Is The Hypertrophy Rep Range Dead? (30+ Studies Explained)

In this video, Milo from Stronger By Science reviews the literature on the best rep ranges to grow muscle. Should you be going heavy to maximise growth? Or should you be going light? What is the hypertrophy rep range, anyways?
Gain access to 28 FREE Programs:
www.strongerby...
Want us to help you reach your goals?
strongerbyscie...
References:
www.ncbi.nlm.n...
www.ncbi.nlm.n...
pubmed.ncbi.nl...
www.ncbi.nlm.n...
pubmed.ncbi.nl...
www.ncbi.nlm.n...
pubmed.ncbi.nl...
pubmed.ncbi.nl...
www.ncbi.nlm.n...
pubmed.ncbi.nl...
www.data-drive...
www.ncbi.nlm.n...
pubmed.ncbi.nl...
pubmed.ncbi.nl...
sportrxiv.org/...
#musclebuilding #scienceexplained #heavyweight
"Is The Hypertrophy Rep Range Dead? (30+ Studies Explained)"

[@FitOneswithVarun]

0:00- Introduction 1:00- Detailed Analysis of Lower Threshold for Hypertrophy 4:03 - Top Threshold for Effective Hypertrophy 6:49 - Effective Hypertrophy Rep Range 7:57 - Variety in Training for Maximum Growth 11:26 -Application and Practical Recommendations

[@EvanAguilar-c4f]

Finally something based on actual studies. I’ve been looking into this because I actually want to be as compact as possible. I scoured the internet and noticed a strange pattern: there are a lot of videos of kids in third world countries who look very average and yet are lifting with ease what really big guys in the gym struggle to lift. When I was a teenager I got way stronger than my peers who followed conventional methods when all I did was lift at home (because I couldn’t afford a gym). But how I trained, and how I bet these other kids from third world countries are training, is doing a ridiculous number of reps simply because I couldn’t afford to buy bigger dumbbells. So I’m starting to hypothesize that maybe high rep ranges with around 30% of max is actually great for Myofibrillar Hypertrophy. I don’t know, just some thoughts. Thanks for the video!

[@Yupppi]

Milo and Pak are really killing the SBS youtube channel. Just the guys you want to handle your "PR" content for average consumer, they know how to make interesting wrap ups.

[@anon1231]

What u mean?

[@FTCRW]

"Killing the channel" sounds ambiguous here

[@frankieluquis3671]

This channel is a game changer

[@FitOneswithVarun]

Good tips, some variety in those rep range and figure out which rep range feels right for the right exercise

[@lolololalala8225]

Indeed, for some exercises I get more pain in my back with higher reps than the muscle I am targetting.

[@lensgreve]

This is the absolute cats PJs! Thx Dr. Wolf - the density of info in these vids is fantastic. Frontal lobe hypertrophy over 9000. Love it.

[@JamesDavisakaRemguy]

@@oommenthms2728 Careful though, I blew out my prefrontal cortex going for a PB. (Now I just sit and stare, like a neutered cat...)

[@yaroslav64]

I dont think we can use studies like this to make strong statements for the minimum weight needed for experienced lifters. I dont think this the case for a lot of principles but i think it applies here. The reason is because the principles of specificity would expect an experienced lifter to require a more specific stimulus to progress vs a novice lifter. Ex: someone can take their squat from 95lbs to 105 lbs by riding a stationary bike with high resistance (low specificity training) but noone will tale their squat from 600 to 610 with the same strategy. The same principle likely applies to hypertrophy, where a novice might get enough stimulus from 20% but an experienced lifter never will. A case where context really really matters.

[@sealedindictment]

interesting point

[@BradleyCTurner]

Im definetly getting bored over 20+ reps on anything, close to 20 is great for feeling the pump.

[@SuperRijul]

Working out isnt the same as scrolling through reels.

