What Matters More? Load or Reps? | Educational Video | Biolayne
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 25 окт 2022
- Study Mentioned:
pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36199...
Get my research review REPS:
biolayne.com/REPS
Get my new nutrition coaching app, Carbon Diet Coach: onelink.to/9h4d62
My research based supplements: www.outworknutrition.com
Get my books on how to lose fat: www.biolaynestore.com
Take my online course "The Science of Nutrition": chfi.click/laynenorton_online
Get Custom Workouts by me for $12.99/month:
biolayne.com/workout-builder/
/ laynenorton
/ biolayne
/ biolayne
Rectus femoris is actually part of the quadriceps, not the hamstrings. Great video, as always!
yes, thanks. I came to comments to confirm if I was wrong because he made me doubt. Maybe he means biceps femoris... Still, interesting study and breakdown of the findings.
@@uhsemehicieronlas3 he actually meant rectus femoris because that's what the study says. You may review it if you please (it's linked in the description of the video). Having mentioned that, the mistake is really not a big deal. Anybody could get something wrong while talking without realizing. The main info provided on the video is still of great value.
@@saludintegra Yes, it could be a genuine mistake. But the tortured rationalisations & mechanisms/explanation to justify the "hamstring involvement" makes it a bit suspicious, and less likely...
I was about to comment this as well.
Lane. Rectus femoris is a quad muscle. You should correct this and reshoot. It doesn’t matter for the point of the video but it is a blatant error.
Always enjoy these videos, my favourite of your content. Trained as a PT for fun. And don’t have a lot of time to pursue, but don’t have a lot of time for it.
So these are always a great way to keep my toe in the water and keep my knowledge moving along. Makes me feel like I’m getting smarter even if it isn’t the case 😂
Love your vids Layne. I am learning a lot and my misconceptions are being dispelled
I like the simple and sensible approach mentioned.
Heavier load goals for compound, big movements.
Higher reps goals for isolation, simpler moments.
This keeps things interesting for me, and allows some variations in my workouts.
Great video. Ty
Some people hit a plateau after doing this for 2-3 years (but they still get hella strong) and to break the plateau they typically need to introduce more variation. i.e. 1 week do lighter loads with higher reps, and the next week do heavy loads with lower reps.
Great video, great info as always! Thanks Layne
boy. this was EXACTLY what i was just wondering. literally as i saw this pop up.....good timing
I love the workout builder. I’ve been using it as a staple in my training for at least 4 years & it has helped me make some great progress 💪🏼
Love it Layne, this is always a question in mind people ask.
I asked my wife if she prefers more reps or more load...
she said "YES" 😪🤣
Super interesting Layne, I’ll implement your suggestions 👍🦾🦾
Very educational. I’ll keep powerbuilding because I enjoy it, but nice to know it all has some benefit.
Great Review and providing context!
Your content is priceless!! Thank you so much! 👊💖
I see so many studies on this workout, this rep range, heavier lighter etc. However I see too many people stressing on these things vs simply worrying about being consistent for very long periods of time and eating right for the same duration. I have seen people get amazing results with huge varieties of volume, load, reps, etc as long as they had the basics down. Along of course with some halfway decent genetics.
Well said
💯
So in the end if you wanna look good and be healthy you gotta find things that you enjoy doing the most. Forget min maxing and all that crap and focus on enjoyment
💯
True, but for people who got injured in the past knowing i can do 20+ reps and still build the same amount of muscle like the 6-12 range, makes me feel confident that i can still workout to build muscle.
I'll say that I used to be a big fan of low reps for the big movements... But now as I've aged, I'm more about the higher reps or cycling every 2-3 months in it. Ryan Humistad convinced me that the 20 to 30 rep range with sufficient load (like actual time of 'effort' not tension) really grows you. Plus my joints aren't the limiting factor... now its my muscles.
How many sets per exercises are you performing with that rep range?
I agree with this guy. I also do 20+ reps for most sets. Most exercises are 4 sets.
Goat
It is a very important point that you can implement progressive overload in different ways, especially for calisthenics, if weights are not availabe. You can increase reps, but you can also switch variations of exercise to make it more challenging, e.g., different variation of push-up or pull-up.
For the algorithm, thanks for the video Layne.
2 points/critiques of this study:
1) Major criticism: The study was designed to detect a 68% relative change from baseline between groups (MDC of 68% or 1SD)! This is a huge difference for an 8-wk study!
Does *anyone* expect that large a difference after mere 2 months of training?! Esp. when no specific dietary recommendations (reg. protein esp.) were made?!
No!
I know this was done for sample size considerations, but then that's the flaw. You can't design a study deliberately underpowered to detect a small difference & then when it fails to detect that small difference, declare the two groups to be 'equivalent'/similar...!
2) This is a minor criticism: They have not mentioned what was the max. no. of reps per set (on average) which the REPS group was performing by the end of the 8 wks -- this is imp. & relevant as this group was allowed to progress only in reps & not weight, *nor sets* !
For example: If by the end of 8 wks they were able to perform 30+ reps then they were no longer in the hypertrophy-optimal range (even if these sets were performed to/near failure), and were in the muscular endurance range. This *may* explain the no significant difference -- esp. when coupled with the huge a priori delta effect that the study was designed to detect...Esp. when we see that the strength increases favoured the LOAD group (which is expected)...Of course, it is less likely that they were in that rep range, but it'd have been nice if the authors had published that data as well for context...
3) Rectus femoris is *not* part of the hamstrings! It is a part of the quads! Rookie/Genuine mistake? Maybe. Sure. But, rationalisations & mechanisms/explanation (fatigue leading to rectus over-involvement? What?!) to justify the "rectus femoris hypertrophy" makes it a bit suspicious, and less likely...
Have you ever increased a ten rep max to 30 reps in two months? Your second criticism is simply looking for an argument. Read the study if you want to make crazy claims.
Very helpful video and based on some great research. As someone else said the Rectus Femoris is part of the quads but I don’t think that changes the conclusion from the research.
What always worked for me was 5x5 for compound lifts and 3x12 for all of the accessory lifts and that's what I'm going back to now that I've been getting into the gym
Happy growing season
Super helpful video!!
Another great video. Thanks LN
Quick Correction: Rectus Femoris Quad Muscle*. Regardless of that, great job expanding your reasoning on the study by saying how an individual have multiple ways to approach hypertrophy training based on their goals and what’s available for them. Cheers from Brazil 🇧🇷!
Love it . Thank you very much
the good thing about progressing on reps is that is more friendly on joints, less injury risk andbetter recovery. I like to combine both, but lately I tend to do sets on the higher numbers of reps (up to 15 and not less than 9/10) that handling big weigths, and hypertrophy wise, the results are very good with less pains and fatigue
Reminds me of the strength and hypertrophy workout splits you used to do years ago. Always had good results, this study kind of reinforces that.
PHAT is still one of the GOAT workout routines there is and its fcking free
@@yakudza2773
PHAT at 4 days per week vs PPL at 6 days per week is all about your schedule.
I have no problem working out 6 days per week because I only work 25h/week.
Objectively I would take PPL over PHAT though.
That is what the scientific studies says.
@@C0d0ps PHAT is 5 days per weeks. It's 2 days of upper then lower power lifting, rest, then 3 days of PPL hypertrophy.
@@xitaris5981
You’re right.
What do PHAT and PPL stand for?
I fucking love this man.
Rectus femoris is a part of quadriceps femoris, only muscle that actually crosses both hip joint and knee .
Rectus Femoris is the quad, but everything else was great 🤙🏽
Perfect video as I’ve just gotten a herniated disc and need to go less weight on EVERYTHING
I have 6 herniated discs. No surgery. The surgeon and physical therapist taught me a lot of things to do and not to do which helped big time. 20 years of pain is gone, knock on wood lol. You can still lift heavy once you figure it out 👍🏻
The rectus femoris is not a hamstring muscle, do you mean the biceps femoris?
He meant the rectus femoris, part of the quadriceps. Or he meant bicep femoris, part of the hamstring.
