Time Under Tension
- Thread starter Shawn
- Start date
Kenny Croxdale
Level 7 Valued Member
Time Under Tension
How much Time Under Tension?
Hyperterophy/Bodybuilding
Maintaining a longer amount of Time Under Tension is effective with increasing Muscle Mass.
Amount of Tension Time
Strength Coach, Ian King indicated that around 20 - 40 seconds of Constant Tension in an Exercise the effective zone.
This method produces...
"The Pump"
During an Exercise with Moderate to High Repetition there is a incease in Arterial Blood Flow to the working Muscles.
The the Contraction of those Muscles restricts Venous Blood Flow back to the heart.
The Trapped Blood balloons the Muscle up, aka "The Pump".
This increases Lactate (not Lactic Acid) in the Muscles; which triggers a downstream anabolic, Muscle Building Effect.
Maintaining Constant Tension In An Exercise
Let's use the Bench Press as an example.
Not allowing the bar Rest on the Chest nor Lock Out, Maintains Constant Time Under Tension on the Muscles, magnifies "The Pump".
This is one of the fudamental principles to increasing Muscle Mass.
Strength Training
Performing Repetition with Heavy Loads and Lower Repetitions optimize Maximum Strength Development.
This means Less Time Under Tension in part for the following...
1) Fast Twitch Muscle Fiber are innervated and developed in an Exercise that last around 10 Seconds.
After around 10 seconds Maximum Strength, Power and Speed drop like a rock. The Fast Twitch Muscle Fiber are not being trained nore developed.
2) The Increase In Lactate (Not Lactic Acid)
An increase in Muscle Lactate is one the main factors for increasing Muscle Mass.
However, an increase in Muscle Lactate decrease Strength.
Source
Please provide that source.
Connective Tissue
Research by Dr Keith Baar, peviously post on this site, stated that building and increasing strength in Connective is optimized with Slow Movements such as Maximum Strength Exercies and espeically Isomterics.
Georgiaoutdoors
Level 5 Valued Member
I don’t know. I’ve read about recent research that slow heavy resistance training (5:1:5:1 tempo and slower) may be particularly helpful for connective tissue remodeling and repair, particularly when it comes to the tendons. This is one of the classic interventions for Achilles tendon issues - weighted, slow eccentric heel drops, which was discovered by accident.
Bauer
Level 8 Valued Member
There is a nice section in Beyond Bodybuilding on connective tissue and tendons. Here is a snippet:
So, yes, high rep work + heavy isometrics seem to be a good idea for it.Pavel in Beyond Bodybuilding said:
That being said, TUT is a weird concept to me, as it favours slow reps over explosive reps.
I think "quality volume" would be a better concept. A+A would be a good example. Short quality sets (low TUT), repeated again and again (and still only a few minutes of TUT).
Thus: Try to accumulate as much quality volume as you can recover from and good things will happen. If you care about connective tissue, consider adding some high rep work and heavy supports.
If you are pressed on time, focus on power rather than strength endurance, for example with Q&D (less TUT, but more carryover).
wespom9
Level 6 Valued Member
Look into Brad Schoenfeld - he has some research that refutes the TUT model as we know it
It looks more and more like TUT is across the total workout, not just the set. He showed a few studies that in conjunction seem to show this:
1. 5 rep sets vs 10 rep sets, but volume equated = similar hypertrophy
2. 5 rep sets vs 10 rep sets but only 3 sets each (aka double the volume for the 10 rep group) = 10 rep group had more hypertrophy
It looks more and more like TUT is across the total workout, not just the set. He showed a few studies that in conjunction seem to show this:
1. 5 rep sets vs 10 rep sets, but volume equated = similar hypertrophy
2. 5 rep sets vs 10 rep sets but only 3 sets each (aka double the volume for the 10 rep group) = 10 rep group had more hypertrophy
Bingo!
According to Schoenfeld's research (that is now accepted by almost everyone), it comes down to three main factors:
1.) Mechanical Tension (heavy weights not TUT)
2.) Muscle Damage
3.) Metabolic Stress
All three methods can be used within the same training program or periodized on phases.
I use all of the above and also TUT with myself and my coaching clients.
Out of the three, mechanical tension (heavy weights) still remains supreme for muscle growth.
TUT is a good technique that has valid uses but not over heavy weights or used all the time.
Research has also shown that Compensatory Acceleration Training (CAT as popularized by Fred Hatfield) is far superior than slower TUT.
As stated above, TUT can be helpful for tendon and ligament strength and very slow eccentrics are used in injury treatment.
TAKE HOME POINT: Lower weights slowly under control (3-5 seconds) but lift explosively even when the weight is heavy and doesn't move fast.
Periodically, do some training phases where you utilize TUT.
Last edited:
North Coast Miller
Level 9 Valued Member
TUT as in total time under load per session is a thing, longer sets are not.
Spartan Agoge
Level 6 Valued Member
For me, total time under tension(per workout, per week, per mesocycle etc) is the most important factor for hypertrophy. More than higher reps, or failure.
For example 12 sets of 3 reps at 75% 1rm(=36 total reps) will produce more hypertrophy than 3 sets of 10(30 total reps) at 75% 1rm even if the sets are almost to failure in the second case.
