- Joined
- Sep 25, 2002
- Messages
- 1,670
Well you caught me...I did skim and read "selectively." Now I see why both types of training (low load vs. high load) can both create a hypertrophic response. When using a lighter load, as the motor units that initially started the movement become fatigued, new motor units take over, thus creating a different activation pattern than when using a heavy load, but when reps are performed to failure will still yield a similar hypertrophic effect as using a heavy load. Am I on the right page with that?
Yeah, that's pretty much the bottom line from those two studies, but I think it's quite important to note that they were doing the 30%1RM-loaded sets to FAILURE. When you look at Table 2 of that study, you can see that the lighter load sets ended up being about 50% more "volume load" done (which they quantify as kg lifted x reps) and lasting nearly three times as long in terms of time under (less) tension.
Reps for the 30% 1RM set were about 24 (averaged over 4 sets, 3min. between sets, so more on the first set i presume), but these guys weren't just fiddling around with light loads. If they did a set of ~30, 26, 22 and 18 reps respectively, each to failure, that would average out to 24 reps / set over 4 sets. That would be pretty damn brutal, even for an isolation exercise...
-S