Creatine and endurance in high rep range

[Matsuo Munefusa]

Also, think the phosphagen energy system is limited to short bursts of energy, it is short bursts of energy from a cellular standpoint, in individual motor units that are firing. So even someone who doing endurance activity (like running for example) is still using the phosphagen energy system to a small extent as individual motor units are working in short bursts, always. The same is true of the aerobic metabolism and low reps. The differences are what is the limiting factor? Inability to supply oxygen fast enough to continue being primarily aerobic, lack of sufficient ATP to stay anaerobic, or inability to clear anaerobic waste products.

It feels like the last one? I lay in between sets of 35 lateral raises literally wanting to vomit there is so much lactic acid in my shoulders/arms. By the end of the workout I’m unable to make a solid fist my forearms are so pumped.

 

[Kaladryn]

I’ve always THOUGHT it messed with endurance. My bro science way of thinking is creatine always got me more pumped, more pumped means less of an ability to stay aerobic, going anaerobic you are never going to last as long...

Regardless of my stupid bro science, I have found my workouts have improved dropping the creatine. I don’t have as debilitating a pump as I had with them in the 25-35 rep range (yes I’m trying super high reps for shoulders on JMs advice). I’ll reintroduce creatine when I drop back to my 10-15 rep range.

It's funny, we push the idea of the pump so much, and it feels so good, but ultimately the pump is counterproductive to strength. When we rock climb, the pump is our worst enemy.

A central idea of HIT training, and advocates of it like Yates and Mentzer, is that the pump is meaningless in regards to growth. One of the advantages of HIT training is you don't get that pumped on your first exercise so you are much stronger for your 2nd and so on.

I personally like to take a middle road, where I go for strength not pump on the first 1-2 exercises, then finish with an exercise I push the pump on (I like to add in a range of motion exercise at the very end after this sometimes nowadays, got this from JM).

When I made my best gains in my 20s training pure Yates style, I gave zero shits about the pump and even avoided it. My experience rock climbing the and negative effect of the pump there reinforced what I read from Mentzer and Yates and they seemed to be correct for the most part.

Damn it feels good though!

 

[Matsuo Munefusa]

It's funny, we push the idea of the pump so much, and it feels so good, but ultimately the pump is counterproductive to strength. When we rock climb, the pump is our worst enemy.

A central idea of HIT training, and advocates of it like Yates and Mentzer, is that the pump is meaningless in regards to growth. One of the advantages of HIT training is you don't get that pumped on your first exercise so you are much stronger for your 2nd and so on.

I personally like to take a middle road, where I go for strength not pump on the first 1-2 exercises, then finish with an exercise I push the pump on (I like to add in a range of motion exercise at the very end after this sometimes nowadays, got this from JM).

When I made my best gains in my 20s training pure Yates style, I gave zero shits about the pump and even avoided it. My experience rock climbing the and negative effect of the pump there reinforced what I read from Mentzer and Yates and they seemed to be correct for the most part.

Damn it feels good though!

Boom exactly. Finally. You put into words what I could never elucidate in my own thought process. Thanks man.