# 15 reps rest pause (total 40-50 reps) vs standard 4x8



## smallboy (Jun 13, 2013)

for rest pause training, first set 15 reps for progressive overload then many sets of 2-5 reps every 15-30 sec rest between set.

lets say we do 100kg for 15 reps. 115kg for 8 reps.

rest pause 40 reps x 100kg = 4000kg volume

4x8. average 24 reps because we get tired doing next sets like 8-6-5-5. so 24 reps x 115kg = 2760kg volume.

rest pause training better as volume is for mass gain and it has progressive overload as well?


----------



## Fadi (Dec 14, 2010)

smallboy said:


> for rest pause training, first set 15 reps for progressive overload then many sets of 2-5 reps every 15-30 sec rest between set.
> 
> lets say we do 100kg for 15 reps. 115kg for 8 reps.
> 
> ...


 You've missed one critical factor in this whole equation above....your CNS. First your aim ought to be the exhaustion of linear progressive overload, after that you could introduce some periodisation, and after that comes the rest-pause and descending sets, and all these methods that serve to intensify your workouts.

So basically what I'm saying here is that if the ladder has ten steps on it before one reaches the top, the rest-pause methods and methods like it would be right at the top of the ladder. It's best to take one step at a time, and it's always best to start right at the bottom and work your way up to the top than to start at the top and stumble backwards.


----------



## Ultrasonic (Jul 13, 2004)

smallboy said:


> for rest pause training, first set 15 reps for progressive overload then many sets of 2-5 reps every 15-30 sec rest between set.
> 
> lets say we do 100kg for 15 reps. 115kg for 8 reps.
> 
> ...


 Most people believe that for volume to be effective you need it to be above a certain intensity thteshold. Mike Israetel talks about it needing to be for weights no lighter than 60% 1RM for example. There is also an argument for metabolite training ('going for a burn'), but for this the concept of volume is no longer really relevant.

So one factor in your example would be how close to failure someone would be at 15 reps. Another would be whether you could do more total reps at the same weight by taking longer rests between sets, which I'm sure you could.

Another key point is that you want volume to progess over time - that's the real progressive overload you want to be focusing on for hypertrophy.


----------



## nWo (Mar 25, 2014)

The rest-pause scenario you've proposed sounds silly tbh, if you're talking about hitting 15 reps to failure and then rest-pausing numerous times until you hit 40-50 reps. Be much more sensible to go for a heavier weight and rest-pause your way to 15-20 reps total - so, hit failure at 10 reps initially, then a couple of rest-pause sets. The progressive overload would come from total reps - so, if you did 10+3+2, meaning 15 reps total, last time, then this time you should try and rest-pause your way to 16 reps. When you can manage 20 in total, increase the weight by 10%.

If it was the above vs 4x8, it's all down to preference and what works for you. Also bare in mind that you have to train to balls-out failure to make rest-pause really work.


----------



## swole troll (Apr 15, 2015)

just take your 10RM and hit 10 clean reps then rest pause the reps up until you hit 20 then up the weight on the next workout

its a brutally effective method for gaining muscle and it takes v little gym time

so why dont more people use it? its fu**ing hard

doing for example 1x12 then 3x2 then 2x1 all without taking the barbell off your back, just slugging back lung fulls of air is mentally challenging

it makes for a great change of pace, especially for those that have been working with higher intensities like 5x3 or 5x5

but just like any training method it will need cycling in and out as no rep range, intensity or number of sets works indefinitely


----------



## Dltdz (Jul 2, 2016)

I'mNotAPervert! said:


> it's all down to preference and what works for you.


 This, as long as you keep progressing either ways are fine. It wont make that much of a difference long term.

Calories surplus is the thing that you should worry about for mass gains


----------



## nWo (Mar 25, 2014)

swole troll said:


> just take your 10RM and hit 10 clean reps then rest pause the reps up until you hit 20 then up the weight on the next workout
> 
> its a brutally effective method for gaining muscle and it takes v little gym time
> 
> ...


 I've used this on a PPL split for a few runs before. In and out of the gym within half an hour. One exercise per muscle per workout, best to use your 12RM though as per the "20 rep squat" routine.


----------



## u2pride (Sep 20, 2012)

it looks like DoggCrapp training.


----------



## smallboy (Jun 13, 2013)

just tested. 7x3 with 30 sec rest. and 4x8 with 2-4 mins rest.

i gain muscle faster using 7x3 with 30 sec rest.


----------



## Ultrasonic (Jul 13, 2004)

smallboy said:


> just tested. 7x3 with 30 sec rest. and 4x8 with 2-4 mins rest.
> 
> i gain muscle faster using 7x3 with 30 sec rest.


 Don't be daft, you can't possibly know that in the time since you started this thread.

You might end up with larger muscles after the workout with the former due to more 'pump' but that is not remotely the same as saying you gain muscle faster that way.

Occasional use of short rest periods is probably beneficial but I think for the vast majority of your training you'd be best served by taking long enough rest periods that it doesn't adversely affect the total training volume. That is, rest just as long as you need to recover to do the next set.


