# The slower your reps, the more your muscles grow



## Arnold (Jan 6, 2012)

*The slower your reps, the more your muscles grow*

Research done by Nicholas Burd, a sports scientist in the Stuart Phillips stable, may well radically change the way we do strength training in the coming decade. Then again, it might not work. Nevertheless, 'muscle time under tension' looks set to become a familiar concept, and one we can't ignore.

We first reported on Burd's research in the summer of 2010. The subject then was a study in which men who had trained with just 30 percent of their maximal weight ??? doing 20-30 reps ??? had built more muscle proteins than men who had trained in the traditional way.

The researchers' theory is that weight isn't the most important factor in strength training, or at least not the only important factor. Equally important is 'muscle time under tension': the amount of time that muscles are placed under tension during weight lifting. Elite trainer Charles Poliquin has been telling that yor years. [charlespoliquin.com]

The researchers will now soon publish the results of their latest study in The Journal of Physiology, in which they subjected the left and right legs of strength athletes to two different workouts. They got the men to train one leg on a leg-extension machine, using weights at 30 percent of their 1RM. The men had to perform the movements slowly, taking 6 seconds for both the concentric and the eccentric movement. The men trained at failure and did 3 sets. [SLOW]

With the other leg the men had to perform the same number of sets, with the same weight. But they performed these movements 'normally' and therefore didn't train at failure. [CTL]

Immediately after the workout the subjects drank a shake containing 20 g whey, and another one 24 hours later.

The workout with the slow reps resulted in the highest muscle protein synthesis ??? the researchers saw this when they examined cells they had extracted from the leg muscles of the test subjects. This was true for both the contracting myofibrillar protein [the protein in the muscle fibres] and the mitochondrial protein [the cells' power packs]. The latter suggests that strength training with slow reps may be interesting for endurance athletes too. 












The figure above shows how slow-rep strength training results in enhanced muscle protein synthesis. Electrode measurements show that the slow-rep sets induced more muscle fibres to be used in the movement.

"These results suggest that the time the muscle is under tension during exercise may be important in optimizing muscle growth", the researchers write. "This understanding enables us to better prescribe exercise to those wishing to build bigger muscles and to prevent muscle loss that occurs with aging or disease."

Perhaps we shouldn't write off the super-slow method just yet???

Source:
J Physiol. 2011 Nov 21. [Epub ahead of print].


----------



## ThreeGigs (Jan 6, 2012)

Bogus research. Sorry.

One leg was **TRAINED TO FAILURE**, the other was not trained to failure.

The leg that was trained to failure grew more.

Therefore, training to failure is better than not training to failure.

Same data, different conclusion. That shouldn't be possible in a well-designed experiment.


----------



## vancouver (Jan 6, 2012)

I'd like to see the same study done for 1-2 seconds concentric and 6 seconds eccentric vs. 6 seconds in both direction...


----------



## bjg (Jan 6, 2012)

from experience what suits me the best is lifting relatively fast on positive and slow on negative like trying to be explosive on positive and release slowly i would say 2-3 sec positive depending on weight used then 4-6 sec negative something like that.
i have tried slow reps a while back for a long time and did not see any benefits except wasting time. 
The idea is:
 to 1st make the muscle call on all the muscle fibers to work 
then 2nd the load should be big enough to make those fibers split and multiply. 
as you start lifting a group of fibers work at a time not all the muscle and when these fibers are getting tired (not enough nutrient supply) other fibers will come to help until all the fibers of the muscle are used. 
If you lift heavy for a short period like 2-3 reps lets say you will make the fibers split(break down) but not all of them not enough time to call on all the fibers, you will get stronger with low increase in size
if you lift lighter for  8 reps and fast with good acceleration is almost like doing 2-3 reps heavy same effect (almost depending on how explosive you are).
if you lift light but slow many reps you will have time to hit all the fibers but not much growth no splitting except for a beginner which is the case of the study probably.
so the muscle growth depends on two variables: Time and load. 
using weights that could be lifted 7-10 reps relatively fast in positive and slow in negatives will ensure the best of both ( note you cannot lift slowly 7-10 reps if you can then you need to increase the weight).


