Well /fit/ ?
Images are sometimes not shown due to bandwidth/network limitations. Refreshing the page usually helps.
You are currently reading a thread in /fit/ - Fitness
You are currently reading a thread in /fit/ - Fitness
Well /fit/ ?
>>34848996
It's actually 3x8.
>>34848996
3x8-12
/thread
>>34848998
its between 8 and 12 so 3x10
>>34849006
Why not 5x5?
Does it matter if you do curls 3x10 and squats 5x5 for example?
More volume = more hypertrophy
More weight = more strength
15x3 would be perfect but it's a little ridiculous
>>34848996
3x10 for size
5x5 for strength
>>34849027
wait so bigger muscles dont automaticly mean bigger strength? that seems highly plausibel
with that logic bodybuilders would be weak and skeltals would be strong
>>34849033
well that explains why Arnold cant lift shit and mr. skeltal is the strongest on earth
>>34848996
3X10=30
5X5=25
Fucking hell man how do you not know this yet? I'm surprised you even know how to make a thread.
>>34849042
>>34849035
Ebin shitposts ;^)
>>34849035
amount of muscles=/=strength.
>>34849035
Strength and size are very closely related and you can't gain strength without some size (and vice versa) but it's possible to train directly for size at the expense of maximum strength gains.
3x8-10 is objectively better because rippefag does 5x5 and all he trains are fat t-rexes who can squat a lot
>>34849085
What if you're body has a tendency to skinny-legged curl-bro mode?
I want to be more of a fat t-rex who squats a lot.
>tfw
>>34849107
squat more
>>34849107
I'd be sad too with those narrow shoulders.
>>34849035
It's almost like cell size and cell density aren't the same thing you fucking idiot
>>34849111
>squat more
That's what I'm doing faggot.
>>34849118
then do it more
>>34848996
Depends on the goal. Fewer reps per set means you can go higher in weight and this will work more towards strength.
A rep range of 10-12 is better for Hypertrophy.
>>34849116
What? Are you talking about hypertrophy and hyperplasia by any chance?
Because muscle hyperplasia is actually pretty rare. The only things you get from training is CNS adaptation and muscle hypertrophy.
>>34849126
OK. New routine:
>AAAAAAx
>A = 50x5 squats (quit your job, your new job is squats now, fag)
>>34849085
>objectively
>>34849141
looks good breh
>>34849052
ok, so, stick with me here... Why not take the 5 from the 5x5, and the 10 from the 3x10, and make 5x10?
>>34848996
3x10 warm up>3x8 up weight>3x5 up weight>3x3
>>34849132
When will this social media fad will end?
Shit is getting too ridiculous know. That woman is just an exaggeration.
>>34849137
>What are sarcomeres
>>34849147
>>34849141
Not trying to troll here, but the idea of that post is correct. Many sets of low repetitions are godly for strength gains.
>>34849042
never said that retard, just saying one is better for one thing and the other is better for something else, obviously you need big muscles to lift heavyweight and you'll get big muscles if you lift heavyweight
>>34849160
What are those?
>>34849153
>That woman
>woman
>>34849170
FUCK THE EDUCATIONAL SYSTEM
REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE
>>34848996
>use a shit ton more weight with 5x5 and nearly the same volume
do people actually do 3x10 on things that arent accessory lifts?
>>34849186
"i've been lifting for 2 months and am still getting linear progression, thanks mark!"
that's you
Squat 5x5
GHR 3x5-8
Press 5x5
Pull Up 3x5-8
Barbell Curls 3x5-8/Lateral Raise 3x8-12
Deadlift 5x3
GHR 3x8-12
Push Press 5x3
Pull Ups 3x5-8
Power Clean 5x3
Bench/Pendlay Row 5x5
Front Squat 5x5
Hammer Curls/DB Flies 3x8--12
A bunch of face pulls every day, massive single sets, multiple big sets, or pause stuff if I'm bored
>>34849161
>Not trying to troll here
It's all good. If I'm usually working 5x5, how would I go about adding sets?
E.g. say I stall and want to try a different number of sets but still 5 reps? I guess I decrease the weight in order to be able to complete the sets, but will this help strength? Maybe that's a stupid question.
