# Adding weight vs. Lowering rest period



## Gissurjon (Jan 1, 2012)

I googled it and found nothing, so I'm asking you guys which method you think is more suitable to add size. 

lets just use 10x10 as the format and the exercise would be bench press.. or whatever

#1 10x10/185 lbs and 60 seconds of rest 
#2 10x10/ 190 lbs, 60 second rest
and so on...

or,

#1 10x10/185 lbs 60 second rest
#2 10x10/185 lbs 45 second rest
#3 10x10/185 lbs 30 second rest
add weight and repeat from beginning

keep in mind the sets and rep ranges I use here are arbitrary


----------



## GFR (Jan 1, 2012)

Who the fuck rests 30 seconds between sets?


----------



## Ziggy1333 (Jan 1, 2012)

2 min minimum


----------



## x~factor (Jan 1, 2012)

Do you guys actually time yourselves when resting?


----------



## Gissurjon (Jan 1, 2012)

GeorgeForemanRules said:


> Who the fuck rests 30 seconds between sets?


 
the numbers are arbitrary, their only purpose is to illustrate the "theory". 



x~factor said:


> Do you guys actually time yourselves when resting?


 
yes, I track progress in general. 5 sets of 10 reps with a rest period of 2 min is not the same as same rep-set-weight range with 1 minute of rest.


----------



## CaptainNapalm (Jan 1, 2012)

You're better off upping the weight and maintaining constant rest periods


----------



## Gissurjon (Jan 1, 2012)

CaptainNapalm said:


> You're better off upping the weight and maintaining constant rest periods


 
Do you know why? I'm not being an ass just trying to learn here.


----------



## Curlingcadys (Jan 2, 2012)

Gissurjon said:


> Do you know why? I'm not being an ass just trying to learn here.


 
What you feel with quick short rest is the taxation of your CNS, yes your muscles haven't been able to recoup much either, common sense, but your CNS taxed is going to restrain you more than you want for your goals. If you were cutting I'd say go for it, I love the short rest method, with lighter weight. Progressive loading as was allready mentioned would yield you better results with the longer rest/recoup period. Not take a nap type break but sufficient enough to put everything back into your next set WITH adding more weight set to set with in reason keeping a good rep range and form. Kicking in hypertrophy training basically.


----------



## kboy (Jan 2, 2012)

Curlingcadys said:


> What you feel with quick short rest is the taxation of your CNS, yes your muscles haven't been able to recoup much either, common sense, but your CNS taxed is going to restrain you more than you want for your goals. If you were cutting I'd say go for it, I love the short rest method, with lighter weight. Progressive loading as was allready mentioned would yield you better results with the longer rest/recoup period. Not take a nap type break but sufficient enough to put everything back into your next set WITH adding more weight set to set with in reason keeping a good rep range and form. Kicking in hypertrophy training basically.




X2


----------



## Gissurjon (Jan 2, 2012)

Curlingcadys said:


> *What you feel with quick short rest is the taxation of your CNS, yes your muscles haven't been able to recoup much either, common sense, but your CNS taxed is going to restrain you more than you want for your goals*. If you were cutting I'd say go for it, I love the short rest method, with lighter weight. Progressive loading as was allready mentioned would yield you better results with the longer rest/recoup period. Not take a nap type break but sufficient enough to put everything back into your next set WITH adding more weight set to set with in reason keeping a good rep range and form. Kicking in hypertrophy training basically.


 

Doesn't this sort of go against the philosophy of programs like 10x10 and rest pause methods, where the rest intervals are kept pretty short and CNS taxation surely is a big factor? or even using super sets/ compound sets.


