Exercising for Maximum Hypertrophy

soflsun

New Member
As everyone here knows, the order that we do our exercises and the amount of rest we take between sets can greatly affect how much weight can be used, fatigue, and ultimately if we are able to complete a set.  At any given weight, we can make it easier or more difficult to complete the desired # of reps...should we be making it easier or more difficult?  Should we make it more difficult before progressing to higher weights (i.e. shorter rest periods, order of exercises, etc).  There are 2 ways to look at this IMO, and I'm wondering which is better for hypertrophy.

Lets's use flat BB bench as an example...
I am gunning for 2x10 at 185 lbs...

Most difficult:
Both sets back to back with minimal rest.  This would make completeing the desired reps and weight the most difficult, and would most likely result in clustering if we were close to 10 rep max weight.

Least difficult:
Sets spread significantly with maximum rest.  Possibly one set done at the beginning of workout and one set at the end (30-45+ minutes of rest between sets).  Clustering most likely not necessary and higher weights could have been used than in previous example.

So that's the first question.  Should we make the sets more or less difficult for ourselves to promote hypertrophy?

Secondly:  Should we make the weight FEEL heavier before progressing to higher weights.  In the above example, if 185 lbs was close to my max, I could probably make that SAME weight more and more challenging to complete for quite some time by shortening rest periods each workout until I could complete both sets back to back.  Then at that point move up in weight.  

Is that still progression even thought the weight is the same?  Are we better off keeping the weights as low as possible for as long as possible to keep ourselves away from maxes thus leaving more potential for future hypertrophy?
 
Since total load and total volume are very important to hypertrophy, then which do you think is better? Which way will allow you to get more on your total workload? What does max-stim do for training for example?



...Make it easier.
 
Do you think your muscles know how heavy a weight feels to you? Or do they just know "on" and "off"?
 
<div>
(scientific muscle @ Apr. 10 2008,20:52)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">Since total load and total volume are very important to hypertrophy, then which do you think is better?  Which way will allow you to get more on your total workload?  What does max-stim do for training for example?



...Make it easier.</div>
Okay, so less fatigue and higher weights are better.  But, why not progress from this to a more difficult setup before increasing weight?  Couldn't it be better not to be pushing maxes all the time...giving more room (time and weight) for growth.  I mean, there is a limit to how much we can lift naturally.  Whay not stay as far from this a possible for as long as possible?

If a workout is harder, isn't that some form of progression?
 
<div>
(Totentanz @ Apr. 10 2008,21:20)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">Do you think your muscles know how heavy a weight feels to you?  Or do they just know &quot;on&quot; and &quot;off&quot;?</div>
I'm not sure exactly what you mean.  But I believe they know how hard they are working.  So while muscles don't know what I am feeling, they know they are straining harder in certain situations.

edit: spelling
 
As Sci intimated, workload is key. Fatigue we are finding out is far overrated for the purpose of hypertrophy. It has other benefits though. Using fatigue tends to lower workload. Not using fatigue lends less acclamitization to lactic acid and the benefits of that, but we have the 15's for that. Cardio takes care of the Vo2 and endurance factors, so all that is left is workload...unless of course you're working on sports-specific training.
 
As far as hypertrophy is concerned, the only thing a muscle &quot;knows&quot; is the level of tension it is subject to. This is directly related to the weight that is actually on the bar and not how &quot;heavy&quot; or &quot;light&quot; it feels.

How &quot;difficult&quot; or &quot;easy&quot; a set feels is, on the on the other hand, a perception of our CNS and has nothing to do with the actual hypertrophic stimulus.

So, if hypertrophy is your only concern, all you are interested in are the load (primarily) and the total TUT (for simplicity, metabolic work is not taken into account here).

If still in doubt, just keep in mind that if you make a set purposely &quot;hard&quot; you are actually training your CNS and you are usually shifting the emphasis from hypertrophy to something else (strength, strength endurance etc).

