Resistance training load does not determine hypertrophy • Hacker News Board

Re: Resistance training load does not determine hypertrophy

#261

Post by cindyllm » Thu, Jan 01, 2026, 4:58 PM UTC

worldsavior wrote: post #224

randysalami wrote: post #195

I just do light weight nowadays with my strength training. It’s easier mentally. Rather than push myself to go higher on bench, squat, and deadlift, I stick to 1 plate for bench and squat and 2 plates for deadlift. Every single time. Instead of increasing load, I increase rep amount and focus on my form. Honestly, I still find myself sore after most workouts and the simplicity is nice. I’m 25 for reference.

You won't see any progress if you won't push yourself. It shapes your mentality, and running away from work is what will keep you at the same place. Soreness is not a sign of progression most of the time. Bump up the weights, don't run away.

[dead]

Re: Resistance training load does not determine hypertrophy

#262

Post by machomaster » Thu, Jan 01, 2026, 4:58 PM UTC

samiv wrote: post #219

unaindz wrote: post #216

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While technically true getting very close to failure is only useful if you don't need optimal results and lack the time to do more volume. The damage by going to failure will make high volumes maintained over time impossible. Ideally you would leave 1-2 possible reps. I think it's important to train to failure to know your body and learn to gauge your reps to failure but other than that and very little time per week…

Volume itself is meaningless. The only thing that matters is the intensity of the workout. In fact you want the maximum intensity with minimum volume to have less wear and tear and more recovery while maximizing the growth stimulus. First intensity. Then recovery. These two dictate the volume. If volume exceeds recovery injury and burnout will follow.

Doing dumbbell raises to failure with 5repmax will bring more pain, discomfort and wear/tear than doing the same exercise with 20repmax.

Re: Resistance training load does not determine hypertrophy

#263

Post by teecha » Thu, Jan 01, 2026, 5:00 PM UTC

nzeid wrote: post #55

elevaet wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What about the old gym adage "training to failure is failing to train" - is there any physiological basis for this, or is it mental, or just a myth?

It's definitely way more nuanced than that. You have to approach exhaustion to get the body to eventually build strength. But you need to carefully time your rests/deloads and handle plateaus with more volume.

i definitely agree it is more nuanced! might not have communicated it well that in the context of untrained people and beginners that these guidelines will work for quite a while and most of the nuance applies much more once you get past the easy beginner gains

for example, if someone new starts with low weight to work on proper technique and form, and adds weight each week they will continue to both get stronger and to gain muscle

i'd imagine the average person who is casually lifting might not even get to this point and could easily spend a couple of years before really hitting a spot where the nuance is more important

Re: Resistance training load does not determine hypertrophy

#264

Post by MegaDeKay » Thu, Jan 01, 2026, 5:03 PM UTC

CuriouslyC wrote: post #226

MegaDeKay wrote: post #222

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Indeed. It is really just tension x time under tension within a sensible rep range (probably around 5 - 30 reps or so). Menno on Youtube has a bunch of videos on this, the link below being the latest one. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rmOBmTZARq8 Basically work the muscle harder and get more jacked. It isn't that hard. Full body workouts are also great for this reason: you can hit a muscle more times per week and b…

Time under tension is an imperfect measure, it's just less bad than other measures we could use. Sort of like lines of code in software engineering. Given that, saying it's "just TUT" is misleading. It could turn out to be that the brain is coordinating hypertrophic biochemical cascades in muscles, and TUT is just a fairly reliable method for inducing this. I was a competitive powerlifter and trained around pro bodyb…

Well... I didn't say "time under tension". I said tension x time under tension. It's the integral. So high volume 50-70% can equate out to medium volume 70-85% for hypertrophy, all other factors being equal.

I'd guess that drugs come into the equation if you were training around pro bodybuilders and that unlevels the playing field between each person because of how much they might have been on. And amongst the pro's, you're going to hit those genetic Mentzer-like freaks that can somehow grow on 45min 3x a week.

100% agree that drive and intensity is key, and there is more than one way to get big from a program POV.

Re: Resistance training load does not determine hypertrophy

#265

Post by worldsavior » Thu, Jan 01, 2026, 5:03 PM UTC

randysalami wrote: post #246

worldsavior wrote: post #224

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You won't see any progress if you won't push yourself. It shapes your mentality, and running away from work is what will keep you at the same place. Soreness is not a sign of progression most of the time. Bump up the weights, don't run away.

I got to 425 max on deadlift. My ego isn’t tied to being stronger, just strong enough to be healthy and fit. I think it’s unhealthy to view this as “running away” and honestly I look good and by putting less focus on it, I have more focus for other things in life I can optimize.

You do what's good for you, but in my opinion, what you suggested isn't the best progression scheme.

