As always I hope you found the video interesting! There actually is one potential consideration with the data that I failed to mention in the video. A comment on one of my community polls earlier this week by "Gabriel Rocha" made me realize this: In both studies, 8-10 rep-max loads were used. This loading is likely perfectly fine for hypertrophy. However, for maximizing strength (one-rep max), it's likely heavier loads (1-5 rep-max loads) are going to be superior (reference: www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/labs/pmc/articles/PMC5131226/ ). This begs the question, if the studies alternatively had subjects train with 1-5 rep-max loads, would the decreasing rest group still have had experienced similar strength gains to the constant rest group? It's difficult to say as there's currently no data (that I'm aware of) examining how using different loads impacts rest interval requirements. Hopefully we one day get insights!
I think this work only for trained individuals who shock their muscles and this lead to some growth. Its not a program which is good for hypertrophy if you do it all the time. Remember, in the other videos about rest intervals, the studies you presented show us that working at with 2-3 min is better than 30s-60s. We know that when you reach a plato, you must shock your body and make some.change either on wheights either on intervals, sets, reps etc.
I definitely see where you're coming from! But I think it's worth considering the potential idea that perhaps gradually decreasing you rest interval duration overtime incrementally produces adaptations that acclimatize yourself to successfully using short rest interval durations without compromising hypertrophy. I'm not saying that's 100% what's happening, but I think it's possible. What you're saying could also be true, maybe it only works in the short-term for trained indivduals. Hopefully we get future research exploring this interesting area :)
I can tell you personally I used to train with very short rest periods between sets.(many years) I experienced good growth. However, my strength didn't reach any elite level. Taking longer periods of rest will alow you to lift heavier loads, as it relates to hypertrophy I'm not sure it matter too much for me. Also taking shorter rest periods will definitely increase cardio output which could impact strength levels. I occasionally do 3×5+ training with short rest periods using machines. I'm curious if anyone does this style.
I do really quick rests. But it really depends on the exercise. Concentration exercises might get a shorter rest. Like a minute or less. I do full body and like to fit in everything in an hour. I've been pleased with both my strength and size gains. Listen to your body. Your body has no clock. it doesn't know if you've rested for 1 or 2 minutes. If you like to keep your heart rate up by taking shorter gains go for it. Your rests don't need to be iron clad.
I do the same, rest 45seconds multiple sets of 8 reps depends on the group, same result acceptable growth in terms of size but small in strength, btw resting around 2 minutes seems better in general.
It makes sense, intuitively. Shorter rest periods would lead to faster failure in the next set. If we assume that (close to) failure is one of the main factors of muscle growth, this would mean shorter rest periods without an increase in load would similarly lead to growth as longer rest periods with higher load as both will experience failure. And, what another commentator wrote from his experience, that he experienced good growth with short rest periods but not that much of an increase in strength makes also sense, as, without an increase in load, the body would not be trained to recruit more motor units at the same time.
I have read that shorter rest periods can causes the body to produce more testosterone and growth hormone. I always use 30-45-60 second rest periods. Lengthening them as a get winded. Very rare do I wait 2min between sets. Only when I'm exhausted. I move fast, if I don't I get bored.
I used to do push ups every day, resting between 10 seconds to a minute for about 4 years & didn’t see my bench get any stronger, so I decided to do 5 to 10 sets of push ups till failure, resting 4 minutes between sets & in four weeks my max bench went from 245 to 275 just from pushups.
Have found that decreasing rest times then bumping back up to add another rep or two has been effective for advanced calisthenics. Glad the science seems to back this up. Thank ya!
I use to rest like 2 min or less, than I just stopped and started resting from 3 to 7 min during working sets of compounds only. I got so much stronger and more muscular from it. I got the idea from that Russian guy he said to take like 20 min, I was like 7 will be the max.
tbh 20 minute can work if you do an exercise with an easy setup like bicep curls 3-4 sets in between your other exercises. Personally I notice biceps need a longer time for the muscle to rest, even though the central nervous system recovers quickly
All I know is that when I train for strength low reps, high weights. I make sure I rest at least 2 min 30 seconds to 3 mins between sets. I can make gains week after week with progressive overload. I’m sticking with what works for me. Also I would hate to mess around with load reductions if decreasing rest time.
I prefer using jefit and having it tell me what my 1RM was for each set. I then adjust the weight for the next set. This can be higher or lower and over time, it shows progressive overload with increasing total volume. I also use my heart rate to indicate when to hit the next set. New programs will take a few weeks to adapt to and then my recovery time gets shorter. Then toward the end of the cycle I'll add another exercise. So I'll start at 45 minutes and wind up at 70 minutes toward the end. I use resting overnight heart rate (>10 bpm) to let me know when I need to take an extra rest day (1 night with elevated resting hr) or deload (3 nights in a row] .
