Journal article on muscle strength vs. hypertrophy vs. endurance training

[panic_jam]

Found this and wanted to share. It's a lot to read but very informative.

(PDF attached)

ABSTRACT
Loading recommendations for resistance training are typically prescribed along what hascome to be known as the “repetition continuum”, which proposes that the number of repetitionsperformed at a given magnitude of load will result in specific adaptations. Specifically, the theorypostulates that heavy load training optimizes increases maximal strength, moderate load trainingoptimizes increases muscle hypertrophy, and low-load training optimizes increases local muscularendurance. However, despite the widespread acceptance of this theory, current research fails tosupport some of its underlying presumptions. Based on the emerging evidence, we propose a newparadigm whereby muscular adaptations can be obtained, and in some cases optimized, across awide spectrum of loading zones. The nuances and implications of this paradigm are discussed herein.

 

[LevButlerov]

Found this and wanted to share. It's a lot to read but very informative.

(PDF attached)

ABSTRACT
Loading recommendations for resistance training are typically prescribed along what hascome to be known as the “repetition continuum”, which proposes that the number of repetitionsperformed at a given magnitude of load will result in specific adaptations. Specifically, the theorypostulates that heavy load training optimizes increases maximal strength, moderate load trainingoptimizes increases muscle hypertrophy, and low-load training optimizes increases local muscularendurance. However, despite the widespread acceptance of this theory, current research fails tosupport some of its underlying presumptions. Based on the emerging evidence, we propose a newparadigm whereby muscular adaptations can be obtained, and in some cases optimized, across awide spectrum of loading zones. The nuances and implications of this paradigm are discussed herein.

@panic_jam interesting info. I personally like journals for testing but hard to apply to bodybuilding many times, or even steroid users for that matter.

 

[Mobster]

One study doesn't mean much

 

[stevesmi]

the big issue with weight training is the genetic element. Someone with fantastic genetics can train poorly and still get better results than someone with poor genetics who trains perfectly

 

[e2]

nice job posting this info
it's always fun for discussion

 

[2Thick]

here weight training definitely there's a lot of info behind it
stuff that we still don't understand

 

[Vadim Fedorov]

we've definitely been evolving with sports science
compared to 20 years ago it's amazing how far we've come

 

[Wootoom]

there are some really good coaches out there at high levels
weight training has definitely evolved

 

[JasonPriest]

there are always some interesting tricks out there
lots of ways you can better train

 

[BodyMonster34]

bro i got a lot of respect for weight training info
but for me its simple. just lift heavy ass weight

 

[Quadsweep]

I've always respected the weight lifting nerds
they're always coming up with some good tactics

 

[StevenDarwinMD]

This thread/post was reviewed by our Medical Review board.

This thread/post/message was also fact checked by Steven Darwin, MD and our medical review board.

Full editorial process was followed, and please read our medical disclaimer, check our editorial process.

 

[ceo]

bros this is a pretty cool study
there's always information out there to learn like a lot of people out there

 

[ROIDDERS]

there's some good info here
always new things to learn

 

[chesty]

it'll be interesting if we progress more over the next five or ten years
there's a lot we don't know about our bodies

 

[Ulter]

more info is always good
thanks for posting this

 

[Mobster]

Sometimes I despair at how some studies get funded and then info is cherry picked from the published, if not peer reviewed articles.

The late Arthur Jones, of Nautilus, published a very method to determine the rep range which suits you for hypertrophy years ago - decades in fact.

Then there's the ideas of how high reps can't be used for strength. You CAN of course, do 20 reps and add weight to the load and then argue that got stronger doing 20 reps. Equally I can do low reps and just shorten the rest periods and argue I've improved my endurance. And that's exactly what's happened here.

You also have to remember (Stevesmi and I have talked about this on Evo Podcasts) WHO is used in these studies - the untrained student. Young, willing and able (and often paid). Who will respond well to just about anything.

Finally some scientists are egotistical dicks. QED those proposing a new theory of evolution. It gets you attention even if it's sh*t

 

[Mobster]

Or, to put it another way, they want to make you think you can do lots of reps with light weights and then bench 400. NOT GONNA HAPPEN

 

[ballin2504]

That’s a informative article

 

[panic_jam]

I wanted to share because this is the only study I have recently come across that directly examined whether doing heavy weight with low reps vs moderate weight with moderate reps resulted in different strength or muscle gains.