YT YouTube2Text

YouTube2Text → Transcripts → Is There a Hypertrophy Zone? (Well....not really but kind of)

Is There a Hypertrophy Zone? (Well....not really but kind of) — Transcript

by Lyle McDonald · 5,870 words · 865 segments · language en · Watch on YouTube

Open in transcriber Summarize with AI Download SRT/VTT

Full transcript

0:05So once again, while I'm trying to put
0:06together something a little bit more
0:07involved, I want to take one of my very
0:10old articles originally published in
0:112016 and put it in video format because
0:13let's face it, the kids today don't read
0:16articles. And what I want to address is
0:19the question, is there a hypertrophy
0:22zone in terms of repetitions per set? We
0:26start as always with a story and a
0:29little bit of history.
0:33So when I graduated from UCLA in 1993,
0:37and by the way, Jackson, my degree was
0:38in physiology, not exercise science. So
0:42spare me the [ __ ] ad homonyms and
0:43either address my criticisms directly
0:46and apologize or please feel free to
0:48shut the [ __ ] up. Anyway, when I
0:51graduated, like all good college
0:53graduates, I knew I knew everything.
0:55>> [laughter]
0:55>> Ha.
0:58Yeah. Ah, youth. One of the things we
1:01had been taught was that the hypertrophy
1:05range in terms of repetitions per set,
1:07the number of repetitions that optimally
1:09stimulated muscle growth was 8 to 12.
1:12And this value has kicked around for
1:14decades.
1:16Endless books from textbooks to
1:19practical books, many of which I have on
1:21on my shelf, uh, repeat this number. And
1:24none of them that I can recall has ever
1:26had a reference for it. It's just one of
1:28those values that's
1:31been repeated so many times that it's
1:33true by repetition. Except, as you'll
1:36see, it's not. [snorts]
1:40Now, somewhere shortly thereafter, I
1:42would go take the United States
1:43Weightlifting Federation level one
1:45certification because I was interested
1:46in everything, including Olympic
1:47lifting. And at that class, Wes Barnett,
1:50who was one of the top US lifters of the
1:52day, uh definitely stood out because he
1:54was he was a big dude. So I asked the
1:57coach, "Hey, what is what does Wes do,
2:00you know, for for quad size, for
2:01hypertrophy?" And the coach said, "Oh,
2:03just lots of sets of fives."
2:06What? I knew that 8 to 12 was the
2:09hypertrophy range. How could sets of
2:11five possibly work? And what that told
2:14me is that maybe, just maybe, there was
2:17a little more to that story.
2:22Like I said, if you look at books in
2:24like the 80s and 90s when we were
2:26starting to scientific scientificize
2:28this [ __ ] you'll just see 8 to12 listed
2:30as the hypertrophy range. And as I
2:32stated, no one ever seemed to have a
2:35direct reference. It was just one book
2:36citing a paper, citing another book.
2:38It's what I call the reference circle
2:40jerk, not to be confused with the
2:41fitness industry circle jerk. But where
2:43did that value come from? Well, I have a
2:45hypothesis and that's all that it is.
2:48You go back even further to the lifters
2:51of the 50s, the 60s, and the 70s. Um, a
2:54common recommendation was to do three
2:56sets of 10 of every exercise. Somewhere
2:58on my shelf, I've got Steve Reeves
3:00training book. And even then, three sets
3:02of 10. And that derives from Delor. Go
3:04look it up, kids. I've also got his his
3:07book on my shelf because I'm a nerd.
3:08Anyway, and what I here's what I think
3:10happened. uh bodybuilders were doing
3:12three sets of 10 and uh like the best of
3:15us uh lost count on repetitions and
3:17sometimes they did eight and sometimes
3:19they got 12 and voila 8 to 12 became the
3:23hypertrophy zone. That may or may not be
3:26right. That's my best guess. If anyone
3:28has a clue, please please let me know.
3:30Um because I've I've never seen a value.
3:32In any event, that value was just stated
3:35and restated most places for years.