I love this guy and his research reviews. I listen daily to keep me up on research I teach my students. But, and I could be wrong, I think there was an error in the statistical assessment. There was no significant difeeence between groups is it the same thing as the two groups are equal. To do that you need a TOST analysis. If there is no significant difference that just states we failed to find a difference, which is different from finding equality. Because you have to double the power and do two one sided. Without having all that info a quick cheat may be to look at the p value and double it to see if it is still not significant. If it is not then it is equal. So instead of p less than .05, p less than .10. If they have a o in between, likely means there may be a difference but we are underpowered.
You said there was no statistically significant difference but a ten pound different on the bench press is huge ! Bench is usually the hardest workout to push your 1rm strength on.
Yeah, it's not clear if that difference is actually due to the training method used, or just due to random variation between the subjects in the different groups :)
Interesting to see how in terms of gains this works just as well for a shorter amount of time in the gym. But personally i wouldn't do it becausd of how mentally taxing it would be to decrease in weight lifted just to tell myself it will be good in the long run.
I think we just have to consder Mypo Reps. One activation set and then several mini sets with only a *10-15 second rest* Short rest time is clearly effective.
I think it’s ideal to have periods where you focus on increasing work capacity (one part of which means reducing rest time between sets) and periods where you focus on increasing strength while keeping other training variables constant.
In the studies the volume was kept constant 3 to 4 sets with 8 to 10 reps, for both groups. But we know that volume is a major trigger for hypertrophy. In the constant rest group (2 minutes rest) the overall volume that can be performed in a given time (say 60 minutes) is considerably less than in the reduced rest group. As a consequence a new study needs to be conducted where workout volume is adjusted by available time (say 60 minutes). In this version of the study the reduced rest group will be performing far greater volume of work to failure compared to the constant rest group in the given 60 minutes. And as a consequence I hypothesise that the reduced rest group will see greater hypertrophy due to greater volume of work to failure in a given time frame.
I personally would use a technique like this for a muscle like biceps. Biceps have a high fatigue tolerance, most people have overdeveloped them to the point in which very high volume is required for continued progress, and I feel like biceps would be the most likely muscles to recover faster between sets than say chest. This will save so much time.
I think that's a great point, different muscles likely have different recovery abilites between sets, and this can impact how practical one views it :)
It is known from former Mr. Olympia Frank Zane that in order to overcome a performance plateau, he reduced the pause times between the sets (and probably the weights too) and increased the number of repetitions. Increasing the weights in alternation with shortening the pauses between sets might not be the worst method of progression in the long run.
It's because you don't take in to account he was heavily on Power Enhancing Drugs and with another whole level of muscle development based on it. So his recovery time it's at superhuman level no way comparable to anyone else's.
I'm guessing the short rest group was having to reduce the weight between sets, especially in the last couple of weeks? And I don't mean reducing it from week to week, I mean reducing it almost every time between their 1st set and 4th set. Bc there's no way you can maintain the same level of intensity between the 1st and 4th sets at the same weight with only 30 seconds of rest, whereas with 2 minutes that's much more feasible. So another factor to consider with the short interval is you're going to be scrambling between each set to remove weight during that short rest window and to make that efficient you're going to be that guy using all the 2.5 lb plates on one bar.
Do you think metabolic stress could be component playing role in hypertrophy in low rest group? would love to have an video from you on this topic cause i barely see anyone covering fully on metabolic stress
I 100% plan to make a video on metabolic stress at some point. Based on my current assessements, it's truly difficult to say what role metabolic stress has (if any) on hypertrophy.
There’s no magical rest period. If you want to reach maximum hypertrophy, you need to use the maximum or near maximum capacity of your muscles. Resting too little makes you reach cardiovascular failure instead of muscular failure. That should be fairly obvious and there should not be an open discussion about this.
my rest is from 30 to 40 sec (legs 120/180). after 15 years of training in this way. I can tell you that there are no difference in the number of set and reps if I take more rest. I’m done in any case. I train to failure every single set. with short rests you could spend 30 minutes for 18 sets (30/40sec between set 120sec between exersice 5minutes between different body part)
As always awesome stuff, but just like you mentioned in your conclusion, it's confusing how this fits in with other studies stating that longer rest periods are better for strength. Logically, if you are overloading by decreasing rest time, it means that on average during the 8 weeks you would be resting less than 2 minutes (around 1 min 15 sec). Then, how come your strength gains are the same as the 2 minute group? If it is true that overloading with rest is equal to overloading with load for strength, wouldn't that contradict the rest for strength studies?
Thank you for the kind words! I see what you're saying. While it's true there is data showing that *exclusively* training with longer rest intervals evokes greater strength gains versus *exclusively* training with shorter rest intervals, this does not neccessarily conflict with the data shown in the two Souza Jr studies. Remember, the decreasing rest group in those two studies started with a long rest interval (2 mins), and then gradually decreased it (to 30 seconds over 6 weeks) , this is not the same thing as simply *exclusively* using short rest intervals. It might just be that by gradually decreasing your rest interval overtime, your body produces incremental adaptations that enable you to effectively be able to use short rest intervals without compromising adaptations (this would starkly contrast to just jumping in and *exclusively* using short rest intervals from the get go). I hope this makes sense :) Of course, this is only me speculating , but it would reconcile the overall evidence. Ultimately, future research is needed :)
@@HouseofHypertrophy That seems to make sense. One thing though, given the positive correlation between strength and volume in training, I think we can make the assumption that increasing the sets done per session while lowering the rest time in the 8 week period and then repeating the 8 week period would lead to greater strength and hypertrophy gains than following a constant 2 minute rest. My logic is that the individuals, performing less overall volume, had the same or slightly better results. So, if the volume was equated, or maybe even pushed higher since each set takes less time, wouldn't this be a far more efficient method of training than traditional strength training, while taking much less time? Of course, correct me if I'm wrong.
I think that's a very interesting idea, and I think there's a chance you could be correct. But, there still might be some considerations: Though I have not fully assessed the research on the relationship between volume and strength, it does not appear to be consistently positive. There are studies finding similar gains between higher and lower set numbers (pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30153194/ + journals.lww.com/nsca-jscr/Abstract/1997/08000/The_Effect_of_Weight_Training_Volume_on_Hormonal.3.aspx + pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32058362/) There's also data showing higher volume loads (sets x reps x load) do not always equate to more strength gains either (pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33343066/ + pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31306302/). On the basis of this, it's difficult to make any conclusions :)
Hey new to the channel, I enjoy the content. What about Arthur Jones or more recent Jay Vincent. They do HIT workouts, lifting heavy with machines with basically no rest in between? I just started working out again and that's how I found your channel. Thanks for the good content, keep up the good work from California 💪
Thank you for the kind words! I have to admit, I'm not entirely famillar with what it is they precisely do. At some point, I'll be sure to read up on it and see if there's any relevant research with which I could use to construct a video :)
I find 2 minutes my perfect rest. I can get a lot more out of my following sets than 1.5 minutes, which means better progress next time. I know quiet a few pro powerlifters and i know wait 5 minutes between working sets but they are 3-5 reps maximum weights. I generally train 8-30 reps, with some high weight to begin
Very interesting, most surprising is that the strength gains were similiar. Makes me think of the theory thay hypertrophy drives strength rather than the other way around. While I propably wouldnt never use this method unless I had to for some reason, still very interesting and good to know.
@@HouseofHypertrophy btw you should do video about nucleus overload some day, I remember someone else recommending that as well. Its one of the most interesting ideas for hypertrophy out there imo and I definetely think it works to some degree. Did it once to my side delts but I didnt have deload after like you should do. I did get stronger everyday tho, which is interesting.
Yep, it's something that interests me a lot as well. I'm really looking forward to digging into the research and seeing if anything interesting can be found!
Is there any data or studies on Mike Mentzer's program where he wpuld go to failure, wait only a few seconds and then repeat several times? The theory being that you're maximizing your time spent in the failure range of your reps despite not performing the same volume as higher rest duration sets
I only do one set per exercise and minimize time between exercises. Since I also have a goal of increasing my VO2 max, I dont mind sacrificing some hypertrophy (if that happens).
If training in a short duration of rest interval is fine for hypertrophy then what about the studies that show training with longer rest interval provides a greater muscle growth? Doesn't this contradicted it? Or do we have to progressive overload our rest time by reducing its bit by bit for the short rest time to be effective?
Yep! I've had a few email exchanges with him recently. He very kindly sent me his book, I've yet to fully read it, but I'm in the process of going through it during my free periods.
