100 rep squats

[Coz]

Anyone done these before? I have done 40 reps with my bodyweight (205) before and it was hard but I could probably have kept going. I was thinking of going for 100 reps tomorrow for a final workout before taking a week off.

So anyone done these? What % of your bodyweight did you use and how did it go?

[farzin316]

^^^^^ dude that's so hardcore. I weight around 170 and I do my usual reps at 270.

[Steel Warrior]

COZ jsut use whatever weight would cause you to fail at 25 reps.

[OUTLAW20SICX]

when i did it i used weight that made me fail at 10-15 then rest paused the rest out, just dont stop at 100 if you can get a few more /forum/images/graemlins/blush.gif /forum/images/graemlins/blush.gif /forum/images/graemlins/blush.gif /forum/images/graemlins/blush.gif /forum/images/graemlins/blush.gif /forum/images/graemlins/blush.gif /forum/images/graemlins/blush.gif /forum/images/graemlins/blush.gif

[**DONOTDELETE**]

[MrHappy]

why so many Reps?? is there any point in doing so many in one set?

[DukeOfEarl]

^^^^^^^^ its a brutally hardcore shocking method brother, it will set ur legs on fire!

[ChopptUp]

Why do you want to do 100 reps?!

[thevoice]

[ QUOTE ]
why so many Reps?? is there any point in doing so many in one set?

[/ QUOTE ]


I would assume it pumps so much blood into the legs and causes such a shock that the legs have no choice but to grow.

[ChopptUp]

Squats are a mass muilding exercise that should be done in a low rep range. Doing 100 reps wont make them bigger or more defined. It's just doing "100" reps, very pointless!"

[MrHappy]

Oh, i never even imagine in doing so many. I'm gonna have to try it once. My max right now is 325. Maybe with the bar alone i can do it. =P

Edit: But what is the proper amount you put on the bar in order to do the 100 reps? Tomorrow is leg day and i feel like doing it now! >=)

[**DONOTDELETE**]

[**DONOTDELETE**]

[Arkades]

Argh I have legs today, couldn't you have posted this tomorrow or summet /forum/images/graemlins/mad.gif /forum/images/graemlins/smile.gif /forum/images/graemlins/laugh.gif

[ChopptUp]

If you want to build up great endurance, then do it. But from what I have learned from experts and other bodybuilders and P-lifters is that a high rep range is only from endurance. Hence doing your 100 reps would be like a cardio session!

[**DONOTDELETE**]

[ChopptUp]

My point is that doing this wont be good for your growth in mass.

[**DONOTDELETE**]

[ChopptUp]

Seriously, I have been told opposite from other message boards. So far on this site, there seems to be some contradictions on myths and stuff!

[ChopptUp]

Look like many other bbers, i not that much into the deep scientifics and stuff. You seem to be. I'm not trying to say im right and youre wrong. It's just that seems pretty crazy to do.

[**DONOTDELETE**]

[**DONOTDELETE**]

[ChopptUp]

I have never seen this method, but you seem to know what you are doing. I asked an "expert" a few minutes ago, and he said w/ the rest pause up to 100 reps, that it would take a long time! How long do you think it would take?

[ChopptUp]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Look like many other bbers, i not that much into the deep scientifics and stuff

[/ QUOTE ]

Which is tragic. The more an athlete knows about his or her body, the better equipped they are to manipulate their diet and training to enduce hyperplasic havoc. That is the whole purpose of this website and its publications.

[/ QUOTE ]

I mean im not a dumbass. I have a great diet and i will be switching to a keto diet, whats your opinion on the keto diet.

[**DONOTDELETE**]

[ChopptUp]

yeah, my friend wants a link to this exact thread, i cant seem to get one, can you get me one, please?

[**DONOTDELETE**]

[**DONOTDELETE**]

[ChopptUp]

Thanks for all the info!

[ChopptUp]

Just curious where did you get all this knowledge from?

[MaineStag]

Every few weeks I get away from the low rep sets with a lighter weight and do 4 or 5 sets of 20 with a 2 min rest. Helps me concentrate on form and really opens the lungs! I did this yesterday and feel the soreness in different areas than usual.
For me it's a good mental tool to be able to perform that many reps while still being able to concentrate on good form. I always walk away from this w/o shakey and spent!

[Joe Gillian]

I sometime use a 3x60 (bodyweight only!!) to end a legs session... and that is hard enough for me: It burns like HELL!
But I'll go for it next saturday, for my leg session.
I'll try a 1x100 to finish.
I'll probably die after that. /forum/images/graemlins/grin.gif

[TheShanMan]

[ QUOTE ]
Seriously, I have been told opposite from other message boards. So far on this site, there seems to be some contradictions on myths and stuff!

[/ QUOTE ]
Sounds like you need to spend less time on other sites and more time here. Literally, this is the only site you need. The articles here are as good as they get and the authors do a tremendous job of research. Everything written here is backed by a tremendous amount of scientific research and studies. Learn to love reading the articles on this site and you won't regret it, my friend!

[ChopptUp]

Yeah, I dont think I will try this method though. I just wanna know if it will truly pack on size and mass to my legs.

[Coz]

[ QUOTE ]
Squats are a mass muilding exercise that should be done in a low rep range. Doing 100 reps wont make them bigger or more defined. It's just doing "100" reps, very pointless!"

[/ QUOTE ]

This is totally false. By low rep range I would assume you aretalking less than 6. In fact, Quads are predominantly slow twitch muscle fiber and if your main goal is to build mass it would be wise to also include and possible to focus on rep ranges of 8-15. This does not mean that you should neglect low reps as well. It just means if your goals are hypertrophy then you are making a big mistake to only be doing low reps, especially for Quads. If your goal is
strength then that is a totally different subject.

Also, 100 rep squats are not meant to be a regualar training method. It is more of a shock.

So, it is 80 minutes to game time. I will let you folks know how it goes if I ever make it out of the rack! /forum/images/graemlins/tongue.gif /forum/images/graemlins/laugh.gif

[soccerchick]

i have yet to try the 100 rep method for squats. i have done it for calves and love it.

ChopptUp, i suggest you give it a shot one workout. i guarantee you will be walking funny the next day. what do you have to lose for trying it once?

[ChopptUp]

Hopefully you dont do this for every bodypart! Seriously if you want to "schock", what's wrong with doing an extra set or supersetting? I usually use a 5-9 range, and strength is my priority!

[Coz]

[ QUOTE ]
Hopefully you dont do this for every bodypart! Seriously if you want to "schock", what's wrong with doing an extra set or supersetting? I usually use a 5-9 range, and strength is my priority!

[/ QUOTE ]

Then if strength is your priority you are still not working out optimally just by using a 5-9 rep range. If you want strength do a search here for the Westside method and read some of sta63bmx's posts.

If you want mass (like you indicated previously) then be prepared to try different methods. I use supersets quite regularly. I need something that will make me cry now. If you don't want to try it then that is your perogative. However, you are missing out.

I haven't done this for any bodypart yet. It's gonna happen in an hour. However, I don't see why I would not do this for other parts. You can also do a search for riot bombing or the Austrian blitz.

Like I said, everyone has different goals and require a different training method. I have done strength training in the past and had your mentality. However, my goals now are hypertrophy and adapting to new training methods that will suit my goals are necessary.

[OUTLAW20SICX]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Hopefully you dont do this for every bodypart! Seriously if you want to "schock", what's wrong with doing an extra set or supersetting? I usually use a 5-9 range, and strength is my priority!

[/ QUOTE ]

Then if strength is your priority you are still not working out optimally just by using a 5-9 rep range. If you want strength do a search here for the Westside method and read some of sta63bmx's posts.

If you want mass (like you indicated previously) then be prepared to try different methods. I use supersets quite regularly. I need something that will make me cry now. If you don't want to try it then that is your perogative. However, you are missing out.

I haven't done this for any bodypart yet. It's gonna happen in an hour. However, I don't see why I would not do this for other parts. You can also do a search for riot bombing or the Austrian blitz.

Like I said, everyone has different goals and require a different training method. I have done strength training in the past and had your mentality. However, my goals now are hypertrophy and adapting to new training methods that will suit my goals are necessary.

[/ QUOTE ]
me and a few others here have done it for every muscle, i liked it

[soccerchick]

[ QUOTE ]
Hopefully you dont do this for every bodypart! Seriously if you want to "schock", what's wrong with doing an extra set or supersetting? I usually use a 5-9 range, and strength is my priority!

[/ QUOTE ]

you do it for the muscle you want to shock. i did it for calves last night. this method helped me make gains in all areas of my training.

its a different shock to your muscles that you would use; like drop sets, extra sets, supersetting, etc. why are you afraid to add one more shocking method to your arsenal?

[ChopptUp]

Uh... Overtraining!!!!

[ChopptUp]

This site really believes in "shocking" their bodyparts. Do many of you hit plateus or something?

[CRaVe]

[ QUOTE ]
Just curious where did you get all this knowledge from?

[/ QUOTE ]i think he was born smart like that /forum/images/graemlins/laugh.gif

[Coz]

[ QUOTE ]
This site really believes in "shocking" their bodyparts. Do many of you hit plateus or something?

[/ QUOTE ]

I have never hit a plateau in the last 4 years. I think that is reason enough to continue what I am doing. Benn a member here since early 2001 and my training has just improved. I am jealous of the young kids here have access to this site. I wish I had it in my teens!

Why don't you just read the articles and get aquainted with all the methods here.

[Coz]

[ QUOTE ]
Uh... Overtraining!!!!

[/ QUOTE ]

I find too many people use this word too liberally. I train 6 and sometimes 7 days a week. Out of those around 4 days a week are twice a day.

I train each bodypart every 6 days and do a lot of active recovery workouts. I take a one week break everyfew months and that is what I am going to do after this workout.

Like I said I haven't hit any plateaus in 5 yrs. Consistent gains my friend. I just alter my training methids very regualarly.

[ChopptUp]

Well, no offense but i have been a member on bodybuilding.com, and many of their thinking is way different. And I have used many of their methods and have gained like crazy. And they also sell supplements and everything you need. And they have great articles, by actual competitors and powerlifters. And they give great advice. And why not listen to them, they are freaks, they are huge. But since I have stumbled onto this site, everything has to do w/ "science" and "shocking". And I have read some articles, but it's like where is the visual proof?

[CRaVe]

[ QUOTE ]
Well, no offense but i have been a member on bodybuilding.com, and many of their thinking is way different. And I have used many of their methods and have gained like crazy. And they also sell supplements and everything you need. And they have great articles, by actual competitors and powerlifters. And they give great advice. And why not listen to them, they are freaks, they are huge. But since I have stumbled onto this site, everything has to do w/ "science" and "shocking". And I have read some articles, but it's like where is the visual proof?

[/ QUOTE ]lmao bodybuiding.com that is the worst site ever ! 90% of the people there are cluless and since there are some many people registerd the ones that know anything about bb'ing dont even post really

[Coz]

[ QUOTE ]
Well, no offense but i have been a member on bodybuilding.com, and many of their thinking is way different. And I have used many of their methods and have gained like crazy. And they also sell supplements and everything you need. <font color="red">So that makes them have better information? This site is run without advertising and without the sale of supplements. There is no monetary interest in its members. </font> And they have great articles, by actual competitors and powerlifters. And they give great advice. And why not listen to them, they are freaks, they are huge. But since I have stumbled onto this site, everything has to do w/ "science" and "shocking". And I have read some articles, but it's like where is the visual proof? <font color="red"> Science is the proof. I don't take advice from someone who is big. I take it from someone who has researched AND I verify the information with other sources. It seems you are taking information from people just because of what they have achieved without knowing exactly how they achieved it. You do know that many competitors are not necessarily drug free. </font>

[/ QUOTE ]

[ChopptUp]

Well I dont listen to the pple that dont know what they are talking about. I read the articles that are written by the mods and real competitors, who are actually pretty big! I have never heard about this mehtod! I am just trying to acquire the most knowledge I can, but there are so many different beliefs and myths.

[soccerchick]

have you bothered to look through people's journals, pics, etc.? the proof is there.

[Coz]

[ QUOTE ]
I am just trying to acquire the most knowledge I can, but there are so many different beliefs and myths.

[/ QUOTE ]

That is where science plays a role. However, what works for someone may not work for another. This is why you should take science and experience over what works for someone else.

[ChopptUp]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Well, no offense but i have been a member on bodybuilding.com, and many of their thinking is way different. And I have used many of their methods and have gained like crazy. And they also sell supplements and everything you need. <font color="red">So that makes them have better information? This site is run without advertising and without the sale of supplements. There is no monetary interest in its members. </font> And they have great articles, by actual competitors and powerlifters. And they give great advice. And why not listen to them, they are freaks, they are huge. But since I have stumbled onto this site, everything has to do w/ "science" and "shocking". And I have read some articles, but it's like where is the visual proof? <font color="red"> Science is the proof. I don't take advice from someone who is big. I take it from someone who has researched AND I verify the information with other sources. It seems you are taking information from people just because of what they have achieved without knowing exactly how they achieved it. You do know that many competitors are not necessarily drug free. </font>

[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]

Okay to assume that many of them are juicing is just ignorant. And what is wrong with selling supplements, I mean you believe in taking some, dont you? Many of the competitors arent the size of freakin Ronnie or Jay. And some of the members actually keep very detailed logs, and they have used their methods as well, and they have made great gains.

[Coz]

[ QUOTE ]
Okay to assume that many of them are juicing is just ignorant. And what is wrong with selling supplements, I mean you believe in taking some, dont you? Many of the competitors arent the size of freakin Ronnie or Jay. And some of the members actually keep very detailed logs, and they have used their methods as well, and they have made great gains.

[/ QUOTE ]

Oh man, ok someone take over because I am getting annoyed. Why would selling supplements have any bearing on this argument? It has nothing to do with this. The point is this site is completely free with no vested interest in it's members. Nothing is asked in return.

You are ignorant if you do not acknowledge that steroids play a huge part in competition. I was only making a point that if you follow somoene else's diet and training techniques you may or may not be getting the whole picture. This is where science and personal experience are important.

You are completely going off into many different directions. I don't want this thread locked stay on the subject.

OK guys I am off and will report my pain when I return! /forum/images/graemlins/laugh.gif /forum/images/graemlins/cool.gif

[ChopptUp]

Okay, well lets agree to disagree, you have your methods, I have mine.

[Jedi]

Why won't you try this method and then see if it works for you without arguing so much? Just because somone on bodybuilding.com never used this method doesn't mean that you shouldn't try it yourself.

The way I see bbing in a whole is trying, trying different methods and different approaches, no matter what someone else says.. hell it might even work for me.