Other people say that training to failure worked best for them, and I totally respect that, but my experience is that more total reps=more hypertrophy (70-85% 1rm), regardless of other variables like rep ranges and failure.
For example 12 sets of 3 reps at 75% 1rm(=36 total reps) will produce more hypertrophy than 3 sets of 10(30 total reps) at 75% 1rm even if the sets are almost to failure in the second case.
Other people say that training to failure worked best for them, and I totally respect that, but my experience is that more total reps=more hypertrophy (70-85% 1rm), regardless of other variables like rep ranges and failure.
Shawn
Level 5 Valued Member
Did I see somewhere that Pavel agrees with Brad's opinion on this?
I'm not sure. But it seems like he would based on StrongFirst methods.
In Short: No, TUT is NOT the #1 thing when it comes to gaining strength.
Bull_Rush
Level 2 Valued Member
I think it matters, but not in the way where we actually have to pay attention to it. I mean dude, if you're squatting, benching, and deadlifting with proper form, you're TUT is spot on. It's pointless to be meticulous about it.
Heck, lots of powerlifters and Olympic lifters build huge upper backs with dynamic bent-over rows. How's that for time-under-tension?
Antti
Level 10 Valued Member
Tension itself doesn't really help. It's effort with tension. And you can only effort maximally for so long, so that you don't really need to think about time.
The typical muscle building recommendations for set length is 5-30 reps. That's all there is to it.
When it comes to strength, load is king, and thus lower rep ranges.
The typical muscle building recommendations for set length is 5-30 reps. That's all there is to it.
When it comes to strength, load is king, and thus lower rep ranges.
I think it matters. Otherwise why would we care how far or long we go with something like a farmer's carry?
Some exercises can really utilize TUT for great effect. I don't have a study to back it up, but if one does S&S for a year or more and get-ups are 30-40 seconds each, as opposed to a 20 second quick sprint through the positions, I believe there will be a difference in outcome. The increased TUT will elicit a greater training effect.
All that said, I do agree that TUT is not the best way to build strength.
And I also agree that it's usually greatly eclipsed by other more important variables such as exercise selection, absolute load/weight, reps, and sets. This is the "what" of exercise.
But the "how" of exercise is also important. I would put TUT in a similar category as other aspects of technique. Form, explosiveness, TUT, focus, intent, etc.
But in the big picture the "how" is certainly secondary to "what" is done.
Some exercises can really utilize TUT for great effect. I don't have a study to back it up, but if one does S&S for a year or more and get-ups are 30-40 seconds each, as opposed to a 20 second quick sprint through the positions, I believe there will be a difference in outcome. The increased TUT will elicit a greater training effect.
All that said, I do agree that TUT is not the best way to build strength.
And I also agree that it's usually greatly eclipsed by other more important variables such as exercise selection, absolute load/weight, reps, and sets. This is the "what" of exercise.
But the "how" of exercise is also important. I would put TUT in a similar category as other aspects of technique. Form, explosiveness, TUT, focus, intent, etc.
But in the big picture the "how" is certainly secondary to "what" is done.
Bill Lets
Level 6 Valued Member
It depends.
Here is an example of TUT.
“The dumbbell bench press is one of my favorite exercises, but getting the bells in position is a big problem. I have to psyche up more to get the dumbbells in position than to do the presses. If I miss the groove and fail to get the weights in position, it jams my shoulder and hurts like hell. While writing this article I decided to drop each dumbbell by five pounds, and do slower more controlled reps. Wow, it made all the difference. Getting the dumbbells in position was no longer an ordeal--and the muscle response was much better. I could feel every muscle fiber in my chest working. The movement was a joy again.”
From Clarence Bass’s website
LukeV
Level 7 Valued Member
Interesting. So you're like a Russian Bear man whereas I get better growth with limited sets close to failure. Now having said that, I got pleasing results from Russian Bear but it wasn't optimal (for me). In terms of TUT, I did two long (6 month) cycles of Super Slow based on achieving failure within 60 to 90 seconds of continuous effort. It definitely builds muscle and its the most time efficient workout I've ever done, but also not optimal compared to more orthodox set/rep hypertrophy schemes.
Spartan Agoge
Level 6 Valued Member
Yes, I am a Russian Bear man. For me, total volume is what works best. When I do a hypertrophy mesocycle, I always do low reps-high sets, like 15x3 and every week I add 1 set. Training to failure, even with low volume burns me out and doesn't produce results.
I guess it is different for everyone. The biggest guy in my gym does low weekly volume, but every set is beyond failure(forced reps, drop sets etc).
LukeV
Level 7 Valued Member
I abandoned the hours-long Schwarzenegger-style workouts for abbreviated training and got the best muscle gains of my life but the really big guys in my gym kept doing Schwarzenegger-style workouts
North Coast Miller
Level 9 Valued Member
My best gains in terms of lean mass in shortest time, came from chopping weekly volume way back, reducing daily volume to the bare minimum as well.
I did find via trial and error what that was ( for me), and kept loading fairly high on the working sets. Only the last of three was done with drop or rest/pause but really blew it in on that last set.
Entire sessions were 35 minutes compared to the 90+ minutes I trained in my younger days.
Joel the Savage
Level 6 Valued Member
Chris Beardsley has an excellent book on this, and a shorter more digestable blogpost on it:
What causes muscle growth?
What causes muscle growth?