----------



## awhites1 (Jan 6, 2012)

Prince said:


> Research done by Nicholas Burd, a sports scientist in the Stuart Phillips stable, may well radically change the way we do strength training in the coming decade. *Then again, it might not work*.



LMAO. I was like ok way to hype your story. 

HUGE BREAKTHROUGH.... or not. 


I'm not much of a believer in claims like this. I'm sure like any other training method it's got it's place but that's just it, as a niche of someone's workout.


----------



## OTG85 (Jan 6, 2012)

Why fix it if it ain't broken


----------



## pjreiff (Jan 6, 2012)

interesting Mike Mentzer training video on youtube.  

Mike Mentzer's HIT: Chest & Back - Part I - YouTube


----------



## Ziggy1333 (Jan 6, 2012)

Slow down fast up all the way


----------



## CowPimp (Jan 7, 2012)

That's interesting, but there's some problems with the setup of this study.  First of all, the second group performed sets using 30% of their 1RM not going to failure.  It's not surprising that this didn't result in much.  I wonder what the difference would have been supposing that this group performed a very high number of repetitions and went to failure.

The other issue is there's no comparison to more traditional loading parameters.  I wonder how the effects are relative to a more traditional 3x8 @ 75% kind of scheme.

There's also no indication of the training status of the individuals.  If they're beginners, this is less telling.  There's already research out there indicating that as little as 40% of the 1RM can promote some of the adaptations to strength training in a novice lifter.  There's also research indicating that over time, as one's training status increases, the minimum intensity threshold necessary to see adaptation increases.  Therefore, training slowly and at a low intensity may produce some results in novice lifters, but become less useful with training age.

What this study does say is that it's not just total work performed that makes the muscle respond.  However, that was sort of already established since studies have been done showing the importance of the eccentric phase in producing results, and other studies showing adaptation resulting from isometric movements.

Nonetheless, I would be curious to see more research done in this area using a variety of intensities, different control group parameters, and with more advanced lifters.  It certainly makes it worth pursuing, I'm just not jumping to any conclusions yet.


----------



## Powermaster (Jan 7, 2012)

^^^ agree. 30% of their 1RM is a joke.
None the less this is an interesting point:
"The workout with the slow reps resulted in the highest muscle protein synthesis"
Other studies have reported explosive sets increase hormonal responses.
Putting both together supports the theory that non linear periodization training is more effective for both hypertrophy and strength.


----------



## ak1951 (Apr 9, 2013)

The Key to me is TUL. If you do 10 sets fast one up one down = 40 seconds. You do 4 sets 4 2 4= 40 seconds. You did twice the work out with less than half the sets and Mike's thinking is that less is better for faster recovery and to start the "growth machinery". Also the second key is to max the weight you lift. It is really hard at first to get a feel for your max weight. A light weight feels really heavy but that is where your heart and concentration come to play. The intensity makes a two fold difference in the work out. Twice the damage for less than half the work. I made a vid in 1980 that was onto the same principal as Mike but I called it "Hydraulic" lifting. I imagined myself as a machine, a hydraulic press machine = controlled movement same speed up same speed down. But I varied the speed some as the weight got heavy but never went below a 2 1 2 second lift. I never liked the 10 second lifts but they can be great for a warm up and help to train yourself to slow down. I like to stay in the 2 to 6 second range. As a change up I also like the stutter lifts where I would stop the weight 2 3 or 4 times moving up and down. It is a bit like isometrics which was the first thing I tried as a kid to build muscle. Obviously iso won't work for real size building but it did build some strength and I think it can be incorporated in some lifts. As Mike has said...it also depends on your genetics so it takes time to find what works best for you...or not... The big thing is to not over train which I fall into over and over again. I just won't learn the lesson and I teach it!!!