[TheShanMan]

[ QUOTE ]
Yeah, I dont think I will try this method though. I just wanna know if it will truly pack on size and mass to my legs.

[/ QUOTE ]
Read up on mitochondrial density and you'll discover why techniques like this will improve your ability to do squats in "normal" rep ranges (improved recovery between sets, more energy during a set to get a couple more reps out), not to mention hypertrophy in your slow twitch fibers.

[ QUOTE ]
Hopefully you dont do this for every bodypart! Seriously if you want to "schock", what's wrong with doing an extra set or supersetting?

[/ QUOTE ]
Are you saying there is no reason to use any other shocking technique? Pick up Schwarzenegger's Encyclopedia of Modern Bodybuilding. He describes plenty more shocking techniques than the ones you use.

Seriously, if you choose not to be a student of the body, you will be turning your back on gains. Sure, you may be gaining now, but would you knowingly turn down the chance to gain at a faster rate? It's your choice. People here are trying to help you understand the value of this site. But it doesn't appear that you're interested. If you're not, just stick with bodybuilding.com and best of luck to you! /forum/images/graemlins/smile.gif

[CRaVe]

choptup why are u so argumentative it has been explained why the method is good

[ChopptUp]

I'm reading the articles right now, I'm an open-minded person when it comes to bodybuilding. It just takes a lot to switch your whole thinking and philosophies, that have been working, for new ones.

[CRaVe]

[ QUOTE ]
I'm reading the articles right now, I'm an open-minded person when it comes to bodybuilding. It just takes a lot to switch your whole thinking and philosophies, that have been working, for new ones.

[/ QUOTE ]its just a shocking methond, u odnt have to change anything just try it!

[Heisman]

[ QUOTE ]
Why won't you try this method and then see if it works for you without arguing so much? Just because somone on bodybuilding.com never used this method doesn't mean that you shouldn't try it yourself.

The way I see bbing in a whole is trying, trying different methods and different approaches, no matter what someone else says.. hell it might even work for me.

[/ QUOTE ]

Who is that in your sig? That's a really impressive pic.

Since you guys like science so much, do you mind explaining to me how doing rest pause that many times in one set doesn't have a negative effect on the CNS?

Also, somebody way back mentioned mitochondrial density. Why do you care about making anything denser (like myofibrillar hypertrophy) when you want size? You want to make things bigger (like sarcoplasmic hypertrophy) for size, don't you?

[ChopptUp]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I'm reading the articles right now, I'm an open-minded person when it comes to bodybuilding. It just takes a lot to switch your whole thinking and philosophies, that have been working, for new ones.

[/ QUOTE ]its just a shocking methond, u odnt have to change anything just try it!

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah I know it's just a shocking method, but when I told someone of the ranges that i do for regular sets, he was like you wont achieve the ultimate gains if you are doing it in for stregnth and stuff like that. It's like I have no idea what I'm doing, but I obviously do.

[BrothaMan325]

did 80 at 185 lbs. normal weight / rep ratio is 152 lbs- to squat 365. 8 to 10 sets, 6 to 8 reps.

[Coz]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I'm reading the articles right now, I'm an open-minded person when it comes to bodybuilding. It just takes a lot to switch your whole thinking and philosophies, that have been working, for new ones.

[/ QUOTE ]its just a shocking methond, u odnt have to change anything just try it!

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah I know it's just a shocking method, but when I told someone of the ranges that i do for regular sets, he was like you wont achieve the ultimate gains if you are doing it in for stregnth and stuff like that. It's like I have no idea what I'm doing, but I obviously do.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well if you believe you know what you are doing so well then you obviously do not need any advice so why even post on boards right?

Listen, you said your goal was strenght and you train in the 5-9 rep range. I told you if you are interested in strength that was not OPTIMAL. I never said you would not gain from what you were doing. I pointed you in the the direction of Westside for a strength specific program and you choose to stick to your methods for strength gains...so good luck, you obviously need no assistance from anyone.

[Coz]

Ok so I am officialy dead. I am writing this from my grave. I just did 62 reps @ 185 with a couple rest pauses in between and I had to lower the weight to 185 to complete 100 reps. I am totally exhausted. I also did 4 sets of squats in the 8-12 rep range, 4 sets of Zercher Squats in the 4-12 range and 2 sets of Sissy Squats.

I will be doing Hams and Calves either later or tomorrow morning. I will postpone my break until I get those done but there was no way I was able to stand after my Quad workout. I am in so much pain! /forum/images/graemlins/crazy.gif

[**DONOTDELETE**]

[Kyra1991]

[ QUOTE ]
Ok so I am officialy dead. I am writing this from my grave. I just did 62 reps @ 185 with a couple rest pauses in between and I had to lower the weight to 185 to complete 100 reps. I am totally exhausted. I also did 4 sets of squats in the 8-12 rep range, 4 sets of Zercher Squats in the 4-12 range and 2 sets of Sissy Squats.