[@marting9568]

10 reps on first set and I'm upping the weight next workout no need to complicate things, push to failure

[@LiamBens]

Great job on the new format of stronger by science you increase your chances of visibility without cutting the knowledge to much. Thanks for all the knowledge 💪🏼

[@yifb1444]

Great video. There is just one issue. CNS fatigue. It is not possible that 5 reps has the same hypertrophic adaptations as 50+.

[@MavrovFit]

It was about time for some quality work on the videos. Not for us, nerds, but for the broad consumers. Still, I enjoyed this video far more than your other ones, no matter if they've been more helpful for me. So, great work, guys. I think the channel will definitely grow and skyrocket with that kind of content. Milo is very good in front of camera, so use that pretty beard face more :D As always, thanks for never stopping after all those years!

[@n00dle_king]

I just don’t believe that very many people using 30% of their max is going to use enough reps to get real results outside of a lab setting.

[@strongerbyscience]

What about people training with bodyweight only and still making solid progress, despite being able to do 20-30+ reps on many movements?

[@n00dle_king]

@@strongerbyscience didn’t say people like that don’t exist just said there aren’t very many of them. My main argument being that a set of 50 at 30% feels far far harder than the equivalent set of 8 and if something feels harder you’ll inevitably get some level of sandbagging from a normal trainee left to their own devices. Also most calisthenics athletes progress to more advanced techniques so “just body weight” is a bit misleading when they could be doing something like a progression toward a one arm push up that keeps them in an 8-12 range the whole time.

[@Jimmy_Cream]

​@@n00dle_kinghow do yiu know there aren't many of them? What are you basing that on? Studies? Figures available? Personal anecdote? Hint... Its not the 1st two

[@n00dle_king]

@@Jimmy_Creamno studies exist to contradict me either you goober. Part of the scientific process is using observations and logic as a starting point. Can you honestly tell me that if you wrote a program for someone using sets of 50 reps that you’d expect them to get the same results as a program with sets of 8?

[@vikt]

​@@Jimmy_CreamI think going to pretty much any gym and looking at how many reps most people do is more than fine enough to make a general conclusion about how most people in the world train Consequently, most people in the gym don't train close to failure, and as a result they stay forever small You do not need a study or a meta-analysis to figure this out, me thinks But even if you did, would a study not be conducted in a way where the researcher goes to a gym and looks at how many reps people are doing, and draw conclusions from that? And would he not get the same results that I did from my reasoning in the first paragraph?

[@gerym341]

Excellent video, Doctor. Thank you

[@Hereweare75]

How can someone determine their 30% Max if they aren't able to do a 1RM to determine their 100%? Most older adults and novice trainees aren't able to nor should they try a 1RM.

[@Katalmach11b]

Lots of people like Dr Mike are saying novices just need to lift and eat good. Early newbie gains are extremely easy to obtain

[@rebornstillborn]

Did the researchers test out the subjects 1RM before the start of the training period? That would probably do the job

[@pretty_flaco]

i’m a simple guy, top set of 3 back of set of 7 for my tier one movement (OHP, Squat, Deficit DL)… 4 sets of 7 for my tier two movements (Incline DB Press, Leg Press, Lat Pulldowns, Rows)… tier three (isolations) are 8+ reps….

[@XanEli1]

I was thinking about high rep sets vs low rep in terms of proximity to failure. I really think proximity to failure ought be defined as % time doing set left in the tank. For example if I do a set of 2 where I have 1 rep left in the tank, that would be 2/3rds of "the way to failure" whereas if I do 20 reps where I had 30 in the tank it would be the same. I'm not sure if that way of looking at it would be accurate I suspect NOT, however, I do think it should be looked at. Intuitively though, I just think it's wrong on it's face, but also I think it's wrong to say if I did a set of 45 where 5 are in the tank, I'm very close to failure in that set, however if I did a set of 5 where I had 5 in the tank I'm VERY far from failure in that case. So I think what I'm saying would come into play somewhat and just saying x RIR it not correct for all rep schemes.

