

More weight, fewer reps works best. - aneth
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/06/health/06real.html?src=sch

======
matrix
It is well established that higher rep workouts better promote hypertrophy,
and heavier low rep workouts promote neuromuscular efficiency. However,
average trainees get both effects from any workout. The effects really only
start to matter for more advanced trainees.

Whatever you do, don't rush out and start doing heavy 5 rep sets of squats
without proper coaching. Heavy, low rep exercises must be done with impeccable
form because otherwise the risk of injury is high. Developing good form takes
time and carefully performed lighter high rep sets to train your body to
maintain that form.

Diet, of course is also an essential component.

~~~
danteembermage
Do you have that backwards? Conventional wisdom is the opposite so if you're
correct this is actually quite interesting.

~~~
enjo
Everything I've read is somewhere in the middle. Higher weight (85% of max) at
8-12 reps is the sweet spot for hypertrophy. I've seen that in lots of
different places.

~~~
keefe
<http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/strength-training/AN00893>

Agree. Also, experimentally verified.

~~~
earl
Actually, I don't think that's true -- most, if not all, studies are performed
on untrained subjects. It is not at all established that methods that work for
the first 6 months work the same at 5+ years.

~~~
keefe
how about worry about 5 years after 6 months, it's a much easier routine.

------
xiaoma
This mostly agrees with my own experience growing up and doing various types
of weight training for various sports.

However, I'd say the very biggest thing that determines whether your weight-
training leads to a big bulky physique or a lean and cut one isn't the number
of reps you do. It's diet. If you eat large meals, you'll be big; if you
don't, you'll be lean.

It may not be possible to get "huge" without using relatively heavy weights or
your body weight, but a lot of people I've known have a ridiculous fear that
they'll somehow accidentally develop the kind of physique that professional
bodybuilders get after spending thousands of hours in the gym and taking
anabolic steroids. It's also worth pointing out that some very lean people are
shockingly strong. One guy at my school weighed about 160lbs, looked nothing
like a bodybuilder and could bench 350lbs with ease.

~~~
keeptrying
There are 2 ways you can get stronger - 1\. Adding muscle mass 2\. Increasing
the amount of muscle that's recruited for doing something. Ie increasing your
neuromuscular efficiency.

Low reps increase strength by the second method. The second method also
explains why you can be small but very strong

------
johnswamps
We've known about this for a long time: just ask any weight lifter. A routine
of high weight compound movements would help pretty much anyone, regardless of
whether you're trying to lose weight, gain it, convert fat to muscle,
whatever. Just exercise 3 times a week and eat more or less than your calorie
needs according to what you're trying to do.

Starting Strength is a good program to look into, but really anything with
squats, deadlifts, presses, etc. would be fine.

~~~
Oatmeat
_Just exercise 3 times a week and eat more or less than your calorie needs
according to what you're trying to do._

Right, eat less if trying to lose weight and eat more if trying to bulk up.
But what if you are trying to lose fat and gain muscle?

~~~
apmee
It's much _much_ harder to gain muscle and lose fat simultaneously, than it is
to simply focus on one then the other. They are fundamentally at odds with
each other: to lose fat, you need less calories; to gain muscle, you need more
calories.

The advice I've heard is to build strength and size first, by eating lots and
training hard until you have the muscles you're after. Then you can turn your
attention to losing fat and maintaining muscle, by eating less (though you'll
still need more calories than before, as larger muscles burn a lot more energy
even at rest), lowering the intensity of your training, and focusing more on
cardiovascular exercise like jogging and cycling.

~~~
dkarl
Up to a certain point, you can do both just by exercising more and harder. A
complete beginner starting from zero volume will definitely lose fat and gain
muscle if they start working out, as long as they eat no more than enough to
maintain their weight. The only problem is that you can only do it if you're
pretty poorly trained to start with. Most people who work out seriously are
well past the point where they can do both at the same time.

------
swombat
Standard knowledge in the weight lifting world. You'll find this advice
repeated in most decent body building books.

Here's a good website to get you started with a decent programme:

<http://stronglifts.com/>

~~~
flog
I've had good results with the 5x5 programme. It's a good manly thing to do,
not as boring as hours on a bike, and is quick to perform (I can get in an out
of the gym in 45 minutes).

