Can someone explain the difference between hypertrophy and strength

>>34871517
bumping this thread. i want gains not strength.

>>34871665
Guess what fagtron, you can't build muscle without getting stronger.

If you're a noob just lift.

If you do stronglifts 5x5 you'll notice that it becomes 3x5 just like SS after a while anyway. The idea is that you get strong and muscles are a side effect of this.

>>34872010
No. SS and Stronglifts are meme routines. Ever notice how people on brosplits end up looking good after about a year while people on SS look like fatasses after a year? Do a brosplits.

>>34871517
Popular gym wisdom states the following:
- few reps with lots of sets and high weights builds strength (common examples are 5 sets of 5 reps, i.e. 5x5)

- medium sets medium reps with medium weights give maximum gains (e.g. 3x8)

- medium sets, high number of reps with light weight gives resilience without making too many gains (e.g. 3x15), this is often used by girls who don't want to "get big"

Why is this true, you ask? I doubt anyone will give you a great answer.
Is it actually true? Probably, at least for the strength part (i.e. lift heavy weights if you want to get better at lifting heavy weights). Some pro bodybuilders do high reps with (relatively) high weights and swear by it, others don't.

source: 10+ years lifting

>>34872022
>what is diet?

hypertrophy comes from total volume, strength comes from lifting heavier weight.

assuming every set is done to failure (ie, you've selected weight heavy enough that you can't do one more rep), 3 x 8 would produce the same hypertrophy, less than 8 x 3.

the reason the most common routines are 3-4 x 8-12 for hypertrophy and 3-5 x 3-5 for strength is because doing 12 x 3 would take forever and be extremely exhausting / near impossible. so instead, people reduce total weight, sacrifice strength gains, and do low sets / high reps for mainly hypertrophy.

>>34871665
I want autism not aspergers is what you meant to say

>>34872062
>assuming every set is done to failure (ie, you've selected weight heavy enough that you can't do one more rep), 3 x 8 would produce the same hypertrophy, less than 8 x 3.

fuck, i meant to say would produce the same hypertrophy BUT LESS STRENGTH GAINS than 8 x 3

File: image.jpg (244KB, 1008x1008px) Image search: [Google]

244KB, 1008x1008px

At the end of the day, as a natty training for strength/size are pretty much two sides of the same coin, you can't have one without the other. While you can train for CNS adaptations, which will help strength, the primary thing that will build strength, will be building muscle. Think about it, you never see a strong as fuck powerlifter that's small. You also never see giant bodybuilders that are weak as fuck.

As for rep ranges, studies show assuming the exact same total volume someone doing lower rep ranges will build just as much muscle as someone doing higher rep ranges. Higher rep ranges advantages are purely being able to hit more volume in a smaller amount of time. Lower rep ranges will cause more CNS adaptations and strength gains, but it will take much more time (rest in between sets) to hit the same total amount of volume.

The only way you should train differently as a bodybuilder for aesthetics rather than as a powerlifter is you should do lots of accessories on areas you want to focus on being more aesthetic, but that's really it, either way you need to just focus on progressive overload constantly adding more volume/weight

5x5 is strength

3x10 is gains

If skinny faggot just lift. If stalling while intermediate faggot do 3x10

>>34872126

Is the endurance gain just a factor of high reps working the cardio vascular system? Or does it actually affect muscle development?