Hacker News Reader

Comment by uhngureff | Hacker News Reader

> Even though in the early days you don't notice much physical difference

People who do weight training always leave out the fact that you feel sore after a lift. Even the next day.

This can feel like pain to the unaware and can be scary or off putting enough to become a deterrent to keep at it.

It can leave you feeling weak, but often the soreness is surface level and in fact you are still stronger even with the soreness and fatigue.

> (other than the steady increase in weight you're able to lift)

“Steady” is doing a lot of heavy lifting here.

Maybe you could argue that in the beginning, but adding more and more weight is more logarithmic than linear; otherwise, everyone in the gym would be benching 3 tons.

I recommend ramping up weight after you can do a full 3 sets of 10 reps at your current weight.

Introducing the new weight to the first set, then dropping the weight for the next two.

Once comfortable with that try the new weight for 2 sets and then finally 3; then repeat.

View on HN

Rippetoe and Baker talk about this in Practical Programming for Strength Training.

Heavily depends on the movement. 3x10s are fine for accessory exercises but will be too much volume for compound movements (if strength is the focus) and can actually retard progress in later stages (because training for strength is incredibly taxing once you go heavy enough).

That said, literally anything will work when you're just getting started, so this retardation won't show up until later (when you're unbelievably sore all of the time but are not progressing on the lifts).

Most strength programs are developed around 3x5 for the core lifts, as this is a good balance between strength and recovery. In fact, you will likely do even less than this once you're advanced enough (1x5 super heavy deadlifts, once a week, for example) so that your muscles have time to recover and build.

I like the 3x5 y’all are touting.

I’m an old man and 3x10 is “how I was taught” but I’m open to new research and see how 3x5 would be easier on someone new to it.

But what y’all all seem to omit is the core of my suggestion: how and when to add more weight.

Would you say the weight increase signal I suggest is good, just go 3x5 rather than 3x10, or what does your literature say on that?

I always add more on if I'm able to complete the set. How much depends on how hard the last set was for me.

For example, lifts that work small muscles, like the military overhead press or power cleans, might only go up by 1 lb/session, as a +5 lb progression might cause premature failed lifts. (You need to buy micro plates if you are serious about strength training; gyms won't have anything lower than 2.5lbs and if they do, they don't have many of them.)

Re: programming. anyone can make progress on 3x10 at first. The problem is that recovery will outrun your program as your training gets more advanced, which will eventually stall your progress early. See this article that talks about this: https://startingstrength.com/training/3-sets-of-5.

Now, 3x10 or more can be good for hypertrophy if you're using light weights. I use 3x12s in my program for big assistance lifts, like dips and pull/chin-ups, but you can't get big without getting strong, so why not do it right the first time? Elite physique bodybuilders can usually move insane weight for this reason.

Been lifting for over a decade now, and gone down the deep rabbit hole on this stuff. Also older.

My advice: completely ignore the X by X stuff.

Focus on time under tension, form, control and how your body feels. Lifting with a goal to hit numbers causes sloppy form and cheats (and injuries) to just try to hit X reps.

Every day is different, how you slept, what you ate, whether you're training fasted, where your muscles are in recovery, and a million other variables.

As an example (bragging a bit), as a ~50 year old, 165lb, 5' 7" guy, I'm able to lift 100lb dumbells on flat bench chest press, one in each arm.

I can hit around 10-12 reps with that, most of them BS cheat reps where I'm powering with my shoulders.

It also causes me all sorts of problems with tendon issues, etc...

I find when I do 50-70lb weights, and forget about hitting numbers and just feeling the workout, I get way better results. Fewer injuries, better focus on the muscles I'm targeting, and real progress with strength.

It's hard to do, because I'm always comparing my performance with my last workout, trying to compete with myself.

I have to constantly remind myself that small things, even a couple inches in variation of form have a massive impact on volume.

So, I try to throw out the numbers. I vary my rep speed, vary explosiveness, and try to feel what's hardest to do, and then do that.

Basically, what I'm trying to get better at is learning to lift with my muscles, not my ego.

This is okay advice after you reach an intermediate level of training and don't necessarily care about hitting personal records. I wouldn't recommend this approach outside of that scenario.

Beginner lifters don't know what their max potential is and might overtrain by accident (because they are naturally strong and might do more reps to try and get to failure) or might not do enough volume to trigger the musculoskeletal adaptions needed to lift more weight (because they are not naturally strong and might tap out early).

> As an example (bragging a bit), as a ~50 year old, 165lb, 5' 7" guy, I'm able to lift 100lb dumbells on flat bench chest press, one in each arm. I can hit around 10-12 reps with that, most of them BS cheat reps where I'm powering with my shoulders.