----------



## smallboy (Jun 13, 2013)

no, i dont compare muscle growth like that during gym or after gym. i compare is after rest for few days.

i did 4x8 for 3 weeks. and 7x3 for 1 week. after this and i rest for few days, can tell muscle growth by touching muscle already. after 4x8 for 3 weeks, got muscle growth but not so much. 7x3 gives more.


----------



## Ultrasonic (Jul 13, 2004)

smallboy said:


> no, i dont compare muscle growth like that during gym or after gym. i compare is after rest for few days.
> 
> i did 4x8 for 3 weeks. and 7x3 for 1 week. after this and i rest for few days, can tell muscle growth by touching muscle already. after 4x8 for 3 weeks, got muscle growth but not so much. 7x3 gives more.


 Not quite so daft but I'm sorry, the idea of judging muscle growth after one week of doing something just isn't possible. You'd have phenomenal genetics if you could!

Absolutely nothing wrong with experimenting with different options though, so long as you don't lose sight of the fundamentals of volume progression over time (via weight and/or rep/set increases).


----------



## Ultrasonic (Jul 13, 2004)

Thinking about it you may have been feeling a difference from an inflammatory response that hadn't fully subsided from the novel training stimulus. If it was this you'll probably find less of an effect the next time you try it.

Something like 7x3 with fairly short rests is a perfectly valid way to train BTW. For something like deadlifts in particular where it can potentially help maintain form at a higher weight for more total reps. I'd be tempted to try closer to a minute rest than 30s though I think.


----------



## smallboy (Jun 13, 2013)

10x3 1 min rest is waterbury's method. no harm trying either 10x3 or 7x3 with 1 min rest. i feel its much better than 3x8 or 4x8.


----------



## Quackerz (Dec 19, 2015)

smallboy said:


> no, i dont compare muscle growth like that during gym or after gym. i compare is after rest for few days.
> 
> i did 4x8 for 3 weeks. and 7x3 for 1 week. after this and i rest for few days, can tell muscle growth by touching muscle already. after 4x8 for 3 weeks, got muscle growth but not so much. 7x3 gives more.


----------



## smallboy (Jun 13, 2013)

Quackerz said:


>


 you can say this to this guy. he did 3-4 reps per set with 15 sec rest between sets. i tried his and it works better than 4x8 i usually do.

https://www.uk-muscle.co.uk/topic/240590-post-a-recent-picture-thread-vol-ii/?page=237&do=embed&comment=5576494&embedComment=5576494&embedDo=findComment#comment-5576494


----------



## Quackerz (Dec 19, 2015)

smallboy said:


> you can say this to this guy. he did 3-4 reps per set with 15 sec rest between sets. i tried his and it works better than 4x8 i usually do.
> 
> https://www.uk-muscle.co.uk/topic/240590-post-a-recent-picture-thread-vol-ii/?page=237&do=embed&comment=5576494&embedComment=5576494&embedDo=findComment#comment-5576494


 I'm not talking about rest paused training, I'm talking about you being able to tell that one training method is better than another after just one week of training.

It's bullshit. I can even smell it though the PC.


----------



## smallboy (Jun 13, 2013)

Quackerz said:


> I'm not talking about rest paused training, I'm talking about you being able to tell that one training method is better than another after just one week of training.
> 
> It's bullshit. I can even smell it though the PC.


 you go try it. i am on 2 week of 3 reps 30 sec rest. and still better than 4x8. i never get this kind of muscle growth in first and second week of 4x8.


----------



## Quackerz (Dec 19, 2015)

smallboy said:


> you go try it. i am on 2 week of 3 reps 30 sec rest. and still better than 4x8. i never get this kind of muscle growth in first and second week of 4x8.


 I'm calling troll with this guy.........


----------



## smallboy (Jun 13, 2013)

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19691365

Furthermore, in terms of chronic adaptations, resting 3-5 minutes between sets produced greater increases in absolute strength, due to higher intensities and volumes of training. Similarly, higher levels of muscular power were demonstrated over multiple sets with 3 or 5 minutes versus 1 minute of rest between sets. Conversely, some experiments have demonstrated that when testing maximal strength, 1-minute rest intervals might be sufficient between repeated attempts; however, from a psychological and physiological standpoint, the inclusion of 3- to 5-minute rest intervals might be safer and more reliable. *When the training goal is muscular hypertrophy, the combination of moderate-intensity sets with short rest intervals of 30-60 seconds might be most effective due to greater acute levels of growth hormone during such workouts.*


----------



## Quackerz (Dec 19, 2015)

smallboy said:


> https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19691365
> 
> Furthermore, in terms of chronic adaptations, resting 3-5 minutes between sets produced greater increases in absolute strength, due to higher intensities and volumes of training. Similarly, higher levels of muscular power were demonstrated over multiple sets with 3 or 5 minutes versus 1 minute of rest between sets. Conversely, some experiments have demonstrated that when testing maximal strength, 1-minute rest intervals might be sufficient between repeated attempts; however, from a psychological and physiological standpoint, the inclusion of 3- to 5-minute rest intervals might be safer and more reliable. *When the training goal is muscular hypertrophy, the combination of moderate-intensity sets with short rest intervals of 30-60 seconds might be most effective due to greater acute levels of growth hormone during such workouts.*


