Conventional wisdom has it that training with high reps and light weights builds endurance, but makes little contribution to gains in muscle mass.
Heavy weights and low reps has long been the accepted “best way” to maximize muscle growth.
Back in 2010, Stuart Phillips, a kinesiology professor at Canada’s McMaster University, began to overturn much of that conventional wisdom.
[h=3]Does High Rep Training Build Muscle?[/h]Phillips and his team found that muscle protein synthesis, a key driving force behind muscle growth, was higher with light weights and high reps (4 sets of 24 reps) than it was with heavier weights and lower reps (4 sets of 5 reps) [6].
At the time, these findings generated a lot of controversy.
They were also dismissed by many, mainly on the basis that the study looked at short-term changes in protein synthesis rather than long-term gains in muscle size.
So, Phillips set up another trial.
This time, he got a group of guys to train their legs on the leg extension machine three times a week for 10 weeks, using one of three different set and rep configurations [2]:
What’s more, the average size of both the fast and slow twitch muscle fibers increased equally with heavy and light loads, meaning that both fiber types were recruited and stimulated during training.
[h=3]Do High Reps Build Muscle in More Advanced Lifters?[/h]Once again, this study attracted criticism, most notably because it used untrained beginners as subjects.
Take someone who’s never exercised and get them to lift weights for a few months. They tend to grow no matter what they do.
Are you going to see the same results in guys who have been training for a few years?
To find out, Phillips recruited a group of 49 men with an average of four years lifting experience. The men were assigned to one of two groups [8]. One group did 20-25 reps per set, while group two did 8-12 reps per set.
The findings: After 12 weeks, there was no statistically significant difference in the rate of muscle growth between the two groups.
As with the research in novices, the average size of both the fast and slow twitch muscle fibers increased to a similar extent in both groups.
But, that doesn’t mean the two protocols delivered identical results.
The average amount of muscle mass gained in the high rep group was 2.2 pounds (1 kilogram), compared with 3.5 pounds (1.6 kilograms) in the low rep group.
[h=3]High Reps vs. Low Reps: The Research[/h]Of course, these are the results from just a few studies. As I’ve explained here, drawing conclusions about anything from two or three studies is never a good idea.
However, there’s plenty of other research out there showing multiple benefits of training with a light weight and high reps.
– Light slow-speed training (55-60% of one-rep-max, 3 seconds to lift and lower the weight) has been shown to increase both muscle mass and maximal strength [3]. The results are comparable to those obtained with heavy normal-speed training (80-90% of one-rep-max, 1 second to lift and lower the weight).
– Both heavy (4 sets of 8-10 reps) and light training (4 sets of 18-20 reps) activate the expression of various genes involved in muscle growth [4].
– Eight weeks of training the arms with light weights (20 rep-max) and short (30 seconds) rest periods led to gains in muscle size that were no different to those seen with heavier weights (8 rep-max) and longer (3 minute) rest periods [1].
– Training with lighter weights and higher reps (not to failure) also stimulates protein synthesis in connective tissue just as well as heavy training, giving it a role during injury rehabilitation to improve regeneration of connective tissue [7].
– Eight weeks of training with high reps and light weights (30-40 reps per set) builds just as much muscle as low reps (8-12 reps per set) and heavy weights [10].
[h=3]Super High Rep Training: How Light is Too Light?[/h]Most of the studies we’ve looked at show similar rates of muscle growth with both low and high reps.per set?
That was the question asked by a Brazilian research team, who took a group of 30 untrained men and got them to lift weights twice a week for 12 weeks [9].
The lifters were split into three groups. All three groups trained the biceps and quads on one side of their body with very light weights and super-high reps – 20% of their one-rep max and 60-70 reps per set.
On the other side of their body, the men used one of three different loading protocols: a high-rep protocol, where the men lifted at 40% of their one-rep max for around 30 reps per set, a moderate-rep protocol, where the men lifted at 60% of their one-rep max for 15-20 reps per set, and a low-rep protocol, where the men lifted at 80% of their maximum for 10-15 reps per set.
All three groups trained to failure, and did two exercises: the biceps curl and leg press.
At the end of 12 weeks, training with low, moderate and high reps all led to similar gains in muscle size. Higher reps and lighter weights triggered just as much muscle growth as heavier weights and lower reps.
However, it was a different story for the side of the body that was trained with super-high reps, where muscles grew at half the rate they did in the other three protocols.
In other words, while sets of 30 reps led to gains in size that were on par with sets in the 10-15 rep range, training with just 20% of your one-rep max appears to be below the threshold needed to maximize gains in muscle size.
[h=3]High Reps vs. Low Reps: Two Types of Muscle Growth[/h]Some say that the type of muscle growth caused by training with lighter weights and higher reps isn’t as “good” as the muscle gained with heavier weights.
Heavy weights and low reps has long been the accepted “best way” to maximize muscle growth.