@@privtprofile24 The study states rec fem, so he was talking about that
Rectus sphincter
He means in relation to the quad group. RF is a two joint muscle
@@Agnes135 I didnt watch the enitre vid yet haha just knew that it had to be either one of those.
If I just do straight barbell back squat sets I only get soreness in my quads. If I do drop sets my glutes and hamstrings also get sore. Like the guys doing the study, I've always assumed it's because when your quads are fatigued as hell you unconsciously start using any muscles you can to get the reps done 😅
Great news for me! I have two dumbbells and a bench at home. Which means if I increase reps instead of load and go close to failure I can still get good results!
But eventually will have to increase the load to get the same pump. I use the X3 band system and in it you get everything you need to keep it interesting and plus you don't wear out your joints. I don't go to the gym anymore.
How are your gains?
You dont need gym to get results you dont need all them fancy equipment at the gym
@@danbuckles2745 Yea and you are a shill for that con artist snake oil saleman that peddles the useless X3 bar. That clown who claims lifting weights is a waste of time. What a con man.
Interesting study! If the outcome is almost the same, then I prefer progress with load, because it requires less rep which could decrease the amount of time for the workout. Was anything regarding how long does it take for each group to complete the trainings in the paper? Wi would expect the rep increasing as more time consuming, but that's jus me.
Thanks for the info,
Thanks for the info
Rectus femoris is a quad is it not?
100p
It is, maybe he confused it with biceps femoris
The question on my mind is which approach is best if your goal is to avoid injury. I'm 81 years old. I have lifted on and off since I was a teenager. The thing that has kept me from goals that I have set for myself has always been injury. What is the evidence on avoiding injury?
Algo boys we up
I tend to agree. I think there is the need for individual preferences regarding load and reps. Myself, an advanced lifter, I want to train differently but I defer to what Biolayne, Israetel, Schoenfeld explain when there is a disparity. I am not smarter than the program and we already have a pretty darn good idea as to what works and what doesn't so much.
Man, I love doing high load low reps workouts. But I've done them for the last 10 years and now I started ppl with high low-ish load and high reps. Feels nice too. But the dopamine release is higher for me when I lift really heavy
@@bastipear2864 I feel you! If I had my way, I would be in the 1-3 rep range for life.
they need to make studies of a year or longer, and to control the calorie intake of all participants at all times, also the water intake, and consider the type of job they have (physical vs sedentary), how do they even design the split for the participants? do they all train on same days same hours? so many variables to consider
so can you build build muscles with BODY PUMP kind of fitness exercise?
Rectus Femoris is in the quadriceps, not hamstrings.
Would taking a set to 50 reps but to true failure provide as much stimulus as the 8-30 rep range?
I want to lose muscle or at least stop growing but love training especially trying to push to failure on high reps 50-100 but only a couple sets for each body part twice a week. I’m wondering if going this light will help me lose muscle size faster having like a cardio effect being more catabolic than anabolic or if it still provides enough stimulus for growth/maintenance of size.
Aside from the confusion between hamstring and quads Re: rec fem solid video
Isn't the rectis femoris a quadriceps/hipflexor muscle? Not hamstring? Biceps femoris is one of the hamstrings?
Ok but what about their diet? Was there diet and calories all the same relatively to rach individual???
Thanks, Layne. What about joint wear and tear - which is better, lower weight with more reps, or higher weigh with less reps?
Great video .
I wonder what the research says about intensifiers (drop sets, rest pause, etc). If the hypothesis that, once sets to failure are equated, the number of reps don't yield a difference in results, then extending the set via intensifiers shouldn't work either. Correct?
Trying to figure out which is the best for MMA, Boxing or Muay Thai.
Isn't Rec fem in the quads not hamstrings?
The one thing I don’t see in these studies is the total tonnage moved by each group. When we’re talking progressive overload, we’re essentially talking about an increase in tonnage. So if we had a study that equated the tonnage in each group. For example, 30,000lbs each week in the squat, 3 workouts per week, but group A did 315x4x8, and group B did 205x12x4, would we see a difference in strength/hypertrophy?
