[nunez]

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.

[uhngureffalt]

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?

[nunez]

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.

[claytongulick]

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.

[nunez]

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.

[claytongulick]

> 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.

[mzhaase]

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.

[maxglute]

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.