>>34849199
i dont understand. youre suggesting 3x5 or something? that wasnt one of the options anon. are you retarded?
>>34849213
oops i mean 5x3
I do 50x5 pushups every morning
fuck you all idc what you say
>>34849211
Volume drives strength. It doesn't have to be super heavy to do so (although how heavy depends on the person and a bunch of factors).
>>34849132
Thanks, asshole. I just got fired.
100 reps should be ideal each day. Here's my routine
100 push ups
100 sit ups
100 squats
10km running
Every single day.
>>34848996
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JFZWM-_JNhQ
This Alan Thrall video is all you need to know. Started to plateau on Squats and OHP while doing 5x5. Switched to 3x10 + 1x20 for a few months, and now just recently switched back to 5x5. It's like having noob gains all over again. Plateau has been completely broken.
>>34848996
itt: 2-day/week perma dyels with garbage routines
>>34849213
5x5 is good for pure strength, like what's in SS and SL
3x10 (with last set to failure if you want) is good for hypertrophy/aesthetics
you'll still obviously gain mass and definition on 5x5 especially if you're still getting your noob gains, but if you're looking for a more aesthetics-based routine low set high rep is better
>>34849268
Ebin x'd
>>34849290
what are your OHP stats?
>>34849132
Who is this and is there more?
>>34849290
>a few months
Wow I wonder why
>>34849290
>untamer strength
terrible logo
>>34849035
The type of work changes the type of adaptation. Perhaps you've heard about slow twitch and fast twitch muscle fibers?
As it happens, that's a pretty big over simplification, but it works okay for this.
Doing high intensity work, taxing muscles to the limit of their work capacity, forces the muscle to adapt by transforming fibers into fast twitch ones (and improving the ones already there).
Doing moderate intensity work that tests your muscular endurance (but not, primarily, your cardiovascular endurance), your muscles adapt by making more fibers into slow twitch fibers. As it happens, slow twitch fibers are much much larger than fast twitch ones, and get larger the more they're improved.
If you go to relatively low intensity work ("low intensity" here means "without much resistance", even if it's actually intense in other senses) that tests your endurance, instead of doing much to the muscular fibers, instead builds more blood vessels into the muscle, and improves the heart and lungs.
Now, in fact, even the high intensity work improves cardiovascular function some, and the low intensity work can even cause a little bit of strength (work capacity) adaptation.
>>34849320
eva andressa
>>34849336
its actually fast-twitch fibres that are the large ones - and the ones with the largest capacity for size increases.
>>34848996
I have a question
Why do some programs have 3x5? Sounds like very little
>>34849352
Beginners need very little volume to progress.
>>34848996
3×10 is pretty fucking thick dont know if u can stick it inside a vagine even
5×5 is about average which is ok i guess
>>34849027
>>34849027
>More volume = more hypertrophy
>More weight = more strength
Incorrect
>>34849261
Holy guacamole that's odd, I just got promoted.
>>34849336
If you're interested in the details:
What makes fast twitch fibers fast is that they have a lot of "myofibrils", the actual unit of muscle that causes them to move. These are reddish, which is why fast twitch fibers are redder. If you add more myofibrils to a muscle, it doesn't get much bigger, because they're fairly dense things that don't actually make up a lot of cellular volume.
Slow fibers have an extra large dose of basically everything else that goes into a normal cell, including these big storage chambers full of oxygen and sugars for powering multiple movements without needing to be resupplied from blood. This stuff (called sarcoplasm) isn't very dense, and so if you add more, it requires the muscle fibers to literally get bigger.
Actually, If I remember correctly, in my physiology class they said, "The current science is that your muscle fibers are actually the type the are from your birth. White fibers will always be white. Red will always be red. But if you train muscular endurance a lot, the 'fast twitch' fibers will still become more like endurance fibers than those of another person. But it's not a completely closed question, and more research may change our understanding."
>tfw I can bench 185 x5 but can barely eek out 135 x10
666
>>34849290
farmers walk seems like such a fucking waste of your grip load
you could be doing something useful like deads or weighted chinups or rows or even fucking shrugs
also your video is literally about
>muscle confusion
>>34849395
>physiology class
>learn difference between red and white
>recess bell rings
>i'm a lanklet so tetherball master race
>>34849348
I was about to call you wrong, but then I realized you weren't, then I was about to throw my old textbook in the trash, then I realized that no, that's exactly what it said.