I will be doing Hams and Calves either later or tomorrow morning. I will postpone my break until I get those done but there was no way I was able to stand after my Quad workout. I am in so much pain! /forum/images/graemlins/crazy.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

Congrats Coz!! I have to say it definetely sounds like quite a feat!

[Heisman]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Since you guys like science so much, do you mind explaining to me how doing rest pause that many times in one set doesn't have a negative effect on the CNS?

[/ QUOTE ]

How would it have a negative effect? Explain?

Wouldn't doing that many rest pauses (in essence taking it far past a sate of failure) literally fry your CNS? Many people start feeling burned out if they go to failure more than on the last set of each exercise they do every now and then. How long does it take to recover from doing this (for the average bodybuilder)? I don't see how you could recover quickly enough to continue on with your training without being forced to take some time off.

[ QUOTE ]
Also, somebody way back mentioned mitochondrial density

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, that was me.

[ QUOTE ]
Why do you care about making anything denser (like myofibrillar hypertrophy) when you want size?

[/ QUOTE ]

You're kidding right? Do you know what mitochondria is? Increasing mitochondrial density will allow for more efficient substrate utilization. I take it you know what that means, correct? I'll let you ponder on that for a while.

No, to be honest, I've never heard of mitochondrial density. I do know what mitochondria are. I do not know what substrate utilization is. I am only aware of sarcoplasmic and myofibrillar hypertrophy.


Further, explain to me your rationale. Show me how, from a physiological standpoint, that increasing mitochondrial density will not allow for hypertrophy or hyperplasia.

Again, I don't know what that is, but I've NEVER seen any study that showed that hyperplasia is possible in humans. Personally, I do believe that it is possible, but since nobody knows how to induce it, I don't see how you could convince me that increasing mitochondrial density would help.

Just give me a couple of links to explain to me what mitochondrial density and substrate utilization is, if you don't mind.


You seem to like throwing out scientific terms without knowing the science behind them. I suggest you do more than look at the glossary of a physiology book and start reading the chapters. /forum/images/graemlins/smirk.gif

I'm 16 and haven't had access to a physiology book, unfortunately. I'll be buying quite a few books soon though. Why don't you educate me and show me some links so that I can learn?

[/ QUOTE ]

[Coz]

[ QUOTE ]
Congrats Coz!! I have to say it definetely sounds like quite a feat!

[/ QUOTE ]

Kyra, thanks...yes that was hard, mentally and physically. I am still hurting now. I was seeing stars for quite some time after my workout and my legs were wobbling while I was attempting to take a shower! /forum/images/graemlins/laugh.gif

[Fahsy]

I think I'm gonna give this 100 rep method a go tomorrow.

What type of weight should I be doing for 100 reps, any suggestions? I max squat at over 315 but probably less than 365. I usually do working set up to about 285-295. I was thinking 135, but I've done sets of 25 like that before and it wasn't easy (I'm sure 100 reps is a lot harder).

[**DONOTDELETE**]

[**DONOTDELETE**]

[Fahsy]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
What type of weight should I be doing for 100 reps, any suggestions?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, for the second time in this thread, use a weight you normally can hit 25 times.

[/ QUOTE ]

Sorry, I got so wrapped up in reading the discussion, I passed right over the first few posts.

[Heisman]

[ QUOTE ]


[ QUOTE ]
Wouldn't doing that many rest pauses (in essence taking it far past a sate of failure) literally fry your CNS?

[/ QUOTE ]

That doesn't sound scientific at all. Besides, I'm sure you are aware that during the pause, lactic acid is being flushed out and ATP stores are being replenished. Moreover, a larger number of motor units are being called into play, ones that aren't normally activated. This can only be beneficial and is the whole purpose of the shock.

Since when does lactic acid and ATP stores have anything to do with the CNS?

Next time, don't use such unscientific terms like "fried." /forum/images/graemlins/tongue.gif That offers no insight into the proposed physiological mechanisms behind your arguement

Yeah, sorry about that. Would "doing 100 reps rest pause inhibit the CNS from firing efficiently" be good enough for you?

[ QUOTE ]
How long does it take to recover from doing this (for the average bodybuilder)? I don't see how you could recover quickly enough to continue on with your training without being forced to take some time off.


[/ QUOTE ]

With proper nutrition, I'm ready to go the next morning (not for the same muscle group of course). Average recovery after a workout containing this shock is 3-5 days.

Really? You can recover from this in 3-5 days? I'll admit, I wasn't expecting that. When I do heavy set of squats for 3 reps it takes me at least 2 full days to recover. I'm curious, and you can completely ignore this if you want to, but are you natural?

[ QUOTE ]
No, to be honest, I've never heard of mitochondrial density

[/ QUOTE ]

Then how can you criticize it if you don't even know what it is!

It just threw me off that you would use the term density for trying to gain size. If you gain size, you will lose density.

[ QUOTE ]
I do know what mitochondria are. I do not know what substrate utilization is. I am only aware of sarcoplasmic and myofibrillar hypertrophy.


[/ QUOTE ]

You have a lot to learn then. Start reading the articles under the Anatomy tab above.