----------



## Burrn (Apr 9, 2013)

Thanks pj for the video. I for one, did not ignore it. Appreciate it buddy!.
Burrn


----------



## Burrn (Apr 9, 2013)

You might want to read the opposite:
fast reps make muscles bigger than slow reps
good article


----------



## ak1951 (Apr 9, 2013)

When I start out my HIT work out that is exactly what I use to start out with 25% of my max weight. I just did bench yesterday and I did (I only count one end of the bar cuz I don't know numbers that low!) 25x10 45x8 55x9 65x8 75x7 with the 4 2 4 cadence. Today my chest felt sore and over trained big time from 5 HIT sets with nothing weight! My max on bench right now is around 350 (my PR years ago was 525). Today I did Tri's with what I would consider beginner play weight - push down cable 25x15 warm up , skull crusher 60x10, close grip bench 125x8, push down 50 x7 @ 4 2 4 lifts. My tri's were like balloons and so tight they hurt! HIT is not a joke. I am recovering from sever almost life threatening over training where 2 weeks ago my heart was acting up and I was so depressed I was thinking really stupid thoughts. I am not recovered yet but feel way better! I know I should just lay off totally but I am off the cardio so everything is going to recovery. I figure just slow down for a while and the recovery will catch up. Mike would not like that but I have an addictive personality and have to go to the gym at least 4 times a week just to stay sane. Lucky I work Fri, Sat and Sun so I can't go! But then my job is labor intensive so that does not help recovery either. Of course being 62 REALLY does not help!!! Mike said if you use proper lifting intensity with enough recover you WILL gain strength and size EACH work out. He also said to try it for 4 to 8 weeks but after just a few workouts I am convinced he is right. Plus he was always my fav. body builder. Love Ahhhnold...but I think Mike had the best over all symmetry of anyone. Mike died so that I might be saved!


----------



## ak1951 (Apr 9, 2013)

I will NEVER say something works or does not work because it is stupid to do so. The variables are endless. I can only speak for myself or others I have personally worked out with. I do know that I have fast reped myself into oblivion and got ZERO net size and strength from it but will still open and close a work out with it...well not right now but I did. I considered the reps simply an exhaustion move to set up the last lift to failure but the 4 2 4 makes use of every bit of movement and does not throw away the positive part (the weakest part) of the lift. I think of fast reps as exercise and an isometric combo (if you hold contractions) but not a body builder lift. But that could be just me. Plus as an avid writer and reader I KNOW you can make anything sound good on paper. Just read the ads for aminos...LOL  I use to get results from rest pause and stutter lifts and concentration 1/4 or half moves at failure and negatives with a partner but I have never considered using full on 10 second 4 2 4 contraction lifts for the entire work out and I never really warped my mind around the negative part being the power portion of the lift. A real eye opener for me. At the very least I am going to stick with HIT for a few months and see what happens. And the beat goes on...as Sony and Cher would say.


----------



## ak1951 (Apr 9, 2013)

ak1951 said:


> I will NEVER say something works or does not work because it is stupid to do so. The variables are endless. I can only speak for myself or others I have personally worked out with. I do know that I have fast reped myself into oblivion and got ZERO net size and strength from it but will still open and close a work out with it...well not right now but I did. I considered the reps simply an exhaustion move to set up the last lift to failure but the 4 2 4 makes use of every bit of movement and does not throw away the positive part (the weakest part) of the lift. I think of fast reps as exercise and an isometric combo (if you hold contractions) but not a body builder lift. But that could be just me. Plus as an avid writer and reader I KNOW you can make anything sound good on paper. Just read the ads for aminos...LOL  I use to get results from rest pause and stutter lifts and concentration 1/4 or half moves at failure and negatives with a partner but I have never considered using full on 10 second 4 2 4 contraction lifts for the entire work out and I never really warped my mind around the negative part being the power portion of the lift. A real eye opener for me. At the very least I am going to stick with HIT for a few months and see what happens. And the beat goes on...as Sony and Cher would say.



