Why 3-5 Reps?

[beastmode1]

Does that mean for every exercise I have to do 3-5 reps? If the exercise gets to easier do I just advance to a harder stage and what about exercise you cannot advance to a harder stage like pullups or chinups?

[Blairbob]

then you would use a more advanced version of such FBE or you would add some weight

[cccp22]

I recently received a very good question regarding programming:

I'm wondering why (when) we do strength trainng , we always do 3*5 or 3*3? Why always perform 3 or 5 reps per set? Why not 5-10 or more?

The reason for selecting 3-5 reps is because at this stage of your Gymnastic Strength Training™ you are focusing on building maximal strength with FBEs. Once you have built a solid foundation of maximal strength through the FBEs and have progressed onto advanced ring strength elements to further your maximal strength work, then you will begin performing FBEs in higher repetitions ranges to support joint health for your more advanced ring strength training.

Yours in Fitness,

Coach Sommer

********** Perhaps on a related note if one get's the chance check out "Misinformation engineering" section of Sportivnypress.com. and read the latest article "Ten sets of what?" {German Volume Training}-It really critiques

the heck of Poliquin and the tens sets of ten protocol for any "dynamic" sport!

Brandon Green

[Joshua Naterman]

Keep in mind that GVT is not in any way intended to be a sport-specific protocol. It is a hypertrophy protocol, typically used (according to Poliquin) to bump an athlete up a weight class.

The purpose of GVT is being taken out of context. Having said that, I personally found that 10x10 with 60% of my 1RM on ANYTHING was basically impossible. I ended up being able to do that with 50% of my shoulder press, eventually.

I will also say that, in retrospect, this sort of slow steady work does do a lot for your stabilizers, but perhaps it should be redirected. The 10x10 is the beginning version of GVT and doesn't hit higher threshold fibers. It does develop a ton of vascular tissue, which helps immensely with recovery.

When you start doing 10 sets of 6 and then the "5% protocol" you start seeing some more results, and I am not necessarily sure that anyone would need to do the 10x10 more than once. If the primary benefit is vascularization, any kind of high oxygen debt-inducing exercise for the area will work so perhaps the 10x10 is somewhat irrelevant in its specificity, but the basic idea works. Especially if you haven't done anything like that in forever.

I have to say that the site you mentioned is pretty hate-filled, but they do make some good points. Their presentation is ugly though, and the menus are straight out of a 1996-era newbie site. I'm not a big fan of such heavily editorialized content since it's hard to sift through and find any real direct statements.

As far as this topic goes, 3-5 reps for 3-5 sets is a fairly good relative strength builder for most people, and that's exactly what you want in gymnastics: Relative strength. Properly utilizing the FSP progressions and pre-requisites allows you to take care of your joints while you focus on increasing your relative strength.

Also, for anyone reading this still, if you use the WODs that Coach posts you will get a very healthy mix of low, medium and high reps. The dynamic days nearly always have a reasonable amount of high rep training.

Besides, if you WANT to just do more reps because you like to do lots of reps, no one here is stopping you.

[cccp22]

Keep in mind that GVT is not in any way intended to be a sport-specific protocol. It is a hypertrophy protocol, typically used (according to Poliquin) to bump an athlete up a weight class.

The purpose of GVT is being taken out of context. Having said that, I personally found that 10x10 with 60% of my 1RM on ANYTHING was basically impossible. I ended up being able to do that with 50% of my shoulder press, eventually.

I will also say that, in retrospect, this sort of slow steady work does do a lot for your stabilizers, but perhaps it should be redirected. The 10x10 is the beginning version of GVT and doesn't hit higher threshold fibers. It does develop a ton of vascular tissue, which helps immensely with recovery.

When you start doing 10 sets of 6 and then the "5% protocol" you start seeing some more results, and I am not necessarily sure that anyone would need to do the 10x10 more than once. If the primary benefit is vascularization, any kind of high oxygen debt-inducing exercise for the area will work so perhaps the 10x10 is somewhat irrelevant in its specificity, but the basic idea works. Especially if you haven't done anything like that in forever.

I have to say that the site you mentioned is pretty hate-filled, but they do make some good points. Their presentation is ugly though, and the menus are straight out of a 1996-era newbie site. I'm not a big fan of such heavily editorialized content since it's hard to sift through and find any real direct statements.

As far as this topic goes, 3-5 reps for 3-5 sets is a fairly good relative strength builder for most people, and that's exactly what you want in gymnastics: Relative strength. Properly utilizing the FSP progressions and pre-requisites allows you to take care of your joints while you focus on increasing your relative strength.

Also, for anyone reading this still, if you use the WODs that Coach posts you will get a very healthy mix of low, medium and high reps. The dynamic days nearly always have a reasonable amount of high rep training.

Besides, if you WANT to just do more reps because you like to do lots of reps, no one here is stopping you.

*******It's interesting that you use the word "they". It's Andrew Charniga's site and comments. In my specific opinion he's slightly "narrow" minded. He really loves the 'bulgarian" concept of specificity(jerk,snatch,squat) for weightlifters.

