Has this not been common knowledge for a long time? The argument for high load/low reps has always been that it a) saves time and b) will increase your strength (vs. muscle size) more. Both of which are important factors, especially if you are doing strength training not for cosmetic but health reasons. The number of 8-12 reps to muscle failure has been promoted because a too low number of reps (too high load) seems not to induce as much hypertrophy and is bad for your joints, etc..
Resistance training load does not determine hypertrophy
351–360 of 371 posts
Re: Resistance training load does not determine hypertrophy
#352Earlier quoted context omitted.
these days your better of not reading that, probably. bunch of outdated and bad advice coming from that corner.
What do you recommend?
"Eat food, not too much, mostly plants."
Also probably move around a lot, doesn't matter how, ideally by finding something fun to do that involves moving around a lot.
Re: Resistance training load does not determine hypertrophy
#353Earlier 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…
2 reps in reserve is fine and far less painful, but you need to go to actual failure often enough to know where failure is on each set. I’m nerdy enough to suggest rolling a 20 sided die for each set, and on a 1 take it to failure it’s not that complicated and keeps your predictions honest. As I understand it taking a set near failure works reasonably anywhere between 5 to 30 reps, but 30 well controlled reps with go…
I mean if you're going "until I can't maintain proper form" is there seriously a risk that you're too far from failure to make real progress?
Re: Resistance training load does not determine hypertrophy
#354Earlier quoted context omitted.
>Every year without fail. >First published: 31 December 2025
I think the poster means that around this time of year these types of articles appear
Precisely. Also, noted yesterday the sudden appearance of TV commercials for gyms. That'll last about 2 weeks if memory serves....
Re: Resistance training load does not determine hypertrophy
#355Earlier quoted context omitted.
2 reps in reserve is fine and far less painful, but you need to go to actual failure often enough to know where failure is on each set. I’m nerdy enough to suggest rolling a 20 sided die for each set, and on a 1 take it to failure it’s not that complicated and keeps your predictions honest. As I understand it taking a set near failure works reasonably anywhere between 5 to 30 reps, but 30 well controlled reps with go…
I mean if you're going "until I can't maintain proper form" is there seriously a risk that you're too far from failure to make real progress?
It’s a nuanced topic.
If you actually can’t use proper form that’s already failure of one of the muscles you’re trying to train. However many people resort to improper form well before that point.
Further the risk isn’t just injury, using excessive weights you can’t properly train with can mean failure to provide proper stimulus to a muscle you’re targeting.
Re: Resistance training load does not determine hypertrophy
#356Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not just one reason, but I stopped because I more or less maintained my physique for 7-8 years afterwards (probably being in your 20s helps) and my life circumstances were in a goldilocks zone; my dad (a doctor) was adamant I'd destroy my heart with all the muscle mass I added. The thing that motivated me to start was the fact I was not very successful with girls and gaining 30 pounds of muscles in early 2000's Roman…
And this is incredible motivation for me. I’m in my 40ies, and have been unsuccessful with girls. Of course being in your 20ies helped because that’s when good stories start, and at 40 women are already taken, but I find it a decent explanation of the times I was successful or not and it’s worth trying again. I was very fit at 30 but never muscular, just a guy with 8 hours or random sports per week, so like you befor…
> And this is incredible motivation for me.
Two caveats: I'm talking about early 2000's Romania where it was quite rare to see really muscular men AND I was in my early 20s, I have no clue if men in their 30s or 40s get the same kind of attention, it was the shallow kind of attention.
By the time my 30s hit I was already married, however we did have a very rough patch where we were very close to divorce, I traveled alone, was part of an NGO and I think a lot of the young women there got a strong clue about how rough things were between me and my wife because I also got a lot of attention from women back then but then it wasn't because of physique - it was because I was their photographer and high status in the NGO and much higher net worth.
