DOS: "3 x 10 IS NOT the same as 10 x 3"

[WorkinOnIt]

I didn't want to hijack Bill's great account of his time in LA, so I'm posing this question in a separate thread.

In the thread Dos mentioned "3 x 10 IS NOT the same as 10 x 3," and I'm interested in learning more about this distinction.

A while ago I followed a 10 x 3 routine. I was able to lift significantly heavier weight, but didn't experience the hypertrophy I expected (my calories were more than adequate).

Any thoughts on when 10 x 3 is better than 3 x 10 and vice versa? thanks

[Kevin T.]

10 x 3 is 10 sets of 3 reps. By doing this, you can use a heavier load and will make strength gains.

3 x 10 forces you to lower the weight, but the added reps will most likely lead to greater hypertrophy than a 10 x 3 scheme.

10 x 3 is better than 3 x 10 when you're trying to get stronger. 3 x 10 is probably better when you're trying to put on some mass. Note that these aren't the only schemes and that there are a lot more. That was comparing only 3 x 10 and 10 x 3.

That a very basic and general idea of the difference between the two.

[raymond3]

Interesting..I know one can obviously get good strength gains from 10x3, but Ive heard many have put on alot of muscle (hypertrophy) from this protocal as well.

[Brian A.]

Training Zones
Strength: 85%-1RM - <6reps - 2-6sets
Power: 75-90%-1RM - 1 to 2reps - 3-5sets
Hypertrophy: 67-85%-1RM - 8 to 12reps - 3-6sets
Muscular Endurance: < 67%-1RM - >12reps - 2-3sets

These are the NSCA guidelines for training zones. Basicly lower weight with higher reps is endurance zone, highter weight with lower reps is strength/power zone, and hypertorphy zone is in the middle.

raymond3: These are the general guidelines which means there are always exceptions to the rule. Some people's body type responds better to the strength/power zone and thus they will gain muscle using it. However, that is not the general purpose for that type of training. Also the high number of sets brings the overall volume up and you can't help but add muscle.

[dos]

I like to make a point that 'lighter weights' is a very relative term. Sure, the load will be significantly less on your set of 10 than your set of 4-5 but the reality is that is should be A LOT more uncomfortable performing hard sets of 10 than a hard set of 5. In fact, there shouldn't be many more difficult tasks than doing your 4 x 10 on your bench or squat. I think that many people miss the point when they see 'lighter loads performed for more reps' and then play with loads that are flat-out too light to reach their goals.

Many of the protocols for 10 x 3 are not calling for 90+% of your 1RM (which would be a sound guideline for strength gains), rather, they call for something like 70% or your 1RM which is entirely too light to elicit much of anything.We can be talking 4 x 8 vs. 8 x 4 or 3 x 12 vs. 12 x 3 etc. but the load assignment needs to be appropriate not only for the goal but for the basic rules of overload.

I can't remember the thread but we recently addressed this issue a bit. Bottom line, when someone does 200 lbs. for 10 reps x 3 sets it is NOT the same as doing 200lbs. for 3 reps x 10 sets. Don't be misled into thinking that because the volumes are the same, the actual work is the same....they are VERY, VERY different.

[Lost Dog]

Most of the articles/routines that I've seen on 10x3 recommend 85% of 1RM or your 5RM.

If your 1RM is 300lbs, then you'd do 255lbs x 30 reps to equal 7650 lbs lifted.

For 3x10, you'd probably need about 70% (12RM) of your 1RM or 210lbs. At 3x10, or 30 reps, that's 6300lbs lifted.

That's a lot more weight in the 10x3. Still, I don't think you can compare the 3x10 to 10x3 weight apples to apples. Different muscle fibers are hit at different percentages. Alas, I'm no scientist...

Also, if we're talking a Chad Waterbury program, he starts the routing at 85%, but then you bump it up 1.25-2.5% each week. So, by the end of the four week program, you're up above that 90% threshold.

All that being said, I don't think anybody's recommending programs that are 10x3 ONLY. Most programs have a day of 10x3, a day of 4x6, a day of 3x10-12, or other, similar variations in the program.

The only program I've seen that's purely 10x3 is Chad Waterbury's 10x3 for Fat Loss, where he recomnends doing the program ONCE, then switching to another program. All of his other programs use 10x3 for one day, or maybe one lift in a day's program.

[OldGuy]

It's obvious you can't lift the same weight in 3x10 as you can in a 10x3. But that's a big drop in volume between the two (using L D's numbers). Is there any significance to that much of a drop (ie. loss of strength)?