@@HouseofHypertrophy thats nice! I have been following him over a year now and binge watched almost all his content. His principles are very good atleast and I agree with him on most things. I think he is a great guy apart from the beef with kassem who is also very smart. Learned a ton from them both.
are you starting to see that Hypertrophy is just a side affect of training in general? Find studies of people who weren’t on steroids and then got on them and see the data. You will see it didn’t really matter what type of training they did, there muscle would get bigger by a large margin. IMO it is better to train for a goal other than big muscles. If you didn’t win the genetic lottery, you will be trying to obtain a goal that wasn’t in your future in the first place. Probably not exciting or happy news but is the truth ever that?
"You will see it didn’t really matter what type of training they did" - this statement is evidently not true. There are numerous examples of studies demonstrating that training a certain way produces more hypertrophy than training another way (in natural individuals). For instance, with compound exercises at least, exclusively training with longer rests (2+ mins) produces more gains than consistently training with shorter rests (90 secs or less). There's also the volume literature (multiple sets on a given exercise tends to be better than single sets, on average), loading literature (loads below 30% one-rep max *might* not be optimal), proximity to failure literature (achieving a sufficient proximity to failure is needed to optimize tension), etc., etc. "IMO it is better to train for a goal other than big muscles" - That is your opinon, of course. "If you didn’t win the genetic lottery, you will be trying to obtain a goal that wasn’t in your future in the first place." - not all hypertrophy goals are created equal. For example, someone's goal may simply be to attain their best physique possible. In this sense, are you trying to obtain a goal that wasn't in your future? no.
@@HouseofHypertrophy I try to keep things simple because we can talk in semantics all day. Its called being blunt which most people dislike as it gives no wiggle room. For your sake, I know your channel is built off hypertropy and I am not trying to take your passion away from you. I do enjoy youe videos. My observation is still the same. The differences are so small to consider them "revolutionary" or "exact" to determine if training holds the ulitmate tie breaker. It just doesnt. It has everything to do with genetics and in a conceled way "chemical" pathways. Hypertrophy means nothing if the only focus is looks. That is vainity my friend and if that is important to you so be it. Everyone has what they like and dislike but lets not suger coat it. Strength can bs accurately measured. So can speed, but size changes more often for it to be a constant metric. The study shows the obvious. The less time you rest, the lest power output you produce over a long time. Growth will also change with that because you are producing less force. Ultimately force production or metabolic stress contributes to muscle size. It really isnt complicated but bodybuilding isnt either but that is why you can sell more bs to people. Make something simple more complex so if they fail, you can blame it on other variables. In conclusion. Drugs have completely obscure the reality of what is truly possible because most people will hide or lie about there use. Check out the study of a person taking drugs and did no physical exercise but had a CONSIDERATE amount of muscle growth. How would that look to point the blame on trainint parameters?
@@HouseofHypertrophy Lol. Hey everyone has there thing. I just want it to be clear as people will obviously take ANY information they hear or see without understanding what it took to get such a miniscule change. Thanks.
![One Punch Workout [ How-To ] [ One Set ] by #DAREBEE](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/wPSK0pOnCeU/mqdefault.jpg)
As always I hope you found the video interesting!
There actually is one potential consideration with the data that I failed to mention in the video. A comment on one of my community polls earlier this week by "Gabriel Rocha" made me realize this:
In both studies, 8-10 rep-max loads were used. This loading is likely perfectly fine for hypertrophy. However, for maximizing strength (one-rep max), it's likely heavier loads (1-5 rep-max loads) are going to be superior (reference: www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/labs/pmc/articles/PMC5131226/ ).
This begs the question, if the studies alternatively had subjects train with 1-5 rep-max loads, would the decreasing rest group still have had experienced similar strength gains to the constant rest group?
It's difficult to say as there's currently no data (that I'm aware of) examining how using different loads impacts rest interval requirements.
Hopefully we one day get insights!
I think this work only for trained individuals who shock their muscles and this lead to some growth. Its not a program which is good for hypertrophy if you do it all the time. Remember, in the other videos about rest intervals, the studies you presented show us that working at with 2-3 min is better than 30s-60s. We know that when you reach a plato, you must shock your body and make some.change either on wheights either on intervals, sets, reps etc.
I definitely see where you're coming from! But I think it's worth considering the potential idea that perhaps gradually decreasing you rest interval duration overtime incrementally produces adaptations that acclimatize yourself to successfully using short rest interval durations without compromising hypertrophy. I'm not saying that's 100% what's happening, but I think it's possible. What you're saying could also be true, maybe it only works in the short-term for trained indivduals. Hopefully we get future research exploring this interesting area :)
I can tell you personally I used to train with very short rest periods between sets.(many years) I experienced good growth. However, my strength didn't reach any elite level. Taking longer periods of rest will alow you to lift heavier loads, as it relates to hypertrophy I'm not sure it matter too much for me. Also taking shorter rest periods will definitely increase cardio output which could impact strength levels. I occasionally do 3×5+ training with short rest periods using machines. I'm curious if anyone does this style.