[@carlosvivani5042]

Absolutely. I have had the same thought and no one seems to be mentioning it.

[@georgesarreas5509]

As long as you go to failure or really close... Does load matter? Yes the pencil curl argument... But i doubt you would reach failure with it so i think we are covered as long as we reaxh muscular failure

[@loganwolv3393]

I believe there's still some truth of the endurance rep range, i believe you see more of those capilaries around the muscles that you train in a higher rep range, wich means that even if combining rep ranges dosen't offer any benefit, there's still reasons to include them besides the pump.

[@Omar1066]

Regarding the 5-50 rep range, does this vary my muscle group? For example, is 5 reps on a short range of motion exercise like a shrug different to 5 reps on a longer range of motion exercise like a pulldown? Should you do more reps on short range of motion exercises? Also, what about when doing lengthened partials, should you do more reps to make up for the shortened range of motion?

[@strongerbyscience]

Provided set duration is similar, I don't think so. Just make sure you use a reasonable repetition duration! Regarding lengthened partials, the answer is similar; if repetition duration is similar to full ROM, probably no need.

[@JamesDavisakaRemguy]

Major Take-Away: Rep range JUST DOESN'T MATTER. What matters is take (at least 1 set) CLOSE TO FAILURE. Minor Take-Away: Vary rep ranges according to exercise and for possibly > hypertrophy (and definitely > sanity). Did I... _miss anything?_

[@NaturalIntensity69]

I like 4-8 just for enjoyment but then there's also good evidence that higher reps just increase fatigue.

[@JamesDavisakaRemguy]

Great job condensing (and translating) the scientific journal studies for your average Joe Bro. (Uh, like me.) I will DEFINITELY be looking for more SBS videos now that I know they exist. Thank you!

[@Half-code]

Good content thanks bro

[@wdadwawdadawdwdwa4133]

Would it be reasonable to assume that squatting in the 15+ rep range gives you also cardio health benefits ?

[@petersoar2886]

It would be more reasonable to assume that you would need good cardio ability to get hypertrophy benefits out of 15+ reps.

[@DARTH-KTULU]

I’m going to share the current program I’m running, based loosely on Starting Strength. I Stick with 3 sets of 5’s on Bench Press, Overhead Press, Squats, and Deadlifts. On the last set of 5 I will attempt a 6th rep and if it goes I know I can add 2.5-5 lbs every workout. I do this 3 days a week during a strength phase. I alternate 2 base workouts… Workout A: Bench Press 2x5, 1x5+ Deadlift 1x5+1 Workout B: Overhead Press 2x5,1x5+ Squat 2x5, 1x5+ After a solid month or 2 , I switch to 1 set of 5 with my 5 rep PR and do to back off sets where I drop from say 315 to 275 to 225 and try to get as many reps as possible with each lighter set. I might do this for several weeks, trying to top previous rep counts on the back off sets. Then I go back to normal linear progression. On each workout I pick a muscle group or more I want to bring up or focus on. I do a shoulder workout with some triceps on OHP day, or a chest workout with some biceps on Bench Press day. Or I might do leg extensions on squat day and leg curls on deadlift day. I like to keep these at around 1 set of 10-15 followed with myo-reps to near or to failure. I don’t let these get in the way of my strength progress and I’ll back off on accessories if my main strength movements aren’t going up in weight. Take a day off between A & B So what that might look like all together is Workout A: Bench Press 2x5, 1x6 Cable Fly Cable row Incline dumbbell curl Deadlift 1x5-6 Leg Curl Everything not specified is 1 or 2 straight sets of 10-15, followed by 2-3 myorep sets resting just a few breaths between sets and aiming for as many reps as possible. Workout B: Overhead Press 2x5,1x5-6 Lat Pulldowns Squat 2x5, 1x5-6 Dumbbell Laterals Overhead Tricep Ext Leg Extension Add an exercise for whatever you’re trying to bring up at the time, like a rear delt fly or extra tricep work, or a machine press variation, or leg press, whatever feels like it could use a set or 2 if you’re still feeling frisky. Swap out any exercise that feels stale or uncomfortable after a while for a different variation. That’s it.