Re: Resistance training load does not determine hypertrophy

#266

Post by machomaster » Thu, Jan 01, 2026, 5:05 PM UTC

nezi wrote: post #111

AstroBen wrote: post #34

> Healthy, recreationally active but untrained young males Yeah this is why. Anything you do as an untrained person is going to get you newbie gains. It's just really easy to improve initially. Doesn't mean it'll work after the first 6 months

This paper isn’t saying that it doesn’t matter what program you do, it’s saying that other variables, not directly related to the method of weight training, matter more. It also assumes that you can extrapolate data from one individual training each limb with a different program to if that individual performs either program on both limbs. Maybe there are carryover affects to the lower load limb that you get from trai…

Except that the paper did not compare different training methods. The used the same method since it has been long established that training to failure anywhere in the 5-30 reps (perhaps even more, the upper limit has not been established yet) gets the same results from the hypertrophy point of view.

So basically the study's results are "there are individual differences in how people respond to training". Wow, such news, so research, much insight. /s

Therefore study itself is dumb and the misleading title makes it even worse.

Re: Resistance training load does not determine hypertrophy

#267

Post by teecha » Thu, Jan 01, 2026, 5:08 PM UTC

thatcat wrote: post #69

nzeid wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's definitely way more nuanced than that. You have to approach exhaustion to get the body to eventually build strength. But you need to carefully time your rests/deloads and handle plateaus with more volume.

Where could I find more information on proper set timing?

I like Mehdi's description over here as a good starting point:

https://stronglifts.com/stronglifts-5x5/intermediate/#rest-p...

Has a paper from 1976 but this seems in line with what I've read elsewhere

basically, 2-3 minutes is probably good for most of your lifting, you could go to 5 minutes if you are doing your heaviest lift of the day

this is also a reasonable way to make sure your workouts aren't going to take 3 hours at a time

some people really mix max this though if they're focusing on super heavy lifts. i remember being at the gym and watching people take 8-10 minutes between sets when they were putting up 400-500lbs on a squat. they also arrived before me and weren't done when i was leaving and, i'm assuming, they were interested in powerlifting competitions

i've actually started looking at reactive training system with mike tuchscherer who has a lot of interesting things to say about training, rest times, etc. been startin to build his stuff on RPE and fatigue percentages in to my training and it has already been super insightful and helpful

https://store.reactivetrainingsystems.com/blogs/default-blog...

Re: Resistance training load does not determine hypertrophy

#268

Post by Insanity » Thu, Jan 01, 2026, 5:08 PM UTC

senko wrote: post #197

formichunter wrote: post #190

Why is this article showing up on New Year's Day like the flock of newbie gym customers attracted to the gym only to quit 30 days from now? Every year without fail. Let's ignore this article for a moment. Overall factors that REALLY matter building muscle: 1. Consistency - Working out each muscle group at least once a week....every week. 2. Diet - Making sure you are consuming enough protein in your diet, approximate…

This is a physiology research article published in a physiology journal, not a Tiktoken influencer peddling "get ripped fast" schemes. In an ironic twist, you then proceed to peddle your own. In a single paragraph you added more contentious "advice" than in the entire article you're dismissing. > Stop reading these studies thinking there is some optimal way! It's just hard work over time. "Hard work" and "learning ne…

To be charitable to both the article and the OP - his advice of “hard work over time” is still good advice.

I think many people tend to get stuck in premature optimization, which can take the fun away and thus you end up quitting. I did that a few times, so it might be a me-thing.

Nowadays I exercise 4x/week without really worrying about a strategy or about optimal protein intake etc.

But then again, nowadays my goal is just to live healthy rather than gain strength.

Re: Resistance training load does not determine hypertrophy

#269

Post by machomaster » Thu, Jan 01, 2026, 5:09 PM UTC

acoard wrote: post #104

safety1st wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are a few issues with taking every set to failure, the most important being that it will substantially increase your risk of injury. It sounds great until you consider compounds like the deadlift that can ruin your back if your form is bad, and by definition, going to failure means your form will be imperfect at some point. There are lots of macho powerlifters out there with permanently ruined spines who will p…

What about longer rest periods? For example if I wait 1hr between sets I can do full weight again without dropping down weights with a 2-5min break. In fact I can get multiple more sets in and significantly increase my total volume if I spread a workout over a day (which is easier with WFH). Any thoughts on this? Is there not enough muscle fatigue with this approach?

You might also be interested in reading about Pavel Tsatsouline's "grease the groove".

Re: Resistance training load does not determine hypertrophy

#270

Post by machomaster » Thu, Jan 01, 2026, 5:14 PM UTC

vjk800 wrote: post #135

torben-friis wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>While one might think "I can do 50 reps with low weights" The caveat is that you need anaerobic training. Low enough weight and it’s cardio, you don’t get giant legs by walking to failure for example.

I don't know. All cyclists I know seem to have massive thighs. And these are amateurs who don't do any kind of strength training, just hours and hours of cycling every week.

Squat training is a must for cyclists. Heck, there are youtube videos of a German competition (squat as many times as you can with your weight on the bar) with high-level competition (powerlifters, strength athletes, OLY lifters). It was overwhelmingly won by the cyclist.