Very interesting, thank you for sharing!
I do really quick rests. But it really depends on the exercise. Concentration exercises might get a shorter rest. Like a minute or less.
I do full body and like to fit in everything in an hour.
I've been pleased with both my strength and size gains.
Listen to your body. Your body has no clock. it doesn't know if you've rested for 1 or 2 minutes. If you like to keep your heart rate up by taking shorter gains go for it. Your rests don't need to be iron clad.
I do the same, rest 45seconds multiple sets of 8 reps depends on the group, same result acceptable growth in terms of size but small in strength, btw resting around 2 minutes seems better in general.
It makes sense, intuitively. Shorter rest periods would lead to faster failure in the next set. If we assume that (close to) failure is one of the main factors of muscle growth, this would mean shorter rest periods without an increase in load would similarly lead to growth as longer rest periods with higher load as both will experience failure.
And, what another commentator wrote from his experience, that he experienced good growth with short rest periods but not that much of an increase in strength makes also sense, as, without an increase in load, the body would not be trained to recruit more motor units at the same time.
Very interesting! Basically, anything that increases difficulty can be progressively overloaded for gains
I have read that shorter rest periods can causes the body to produce more testosterone and growth hormone. I always use 30-45-60 second rest periods. Lengthening them as a get winded. Very rare do I wait 2min between sets. Only when I'm exhausted. I move fast, if I don't I get bored.
Well done. Nice to see you include issues with the small sample sizes and other caveats required based on the nature of these studies.
Thank you :)
I used to do push ups every day, resting between 10 seconds to a minute for about 4 years & didn’t see my bench get any stronger, so I decided to do 5 to 10 sets of push ups till failure, resting 4 minutes between sets & in four weeks my max bench went from 245 to 275 just from pushups.
Someone please give this guy a million subs . He deserves it
It means a lot to me that you think that! Thank you :)
Have found that decreasing rest times then bumping back up to add another rep or two has been effective for advanced calisthenics. Glad the science seems to back this up. Thank ya!
No problem! that sounds like a solid method :)
Your content is amazing and well presented. High quality! I feel like your channel will blow up. Glad I’m here early
Thank you :)
I use to rest like 2 min or less, than I just stopped and started resting from 3 to 7 min during working sets of compounds only. I got so much stronger and more muscular from it. I got the idea from that Russian guy he said to take like 20 min, I was like 7 will be the max.
Haha, awesome :)
20 fucking minutes 💀 4 hours workout or smn?
@@spooonpro614
6 hours if he does 18 sets
tbh 20 minute can work if you do an exercise with an easy setup like bicep curls 3-4 sets in between your other exercises. Personally I notice biceps need a longer time for the muscle to rest, even though the central nervous system recovers quickly
All I know is that when I train for strength low reps, high weights. I make sure I rest at least 2 min 30 seconds to 3 mins between sets. I can make gains week after week with progressive overload. I’m sticking with what works for me. Also I would hate to mess around with load reductions if decreasing rest time.
I definitely see where you're coming from!
😂 week after week, then after 1 year you benchpress is 600 kg 😂😂
I prefer using jefit and having it tell me what my 1RM was for each set. I then adjust the weight for the next set. This can be higher or lower and over time, it shows progressive overload with increasing total volume.
I also use my heart rate to indicate when to hit the next set. New programs will take a few weeks to adapt to and then my recovery time gets shorter. Then toward the end of the cycle I'll add another exercise.
So I'll start at 45 minutes and wind up at 70 minutes toward the end.
I use resting overnight heart rate (>10 bpm) to let me know when I need to take an extra rest day (1 night with elevated resting hr) or deload (3 nights in a row] .
Very very interesting, thank you for sharing :)
I'm saving this so I can look into all this cool tech later. Feel free to provide more details, love this stuff!
I love this guy and his research reviews. I listen daily to keep me up on research I teach my students. But, and I could be wrong, I think there was an error in the statistical assessment. There was no significant difeeence between groups is it the same thing as the two groups are equal. To do that you need a TOST analysis. If there is no significant difference that just states we failed to find a difference, which is different from finding equality. Because you have to double the power and do two one sided. Without having all that info a quick cheat may be to look at the p value and double it to see if it is still not significant. If it is not then it is equal. So instead of p less than .05, p less than .10. If they have a o in between, likely means there may be a difference but we are underpowered.
You said there was no statistically significant difference but a ten pound different on the bench press is huge ! Bench is usually the hardest workout to push your 1rm strength on.