I'll check those out. Thanks.

[ QUOTE ]
Again, I don't know what that is, but I've NEVER seen any study that showed that hyperplasia is possible in humans

[/ QUOTE ]

Then you haven't been looking! Do a search on it here, and read our articles. It is pretty well established.

Again, I'll look. Thanks.

[ QUOTE ]
Personally, I do believe that it is possible, but since nobody knows how to induce it, I don't see how you could convince me that increasing mitochondrial density would help.


[/ QUOTE ]

If you don't know what mitochondrial density is, then I would not expect you to understand hyperplasia. Again, read our articles. Hyperplasia is actually growing in popularity and many studies have found how to induce it in humans.

Could you link me to one of these studies? I have a feeling I know some people who are much more knowledgable than me (at fortifiediron) who would be interested.

[ QUOTE ]
Just give me a couple of links to explain to me what mitochondrial density and substrate utilization is, if you don't mind.

[/ QUOTE ]

Do a search on the boards and read the articles here, otherwise pick up a textbook.

Yeah, I will. I'm going to be getting The Science and Practice of Strength Training and Supertraining, so I should learn a lot form those books (I'll ask others to help me get through them, LOL).

[ QUOTE ]
Why don't you educate me and show me some links so that I can learn?

[/ QUOTE ]

Just read our articles. /forum/images/graemlins/smirk.gif

I'll take a look at them.

[/ QUOTE ]

[**DONOTDELETE**]

[IronFuji]

Congrats on the squats COZ!

[Kasaz]

Ok I hate whoever posted the 100 rep workout!!!!!!!!!!

So I go into leg day today after reading this wonderfull thread, and thought to myself....self, why don't we try it?
Well I throw 150lbs on the bar, and I bang out 58 reps with some rest pause in there. Then I had to lower the weight to 130 to finish 33 more reps. Finally I lowered the weight to 110 and finished the last 9 reps!!!

I hate Mr. 100 Rep Man!!!!!!!!!!!!!! In a good way of course /forum/images/graemlins/laugh.gif

[rev]

Bump for a great thread. I'm so trying this.

[parman84]

For those that have been saying that 100 reps is only for endurance, you may be thinking of doing 100 reps all at once, but if u put a weight on there where u fail at like 20, pause for 10 secs and eek out a few more reps, and continue in this manner til 100, this will be far from an endurance workout. Listen to the experts on this site, they know their stuff.

[MrHappy]

The original poster who attempted the 100 reps is an insane man. I just got back from the gym from trying the 100 reps and i couldn't even do more than 20 reps.

I added the amount i weigh to the barbell and i was only able to do 20 reps. I did another set but it was only 16 reps and my 3rd set was only 9. This is the most brutal thing i've done. I've never went over 10 reps during squats.

[Bio]

lol, he just wont give up
*sigh*

[mr.selfdestruct]

On a different note, I have several questions of my own on "mitochondrial density".

By my understanding, increasing the number of mitochondria within the individual myofibrils has little to do with actual size increase, is that correct?

Also, is it correct that hypertrophy occurs due to the increase in number of myofibrils within each fibre or is that hyperplasia?

Finally, is it true that the density or "hardness" of a muscle can be changed by manipulating high and low rep ranges? Having a bit of an argument with a PT at my gym. /forum/images/graemlins/grin.gif

Help or links would be greatly appreciated, thx guys.

[**DONOTDELETE**]

[ryancostill]

Yu, this thread has been great for your post count!!!!

Just kidding, this has been a fascinating thread.Your inputs been interesting Yu. Although you've been quite argumentative Heisman and ChopptUp you've initiaited a fascinating discussion. Welcome to the site!

[Jedi]

[ QUOTE ]
Who is that in your sig? That's a really impressive pic.


[/ QUOTE ]

That's Jeff Willet

[Jedi]

[ QUOTE ]

Might I also reccomend going to www.humankinetics.com (http://www.humankinetics.com) and purchasing an actual physiology book?

[/ QUOTE ]
Yu can you suggest a specific book from that site?

[mr.selfdestruct]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
By my understanding, increasing the number of mitochondria within the individual myofibrils has little to do with actual size increase, is that correct?

[/ QUOTE ]

Increasing mitochondrial density will not directly increase the size of the muscle fiber, however it will allow for further muscle growth to take place faster.

[ QUOTE ]
Also, is it correct that hypertrophy occurs due to the increase in number of myofibrils within each fibre or is that hyperplasia?

[/ QUOTE ]

Correct. Hypertrophy results from an increase in the number of myofibrils, actin and myosin filaments (contractile components), amount of sarcoplasm, and also an increase in connective tissue (within the muscle fiber).

Hyperplasia is defined as an increase in the number of fibers.

[ QUOTE ]
Finally, is it true that the density or "hardness" of a muscle can be changed by manipulating high and low rep ranges? Having a bit of an argument with a PT at my gym

[/ QUOTE ]

Hard as in "hard to the touch?" Many factors are involved in the transient density of a muscle, including water retention and the amount of available glycogen stored within the muscle fibers.