Going the traveling groups, I also did get quite a bit of attention, because there were a lot of single women in their late 20's and I'm sure a lot of them got this fantasy they would find their soul mate on such a trip and I was 100% not interested in anything romantic but I was very open to socialize. All sorts of un-intended "adversarial" techniques I noticed worked -- again my portrait photography hobby seemed attractive to the ladies, when I noticed one was too interested, I pulled away so she won't get the wrong idea, which made her even more interested, I also chatted up foreign women in the hostels because I was geniuinely curious about their background -- I had a long conversation with a hot, early 30s phd in fish farming and a young woman in our group started interrupting us by saying "You know, we've been together in this group for 3 days and you haven't spoken to me as much as you did to this foreigner, why?". I clearly remember I talked to a psychology major woman in the bus because I'm very interested in psychology and I did quite a few years of psychotherapy and I'm very interested in Schema Therapy. At some point we discovered we run in the same park and she invited me to run together. It was then that it hit me she probably had the wrong idea, but I felt it would be weird to say "that's great but I'm married" and I was in a headspace where if I wanted to I would have gone with her for a run regardless of what my wife thought about it, but I also got the feeling this young woman will not take it well if I said I was married, so I just started avoiding her. I noticed she tried even harder to approach me. Later that evening one of of the women in the group asked me "Oh wow, so I checked your facebook and you're married?". And I said, "Yes." . That young woman just blurted it out "But I asked you to go running together, why aren't you wearing your wedding band????".
The point I'm trying to make is I'm sure having a great physique is sure to be helpful even in your 30s and 40s and it will certainly set you aside, but there are other, more powerful tools to build attraction, alas, some quite manipulative (like social proofing, oblique approach, status, feigned low interest, push pull, triangulation).
I think it's very important to understand where you stand, where your target demographic stands, and where your competition stands.
If you're in an area where all the guys are super fit millionaires, you're not going to have much luck with the ladies there.
I was never in the pickup scene, and I've seen some terribly messed in the head men because of it (bitter redpill types), but I think there are quite a bit of spoken or not so spoken psychoevolutionary tricks out there great to know and take with a huge grain of salt.
Probably the biggest trick is no trick, but to actually be ok with yourself, empathetic, reasonable, have fun by yourself, explore, have healthy boundaries, but still generous, not have/display emotional baggage, basically present yourself as being what the kind of woman you want also wants.
Re: Resistance training load does not determine hypertrophy
#357Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is what I've found after 15 years of working out and athletics. Think of it this way: doing the same thing over and over again is what is proven to lead to workplace injuries. Doing the same thing over and over again in the gym is no different. I like to do a weight training as the consistent foundation, with a mix of heavy lifts, calisthenics, volume (bodybuilding) training and mobility training. Add in some yo…
Is there any evidence this is at all bad in the weight room? It isn’t repeated at enough volume and if you have a diverse enough full body routine making everything stronger including connective tissue it would not matter. Changes in load are a better predictor for injuries in studies I have read.
I’m mostly talking from personal experience. I imagine an actual well powered study on this sort of thing would be hard to do, for similar reasons a lot of fitness / nutrition studies are not great. I agree that a good diverse full body routine would help mitigate injury risk vs a less diverse routine. Obviously diminishing returns but expanding outside of the weight room is IMO also helpful for injury prevention if not quality of life. Pertinent video: https://youtu.be/rb2DPHi39FU
Re: Resistance training load does not determine hypertrophy
#358Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why? Most people don't build up to such a stimulus, so its not surprising if its uncomfortable, if all youve ever done is 20 rep sets.
It's not about the stimulus. It's about the fact that some exercises are naturally better done within the lower rep range (5-10), while others work and feel better with the higher rep range (20-30). Some are better in the middle. With DB side raises, take too high of a weight, and you will feel like you can't do anything productive done (can't even raise to an appropriate height). With lower weights you can get a pro…
My point is that there is nothing a priori about it, its just a question of what your goal is, what you are adapted to do and how the resistance curve of the movement is set up.
If you have a cardiovascular system that can grind through 20RM squat sets and you like it, go off. It'll be hard for most people due to the large amount of muscle mass recruited, but on the other hand, if you can load a lateral raise 5RM with acceptable range of motion, why the hell not. It just doesn't work well with dumbbells in particular.
Re: Resistance training load does not determine hypertrophy
#359Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not true, no one is symmetrical or fully balanced in strength. outside of extreme cases, so called imbalances arent a problem on a population level, at least as far as we know today.
I guess you live in a different population than me, where all the physical and occupational therapists are out of work
I live in a population where 90% of physical therapists will do placebo manual treatments and susbcribe to unscientific ideas about imbalances and "moving wrong".
Re: Resistance training load does not determine hypertrophy
#360Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, because the stimulus is novel if youve never done yoga before (e.g. a bunch of isometrics). That is not an indication of it being useful exercise for the outcomes of interest.
Yes of course, but I assume people on hn are more health focused than big muscles focused
In many ways those are the same thing up to a point. Although strength is probably more predictive of health than muscle size.