That's what I get for trying to put that up from memory.
>>34849352
>>34849352
Training for hypertrophy can get as low as 3 repetitions per sets with heavier weights
>>34849407
Try doing them.
They're an incredibly useful exercise for a lot of purposes.
>>34849132
In the one with tits she looks like Benedryl Cucumbergash.
>>34849352
If you tried it and felt like you could do more you should've used more weight.
>>34849455
But why 3x5 not 5x5? It's the same amount of reps in a set but less sets
Someone post the image of all the rep ranges and benefits, from CNS training to strength conditioning to hypertrophy to endurance.
Sets of 3, 5, 6, 8 are all well and great for heavy compounds if you control the variables right.
Depends on the muscle.
For legs I did 15~18 reps for 3 sets, upper body 12~15 reps.
You all are dumb fucks.
Do 3x3 for one workout, and then next time you do the same workout do 5x8, do two of the 5x8 days for every 3x3 day
>>34849462
Why 5x5 and not 10x5?
At some point you have to make a call between more volume and more intensity. If you're trying to train frequently and at relatively high intensity, 3x5 is a good place to make that call.
I do 5x2 then 3x3 for my compounds increasing weight each time.
I do 3x10 for everything that isn't part of the big 4.
I'm in the 90th percentile in my gym
is 5/3/1 too slow for beginners?
>>34849462
3x5 is so that your noob gains last longer. If you want your noob gains to last even more, you could go to 3x4, 3x3, 2x3, 1x3 or whatever repxsets that allow you to keep increasing the weight.
That or gradually build up volume with the same weight so that you gain CNS adaptation and work capacity.
>>34848996
Nigga, there's no reason to pick one. You SHOULD use a variety or reps and sets ranges during your workouts.
For example during my workouts I normally use
3 X 8
3 X 12
3 X 10
3 X 5
5 X 5
8 X 8
10 X 10
It all depends on what objective you have in mind and what type of exercise you are doing (Strenght, isolation, compound, hypertrophy)
>>34848996
Both (aka Smolov base mesocycle phase 1)
Week
>Monday
>70% 9x4
>Wednesday
>75% 7x5
>Friday
>80% 5x7
>Saturday
>85% 3x10
>>34849526
Generally.
I mean, you can run it and it'll probably work for you, but the expected progression is written around someone who can't always even make monthly PRs. Beginners tend to find themselves doing an absolute shit-ton of reps.
Which can be good for beginners but still generally calls for more frequency than 5/31 gives.
>>34849549
maybe newbies would benefit from progressing weekly until each lift stalls, back off 10% and then start 5/3/1 proper.
>>34849148
I did 7x7 for a while...last set was always murder.
3x5 tbqhwu senpai
>>34848996
8x8 gironda
>>34849319
12 each hand
>>34849397
thats cause you get shit endurance
thats why 3x10 is better than 5x5
>>34849492
fake
>>34849531
i just mix them around a bit
or when ive already been in the gym for 2 hours i usually dont do many 3x10's anymore but usually 3x5 or 5x5 depending on how much energy is left
>>34848996
When I was in Judo, we lifted on saturdays, but sensei just wanted us to be durable.
1×50 was an absolute bitch
>>34849006
I'm convinced it's one guy on /fit/ that /threads all his posts. I bet you suck your own dick, too. Gross.
>>34848996
both
>>34850790
its the best solution though being durable
who /4x12/ here?
>>34850933
Present
>>34849245
Pushups are all about endurance
>>34851015
i've not been doing it for long, started with 10
>>34851081
>OHP
>Each hand
Pick one
Fucking google the movement if you don't know what OHP is.
>>34848996
4x10, but 3x10 can be accepted
>>34851098
Overhead press I guess?
you do that with dumbels too
3*10 makes you aesthetic.
5*5 makes you fat.
I know which I'd choose.
ITT: Way too many fags thinking that volume is just the total amount of reps done and not weight x repetitions
>>34848996
And the winner is....