Chronic density is built through the overload principle, and is best observed during a bulking routine.

Does that answer your question? I'm not sure what specifically you were referring to.

[/ QUOTE ]

Wow, thanks for the in-depth response Yu. The PT at my gym was saying that muscle hardness (ninja edit: yes, hardness to the touch) and density can be increased via the use of certain rep schemes (though he did not specify... rather vague kinda guy actually /forum/images/graemlins/grin.gif ). I think from your response that he is incorrect...

[British Bulldog]

I get the feeling that Heisman and ChopptUp may become regular members of this site after receiving a great ABC Smack down from Yu!

Seems like they are tempted by the science at last!

Great thread guys!

[TheShanMan]

I just did 100 reps for the first time ever. I started at 175 and made it to 55. Then dropped to 155 and got to 80. Finally dropped to 135 and made it the rest of the way. Yu, you must have mitochondrial density out the ying-yang! Next time my goal is obviously to go longer without dropping the weight.

We followed that up with 3 sets of squats for 20-25 reps at 185 supersetted with a static contraction and for the 2nd set topped it off with some leg extensions too. Then I did weighted glute-ham raises, keiser (air) heavy leg curls, hip adductors, and hip abductors. Overall, that had to be the most brutal workout I've ever done (mainly due the quad part).

Thanks for the inspiration to finally try this shocking technique!

[Venom]

Great breakdown Yu!

Yes, the 100 rep method is a great shock to demolish numerous muscle fibers. I just did 3 yesterday for legs! I would recommend the following articles to be studied on energy systems (they can be found in the current issue of JHR):

Energetic Transference Occurring in the Biosphere Part I: Free Energy Manipulation and Enthalpy

Energetic Transference Occurring in the Biosphere Part II: Anaerobic Energy Pathways

Energetic Transference Occurring in the Biosphere Part III: Lactate Clearance and Anaerobic Training Adaptations

You'll view several other adaptations which will transpire from shocking methods such as the 100 rep method.


[ QUOTE ]
By my understanding, increasing the number of mitochondria within the individual myofibrils has little to do with actual size increase, is that correct?


[/ QUOTE ]

Well, myofibrils compose the majority of the muscle (about 80%); however, by increasing certain organelles within the muscle, such as mitochondria, you can actually increase the overall size of the muscle, without inducing hypertrophy/hyperplasia to individual muscle fibers. To quote prez:

[ QUOTE ]
4. Mass Factor &amp; Density In The Muscles Cytoplasm! - While building up your body's ability to produce energy( mitochondria ) you will also increase your ability to store energy in the cells cytoplasm or sarcoplasm
( see anatomy of a muscle ). Again, this translates to more energy in the weight room, and more energy to
build mass. Further, mitochondria and
all the elements that will be built up with it in the sarcoplasm will contribute to the overall size of a muscle fiber! I hear several people preach that this size is not significant, but those same people are the ones who slow thousands and thousands of athletes growth by telling them to ignore slow twitch muscle fibers! In this sport, growth, is growth! Not only will you enhance hypertrophy in the contractile proteins within the muscle, but also enhance it through multiplying Mitochondria!


[/ QUOTE ]

[luvmypt]

Why is it necessary to complete 100 reps, why won't 40 reps or 50 or just 25 reps accomplish the same muscle growth and shocking value to the body if you are only used to performing sets of 8-10?

I understand the concept of shocking muscles. I don't understand the magic of the number 100. I would think that there would be a point reached by the muscles that after being shocked, they just become susceptible to injury.

[Coz]

[ QUOTE ]
Why is it necessary to complete 100 reps, why won't 40 reps or 50 or just 25 reps accomplish the same muscle growth and shocking value to the body if you are only used to performing sets of 8-10?

I understand the concept of shocking muscles. I don't understand the magic of the number 100. I would think that there would be a point reached by the muscles that after being shocked, they just become susceptible to injury.

[/ QUOTE ]

It's just a number...a high number. If it will make you feel better we can call them 150 rep squats or 214 rep squats. Just don't compare 25 to 100.

[diamondtim]

ok who wants to start the 150 rep squat post [*%#*%*#] thread?

[CoLDTuRKeY]

Alright, I did them for squats and they butchered me like... well... something that gets butchered /forum/images/graemlins/confused.gif Do you think it would be beneficial to try this rep scheme on deadlifts, bench, and cleans?

[Coz]

Well today was chest day and I figured I would try something similar to the 100 rep method just at the end of my workout as a final burnout.

I figured no problem can I get to 100 with 135 even as tired as I already was. So I started and completely failed consecutive reps at 33 reps then rp for 10 sec and only did 8 then another rp for 10 sec and was only able to squeeze out 3. So, 44 reps only. Well it was the end of my workout I should have just put less weight on. I will know for next time I do this. /forum/images/graemlins/laugh.gif

[Fahsy]

Yesterday I did 100 reps with 135. Then I did 3 sets of leg press and left the gym because I wasn't feeling good. I left thinking that it was a pretty bad workout (ony 4 working sets) but today I have DOMS like I do after any other leg day.

