/fit/ ABSOLUTELY BTFO
http://jap.physiology.org/content/early/2016/05/09/japplphysiol.00154.2016
t. Reddit
>>37231686
myofibrillar hypertrophy and sarcoplasmic hypertrohpy are 2 different things,also
Compound 2-6 reps
rest 3x8-15
>>37231686
Most of /fit/ will post that exact image at you. It's not new information senpai
>>37231770
most of /fit/ is also not that retarded to post a screenshot of a jpg as viewed from a smartphone.
That article has been published over one year ago.
>>37231821
Clover is shit at PNG transparency, senpai.
>>37232866
I do believe that degenerates using mobile apps to browse the internet shall rot in hell, anyone here have the same image without alpha transparency.
>>37233142
>>37231821
that awful font kerning always triggers me
>>37233142
So the gist is 6-8 reps is the best for both Hyper/Strength.
Or am I reading this wrong?
>>37231686
Oh wow it's like I'm really browsing /fit/ from a year ago. Old pic is old newfag. Also /r/fitness is a joke. Even every other fitness sub on leddit makes fun of what a bunch of noob dyel fatties you are. At least claim to be from somewhere not as retarded like /r/advancedfitness or /r/bodybuilding. Even Misc. ffs.
>>37233373
No no no, youre forgetting, between 6 and 8 nothing happens.
>>37233168
What's wrong with it?
>>37233373
No. The point is rep range doesn't effect hypertrophy. Just progressive load and going to failure does. For strength 5 reps are best. So the 5 reps builds size and as well as strength thing which /fit/ says, turns out to be true and not a meme for fatties on SS.
>>37233419
>between 6 and 8 nothing happens
some days/weeks ago some anon posted first the meme graph about that and then another anon posted the actual academic paper with a nice graph showing that, as a matter of fact, between 6 and 8 reps you make no gains
/r/equesting at least one of those two images (I could reverse search in the archives starting from the meme image)
>>37233557
>between 6 and 8 reps you make no gains
I've been doing 5-8 reps my whole life and look better than 90% of /fit/ but hey whatever floats your boat
>>37233851
No, it's 7 reps, exactly, that's worthless. If you do 5, you're good. If you do 6, you're good. If you do 7, you had BETTER fucking do 8 or the entire set is wasted.
Someone tldr for me because I really don't give a fuck
>>37234074
Doing fewer reps with heavier weight is usually better than doing many reps with lighter weight.
