I understand this might be a total preference thing, but I was wondering if there is any advantage/disadvantage to increasing weight per set
5x5 Wt. Reps Total Lbs.
Set 1 150 5 750
Set 2 170 5 850
Set 3 190 5 950
Set 4 210 5 1050
Set 5 230 5 1150
Average weight lifted = 190
Total weight lifted = 4750
Advantage:
using heavier weight at end
less warm-up sets
versus keeping the same weight for the entire exercise.
5x5 Wt. Reps Total Lbs.
Set 1 190 5 950
Set 2 190 5 950
Set 3 190 5 950
Set 4 190 5 950
Set 5 190 5 950
Average weight lifted = 190
Total weight lifted = 4750
Advantage:
more weight earlier
constant output
Are there any CNS, fatigue, and/or hypertrophy advantages or disadvantages to either of these examples that I am overlooking or do not know about. Maybe I am just thinking too much again.
What’s the theoretical max of this lifter? When the training session was drawn up, was the intent for it to be dynamic effort, maximum effort, or repetitive effort?
[quote]Doug Adams wrote:
What’s the theoretical max of this lifter? When the training session was drawn up, was the intent for it to be dynamic effort, maximum effort, or repetitive effort?[/quote]
I was thinking more along the lines of general increase in muscle mass. I chose the weights because the math is a little neater, but let us assume a 265 lbs. max. That will make the 230 lbs. lift between 85%-90% of their max.
As nice as it would be to see some real scientific evidence promoting one of these philosophies over another, I think all you’ll be getting is argument over which method built what athletes.
Personally, I like starting low and increasing weight throughout the set, I’ve been doing that since my dad introduced me to a weight bench at age 12, and Its given me quite a bit of size so far.
Here is my take on deciding if you should go up, go down or stay the same weight.
Going up in weight each set is good for beginners. It allows the person to learn the movement, be well warmed up and develop a good neural pattern for the exercise. I believe it is the best method for developing strength. The negatives are that for strength it requires longer rests and takes a longer total time, and that you can either spend too much time lifting too light of a weight or you can go too heavy and be tired by your final set.
Staying the same weight is good for building muscular endurance, particularly multiple set endurance which is simply your ability to do something you already did again. You don’t have to rest as long and it is convenient in the gym to keep the weights the same.
Decreasing the weight is good for muscle size. For size you want to train in a fatigued state with moderate rest, so after a warm-up if you start heavy and go lighter you accomplish those ideals. Decreasing the weight allows for the short rest time. It is not good for beginners because they often don’t know how much weight they should be lifting, and it is not good if you aren’t very familiar with the exercise you are using. It is also hard on the body if you aren’t warmed up enough when you go real heavy.
Just to be clear I think you can build size, strength, and endurance with all 3 methods but each one is slightly better at one of those goals, so it makes sense to match up the method with the goal the majority of the time.
If you haven’t done this already I would try all 3 and see which one you like the best, that is certainly worth considering.
Bill Starr (who was one of the pioneers of the 5X5) would say use both. For example on his intermediate program you squat 3 days per week. On day one you would squat straight sets at a fairly high effort.
Day 2 is also straight sets, but much lighter, used as recovery. Day 3 you increase each set where the 3rd matches your day 1 weight. Then, on the next week’s day 1 your straight weight becomes your 4th or 5th set weight from the previous day 3.
This is a little over simplified nad I’m not sure off hand of the percentages. If I were to guess right now the first week you start with around 60% of your max, and after 5 or 6 weeks you should have progressed quite a bit.
I think you should start heavy. If you start with a lower weight and work up, your not going to be lifting as much weight as you could if you started your first set with the heaviest weight you can use for however many reps you want. You want to start off with the heaviest weight because that is when your muscles have the most power/strength, doing lower weights first and than going up is not going to allow you to lift as much as you could if you started heavy.
I don’t mean alternating schemes every workout- but don’t you switch them when you stagnate?
I’ve ALWAYS done constant weights for 6 weeks, pyramid for 6 weeks. I guess I was just lucky enough to learn about this real early on in my training. I legitimately thought everyone else did this too.
I would alternate both. Let’s say I do 175x5, 185x5, 195x5, 205x5, 225x5 (5RM) in one workout, I would do 90% of that 5RM for 5x5 on the next week. Just my two cents.
There is a Starr/Pendlay spreadsheet available where you plug in your max numbers and the spreadsheet computes all your weights and reps for the training cycle. PM me if you’re interested.