[ryancostill]

speaking of recommending books...

i recommend Exercsie Physiology: Bioenergetics and its applications by A. Brooks

Its a bit pricey but it is so well compiled and comprehensive. It covers so much of exercise science you wouldnt believe!

[Venom]

[ QUOTE ]
speaking of recommending books...

i recommend Exercsie Physiology: Bioenergetics and its applications by A. Brooks

Its a bit pricey but it is so well compiled and comprehensive. It covers so much of exercise science you wouldnt believe!

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, that is an excellent book. Brooks is a great scientist. Me and prez sourced him several times in our bioeneretic articles.

[klosey]

century sets are great shockers

[Coz]

[ QUOTE ]
century sets are great shockers

[/ QUOTE ]

Talk about reviving an old post, this ones almost 2 yrs old. /forum/images/graemlins/smirk.gif

[klosey]

just goes to show the old tricks still work best /forum/images/graemlins/laugh.gif

[TasteLikeChicken]

klosey, you have encouraged me to try century sets, I don't know what exercise I'll do them on though.

[klosey]

hello TasteLikeChicken i do a full bodyworkout as a shocker

bench &amp; dips for chest
deadlifts &amp; chins for back
squats &amp; leg press for quads
hamstring curls &amp; sl deadlifts for hams
calf raises
barbell curl &amp; precher curl for biceps
skull crushers &amp; kickbacks for triceps

after this im fried

[TasteLikeChicken]

I read that Lee Priest did this in Battle for the Olympia 2005:
[ QUOTE ]
Lee Priest started off with leg extensions which he did for a high rep set. The reps seemed to go on forever and it was a pretty unorthodox set along the lines of something I would expect from Johnny Fuller! Johnny was known to do plenty of reps and sets and his diet was even crazier lol.

For Lee's next exercise, he hit the leg press machine. He went up to four plates per side and did a staggering 105 reps! That is something I had never really heard of before, even reading up on Johnny Fuller, I don't recall him going quite that heavy. For his next set he went up to six plates also doing neverending reps.

[/ QUOTE ]

[klosey]

/forum/images/graemlins/laugh.gif sick things make you big lol

[Edgecrusher]

Ok I don't know if this has been clarified or not but there is a LOT of confusion here! When he says "10 rep squat" he's not talking about doing 100 reps in a row, although this would be great for the slow twitch, it's not what he's talking about. He means picking a weight that he'd fail with at a low amount of reps but rest pausing out rep after painful rep untill he gets to 100.

Anytime I talk about a 20 rep squat people always say doing 20 reps is too easy and won't get me any size and that that's just what wimps do cause they're afraid to go heavy etc....
It's VERY ANNOYING!!!!!

[Bahir]

I tried it for my leg workout 2 days ago, although I only got to 50 reps... My quads are FRIED!

[jlands]

I was thinking he meant doing 100 reps straight. If you need to do a rest pause then use it, but keep going until you reach 100 or you fail.

[Edgecrusher]

Yeah that's what it is. But you pick a weight that you'd fail at say 15 - 20 reps, once you hit failure you pause at the top, take a few breaths and go down again....... 21.... take a few breaths and go down again...... 22....... and continue this untill you get to 100.

[TasteLikeChicken]

I tried both today. Rest pausing on the leg extention, it's realy too hard to be honest. And I tried for 100 straight reps on the leg press. The leg press was great even if I only got to 60 reps on both sets. I'll work on it and devellop the endurance that it doesn't hurt as much and have the lungs to do it. Definatly promissing.

I think legs shouldn't usualy be worked in a rep range lower than 20. Exept hams that like lower reps.

[Coz]

[ QUOTE ]
I was thinking he meant doing 100 reps straight. If you need to do a rest pause then use it, but keep going until you reach 100 or you fail.

[/ QUOTE ]

100 straight reps woulsn't be as effective since the weight would be way too light. Rest pausing with an aim of 10-25 reps each is brutal. Rest pause all the way to 100 with as little time between pauses as possible.

[ QUOTE ]

I think legs shouldn't usualy be worked in a rep range lower than 20. Exept hams that like lower reps.


[/ QUOTE ]

Like any bodypart, variation is the key. Hamstrings especially respond quite well to low rep ranges (6-8). Do them all regardless.

[DrumLaxer]

Ive done 2 sets of 50 of bodyweight (215). Its fairly brutal... I rested somewhere around 5-10 mins between sets with an active recovery, light jog. Its a great blow-out! Make sure your form is proper... with proper form most people could not 50 squats with 0 weight on them!

[klosey]

you pick a weight you can do upto ten reps with and force out 100 with as many pauses as needed. by end it takes about 10 seconds to do a rep

[ecto no more]

Hey Coz, nice 2 year old post! /forum/images/graemlins/grin.gif It's older than my youngest child. /forum/images/graemlins/tongue.gif