heavy weights Archives

Exciting Muscle-Size Insights

Q: After reading one of your articles that discussed the study where light, longer sets built muscle, I was thinking that maybe that’s why X Reps build so much size. Because they’re partial reps where the muscle is stretched, you block blood flow and get more tension time by making the set last longer. Do you think that’s the case—that X Reps work because they make a set last longer?

A: No doubt that ex-tending the set with X-Reps is one reason those power partials are so effective at building more muscle. As you said, you not only pulse at the target-muscle’s strongest point, where it’s elongated, but you also force the muscle to continue firing for five or more extra seconds—which means a longer tension time on any set with X Reps tacked on. That was the ground-breaking finding of that study—that extending tension time was another way to trigger hypertrophic stimulation…

[Read more…]

The fast-twitch fibers are best worked in a four-to-six-rep range, so why not just do X Reps in that rep range? The time under tension for the above, assuming a three-seconds-up/one-second-down cadence, equals about 16 seconds plus four X Reps. That’s a total time under tension of 26 seconds. Won’t lower reps and heavier weights produce more growth?

A: Heavier weights and lower reps will produce more growth—in a couple of fast-twitch fiber types. Scientists believe there are at least five (some even say nine) different fast-twitch fiber types, some being slightly more endurance oriented than others. So a set with four to six reps plus X Reps may do great things for one or two of those; but to get at the others you’d want to include slightly higher-rep sets (or include drop sets and supersets in combination with X Reps, as outlined in The Ultimate Mass Workout e-book). That will help you hit as many fast-twitch types as possible.

Technically speaking, fiber makeup dictates which rep range should dominate for an individual. For example, if you have more pure fast-twitch fibers, lower reps should dominate in your routine, but you shouldn’t neglect other rep ranges because you want to hit as many fiber types as possible to max out growth. In other words, the more fibers you get to grow, the bigger your muscles will be.

In our cases, Jonathan, being more mesomorphic (muscular/athletic), responds to lower reps, but he also includes drop sets and supersets to hit a variety of fiber types as well (those techniques bring in an endurance component). Steve, on the other hand, responds better to higher reps, as he’s an ectomorph (hardgainer/skinny) with more endurance-oriented fast-twitch fibers as well as lots of slow-twitch fibers. Heavy straight sets don’t do much for him, so he relies more on drop sets and supersets, while still keeping the reps in the six-to-12 range. That means if he does a drop set of 8(6) reps—eight reps, reduce the weight and immediately do six reps—he’s doing 14 reps. That’s two lower-rep sets back to back, giving him the best of both worlds. Add X Reps to one of those sets and he gets even more time under tension, overloading a number of fiber types. It’s a very efficient way to train for more muscle mass.

Remember, it’s not about just hitting fast-twitch fibers with low reps. There are a number of different fast-twitch fibers that vary in work capacity. We attack that problem by doing heavy work but also getting more endurance-oriented anaerobic work by using supersets and drop sets along with X Reps.

A Different Path to Muscle Mass: No Heavy Weights Required

Q: I’ve read some of your articles on the 10×10 method, and I just can’t wrap my mind around using lighter weights to gain mass. Can that really work? I’m scared I’ll lose muscle if I try it.

A: First, you don’t have to dive in head-first and use 10×10 all the time for every bodypart. For example, when we first tried it, we had some of the same doubts you’re expressing, so we decided to try it only on arms originally… [Read more…]

Arnold vs. Mentzer—No-Cardio Fat-to-Muscle Training

Q: First off, I just picked up The Ultimate Fat-to-Muscle Workout, and it’s fantastic. I learned so much reading it, which I did at one sitting. Great info and easy-to-understand-and-follow workout, just what I need to kick off a new training program. In the first chapter, you tell the story about Arnold getting ripped and vascular without cardio. Didn’t Mike Mentzer do the same thing but with a lot fewer sets? It’s interesting that their training styles were so different, yet they both got very lean without much, if any, cardio. Do you think a lot of it could be genetics, and us average Joes need more cardio?

A: While genetics could have something to do with it, it might not have as big an impact as you might think. As far as Arnold vs. Mentzer, The key to both of their [Read more…]