starting strength gym
Page 1 of 7 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 62

Thread: Hypertrophy

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Posts
    1

    Default Hypertrophy

    • starting strength seminar april 2024
    • starting strength seminar jume 2024
    • starting strength seminar august 2024
    PPST explains why 8-12 rep sets produces hypertrophy and claims that stronger muscles are bigger muscles.

    As I understand, size is proportional to 8-12RM. Increasing 1-5RM automatically increases 8-12RM. For novices, 1-5 rep sets increase 8-12RM faster than 8-12 rep sets. For intermediates and above, 8-12 rep sets are more specific and efficient at increasing 8-12RM. Loosely speaking.

    A corollary is that the means of obtaining an 8-12RM is irrelevant. Whatever maximizes your 8-12RM maximizes your size. People with similar 8-12RM and different size are explained by genetics.

    Am I right?

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    5,659

    Default

    Am I right?
    No.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Murphysboro, IL
    Posts
    726

    Default

    I haven't used more than 8 reps in years other than a few assistance lifts, with the rest of the reps being in the 1-5 range. I got stronger and bigger. Even in my 60's.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Fort Worth
    Posts
    4,830

    Default

    A surplus of food and more volume. This is a rathole. That will end in a debate of total tonnage vs total hard sets.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    5,659

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bryanccfshr View Post
    That will end in a debate of total tonnage vs total hard sets.
    Sounds about right.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    May 2016
    Posts
    357

    Default

    ...with the common theme being that there is no "either or". Dont get fooled by one of the oldest false dilemmas in strength sports. Do various rep ranges according prioritized according to your goals.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    990

    Default

    There's nothing mechanistically special about the 8-12 range for hypertrophy. It's just a time-efficient way to accumulate volume with a heavy enough load to produce hypertrophy.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Location
    Atlanta, Georgia
    Posts
    549

    Default

    PPST explains why 8-12 rep sets produces hypertrophy and claims that stronger muscles are bigger muscles.

    As I understand, size is proportional to 8-12RM. Increasing 1-5RM automatically increases 8-12RM. For novices, 1-5 rep sets increase 8-12RM faster than 8-12 rep sets. For intermediates and above, 8-12 rep sets are more specific and efficient at increasing 8-12RM. Loosely speaking.

    A corollary is that the means of obtaining an 8-12RM is irrelevant. Whatever maximizes your 8-12RM maximizes your size. People with similar 8-12RM and different size are explained by genetics.

    Am I right?
    I think that you are conflating some concepts that are unrelated. Any kind of physical exertion that produces a sufficient stress to result in muscular adaptation will produce hypertrophy as the cells adapt in some way to the applied stress. While someone's 8-12RM (who gives a shit about an 8-12RM anyways? It is so sub-maximal that a rep max is useless) will undoubtedly increase as a result of either the adaptation to sets of 1-5 or sets of 8-12, these stresses are fundamentally different. The simple TL;DR explanation is that an organism will adapt to the specific stress placed upon it. Someone who does sets of 8 will get very good at doing sets of 8. Someone who does singles will get very good at doing singles. The reason sets of 5 are chosen for Starting Strength is not because it induces hypertrophy most efficiently (nor does Rip ever suggest this) but because it encourages muscular strength very well. Yes, someone who increases the weight they can lift for 5 reps will notice that they are able to lift more for 8 reps. This is because they have increased the contractile strength of their muscle fibers. The lower weight is even more sub-maximal than it was before. However, there is a fundamental difference between rep ranges.

    The longer a set takes to complete, the more likely additional factors enter play. Some of them are mental (the lifter's willingness to continue to lift, and some are physical. The most important physical considerations are muscle fiber types and energy pathways. Your 'strongest' fibers (defined as those capable of generating maximum force) do not like to function for more than a couple of seconds. As you increase the reps from 3 to 5 to 8 to 12, the contribution of each type of muscle fiber changes quite drastically. As a corollary to this, different energy pathways are used by the muscle fibers involved with varying degrees of efficiency. Straight up ATP is very easy to use but is quickly exhausted, the body is then forced to use a slower and less efficient pathway called glycolysis. If the exertion continues, the body must then use cellular respiration (which is slow as shit relatively), to continue to produce energy.

    This leads to the theory of muscular hypertrophy that is mostly believed today: that there are two types of muscle gain: Myofibrillar and sarcoplasmic. Myofibrillar hypertrophy is a STRENGTH adaptation. Increases in contractile units of the muscle fiber results in increased force production. Sarcoplasmic hypertrophy increases the intracellular fluid volume which results in the ability to contain more 'fuel' inside of the cell so that it is able to work for a longer period of time. This is why you can see quite often people who have massive one rep maxes but struggle with sets of 12 at a (relatively) light weight.

    It is fallacious to relate sets of 5 to performance at sets of 8-12. It is also false to claim that stronger muscles are bigger muscles since there are too many factors involved in the production of force.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Fort Worth
    Posts
    4,830

    Default

    Dalton Clark
    I would stop short of saying hypertrophy is not important to getting stronger. After skill development and neuro-muscular efficiency is maximized, the development of more contractile fiber is neccesary to continue getting stronger.
    In absolute terms How a lifter develops more muscle is less important than the need that they do develop more to get stronger. Doing so with the least potential for injury and joint wear is a consideration for longevity.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Location
    Atlanta, Georgia
    Posts
    549

    Default

    starting strength coach development program
    Quote Originally Posted by Bryanccfshr View Post
    Dalton Clark
    I would stop short of saying hypertrophy is not important to getting stronger. After skill development and neuro-muscular efficiency is maximized, the development of more contractile fiber is neccesary to continue getting stronger.
    In absolute terms How a lifter develops more muscle is less important than the need that they do develop more to get stronger. Doing so with the least potential for injury and joint wear is a consideration for longevity.
    I did not say that hypertrophy is not important to getting stronger. I said that it is false to claim that stronger muscles are NECESSARILY also bigger muscles. It tends to be the trend but I am simply being pedantic and saying that it is not always true. I would argue that if a lifter purely focuses on sarcoplasmic hypertrophy to get 'bigger muscles' they will not see as large of strength gains compared to someone who strains for strength. This is somewhere in Rip's literature where he relates massive bodybuilders to powerlifters who are smaller but stronger. Therefore HOW a lifter develops more muscle is critically important since there are (as of the current theory) two distinct mechanisms of hypertrophy.

    Analogy: Giving a car a larger gas tank (sarcoplasmic hypertrophy) vs giving a car an engine capable of producing more torque (myofibrillar). A more accurate statement would be that MYOFIBRILLAR hypertrophy is necessary to continue getting 'stronger' once technique and neuro-muscular efficiency are perfected. Of course, this is an oversimplification of the issue but it has been shown anecdotally that doing sets of 8-12 for sarcoplasmic hypertrophy does not result in the same increases in absolute strength as straining in lower rep ranges.
    Last edited by Dalton Clark; 08-26-2017 at 12:21 PM.

Page 1 of 7 123 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •