Pumping iron: Lighter weights just as effective as heavier w

Shit research like this gets published all the time. Nothing new.

Also, how much can you bench, OP?

>>37948642
>Shit research

Because it didn't provide the result you expected?

File: Rep-Ranges.png (42KB, 1008x1008px) Image search: [Google]

42KB, 1008x1008px

>>37948614
The point the study makes is that muscle failure is what leads to muscle growth, regardless of rep range. Bench press 1RM was also higher in the low rep group. Which means it fits neatly into the pattern established by other previous studies, pic related.

>>37948694
well yeah, i dont like anything that disagrees with me.

>>37949779

Near muscle failure, not necessarily to muscle failure. Which is one very slight advantage in heavier training - the higher the % you're working with, the further away from failure you can be and still get the benefits.

>>37948614
This isn't new nor is it really even challenging anyone other than SS autists on /fit/.

For maximal hypertrophy you use a weight that allows you to work within a high rep range with strict form and constant tension.

If anyone actually thinks they'll get big doing 3x5 they're fucking retarded.

>>37950432
>No difference in hypertrophy from high rep, mid rep, and high rep ranges
>You'll never get big on 3x5

>>37948614
Really?
Because anything less than 70% does nothing for me in terms of strength.

Yeah this is misleading. The study found pushing muscle to failure mattered. We know if you force muscles to do something they struggle with, they'll adapt to that work. Anyone who has done volume training will know you can grow on it. I've regularly gotten gains on things like 5x20 or 4x25 for calves, forearms, abs, lower back, etc... When I was in military, we transformed our bodies with high rep push-ups and sit-ups. On crew team in high school we just had bars in cement filled coffee cans for weights. We would do long circuits with them nonetheless, and got bigger and stronger.

Your body will do what it needs to do. This isn't news. And this study isn't necesarily game hanging for bodybuilding either.

>>37948614
Proper form and low weight provides gains... who would've thought?

>>37950432

Problem is "high rep" in this article means 25 reps.

>>37948614
>Working to muscle failure is the key.

We all know this.

Also I rather only work out for about 2-3 hours a day lifting the heaviest weights I can handle and not 8+ hours a day lifting soccer mom weights.

The point of the heavier weights is to hit that muscle failure quicker so I can build muscles faster.

File: 163972_121136724618559_100001666961188_156287_3158012_n.jpg (54KB, 720x514px) Image search: [Google]

54KB, 720x514px

I believe it. I mean look at Ronnie repping with these 25lb dumbbells you fucking retard

>>37950455
let us see your SS gains lmao