3x5 compounds + 3x8-12 accessories (depending on exercise)
3x5 is a faster progression than 5x5 and 3x10 = more gainzzzzz in shorter time
The lack of volume in 3x5 is easily compensated by doing compound lifts where each lift hit a lot of muscle mass and adding some reasonable accessory exercises.
/thread
>>34848996
6x10
I think 3x10 is best
>>34849067
Amount of muscles doesn't vary...
>>34849035
look at this imbecile.
30 and 25. What do I win?
>>34851143
It is though. I think you're confusing it with intensity.
>>34851763
>>34851763
>It is though. I think you're confusing it with intensity.
From Practical Programming for Strength Training, 3rd ed.
"Volume is the total amount of weight lifted in a workout or group of workouts:
repetitions x weight = volume"
k
>tfw this thread is filled with a bunch of weaklings
I do 5x20 because 5x20=100. And that's more than 3x10 and 5x5
>tfw im furking jacked
>tfw im so strong women don't want to fuck me anymore
>tfw im going to die alone
>>34851882
4relz or trolling?
>>34851895
4reals.
>tfw I look like a god
>tfw women are scared of me reking they're vag
>tfw i still cri evry tim
>>34851959
why not post a pic to prove it
>>34852042
>>34848996
Almost exactly the same. 3x10=30, 5x5=25. Less weight used for 3x10 makes it pretty much equal when you calculate the volume. With 3x10 your form will most likely go to shit tho.
>>34852042
I mean, I'm better with a pump on. But this should do. People told me I should compete
>tfw I look better than 99% of /fit/
>tfw I'm twice as stronger than any of you faggots out there
>tfw I still fall asleep alone every night
>tfw nobody loves me
>>34852106
>tfw nobody loves me
I wonder why
>>34852106
I just got a nice kek buddy
>>34852106
Where did u hide ur lats?
>>34848996
Some say one it's sarcoplasmic hypertrophy and other myofibrillar hypertrophh, making 5x5 smaller but "harder" muscles. I don't give a shit, tried both and just didn't see much difference
5x5: Faster strength gains
3x8: Faster muscle gains
I do both, squat, deadlift, pullup, rows, bench and ohp i do 5x5, 3x8 for everything else, except calves, abs and forearms, i do 2x15/failure
Compounds on 5x5
Isolation accessories on 3x10
Come at me brehs
Why not just do 4x7? That's God tier.
>>34852121
yeah, me 2 :(
>>34852124
Whats a kek?
>>34852207
say that to my face and ill fcking reck you m8. I'm twice as stronger than you could ever be
main lift 5-6x3
secodary compound lifts 3-4x6-8
isolations 3-4x10-12
strength drives hypertrophy
since i've incorporated this into pplxpplx i've had best gains ever
I'm doing bench press, overhead press, and squats 8x3, and deadlift 5x3.
I've been progressing nicely with them. I also do some isolation exercises for those muscle groups, about 3x8, after those.
>>34849035
>>34852058
C O O L L E R
O
O
L
L
E
R
>>34848996
Doing both is ideal
3x10 with short rests will help you recover during workouts as well as between workout days
5x5 at heavy weight will help you gain strength, although 3x5 might be more appropriate for certain lifts
In any case, you want to vary rep/set ranges, and sticking to 3x10 and 5x5 only is just limiting your progress potential
>>34852519
are you suggesting that hypertrophy is always the same and the only difference is endurance and strength? Because that's wrong, and the site reporting that graph is misleadingly citing unrelated publications
If you're going to do fewer sets, you'll up weights. Changing both __will__ matter as per hypertrophy goes
>Captcha: select all the eggs
>>34852632
I was just about to question the validity of that table. Thankyou anon.
Switching from greyskull to Lyle McDonalds, hoping for more gainz. That table scared me.
>>34849319
Plateau it was at 105x5, now it's at 135x5
>>34849326
Why not? Do strength training until plateau, then did volume until plateau, now doing strength again until I plateau. Then I plan on switching back to volume.
8x16 you fucking DYEL natty piece of shit.