I personally never recommend cheating reps.

Bodybuilders do them to localize hypertrophy in specific regions, like the upper pecs or shoulders, to improve physique during competition. Most people aren't bodybuilding though and would not benefit from this style of training.

At best, you're short-changing the development of primary and secondary movers this way in the name of moving more weight (like not engaging the lats enough when you do a bent-elbow pull up).

At worst, the risk of injury goes way up (shoulder blowouts are super duper duper common in bench presses; doubly so for dumbbell bench presses, since there isn't a bar to stabilize your arms).

In my experience, I've found that it's better to go lower in weight and use an assistance exercise and/or increasing rest/recovery time and, if needed, decreasing volume instead of cheating reps when you're stuck.

Anecdotal example. When I was struggling with getting to 225x5x3 on the bench, I dropped back 20%, added weighted dips to my rotation and decreased bench press volume. Dips engage the pectoral and tricep muscles more directly, which contributes to forward progress on bench. I can do 250x3x6 now at around 9.5 RPE.

> This is okay advice after you reach an intermediate level of training and don't necessarily care about hitting personal records. I wouldn't recommend this approach outside of that scenario.

> Beginner lifters don't know what their max potential is and might overtrain by accident (because they are naturally strong and might do more reps to try and get to failure) or might not do enough volume to trigger the musculoskeletal adaptions needed to lift more weight (because they are not naturally strong and might tap out early).

I don't agree with most of your points here. I think listening to your body and training to failure with a focus on good form is appropriate at any training stage, and superior to any sort of X by X program.

Varying volume, exercise, weight, explosiveness and rest periods is all you really need. Your body will tell you when you're doing things right and wrong, I think it's most important to learn how to listen to it.

> I personally never recommend cheating reps.

I agree.

> it's better to go lower in weight and use an assistance exercise

Yep, that was kind of my whole point. Note the following sentence where I call out all the problems with BS cheat reps. And the sentence after that where I recommend decreasing weight.

Sounds like we're in vehement agreement on this.

First of all one should continue linear progression (adding weight every session) for as long as possible, by using microplates (125g increment). This is still the fastest way to progress.

Once that does not work anymore, one leaves the novice phase by definition and is now considered "intermediate".

Eric Helms wrote a metaanalysis of the current state of exercise science in "The muscle strength pyramid". In that, the recommended periodization for intermediate lifters is "wave loading". So one would do 3x8 at weight x, then 3x7 at x+5, 3x6 at x+10, 2x6 at x (DeLoad), then 3x8 at x+5. All sets performed at RPE < 10, meaning, one could do at least one more rep.

The rep ranges and weights here should be modified to suit the goals at hand, so for deadlifts the increase may work, but for overhead press it should be lower. If training for strength the reps should also tend to be lower.

Also, technique gets more important at higher training ages. It's worthwhile to drop the weight if it increases ROM or the stretch at the bottom, as it leads to more muscle growth this way.

Literature says you can gain strength doing 3-20 reps, as little as 2-3 sets per week. AKA it's all over the place as long as you're progressive overloading and getting stronger. Some people respond better to some stimulus than others, and sometimes you change stimulus to progress. Some exercises feel bad for some people. You don't know where you fall on the genetic bell curve unless you try to figure out what works for you. Ultimately it's about knowing the basics of strength programming being able to manage stimulus/fatigue and applying it to yourself so you can progress - ONLY if you want to progress. At some point it becomes a lot of work / you hit genetic ceiling at specific bodyweight. Also need to figure out what you're training for, if you're an old man and just want to keep a baseline level of fitness and avoid injury etc, i.e. NASA routine for ISS is like 5 sets of 10s-20s with pretty modest weight because they just want to maintain muscle mass and avoid injury at all cost.

I'm a big fan of double progression + RPE / RIR (rate of percieved exercion / repititions in reserve) for people who don't want to bother with percentages and complicated training cycles and platemath. You do 2-4 sets of an compound exercise with a setXrep goal in mind, i.e. 3x8 on bench with 135lbs. you start with 3x5, then add 1 rep to 1 set, i.e. 5/5/5 then 6/5/5 then 6/6/5 until you get to 8/8/8 with a RPE/RIR in mind, where RPE/RIR is how many reps you can still do after that set. Usually you start with 2-3 RIR = you pick weight you where you can do 8 reps but only do 5 (3 reps in reserve), and maybe at the end of the cycle you can do all 8 reps but still feel you can do another 2, so theoretically you went from 8 rep max to 10 rep max. Then add 5/10lbs and repeat. It's slow, it's boring, but it's simple, it's systematic and works pretty well, since +1 rep means you're always accumulating more volume each session until you reach the end where build up to doing 40% more volume/work @3x8 vs @3x5, and then you reset back to 3x5 and ramp up at a slightly higher baseline with slightly mroe weight.

>I recommend ramping up weight after you can do a full 3 sets of 10 reps at your current weight.

This seems rather arbitrary as rep ranges will heavily depend on what type of exercises/routines a person is running.

3 sets of 10 reps doesn't really fit the bill for a strength training program. That is more of a "bodybuilding" routine focused on hypertrophy.

"Strength" in weightlifting is measured by the one-rep max (1RM) [1] of a given movement. Most starting strength training programs recommend starting off with 5 reps. (For example, Starting Strength [2], Stronglifts 5x5 [3], or Wendler 5/3/1 [4] were common recommendations for beginner routines when I first started lifting).

This is why most strength training programs focus on basic lifts like squat, bench/overhead press, and deadlift.

Some of the intermediate programs will also use "linear periodization" [5] that (iirc) is supposed to help prevent plateaus as a trainee acclimates to their routine.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One-repetition_maximum [2] https://startingstrength.com/about [3] https://stronglifts.com/stronglifts-5x5/progress/ [4] https://www.jimwendler.com/blogs/jimwendler-com/101065094-5-... [5] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4637911/

> "Strength" in weightlifting is measured by the one-rep max (1RM) [1] of a given movement. Most starting strength training programs recommend starting off with 5 reps. (For example, Starting Strength [2], Stronglifts 5x5 [3], or Wendler 5/3/1 [4] were common recommendations for beginner routines when I first started lifting).

This feels like too much information to the point it confuses me. You gave 2 (3?) different pieces of actionable advice.

I’ve always hated the 1 rep max mentality. Mostly saw it in high school with kids trying to out do each other, but it fails to promote strength.

I’m all for going slow. If 5 reps are better for you then great, do 5!

Since strength is a measure of maximum force, then the 1RM is probably the best metric for judging strength.

> I’ve always hated the 1 rep max mentality. Mostly saw it in high school with kids trying to out do each other, but it fails to promote strength.

I agree. There is a difference between the mentality of high school lifters chasing a 1RM to impress people (often called "ego lifting") and the use of the 1RM as a baseline for measuring a person's strength for the purposes of developing a strength training regimen.

The 1RM also takes into account comfort of the lift. If you feel like your spine is going to snap, but you complete the lift then the weight is probably too heavy, for example. Some lifters use the Rate of Perceived Exertion (RPE) as a heuristic for this [1].

[1] https://blog.nasm.org/rate-of-perceived-exertion

> I’ve always hated the 1 rep max mentality. Mostly saw it in high school with kids trying to out do each other, but it fails to promote strength.

Knowing your 1RM is a fundamental necessity in non-RPE based strength training programs. It's how you safely and efficiently progress in your lifts. RPE programs are based on perceived exertion for a variety of reasons, but I've never met an RPE lifter who didn't also have a very good idea of their 1RM, and most still regularly tested it.

And if you're not doing a program, you're not training. Which could be fine! But training is different than just exercising.

> I’m all for going slow. If 5 reps are better for you then great, do 5!

There's lots of underlying science around this - it's not just "what works for you," but instead what works best for the overwhelming majority of humans. If your goal is strength training, biasing towards fewer reps of higher weights is basically settled science. If your goal is bodybuilding, higher reps of lower weights is basically settled science. Though, 10 reps is in-line with plenty of strength training programs, particularly for intermediate lifters - it's in a range where you get solid results for both strength and hypertrophy. And, frankly, most powerlifters are lying if they say they don't want at least some hypertrophy.

It's pretty linear at first, especially like this person who has been doing it a few months. You should be able to add 2.5kg to your major lifts every week if you're recovering well, and that's recommended by the starting strength program. It definitely starts to become logarithmic after while though.

This is bad advice, because it’s ambiguous.

> You should be able to add 2.5kg to your major lifts every week

When you couple progression with a time frame but fail to address the time frame of the workouts it is more dangerous than helpful.

This would be bad advice for anyone who only trains once a week or twice a month.

> if you're recovering well

I’ve been strength training for 20 years and even I’m unsure what this means. Do I recover “well”?

When it comes to education avoiding ambiguity is essential.

If someone doesn't mention a detail, assume they meant "whatever is standard". All beginner strength training programs recommend 3x per week, do they not?

>> if you're recovering well

> I’ve been strength training for 20 years and even I’m unsure what this means.

