If you know alot about Muscles please Read

[Trick]

Not above 6? That's more for strength than hypertrophy. The main hypertrophy reprange is 6-12.

Getting big muscles is actually not so easy for most people (without steroids), and getting strong without gaining too much is no harder, if you know how to do it (which you apparently are a bit confused about).

Well I donno man, I went from 165 to 152 and can lift more... Obviously shed some fat though, not that I was all muscle at 165. It has a lot to do with what and how you eat. All these things that I've learned as a cell biologist I've applied to my training, and I get good results. Maybe they don't work for everyone, but they work for me. And minimal rep lifting (heavy obviously too) gives the most pronounced tears in the fibers. More pronounced tears mean a larger fiber when it's all healed. You want size? That's the way to do it. Although for anyone who wants to be actually athletic, I'd also recommend 6-12. But he apparently just wants size...

[PunchDrunk]

Well I donno man, I went from 165 to 152 and can lift more... Obviously shed some fat though, not that I was all muscle at 165. It has a lot to do with what and how you eat. All these things that I've learned as a cell biologist I've applied to my training, and I get good results. Maybe they don't work for everyone, but they work for me. And minimal rep lifting (heavy obviously too) gives the most pronounced tears in the fibers. More pronounced tears mean a larger fiber when it's all healed. You want size? That's the way to do it. Although for anyone who wants to be actually athletic, I'd also recommend 6-12. But he apparently just wants size...

Sorry, but that's just plain wrong.

1-6 reps - targets mainly strength

6-12 reps - targets mainly hypertrophy

12+ reps - muscle endurance

The "pronounced tear" you're talking about has to do with a mix of volume and intensity. 6-12 is where you have an optimal relationship between the two, which is why this is the hypertrophy zone where bodybuilders train. Olympic weightlifters and powerlifters generally lift in the 1-6 rep range. Why? Because they train for strength.

Those are the facts, and you can look it up in any book, or on any bodybuilding site. From T-Nation;

"Relative strength zone (1-3 reps range)
Limit strength zone (4-6 reps range)
Functional hypertrophy zone (6-8 reps range)
Total hypertrophy zone (8-12 reps range)
Strength-endurance zone (12-15 reps range)"

http://www.t-nation.com/readTopic.do?id=1474118









So, why did you go from 165 to 152 while getting stronger? (which contradicts your previous statement on how getting stronger without getting bigger is so hard) Well, my guess is you started training. And possibly even thinking about what you were eating. Any training noob with to much bodyfat can lose weight while getting stronger. You just have to start training. Pretty much any training will make you stronger in the beginning. When you've been training a few years, you'll begin to hit plateaus and need to correct your program, trust me.

[PunchDrunk]

Here's more:

"depends on whether the load affects neural factors (low reps) or metabolic factors (higher reps). When you train with low reps (1 – 5), the adaptations that make you stronger are mostly neurological: You develop an increased ability to recruit more muscle fibers, you stimulate the higher threshold fibers that are not activated with high rep, low weight sets, you decrease neuromuscular inhibition, and there is increased coordination between the muscle groups. However, with low reps, the hypertrophy (size increase) of the muscle fibers is minimal.

In other words, reps under 6 make you stronger, but they don’t necessarily make you bigger because the strength gains come from adaptations in the nervous system – the muscle fibers and other muscle cell structures do not hypertrophy (enlarge). This explains why certain athletes, powerlifters and Olympic lifters can be wicked strong but they don’t look as strong as they are.
When you train with medium reps (6-12) the adaptations are more metabolic and cellular and only moderately neurological. This is why 6-12 reps is the range most often recommended for bodybuilding and hypertrophy. You get bigger and stronger in this rep range, but your strength gains are not maximal. This explains why some bodybuilders look stronger than they are (and why they are often the brunt of jokes made by powerlifters and weight lifters; i.e. “big, weak, slow, useless muscles”, ha ha).

When you train with higher reps (13-20+), the adaptations are mostly metabolic and cellular. This rep range produces local muscular endurance, a small degree of hypertrophy in certain cellular components such as the mitochondria and the capillaries, and very little strength."

From: http://www.ironmagazine.com/article180.html

"High volume, multiple set programs (6-12 reps, 3 to 6 sets) have been shown to create greater hypertrophy for two important reasons:

The higher workload is more effective at creating microtrauma because of the extra time under tension and extra number of fibres recruited (Shinohara et al, 1998; Smith & Rutherford, 1995; Moss et al, 1997)

High volume, multiple set programs are more effective at increasing the body's production of testosterone and growth hormone (Kraemer et al, 1991; Kraemer et al 1990) "

From: http://www.bodybuilding.com/fun/topicoftheweek8.htm




P. S. You should think about training your lats more. Your back looks pitiful compared to your arms

[Trick]

Well PunchDrunk, don't know why you're comin' after me but alright...

I appreciate the articles in the 2nd post, when you mentioned the bodybuilding site beforehand my eyes rolled... I will digress, NO MORE than 6 is the wrong advice, but I would say between 6-8. I wasn't thinkin' properly.The High stress by increased weight IS what causes larger tears though. I'd say you'll get "bigger" with 6-8 than 10-12, considering you'll do more weight at 6-8. And no, I've been training for a while. I was around 75kg and christmas, but decided I had a lil' bit of fat to lose, and 75 felt a little too bulky for me (I'm a smaller build guy). So I hit the cardio pretty hard, counted calories tight, and made it down to 152 (69kg). Now I'm not lifting SO much more than I was at 165, but I am lifting more. Progress is slow, that's what makes it hard. What makes it possible (for the most part) is actually what you eluded to yourself. Proper training trains not only muscles, but all aspects of the body. You'll eventually be able to recruit more fibers more efficiently. So you will be able to do more with the same muscle mass. If size is the primary concern though, I'd still say that 10+ is pushing it. Not to mention nutrion is just as important as that.

I am impressed that you know your stuff though, what's your education? My area actually has much more to do with Cancer and Aids Research, so the stuff I've had to learn about muscles sometimes gets a little shady. I'm glad you look up some stuff in articles (scientific journal) as well. The BS that floats around this subject is insane.

As for me, personally, I'm satisfied with the way things are, but I do agree with you. My ARMS per se are actually kinda small, my shoulders are big enough though. My lats, I agree are a little too small, and stylistically, I'm more of a speed guy, so I have well enough conditioned lats, but I have trouble developing power in them unless I spend time switching up my styles to focus a little more on power, which I do do sometimes. One thing I really gotta start doin' is more chin ups. Any other advice?

EDIT: Although, I am no bodybuider, so I'm inclined so believe what they're sayin' about some of these things. The first thing I learned in all my studies was this **** always changes, half the stuff I was taught when I began isn't even true anymore...