------
thesnark
I really enjoy <http://crossfit.com>

~~~
Goosey
From the CrossFit Faq (<http://www.crossfit.com/cf-info/faq.html>): "The
world's most successful athletes and coaches rely on exercise science the way
deer hunters rely on the accordion."

I hate to say this damages my perception of CrossFit.

~~~
jzycrzy
This is because exercise science is doing experiments that were proven
effective by practitioners years ago. In the same way you wouldn't expect to
learn bleeding-edge hacking techniques taking classes at the undergraduate
college level.. you'd expect to learn them from people who've used them
effectively and are re-using them often.

------
sorbits
I started with <http://concept1010.com/> early 2009.

This is 6 machines (back, legs, arms, breast, stomach, and neck) once a week.

Each repetition should take 20 seconds (so you do it slowly, which makes it
harder) and you should be able to do about 7 repetitions before your muscles
give up.

If you continue past two and a half minute the weight is increased.

I was skeptical at first, but today I am a believer ;) I have gone from 90 KG
to 72 KG and would describe myself as muscular (but certainly not bulky) and
feel overall in great shape (not just raw strength and duration, but also
ability to do prolonged work in front of the computer in questionable
positions w/o feeling back or neck pains).

Of course my weight loss can also be attributed to other factors (eating less
and burning more calories), strength training alone is not necessarily giving
a weight loss, but it does help increase the metabolism and ensures that
eating less does not cause burning muscle tissue, plus give a nicer shape when
the fat is gone.

------
grandalf
these guys wrote a book to that effect and then realized that for some people
light weights work better:

[http://books.google.com/books?id=eo9X8asRie8C&dq=static+...](http://books.google.com/books?id=eo9X8asRie8C&dq=static+contraction+training&printsec=frontcover&source=bn&hl=en&ei=0yvES9viB5XYNu3ynfMN&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=6&ved=0CCsQ6AEwBQ#v=onepage&q&f=false)

------
NEPatriot
I think familiarization and adaption are the enemy. You should vary workout
cycles so you're never a heavy weight/low rep or a low weight/high rep person.
But rather one who always varies workout variables at least every 3 weeks.
These variables: reps, weight, rest duration, big body exercise (squat/dead
lift), specific body exercise (bicep curl), tempo, sets, reps, super sets.

------
pesho
or just take up an endurance sport, like rowing, for example.

~~~
gaius
Rowers do a _lot_ of weight training.

~~~
xiaoma
Not necessarily. My school's Dragon Boat Festival team didn't. The rowing
itself still built some serious muscle.

------
tome
Interesting, and I agree, but not for here.

~~~
johnfn
Really? I'm not sure if I agree or not.

It's certainly not related to hacking, but on the other hand, there's always
that broad "satisfies our intellectual curiosity" banner that you have to hold
things to. Although it was short and to the point, it caused me to reevaluate
something I had taken for granted, so personally I think it fit the bill.

Plus, I have a suspicion that the overlap between people who work out and
people who go to hacker news is larger than you might think. I know that
jogging, for instance, helps me focus, and I've heard other coders say the
same. But I think I'm getting a bit tangential.

~~~
_delirium
Jogging I can see, but body-building and "working out" to me seems sort of the
diametrical opposite, something I associate more with jocks. Being healthy and
in reasonable shape is one thing, but obsessing over reps, weights, and muscle
tone?

~~~
einaros
I think that largely depends on the gym. Some are really just show-off spots,
I agree, but my experience is that the less mainstream, often kinda run-down
joints have a much friendlier, less cocky and pretty intelligent under-tone to
them.