Brandon Green

[Joshua Naterman]

They meaning the site as an entity lol! But you're right, it's one person. He is really narrow-minded in that he clearly believes that if it isn't O-lifting it's garbage. However, I love most of his articles. I read through a lot and he has a very fair opinion all in all. I simply think he has either mis-interpreted or misrepresented what GVT is supposed to be used for and what it actually is. At any rate I think these comments need to be moved to a new thread.

[Joshua Naterman]

Define Irony: A fan of a sport that primarily focuses on the upper body calling a sport that primarily focuses on the lower body "narrow minded".

Nice.

[cccp22]

*******It's interesting that you use the word "they". It's Andrew Charniga's site and comments. In my specific opinion he's slightly "narrow" minded. He really loves the 'bulgarian" concept of specificity(jerk,snatch,squat) for weightlifters.

Brandon Green

You are incorrect. The site belongs to Dynamic Fitness which is owned by Bud Charniga, Andrews brother. Narrow minded? It is a Weightlifting site nothing less nothing more. Between Bud and Andrew they have translated and studied virtual every soviet weightlifting text, they are some of the most knowledgable people in America on the sport. Had you read the site you will find many articles refuting the Bulgarian system.

*note that the Bulgarian system is the snatch, CLEAN & jerk and squat.

*********** I used the term "Jerk,snatch, squat" as a figure of speech.What i intended to convey was specificity.

If you look on google Andrew's given name is "BUD". If they are two people i have been incorrect all this time and i humbly apologize. I have read the site and my comment on Charniga's "love" for the Bulgarian concepts comes from personal conversation over the telephone(with whomever it was that i was speaking:)!)

Brandon Green

[cccp22]

Define Irony: A fan of a sport that primarily focuses on the upper body calling a sport that primarily focuses on the lower body "narrow minded".

********** I don't call the sport of weightlifting "narrow minded" . I called Charniga's opinions "narrow minded"!

Brandon D. Green

[beastmode1]

I thought of something well trying to think of a workout plan. If you build endurance the more sets you can do which can make you stronger because of the volume and the overload you can do. It can result in building you getting bigger. Can i build strength first then build endurance if i have no where to put the rings in my house?

[Joshua Naterman]

I don't know what your rings have to do with anything, but yes you can do strength first. That is usually the best way to go. Just be careful not to push too far too fast!

[seiyafan]

Ironically, weightlifting is all about leg power.

[biobohne]

Short question:

Is there any aim related difference between doing 3 sets of 5 or 5 sets of 5?

I nearly always do 5 sets but sometimes it needs quite much time, especially when you say one should at least rest 3 mins betweens sets. I normally do only 2 mins, but I'm gonna try 3 mins today to feel the differnce. But that would consume even more time.

I'm training mainly rings now, beginning with ssc but also putting in some weight training, deadlifts, squats, bench press etc.

Thanks!

[Rik de Kort]

It's mostly a question of stress and recovery. More sets means more stress on the body. For some people this means that their body will compensate harder so they progress better on 5 sets. For others, 5 sets will be past the point of diminishing returns, so they don't really do anything strength-wise.

[Nic Branson]

Pretty much the above. Part of it is personal make up for which works better for you. How difficult the movement is you are performing and also how often you've been focusing on one over the other. Sometimes at a plateau a change will give you the adaptation you require.

[biobohne]

Alright, thank you guys!

Gonna experiment a bit with doing just 3 sets.

[Bruno Cochofel]

Can we use those 3m of rest for pairing other exercise?

Like pull or press ex. paired with core or legs?

[timg]

is there a benefit of going past 5 *5 if the exercise is still quite difficult at the end of an ssc? I am still finding pullups difficult after 2 months of 5 sets of 5 and was wondering if bumping it up to 7 or 8 sets of 5 would have any benefit?

[Rik de Kort]

After the SSC you strength test and see if you can do a higher variation (L-pullups in your case). If you can't, upping the reps is a viable strategy to bust through a plateau.

[Eric Kamhi]

I have a hard time increasing pullup strength (compared to other strength gains). After a few suggestions on this forum, I started to increase the total work on pullups (did more sets, ladders and increased weight with weight belts). I was stuck for over a year and in the last month I jumped up a notch in my pullups. Slizz's 10 sets of X rep routine combined with ladders and adding 20 kg weight belt and doing 3 pullups alternating them during every gym day, I was amazed at how my plateau was really just in my mind apparently. But I was unable to break it with regular sets of bodyweight.

[Jeremy]

Woundering, does 3-5 reps apply to all the core exercises as well?

It just seems risky and strange to perform such low rebs on abs/lower back exercises.

[Joseph Fradelakis]

thats because people have always done high reps of a low intensity exercise with those areas. Luckily for us the 3-5 works fine for those areas if you are using the right exercise for your level

[Jeremy]

Thanks Joey, I take it you have got fine results using only this rep range for your core?

[Rik de Kort]

Woundering, does 3-5 reps apply to all the core exercises as well?

It just seems risky and strange to perform such low rebs on abs/lower back exercises.

To be honest I find it rather strange to use an ab circuit consisting of three or four exercises with 20 reps per exercise for 3 rounds or some such. The rectus abdominis is a muscle. You should train it like one.

[Jeremy]

LOL