Can you reach effective hypertrophy in the 3-5 rep range with weighted Calisthenics?

123vicky

New member
I’m adding weights now to my calisthenics because I’m in a lean bulk phase and trying to increase strength + muscle mass as much as possible. I’m just starting, so at 6’4” ~205-208lbs, I’m currently running:
  • 5x3 Pull Ups with 15lbs
  • 5x3 Dips with 15lbs
  • 4x6 Close Grip Push Ups with 20lbs
  • 4x8 Leg Raises at the end for core
P.S- Im very focused on eccentric tension so I put my muscles under more duress and stress. So I take around 4-5 seconds when going down when doing Pull Ups, Dips, and Push Ups.
 
@quietkate Yes, like arms shaking. The pull ups, I get 3 clean reps (the slow negative KILLS my arms) and I always try to get a 4th rep in and I can’t get past halfway.
 
@123vicky Well that should do it, tho keep in mind, the low rep range creates more myofibrillar hypertrophy while the higher rep range creates more sarcoplasmic hypertrophy. So one will give you more strength to size ratio while the other will give you more size to strength ratio. You’ll always get both but the ratios will change with the number of reps.
 
@123vicky Myofibrillar means muscle fibers. Sarcoplasma means the liquid inside the muscle cells. Low reps means more myofibrillar which means more muscle fibers which leads to more strength. Higher reps is more sarcoplasma so more fluid inside the muscle cells which means more size. As I said you will always get both, however the ratio will change. From what I remember the 3-5 rep range is more myofibrillar. The 8-12 rep range is more sarcoplasmic. So from that in theory 5-8 should be a balance. Of course this isn’t an exact science. Diet, body type, general health, training to failure or not, form and technique, rest and sleep, stress levels, social habits all come into play.
 
@quietkate Yep. I’m in a Recomp phase too right now and don’t eat any sugar or processed foods including these breads and stuff in these stores. I’m eating anywhere from 1900-2300 calories (within that range daily) with around 190g protein, ~160g fat and less than 15g carbs (usually from some supplements + seasonings uses.
 
@agadfly I’ve only seen all upsides. Nothing bad about it so far. No inflammation, sleep better and less interrupted, less gut issues if any, better skin and hydration, less water weight, you feel stronger while getting leaner (especially when you’re fully fat adapted), lower insulin levels. I realized that 99% of people who think carnivore diet is bad has used what they HEARD over actually doing their own research. Even then I would think that carnivore diet is what they side with considering pretty much everyone who has tried it has improved so significantly.

The only downsides I can see are negligible ones like “it’s boring”. I will say that bulking with this diet can prove to be hard because the body will naturally get full quicker. If you’re thinking about “a balanced diet”, that’s a standard American diet myth to get people to assume that carbs are supposed to be in our diet. Organ Meat (#1) and then Meat(#2) happens to be the most nutrients dense foods in the world. You will find all essential minerals and nutrients needed from those two alone, and it happens to be the only food that humans can live off alone and thrive. The Inuit Tribe are a perfect example of this. They are some of the healthiest people with the some of the lowest amounts of Cancer, Diabetes, and Heart Disease cases per capita that we have seen. They also happen to live in the cold and eat in a carnivore based diet pretty much all their lives. Those three sickness that I just named, happened to be all the leading causes of death in the west, especially in the US. People will argue the same about being a vegan, but it isn’t true. You will start seeing the downsides of a true vegan diet soon after the first couple of months. The lack of adequate protein and fats causes issues down the line and they need to eat stuff like tofu to supplement for all that. Carbs are the only Macro that aren’t needed at all, and the amount of insulin that the body requires is usually already produced by the liver. You don’t need to eat carbs or sugar to make it, the body converts fats and protein into it already. So knowing that, there is no point in eating these processed poisons that the SAD (Standard American Diet) as brainwashed the public to consume.

General Idea: in the end, you can be HEALTHIER by switching to any form of eating that cuts off sugars and processed foods completely. I don’t think potatoes or rice is evil. Cookies and soda and candy is evil. The sugar that we have normalized is what is really killing us, so these elimination diets help us because of that alone.

Here is a great video by Dr. Robert Lustig about the effect that sugar has on your health and why it is literal poison:

Take care of your body folks. Don’t take your temple for granted, this is coming from someone who was 325lbs just a year ago to now 200.
 
@123vicky
I’m eating anywhere from 1900-2300 calories (within that range daily) with around 190g protein, ~160g fat and less than 15g carbs

How are you eating 2300 kcal worth of meat but getting only 190g of protein? 2300 kcal worth of beef has about 425g, chicken 450g, pork 420g.

Furthermore, 2300 kcal worth of beef has "only" 67g of fat, chicken 55g, pork 70g. So where is your 160g of fat coming from?
 
@col1 A) Not all cuts of meat are the same so those stats are pretty inaccurate

B) I eat pretty much a whole Costco Rotisserie chicken a day with the skin.

C) You want to prioritize getting enough fat while on carnivore to not throw off your hormones or go into something called “protein starvation”. You gotta eat fight to burn fat

Hope this helps.
 
@quietkate
(mike israetel) around 4:44

i'm pretty much doubting the validity of long term myo vs sarco hypertrophy ratio differences. i'd attribute perceived differences to:

- bruce lee type mfs just being super lean all the time so they look "dense"

- bodybuilders just doing more sets and accruing more pump/inflammation all the time and at top level maybe insulin/gh/aromatizing water bloat blurs the size/strength relationship in a way where powerlifting drug use might blur it less or even in the opposite way (neural drive)

- strength being a specific skill so mr 3-6 reps will have a bigger 1rm than mr 10-15 reps so people are intuitively like "yeah the powerlifter must have denser muscles"

- strength guys simply developing different muscles in proportion in a way that people attribute to looking dense (e.g. torso-dominant, midsection musculature) versus puffy (e.g. lots of side delt and bicep and lat isolation) (for example if i looked at larry wheels he just looks like a bodybuilder because he's done his share of bro-ing out on muscles that strength purists might not care about)
 
@123vicky I don't think based on all the research that you get optimal hyperthrophy in those low rep ranges.

Personally i focus on strength with pull ups (90lbs in 3-4rep range and then continuously drop and increase reps) mostly for the challenge. Otherwise i always supplement strength with reps in optimal hyperthrophy ranges.

But thats just me. Maybe it works. I don't believe it does zero for muscle building but yea
 
@bluejacketslunatic Current research is showing you can get equal hypertrophy in low, mid, and high rep ranges. See scientists like Brad Schoenfeld and Bill Campbell’s recent perspectives. It’s about the total volume of high tension reps as the commenter above stated.
 
@acushla But below 5 reps to failure seems to be less effective still. There might be some study showing otherwise, but the majority of research points towards the conclusion. Besides that it's very very taxing for joints, especially on high volume! It's more fatigued for the central nervous system AND it's more likely to cause DOMS and muscle damage in general. It will require more recovery time, and lead to more accommodated fatigue overall. Besides that the risk to reward ratio is just awful for that approach.
 
@jah138 I see your point but some people operate better in low rep ranges. There is a place for it.

There isnt just one study. Majority of current research is pointing to all rep ranges. Go take a look at the recent research and meta analysis by the top muscle physiologists in the field right now. You owe it to yourself/clients/athletes to open your mind to all potential mechanisms to achieve their goals.
 

Similar threads

Back
Top