Article saying 15 reps are temprarily muscle gains? Wth?

[mohdgame]

The Repetitive Effort Method (aka Bodybuilding Method)
This method is the most commonly used method in bodybuilding training and typically involves the following parameters:
Reps: 8-15
Sets: 3-5
Load: 60-80% 1RM
Rest Intervals: 2-3 minutes
The type of hypertrophy gained from the repetitive effort method is often referred to as sarcoplasmic hypertrophy. It is associated with an increase in the fluid volume of non-contractile elements within the muscle such as mitochondria, capillary density, and glycogen. Think of the well known pump that you get when doing high reps with biceps curls. Temporarily you might look like Arnold, but later on your muscles shrink down to their normal size. This type of hypertrophy isn't the permanent kind were after so it should make sense that this should not be your only way of working out!

Source: Bodybuilding.com - Periodization For Bodybuilders! - Keats Snideman



So my training style which involved 10 reps is kinda fake? I think its bullshit or I misunderstood it.

 

[_cato_]

High rep training tends to result primarily, though not exclusively, in sarcoplasmic hypertrophy (ie. size increases in the non-contractile portions of the muscle). So working with sets of 10 isn't "fake" and it won't produce exclusively sarcoplasmic gains, but it will be focused more on those types of gains as opposed to strength increases or sarcomere hypertrophy (size increases in the contractile muscle fibers).

Here's a blurb from Glenn Pendlay on the subject:

DIFFERENT KINDS OF HYPERTROPHY

Hypertrophy: guys, i wrote this in responce to a question on the think muscle board... i thought it might be of interest to some of you here. if not, well no harm done i guess. there are basically 3 trainable factors involved in size and strength. sarcoplasmic hypertrophy... does not directly increase strength but can effect it by increasing tendon angle at the attachment. but of course increases size. sarcomere hypertrophy... increases contractile proteins in muscle thereby increasing strength directly and also size. neural effeciency... increase in the percentage of motor units that can be activated at any given time. no effect on size but increases strength. the training for each quality exists on sort of a continuim. training for sarcoplasmic hypertrophy is high volume and low intensity... like 10 sets of 10 for a muscle. training for sarcomere hypertrophy is med intensity and med volume... like 5 sets of 5 for a muscle. training for increased neural effeciency is high intensity and low volume... like 5 max effort singles for a given muscle. now, each style of training effects each muscle quality, but in different quantities. for example, 10 sets of 10 will result in a high degree of sarcoplasmic hypertrophy, some sarcomere hypertrophy, and little or no increase in neural effeciency. 5 sets of 5 will increase all 3 qualities, but will effect sarcomere hypertrophy the most. max effort singles will increase neural effeciency a great deal, but will have only a small effect on hypertrophy of the sarcomere, and little or no effect on sarcoplasmic hypertrophy. so no matter how you train, you are likely to get both bigger and stronger... but the degree to which each quality is increased depends on the training. as you get more advanced, the picture changes somewhat. for example, if a highly trained explosive athlete, like a shot-putter, did only workouts of 10 sets of 10 for a month, he would get hypertrophy of the sarcoplasm... but likely NO hypertrophy of the sarcomere and would likely LOSE neural effeciency, simply because he was so highly trainind in this quality beforehand that 10 sets of 10 would not be sufficient stimulus to even keep what neural effeciency he had. also... for a beginner, doing multiple singles would likely lead to some size increases. but for an advanced bodybuilder it would not be sufficient stimulus to keep the sarcoplamic hypertrophy already present. now, as far as whether training for one quality helps subsequent training for another quality, the answer is yes. for instance, an athlete who is only concerned with explosive strength will still train at times with higher reps and experience some sarcoplamic hypertrophy... this "supports" later gains in sarcomere hypertrophy and neural effeciency by building work capacity (sarcoplasmic hypertrophy adds the neccessary ingredients such as cappillaries to the muscle to support high work capacity later in the training cycle, so the athlete can do a higher volume of work). also, a bodybuilder who is only concerned with size will do most of his work with volumes and intensities of training which favor hypertrophy of both the sarcomere and the sarcoplasm. but heavy work done to increase neural effeciency will also help... the ability to activate more motor units during an all out effort will make the rest of his training more result producing and effecient. as far as how to "cycle" these different types of work during a training cycle... well at almost all times during a training cycle you should do at least SOME work on each quality... if you totally neglect some portion of the muscle you will lose performance in that quality. however, you should shift your concentration of work from the least important quality for your sport over time to the most important. in other words... a bodybuilder might begin training for a contest 6 months away with more high intensity work, and gradually shift the emphasis over the months to more med. and low intensity work. a strength athlete would do the opposite. hope this helped in some way.

 

[MsBeverlyHills]

the source bodybuilding.com has the most useless & misinformed training articles of any website out there. Theyre pretty good @ reporting contest results & plugging supplements, but for training- forget it.

check out t-nation http://www.tmuscle.com/archives.do?y=0&s=training

 

[V-Opolis]

agree bodybuilding.com has some of the most useless missleading info ive ever read

they have articles everywhere about how to grow, train, gain muscle, eat properly etc

and every article tends to be written by either some average joe, or a bodybuilder whos on 2 grams of gear and still telling people hes natural

e.g best example i could ever give is tom venuto, im fukin sick of his bullshit articles on bodybuilding.com of how he gets to 215 pounds with 4%bf naturaly

he should write articles on how to be a pro shit talker

thats actually not all that hard to beleive. unless you gain fat while your gaining muscle, i could easily do that. im already 6-7% bf naturally(was hardcore runner in high school). just workin out to get a more cut look.

 

[mohdgame]

the source bodybuilding.com has the most useless & misinformed training articles of any website out there. Theyre pretty good @ reporting contest results & plugging supplements, but for training- forget it.

check out t-nation TESTOSTERONE NATION

Yeah, I felt that their articles are more solid the BB.com.

 

[timtim]

agree bodybuilding.com has some of the most useless missleading info ive ever read

they have articles everywhere about how to grow, train, gain muscle, eat properly etc

and every article tends to be written by either some average joe, or a bodybuilder whos on 2 grams of gear and still telling people hes natural

e.g best example i could ever give is tom venuto, im fukin sick of his bullshit articles on bodybuilding.com of how he gets to 215 pounds with 4%bf naturaly

he should write articles on how to be a pro shit talker

not to be a dick, but do you know tom venuto? i know one of his trainers and he is a complete freak. he cant gain fat. he is the top 1%. he and his methods are not bullshit. im just saying, not everyone is equal and tom venuto has few if any equals. and this was coming from a trainer of his who is shredded year round and says he is put to shame by venuto.

 

[timtim]

no i dont

but what im addressing is either he is a freak of nature and his methods arent logical for everyone, and his is a rare case as you say

or hes not natural and missleading people

either way i think my point came out wrong, n i was addressing bodybuilding.coms articles n how alot of them are missleading

i used tom as an example, not an exact person to blame for the info

i dont go to bb.com, so i dont know what they produce. venutos diet and training will work for many though, you just wont look like him at the end of the day. he is made for bbing.

 

[ExtraMile]

Source: Bodybuilding.com - Periodization For Bodybuilders! - Keats Snideman



So my training style which involved 10 reps is kinda fake? I think its bullshit or I misunderstood it.

I think that was talking about the size increases you get from a pump.

But even so, muscle gain is only temporary, once you stop training you start to loose it...