Yeah, it's not clear if that difference is actually due to the training method used, or just due to random variation between the subjects in the different groups :)
Interesting to see how in terms of gains this works just as well for a shorter amount of time in the gym. But personally i wouldn't do it becausd of how mentally taxing it would be to decrease in weight lifted just to tell myself it will be good in the long run.
I see what you're saying!
This is interesting. It kinda makes sense as it gives credence to drop sets. Which, anecdotally, is great for hypertrophy and strength gains.
I think we just have to consder Mypo Reps. One activation set and then several mini sets with only a *10-15 second rest* Short rest time is clearly effective.
Superb. I watch every vid you post. Algo .
Thank you dude, I appreciate that!
I think it’s ideal to have periods where you focus on increasing work capacity (one part of which means reducing rest time between sets) and periods where you focus on increasing strength while keeping other training variables constant.
In the studies the volume was kept constant 3 to 4 sets with 8 to 10 reps, for both groups.
But we know that volume is a major trigger for hypertrophy.
In the constant rest group (2 minutes rest) the overall volume that can be performed in a given time (say 60 minutes) is considerably less than in the reduced rest group. As a consequence a new study needs to be conducted where workout volume is adjusted by available time (say 60 minutes). In this version of the study the reduced rest group will be performing far greater volume of work to failure compared to the constant rest group in the given 60 minutes. And as a consequence I hypothesise that the reduced rest group will see greater hypertrophy due to greater volume of work to failure in a given time frame.
Volume in so far as set numbers has a relationship with hypertropy, but volume load (sets x reps x load) does not - I have a video on this.
I personally would use a technique like this for a muscle like biceps. Biceps have a high fatigue tolerance, most people have overdeveloped them to the point in which very high volume is required for continued progress, and I feel like biceps would be the most likely muscles to recover faster between sets than say chest. This will save so much time.
I think that's a great point, different muscles likely have different recovery abilites between sets, and this can impact how practical one views it :)
What about the rest-pause approach to avoid all that junk volume at each set after reaching failure for the 1st time?
It is known from former Mr. Olympia Frank Zane that in order to overcome a performance plateau, he reduced the pause times between the sets (and probably the weights too) and increased the number of repetitions.
Increasing the weights in alternation with shortening the pauses between sets might not be the worst method of progression in the long run.
It's because you don't take in to account he was heavily on Power Enhancing Drugs and with another whole level of muscle development based on it. So his recovery time it's at superhuman level no way comparable to anyone else's.
New sub! Your channel is class mate 👏👏👏
Welcome! Thank you for the kind words :)
I'm guessing the short rest group was having to reduce the weight between sets, especially in the last couple of weeks? And I don't mean reducing it from week to week, I mean reducing it almost every time between their 1st set and 4th set. Bc there's no way you can maintain the same level of intensity between the 1st and 4th sets at the same weight with only 30 seconds of rest, whereas with 2 minutes that's much more feasible. So another factor to consider with the short interval is you're going to be scrambling between each set to remove weight during that short rest window and to make that efficient you're going to be that guy using all the 2.5 lb plates on one bar.
Yep, they did readjust weights across sets :)
Do you think metabolic stress could be component playing role in hypertrophy in low rest group? would love to have an video from you on this topic cause i barely see anyone covering fully on metabolic stress
I 100% plan to make a video on metabolic stress at some point. Based on my current assessements, it's truly difficult to say what role metabolic stress has (if any) on hypertrophy.
The other conclusion, although probably not with a lot of power, is that the groups that took creatine had markedly lower gains.
There’s no magical rest period. If you want to reach maximum hypertrophy, you need to use the maximum or near maximum capacity of your muscles. Resting too little makes you reach cardiovascular failure instead of muscular failure. That should be fairly obvious and there should not be an open discussion about this.
my rest is from 30 to 40 sec (legs 120/180). after 15 years of training in this way. I can tell you that there are no difference in the number of set and reps if I take more rest. I’m done in any case. I train to failure every single set. with short rests you could spend 30 minutes for 18 sets (30/40sec between set 120sec between exersice 5minutes between different body part)
As always awesome stuff, but just like you mentioned in your conclusion, it's confusing how this fits in with other studies stating that longer rest periods are better for strength. Logically, if you are overloading by decreasing rest time, it means that on average during the 8 weeks you would be resting less than 2 minutes (around 1 min 15 sec). Then, how come your strength gains are the same as the 2 minute group? If it is true that overloading with rest is equal to overloading with load for strength, wouldn't that contradict the rest for strength studies?