~~~
_delirium
I guess I have no opinion on that, never having stepped foot in a gym. =]

Mostly, the idea seems oddly artificial to me. I use my muscles when I want to
do something with them, like go for a walk, or go hiking, or swimming, but not
just for the sake of using them. Sort of how I approach coding, too...

~~~
tcskeptic
Gah. I find this really irritating. You have never stepped foot in a gym,
clearly have no idea what happens there, but are perfectly willing to pass
judgement on it. I find weightlifting itself immensly enjoyable, what I like
to do with my muscles is to lift heavy things. I enjoy the fact that this
strength is useful throughout the other aspects of my life. (Think yardwork,
sex, sports, etc.) I have solved more difficult problems both personal and
intellectual while weight training that anything else that I do. I also enjoy
the long term challenge of planning my training. Once the easy gains are
completed, advancing in strength becomes a rather difficult exercise in
planning, discipline, execution, creativity, etc.

~~~
_delirium
If you enjoy weightlifting, that's fine, but I don't see what it has to do
with hacker culture. Some people enjoy literary theory too, and I don't
begrudge them that, but I would be pretty surprised to see it here.

------
ulvund

         Lift / Eat    big       small
         big         muscular   'toned'        
         small         fat      skinny

------
hackermom
What seems to be ignored is the difference in the muscle itself from more
weight fewer reps contra less weight more reps; bigger muscles faster, contra
notable endurance gain.

You will always gain size by increasing weight to push the muscle and force it
to rebuild as the fibers break down when their potential's limit is
approached, but the only way to build enduring muscle fiber is by more reps;
by tiring the muscle out entirely to the point it can't do more repetitions. A
muscle can be big, bulky, and deliver explosive power, and it can be lean,
"tendony", hardy and durable. It is no different to normal stamina build from
typical "cardio training" like jogging - every 100 meter extra you add to your
trip slowly becomes easier for your entire body - heart, lungs, muscles.

Endurace is also a strength on its own.

~~~
einaros
While true, I think there's more to the mix than that. For the last 9-10 years
I've stuck with a high-weight-few-reps approach, and I've found that while my
strength has increased a lot, I by no means look bulky. I'd think most people
would just place me in the "possibly working out" category if they saw me in a
t-shirt.

Biking, on the other hand, which I for the most had a brief encounter with to
shed 45 excess lbs 10 years ago, I found built huge leg muscles. My biking had
much more in common with the low-weight-many-reps-strategy.

~~~
dkarl
_Biking, on the other hand, which I for the most had a brief encounter with to
shed 45 excess lbs 10 years ago, I found built huge leg muscles. My biking had
much more in common with the low-weight-many-reps-strategy._

Same experience here. I think people get confused because of how professional
athletes are built. The best long-distance cyclists are very light and lean,
while the best sprinters have huge lower bodies. Same thing with runners:
sprinters are very muscular, and marathoners look like coat hangers covered
with a thin layer of beef jerky. That is because of selection effects and
professional levels of training, though, and is a misleading way of judging
the effect of casual training on normal people with day jobs.

------
billybob
That's it. Next time I work out, I'm going to grab the front of my car and
lift like crazy. It won't budge, but I'll exert maximum effort.

One rep - I'm done. Efficiency!

~~~
hugh3
Unfortunately weight training works best if your muscles actually move instead
of just stretching. I do wonder whether the "trying to lift your car" exercise
routine would eventually build your muscles, though.

The other thing I wonder is whether you can do weight training without weights
by pitting one hand against the other. Try to curl your biceps on one arm
while pushing down with your other hand to try to prevent it. Is there any
reason this won't work? Could be a good way to build muscle while sitting at
your desk.

~~~
Psyonic
Trying to lift a car probably would eventually build some muscle, though as
its not a full range of motion, it'd be weird, but I can't see how you'd be
able to keep working at it without doing some serious damage to your back.
Good luck maintaining proper form while attempting it!

And yes, I know it was a joke :)

