Is "time under tension" the best training method to build mass?

[akaba]

hey!! yea i was readin a few posts, and i read that someone suggested that "time under tension" training is the best trainnig method for mass building!! can someone please shine the light on this suggestion??? inform by comparing the regular method of reps and sets with the T.U.T, method and why and how it is so effective...thanks soo much ..peace

 

[edgecrusher]

TUT is n excellent protocol for developing size. If memory serves, your going to want to keep your total TUT around 30-45 seconds for optimal hypertrophy range. Above that you will be training for endurance, and below that your training will be mostly neural in nature.

 

[casualbb]

Where do those numbers come from? People have built muscle with anywhere from 4-20 reps. As long as a certain TUT is in place, it's only the actual load that really matters.

-casualbb

 

[gettinlarger]

Well, the optimal program or method for you to grow is unique to you. Everyone responds differently. Trial and error man. Find what works for you, and get to it.

 

[Fatty4You]

This page doesn't give any research reference, but it is similar to stuff that I have heard before:

http://www.opalathletics.com/tips_0204.html

-Fatty

 

[spatts]

IMO, tut is accurate for endurance athletes only. Strength and size are a different story. Variety is best. The more fiber types tapped into, the better. I grow like a weed on low tut, and as long as there are those of us that do, the theory doesn't apply to everyone.

speed--->strength---->size

 

[edgecrusher]

Where do those numbers come from? People have built muscle with anywhere from 4-20 reps. As long as a certain TUT is in place, it's only the actual load that really matters.

-casualbb

The numbers come from Charles Poliquin's "Modern Trends In Strength Training" book. I'm sorry, i should have mentioned that I was speaking in general terms, and my statement was a blanket one, meant to include the "bulk" (no pun intended) of the population. I also left out, to perform this succesfully, the reps should be kept in the 6-12 range.

What exactly do you mean by load anyway? I regard TUT as a loading parameter, and a nother variable that can influence the results an indivdual gets.

 

[casualbb]

What I mean is this. A lot of programs and methodologies will have individuals shoot for a certain number of reps before raising the weight. You hear this all the time. "Once you get X reps, raise the weight Y percent."

So people will go and move some weights. Say one day they max out at 10 reps at a given weight. Two workouts later they squeeze out 13 and think "w00t! I caused more growth because I did more reps." Well, no, not necessarily. Past maybe 5 reps with reasonable negatives (2-3 seconds), doing more reps on top of that isn't going to add more growth.

There are other reasons to do higher rep stuff, though. Lactic acid promotes joint and connective tissue healing and can cause some sarcoplasmic (cosmetic, nonfunctional) hypertrophy.

That whole TUT thing is sort of tied in with that fact that with a moderate rep range of 8-12 you get a balance of sacroplasmic and sarcomore (functional) hypertrophy. The recommendation is based upon "gurus" just kinda noticing that they grew more doing this rep range. Individual recommendations of TUT sounds a lot like what some IART people do; it's based upon fiber twitch type and rate of fatigue factors that are only relevant to strength (not growth) training.

-casualbb

 

[Fatty4You]

speed--->strength---->size

What about someone like Bruce Lee? He's like the fasted dude i ever seen and what did he weigh? Like 55 pounds?

-Fatty

 

[spatts]

I'm talking about people who use speed to specifically train for strength, which leads to size.

BTW...TUT is not a "method" it's a theory, like a million others, that has been incorporated into many methods.