Agree?

[Septooth]

This is a quote off an article. Would everyone agree with it?

"Training "age" might be more important than fiber type. People with years of training under their belt might benefit from doing more training in the low-rep range, whereas those that have been training less than a year or two might benefit more from higher reps."

[Joker13]

Originally Posted by Septooth

This is a quote off an article. Would everyone agree with it?

"Training "age" might be more important than fiber type. People with years of training under their belt might benefit from doing more training in the low-rep range, whereas those that have been training less than a year or two might benefit more from higher reps."

What is it refering to? What goals are they talking about? Powerlifting? bodybuilding, toning,?

[hrdgain81]

Well right out of the box, training "age" doesnt denote "experience", the rest of the quote is equally off pudding.

Depending on goals, lifters of any experience level will benifit from low rep range work.

[triqqey]

I always thought that juiced up lifters would benefit from high reps, too.
btw, I was wondering if by "fiber type" the quote was referring to fast-twitch or slow-twitch muscles.
This quote sounds a bit off, mostly because it tries to put all lifters (with differing goals, i.e. bodybuilding, strength, endurance, etc.) into a boxed definition IMO

[Eric3237]

^^^^I agree with all the answers.

And since I'm a stickler on wording:

"Training "age" might be more important than fiber type."

This kinda makes it sound like the author thinks that fiber type is important in the first place. I.E. like they are one of those people who think you should "train to your fiber type" which to me is pretty much bullshit. If they think that I'm not apt to listen to further assumptions.

[Darkhorse]

People with years of training under their belt might benefit from doing more training in the low-rep range, whereas those that have been training less than a year or two might benefit more from higher reps."

I firmly disagree. I think beginners and oftentimes intermediates would benefit MORE from doing lower overall reps focusing on building a strength foundation before going to higher reps.

Basically, take two twins who are beginners ->

Joe Bodybuilder #1 does "high reps".. Say sets of 10-15 reps.

Joe Bodybuilder #2 does "low reps".. Say sets of 5 reps.

----

Keeping DIET out of our equation, lets look 3 years down the road..

Joe #1 put on 30 lbs of lean mass, he isn't very strong for his build, and he's unfortunately plateaued strength/mass wise.

Joe #2 put on 20 lbs of lean mass, looks a lot thicker, and has some impressive lifts. Joe #2 now decides to take his neural efficiency and apply it to the "higher reps", and low and behold continues growth.

The difference in these two lifters after 3 years is the following:

Joe #1: Bench Press: 200 x 10 reps.. Not bad.
Joe #2: Bench Press: 250 x 10 reps.. Better.

Basically, if Joe #2 is focusing on strength (with plenty of mass accruel on the side), he's setting himself up for success compared to Joe #2 who decided to "fuck" strength and go for the higher reps from the start.

So to me, that excerpt makes zero sense. If anything, it's backwards Noone should be at all concerned with muscle fiber composition as a beginner in the first place. What matters in BODYBUILDING is that people start off developing strength for a few years before bothering with the higher reps at all.

Being a member of A LOT of various bodybuilding forums, I see this shit ALL THE TIME! An example would be a 190 lb 20 year old creating a thread asking about which "chest" exercises are best for mass. He goes on to say that he's lacking in the chest. Finally, about halfway down the page of advice, it dawns on someone to ask what his bench is currently at. "Oh, I'm benching 185 x 10 reps." Can you imagine why his chest isn't up to par?!

[Eric3237]

I agree. And a lot of this I think comes from this sort of physical therapy for beginners. I.E. beginners may get injured from lower reps so should have a foundation in that. There is SOME logic in that it is quite possible for someones strength to outstrip his tendon and ligament strength in the first months of training. BUT, as I've said before, this would fall under improper programing:

I.E. chances are if you try to hoist enough weight for low reps to tear something....you'll probably also fail on the lift in the first place or you didn't take time to learn proper form...any number of things.

Another point is that thinking that a new lifter is going to start out even being capable of hoisting enough weight to cause a significant injury shows a misunderstanding of what it means to be a beginner. Simply put, in the beginning you just aren't capable of generating that kind of intensity because of neural immaturity. The fact is most of the catastophic injuries happen with more advanced lifters.

In other words, while you need to be CAREFUL, injuries will most likely come from user error and not rep range. Muscle does help protect someone from injury, btw, but that would fall into the realm of actual contractile protein which you get more of from the lower rep range anyway. But people with the high rep high volume 10 exercise per muscle group mentality are more likely to suffer chronic overuse injuries and someone having a acute injury on a 5x5 (provide they don't run the 5x5 stupid).

[Kane]

Throwing in my 2 cents. I fell into the "higher" rep range only because I didn't know better and my partner at the time had been working out for years and took me under his wing and we did 3x8 for almost everything. After a year I went on my own and fell into the 10 rep range for a bit and shortly after that I joined the Forum and dropped into a lower rep range. I'd say I've gained the most off of lower rep range (5x5, 3x5, 5x3, 1x5 ) compound movements than anything else.

I've also heard my fair share of complaints from whinning bitches when it comes to bench. And I've seen alot of people get hurt because they automatically think they can go from zero to powerlifting, nobody wants to set a foundation and then they get injured and lose every gains they've ever made in life. Worse yet is when people ask a question about how to improve on this lift or what should I do to bulk up, only to have them look at you as if you've got the words "Fuck you" tatooed across your forehead.

Best story I've gotten about bench was some dinkwad telling me that bringing the bar any lower than 4 inches off your chest will fuck your shoulders....when I asked where he got that info from, he replies "It fuckin happened to me man, I'm fucked"....only to find out he was benching every goddamned day for a 5x10 on flat, incline and decline bench.....wait for it....then going back to flat for a set of forced reps with about 125% of his 1RM for 8 reps....wtf?

[hrdgain81]

Just as an example, I started lifting at 15 or so. I used a basic 4x10 on bench, and as I recall I went from roughly 4x10x135 to 4x10x165 in a few months time. (with no idea about diet)

After that I was introduced to the SF 5x5 and within the next six months I broke 205 (a huge milestone for a 16yo) and didnt stop progressing untill freshman yr in college when I Hit 315. But of course i had learned a few things about diet by then.