Does level of intensity actually change progress if your doing your max reps in the first place? Guess Im asking if rate makes a difference.
Last edited by motor head; 10-31-2008 at 02:57 PM.
I've always felt like intensity is more important than duration. I'd never spend 2 hours in the gym. I can get a full workout in in less than an hour, and usually not much more than 30 minutes. I don't waste much time between sets. I also like the benefit of endurance.
I think people who are against long workouts are misinformed. Resting longer in between sets allows you to work more intensely during your sets.
longer rest (in the 3-5 minute range) allows for more strength per set, but it doesn't promote growth as well as rest in the 90 second range. resting for a shorter period is more of an endurance range (from what i remember). plus, resting for 5 minutes between sets a big waste of time and ties up the equipment. i have other things to do--like go to work.
i'm not saying you're incorrect, but there's more to the story than what you've indicated in your post.
Last edited by Patz; 11-02-2008 at 10:33 PM.
resting more between sets increases the restoration of atp. if you take shorter rest periods, you inflict more damage on your fibres during the workout (which is why many see good gains raising the intensity at first). its a good idea to 'cycle' the intensity over time, as youre more likely to overtrain with high intensity over long periods. total time of the workout isnt as important.
aim to gradually increase the intensity over a month or so, then cut back and go up again, to ensure proper recovery from cycles.