----------



## Ultrasonic (Jul 13, 2004)

Both short rest period metabolite (burn/pump) and longer rest period training to increase the total training volume at higher load have their place but the prevailing evidence based view is that the latter should be the primary focus of training to optimise hypertrophy. That is you can probably benefit from occasional metabolite training but it shouldn't be the bulk of what you do.

http://www.lookgreatnaked.com/blog/what-is-the-ideal-rest-interval-for-muscle-growth-implications-from-our-recent-study/


----------



## smallboy (Jun 13, 2013)

after all experiment, rep range is not important. only total volume, short rest and progressive overload affect muscle growth. i still gain muscle using 3 or 4 reps because of volume. my favourite one is 8x4 or 10x4 with 1 min rest now. and yes, calories surplus is big role.


----------



## Ultrasonic (Jul 13, 2004)

smallboy said:


> after all experiment, rep range is not important. only total volume, short rest and progressive overload affect muscle growth. i still gain muscle using 3 or 4 reps because of volume. my favourite one is 8x4 or 10x4 with 1 min rest now. and yes, calories surplus is big role.


 The major argument for longer rest periods is specifically because this allows total volume (under significant load) to increase. Keep experimenting to find what works best for you though.


----------



## smallboy (Jun 13, 2013)

Ultrasonic said:


> The major argument for longer rest periods is specifically because this allows total volume (under significant load) to increase. Keep experimenting to find what works best for you though.


 yes but 1 min rest can hit more reps if both finish at the same time.

like

10rm

9-7-6-6. total rest time: 9 mins. total time: 10 mins. total reps: 28 reps

4-4-4-4-4-4-4-3-3-3. total rest time: 9 mins. total time: 10.5 mins. total reps: 37 reps.


----------



## Ultrasonic (Jul 13, 2004)

smallboy said:


> yes but 1 min rest can hit more reps if both finish at the same time.
> 
> like
> 
> ...


 If that truly is your 10 RM and that is what you can do with the two methods then yes, you'd be right.

I did 7x10 squats on Saturday with 3 min rests between sets. If I tried doing that with 1 min rests I'm pretty certain I wouldn't be able to make it to 70 total reps.


----------



## Ultrasonic (Jul 13, 2004)

Looks like you're factoring in 2s per rep above? I'd suggest you slow down the eccentric part of your lifts a bit if this is what you do.


----------



## smallboy (Jun 13, 2013)

Ultrasonic said:


> If that truly is your 10 RM and that is what you can do with the two methods then yes, you'd be right.
> 
> I did 7x10 squats on Saturday with 3 min rests between sets. If I tried doing that with 1 min rests I'm pretty certain I wouldn't be able to make it to 70 total reps.


 impossible to do 10 reps using 1 min rest. i cant do it too. only 3-4 reps can use 8rm or 10rm with 1 min rest.


----------



## smallboy (Jun 13, 2013)

Ultrasonic said:


> Looks like you're factoring in 2s per rep above? I'd suggest you slow down the eccentric part of your lifts a bit if this is what you do.


 yes i use explosive concentric and controlled eccentric. each set of 4 reps take around 10 sec.


----------



## Ultrasonic (Jul 13, 2004)

smallboy said:


> impossible to do 10 reps using 1 min rest. i cant do it too. only 3-4 reps can use 8rm or 10rm with 1 min rest.


 Yes I understood that. I realise I missed a critical word out of my post above though. I meant to say I don't think I could do 70 total reps faster by taking 1 min rests (i.e. in less total time). With a small enough number of reps per 'set' I could obviously get to 70 eventually.

I do understand where you're coming from with what you're doing now BTW and it's certainly a valid approach to try. One thing to watch out for though is you don't inadvertently end up using lighter weights than you could. By using more conventional sets it is easier to gauge how close you are to a true 10 (or whatever) RM you actually are.


----------



## Ultrasonic (Jul 13, 2004)

smallboy said:


> yes i use explosive concentric and controlled eccentric. each set of 4 reps take around 10 sec.


 I'd be tempted to try a bit slower still. For something like a squat I'm sure you do anyway (the weight is too light if not), and for something like a bicep curl maybe experiment with a 3s eccentric. Just a suggestion.


----------



## smallboy (Jun 13, 2013)

Ultrasonic said:


> Yes I understood that. I realise I missed a critical word out of my post above though. I meant to say I don't think I could do 70 total reps faster by taking 1 min rests (i.e. in less total time). With a small enough number of reps per 'set' I could obviously get to 70 eventually.
> 
> I do understand where you're coming from with what you're doing now BTW and it's certainly a valid approach to try. One thing to watch out for though is you don't inadvertently end up using lighter weights than you could. By using more conventional sets it is easier to gauge how close you are to a true 10 (or whatever) RM you actually are.


 ok got what you mean.


----------