----------



## bjg (Jan 2, 2012)

Gissurjon said:


> I googled it and found nothing, so I'm asking you guys which method you think is more suitable to add size.
> 
> lets just use 10x10 as the format and the exercise would be bench press.. or whatever
> 
> ...



here is my opinion for building size.
to build size your should use weights that you can do 7-15 reps normally 8-10 is good. rest period depends on people but should not exceed 3 mins.
i rest around 45sec to a minute max between sets when sets are done using 8 to 10 reps i start by doing 10 and at the end i reach 7 because i'll get tired. so choose the weight that you can do 12 times lets say and don't rest too much , your reps will be at the end around 8 which is still ok. other people need  longer rest around 2 minutes to keep the rep range at least 7 or 8. 
now adding weight should not affect your rest period because when you add weight you cannot go to 8 reps so it is basically almost the same. like if you choose a weight that you can do once you don't need that much time to recover in fact you recover faster than when doing 12 reps.
So to build size you can use weights that you can do 3to 6 times only but you shorten the rest between sets like around 30 sec. this way it would be lets say equivalent to doing sets of 12 reps with one minute rest.(you start with 6 and at the end you will be at 3 because you will be tired)

if you want to build pure strength then use low reps 3to 5 and rest more around 2 minutes between sets in a way that you are always at your maximum strength.


----------



## Gissurjon (Jan 2, 2012)

bjg said:


> here is my opinion for building size.
> to build size your should use weights that you can do 7-15 reps normally 8-10 is good. rest period depends on people but should not exceed 3 mins.
> i rest around 45sec to a minute max between sets when sets are done using 8 to 10 reps i start by doing 10 and at the end i reach 7 because i'll get tired. so choose the weight that you can do 12 times lets say and don't rest too much , your reps will be at the end around 8 which is still ok. other people need longer rest around 2 minutes to keep the rep range at least 7 or 8.
> now adding weight should not affect your rest period because when you add weight you cannot go to 8 reps so it is basically almost the same. like if you choose a weight that you can do once you don't need that much time to recover in fact you recover faster than when doing 12 reps.
> ...


 
I appreciate your response but I wasn't really looking for advice, more just trying to start a discussion in order to gain knowledge on a certain "theory". As I stated above, the numbers in the original post are just made up numbers. What I was looking for was which method out of two is better, not whatever method is "best". Couple of people have told me their opinion, now I just want to know why. 
Usually people have a certain opinion on the way to gain size but can't tell you why it is better.

That's all, just a dude in quest of knowledge.


----------



## Gissurjon (Jan 2, 2012)

Plus I got tired of "how do I get my biceps to grow" threads, and was hoping to get people thinking while learning something.


----------



## GFR (Jan 2, 2012)

Curlingcadys said:


> What you feel with quick short rest is the taxation of your CNS, yes your muscles haven't been able to recoup much either, common sense, but your CNS taxed is going to restrain you more than you want for your goals.


Post some data to back this up. Sounds like bro logic to me.


----------



## Gissurjon (Jan 2, 2012)

GeorgeForemanRules said:


> Post some data to back this up. Sounds like bro logic to me.


 
well if clearly goes against the methods used in some of the programs i listed above so I'm kind of confused.


----------



## Curlingcadys (Jan 2, 2012)

Gissurjon said:


> Doesn't this sort of go against the philosophy of programs like 10x10 and rest pause methods, where the rest intervals are kept pretty short and CNS taxation surely is a big factor? or even using super sets/ compound sets.


 
Yep. Some see no difference in gains, I always seem to yield better results after resting the group I'm working say 1.5 - 2min and being able to up the weight I'm lifting set to set until I hit say 5 reps. Load increasing. If I shorten my rest I'll only be able to up the weight once or twice and I get taxed twice as fast it seems (the muscle group), and for bulking purposes within myself its not as productive as resting for a couple min. Sure one could say "hell you taxed your muscles twice as fast, whats the problem?" There's a difference in taxing a muscle from "rapid fire lifting" (short - no rests)with the same weight vs taking that rest and taxing your muscles by progressively increasing that weight set to set. 
NOW come cut time yes I will cut rest and cut the wieght a hair and increase my reps. On the flip side there are times where I don't have my full alloted time to work out then I will superset with opposing muscle groups, still quite CNS taxing BUT group 1 is resting while group 2 is working and for the most part I can still increase my loads set to set quite well, maybe I'll have to drop a set.


----------



## Curlingcadys (Jan 2, 2012)

GeorgeForemanRules said:


> Post some data to back this up. Sounds like bro logic to me.


 

Better yet go try it. Let that be your data. Go little to no rest between sets increasing your loads every set then compare it the next week taking even just a 1.5min - 2min rest. You'll be happier with week 2, being able to up the weight as you desired set to set and/or get the reps you wanted as well. Or you're not lifting heavy enough.

yes I also realize the longer rest is geared towards strength gains, and yes its been proven you can still build muscle with the shorter rest as well, I'm speaking mainly from a personal stand point, Ilike my results better and my over all work outs at their end taking that rest and getting everything out of it from having a little bit more rest between sets.


----------



## Gissurjon (Jan 3, 2012)

Curlingcadys said:


> Better yet go try it. Let that be your data. Go little to no rest between sets increasing your loads every set then compare it the next week taking even just a 1.5min - 2min rest. You'll be happier with week 2, being able to up the weight as you desired set to set and/or get the reps you wanted as well. Or you're not lifting heavy enough.
> 
> yes I also realize the longer rest is geared towards strength gains, and yes its been proven you can still build muscle with the shorter rest as well, I'm speaking mainly from a personal stand point, Ilike my results better and my over all work outs at their end taking that rest and getting everything out of it from having a little bit more rest between sets.


 
Thanks for the answer.

The only problem with "it works for me" is that we are all different. So the only effective way to really know what is better than what, is to study groups that contain many diffiirent individuals and evaluate what consistently produces the maximum results. 

That, I believe, is the reason he asked you to back it up. That also was kinda the information I was seeking or at least something with an explanation that stated why it works better or worse.


----------



## GFR (Jan 3, 2012)

Curlingcadys said:


> Better yet go try it.


I see I was correct then, it was just stupid bro logic. Thanks for proving my point.


----------



## Curlingcadys (Jan 3, 2012)

Gissurjon said:


> Thanks for the answer.
> 
> The only problem with "it works for me" is that we are all different. So the only effective way to really know what is better than what, is to study groups that contain many diffiirent individuals and evaluate what consistently produces the maximum results.
> 
> That, I believe, is the reason he asked you to back it up. That also was kinda the information I was seeking or at least something with an explanation that stated why it works better or worse.


 
I do agree 110% that were all different, data or not. Yes data will show what's statisticaly shown for better results but does it really solidify whats best for YOU? Or me? thus creating a "cookie cutter" sure fire thing simply because of "data"? nope. why? cause were all different. Now yes somthing with overwhelming research is worth a shot, I'm not trying to be retarded here I'm just saying it just may not be "the key" for everybody.


----------



## Curlingcadys (Jan 3, 2012)

GeorgeForemanRules said:


> I see I was correct then, it was just stupid bro logic. Thanks for proving my point.


 
How about trial and error method/logic of what works for somebody? Quite honestly the best method for one finding a program/routine that works for them. Researching then trying it out. Just because another "study" said its the latest and greatest doesn't mean it's going to be optimal for you-period.

Why don't you actually contribute to the thread besides just being a smart ass, you're a mod. set an example for a change.


----------



## Gissurjon (Jan 3, 2012)

Curlingcadys said:


> I do agree 110% that were all different, data or not. Yes data will show what's statisticaly shown for better results but does it really solidify whats best for* YOU*? Or me? thus creating a "cookie cutter" sure fire thing simply because of "data"? nope. why? cause were all different. Now yes somthing with overwhelming research is worth a shot, I'm not trying to be retarded here I'm just saying it just may not be "the key" for everybody.


 
Nope but the purpose of a research is so one doesn't have to test everything out there to find out what works or is likely to work...


----------



## Curlingcadys (Jan 3, 2012)

Gissurjon said:


> Nope but the purpose of a research is so one doesn't have to test everything out there to find out what works or is likely to work...


 
You're right research is valuable, I research constantly and is very usefull in narrowing the field per se on effective routines/programs, but trial and error is still necessary, with in the studys of effective programs and maybe tweaking a detail such as rest time, thats all I'm stating which is why I posted what I did originally, I personally found somthing that doesn't jive with a few popular programs, as you pointed out, but has worked very well for me.

Don't take me wrong, I'm not trying to create a pissing match, just trying to keep the open mind "open" that routines/programs/techniques that don't completely go with the grain/popular vote/"data" just may work for you- but one doesn't know until they try it and track their personal results.

Not implying you do or don't, but so many people don't want to give somthing a shot if there isn't studys behind it like its the end of the world when they try somthing for a few weeks and it turns out not to be the best. Or are so tunnel visioned that they just wont try anything if there isn't a truck load of "data" behind it....generally speaking its the downfall of much progression in anything- one being stuck in the box rather than thinking and stepping out of it.


----------



## Powermaster (Jan 4, 2012)

Actually rest periods replenish APT (adenosine triphosphate) storage in muscle. ATP is your muscles immediate energy source which gets depleted very rapidly. The closer you get to maximum effort the longer the rest period is required 1 to 3 minutes is a general rule for most but powerlifters doing one rep max efforts can (and should) go much longer.


More info: http://www.creationresearch.org/crsq/articles/36/36_1/atp.html


----------



## JMedic79 (Jan 4, 2012)

boom! now go fix your hair, cuz powermaster just blew your mind...


----------



## ckcrown84 (Jan 5, 2012)

Adding weight is the better method.
IMO (I am sure many agree) that it is more work on the muscle to increase the load and maintain a steady rest period. 
In my experience lowering rest period does give a hell of a burn, but it is largely artificial. Just a bunch of blood pumped into my muscles. I feel fine within a few hours usually. However, increasing that load progressively and making sure I get enough rest between sets to really push myself gives me a heck of a workout. One that it takes a few days to recover from.


----------



## Gissurjon (Jan 6, 2012)

ckcrown84 said:


> Adding weight is the better method.
> IMO (I am sure many agree) that it is more work on the muscle to increase the load and maintain a steady rest period.
> In my experience lowering rest period does give a hell of a burn, but it is largely artificial. Just a bunch of blood pumped into my muscles. I feel fine within a few hours usually. However, increasing that load progressively and making sure I get enough rest between sets to really push myself gives me a heck of a workout. One that it takes a few days to recover from.



Did you read the other posts? I was looking for a "why" not a "it works good for me". Thanks for taking the time to reply though.


----------



## ckcrown84 (Jan 6, 2012)

Bud, i tried answering a part of why.
Heavier weight is going to break down more muscle fibers, even if it does require more rest between sets.
Lower weight is going to increase blood flow to the muscle, you will feel "artificially" tight (because of the blood flow) and not be able to complete as many sets (putting less load on the muscle)

read this: Rest Interval between Sets in Strength Training : Sports Medicine


----------



## Gissurjon (Jan 6, 2012)

ckcrown84 said:


> Bud, i tried answering a part of why.
> Heavier weight is going to break down more muscle fibers, even if it does require more rest between sets.
> Lower weight is going to increase blood flow to the muscle, you will feel "artificially" tight (because of the blood flow) and not be able to complete as many sets (putting less load on the muscle)
> 
> read this: Rest Interval between Sets in Strength Training : Sports Medicine



Here we go!


----------



## OnceWasFat (Jan 6, 2012)

Another recent study suggests that while constant rest periods is better for strength, reducing rest periods is better for size...at least among creatine users.

Creatine users build more muscle mass with shorter rests


----------



## GFR (Jan 6, 2012)

Curlingcadys said:


> How about trial and error method/logic of what works for somebody? Quite honestly the best method for one finding a program/routine that works for them. Researching then trying it out. Just because another "study" said its the latest and greatest doesn't mean it's going to be optimal for you-period.
> 
> Why don't you actually contribute to the thread besides just being a smart ass, you're a mod. set an example for a change.


Where is the data to support your bro logic???


All I see are personal attacks and circle talking.


----------



## Gissurjon (Jan 7, 2012)

OnceWasFat said:


> Another recent study suggests that while constant rest periods is better for strength, reducing rest periods is better for size...at least among creatine users.
> 
> Creatine users build more muscle mass with shorter rests


----------



## Curlingcadys (Jan 7, 2012)

GeorgeForemanRules said:


> Where is the data to support your bro logic???
> 
> 
> All I see are personal attacks and circle talking.


 
I'm pretty sure I've explained myself enough, in logical sense at that. I don't wish to attempt to reword it on a flash card level for you; the OP does understand my stand point he just isn't looking personal experience instances he wants legit studies for this thread, my fault for my contribution and we'll leave it at that.

Personal attacks?? I haven't seen any yet, I simply asked for you to provide a contribution for a change, thats not really an attack a simple look at your post history pretty much says it all you seem spend more time being cynical than helpfull as a mod should be.


----------