What about if your tried to keep up the same volume? Say if you went to a 4x10 routine. You could do 40 reps @ 191, which would give you the same volume. Any merit to this?

[eastcoastsurfer]

Oldguy,
From what I've read to gain strength and get big people go back and forth monthly? (or every few months) in periodization cycles. So you end up with a hypertrophy cycle and then a strength cycle and maybe an endurance cycle if that's your thing.

[OldGuy]

Yes, but my question is do you want to keep the same volume when going from strength to hypertrophy.

[dos]

For the record, I had seen some of the 10 x 3 style stuff prior to CW's programs. I believe Charles Staley was/is a proponent of dropping the loads and volumes and trying to move the weight faster to make-up for the decrease in load (which is another topic altogether).

Oldguy, the volume should be significantly different from a set/rep total standpoint (when going from hypertrophy to strength. You may be doing 40 reps (4 x 10)during hypertrophy but only 20 reps (4x5) during strength. Also, you are fallng into the trap once again by looking at the total amount of pounds at the end of the session when you are not taking into consideration the intensity of that amount of work. Hope that makes sense.

Lost dog, even with 85%, 10 x 3 is not at all difficult (unless you are doing some extreme tempo training etc.). I have tried it and many others on the board have as well and found it to be pretty easy even with shorter rest periods.

[OldGuy]

I think it does, dos. I'm pretty dense at times, you know the whole "old dog, new tricks" thing. I really appreciate your time. Thanks.

[Lost Dog]

Dos,

Maybe you need to up the weight. 85% is the starting point for laying out your routine. Plus, you're not supposed to feel fatigued afterward. Again, by week 4, when you've increased weight, you're at 91% or your 1RM.

But, you might even start higher. I'm assuming you've got a lot of experience in the lower rep ranges and handle this type of rep range better than most. Someone who's been "living" in the 8-12 rep range for a long time, might not be able to handle that type of load. So, 85% is just a place to try out on day 1, to see if it's a good weight to start with.

[raymond3]

Well Ive been doing 10x3 (usually mixed with 4x6 on CW stuff) and as stated, usually the 10x3 is only one of the exercises. If one did the mixture of 10x3 and 4x6, could this cause muscle gain (hypertrophy)? Ive been on the lower end of reps and higher intesity for awhile..Ie 5x5's, 10x3 and 4x6...I wonder if I should switch and do some reps of 8-12...sometimes on WM I would do the workout, but drop one set and do my reps 8-12, instead of 6. Would something like this work if done once every 3 or 4 weeks (upping the reps), or should I change programs all together? Im cutting now, but doing carb cycling, so am eating alot more carbs than usual. I like the carb cycling and feel its helping to reduce fat and build muscle simitanuously (even though this is usually hard).

[dos]

Once again guys, my point is that the most basic principle of resistance training is overload. Without it, you will not see improvement. If you rack a weight @ 5 reps (when you could do say 6-7 reps) you have not reached a point of overload. BTW, the 'fatigue' that you mention is actually a vital part of hypertrophy. This is why rest periods are so short (1 min. or so). There should be serious discomfort when training for size....there is really no way to skirt that. Show me a program that brings no fatigue or discomfort and I will show a program that doesn't work very well.

Also, I am not a big believer in prescribing %'s since they should only be used as a 'guideline'. If I am supposed to do 210lbs. x 10 (70%) one day and it is a 'strong day' in which I could possibly do 215-220 x 10 should I stay with the 210? What if it is a 'weak day' and I can only get 200 x 10? Should I still be trying 210 and only getting 7-8 reps?

Like I said before, we pretty much went through this on another thread so maybe someone can search it and post it here.

Take care, DOS

[dos]

Maybe you need to up the weight. 85% is the starting point for laying out your routine. Plus, you're not supposed to feel fatigued afterward. Again, by week 4, when you've increased weight, you're at 91% or your 1RM.

Lost dog, the basis for this program was 'hypertrophy'. If you keep upping the weight you are now right in a great 'strength' program (as I mentioned before). Once you start doing 3's @ 90+%, you are training for strength. While you will surely get some hypertrophy even in strength cycles, you definately are not emphasizing hypertrophy any longer.

[Newlife]

Dos, I changed my reps up last night and left my program the same.

To your comment..."There should be serious discomfort when training for size....there is really no way to skirt that. "

I almost puked after my box squats... I love it!

[dos]

Yeah, it will be tough. Not that I'm trying to promote 'pukeafied' workouts or anything....I usually leave that up to the complexes and combos