Epimetheus you obviously know plenty about all this stuff, but how could you say that 1-5 reps is not for getting mass? It is overloading the muscles, isn’t it? And anything that overloads the muscles will spurr growth.
All bodybuilders do 1-5 reps at times, because it gives mass just as well, if not better, than 5-12. You are right about fine tuning the CNS. And sticking to any one rep scheme will halt your mass growth for lack of overload. But to say that 1-5 reps heavy weight generally won’t give mass as well as another rep range, that’s like saying that running 24 miles will get you ready for a marathon, but running 28 miles will not help.
1-5 reps is a valuable rep range and should be used fairly frequently to get mass (although I tend to tell people to never go under 3 reps for injury purposes). But do whatever works for you, not everyone responds the same.
I don’t know the exact reason behind the 1-5 reps target the CNS ideal. I have read some literature that says any stress on the muscle tissue induces growth, and that overloading, rather than causing fatigue in the muscle is much better for growth.
However in practice this doesn’t seem to be true. Powerlifters in general stick to the 1-5 rep range exclusively, and only come out of that range occasionaly to do accessory work. (tricep exentions, glute ham raises, power cleans, etc) Many strength athletes are also trained that way- wrestlers, boxers, martial artists etc. Those that are worried about relative strength and want to stay in bodyweight ranges. They get stronger without gaining a single pound. Much stronger in many cases. Bodybuilders do train in the lower rep ranges, but they do this for strength. Sometimes when a bodybuilder reaches a plateau, they train for strength for a short cycle (8-10 weeks) and then go back to the higher reps with more weight. This is supposedly good for inducing more hypertrophy when they go back to the higher reps. (more weight utilizes more of the muscle fibers, which targets them for hypertrophy more thouroughly than the previous weights)
Here is some random literature by a few of the top athletic trainers today on this subject:
Some hypertrophy will occur of course. It isn’t possible to use muscles and not have them grow. The difference is the growth is so minimal that it cannot be really noticed. (in most cases) Genetics determine alot of this. Some people grow by just walking by a weight room.
I see what angle you are going at here, Epimetheus. So I guess you agree with my previous statement that any rep range or scheme done exclusively will result in stagnant mass growth.
We are both right in what we say, but I must say that when your goal is muscle growth, which in turn always includes strength goals, then you need to utilize really low reps from time to time. There is no substitute. I am saying all this for EMT mike’s sake.
I see what you are saying- I agree, there is no substitue. Sticking to one rep range, one workout method exclusivly will lead to stagnation, especially if you stick to the same weight. (which most people do, because upping the weight decreases the rep range most of the time)
I would hope anybody looking for mass is also looking for as much possible strength gains also.
BTW, thanks for spelling it out- I probably just confused the issue, but you saved me.
This thread brought to mind a search I had done recently on Google for “bodybuilding” and “skinny” (I am a felllow ectomorph).
Among the list of results was this site that is actually dedicated to the subject. It’s preachy and self-congratulatory like an infomercial, but there did appear to be some good information there.