3:41Now over time that would start to change
3:44and I think by I don't know late 80s
3:47even the early 90s I think the the
3:49hypertrophy range had been expanded
3:51depending on what you were reading to
3:53maybe you know 8 to 15 6 to 15
3:56repetitions frequently you'd see this
3:58done in like a pyramid style you know 15
4:0112 10 8 and maybe then a final set of
4:04six things of that nature but is still
4:06kind of in that range
4:09at At the same time, there was something
4:11called the repetition continuum. And
4:12actually, this wasn't in my original
4:14article that basically said different
4:17repetition ranges had very different
4:19physiological effect. And it simple form
4:22simplest form, it looked like this. Uh
4:23between 1 to five repetition maximum,
4:25that was strength. 8 to 12 repetition
4:27maximum, hypertrophy. 15 plus repetition
4:31maximum, muscular endurance, the
4:34continuum of repetitions, the original
4:36repetition continuum. And it was seen as
4:38these very very very discreet
4:41categories.
4:43And as I'll come back to, there is
4:44there's an element of truth to that. But
4:47as we would come to find out going
4:49forwards, that was simplistic or it was
4:53sorry, it was overly simplistic, but
4:55more to the point it was incomplete.
5:01And making a quick tangent, you know,
5:02something I never do. At some point on
5:05my website, I also wrote this article
5:06and I said, "If if you had to pick a
5:09single repetition range to optimize
5:11hypertrophy, what would it be?" And I
5:13actually asked my training partner this
5:15back in the 90s, a really smart guy, and
5:16he came with the same answer. And the
5:18answer was sets of five to eight. And
5:20the rationale for that actually builds
5:22upon that video I did on effective reps
5:24a few weeks ago that apparently some
5:26people didn't agree with. And I I might
5:28redress it or or I might not. Um
5:30although I've actually come across
5:31another interesting model similar but
5:34but a little bit more nuanced. But
5:36anyway uh my rationale had to do with
5:39the fact that somewhere between 80 and
5:4185% of max about a 5 to8 rep max you
5:43will get full fiber recruitment from the
5:45first repetition.
5:48By doing sets of five to eight in that
5:50intensity range that also ensures that
5:52well you will get the most repetitions
5:55per set at full recruitment. and realize
5:58I wrote that years before and asked that
6:01question years before the effect of reps
6:02framework any of that had ever even been
6:06considered or suggested that came much
6:08later. Borch vagerly blade wasn't
6:11talking about that till stimulating reps
6:13till the 2000s.
6:15So that was my logic. If you are trying
6:18to get the maximum number of repetitions
6:20per set, like the most efficiently, that
6:23would be the best place to do it because
6:24let's say you move to triples, yeah, you
6:27will get no more fiber recruitment
6:30because rate coding is what's increasing
6:32force output, but you will do far few
6:35far fewer repetitions per set. Now, if
6:37you go to say 15 set of 15 at maximum to
6:40failure, zero reps in reserve, you will
6:43eventually you won't get full fiber
6:44recruitment till about rep 10 or 11. So,
6:46you're doing a bunch of other
6:48repetitions beforehand. So, again, this
6:50was a thought piece. I wasn't saying
6:52only do sets of five to eight. I'll come
6:54back to this in a second. I was asking
6:57the question if you had to pick a single
6:59repetition range. And I mention this now
7:02because I guess the current idea based
7:04on similar concepts is that you should
7:06only do sets of four to six for
7:08hypertrophy, which is myopic to the nth
7:11degree. I understand the physiological
7:14logic that they're applying. It's very
7:16similar to mine, but it's missing just a
7:18couple of nuances in practical training.
7:20And I'll just give you a simple one. I
7:22want any of these people recommending
7:24that to show me a dumbbell lateral raise
7:27for a set of four to six, please. Done.
7:30Well, um, I'll come back to that, but I
7:34kind of brought up a point there.
7:38Again, that five date value, that was a
7:40thought piece. It wasn't meant to be a
7:42recommendation as you'll see why that's
7:45the case. But I mentioned in this last
7:46section that you know you could do
7:48triples but you'd be getting less
7:50repetitions per set. I mean see you have
7:52to do more total sets to get the same
7:55number of repetitions under full
7:57recruitment. Maybe I'll stop using the
7:59terms effective reps because it seems to
8:01cause people a lot of mental trauma. Hi
8:03Greg. Anyway, think back to the West
8:05Barnett story. Even Charles Polloquin
8:07said this that low repetition sets could
8:09stimulate hypertrophy if you did enough
8:12of them. And that sort of brings me to
8:15the next point because there would be a
8:17paper coming out of Brad's lab for
8:20whatever that may be worth now that
8:22looked at seven sets of three, I don't
8:25know, 85 90% of max something in that
8:27range. I'm not pulling it to three sets
8:29of 10 in the more typical hypertrophy
8:31zone. And it found that growth was the
8:33was identical. And if you look at that
8:37in terms of the number of repetitions
8:39done under maximum recruitment, well,
8:42seven sets of three is going to give you
8:4321 repetitions under conditions of
8:45maximum recruitment. Three sets of 10,
8:47assuming they were to to zero reps in
8:50reserve, four to five reps per set under
8:52conditions of maximum recruitment,
8:53you're looking at 12 to 15 repetitions.
8:56And I bet that comparison over the short
8:58term would generate no no differences in
9:01growth. 15 and 21 are just too close.
9:04So, seven sets of three did work to
9:06generate hypertrophy. And I imagine if
9:08I'd thought to ask West Barnett's coach
9:10how many sets of five he did for
9:12hypertrophy, it was probably, you know,
9:15four, five, six sets, somewhere in that
9:17range.
9:21Oh, fun fact, piece of trivia. You know
9:23where 5x5 came from? When Bill Starr
9:26wrote only the strong shall survive,
9:28Atha had done a massive review that said
9:30you got the best strength gains doing
9:32between four to six sets of four to six
9:34repetitions. Because he was working with
9:36football players, Star just rounded that
9:38off to 5x5. Also, that's the reason we
9:41like five rep sets. That's why, guys. As
9:44usual, I digress.
9:49So, it was clear that low reps could
9:51stimulate hypertrophy as moderate
9:54repetitions so long as you did enough
9:56total sets. Hold that thought. Later
9:59work would come out looking at the low
10:02load stuff and also blood flow
10:04restriction which is very similar
10:06showing that three sets of 30 at like 25
10:10to 30% of max done to physiological
10:13failure could cause the same growth as
10:17moderate repetition ranges. And I still
10:19maintain that the reason being that
10:21three sets of 30 to failure means you
10:22get five reps under maximal recruitment
10:25at the end of each set which is 15. And
10:27that's the same roughly the same as
10:29three sets of 10 to failure. Volume load
10:32doesn't equate them. Total reps doesn't
10:33equate them. It's the same number of
10:35sets for what little that means. It's
10:37the same number of total repetitions
10:39under maximum recruitment.
10:42Regardless, this kind of changed the
10:44model or the recommendations.
10:51So in the aggregate, the data seemed to
10:53be suggesting that repetition count
10:54almost didn't matter. Although there was
10:57one slight nuance and I mentioned this
10:58in the video whose title I won't name
11:00that had to do with the number of
11:03repetitions under maximum recruitment.
11:04Again I don't want to I don't want to
11:06cause people mental stress. When you
11:08were doing heavy sets above say about
11:1180% of maximum you did not have to go to
11:14zero reps in reserve. And that was
11:15because the when the weight's heavy
11:17enough you are getting maximum
11:19recruitment early enough to get
11:20repetitions under maximum recruitment.
11:23same time when you're doing high
11:25repetitions you did have to go to zero
11:27reps in reserve because you don't get to
11:29maximum recruitment till those final
11:31four or five repetitions which is also
11:34given that fact is why I don't
11:36understand why people have a such
11:38problem with this model I or better yet
11:42propose a better model please I don't
11:46when I do a follow-up video so that was
11:48one nuance there was another but I'm
11:50going to come back to that in a
11:54Now, one of the genius conclusions from
11:56this data, which is true in in the most
11:59literal sense, is that hey, repetition
12:02count doesn't matter for hypertrophy.
12:04Mr. Mike Isertell and his fantastic
12:07a new AI book or somewhere else gave no
12:10more training recommendations than that.
12:13Repount doesn't matter. Now, in a
12:14physiological sense, that that's
12:16apparently true, and I'm not saying it's
12:18not, but it ignores a lot of details and
12:21a lot of nuance and a lot of
12:22practicality. Let's look at a few before
12:26I sort of come back and and try to get
12:28to the point. While that low rep study,
12:30the seven sets of three versus three
12:31sets of 10 did show the same growth with
12:33lots of low rep sets, the 7 by3 group
12:36took enormously longer to complete the
12:39sets. If you're looking at 7 by3, even
12:41on a two-minute rest interval, and 3
12:43minutes is probably better. you're
12:44looking at 20 minutes to get if you want
12:45exercise. 3x 10 with a two-minute rest
12:48interval, it's about 9 minutes and then
12:50you can go do something else.
12:53Also, I think forgotten was that there
12:55were a couple injuries in the low rep
12:57group. Doing lots and lots and lots of
12:59heavy low repetition work doesn't work
13:02well for a lot of people depending on
13:04how they were physically built. So,
13:06yeah, in a physiological sense it
13:08worked, but in a practical sense it
13:10didn't work. Also, you really have to
13:12consider exercise selection here. I'm
13:14sure Wes Barnett when he was building
13:16his gigantic quads was doing sets of
13:18five in the back squat, something he was
13:19extremely good at. Um, please send me a
13:23video of you doing seven allout sets of
13:25three in the leg extension. Because
13:27while I've seen people claim that their
13:28knees shot across the gym, I've never
13:30seen it happen in real life. As I'll
13:33come back to, certain exercises lend
13:35themselves to a greater or lesser degree
13:38to different repetition counts. jumping
13:40to the high rep work that three sets of
13:4330 the low load stuff and blood flow
13:44restriction is is similar. I know I
13:46didn't describe it but the same dynamics
13:49basically hold it lets you use light
13:51loads
13:52as long as you actually don't have to go
13:54to physiological muscular failure for
13:56reasons which basically the body will
13:58recruit
14:00the the highest threshold motor units
14:02the type two fibers earlier in the set
14:03so you get more repetitions under full
14:06recruitment. What is the [ __ ] problem
14:07with the model guys? Anyway, it takes a
14:10longer time. It's also extremely
14:12painful. And I believe in a couple of
14:14those studies, people threw up, right?
14:17You can prove this to yourself. Go do
14:19three sets of 30 to zero reps reserve in
14:21the leg extension. And you tell me, you
14:23tell me what that feels like. Not to
14:25mention that for certain movements, big
14:28compound barbell stuff, good luck. Good
14:31luck doing three sets of 30 to zero reps
14:33in reserve, right? People often don't
14:35realize that these studies for control
14:37purposes tend to use highly controlled
14:39exercises in the low load stuff. It's
14:42typically [ __ ] like leg extensions
14:44because that can be that can be done
14:45safely for three sets of 30. You're not
14:48going to do like I said a barbell back
14:50squat or certainly not a front squat or
14:52many many movements for three sets of 30
14:55to zero reps in reserve. That's a
14:57practical thing. And then somewhere in
14:58the middle you split the middle.
15:04Before wrapping up, let me revisit that
15:06repetition continuing. So in its
15:07original version, it was very specific.
15:115 RM or less maximum strength. 8 to 12
15:14RM muscle hypertrophy. 15 plus RM
15:18muscular endurance. Clearly that's not
15:20true. Clearly hypertrophy muscle growth
15:23can be generated from very low to very
15:26high repetition ranges possibly a range
15:28of three to 30. I mean I guess in
15:30premise if you could do enough heavy
15:32singles that might work. I don't know.
15:35The only study only did five and it
15:37didn't generate any growth. But like
15:38maybe if you did 30 max singles it would
15:41be extremely timeefficient and extremely
15:43joint unpleasant. But it it might work.
15:45I wouldn't recommend it regardless. We
15:48know that the hypertrophy zone is
15:50extremely broad, but what about those
15:52other adaptations? What you do generally
15:54see is specific adaptations in terms of
15:58both maximal strength and muscular
16:00endurance at the repetition ranges
16:04from the original continuum. Say sets of
16:06five and less. Yes, they can generate
16:09hypertrophy feed enough sets, but they
16:11also tend to improve maximal strength
16:13the most because maximal strength and
16:15performance have there's also
16:17neurological factors and technical
16:19factors and things of that nature that
16:21that play a role in how much you can
16:23actually lift. So, while they can
16:25generate hypertrophy, they still have a
16:27predominating effect
16:29comparatively. But those sets of five
16:31generally don't improve muscular
16:32endurance much. It's a little more
16:33complicated as with absolute versus
16:35relative muscular endurance and you
16:37don't want to get into it. But by and
16:38large now jumping to the high repetition
16:40stuff, the sets of 30, the low load, the
16:42BFR, you don't see nearly as much
16:44increase in maximal strength. Now I
16:46realize there's some studies that show
16:47that's not true and it's always pretty
16:48much in untrained and isolated
16:50movements. We're talking about, you
16:52know, real movements, not the case. But
16:54it improves muscular endurance better.
16:56And then in the middle that hypertrophy
16:59range which I'm going to deci define now
17:00but is between six and 15 and you'll see
17:03why. At the lower end say 6 to 10 you
17:06get hypertrophy more maximal strength
17:09less maximum less muscular endurance and
17:12in the higher repetition ranges 10 to 15
17:14hypertrophy
17:16relatively more of improvement in
17:17muscular endurance and less maximum
17:19strength. So the best way to think of
17:21this is that each of these ranges 1:5, 6
17:24to 15, 15 to 30
17:27not only has its own direct effects, but
17:30affects the rep range next to it. So 1:5
17:34will overlap a little bit with say the 6
17:36to 10. 6 to 10 will overlap with 1:5. 6
17:38to 10 will overlap with 10 to 15. 10 to
17:4115 will overlap with 6 to 10. 10 to 11
17:4315 and up. And then 15 and up will
17:45overlap. Get it? So the rep continuum
17:48there is still elements of truth to it.
17:50The big change being that the
17:52hypertrophy zone is much broader but
17:55fives and below still going to be better
17:56for maximal strength. 15 and up local
17:59muscular endurance in the middle you
18:01split the middle. So let's answer the
18:03original question.
18:07So is there a hypertrophy zone? In the
18:11purest physiological sense the answer is
18:14clearly no.
18:16Clearly a much broader repetition range
18:19than the old 8 to 12 or even the 6 to 15
18:22can generate hypertrophy. Do enough sets
18:25of five, you can get hypertrophy. Do
18:27enough sets of three, you get
18:29hypertrophy. In theory, I guess do
18:31enough sets of one, you might get there.
18:33I wouldn't recommend it. Do sets of 15,
18:3725, 30. There is a lower range once you
18:40get below a certain low intensity which
18:42about 20% of 1RM which essentially
18:44becomes aerobic for all practical
18:46purposes. You you [snorts] you're not
18:49really going to get a whole lot out of
18:50it. But somewhere between like 30% of
18:52maximum and like 90% of maximum 1RM
18:56you're you're going to you can get
18:57hypertrophy assuming you meet certain
19:00other criteria
19:02in my what I think is the best framework
19:05enough repetitions under maximal
19:08recruitment if you're looking at muscle
19:10growth maximizing muscle growth in the
19:14entire muscle. So physiologically it's
19:16clear that the answer is no within a
19:18fairly broad range.
19:22But I still argue and this is what I did
19:24in my 2016 article that there's still a
19:26practical hypertrophy zone which I tend
19:28to define somewhere between six and 15
19:30repetitions.
19:31And by practical I mean doing lots and
19:34lots and lots of sets of five which will
19:36work. Takes a lot of time because the
19:40rest intervals have to be longer. It is
19:43harder on the joints and not everyone is
19:45built for that kind of heavy low rep
19:48work. Some are and they love it or you
19:51can when every time power building comes
19:52back in and you want to you know look as
19:54strong as you are big or whatever
19:56whatever nonsense but not everyone is
19:58built for that. Even sixes can be
20:00pushing it but for those folks again
20:04somewhere between six and 15. So can
20:06fives build hypertrophy? Yes, but not
20:08everyone's built for it. And more
20:09importantly, not all exercises lend
20:10themsel to it. Generally, compound
20:13movements. No, I wouldn't even say
20:14generally. Yeah, generally compound
20:16movements will be better for fives.
20:18Barbell movements, you could do hack
20:19squats, leg presses, machine, chest
20:21press for fives. Like, if you're
20:23extremely skilled, you could probably do
20:26a lateral raise machine for fives. And I
20:28say that because I've done it, but I've
20:30spent 40 years as a a form psycho making
20:33sure I never break. But most people will
20:35not. And certainly dumb lateral raise,
20:36good luck. it. There'll be somebody out
20:39there who can do it, but the majority
20:40know
20:43at the high rep end once you get into
20:45that 2530 that low low stuff.
20:49In my opinion, it's very time
20:51inefficient to get those five
20:55reps at maximal recruitment.
20:58You have to basically dick around for 20
21:00to 25 first. It's very painful.
21:04People throw up. It's great for
21:05depletion work. in my UD2, my ultimate
21:08diet too, uh, high reps and stuff like
21:10that. But yeah, does it stimulate
21:12hypertrophy? Yeah. Are most people going
21:14to push themselves that hard? No. Might
21:16be useful if someone had a joint injury.
21:18Same with blood flow restriction because
21:20you can get a similar effect with less
21:22absolute loading, which is means less
21:24joint strain, but in general, I think
21:27it's very timeefficient. And as I
21:29mentioned, you're not doing that for a
21:32lot of compound barbell stuff. I mean,
21:34yeah, you can do high rep sets of leg
21:36press. I've seen people, you know, fart
21:38around through 30 quick reps
21:39accomplishing nothing, but to actual
21:41zero reps reserve, you're going to go
21:43throw up afterwards. Done correctly.
21:45Same thing with hacks. Same thing with,
21:47yeah, you can do machine chest. It can
21:49be done, but the big barbell movements
21:52and anything technical will not lend
21:54itself to sets of 30. 6 to 15, that's to
21:58me is the sweet spot. It's not the
22:01physiological hypertrophy zone. It's the
22:03practical hypertrophy zone. So you have
22:06six to 10 repetitions, which is more
22:08similar than not to fives. And you got
22:1010 to 15 repetitions, which is more
22:13similar than not to the the higher rep
22:16stuff in terms of how long it might take
22:20take, the physiological demands, what
22:22exercises might or might not be most
22:24appropriate. And a very time-t tested
22:26way of training is to combine some
22:29number of sets in the lower repetition
22:31range, which might be six to eights or
22:33even 8 to 10 if somebody's joints can't
22:34handle it or their technique falls
22:36apart, with some number of sets of 10 to
22:3812 or 12 to 15. with the 6 to10s being
22:42more tensionoriented and the the 10 to
22:4515s being more fatigue oriented even
22:47though they still end up at the same
22:49place in terms of
22:53maximal fiber recruitment if you you do
22:55it right but there are metabolic factors
22:57that can contribute to all of this. So
22:59that combination is time tested.
23:04Actually, one of the I I had this this
23:06old book years ago, Secrets of Advanced
23:08Bodybuilders, and it was just filled
23:10with mostly gibberish, but it did have
23:11one thing that stuck stuck out, and it
23:14was a
23:17super set. You did, you picked an
23:18exercise, and you did a heavy set of six
23:20to failure and then immediately followed
23:23that with a set of 20 to failure.
23:26tension, metabolic work for the [ __ ]
23:29win, guys.
23:34Staying in that practical range for the
23:36majority of your training, will give you
23:38the best bang for the buck in terms of
23:40the best stimulus. It's time efficient,
23:42tends to be most joint friendly. Again,
23:44not everyone can even handle six to
23:46eight. So, combine 8 to 10 and 12 to 15.
23:48Time- tested. 8 to 10 on your compounds,
23:51more complex stuff. 12 to 15 on your
23:53isolations. Work hard. be progressive
23:55over time. That is time-t tested without
23:58having to drop into very low rep ranges
24:00that your joints might not handle or
24:02spending time doing extremely high rep
24:05sets which accomplish little more than
24:08looking maybe okay on Instagram but keep
24:10the puke bucket close by like Dr. Ken
24:12Lner used to do in his gym when he'd
24:15have those maniacs do sets of 50 in the
24:17squat followed by 50 in the deadlift
24:19which I highly don't recommend.
24:25So summing up, is there a physiological
24:28hypertrophy range? Clearly not. Clearly
24:31not. But just saying that, just being
24:34Mr. Mike Gizer and going reps don't
24:36matter or every other popsai article
24:38that that repeats the same thing misses
24:41the practicalities and the nuances
24:45which stating it again. So low reps,
24:48time consuming due to the long rest
24:49intervals, potentially joint unfriendly
24:52and is limited to certain exercises that
24:56usually have higher technical demands.
24:58The very light load, low load stuff,
25:01very painful, takes a long time in my
25:03opinion is inefficient because you're
25:04having to do 2025 fuckabout reps to get
25:07to the five that matter under maximum
25:09recruitment. Then in the middle, the
25:11practical hypertrophy zone, which splits
25:13the middle. Use a slightly lower range
25:16for
25:18one goal, use slightly higher range for
25:20another goal.
25:22So, let's finish with some actual, you
25:24know, practical recommendations.
25:28I think most would agree that that
25:30practical hypertrophy zone somewhere
25:33between six and 15 or 8 and 15 should
25:35make up the grand majority of your
25:38training.
25:40And to be honest, for most people that
25:42could probably make up the entirety of
25:43it, right? If you're working in that six
25:45to eight range, assuming you're using
25:47exercises that lend themselves to it,
25:49that you are physically
25:51and psychologically built for that. By
25:53which I mean, you know, you've got
25:55robust enough joints to work in that
25:57range for a while, and you like pushing
25:58heavy weights, which let's say no is
26:02let's 99.9% of males. I didn't really
26:05get into gender issues, but my
26:07experience is not all women are either
26:11built for structurally or want to push,
26:15you know, the heaviest weights. Many do.
