5x5 vs 3x8-12 debate.. really?

5x5 vs 3x8-12 debate.. really?

Not this debate again The most important thing is progression.

You can make quicker strength progression on a 5x5 as a beginner so that's the best starting point.

IMO all good workouts start with 1-2 power compound movements and finish with some 8+ iso movements

 

5x5 vs 3x8-12 debate.. really?

IMO i prefere 5x5

 

5x5 vs 3x8-12 debate.. really?

Rep range and it's effectiveness can also be down to the genetic amount of fast and slow twitch muscle fibres a person has.

Now that's got ya thinking...

 

5x5 vs 3x8-12 debate.. really?

 

5x5 vs 3x8-12 debate.. really?

I've been doing stronglifts 5x5 but recently thought of changing to higher reps, think I'll go with the 2:1 hypertrophy strength routine

 

I’ve used both approaches at different times and, for me, the choice between 5x5 and 3x8–12 depends on what I’m trying to achieve.

When I’ve wanted to concentrate on getting stronger, 5x5 has worked well because the lower rep range makes it easier to focus on heavier weights and track progress from one session to the next. The downside is that five heavy sets can become quite tiring, especially on squats and deadlifts, and I find my form can suffer if I keep trying to add weight too quickly.

I tend to prefer 3x8–12 when the main aim is building muscle. The lighter weight gives me more control over each repetition and makes it easier to feel the muscle working rather than simply trying to move the weight. It also seems easier to recover from, particularly if I’m training each muscle more than once a week.

I don’t think either method is automatically better, though. Progressive overload, good technique and completing enough quality work over the week probably matter more than whether the programme says 5x5 or 3x8. A beginner could even use 5x5 on the main compound exercise, then 3x8–12 for the accessory movements.

Has anyone here tried combining both rep ranges in the same workout, and did you make better progress than using one approach exclusively?