Fitness---high reps vs. low reps

[jesse morrison]

I am trying to set up an experiment at the local Gold's Gym, to determine which is better for overall fitness, high reps, or low reps in weight lifting.

The position of the personal trainers at the gym, is that it is better to perform 12 reps per set and do circuit training with 30 seconds to 1 minute rest between sets for 30 minutes total time.

My debatable opposition position is that one should do as many foot pounds of work as possible during this 30 minute period.

From my past experience of weight lifting, I am guessing that high reps instead of low reps will produce more foot pounds of work per 30 minutes of work.

I am defining fitness to be (most work per 30 minute period), and strength to be (most work per repetition).

To set up the experiment I will have to measure how far the weight stack is moved per repetition, and multiply this by the number of reps in one set, times the number of sets performed in a 30 minute period.

I plan on using 4 different compound exercises using different muscle groups, using the upper body muscles only, since I already do one hour of aerobic body work for my lower body (semi-recumbent bike).

1. Sitting leverage bar dips.
2. Sitting close grip pulldowns.
3. Sitting leverage bar bench presses.
4. Sitting cable pulley rows.

All the machines are by Bodymaster. I plan to circuit the exercises in the sequence above.

My normal routine is 50-100 reps per set, reducing the number of reps per set as I fatigue, but have recently started reducing the weight instead of the reps.

My plan is to compete with one of the personal trainers, letting the personal trainer use 12 reps per set, and I will use 50 reps per set, and then total our respective foot pounds of work, then reverse this, and see if there is a difference. My guess is that the lines will cross and the optimum number of reps will be somewhere between 12 and 50 reps per set.

If anyone has expertise in the above, or thoughts on this subject, please reply.