Personally, I prefer lower weight, higher reps because I like the way I feel afterwards, but I've long believed that it really doesn't matter as long as you push to the point of failure. This study seems to back that up. Good stuff!
I feel it's very easy to go to failure with high load like 6-8 reps, but when I'm going over 12-14+ reps on compound movements there is a burning + energy/CNS fatigue + cardiovascular limit where I feel like I'm at failure but not exactly muscle failure. Don't you have this issue?
@@Assassunn I do know what you mean. The muscles feel like they can do more but the brain says you're done. It's funny you mention cardiovascular limit because one of the main reasons I prefer high rep workouts is for the added cardio benefit you get, compared to high weight low rep. I don't know if there's data to back that up, but my heart definitely gets pumping much faster with high reps.
Yes! I also like to think about that benefit, could even increase VO2Max. Actually I'm only concerned about the leg day on big compound exercises such as hack squat, I feel like I'm going to faint and that cardio is hindering my progress because I'm scared to push a limit that is not the one from muscle. Maybe I shouldn't rely on such compounds exercises, the other option being using absurd loads which is risky for the joints and would make glutes working too much. @@dlg5485
True, you're basically compounding exercise. Cardio and weights. Much like bike sprints/uphill race would be good for both.@@dlg5485
Isnt the results the same when equating the volume and not the number of sets? Eg 3x10 gives the same hypertrophy as 7x3?
so is it possible that the hamstrings in the reps group was slightly larger possibly due to more fast twitch fibers?
Is, for example, 6 sets of 5 reps at a weight that leads to 8RPE for each set at that rep range, equivalent to 6 sets of 10 reps with a weight that leads to 8RPE at that rep range? been thinking about reducing my max rep range because anything above 10 reps takes too long to recover for me.
Great video as always!
Take into account that doing 5-8 reps takes less time and requires a lot less aerobic conditioning than 20-30 reps. Load for me is easier.
do they look in the calories/weight gain or weight loss in those studies? do they track if the participants are in caloric surplus or not??
Yep, it's easy to do both
for progressive overload.
Increase reps til you get close
to a 20 rep range, then increase
load to a 6 to 10 rep range . . . etcetera
Makes sense to me. That way you get a good mix or cycle rep ranges. And you don't have to add 2.5 to each side lol
I tried everything and nothing built muscle more than time under tension. Slow controlled reps and negatives
"You not doing the Program *, Mark Rippetoe, Starting Strength. 🙏👹🏋
I'd love to see a collab between Norton and Jeff Cav
Differences become “exacerbated”. You know exacerbated means to worsen a symptom or illness, right?
Posted this on a different video on another channel but haven't received an answer:
How does this compare to increased SETS? Some research seems to suggest that overloading through sets can be even more effective than reps. Moreover, one of your videos discusses a study that showed superior hypertrophy with more sets at 60%, which means it may also be even more effective than increasing load (at least for hypertrophy). Whether there is a limit to effective sets it still in question, however.
There's also evidence that velocity, even at lower loads and volumes, (CAT) can effectively increase hypertrophy and power. Some people exclusively use velocity PRs before increasing load or volume. Think Fred Hatfield.
Lastly, there's frequency, which seems to improve most performance markers regardless of training modality. I'm not even considering this in my question, as the answer is almost invariably that it is beneficial -- except, perhaps, for at untenable loads or volumes (think HIT and GVT, for examples).
Now, obviously, we can do triple or quadruple progression -- but which mechanism is best bang for buck? More specifically -- assuming, at the end of the day, that it's all about MPS -- which should natural lifters prioritize? On the other hand, if it's not necessarily about MPS, or assuming it's not an issue (for enhanced lifters), is there a mechanism or modality that is just better all around?