Hope this helps,
Dimitris
 
<div>
(soflsun @ Apr. 11 2008,02:33)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">Okay, so less fatigue and higher weights are better.  But, why not progress from this to a more difficult setup before increasing weight?  Couldn't it be better not to be pushing maxes all the time...giving more room (time and weight) for growth.  I mean, there is a limit to how much we can lift naturally.  Whay not stay as far from this a possible for as long as possible?

If a workout is harder, isn't that some form of progression?</div>
Dimitris and the others are spot on. When you make a set 'more difficult' by decreasing rest time between sets you are obviously not increasing the strain on the muscle tissue (although if you move the load faster each rep that might effectively increase strain a bit for the concentric part of the movement and will increase the overall power output) but the 'stress' on your CNS and metabolic pathways is increased.

If you are using sub-max loads during the 15s and 10s, having a little more fatigue might well be beneficial as you will be forcing your fast twitch fibres to kick in a little earlier than they otherwise might so you might see improved recruitment if you were able to test such a thing.

One of the rationales for HST is that you don't need to be pushing maxes all the time. You are trying to stay ahead of RBE so should only be hitting maxes once a fortnight for the first six weeks of a cycle. Once you are in the 5s you will likely get a fair bit of mileage from the loads being lifted before RBE catches up and they stop having a noticeable effect. You can use all sorts of fatigue management techniques to help you to lift those heavy loads for longer without burning out (like multiple sets of three reps with your 5RM or Max-Stim). I really think this has helped me to keep on increasing my top loads cycle on cycle.

So, yes, if a workout is harder, that is some form of progression but it may not necessarily induce a hypertrophic stimulus unless loads are increasing over time too.
 
I think the message is pretty clear here.  Thanks guys.  I may just challenge myself occasionally by trying to push whatever weight I happen to be working with for maximum reps in additon to the linear progression of weight.  That probably can't hurt.

I enjoy the idea of pushing the last set to near failure regardless of where it falls in the cycle.  For instance, even in my first week of 10's I may push the 3rd set for maximum reps.  Would that impede anything as long as I don't reach complete failure?
 
Im tired of lifting heavy ****!
biggrin.gif
laugh.gif
 
Sometimes I feel like I am lifting too much like a power lifter and not enough like a body builder. Let me clarify...

In my eyes a powerlifter uses their strength to lift maximum weight using as much leverage as possible to move the max amount of weight.

A bodybuilder does not purposely use leverage and has a goal of stimulating growth rather than moving the biggest numbers.


Clearly there is some middle ground that makes it confusing, but I feel like I could do more in my routine to stimulate muscle more, use less leverage, and in the end have additional growth.



I was talking to Steve Pfiester (see: http://www.longevityclubs.com/stevepfiester.htm) from ABC's realty tv show &quot;Fat March&quot; (yeah I never heard of it either) at my dad's gym earlier today...He was telling me how he has changed his routine to be more towards bodybuilding...For instance, he was doing stiff legged deads rather than deads, as he said you use less leverage when doing so. It made sense to me, I might consider switching back to stiff legged deads!

I also noticed that he was in phenominal shape, but wasn't pushing an incredible amount of weight for his size. He had EXTREMELY strict form using relatively light weights (espcially for how strong he looks). He said he hit the gym 2x/day focusing on one muscle group per day and letting it rest for the rest of the week. Clearly he also has VERY strict nutrition.

He definately gave me some things to think about, as I don't look half as good as him, but was doing a lot more weight.
 
<div></div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">I was talking to Steve Pfiester (see: http://www.longevityclubs.com/stevepfiester.htm) from ABC's realty tv show &quot;Fat March&quot; (yeah I never heard of it either) at my dad's gym earlier today...He was telling me how he has changed his routine to be more towards bodybuilding...For instance, he was doing stiff legged deads rather than deads, as he said you use less leverage when doing so. It made sense to me, I might consider switching back to stiff legged deads!</div>

That doesn't make sense unless you are doing deadlifts solely for your hamstrings. In that case, sure, SLDL or RDL might be a better idea. But... neither of those lifts are going to do anything remotely close to what conventional deadlifts do for back development.
 
<div>
(quadancer @ Apr. 13 2008,09:08)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">Also you're looking at one person who may have some great genetics.</div>
that may be (trust me I certainly considered it!)...but do you guys think there is anything to using less leverage?