[@hawrazhede]

i do 3 sets of 20 hacksquat per session and 3 sessions of fullbody per week what kinda help i should look out for?

[@Sneak222]

Probs mental help

[@JamesDavisakaRemguy]

​@@Sneak222 Attention-getting Deficit Disorder?

[@stevenjezyk9435]

Milo, next video please post a 30+ rep set ending near failure☝. No cake raises❌. An utter waste of time and almost impossible to find the accurate load.

[@D350DX]

Would it not be more appropriate to say 4 repetitions being the bottom end of the hypertrophy rep range? I know it's not much different to 5 but it seems clear from the studies you mention that doing sets of 3 is less effective for hypertrophy than higher reps but the one study you mentioned comparing 3x5 to 3x10-12 by mangne et al. seems to suggest better growth in the lower rep conditiion. Based on this, wouldn't it be more appropriate to average this rep range and end up with 4 repetitions as the lower end cap? I know the evidence is fairly sparse anyway but just curious on your thoughts. Great video btw

[@Pain53924]

Milo!!!! Abs........................

[@chattingwithshap8010]

So many issues with these studies. 1. Time - the time it takes to do 30 percent of a one RM is vast. 2. Exercise - yes, certain exercises might work for 30 percent. On the other hand, try squatting 30 percent of one RM. That becomes a breathing movement. If I have a one rm of 300 - that means I’m squatting less than a 100 pounds. Nobody will do that. 3. Volume load - doing those very low percents causes us to do so much more load because the weight is so light. 4. Fun - this will vary, but most people don’t want to do that light of a weight. It’s just not challenging enough. 5. Lastly, common sense - while I do think rep ranges can vary, it seems clear that rep ranges between about 5 reps up to 15 for most exercises will provide the best time/tension/weight benefit.

[@soonahero]

What do you think is the 30 rep max of a new 300 lbs squatter?

[@chattingwithshap8010]

@@soonahero that’s one of the problems of so many reps. Nobody can answer that. The difference between 30 and 1 rep is so big that we can’t know that. If somebody did 300 for one RM you can easily estimate that for 5 reps they will probably be around 270 (give or take a few pounds) depending on their attributes of strength/endurance. It’s why percentages are so valuable for planning. Anyone who tells you that 30 reps equates to an exact 1 RM is simply guessing. One final thing - most people rarely know their true 1RM. They think it’s a certain weight, but especially for squats and deadlifts that’s often off. Proper form - mastery and going all out matter. I hope this helps. Please consider following my KZbin channel Cutting The Crap with Shap. I’m doing 10 reasons you’re not getting stronger. Plus lots more.

[@soonahero]

@@chattingwithshap8010 “nobody can answer that” literally take anyone with decent cardio who squatted 300 as a PR and have them do a 30 rep max. How many people have you coached? It sounds like you’re more interested in strength than hypertrophy

[@chattingwithshap8010]

@@soonahero I might be confused by what you’re asking. Having a 300 pound 1 RM in a squat is impossible to be accurate with what weight they could do 30 times. Again, too many variables - are they strength based - endurance based - or just motivated to grind out thirty all out reps. To you second question. I’ve coached for 35 plus years and taught. Done 28 years of bodybuilding naturally and currently nationally ranked masters powerlifter. Also degree in exercise science. None of us know it all, but using common sense is key. I’ll ask you, do you know what a person with a 300 pound 1 RM could do for all out 30 rep max? If yes, how do you determine that?