>>34852632
studies were probably done in untrained (or inexperienced) individuals
and almost everything works for them
otherwise eery strongman's, powerlifter's and bodybuilder's routine is wrong according to that table
>>34852632
>>34852669
>>34853073
the truth is hard
reg park did 5x5
>>34849132
>Some people in this thread cannot tell the difference between this trap and an actual female
i do all kinds of reps. my routine includes one 3x5 one 4x6 one 4x8 and one 3x10 exercise for each muscle except arms.
>>34849540
that's written in reps x sets actually, but the concept still stand
>>34849407
He does strongman, and teaches strongman to his clients, so farmer's walk is actually understandable.
>>34848996
in the first week you do 3x8, in the second 5x5
>not doing 5x10
Fucking plebs
So, to summarize this thread, the answer to the age-old question of "Should you do 3x10 or 5x5?" is a resounding "Yes".
>>34854960
Maybe
>>34852539
C O O L L E R
O
O
L
L
E
R
>>34849531
10x10
man i haven't done gvt in 3 years
might go for few weeks just for fun and change from usual power-hyp routines
>>34856835
German volume training is dank as fuck
>>34848996
>doing anything according to strict routine at the gym
Enjoy your plateau
>>34849480
what about sets of 4 and 7
>>34848996
3x10 is for steroids
5x5 is for noobs
>>34848996
8, 5, 3, 5, 8, as many as you can 15-25.
And different weights (calculate with %)
Fuck your simplism.
>>34849540
Jesus Christ, 10x3 at 85%?
How can that be done?
>>34859471
80% seems doable. 85% is tiring. Now 90-95 is hard :)
>>34848996
3x5 for beginning strength training
5x5 for intermediate strength training
5x3 for beginning strength training with a technically difficult move (something like power cleans were form breaking down is a serious concern)
3x8 for beginning hypertrophy
4x8-10 for intermediate/advanced hypertrophy.
its recommended that if you are novice enough for linear progression to apply to you, that you do strength training, and then switch to hypertrophy when you switch to progressive overloading.
there is no real "right" answer.
>>34859497
I'm only at 300 lbs for ATG high bar squat max and my workout today was 3x5,5,4 at 85% (255 lbs)
I can't imagine doing another 7 sets
>>34859522
how long do you rest between sets?
>>34859522
Are you a boy or a girl?
>>34859546
3 minutes
I bumped up the weight 5 lbs and doubled the rest interval today. I had a pretty good workout compared to my last one, 250x5,5,4
>>34859546
Please teach me periodization, oh wise one
how can one estimate their 1RM based on something like 3x5 or 5x5 max?
like I *barely* completed 115 5x5 OHP today. wanna go in next time and test my 1RM, but I have no idea what a good estimate is
>>34859556
I'm a 144 lb 5'8" guy who deadlifts 315x10 conventional and my squats are the same depth and stance as Matt Ogus'
>>34859573
I would estimate your max at 155 lbs, no less.
3x5 for cns gains
3x8-12 for mass gains
5x5 is good if you do axbxa
>>34859592
that's pretty good, right? I'm 5'11" 150lbs
>>34859602
Yeah, I consider my squats and deads very good.
The other guys at my Uni are half squatting 2 plates, while I squat 255+ for twice their range of motion.
I've maxed on deadlift at 420 lbs and 370x5
>>34859602
155 lbs would be quite good for overhead press. That's over 1x BW
>>34859567
rest moar = muscles less fatigue = can preform more total work = receive more total results.
just avoid training to failure on your early sets, because that will zap all the atp out your muscles and they will fatigue too soon.
also if you train to failure with large amounts of volume, you will be battling recuperation issues and dealing with "overtraining"
if your mindset is that you can't have too much volume, then you should also realize you can't have too much rest.
that is my 2 cents of broscience, so don't take that with more than a grain of salt.
>>34849462
>>34849498
>>34849529
1x5 is the best way to train CNS desu, 3x5 is good because it is still training CNS + muscle tearing, 5x5 onwards is the same but with marginal gains. Law of diminishing returns apply with working out as well.
>>34859658
1x1 CNS training master race
Goml
>>34859702
I actually agree with that. 5 sets of 1 with progressive overload is best for CNS training.
Don't forget to thank back snap gorilla if your form sucks like supermong.
>>34849384
>Incorrect
Incorrect
>>34856835
>>34857131
GVT > Anything else.
Its very taxing on the central nervous system apparently, so I only do it for a month or two at a time.
>>34852235
>ctrl+f
>4x7
>only 1 result
CMON fit, step it up
4x7 master race, are you even trying to lift?
>>34859758
>>34859522
This guy here;
Can confirm 4x7 has its place-
I've been progressive overloading leg curls with 4x7
Shit is dank as fuck
>>34859521
I plan to start on general fitness and maybe aesthetic gym stuff. Was thinking I might just do running or something. If I want a decent upper body workout do I need to do all sorts of stuff or is there 2 - 3 simple things I can do to get a decent all around upper body workout?
>egg captchas
>>34859811
Dips, lateral raises and pull ups
>>34859850
this is pretty decent advice.
i would recommend decline over dips, as progression is easier, and weighted dips can fuck your shoulders.
you can also do flat bench with an arch so you are getting that decline action.
it is a shit routine, but you will hit basically every upper body muscle group with that.
except your spinal erectors and core.
OHP would hit that a little bit. or jerks or push press.
clean and jerk would be really good for trap development
5 x 5 and 5 x 10
5x5 of a major compound lift, followed by 3x10 of all accessories.
>>34859945
>5x10
absolute
MADMAN
A
D
M
A
N
>>34859962
why not alternate?
like for example, when i do my shit-tier routine:
5x3 power clean
5x5 bench
3x5 ohp
3x8 calf raise
3x8 rear delt flies
5x5 bent over row
3x8 shrug (last set to failure)
5x5 deadlift
4x8 bench
3x10 squat
4x6-8 pull up
4x8 bent over row
3x8 side lateral raise
...one day i do 5x5 binch and row, and the other day i do 4x8
get them strength AND mass gains.
>>34859919
>>34859850
I appreciate the advise.
These seem pretty simple, I like the idea of declines more than dips since I think I'd have a hard time doing dips since I'd have to go to exhaustion to do 3 of them probably.
Do you think a couple more things would round it out a lot more? Last time I did gym stuff I did it with my brother and we'd go through like, 20 things and it kind of put me off it so I'm trying to keep it simple this time so I can stay a bit more motivated.
I follow the Cube Method for strongman, so I alternate my main lift (squat, press and dl) for reps, speed and max weight, plus 3x8 on my accessories, with my last set being 8+, as I'm only hitting that body part once a week, anyway.
So far I'm liking it. Getting sore, getting in and out of the gym pretty quickly and I don't feel extremely taxed all week.
>>34849462
Because despite the fact that we often talk about an "x rep max", the maximum you can lift in a work set decreases as you add sets, because you don't recover 100% between sets.
5x5 inevitably means lower intensity (working weight), but much higher volume. It's a little better for mass and a little worse for strength.
To clarify, I'm comparing these set and rep schemes for a beginner.
Once past beginner stage, of course you'll very rarely be doing any work sets with the maximum weight you can do with that SetxRep scheme. For instance, I do a 5x5x85% day and a 3x5x75% day, and a "power" day where I do 1x5x100%, 2x3, or 3x2.
(The percentages are based on my 5 rep max, not, as is usually the case, my 1 rep max.)
>>34851107
Sorry sempai, but OHP on its own means with a barbell. You want overhead dumbbell press for the one with dumbbells.
That's how language works, you're going to confuse people if you use words strangely.
>>34851763
People use intensity for a lot of different things. Mostly though, if they're usually it in a technical way, they mean weight relative to their max on that exercise.
>>34849200
what does GHR, doesn't ring any bell. Also, I would had a calves/triceps move here and there.
>>34852106
Tippity top
>>34859850
>>34859919
>>34860064
Also, when you say declines you mean barbell ones or one with the bar? Which would be better? I imagine barbell since it would help exercise the muscles in my shoulders more, no?
>>34860335
I'm not sure what you mean.
We're talking about laying on a bench where your feet are positioned higher than your head, and pressing a barbell above your chest.
Wouldn't alternating be better?
>>34860264
Glute/Ham Raise. Requires special bench, like a back extension followed by a leg curl. Good stuff.