(Got timed out on my edit...I hate that!) I will NEVER say something works or does not work because it is stupid  to do so. The variables are endless. I can only speak for myself or  others I have personally worked out with. I do know that I have fast  reped myself into oblivion and got ZERO net size and strength from it  but will still open and close a work out with it...well not right now  but I did. I considered the reps simply an exhaustion move to set up the  last lift to failure but the 4 2 4 makes use of every bit of movement  from rep ONE and does not throw away the positive part (the weakest  part) of the lift. I think of fast reps as exercise and an isometric  combo (if you hold contractions) but not a body builder lift. But that  could be just me. 

Plus as an avid writer and reader I KNOW you can make anything sound  good on paper...including HIT. Just read the ads for aminos...LOL 

 I use to get results from rest pause and stutter lifts and  concentration 1/4 or half moves at failure and negatives with a partner  but I have never considered using full on 10 second 4 2 4 contraction  lifts for the entire work out and I never really warped my mind around  the negative part being the power portion of the lift. A real eye opener  for me. At the very least I am going to stick with HIT for a few months  and see what happens. And the beat goes on...as Sony and Cher would  say.

I will have to say in defense of speed fast twitch muscle stimulation  that it could be wise to utilize fast reps in combo or as a change up.  What could it hurt? As I said...I like to open and close with speed  lifts. But with HIT you are only working with a 3 to 6 total sets per  muscle group. A good method may be to use HIT one week and speed  training the next for those that simply can't stay out of the gym...like  me! Just a few thoughts that don't really mean much.

I think the bottom line is like Mike said "Where do you draw the line?" I  have fallen to over training so many times I can't count them. I have  lost size and strength and have been so stubborn I would not stop  thinking I will just pick up more cardio and build my way out of this  making me even bigger and stronger even if it kills me and it has come  close!!!! DELUSIONAL THINKING!!!! You would think an old fart would know  better! Over training and carbs have been my demise. I simply HATE  giving up the size to compete. I like looking like a Mac Truck! 

I believe over training is one of ... if not THE worst problem most of  us have and EVERYONE with any heart at all will eventually succumb to  it. NO ONE IS IMMUNE to over training. How we learn to get around it is  the game we play. 

Less is more? It simply does not compute.


----------



## Burrn (Apr 10, 2013)

C'mon ak......a lot to read dude....whew!


----------



## BGOTTIR (Apr 12, 2013)

yeah, sounds like my nights (in the day) when I had way too much of that white stuff!


----------



## heavylifting1 (Apr 13, 2013)

I disagree I believe it can help stimulate muscle fiber, but I disagree.


----------



## Adammac (May 5, 2013)

Fast positive, slow negative


----------



## Justliftweights (May 5, 2013)

I like the concept


----------



## OldSchoolLifter (May 5, 2013)

Static lifts and holds. Working your fast twitch and slow twitch muscles. 

Power the weight up, and slowly bring it down, and repeat. 

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I747 using Tapatalk 2


----------



## j2048b (May 5, 2013)

I actually got an ebook called x reps and it has this exact topic in it.... Slow reps, TUT TIME UNDER TENSION...with a heavy ass weight actually allows 2 different portions to grow myofibrilis, and sarcoplasm ... I have a buddy who sent me the book and he got freaking huge! Like traps to his ears... Also talks about drop sets, double drop sets and huge negatives!! 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Watson (May 6, 2013)

i always slow the last 2 reps in each set down to get some nasty burn going...


----------



## ak1951 (May 7, 2013)

Griffith said:


> i always slow the last 2 reps in each set down to get some nasty burn going...


Why only do 2 reps correctly?


----------



## ak1951 (May 7, 2013)

For a more complete anology please go here: HOW TO BODY BUILD FOR REAL | Health


----------



## ak1951 (May 7, 2013)

heavylifting1 said:


> I disagree I believe it can help stimulate muscle fiber, but I disagree.



