Slow reps Versus More reps
Is there a reason that doing slower perfect reps is better than doing more reps? Obviously if you do a slower bench press that is controlled you won't be able to do as many reps.
For example: Let's say I'm doing 3 sets of 12 reps dumbbell military presses. If I do them slow and 'perfect' then maybe I can use 30 lbs (for example). However, if I still use good form but blast them out, probably I can add 10 lbs to that easily.
What is better? If I do lighter weight better reps is that similar to doing 'more' reps therefore building less strength but giving me better cuts?
Fill me in oh great training gurus!
Slower reps is more
Slower reps is more concentrated recruiting more muscle fibres therefore encouraging better form, and muscle definition.
Slow and Controlled is always better then fast and sloppy
Lets say you can pump out reps fast and not sloppy, lifting with speed also uses momentum providing less probability to use stabilizing muscle fibers
Sometimes it feels good to pump fast, for example once and a while i'll gritt my teeth an just do 15 fast push-ups to get a good pump then end with 3 extremely slow ones. In this situation its alright, but with dunbells and barbells it doesn't give as good as feeling and work as well.
Thats my opinion!
I respect Dylan's opinions.
I respect Dylan's opinions.
My unofficial personal trainer has been doing high repetition abdominal training since was a young gymnast. He claims that for him abdominal stamina was essential and said that for him high rep abs training was helpful. Working out with him has been interesting and I see that he likes doing very long sets so there is some kind of enjoyment going on. It's hard not to be damn impressed with his abs but I prefer NOT to do such long sets.
Dylan's idea of doing higher reps occasionally sounds right to me. I've increased my daily abs reps and that has been amazing but to keep it up as a regular thing like Andy doesn't seem necessary for me. I've occasionally done 3000 abs reps total of all sorts of abs exercises just to get to 3000. That is great to get me out of ruts but have found that doing 3 sets of 100 slower abs reps and squeezing the fuck out of them at the top of, say, crunches on the stability ball, is better for me than doing 3000 fast reps all the time and with no squeezing hard at the top.
I think it depends on what people need of their bodies about high or lower rep exercises. I admit it's impressive to see Andy's abs in action as he does sets of 100 hanging leglifts bringing his straight legs up and with toes pointed to touch the bar. But I don't need to have the high degree of muscle strength and stamina. But it's damn impressing to watch.
I'm really enjoying the stability ball exercises Dylan demonstrated. Thanks!
Yours,
Cameron
n/a
I was once told from a
I was once told from a fitness instructor that doing your exercises slow and controlled will help break-down the muscle fibers more so than doing the exercise faster.
All you gotta do after that is make sure your muscles get enough nutrition to rebuild the fibers
n/a
So - if that is the case,
So - if that is the case, shouldn't 8 'slow' reps be better than 12 faster reps... or at least equal? How do you determine how many reps to do?
I like to do 12 reps as I'm defining cuts more than building strength... I typically still do 10-12 slow reps. The burn is intense but I have to drop the weight substantially. Sometimes half the weight...
I would keep that up, I've
I would keep that up, I've gotten some pretty good results in high school doing that.
In regards to the amount of reps / the speed. It really does come down to what muscle fibers you want to be targeting.
Slow twitch muscle fibers are identified by a slow contraction time and a high resistance to fatigue.
Fast twitch muscle fibers are identified by a quick contraction time and a low resistance to fatigue.
Check out this table I took from here:
http://www.coachr.org/fiber.htm
Table 1: Characteristics of the Three Muscle Fiber Types
n/a