...is there a way to lift more like a BB?
 
Not sure what you mean about less leverage, but doing exercises with full ROM and lighter weights is better for hypertrophy then &quot;short&quot; exercises with slightly heavier weights. It also results in higher TUT. Also if you lose strict form due to heavy weights you shift the stress to other muscles therefore not being as efficient in the targeted muscle.
About the deadlift, the SLDL is a somewhat different exercise from the regular DL. The muscles targeted are different.
 
There is actually a great thread over at lyles right now under the bodybuidling section.

Blade as well as other commented on this topic and its a great way to train for hypertrophy IMO.

At least it makes sense...but it still goes back to lifting heavy stuff as often as possible.

I think the main difference if you are wanting to tweak something would be just to keep you reps a little higher than normal in other words....maybe train in the 15 to 8 rep range and never drop below the 8 rep range.

You could use a little more volume on the lighter side of the rep ranges and the extra reps would give you more TUT.

All of this sounds GREAT and it is...but it will not be productive unless you are increasig the poundages on those rep ranges as often as possible.

Which leads you back to why lower reps are good for you b/c they allow you to increase your poundages over a longer period of time.

I will say from expierence....I don't never drop below the 6 rep range b/c of injuries...but its a lot harder to add weight to the bar consistently this way.

If I could and I felt it was safe I would do triples and things of that nature...but its not practical for me.

Long story short...you have to add weight to the bar!

Which I think for a lot of us there comes a point were you can not get too much stronger.

This could be were we hit our natural limits...although I would say maybe 2 to 3 % of true lifters are only at this point!
 
<div></div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">that may be (trust me I certainly considered it!)...but do you guys think there is anything to using less leverage?


...is there a way to lift more like a BB?</div>

I think you are onto something there and you should keep on it. I'll help you out.

Here's something to wrap your mind around for the next week: Muscles don't experience the weight in your hand, they experience the weight in your hand multiplied by the lever arm. In other words, Torque, with a capital T. Here's an experiment for you to try in the next 5 seconds: Get a broom and put a weight on it. Use a heavy book or something. Hold the broom in the middle. Now hold it at the end opposite the book.

Feel the difference? Imagine your hand is the pec insertion point, the broom is your humerus, and the book is the weight in your hand as you bench press.

Powerlifters aim to minimize the length of the lever arm (in this case the broom). This allows them to use more weight, and in Powerlifting, weight is all that matters. If they handed out trophies for torque, my tall lengthy self would be competing (and winning damnit!).

The next part of your question: Should I lift like this? Improving the leverage so I can use more weight? The short answer is &quot;No.&quot; Torque = Weight * Lever Arm.

Torque = Weight x Lever Arm

500 100 5

500 250 2

500 2 250

500 5 100

See? By trading leverage for weight we don't necessarily gain anything. If you still don't believe me then go ahead and Google torque. Also, go to exrx.net and look at the pages on leverage. If you do believe me, do this anyway.

Now, the long answer: &quot;Maybe.&quot; The lever/weight trade off can be useful depending on the goal. Its a phenomena you can exploit to increase or decrease the tension a muscle must produce in order to help lift the weight. Mostly I have used the principle in selecting the right lift and seeing through the false logic of other people's reasons for their own lift selection. I will give you some examples before I talk about &quot;Lifting like a Bodybuilder&quot; which requires an understanding of R.O.M. and kinesiology.

Example 1: Lateral delt raise, aka side raise.

I have heard it said that people should do their side delt raises with their arms bent at 90 degrees because by doing this you can use more weight. You can use more weight, but the muscle isn't experiencing more torque. Another way of seeing this is if bending my arm at 90 degrees increases the weight I can use then it also means my deltoid is suddenly stronger - and that is obviously bullsh1t. By bending the elbow during a lateral raise one merely reduces the lever arm. Thus one can use more weight. Torque stays the same. The stimulus stays the same. Here's the bodybuilder part: If you start your side raises with your elbows at near lockout you can use leverage to your advantage to extend the set. Simply bend your elbows more as you fatigue and you can get more reps. Can you see why? The weight stays the same but by bending your elbow the lever arm decreases, thus decreasing torque. If you're thinking this is similar to doing a drop set you're right, only the tension on the deltoid stays continuous and you don't need to bother with another set of dumbells.

