Resistance training load does not determine hypertrophy • Hacker News Board

Re: Resistance training load does not determine hypertrophy

#161

Post by matwood » Thu, Jan 01, 2026, 10:48 AM UTC

vidarh wrote: post #158

raducu wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> not the mass used. Completely anecdotal, but when I was 18, in highschool, I trained in the gym in my hometown, supervised with a trainer, 12 reps per muscle group, very modest gains. I move to university, start reading a fitness forum where people were saying do max 6 reps if you want big gains. I also started supplementing with whey protein, and within 3 months the gains were spectacular, everybody noticed, I fel…

What do you consider gains? Consider that this paper looked specifically at hypertrophy (size), not strength. While they correlate, training for one or the other can be very different.. "Traditionally" the rep ranges recommended for hypertrophy has typically been significantly higher than the ranges recommended for strength, but the number of sets recommended is often also significantly higher, often translating to s…

> Consider that this paper looked specifically at hypertrophy (size), not strength.

I'm not sure where this idea came from that people do one or the other. Except for the advanced lifter, both will happen from either program. Show me a person who is really big and they are likely pretty strong as well (see Ronnie Coleman). Same with the other direction.

Re: Resistance training load does not determine hypertrophy

#162

Post by rocqua » Thu, Jan 01, 2026, 10:48 AM UTC

DiskoHexyl wrote: post #146

Age: 22+-3 AND with that weight to ffbm ratio not only untrained, but at least slightly (I’m being generous here) overweight. With these pre-requisites it almost doesn’t matter what kind of physical activity one does- the muscles will grow anyway. It’s when you are older and/or accustomed to some kind of physical training, that you really noticeably benefit from resistance training. And still, that ‘almost’ part does…

Are you perhaps reading a personal advice in a paper, disliking the advice, and then finding that due to the experimental design, it doesn't work on you. And then, rather than concluding the paper didn't intend to inform your personal routine, instead conclude that the paper was badly designed? Or to put it differently. Have you considered how many people live in a way you would never consider close to acceptable?

Because your points make sense but it feels like you are arguing against a bit of a strawman, or arguing for a mostly ideal situation rather than current reality?

For overweight and understrength people, is it not very valuable to know that they don't need the extra steps of resistance training to see real improvement in strength and fitness?

Re: Resistance training load does not determine hypertrophy

#163

Post by Leherenn » Thu, Jan 01, 2026, 10:48 AM UTC

matwood wrote: post #143

siddboots wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the total volume idea is more flawed than you realise. Pretty much everyone would be able to achieve greater volume, on any exercise, just by decreasing the weight, so your high rep caveat is covering up for quite a lot. This is true mathematically for an Epley style model for example.

> Pretty much everyone would be able to achieve greater volume, on any exercise I’m not sure this is true and it might be the opposite. Lactic acid will build up with light weight while trying to hit a volume number that will make it hard for people to finish.

Anecdotally, my gym had a "challenge" some times back where the goal was to achieve the max total volume in one set without pause.

I tried various combos of weight* reps, and in the end the optimum was somewhere in the middle because no matter how light the weight there was a limit for me at about ~150 reps.

In my case, the curve would be: total volume increases quickly initially at you go from max weight/1 rep to something like 20/30 reps, then something of a plateau as things equalise, then it goes down again as you reach the max reps threshold.

Re: Resistance training load does not determine hypertrophy

#164

Post by matwood » Thu, Jan 01, 2026, 10:50 AM UTC

raducu wrote: post #112

timr wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Perhaps there's some unmeasured influence, but this study was looking only at the difference between growth within subjects vs between subjects . If the subjects were all "newbies", then that doesn't explain the results. They're essentially saying that individual genetics explain the majority of the variation seen as a response to muscle stimulus in their test subjects, not the mass used, because the variation within…

> not the mass used. Completely anecdotal, but when I was 18, in highschool, I trained in the gym in my hometown, supervised with a trainer, 12 reps per muscle group, very modest gains. I move to university, start reading a fitness forum where people were saying do max 6 reps if you want big gains. I also started supplementing with whey protein, and within 3 months the gains were spectacular, everybody noticed, I fel…

> People who had enough breath left in them to chat in the gym simply did not gain as much as people I saw as training hard.

IDK. When I powerlifted the goal was to move the weight. I've almost passed out from heavy deadlifts, but was rarely out of breath. I also almost never chat in the gym because it's my meditative place, not because I couldn't chat :)

Re: Resistance training load does not determine hypertrophy

#165

Post by sethammons » Thu, Jan 01, 2026, 10:54 AM UTC

Moto7451 wrote: post #78

wswope wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That’s a Pl/Oly mindset rather than a BB/hypertrophy mindset. Totally valid advice in the right context. Long story short, failed reps get much more risky and problematic as the weight you’re lifting approaches your 1RM.

Exactly this. When I was in my best shape my deadlift and squat were in/on the way to 2.5-3x my body weight . You don’t want to fail that without a lot of help and safeties. Note for the uninitiated: That figure is not even impressive or competitive with competition lifters. This is just “guy who put in the time and work” numbers.

Look up lifts and weight multiples and a 3x weight deadlift is advanced to elite.

https://strengthlevel.com/strength-standards/deadlift/lb

Re: Resistance training load does not determine hypertrophy

#166

Post by n2y » Thu, Jan 01, 2026, 10:55 AM UTC

The study assigned different training regimes to different limbs of the same person. If you think their measured effects do not reflect your own experience, I'd be interested in your fitness status and your result when you do the same. Otherwise it sounds a little like you are disputing the study because it showed something different to your belief.

Re: Resistance training load does not determine hypertrophy

#167

Post by matwood » Thu, Jan 01, 2026, 10:55 AM UTC

Leherenn wrote: post #163

matwood wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Pretty much everyone would be able to achieve greater volume, on any exercise I’m not sure this is true and it might be the opposite. Lactic acid will build up with light weight while trying to hit a volume number that will make it hard for people to finish.

Anecdotally, my gym had a "challenge" some times back where the goal was to achieve the max total volume in one set without pause. I tried various combos of weight* reps, and in the end the optimum was somewhere in the middle because no matter how light the weight there was a limit for me at about ~150 reps. In my case, the curve would be: total volume increases quickly initially at you go from max weight/1 rep to so…

Great point. Personally I find lactic acid build up way more limiting for me than muscle fatigue. It's why I gravitated towards power lifting.

Re: Resistance training load does not determine hypertrophy

#168

Post by metalman » Thu, Jan 01, 2026, 11:00 AM UTC

I am afraid of trying to lift to failure. never once been in a gym, or trained for anything except marksmanship, but have alwayse been physical, with a lot of what I call "dirty lifts" in the course of getting things done,pushing 60 now. I do notice that after a stretch of realy hard work, and taking a day or two to rest and EAT, I will bulk, but nothing is by the numbers, except the day I took over the old blacksmith shop and we took the gentlmans anvil down, and lifted mine up, each of us grabing one end with one hand, my anvil weighs 460lbs, he was in his 80's and I was in my late 20's. I muscle everything around, steel, wood, round bales,but follow the philosophy of "just because you can, dosn't mean you should" which I believe is especialy true for realy big guys, because while you can build huge muscle, your cartlige and coligen is no better than an size small office guy with that florecent tan, where I have seen in the same frame, a big guy pushing 40, not moving good anymore, and foccused dweeb gettin his lunch zipps right through, doesn't even see the hulk. my point, if I have one, is that nothing counts, unless you can style it

Re: Resistance training load does not determine hypertrophy

#169

Post by DiskoHexyl » Thu, Jan 01, 2026, 11:08 AM UTC

rocqua wrote: post #162

DiskoHexyl wrote: post #146

Age: 22+-3 AND with that weight to ffbm ratio not only untrained, but at least slightly (I’m being generous here) overweight. With these pre-requisites it almost doesn’t matter what kind of physical activity one does- the muscles will grow anyway. It’s when you are older and/or accustomed to some kind of physical training, that you really noticeably benefit from resistance training. And still, that ‘almost’ part does…

Are you perhaps reading a personal advice in a paper, disliking the advice, and then finding that due to the experimental design, it doesn't work on you. And then, rather than concluding the paper didn't intend to inform your personal routine, instead conclude that the paper was badly designed? Or to put it differently. Have you considered how many people live in a way you would never consider close to acceptable? Be…

This doesn’t look like a particularly charitable interpretation of my comment, although my interpretation of the article isn’t either, so it’s only fair.

And no, I am not looking for a personal fitness advice in scientific research anymore (too late for that), but am rather trying to see its applicability to others, as per my understanding of those others around me.

Most people in the developed world aren’t 22-year old males. A significant part of the population is comprised of the elderly or middle-aged, a lot of those people have pre-existing injuries due to under- (too sedentary) and over-use (blue collar work, youth sports). Approaching physical fitness in those groups has its its own set of requirements and limitations, and I believe that in many cases resistance training is a more safe and efficient choice.

Not saying that the youth and children are unimportant, but typically they are already well covered by the organized sports and pt classes in schools and universities, unlike the adults.

My opinion is that the study is both badly designed (likely in a way to make it easier to implement) and is not applicable to the majority of the population.

Re: Resistance training load does not determine hypertrophy

#170

Post by samiv » Thu, Jan 01, 2026, 11:13 AM UTC

As a natty bodybuilder for over 30 years for anyone aspiring towards fitness and starting at the gym my most important advice is

"Put the phone away and bust some ass"

I see way too many people (the great majority) completely sabotage their training by putting the weights down when it starts to get hard and get on their phone.

When the weights get hard is when the real set begins. If you don't do the hard reps you deny yourself the stimulus required for adapting to overcome the stress, I.e the growth.