Very simple experiment with 3 sets. Try it on bench. Use 25% of your max weight and do 10 4 2 4 reps. Four seconds 2 seconds hold 4 seconds. 10 second reps. Because you are using light weight your time between sets will be negligible 20 seconds or less. Then add 20% of what is on the bar and do 10 reps. Then add 20% again and do 10 reps. I think you will find that you will fail to get 10 on the last set...with baby weight! Let me know how it goes please. If you want the full explination as to why this works go here: HOW TO BODY BUILD FOR REAL | Health


----------



## ak1951 (May 7, 2013)

j2048b said:


> I actually got an ebook called x reps and it has this exact topic in it.... Slow reps, TUT TIME UNDER TENSION...with a heavy ass weight actually allows 2 different portions to grow myofibrilis, and sarcoplasm ... I have a buddy who sent me the book and he got freaking huge! Like traps to his ears... Also talks about drop sets, double drop sets and huge negatives!!
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk



All those lifts you speak of live in the static HIT (High Intensity Training) body building field. Ballistic lifting is for power lifters. There are many!!! ways to lift...HIT is one of them and it is good to know as many ways to lift as possible to prevent injury and going stale. It amazes me how many will simply turn away from HIT and not even try it!?


----------



## Hench (May 8, 2013)

The study obviously has it flaws however based on my own training and that of clients Im inclined to agree with his conclusions, despite the somewhat random loading comparison. 

I feel more important to optimum growth is the removal of all momentum from the movement as well as the increased mental focus on maximum muscular contraction associated with that method of execution. Whether this occurs over a 6 second ecc. & con. period, as opposed to 3 seconds in either direction or even something like 6 ecc. &Y 3 con. is secondary in importance to the two factors mentioned previously.


----------



## ak1951 (May 9, 2013)

Hench said:


> The study obviously has it flaws however based on my own training and that of clients Im inclined to agree with his conclusions, despite the somewhat random loading comparison.
> 
> I feel more important to optimum growth is the removal of all momentum from the movement as well as the increased mental focus on maximum muscular contraction associated with that method of execution. Whether this occurs over a 6 second ecc. & con. period, as opposed to 3 seconds in either direction or even something like 6 ecc. &Y 3 con. is secondary in importance to the two factors mentioned previously.



"is secondary in importance" I have to say that the TUL (time under load) IS very important. In fact it is the bottom line in the high intesity. Without the prolonged TUL then you are simply back to lifting "normally". I will say that when you find you max weight at 4 2 4 lifting (about half of your MR weight) you can play with heavier weights by shortening the TUL as you say. But this is not true HIT lifting...this is of your own design and that is wonderful and a part of my training method. I did a full month of strict HIT lifting and it was an amazing eye opener. I was shaking like a newbe at first. It is a tremendous shock to your nervous system hence the need to stay with lighter weights until you graduate from kindergarten. We started with 3 sets making sure that the last set was just barely 10 reps. I have talked to many people that know of HIT and most all say "that training sucks" because it is not an easy way to lift. But the big boys understand it.

The rule is...there are no rules. However there are specific conditions to each training method of either ballistic or static training. I think where many get confused is that when a "method" of lifting is presented they feel the information is meant to be the "exact" and only way to lift weights. I have been lifting 40 years and it is amazing how much there is still to learn. Especially as you age...EVERYTHING CHANGES and a person has to be able to change along with it or fail. Over training becomes even more critical. The phenomena of maximum size and strength is also an issue. In the beginning you can do virtually anything and do everything wrong or incorrect and as long as you don't hurt yourself you can get good results. But as you achieve your normal maximum muscle level, gains slow to a stand still. It is wrong to think you can simply go on forever gaining muscle. That is why I think it is so critical to learn as many lifting methods as possible so you have alternative tools in your belt to throw at your training. Obviously true size takes weight. HIT is almost an isometric exercise and once a person learns to preform it perfectly and fully understand it...then it is possible to mix it up with heavy weights. Everything is fair game in body building and each form of lifting has its time and place. But the ONE true statement you will hear from EVERY pro is "NEVER GIVE UP YOUR FORM". Form is the number one thing that HIT teaches you and it will guide you in all your other methods of training. IMHO. There are many ways to adjust HIT to allow for heavy weight lifting and they can be incorporated into each work out or exchanged from work out to work out. But the bottom line is to LEARN how to properly HIT train because I believe it will make a tremendous difference in your work outs and especially down the road as you get older because it helps to slow over training and injury.


----------



## Hench (May 15, 2013)

ak1951 said:


> "is secondary in importance" I have to say that the TUL (time under load) IS very important. In fact it is the bottom line in the high intesity. Without the prolonged TUL then you are simply back to lifting "normally". I will say that when you find you max weight at 4 2 4 lifting (about half of your MR weight) you can play with heavier weights by shortening the TUL as you say. But this is not true HIT lifting...this is of your own design and that is wonderful and a part of my training method. I did a full month of strict HIT lifting and it was an amazing eye opener. I was shaking like a newbe at first. It is a tremendous shock to your nervous system hence the need to stay with lighter weights until you graduate from kindergarten. We started with 3 sets making sure that the last set was just barely 10 reps. I have talked to many people that know of HIT and most all say "that training sucks" because it is not an easy way to lift. But the big boys understand it.
> 
> The rule is...there are no rules. However there are specific conditions to each training method of either ballistic or static training. I think where many get confused is that when a "method" of lifting is presented they feel the information is meant to be the "exact" and only way to lift weights. I have been lifting 40 years and it is amazing how much there is still to learn. Especially as you age...EVERYTHING CHANGES and a person has to be able to change along with it or fail. Over training becomes even more critical. The phenomena of maximum size and strength is also an issue. In the beginning you can do virtually anything and do everything wrong or incorrect and as long as you don't hurt yourself you can get good results. But as you achieve your normal maximum muscle level, gains slow to a stand still. It is wrong to think you can simply go on forever gaining muscle. That is why I think it is so critical to learn as many lifting methods as possible so you have alternative tools in your belt to throw at your training. Obviously true size takes weight. HIT is almost an isometric exercise and once a person learns to preform it perfectly and fully understand it...then it is possible to mix it up with heavy weights. Everything is fair game in body building and each form of lifting has its time and place. But the ONE true statement you will hear from EVERY pro is "NEVER GIVE UP YOUR FORM". Form is the number one thing that HIT teaches you and it will guide you in all your other methods of training. IMHO. There are many ways to adjust HIT to allow for heavy weight lifting and they can be incorporated into each work out or exchanged from work out to work out. But the bottom line is to LEARN how to properly HIT train because I believe it will make a tremendous difference in your work outs and especially down the road as you get older because it helps to slow over training and injury.



I think you misunderstood my point slightly, however I agree with most everything you've said. Would love to debate this in detail with you but time is short. 

I would like to mention the last point you've made however, being able to perform HIT in its truest form takes months and months of progression and conditioning, both mental and physical. Our minds consistently quit long before our bodies do, particularly in response to pain or lactate build up as opposed to actual fatigue. I have come on leaps and bounds with my own tolerances, and the aesthetic and performances results reflect this. However it is only now becoming apparent how much further I have to go, or to phrase it another way how much of a soft c**t I still am! lol 

Also when I do finally get somewhere near my true performance limits I want to play around with training volume, and see to what extent it can be reduce and still maintain or improve performance/appearance while using the HIT model.


----------



## LAM (May 15, 2013)

Hench said:


> The study obviously has it flaws however based on my own training and that of clients Im inclined to agree with his conclusions, despite the somewhat random loading comparison.
> 
> I feel more important to optimum growth is the removal of all momentum from the movement as well as the increased mental focus on maximum muscular contraction associated with that method of execution. Whether this occurs over a 6 second ecc. & con. period, as opposed to 3 seconds in either direction or even something like 6 ecc. &Y 3 con. is secondary in importance to the two factors mentioned previously.



building bar speed is far more of a factor in power lifting then it is for stimulating hypertrophy.  not enough people realize that it's the eccentric portion of the lift where the majority of microtrauma occurs so focus too much on the concentric portion.


----------

