A common criticism of the kind of high rep training I enjoy is that you’re “just doing junk volume.” The argument is that only the last few reps of any given exercise are going to trigger strength and size adaptations… This is how you engage the high threshold motor units and mechanical tension applied to those motor units is what triggers growth.
So, it only makes sense to use a much heavier weight and get there faster. Right? Anything else is a waste of time that will “only make you tired.”
Oh, you poor hapless fools. Let me enlighten you.
First: getting tired is a good thing. It means you’re training endurance: both cardio and strength endurance. Strength endurance, by the way, is what you need for the majority of strength-based tasks – you need to exert strength for a significant period of time whether wrestling, doing DIY, carrying something heavy, moving furniture… you name it.
Meanwhile, you’ll boost your work capacity meaning you can get more from every subsequent workout. And you’ll get cardiovascular benefits and angiogenesis that will mean you feel better during the day AND recover faster from training. Training higher rep means you get the cardio (and the accompanying fat loss) for free – no need to do additional cardio.
If your cardio limitations are slowing your weight gain, you just need to improve your cardio until it doesn’t become an issue. So that they improve in tandem. This is a GOOD thing.
SUPERFUNCTIONAL 3: SUPERMOVER - SPRING SALE!
Supermover is a program that builds an athletic physique and functional performance with short, accessible, & fun home workouts.
GET SUPERMOVER HERE!
But let’s say you’re ONLY interested in the strength and muscle gains. High rep will get you there but could you not get there faster by using lower rep?
Well, here’s the thing: those lighter reps aren’t doing nothing. They’re actually isolating the lower threshold motor units and taking them to failure. And this actually greats strength and size IN those smaller muscle fibres. The smaller muscle fibres are smaller than the faster ones but there are more of them – meaning they contribute roughly an equivalent surface area of the muscle. And they contribute to your power output in the vast majority of scenarios.
So, it’s far from junk. It’s just training a different, though equally important, part of the muscle.
And that’s before you even consider the role of metabolic stress and muscle damage – both of which can occur at any rep range. Some will say that only mechanical tension matters for muscle growth but I made a pretty post on my website tackling that one, so check it out if you want more context.
But even if you don’t agree with me on that, we’re getting some strength and size benefits from those lighter weights, either way.
Then there’s the fact that you’re greasing the groove and rehearsing the movement.
And beyond all that, doing those lighter reps at higher counts just means you don’t need as much equipment or space and it lowers the recovery cost. If I can bash out 35 dips and get the same benefits as I would from 8 reps of bench press, it’s not “junk.” It’s allowing me to train anywhere, whenever I like. With minimal recovery cost and no commute.
And it’s not like it takes ages (which is another common criticism of this style of training). You can bash out 35 dips and it will still take you less than 30 seconds if you’re using a rapid cadence. Not that different from five slow, grinding reps.
So, they’re not junk reps. But even if they were, they beat junk commuting and junk queuing for the bench, and junk time in the changing rooms.
And more importantly, the real message I want to convey is this: movement is never pointless. The very fact that we call some movement “junk” just because it’s not the most optimal for growth shows just how warped fitness messaging has become.
If you’re moving, you’re improving.