I'm forced to do higher reps with really slow eccentrics because my buildings gym only has dumbells that go up to 50lb and barbell only to about 200....
there is a spanish natural bench press only competitor champion that has a deformedly huge chest, his training is 2 days a week chest days where the first exercise is always bench press but at 30-50 rep range, to failure, 1 set all out, then a normal chest workout 3x12-15 on dips incline and cable flyes, he doesnt train back neither legs
has a 220kg max bench at -90kg btw
this 30-50 rep range set on the bench is the only thing he does progressive overload with, trying to add reps over time or add load and lower reps, the rest is whatever weights he feels doing
to compete he peaks in a linear manner lowering reps and adding weight
Rectus femoris is hamstrings? At first I thought he misspoke but then he said RF took over for the quads when they were fatigued... Maybe he meant biceps femoris?
Regardless I always thought it was pronounced FEH-mo-ris 😅
Do they ever do analysis on participant's genes and natural hormone levels while doing these studies. Otherwise I would think people could be responding different to training just from genetic differences who knows
The rectus femoris is the center of the quad, not that hamstring. Interesting that higher reps seemed to grow it tho
Really deep squatters (ATG) often get a lot of hypertrophy in their hamstrings - even more than quads.
Sweet hat! 🤠
Isn't the rectus femoris a quad muscle? Did u mean biceps femoris?
Yeah that's right
High rep deadlift is easy wat to get close to HR max once in a week.
Layne 💯💯
Gold
Just do both
Rectus femoris is a hamstring muscle? I thought leg extensions and sissy squats are rec fem movements
Pretty sure hamstrings are biceps femoris, not rectus
5:00 “rectus femoris which is your hamstrings”🤔?
Anecdotally, I was a lot stronger when I was focused on low rep heavy training and now that I do a lot more light weight high rep training and repetitive cardio I'm roughly the same size (I'm leaner now and weigh slightly less thanks to a better diet) but have less strength and more stamina. It's all about focus
For high rep training to improve your low rep maxes you have to improve a hella of a lot with those lighter weights. I started doing high rep dips as i stalled doing low reps, plus my shoulders were hurting, anyway i do up to 40 rep sets on weighted dips and have ended up more than doubling the number of reps i could do with such weight, then when i went back to heavy weight i'd turned my 5 rep max into a 10 rep max. So light weights can make you stronger, but you have to get considerable stronger with those lighter weights for it to follow through to the heavier weights to
Hi Layne
Thx
I heard nothing in this study about time under tension or protein intake. Nothing about the eccentric portion of a lift. Those matter.
So, it's kinda weird that you would say that the previous understanding of rep range & load is mostly wrong based on an 8 week study of people who have been training for at least a year, yet state that the small differences would exacerbate over longer periods of time. They study more or lessconfirmed previous understandings.
Liked, commenting, and subscribed for the algo! Love the vid, keep them coming!
Rectus femoris is a hamstring muscle? What did I miss?
There was a new update lol
I'm confused isn't the rectus femoris part of your quads. Along with the vastus lateralis, medialis, and intermedius?
That’s right. He misspoke.
Did you possibly mean the adductor magnus? Because it can flex, extend, and help with rotation?
I’m assuming you meant biceps femoris? Rectus femoris IS part of the quad, not hamstring 🤔
Heads up, I’m subscribed but this video didn’t show up in my subscriptions.
This is super informative! Question for you... have you ever tried a meal plan from Next Level Diet? I got one and I love it!
They didn’t equate effort. They equated “reaching fatigue”, which is subjective. Effort is the amount of work done, in Joules. It makes sense if the increased reps approach got slightly better overall results, since increasing reps is more likely to increase work more than increasing load alone. If you equate actual Joules expended, the actual work done, I imagine the results will be even closer than equating what they are calling “effort” ie reaching fatigue. Work is work. The sweet spot is finding both the load and the number of reps combined that maximizes work, and increasing both load AND reps over time to keep maximizing work.
I asked my girl the same question. she opted for the reps.
The ultimate debate
it's not a debate; it's facts & science.
Algo boost💪
All gym bros unite!!! We know the answer to this question!!!!
Light weight baby!!!!!!!!!!
For those who train at home that’s good news, as progressing load gets much more expensive with time…
Rectus femoris is in your quads my dude. Great vid other than that :)
Load or Reps? .. Yes.
I prefer 20-30 reps for legs and back, myoreps, rest pause etc all are great ways to make high rep sets into absolutely brutal experiences