[@TypicallyUniqueOfficial]

I think that rep ranges are more experience based. I don’t believe that an advanced trainee is going to get maximal benefit using the 15-20 rep range because the fiber types that they have available to grow are the higher threshold fibers. Beginners and intermediates can get great growth from a variety of rep ranges because they have a lot of fiber types that are not yet developed. The more advanced you become the more you’ll have to focus on maximizing motor unit recruitment of the upper threshold fibers, and there is research that shows advanced trainees benefitting more with loads greater than 80% 1rm, in the 4-6 rep range more so to better recruit the highest threshold fibers while minimizing fatigue getting to them as you’d experience in higher rep ranges. I think if an advanced trainee used a 30-60% load, they’d accrue so much fatigue before they get to failure/recruiting the upper threshold motor units that it would eat into recovery and limit overall gains.

[@jeffbunnell9961]

The higher threshold fibers do eventually get recruited in a low-intensity high-rep set, because in the presence of neuromuscular fatigue the threshold for type 2 fibers is lowered as they have to "pick up the slack" as the type 1 fibers have dropped out (assuming this higher rep set is taken very close or to failure). This is mainly why we see similar hypertrophy when training close to failure in the 5-30 rep range. Of course there are still advantages and disadvantages to going heavier and lighter, heavier being very time-efficient, good for strength development, and having lower neuromuscular fatigue per set vs the higher fatigue in higher-rep sets. Pros of higher-reps being possibly easier on the joints for the same hypertrophy. My takeaway is combine rep ranges. I do agree more advance probably benefit more from the 4-6 range whereas novices can reap gains at lower intensities.

[@TypicallyUniqueOfficial]

@@jeffbunnell9961 yes, I never argued that the higher threshold fibers don’t get hit in a high rep set to failure…the issue is the volume leading up to that point. If you can maximally recruit the high threshold fibers in a set of 4-6, there is no junk volume in that set. In a set where it’s 15 reps, for example, reps 1-10 are going to recruit the lower threshold fibers and then after fatigue sets in the highest threshold fibers become recruited in the last 4-6 reps of that set (the ones that are most growth prone). Doing more reps leads to a greater amount of calcium ion buildup and muscle damage which impair recovery. Someone who’s been training seriously for 3-4 years will not benefit from those reps leading up to failure, it’s just junk volume for them. The key for advanced trainees is to minimize muscle damage and calcium ion buildup (causing fatigue) to focus on limiting junk volume because it will inhibit muscle growth in the end when you’re performing the requisite sets to accrue enough stimulating reps to stimulate growth. I don’t think there are any advantages in going much above 8-10 reps if you’re advanced. It’s the opposite, there’s much more downsides. If you’re training around an injury, this is a different story. Beginners can do whatever and grow because they have yet to maximize the lower threshold fibers/can’t recruit as many higher threshold units even training to task failure. They’re just not strong enough and their nervous system isn’t up to par.

[@TheGreektrojan]

Anecdotally, this seems contrary to the approach that the majority of advanced trainees tend to adopt. Most advanced trainees seem to gravitate to higher rep/'pump' work rather than doubling down on very heavy load training. Most seem to limit, if not eliminate high load training if anything. The systemic fatigue you get from heavy load training as you get stronger increases faster than the stimulus you can generate.

[@TypicallyUniqueOfficial]

@@TheGreektrojan anecdotally this is true for people that use steroids not natural pro bodybuilders. Natural pro bodybuilders tend to gravitate towards lower reps of 4-10, and sprinkle in isolation exercises for 6-12 reps. It’s rare to see a natural pro exceeding 12-15 reps, and that’s typically for ab exercises and maybe side laterals.

[@jeffbunnell9961]

@@TheGreektrojan There is also a lot of fatigue generated from high reps, local fatigue mainly rather than systemic but I don't think heavier work is too systemically fatiguing. Most resistance training generates local peripheral fatigue. I do include higher reps just from a connective tissue standpoint I think it's worth it, and I'm currently experimenting with higher frequency so I like to vary the rep ranges.

[@ahmetefe9894]

4-9 reps is king nmw

[@Clownlife432]

Fawves?

[@user-bl9fj7kf1s]

Please ignore science. It changes in every video. Be safe. Trust gym Bros 💪