As we get older should we focus on higher reps or lower reps? Many books and articles I’ve read about aging trainees suggest using higher reps and lighter weights in order to put less stress on joints. My experience has been exactly the opposite. My joints seem to feel better if I keep the weight heavy and the reps low.
I’m curious to know what readers of this forum think.
The ACSM guidelines are hre:
Stu
Those guidelines make sense for over 65 untrained guys just starting out. They don’t make much sense for me as I’ve been training for years and my goals aren’t just maintenance.
FWIW, I do both high and low rep training and I don’t notice any joint issues either way.
[quote]happydog48 wrote:
Those guidelines make sense for over 65 untrained guys just starting out. They don’t make much sense for me as I’ve been training for years and my goals aren’t just maintenance.
FWIW, I do both high and low rep training and I don’t notice any joint issues either way.[/quote]
Yes, I agree with this post. For me a mix of both has been yielding results in muscle and strength gains. On bench for instance I hit two lower rep 4 to 8 reps per set and then drop weight and do two higher rep sets on chest day.
D
Ive read (somewhere, sorry cant remember where) that our optimal training rep ranges actually drop as we age. Thus, when we are young and new to weight training, higher reps definitely allow us to develop the mind-muscle connection, hypertrophy us and make us stronger, but as we are more experienced in the iron game we will get more benefit from lower reps. Personally, I am using a Westside-style template at the moment, which calls for the full spectrum of rep ranges from 1 to 20-25 anyway.
I usually do CT’s 6-12-25 for most of my training days. So I use a mix of reps also.
I like low reps. I usually train full body workouts and my work sets on my primary exercises (squats and benches) are usually singles or doubles with the weights going up each workout.
But my secondary/auxiliary exercises, I generally do high rep (10-15).
Hey pencil neck,
I notice the same thing — need a higher weight (lower rep) on primary exercises and less wieght on auxilary exercises such as a bicep curl.
In general, i think one should not get caught up to much in the ultimate rep or set range regardless of age as i think no matter what your age you need to vary the intensity, volume to continue making progress; i am older now; but still find if i dont change things up now and then; i will stall. I find its best to bounce back and forth between heavy and less wieght – and volume. That is what works for me
First I have to say that I grew-up in the 70’s and have worked with high volume since I learned what a squat was. I have worked with all rep ranges and about 4 years ago have been using a system of alternating weeks which for me, is the best compromise between strenght and anaerobic endurance.
For example on the 1st week I go for sets of 5 to my top weight and do 2 or 3 sets of 3. The following week I do sets of 25 reps. This is done with my primary exercise as the following ones are more isolated and get best results from reps in the 8-12 range. Both weeks goal is to get stronger in the given rep range so I either try to get more reps with the same weight or rest less between sets. I maintain total reps the same every week to control volume. I rarely feel overtrained and haven’t had an injury in years since started this mix.
I think that as we get older we have to look not just at muscular strenght, but muscular endurance. The lower rep ranges are more beneficial because we have more experience and can recruit a higher number of muscle fibers from rep 1, but in my experience the joints and the cardiovascular system need more time to warm up than before. By alternating low rep weeks with high rep weeks, I get an active rest and work on muscular endurance. This also allows me to add more cardio sessions since I am not working the CNS so hard week in and week out.
Hope this helps