What about upright rows? Answer: you can use more weight because with the weight so close to your shoulders the lever arm in the frontal plain is very small. Torque doesn't change, if it did your side delts would be miraculously stronger - and that is bullsh1t.

Example 2: Barbell curl.

As you curl the barbell the lever arm decreases. This is not theoretically optimal because when the bicep is close to full contraction it is also very strong. So what happens during a barbell curl is the torque decreases while the muscle gets stronger (up to a point, see the length-tension page at exrx.net). One way to improve the stimulus is to bend over during the last part of the curl. Keep your elbows by your ribs and bend at the hips. This is the second part of the Gironda curl, now long forgotten.

&quot;Lifting Like a Bodybuilder.&quot;

In any compound lift, and sometimes during what are called &quot;iso's&quot;, multiple muscles contribute to the movement of the weight. During the movement, however, some muscles are active only during a certain phase of the lift, or most active during a certain phase. An example would be the push press, which is an overhead press with the hands just outside the shoulders. During a push press the clavicular head, or upper region of the pec is recruited but only for the first 115 degrees of upper arm movement. After that it becomes mostly deactivated while the front delts and other muscles move the barbell into lockout position. You and I can exploit this if we want to improve our upper pecs. Simply keep the barbell in the range of 0 - 115 degrees of upper arm movement during the set and the upper pec will have no time to rest like it would if we went to lockout. This increases the Time Under Tension (TUT) of the upper pec. I know this particular fact about the upper pec and push presses because I read kinesiology texts, namely one book entitled Muscle Alive

In other situations muscles are more or less activated depending on the angle of the joint. Take calves for instance. The two largest muscles are the soleus and the gastrocenemius. What a lot of people know, but most people don't, is that when the knee is completely extended both the soleus and the gastrocenemius are activated. However, when you bend the knee, like in a seated calve raise machine, the gastrocenemius is scarcely activated. It cannot contribute to the lift because it originates on the femur. Thus bending the knee shortens the muscle. As a result the soleus takes the brunt of the work.

Another example, not widely known but known for decades, is the involvement of the gastrocenemius in leg curls. Because the gastroc originates on the femur and crosses the knee joint it can help the hamstrings curl the leg. You can screw it out of the lift by pointing your toes like a ballerina. This shortens the grastroc at its insertion point diminishing its ability to produce tension. The brain activates the hamstrings more fully as a result. You can increase the gastrocs involvement in leg curls by pointing the toes towards you. And you can use this to your advantage to work the gastrocs or help the hamstrings out in extending the set. I have been doing glute-ham raises and have gotten sore calves from it.

There are similar situations with other muscles in the body. One has to know the muscles and how they are effected by joint angles to understand what can be done to get the desired effect. It also helps to know during what degrees of movement a certain muscle is most or least active. These things aren't secrets. In fact they've been known for a long time. The reason most lifters don't know them is because the information is contained in academic textbooks and not in magazines or websites. Most people avoid academic texts because they are associated with school but they are dense with information, especially the kind you'd want to know.

P.S.: The lever arm is a line that runs perpendicular to the line of action of the force and the insertion point of the muscle. It is not the length of the limb. In lifting free weights the line of action of the force is always straight down. Its best to find a picture explaining it. Sorry for not doing so earlier.

P.S.#2. This stuff takes a while to understand. Keep at it and it will click.
 
One last thing...

In machines that use cams an egg-shaped cam is best. These were first used by
Arthur Jones in building the first Nautilus series and I have mostly seen them used
in every gym I know. An egg-shaped cam increases the tension while it rotates. For
the life of me I cannot remember the precise reason why, only that I had to word problems
involving cams in mechanical engineering school. Suffice it to say machines aren't always
as lame as they appear and egg shaped cams are good to have because they increase the
resistance during the range of motion.
 
Back
Top