26:17Don't don't mishar me. And obviously, if
26:20they want to work in a higher repetition
26:21range, that really works so long as the
26:24intensity and progression is there. But
26:27if someone merely worked in that six to
26:2915 range for basically their entire
26:31lifting career, you're not going to miss
26:33much. So six to eights are going to get
26:35maximum strength levels. 15s are going
26:38to get you close enough to the the low
26:40load stuff,
26:42which also isn't to say that being
26:45outside of that on occasion will hurt,
26:50right? I've described the benefit of,
26:53you know, short maximal strength cycles
26:55for bodybuilders to push up those neural
26:57factors to let you lift heavier weights
27:00in a moderate repetition range. But I
27:02wouldn't have them done often. Like
27:04maybe two three-week blocks a year, like
27:07every three primary hypertrophy training
27:10blocks. And I'm going to do a video in
27:11the future about training cycle length.
27:14Maybe with a three-week block at the
27:15tail end, or you can think of it as
27:17being three weeks leading into the next
27:19hypertrophy range, depending on on your
27:21perspective. I wouldn't use it often,
27:24but I might use it occasionally. If
27:27there was a rep range I would tell pe
27:29most people stay away from it'd be that
27:31lowload [ __ ] I mean it's
27:33fascinating that it works but it hurts
27:38it. People throw up. It takes too long
27:41to get to the good stuff. Like if you've
27:42got a joint injury, yes,
27:46simply because it will reduce absolute
27:47joint loading. Same with blood flow
27:49restriction. It absolutely has its use
27:51for that. But honestly, who the [ __ ]
27:53wants to grind through 25 to 30 to
27:57failure in in a leg extension? All
27:59right, fine. Maybe if you know, dudes
28:00want to just get that massive pump,
28:02that's great. But you know what? You can
28:04get that with 20s and that can be
28:06useful. I said I use it that's depletion
28:09workouts and my original ultimate diet,
28:11too, and I talk about that in the the
28:13new intermittent modified fasting book.
28:15But that 6 to 15 spread gets gets most
28:18of it. With once again in that lower
28:21repetition, 6 to 10, you're going to be
28:23looking at generally more compound
28:25movements, whether barbell or machines.
28:288 to 10, you can get away with some
28:29isolation movements. Certainly, if your
28:32technique's really good, and having been
28:34in the gym for 40 years and 30 years
28:37professionally, most y'all's technique
28:38is [ __ ] So, there are movements that
28:41will probably benefit from being in
28:43higher repetition ranges. Like, yeah,
28:45you can do a barbell curl for fives. I
28:47did it when I was younger, but I think
28:48most people, A, it's harder on the
28:50elbows, and B, I think most will find
28:52that they they're less likely to
28:54substitute other muscle groups by
28:56working in a slightly higher repetition
28:58range. It may be 8 to 10, but even 10 to
29:0012, 12, 15. And if you think the pump is
29:02better than better than coming, like
29:03Arnold said, you may prefer that. the
29:07same time. Big compound stuff. Can it be
29:09done for high reps? Sure. And here
29:12again, there is a gender difference.
29:14Like if I give a dude like a set of 15
29:17in in a leg movement anywhere close to
29:19zero reps reserve, they're going to have
29:20to lay down for a few minutes. Whereas
29:22you give a woman that same set and
29:24she'll be ready to go in 45 seconds.
29:26There has to be differences in biology,
29:29elasticity, a whole bunch of factors.
29:31But the these are the important things
29:33that that gets left out of the rep count
29:36doesn't matter. Right? So again,
29:38practically six to 15 will get it done
29:40for most people
29:42with exercise selection playing a
29:44secondary role.
29:46Isolations tend to work better in higher
29:49repetition ranges. Compounds tend to
29:52work better in lower repetition ranges
29:54with some overlap. between 8 and 12, the
29:56hypertrophy zone, it's kind of a wash,
29:59but six to eights, most people aren't
30:02probably going to do, you know, lateral
30:04raise as well in that unless your
30:06technique is perfect and y'alls ain't 12
30:09to 15s.
