# size



## callumgoodfello (May 26, 2011)

Everyone I train with in the gym always say do 10-12 reps for size and do around 5 reps for strength! But I always fort the stronger the muscle the bigger so shouldn't you train for strength if you won't size. I always spend hours looking the best way to train for lean muscle gains and feel lost because there's that many things on the Internet by people that don't even train!


----------



## switch (Jan 5, 2011)

Your muscles are split into 2 different types of fibres one responds well to high reps and the other low, so for sheer size you should be stimulating both types of fibre, so do one session with high weight low reps 3 - 6 and one session of lower weight and higher reps 8 -12.


----------



## Itchy Nips (Jan 4, 2010)

food, food, food. wont get any size without food lol

a lot of people respond to different types of training, you will just have to try different routines and find out what suits you.


----------



## callumgoodfello (May 26, 2011)

Thanks for the advice bin eating like a mad man good clean food to!

Would u recommend training everything twice a week the with them to different rep range ?


----------



## milzy (Aug 9, 2010)

some people have loads of strength with hardly any muscles & some people pack on lots of muscle easily but are not all that strong.


----------



## Andrew Jacks (Sep 29, 2010)

There are many roads to the same destination but all of them require you to exhaust the muscle and hurt it, then allow it to repair, how you go about this is 100% up to you, people will only ever express a preference, in fact it is not about the reps but how far you are willing to cross the pain threshold which is more important


----------



## oj0 (Apr 11, 2011)

Andrew is spot on. Really, it comes down to training intensity - i.e. how hard you work the muscle. You can do this with less reps and a heavier weight or vice versa, but obviously there is a limit to how light you should go.

Personally I respond best with 4-8 reps, or 10 at the very most. Any more than that and I feel my intensity suffers and I always have more left in the tank. A heavier weight for less reps leads me to exhaustion quicker although this may not work for you.


----------



## kernowgee (Jan 30, 2011)

Andrew Jacks said:


> There are many roads to the same destination but all of them require you to exhaust the muscle and hurt it, then allow it to repair, how you go about this is 100% up to you, people will only ever express a preference, in fact it is not about the reps but how far you are willing to cross the pain threshold which is more important


BB in a nut shell


----------



## grantinerfe1436114737 (Oct 29, 2010)

tbh I've never seen so much improvement in my body mass but it all changed when I started a strength routine It's all gone through the roof in half of the time


----------



## JohnEvo (Apr 7, 2011)

grantinerfe said:


> tbh I've never seen so much improvement in my body mass but it all changed when I started a strength routine It's all gone through the roof in half of the time


do you mean you saw better improvements in mass when you started a strength routine? or worse?


----------



## grantinerfe1436114737 (Oct 29, 2010)

JohnEvo said:


> do you mean you saw better improvements in mass when you started a strength routine? or worse?


much better and only lift 3 days a week. and I am not saying it's being easy as It gets tougher every week but that's when you grow


----------



## customfitness (Jun 5, 2011)

I would argue this. The more muscle mass you have the more strength you have as well.


----------



## barsnack (Mar 12, 2011)

for compound lifts (deads, squats, bench) use low reps and for all additional exercises use higher reps, im doing this now since ive read alot on alternating the two muscle fibres


----------



## scotty10 (Jun 7, 2011)

callumgoodfello said:


> Everyone I train with in the gym always say do 10-12 reps for size and do around 5 reps for strength! But I always fort the stronger the muscle the bigger so shouldn't you train for strength if you won't size. I always spend hours looking the best way to train for lean muscle gains and feel lost because there's that many things on the Internet by people that don't even train!


Yer you can get confused reading everything on the Internet, good advice here tho!

I'd say also everybody is different and peoples bodies respond differently. Me especially!! I'm gaining now but it took me a while, after trying all the advice I found my own way, by trying different things in the gym each time, I found my arms only respond to high reps and more sets, but my chest, low reps low sets and just two chest exercises!?

I think you just av to get in there an see what works for you sometimes.


----------



## stavmangr (Nov 25, 2008)

So many people believe that getting stronger with lower-rep, PURE anaerobic work is the key to getting bigger. It does get you somewhat bigger, but primarily in the myofibrils. Those are the actin-myosin pairings inside the muscle fibers that produce force. BUT that's only half of the fibers' growth potential...

The other BIG hypertrophy producer--and the one many scientists believe is the dominant one as you'll see in a moment--is the sarcoplasm, the energy (endurance) fluid in the muscle fiber that contains, glycogen, mitochondria, ATP, etc. That's why the biggest bodybuilders are 2A fiber dominant--the fibers with BOTH power and endurance components...

Longer tension times cause sarcoplasmic expansion; heavy weights and low reps cause more myobifrillar growth. You need both for ULTIMATE muscle size, but your goals will determine which one you focus on. Here is what researchers Vladimir Zatsiorsky, Ph.D., and William Kraemer, Ph.D., recently discovered:

"Mostly MYOFIBRILLAR [actin-myosin pairings] hypertrophy is found in elite WEIGHTLIFTERS...

whereas SARCOPLASMIC [endurance fluid] hypertrophy is typically seen in BODYBUILDERS."

That's why many scientists are now saying that sarcoplasmic expansion is the biggest key to muscle size--and why short rests between sets, or longer tension times are so important for building ULTIMATE muscle size...


----------



## Big Kris (Aug 25, 2009)

stavmangr said:


> So many people believe that getting stronger with lower-rep, PURE anaerobic work is the key to getting bigger. It does get you somewhat bigger, but primarily in the myofibrils. Those are the actin-myosin pairings inside the muscle fibers that produce force. BUT that's only half of the fibers' growth potential...
> 
> The other BIG hypertrophy producer--and the one many scientists believe is the dominant one as you'll see in a moment--is the sarcoplasm, the energy (endurance) fluid in the muscle fiber that contains, glycogen, mitochondria, ATP, etc. That's why the biggest bodybuilders are 2A fiber dominant--the fibers with BOTH power and endurance components...
> 
> ...


hmmmmmm looks like some one copyed this from some where :lol:


----------



## Wevans2303 (Feb 18, 2010)

I tend to only come to conclusions on anything nowerdays based on personal experience, just find what works for you.

Since I started training whatever anyone has preached to me, the opposite has proven to be the case for me, so now if i get preached something as if it were gospel I will stick to the reverse.


----------



## cikko (May 25, 2011)

stavmangr said:


> That's why many scientists are now saying that sarcoplasmic expansion is the biggest key to muscle size--and why short rests between sets, or longer tension times are so important for building ULTIMATE muscle size...


So it took scientists to carry out lots of tests to tell us "holding weights develops strength"..... :laugh:

:whistling:


----------

