Hacker News Reader

Low reps (<=5) maximize strength, you're not going to get Arnold muscles if your goal is strength. Bodybuilding emphasizes size > strength and is more in the medium reps range (8-10). Higher reps basically turn into cardio and joint stability work.

I really like this chart for references on rep range:

https://i.imgur.com/UrF1U.png

>Lighter weights, more reps(15-20)

I was with you until you got here. A typical high-rep range for compound work should be between 8-12. 12-15 for auxiliary work. Most lifters would consider a rep range of between 3-5 to be low-rep.

>and you not only gain much better results in stamina (what good is it to be able to lift 100kg 3x times and you're done, when you need to move apartment for example or do multi-hour hike/anything else

Heavy lifting actually trains both fast-twitch and slow twitch muscle fibers, as it takes your entire muscle to lift heavy. The reverse can not be said for higher-repetition lifting. I've never trained in the mentioned rep range and anecdotally am able to do multi-hour hikes/anything else just fine. I find that the running/biking crowd loves to perpetuate this myth and generally does so with use of the phrase "meat-head".

Since we do anecdotes here, a friend who is purely heavy lifter (squats, deadlifts, benchpresses etc), exactly in those low reps range, and pretty good at it. He is utterly useless in 2h+ hikes with 1000m+ elevation gains.

Glad you don't disagree that its more injury-prone to lift heavy. Of course its all good if one has perfect form, but technically its impossible to keep it 100% of the time. Again anecdotally I had various smaller tendon/ligament issues when lifting at my max, every few months I had to stop for a week or two to heal. Since switching to what I described, I can do exactly the same, but no injury at all for 4 years.

But all bodies are unique, I found what works for me and my goals long term, if different approach works for you, stick to it.

>Since we do anecdotes here, a friend who is purely heavy lifter (squats, deadlifts, benchpresses etc), exactly in those low reps range, and pretty good at it. He is utterly useless in 2h+ hikes with 1000m+ elevation gains.

The difference is that I made a statement which is scientifically accepted as true, followed by an anecdote to support it:

"Heavy lifting actually trains both fast-twitch and slow twitch muscle fibers, as it takes your entire muscle to lift heavy. The reverse can not be said for higher-repetition lifting."

There's a reason why NFL running backs can run an entire game and still squat 600 lbs; basketball players are also some of the most active athletes but still put up huge lifting numbers. Reps in the 12-20 range do not increase muscular endurance any more than the 6-8 rep range. [1]

[1]https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18787090

I generally agree, but in a regulation NFL game the running backs are typically only running for about 5 minutes total.

The study you linked does not support your claims.

Also, professional athletes do both high rep and low rep weight training. The high rep build the strength but the low rep build the endurance to use the strength.

>The study you linked does not support your claims.

It does support my claims - but that was not the purpose of the study so you'll actually have to read beyond the abstract to see it

>Also, professional athletes do both high rep and low rep weight training. The high rep build the strength but the low rep build the endurance to use the strength.

I agree - which is why I don't believe that heavy weightlifting is detrimental to one's ability to do multi-hour hikes.

In the case of weight lifting, it's usually the mind, not the body, that leads to injury. Crossfit is probably the fastest way to injure yourself, followed by trying to lift more than you should. It's injury prone to make your body do more than it should, you can lift heavy and not do this. Similarly, it's quite easy to stay in the good form zone and still get a good workout. You aren't going to be Ronnie Coleman, but you'll be healthy.

And yeah, I hope no one is claiming that weight lifting trains your aerobic system.

>And yeah, I hope no one is claiming that weight lifting trains your aerobic system.

The issue is when people claim that weight lifting is detrimental to cardio-related activities, which is what OP seems to be insinuating.

> Since we do anecdotes here, a friend who is purely heavy lifter (squats, deadlifts, benchpresses etc), exactly in those low reps range, and pretty good at it. He is utterly useless in 2h+ hikes with 1000m+ elevation gains.

