12 means bigger and stronger than X weight for less than 12. I am not reading any other post in this thread. This is lifting 101.

  19. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Why do you post 12 year old, pre-insta times soft fap material?

    ?t=5

    Thanks for the nostalgia I guess

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      Better?

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        How do I become a rice and tea farmer?

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        >Steering wheel on the right side
        Dropped

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      her voice and mannerism destroyed all attractiveness. Edited photos of women should be banned.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        She's playing the reporter role. You can see her breaking into a honest chuckle after the first tidbit

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      Jesus something about her pose and what she's wearing when she's sitting on that railing 30 seconds into the video makes something deep within me tense up like a predatory animal. It's almost enough to make me look past the fact that she's british.

  20. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    5x5 = 25 > 24

    thank you

  21. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    a caveat that i don't really know what im talking about: this is kinda a stupid question in many ways but also an interesting question. as people have said because you say the weight is the same you can't factor for intensity. with that in mind, the safe bet is that the 2x12 set is going to be the best for muscle growth, because as you can't increase intensity nor total volume you may as well for the one that has the most volume per set, with the lowest amount of rest (assuming you take the same rest period between sets). if you pick a weight that you can do for only 13 reps with, you can imagine that the 2x12 will be a lot harder than doing 4x6, again assuming the same amount of rest. all i have to say is that you make the most gains when you are doing quite a lot of intensity with quite a high total volume (for the entire workout not a given exercise) and you are actually able to recover from it. another thing i notice is that a lot of people on the internet are often very new to something, think they know a lot but really they just know about whichever meme beginners routine. whether its 3x5 benching or 4x12 on leg extensions on a thursday they think you need to do it forever.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      meds

  22. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    You should always do max reps you can do per set for the most growth.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      I was told going to failure is bad though

  23. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    didnt read nice tits!

  24. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    There certainly will be, so long as you're going close to failure on each set. You'd obviously use FAR more weight on sets of 6 if you're going near failure than you would on sets of 12, so there you go.

  25. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    I can't tell if thats a human or just a very realistic looking sexdoll

Your email address will not be published.