MN Hoser wrote:
7 reps is still heavy lifting. Since we are primarily endurance athletes, our bodies are more responsive to lighter weights and more reps - 12 to 15 reps being the optimum.
This doesn't sound correct.
Depends. If you are a dedicated racer, then more reps and lighter weights should work better.
OTOH if you are a fitness enthusiast,(who even occasionally races), 12 to 15 reps per set are a good starting point for strength development, muscle maintenance and general fitness.
Neuro wrote:Yes but using light weights like I said. I could much more, both weight and sets.
If I understand correctly, you do only 7 reps per set, but with weight light enough you could still do more reps easily.
If so, it's not an efficient way to strength train.
When doing only 7 reps per set, weight should be heavy enough so you cannot do more.
Ability to do more reps comes into play when you do lots of reps per set (say 30+)
However, 30+ reps per set is NOT strength training. It's endurance training, using weight (or sometimes bodyweight) as the resistance.
It's often implemented as circuit training, where you move from station to station, with little rest between stations.
Many endurance athletes cross-train using circuit-training.
Neuro wrote:When the latest Swix 3.0 pole was launched now, they said poles from not long ago would literally be bent by today's skiers, the power difference from skiers before to now is apparently huge.
Only if they pulled at the ends of the pole while holding its middle against their knee
Furthermore...Sundby's muscle is nothing to write home about.
Here are endurance athletes with muscle:
Or here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=11YH_7Esfjc