>>34849184
>fuck the educational system
>educational system
I'm under the impression that 5x5 is for strength and 3x10 is for hypertrophy, is that a meme?
I do my squats and diddys and weighted pull ups/chin ups 5x5 and everything else 3x10 (including OHP and bench)
0£ - 45¥ = 0 fucks
>>34860709
Okay, my vocab got mixed up too a bit. When I googled it I only got dumbbell stuff coming up (one in each hand) laying the way you described.
>>34848996
5x10 anything less is for skellies
>>34848996
Print this out and stick it on your fridge.
Pick a new rep range each day. It's good for you :)
aaah i see
ok, so, follow-on question. As we know, weightlifting is good for losing fat, more muscle = more metabolism = burns more fat, etc. So if FAT LOSS is your primary goal, which is better?
>>34861614
Fixing your diet.
The difference in calorie expenditure between the two forms of training is so small as to not be worth worrying about and you're not building a ton of muscle on a deficit regardless of which you choose.
>>34860851
can anone confirm?
>>34860851
I'm a literal retard, can someone explain this shit for me?
>>34861739
Legit enough.
Although the percentages do vary a bit from person to person - generally the shorter and weaker a lifter, the higher the percentages they can use while the taller and stronger a lifter is the more they'll struggle at the same percentage.
>>34859629
desu you're a manlet so it's not that great but still bretty good considering what a skelly you are
>>34861755
Prilepin's table (top one) is designed for Olympic weight lifters to determine their optimal training rep ranges and total volume , based off of a percentage of one rep max.
The bottom table is the same thing, but instead adjusted for powerlifting- the difference being that powerlifting movements more dependent on slow twitch muscle fibers than the explosive Olympic movements which Prilepin designed the table for. This means that for powerlifting movements, more overall volume needs to be used, whether at low intensities (such as 50%) OR at 100% 1 rep max.
Powerlifting programs use periodization- higher volume in the beginning of the program to build a base; gradually decreasing volume and reps and increasing intensity until a new max is attained.
Another variable that the powerlifting table takes into consideration is RPE- rate of perceived exertion. 8 RPE means that the perceived exertion is 80% of the maximum- this is a different metric from intensity, which is merely a percentage of total weight.
>>34861830
Being 5'8" is barely any different from being 6'.
There are guys with shorter femurs and longer torsos than me who are 6'2" and are MUCH more built to squat.
I have a shorter torso and long femurs.
My squat range of motion is 28 inches. Not even kidding you. I just measured it.
>>34861876
Have you tried telling your boyfriend 4 inches barely makes a difference?
>>34861892
Huehue
Srs, for all practical purposes, 173 cm / 183 cm * 100%= 94.5%
I'm 94.5% the height of my dad, for example. He is 6', I am 5'8".
>>34861755
The so basically, if you were to look at this chart you could apply it to your program.
Let's say you're doing Upper/Lower split 2x per week. You have two leg days. You choose to squat each day.
One day you could choose to go 'easy', so you do 8RPE. The other day you go 'hard'.
You can choose from there what rep and set range OR intensity (percent of max) you would like to use on each day.
>>34848996
5x5 for learning proper form
>>34848996
>implying you could even use a 3x10 inch penis
I'd go for the fy by fy ding dong desu oh pee.
>>34849035
How fucking dumb can you be...
>>34862564
Please mind your language and the insults. This isn't /b/.
>>34852284
>Whats a kek?
You are
>>34863023
kek means laughing on 4chan
>>34859362
Disagree.
Done both on steroids.
Got just as big on both.
Did both natty, seemed to get just as big on both.
The thing that mattered most was total volume, strength progression (be it through increased reps or weight), and frequency of training. This is what the end of the thread should be.
>>34863042
Also diet.