Back in 2010, Stuart Phillips, a kinesiology professor at Canada’s McMaster University, began to overturn much of that conventional wisdom.
[h=3]Does High Rep Training Build Muscle?[/h]Phillips and his team found that muscle protein synthesis, a key driving force behind muscle growth, was higher with light weights and high reps (4 sets of 24 reps) than it was with heavier weights and lower reps (4 sets of 5 reps) [6].
At the time, these findings generated a lot of controversy.
They were also dismissed by many, mainly on the basis that the study looked at short-term changes in protein synthesis rather than long-term gains in muscle size.
So, Phillips set up another trial.
This time, he got a group of guys to train their legs on the leg extension machine three times a week for 10 weeks, using one of three different set and rep configurations [2]:
- 1 set of 10-12 reps performed to voluntary failure
- 3 sets of 10-12 reps performed to the point of fatigue
- 3 sets of 30-40 reps performed to the point of fatigue
What’s more, the average size of both the fast and slow twitch muscle fibers increased equally with heavy and light loads, meaning that both fiber types were recruited and stimulated during training.
[h=3]Do High Reps Build Muscle in More Advanced Lifters?[/h]Once again, this study attracted criticism, most notably because it used untrained beginners as subjects.
Take someone who’s never exercised and get them to lift weights for a few months. They tend to grow no matter what they do.
Are you going to see the same results in guys who have been training for a few years?
To find out, Phillips recruited a group of 49 men with an average of four years lifting experience. The men were assigned to one of two groups [8]. One group did 20-25 reps per set, while group two did 8-12 reps per set.
The findings: After 12 weeks, there was no statistically significant difference in the rate of muscle growth between the two groups.
As with the research in novices, the average size of both the fast and slow twitch muscle fibers increased to a similar extent in both groups.
But, that doesn’t mean the two protocols delivered identical results.
The average amount of muscle mass gained in the high rep group was 2.2 pounds (1 kilogram), compared with 3.5 pounds (1.6 kilograms) in the low rep group.
[h=3]High Reps vs. Low Reps: The Research[/h]Of course, these are the results from just a few studies. As I’ve explained here, drawing conclusions about anything from two or three studies is never a good idea.
However, there’s plenty of other research out there showing multiple benefits of training with a light weight and high reps.
– Light slow-speed training (55-60% of one-rep-max, 3 seconds to lift and lower the weight) has been shown to increase both muscle mass and maximal strength [3]. The results are comparable to those obtained with heavy normal-speed training (80-90% of one-rep-max, 1 second to lift and lower the weight).
– Both heavy (4 sets of 8-10 reps) and light training (4 sets of 18-20 reps) activate the expression of various genes involved in muscle growth [4].
– Eight weeks of training the arms with light weights (20 rep-max) and short (30 seconds) rest periods led to gains in muscle size that were no different to those seen with heavier weights (8 rep-max) and longer (3 minute) rest periods [1].
– Training with lighter weights and higher reps (not to failure) also stimulates protein synthesis in connective tissue just as well as heavy training, giving it a role during injury rehabilitation to improve regeneration of connective tissue [7].
– Eight weeks of training with high reps and light weights (30-40 reps per set) builds just as much muscle as low reps (8-12 reps per set) and heavy weights [10].
[h=3]Super High Rep Training: How Light is Too Light?[/h]Most of the studies we’ve looked at show similar rates of muscle growth with both low and high reps.per set?
That was the question asked by a Brazilian research team, who took a group of 30 untrained men and got them to lift weights twice a week for 12 weeks [9].
The lifters were split into three groups. All three groups trained the biceps and quads on one side of their body with very light weights and super-high reps – 20% of their one-rep max and 60-70 reps per set.
On the other side of their body, the men used one of three different loading protocols: a high-rep protocol, where the men lifted at 40% of their one-rep max for around 30 reps per set, a moderate-rep protocol, where the men lifted at 60% of their one-rep max for 15-20 reps per set, and a low-rep protocol, where the men lifted at 80% of their maximum for 10-15 reps per set.
All three groups trained to failure, and did two exercises: the biceps curl and leg press.
At the end of 12 weeks, training with low, moderate and high reps all led to similar gains in muscle size. Higher reps and lighter weights triggered just as much muscle growth as heavier weights and lower reps.
However, it was a different story for the side of the body that was trained with super-high reps, where muscles grew at half the rate they did in the other three protocols.
In other words, while sets of 30 reps led to gains in size that were on par with sets in the 10-15 rep range, training with just 20% of your one-rep max appears to be below the threshold needed to maximize gains in muscle size.
[h=3]High Reps vs. Low Reps: Two Types of Muscle Growth[/h]Some say that the type of muscle growth caused by training with lighter weights and higher reps isn’t as “good” as the muscle gained with heavier weights.
Last edited by a moderator:
