all posts post new thread

Barbell Does low rep strength and high rep endurance really vary?

Bull_Rush

Level 2 Valued Member
So on the obvious side, we got those who can bench at least five reps with 225 and can bench up to 315. It's very hard to imagine how a 315-pound bench presser can do less than five reps with 225.

But what if we're talking about some little guy with a max of 225 in the bench press and then you make him handle 135? That's a far-away difference, but not so far that the lighter one is pure endurance. It's not a max deadlift versus marathon jog. To those who are slow-twitch dominant, are they really gonna have a ridiculously awesome performance with that light weight compared to the pure strength guys? Or the difference is really not even that big?
 
This can vary widely by the person.

One of the variables in PlanStrong is whether you are a high or low endurance strength athlete. In StrongFirst's Reload program, created by Fabio Zonin, a test is performed to see how many reps can be performed with 80% 1RM and that number is used for later parts of the program. This example isn't a direct answer to your question but it does touch on how one can determine one's relative strength-endurance and then use that in creating good programs for a specific individual.

At the first US barbell cert, this was discussed with two specific people who were in the room as examples - both were strong lifters with 500 lb + deadlifts.

To the best of my knowledge, a person's size - "some little guy" - has nothing to do with this.

225 is a higher percentage of 315 than 135 is of 225, roughly 70% and 60%, respectively.

You might also wish to look into how Wilkes Points, DOTS, and other weight-corrected lifter evaluations metrics are calculated.

Strength endurance is a measurable variable so, yes, it's not like "max deadlift versus marathon job."

-S-
 
From experience, if all you ever do in training is five or fewer reps, you get a big reality check when you need to do higher rep work.

It’s a skill that needs to be trained.

An example is heavy squatters that use monolifts. They can’t walk out a thousand pounds for a single step, but can squat it for a rep. But then you have strongman competitions where people are moving 1000 lb yokes all day, none of them could squat it though.

The power lifter never trained moving the weight and the strongman never trained squatting the weight. The demands of being under a weight for a long period of time are different than just spending a few seconds under the weight.

When I started exploring higher rep ranges my 80%1RM bench was maxed at 5. I’ve since moved that weight to 11 reps through practice.
 
I would typically prioritize improving max strength over strength endurance. Max strength crosses over to the other side better in my experience. This is even more true when one gets the endurance training from their chosen sport. I would suppose this is the StrongFirst approach in general.

Even with purely low rep training, there can be big differences between equally training athletes with equal 1RMs when testing for a rep max with a lighter weight. Training for the rep work obviously helps, but I think there's a significant genetic component when it comes to it, which may prove more important in the end. And when lifting, the range of motion becomes more important the longer the set is. How much that is genetic and how much skill, varies, I suppose.

Relatively very light loads are a different case, and I would believe in that context the more specific training becomes more important.
 
Once you get past 12-15 reps and def into 20+ the metabolic aspect of fatigue kicks in more and more. Is less about having enough strength and more about being able to deal with the buildup of tension-robbing metabolites.

That said, your top end makes a big difference.
 
Hello,

One is not necessarily obliged to perform only low repetition training or high repetition training. Both can be used simultaneously:
barbend.com

How Ultra High Rep (25+) Sets Can Improve Your Strength and Size

Using ultra-high rep sets in the gym can hold many benefits for improving your muscle's size and strength.
barbend.com barbend.com

Rethink Your Rep Range

The way you perform your reps can make a HUGE difference. Here's my breakdown on changes you can make to this crucial training variable.
www.jimstoppani.com www.jimstoppani.com

Kind regards,

Pet'
 
The question lost me a bit, but I have trained 5s consistently in bench for a few months now. My max reps on push-ups are up.
 
As we've talked about before, not all high rep sets are the same. Very very high rep work over long durations is a different beast and if, for example, you're pretty strong and comparing a 1rm vs max reps w. the empty bar, there's very little to correlate.
 
North Coast Miller said:
Once you get past 12-15 reps and def into 20+ the metabolic aspect of fatigue kicks in more and more. Is less about having enough strength and more about being able to deal with the buildup of tension-robbing metabolites.

That said, your top end makes a big difference.
Click to expand...

This would be my answer also.

Doing high rep sets is glycolytic. I've noticed after some gylcolytic peaking that I can do ridiculous high rep sets with a sub-max weight. Case in point, the week after a TSC (I had done some glycolytic peaking for the snatch event and had also been training deadlift up to 1RM of 305 lbs at the time) I was in the gym and felt like doing an AMRAP set of deadlifts at 225 lbs. I got an amazing 17. Normally I wouldn't have expected more than 10 or 12 at that weight with 305 as max. But the glycolysis kicked in like a turbocharger.




Moral of that story is, it may be more related to metabolism and recent training emphasis than actual muscle fiber composition.

And... this is also why CrossFitters can get to be "metcon pros"... they train glycolysis all the time. So the reps they can do and the time they can do them in is sometimes out of proportion to what "we" can do... meaning StrongFirst methodology trainees who normally emphasize pure strength, power, A+A, aerobic capacity... all the best qualities, and can support AMRAP or metcon performance, but we don't train that directly or max out the performance of it on a routine basis.... just the once or twice a month sessions, or until we need to do some glycolytic peaking for an event.
 
Last edited:
Bull_Rush said:
So on the obvious side, we got those who can bench at least five reps with 225 and can bench up to 315. It's very hard to imagine how a 315-pound bench presser can do less than five reps with 225.

But what if we're talking about some little guy with a max of 225 in the bench press and then you make him handle 135? That's a far-away difference, but not so far that the lighter one is pure endurance. It's not a max deadlift versus marathon jog. To those who are slow-twitch dominant, are they really gonna have a ridiculously awesome performance with that light weight compared to the pure strength guys? Or the difference is really not even that big?
Click to expand...

Here's a post I saw today that's relevant to your question.

1682597489095.png
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom