I've been doing 5rep exercises for years now. Passed 1/2/3/4

*PPPRRRRRAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAPP*

There's a section in Justin lascek's ebooks on the Texas method which details a few guys who did this. As far as I remember, one lost strength, one maintained and one got stronger. Try it out and see. Provided you're not doing about 10 sets GVT style I think the strength element should be ok for you.

File: qt.gif (919KB, 173x339px) Image search: [Google]

919KB, 173x339px

Also, i'm kind of out of the loop... we still believe in the whole sarcoplasm/hypertrophy thing right?

>>40054596
>one lost strength, one maintained and one got stronger
figures lol

>10 sets GVT style
nah just 3 sets, the plan is to basically just keep my same routine and boost reps to 10 and adjust weight to do so.

>>40054631
If you want to maintain strength why not do 1x3, 1x5 or something and then drop the weight and do your 10s? Just a thought

Ayy that's mah girl Kiki

>>40054552
I switched to a 10rep scheme on my overhead press and increase it 1lb a workout 3-5 times a week.

Has been working great for me so far, but I just started.

https://www.instagram.com/p/BPTiDIYlvvn/

>>40054552
Why not do both?

>>40054631
No, It's been debunked by a lot of medical professionals. A muscle with a larger diameter as a rule can exhibit more force than a smaller one. The main reason why some people with larger muscles can lift less is because the of the mechanics of the body (ie longer arms need more force) and the types of muscle fibers you've trained for (ie more reps develop more type 2 muscle fibers, less reps more type 1 or fast twitch as people call them)

>>40054552
for who is wondering: jellybeannose

>>40054809

>ie more reps develop more type 2 muscle fibers, less reps more type 1 or fast twitch as people call them

If you're lifting right you're training them all anyway, it's not like you hit 5 reps and suddenly activate hidden muscle fibers. A lot of it is neurological adaptation too - if a guy with big muscles that hasn't ever maxed out trains for strength he'll be lifting a lot of weight much faster than someone who trained only for strength from the beginning.

jesse norris, probably the goat powerlfter in the 198/205 weight class trains compounds with sets of 10, 12 and even 15

>>40054706
>>40054751
I dunno why not... i kinda figured that was a nono?

If I were to do... a set of 5 then 10 then 5, the mechanics of what is beneficial for doing 5 or 10 are only happening 2 and 1 (respectively) times in a set.

Unless I were to do 3 sets of 5 and then 3 of 10, or vice versa, but what ever one I did second I would be getting less out of because I am, to some degree, depleted from having done the previous round of sets

... or not?

File: esxyteens.gif (4MB, 300x300px) Image search: [Google]

4MB, 300x300px

>>40054957
>Unless I were to do 3 sets of 5 and then 3 of 10
oh yeah, and this would suck cuz id be at the gym for fuckin ever

>>40054892
>If you're lifting right you're training them all anyway
True but doing lower reps generally induces more tears in the type 1 fibers causing them to be strengthened more. I'm not disputing the fact that you pretty much achieve hypertrophy by doing either, just that the proportions are slightly different, as in proportions of muscle fibers.