Recovery in strength training means eating, sleeping and resting worked muscles for at least a day (i.e., don't work the same muscle on consecutive days). I think it's safe to assume they meant "if you're eating and sleeping well, and resting muscles appropriately".

> "whatever is standard"

Okay, but only if we agree on what is “standard”?

My standard routine is every other day. (And that’s just my regularity, I’ve yet to even mention what lifts I do)

Is that what both you and the op meant for your “standard”?

Just read this thread. I’ve seen other people in this thread say “once a week” and “three to four time a week”, and “for 30 minutes”, and on and on.

Let go of this assumption that anything is “standard” and simply explicitly state your own advice. It is more helpful.

> Recovery in strength training means eating, sleeping and resting worked muscles for at least a day

In truth when op said “recovering well” I thought they meant the autonomic side of things.

Your interpretation of it being solely about my active efforts to recover being the definition of “recovering well” was completely lost on me; further making my point that the op was ambiguous.

But all good advice on aiding recovery! I’d add, stay hydrated!

In context of Starting Strength Program aka boilplater 3x5 compound lifting novice program where "recovering well" is basically eating surplus calories (GOMAD joke), and being able to hit session linear progression, aka +5lbs 2-3x per week. If you can't hit that then you're not "recovering well". Yes that means adding 30-60lbs per month for most males, and the program is meant to be ran for a few months with caloric surplus until you stall - no longer able to progress session to session, in which case you have milked all your beginner gains and then can move onto an intermediate program of week to week progression, then month to month. It's... basically the standard template for novice lifting, relativelty systemic with pretty clear definitions of progress and recovery (in the book/manual) to the point where people get chasitized for "not doing the program" if they deviate too much. I find it very prescriptive, but it's initially designed for atheletic / football programs where you dump a bunch of teens and have then run it on autopilot while eating everything in sight to get as much gains as possible with very little individualization. I'm not sure what gets recommended these days, but training has come a long way with all the new apps and templates, but I think most people still just recommend 3x5 or a 5x5 since it's KISS.

> People who do weight training always leave out the fact that you feel sore after a lift. Even the next day.

It's absolutely normal to feel sore after any kind of exercise?

If you don't you're in top shape for it, congratulations. But it ain't going to happen when progressing.

> It's absolutely normal to feel sore after any kind of exercise?

I Ctr-F’d the linked article and found 0 instances of “sore”.

Assuming any knowledge is “obvious” is detrimental to education, encouragement, mentorship, or simply cultivating a welcoming environment.

Some might argue that if you don’t feel sore at all you haven’t pushed yourself enough, and if you feel so sore it takes days and days to recover then you pushed yourself too hard. Finding the sweet spot is important. And I think this applies to strength as well as running and other exercise.

In my experience it's an indicator if I'm doing something enough or not. If I regularly perform an exercise it won't cause soreness. Squat 3x a week, one of those sessions being heavy? No soreness. Squat once a week? Definitely getting DOMS afterwards. Same with running. If get sore after a run I probably took time off before it.

I’ve been doing StrongLifts consistently since Jan 1 and so 3x per week I am doing squats. I still feel soreness despite 3x per week because the weights are semi-consistently increasing. So I think to modify what you are saying, I think frequency is one vector, but another is volume. Or maybe I am still just a beginner and eventually I’ll be able to lift increasingly heavy weights week over week without any soreness!

Interesting. I was lifting for nearly ten years, did starting strength, texas method, 5/3/1, and I found that the soreness largely went away unless there was a marked change in intensity or program.

This has been my experience with a sustained period over years of lifting in my early to mid 20s and several periods of restarting since then. Even when regularly adding weight, after a few months I stopped being particularly sore.

I could still feel that I had worked out the day before, sure, but as long as I was getting enough protein, getting enough sleep, doing warm up sets, etc., the soreness was incredibly minimal. Missing any of those things could cause a pretty significant increase in feeling it the next day, though.

It's worth noting that some soreness may not be immediate, but delayed. People call this Delayed Onset Muscle Soreness (DOMS), and can come on ~24-48h after a given exercise.

It's not sudden, but can feel that way sometimes when you wake up!

I only feel sore if I haven’t been working out regularly. After a week or two, the soreness is gone, for as long as I keep regular trainings.

(I do strength training in the gym.)

I've found that small increases in weight and protein excess in diet help mitigate soreness a lot.

Yes, and eat immediately after every workout.

I’ve read studies that show via biopsy that ingested proteins are already present in the worked muscles 10 minutes after ingestion!

I’ve also found in my own practice that using a hydrating powder in 32oz of water after a lift aids in recovery.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com