Is there any advantage to 5x5 over 3x8 for the basic lifts (bench,

strength

>>42552223

>5x5 = 25
>3x8 = 24

5x5 = for winners who want to be strong
3x8 = for shitters who want to do shit just to tell people on the internet they did shit

>>42552223
Shit I meant 8x3. 3 sets of 8 reps.

>>42552223
You're using a heavier weight. Thus, you will get good at using heavier weight.

That being said, weightlifting is a lifelong game and you will likely end up working in all rep ranges at some point. Don't get hung up on which is "better", just pick one and do it until it stops working.

>>42552249
3 sets of 8 reps is 3x8

>>42552223
you can lift more weight with less reps thus get better adaptation

2x10 or 10x2 is 20 reps in total but you can do 10x2 with much heavier weight

>>42552223
8 triples or you're a pussy.

>>42552272
This m8

Heavier weight = bigger gains

All day, every day, until you die.

So 5x5 = less reps per set = heavier weight = more gains?

>>42552272
So 20 sets of 1 half rep is the best for strenght training?

Plebs. Mix both and just do 3x5

>>42552338
half ref = half results. get a clue, moron.

>>42552223
Depends. There has been some research that indicate as far as hypertrophy goes reps/set doesn't matter much especially when going to (or near to) contractile failure. Which would imply either the number of sets is more when volume (load*reps*sets) is matched such that you reach near failure per set.

As far as performance/strength. It would seem that peak strength is improved more when training in lower reps and heavier weights. However performance at a lesser load with higher reps seems to improve when training at that load and rep level.

End of the day you'll probably benefit mostly from mixing up but should tailor your program to your goals.

>>42552325
yes because you'll be getting more overall volume. not only are you doing more total reps, but you'll be using heavier weight

>>42552382
this is literally worse than both options

>>42552270
>>42552249
"bigger unit" x "smaller unit"
it's the opposite for dates: day-month-year

>>42552223
5x5 on compounds
4x8 or 4xf on iso

I don't even worry about sets x reps no more. I just pick a weight and lift it until I can't anymore, then move on to breathing reps, followed by forced reps, followed by forced eccentrics, then partials, then isometrics

all in one set

so just do that

File: maryana Naumova3.jpg (96KB, 1080x1080px) Image search: [Google]

96KB, 1080x1080px

>>42552223
>This will never be you

>>42552223
>doing 5x5 at all

Why the fuck aren't you doing 3x5 + AMRAP?

>>42552223

It doesn't matter and you're wasting your time worrying about it. Pick a set and rep range and bust your ass at it until it stops working.

sets * reps * weigh = volume
5 * 5 * x = 25x
3 * 8 * x = 24x

first option makes more sense to build strength because of more volume.

5*5 takes forever to complete. You need to take 5 long ass rests because you're lifting so heavy

You can compelte 3*8 in a third of the time i'd take you to do a 5*5 and get similiar hypertrophy results

>>42554395
Yeah but you lift baby weights. Never gonna make it.

>>42554435
DYELs tryhards are a thing /fit/ will never have a shortage in

File: 1502907160763.png (732KB, 926x460px) Image search: [Google]

732KB, 926x460px

5x5 is Starting Meme shit. If you wanna look good do 4x10.

Holyfuck the broscience in this thread