View Single Post
Old 02-08-2012, 12:35 PM   #4
Hazzard
Senior Member
Max Brawn
Points: 5,710, Level: 48 Points: 5,710, Level: 48 Points: 5,710, Level: 48
Activity: 10% Activity: 10% Activity: 10%
 
Hazzard's Avatar
 

Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 2,522
Training Type: Powerlifting
Fav Exercise: Squat
Fav Supp: Pizza
Reputation: 1950
Hazzard has made some good postsHazzard has made some good postsHazzard has made some good postsHazzard has made some good postsHazzard has made some good postsHazzard has made some good postsHazzard has made some good postsHazzard has made some good postsHazzard has made some good postsHazzard has made some good postsHazzard has made some good posts
Default

I think that they're both good and I incorporate both. When performing a new exercise, or at least a variation on one I'm familiar with, I usually work up to a max-ish set. For example today I did high box squats and worked up to a big single. This gives plenty of volume as you work the way up the weight. However, I also find it beneficial to work at sub maximal weights for sets across to really hit home the intensity and volume as each set is tough.

I find the latter better for a more linear style of progression, or if not then one based around set percentages where the weight being performed is pre-determined by 1 rep maxes and the like.

For example, when I'm training with someone, I like to have them work up to a heavy single, possibly a PB or fairly close. Then I have them drop back and hit 5x5 with around 80% of what they achieve. This way you get the best of both worlds. Obviously this is just a one off, but it gives you a slight idea of what I mean. Ish.
__________________
Hazzard is offline   Reply With Quote