30:11If you do a set of hack squats in that
30:13range, you're going to have to go lay
30:14down for a few minutes if it's anywhere
30:15close to intense. There may be some
30:18gender differences. There may be gold
30:21differences, right? Like again, I don't
30:22I don't I suspect the the typical female
30:26who's a competitor who's working, you
30:28know, looking at at one of the non
30:30bodybuilding or physique divisions when
30:32you get a bikini fit model, fit wellness
30:35or one of the other 137 divisions,
30:37probably not be doing lots of heavy six
30:39to eights and probably in the 125 rep
30:42range because it suits them
30:44physiologically, possibly anat
30:46anatomically. Guys love to go heavy.
30:49Joints don't always handle that.
30:52Um, I know this is disorganized because
30:54I don't script it, guys, because I can't
30:56be bothered.
30:58One thing that I've written about
31:00speculatively, I should probably put
31:01something about this formally. Like, if
31:03you're coming out of heavy stuff and
31:05your joints a little beaten up, doing a
31:07couple weeks in that 15 to 20 rep range,
31:10moving a lot of blood, things of that
31:12nature can be really good for your
31:13joints, right? There is no metabolite
31:16growth cycle. It's just another way to
31:19high tension. But like I could probably
31:21come up with a cycle that's, you know,
31:23couple weeks of high reps, give your
31:25joints a break, move a lot of blood,
31:28maybe get a little growth from
31:30metabolites, probably not fiber type
31:32specific. Would I go to 30? Abso
31:34fuckingutely not for reasons already
31:37explicated. Yes, explicated. The
31:40majority then I would do several blocks
31:42in a six to 15 rep range. A mix is
31:45always nice. By which I mean the
31:47combination of six to eight for heavier
31:50compounds and 10 to 12 or 12 to 15s in
31:52isolations is a time-tested
31:55way of training. So
31:58success may not always leave clues, but
32:01sometimes it does. And then if it fit
32:05someone's goals, I might finish with a
32:06three-week block of maximal strength
32:09training.
32:13So there you go. Now you know is there a
32:17hypertrophy zone? Not in the strictest
32:20physiological sense. Is there a
32:22practical hypertrophy zone? Obviously in
32:24my opinion that is the case.
32:27And that we're going to call it six to
32:2915 range will probably be the most
32:33beneficial from the grand majority of
32:35trainees under the grand majority of
32:37conditions for the grand majority of
32:39their training with context specific
32:42reasons to include either five reps and
32:46less short maximum strength cycle maybe
32:49up to 20 because nobody's doing three
32:52sets of 25 to 30 leg extensions to zero
32:55reps in reserve consistently.
32:58See you next time.
33:02Okay, so since the date has passed, my
33:06twomonth run long run 20% off discount
33:10sale is now unofficially over. However,
33:13that means you can go back to as always
33:16using the coupon code Mike has no tan,
33:18which maybe I should change to Mike has
33:20a bubble gut despite that plastic
33:22surgery. that will give you 10% off on
33:25every book in my store consultations.
33:28It will stack with the multibook
33:30discount. It will not stack with any
33:32other coupons, but I don't have any
33:34other coupons. Once again, coupon code
33:37Mike has no tan. 10% off anything in my
33:39store, body recmposition.com.
33:42My dog is big. He needs food. Buy now,
33:46buy often. Tell your friends. Tell your
33:48enemies.
33:50There you go. By which I mean the
33:52combination of six to eights for heavier
33:54compounds and 10 to 12 or 12 to 15s in
33:56isolations is a time-tested
33:59way of training. So
34:03success may not always leave clues, but
34:06sometimes it

About this transcript

This page contains the full transcript of Is There a Hypertrophy Zone? (Well....not really but kind of) by Lyle McDonald, generated from the public captions YouTube serves with the video. The transcript has 5,870 words across 865 segments, with the original timestamps preserved so you can click any line to jump to that moment in the embedded player.

What you can do with it

Use the transcript to take notes, quote the speaker, build a study guide, generate a summary with ChatGPT or Claude via the YouTube Summary tool, or export it as a timed subtitle file with YouTube to SRT. You can also re-open it in the transcriber to translate the transcript into 100+ languages.

Free YouTube transcript tool

YouTube2Text is a free YouTube transcript generator — no signup, no daily limit. Paste any YouTube link and get the full transcript instantly, with timestamps, click-to-jump, translation to 100+ languages, AI prompts for ChatGPT, Claude, and Gemini, and exports to TXT, SRT, VTT, or Markdown.