Just stumbled on this article: http://baye.com/low-reps-vs-high-reps/ The thesis is that there is no significant difference between using high load/low rep or low load/high rep training protocols for increase in hypertrohpy and strenght, as long as you go to volitional failure. He is citing a study which had previously trained participants divided into two groups. In one group they did 30-50% of 1rm or 20-25 reps and in another they did 75-90% of 1rm for 8-12 reps. After 12 weeks, no significant different in cross sectional type 1 or 2 fibre distribution nor hypertrophy was found. Only a relevant increase in benchpress strenght for the high load group, not for other exercises. He also mentions a few studies which shows that a single set to volitional failure, maintaining muscular tension, 2-3 times a week gives the same benefits as the usual multiple sets. This one in particular, which is quite frankly ballsy, suggest that strenght gains from free weights, machines and BW has the same potential with no significant differences, that the balance component of free weights doesn't transfer better to sports, that explosive movements have no greater benefit than slow controlled ones and that hypertrophy is genetics. Oh, and it also prescribes the "one set" protocol. That's some hardcore study lol, haven't read through it yet. - It's this one!: http://baye.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/ebrtr-Fisher.pdf Anyway, he suggests in the article, citing another study, that supersetting does not increase hypertrophy as "post-exercise levels of circulating hormones did not change as a result of the RT intervention were unrelated to, and did not account for significant changes in, muscle mass or strength” and “In agreement with previous studies (50-52) it is clear that the post-exercise increases in systemic hormone concentrations are unrelated to changes in muscle hypertrophy or strength." and in regards to loads that; "The current data, along with previous work (28, 35), are direct proof that hypertrophy and strength gains are not a function of the load lifted and directly contradict the assertion that acute EMG recordings predict hypertrophic potential" He mentions that by extention that BW exercises can increase strenght and hypertrophy to the same degree as weight training. He evens it out a little bit at the end saying that the neurological adaptions for 1RMs should stil be trained leading up to something like a PL competition and that too light a load will not stimulate to the same adaptions. What say you guys? Is he cherry picking studies? Is the 8 reps range still not low enough? What's your take?