>>34852106
3/10 quite bad troll
>>34848996
>not just going to failure from exercise to exercise for the same muscle
>>34852106
not him but
>>34852121
>>34852124
>>34852207
>>34860294
>>34863054
>all these insecure fatasses saying he doesnt look good
i wonder how fat you guys look then, nothing wrong with that dude
low bodyfat
visible abs
nice biceps
many girls prefer this over Mountain-type dudes you know that right?
i do 5x5, 4x6, 4x8 and 3x10 for back and chest, one exercise per set/rep scheme. for shoulders, i do ohp 4x6, dumbbell press 4x8 and lateral raises 4x8-10. for arms, i do one 4x6 and one 3x10 exercise. For legs, since I have big legs thanks to childhood obesity + soccer, i just do 5x5 squats, 4x6 leg curls and 4x8 lunges. i think my routine cover all essential sets and reps, gives me enough volume, and i hit each muscle 2 times a week. but if i would pick only one rep/set scheme, i'd pick 4x6.
>>34863090
i'm fat and i rather have my body than his.
>>34863104
kek, that other dude definately looks better
>>34863123
not in clothes.
>>34863142
its not about clothes dude
i seriously do not understand why you rather be fat instead of fit when you browse a fitness board
>>34863210
i rather have a manly, broad shouldered physique than spoopy skelly girly frame with little to no muscle mass.
>>34863227
but you are fat, you dont even have bisible abs
and that other dude doesnt look like a girl, wtf man
If I had to choose between fat and not fat with visible abs and nice biceps I would chose the ones where girls get wet af when liking your abs
>>34863239
true dat. i'm pretending i wouldn't pick him over me because i'm mad jelly.
>>34863249
ok now i get it, well i dont judge other people who are working on themselves and frankly only retards do that
I like 4x10 desu.
>>34848996
5x5 is better for nattys, frauds do well with 10-15 reps or even more.
Sauce: Ricardo Piano, Mike O'Tren and Jason Blaha have all said so. It's odd that Blaha agrees with the bro scientists but there you go.
Oh yeah, Skip La Cour and Jeff Willet endorse the 5-6 rep range as well, and they're two of the best known fake nattys of all time. I'd check out the Max-OT program if I were you. Willet swears by it and I'd say he's gotten decent results, fake natty or not. Unlike openly cheating fraud Piano, fake natty Willet actually got his pro card.
>>34863430
what is a natty? i keep seeing that word
>>34849148
I do 4×10. Works for me
>>34863794
1 being warmup?
>>34863796
Nah
>>34863440
Natural
You should do 5x5 for the core compounds exercises and 3x10 for assistance/isolation, whatever if you train for bb or strength. You will have more volume with 5x5 anyway because more weight and additional warm up sets.
>>34863035
no it means lol in orcish :)
>>34850800
/thread
A few friends of mine all have weird routines with shit like
3x15
5xF
5x10-20
they're lal othermodes, I just wonder if thats some bitchboy routine or just illiterate people doing whatever seems to be working ?
>>34864225
>implying ottermode is a bad thing
>>34849085
I can squat a lot and never do 5x5, I might do 7x5 or 10x3 but that's maybe because i'm not fat
>>34849148
>>34848996
>>34864225
I do 3x5 for most lifts with 3x10 for some specific ones, normally using weights really close to my 1RM
But I do everything as a shitton of compounds so I guess they all get hit a lot?
I get fairly good results idktbh
i do 5x3 for basic compounds, 3x6-8 for additional copounds and 3x8-12 for isolations (sometimes up to 15 reps for stulff like laterals, etc)
i just don't like 3x5
with 5x3 recovery time between sets is a bit shorter, and i feel it's beter for strength progression
>>34863104
time for some fork put-downs tubby
Hope this helps as a rough guide
>>34864767
The scale is way exaggerated, but direction-wise, it's correct.
>>34864693
i don't see myself as a failure.
From a purely health and ageing-oriented perspective, and discarding and hypertrophy appreciation, is more beneficial strength or endurance training? I've heard (wikipedia) that endurance training can lower your test
>>34865063
Yes it can. Even professional distance runners know that.
Heard about the Oregon Project?
Galen Rupp, Lagat- lots of distance runners are on low doses of testosterone.
Rupp was on the juice at age 16.
Too much endurance training causes massive amounts of cortisol release, which thereby lowers test.
>>34849160
you mean sarcoplasmic reticulum Bish and that shit Aint proven
>>34865120
great in my schedule my PT put 20 reps on almost anything
I don't care about hypertrophy but for fuck's sake I don't want lower test