Thank you for the kind words!
I see what you're saying. While it's true there is data showing that *exclusively* training with longer rest intervals evokes greater strength gains versus *exclusively* training with shorter rest intervals, this does not neccessarily conflict with the data shown in the two Souza Jr studies. Remember, the decreasing rest group in those two studies started with a long rest interval (2 mins), and then gradually decreased it (to 30 seconds over 6 weeks) , this is not the same thing as simply *exclusively* using short rest intervals. It might just be that by gradually decreasing your rest interval overtime, your body produces incremental adaptations that enable you to effectively be able to use short rest intervals without compromising adaptations (this would starkly contrast to just jumping in and *exclusively* using short rest intervals from the get go). I hope this makes sense :)
Of course, this is only me speculating , but it would reconcile the overall evidence. Ultimately, future research is needed :)
@@HouseofHypertrophy That seems to make sense. One thing though, given the positive correlation between strength and volume in training, I think we can make the assumption that increasing the sets done per session while lowering the rest time in the 8 week period and then repeating the 8 week period would lead to greater strength and hypertrophy gains than following a constant 2 minute rest. My logic is that the individuals, performing less overall volume, had the same or slightly better results. So, if the volume was equated, or maybe even pushed higher since each set takes less time, wouldn't this be a far more efficient method of training than traditional strength training, while taking much less time?
Of course, correct me if I'm wrong.
I think that's a very interesting idea, and I think there's a chance you could be correct. But, there still might be some considerations:
Though I have not fully assessed the research on the relationship between volume and strength, it does not appear to be consistently positive. There are studies finding similar gains between higher and lower set numbers (pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30153194/ + journals.lww.com/nsca-jscr/Abstract/1997/08000/The_Effect_of_Weight_Training_Volume_on_Hormonal.3.aspx + pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32058362/)
There's also data showing higher volume loads (sets x reps x load) do not always equate to more strength gains either (pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33343066/ + pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31306302/).
On the basis of this, it's difficult to make any conclusions :)
Hey new to the channel, I enjoy the content. What about Arthur Jones or more recent Jay Vincent. They do HIT workouts, lifting heavy with machines with basically no rest in between? I just started working out again and that's how I found your channel. Thanks for the good content, keep up the good work from California 💪
Thank you for the kind words! I have to admit, I'm not entirely famillar with what it is they precisely do. At some point, I'll be sure to read up on it and see if there's any relevant research with which I could use to construct a video :)
If you're already in super good shape that makes sense but if not you need more rest
I find 2 minutes my perfect rest. I can get a lot more out of my following sets than 1.5 minutes, which means better progress next time. I know quiet a few pro powerlifters and i know wait 5 minutes between working sets but they are 3-5 reps maximum weights. I generally train 8-30 reps, with some high weight to begin
Very interesting, most surprising is that the strength gains were similiar. Makes me think of the theory thay hypertrophy drives strength rather than the other way around. While I propably wouldnt never use this method unless I had to for some reason, still very interesting and good to know.
100% agree, I would never have expected these results to be the case either, it's extremely interesting :)
@@HouseofHypertrophy btw you should do video about nucleus overload some day, I remember someone else recommending that as well. Its one of the most interesting ideas for hypertrophy out there imo and I definetely think it works to some degree. Did it once to my side delts but I didnt have deload after like you should do. I did get stronger everyday tho, which is interesting.
Yep, it's something that interests me a lot as well. I'm really looking forward to digging into the research and seeing if anything interesting can be found!
@@HouseofHypertrophy looking forward to it!
Love your videos
Thank you :)
Very interesting 👏🏽👏🏽
Thank you, and I agree. I hope future research explores this area further!
Is there any data or studies on Mike Mentzer's program where he wpuld go to failure, wait only a few seconds and then repeat several times? The theory being that you're maximizing your time spent in the failure range of your reps despite not performing the same volume as higher rest duration sets
Amazing
I only do one set per exercise and minimize time between exercises. Since I also have a goal of increasing my VO2 max, I dont mind sacrificing some hypertrophy (if that happens).
You should make a video on if the pump is beneficial for muscle growth?
I will definitely make a vid on this :)
If training in a short duration of rest interval is fine for hypertrophy then what about the studies that show training with longer rest interval provides a greater muscle growth? Doesn't this contradicted it? Or do we have to progressive overload our rest time by reducing its bit by bit for the short rest time to be effective?
I discuss this from 7:40 onwards :)
I think they dont even workout
Are you familiar with doug brignole? I might remember him once shouting out your pushup load percentages.