Kind of a false equivalence. Firstly, I'm not sure that long, arduous hikes are very relatable to e.g. moving around in old age, whereas doing a single squat is absolutely comparable to getting out of a chair for anyone. Secondly, my guess is that you'd be utterly useless if you had to carry a pack whose weight equalised the difference between your respective bodyweights.

Heavy lifting actually trains both fast-twitch and slow twitch muscle fibers, as it takes your entire muscle to lift heavy.

If that were true bodybuilders would do great at marathons and triathlons.

>If that were true bodybuilders would do great at marathons and triathlons.

It takes more than leg and back muscle to do great at marathons and triathlons. Aerobic development, VO2 max, lactate threshold are just as important. Further, you would want less weight (muscle mass) in the areas that are not required for your marathon. That's why many professional bikers and marathon runners intentionally neglect gaining upper body muscle.

Weight lifting won't train you to run a marathon, but it certainly isn't detrimental towards multi-hour hikes. Don't move the goal-posts on me :)

You have it backwards. Bodybuilding is mainly high-rep, often with isolating exercises for muscle hypertrophy. Obviously concessions are made to improve strength for size, but strength training is where you really see the focus on low-reps.

Low reps is more frequently used for powerlifting than bodybuilding. Body builders tends to use medium to high reps.

(And Arnolds body type is not possible without steroids, in any case)

You can just as easily get too close to your limits with high-rep work. In fact, if I've ever been injured doing something, it's been wear and tear from high-repetition strength endurance exercise. IMO neither is inherently mote dangerous than the other, you have to know your limits whatever the repetion range you work in.

>Arnold type body looks great on photos, but is utterly impractical for normal life

No one gets "buff" on accident. No one gets to the size where they have trouble fitting through a door on accident (and without drugs).

>Low rep means you are close to your limits, which is area where injuries happen a lot

High reps = more movement, and just like a hard disk drive, more movement means more chances for failure. The injury that sent me to the chiropractor was a warm-up ~125lb Deadlift that I did with impromper form. Weight does not correlate with Injury risk.

>what good is it to be able to lift 100kg 3x times and you're done, when you need to move apartment for example

The "joints and connective tissue" (tendons aka grip) you mentioned prior is exactly what gets trained on heavy reps, and takes a LONG time to develop.

> High reps = more movement, and just like a hard disk drive, more movement means more chances for failure. The injury that sent me to the chiropractor was a warm-up ~125lb Deadlift that I did with impromper form. Weight does not correlate with Injury risk.

You don't see any logical fallacy in your statement? If more movement = simply more risk, then ultra-trail runners would be all in wheelchairs in 5 years. What you load on yourself on top of your weight makes huge difference. Give those ultras 10kg backpack and they will be having all kinds of knee/ankle issues in very short time.

Doing deadlift warmup with cca 55kg seems ridiculously high, I am not surprised you eventually had an injury. Really buffed up guys in my gym start with cca 30 kg only after proper warmup of whole body via some other way (I do it same way, usually on elliptic trainer for 5 mins).

Joints and tendons get trained with whatever you do, bodyweight can still do the trick if done properly. You are right it takes horrible amount of time, also healing injury can take months easily. I prefer sport climbing for those, flexibility required is substantial, and overall the sport is awesome on every single level, especially on the rock outdoors.

Whatever works for you long term, stick to it. You should know your body better than anyone else. I know amount of load made a big difference in injury risk for me, going lighter but still almost till muscle failure I have lost 0 of the power, and gained tons of endurance. But that's just me.

All of the ultra-trail runners I've known have had significant injuries from overuse or falling on the trail. When you're exhausted at the end of a 50 mile race it's easy to trip over a root and blow out your knee. A single mistake is all it takes.

Just as note, for a trained adult male, a first set warming up for deadlifts with ~60kg is not uncommon.

A regular bar is ~20kg by itself.