Yep! I've had a few email exchanges with him recently. He very kindly sent me his book, I've yet to fully read it, but I'm in the process of going through it during my free periods.
@@HouseofHypertrophy thats nice! I have been following him over a year now and binge watched almost all his content. His principles are very good atleast and I agree with him on most things. I think he is a great guy apart from the beef with kassem who is also very smart. Learned a ton from them both.
I alternate my sets between body parts with 90 seconds rest (i.e. bench press-lat pull then repeat). Does this seem like a good program?
That is perfectly fine in my view!
Another limitation in these studies is rep range, in my opinion.
What's gonna happen if they do less than 5 reps instead of 8 to 10 reps?
Yep, that's a great point! (I noted it in the pinned comment)
@@HouseofHypertrophy sorry i didn't see that.
Thanks.
❤
I rarely rest longer than 45 seconds. I can get more done this way
Interesting! :)
Decreased rest time between sets are for people that have no idea what they're doing!
You're looking at the wrong thing. Look at cardiovascular capabilities and fat burning.
What about using rest pause sets?
There's not much research exploring this, so it's difficult to say. I do plan to make a vid on it at some point, and a vid on cluseter sets too.
casual algorithm comment
Thank you dude, I want you to know your supports means a great deal to me!
since i increased my rest time to 2min at least i experiment my best gains since i started 6 years ago ( sorry for my frenchy english ) 🤣
how do you animate this
Using illustration and VSDC editor!
@@HouseofHypertrophy your video animation it's so high quality it amazes me bro you deserve more subs
👍
algo
Thank you dude :)
are you starting to see that Hypertrophy is just a side affect of training in general? Find studies of people who weren’t on steroids and then got on them and see the data. You will see it didn’t really matter what type of training they did, there muscle would get bigger by a large margin. IMO it is better to train for a goal other than big muscles. If you didn’t win the genetic lottery, you will be trying to obtain a goal that wasn’t in your future in the first place. Probably not exciting or happy news but is the truth ever that?
"You will see it didn’t really matter what type of training they did" - this statement is evidently not true. There are numerous examples of studies demonstrating that training a certain way produces more hypertrophy than training another way (in natural individuals). For instance, with compound exercises at least, exclusively training with longer rests (2+ mins) produces more gains than consistently training with shorter rests (90 secs or less). There's also the volume literature (multiple sets on a given exercise tends to be better than single sets, on average), loading literature (loads below 30% one-rep max *might* not be optimal), proximity to failure literature (achieving a sufficient proximity to failure is needed to optimize tension), etc., etc.
"IMO it is better to train for a goal other than big muscles" - That is your opinon, of course.
"If you didn’t win the genetic lottery, you will be trying to obtain a goal that wasn’t in your future in the first place." - not all hypertrophy goals are created equal. For example, someone's goal may simply be to attain their best physique possible. In this sense, are you trying to obtain a goal that wasn't in your future? no.
@@HouseofHypertrophy I try to keep things simple because we can talk in semantics all day. Its called being blunt which most people dislike as it gives no wiggle room. For your sake, I know your channel is built off hypertropy and I am not trying to take your passion away from you. I do enjoy youe videos. My observation is still the same. The differences are so small to consider them "revolutionary" or "exact" to determine if training holds the ulitmate tie breaker. It just doesnt. It has everything to do with genetics and in a conceled way "chemical" pathways. Hypertrophy means nothing if the only focus is looks. That is vainity my friend and if that is important to you so be it. Everyone has what they like and dislike but lets not suger coat it. Strength can bs accurately measured. So can speed, but size changes more often for it to be a constant metric. The study shows the obvious. The less time you rest, the lest power output you produce over a long time. Growth will also change with that because you are producing less force. Ultimately force production or metabolic stress contributes to muscle size. It really isnt complicated but bodybuilding isnt either but that is why you can sell more bs to people. Make something simple more complex so if they fail, you can blame it on other variables. In conclusion. Drugs have completely obscure the reality of what is truly possible because most people will hide or lie about there use. Check out the study of a person taking drugs and did no physical exercise but had a CONSIDERATE amount of muscle growth. How would that look to point the blame on trainint parameters?
Hey, if chasing those extra 0.1 inch biceps gains me an egotistical narcissistic maniac, so be it BABY
@@HouseofHypertrophy Lol. Hey everyone has there thing. I just want it to be clear as people will obviously take ANY information they hear or see without understanding what it took to get such a miniscule change. Thanks.
Training for hypertrophy is fun, while I like getting stronger a lot too, strength still remains my side effect for training for hypertrophy.
This comment contains nine words consisting of at least three symbols.
Createn :P