Is a 3 sets, 12 reps scheme better than doing more sets and lower reps?

The 3 x 12 is a great routine. Many beginners will benefit from this and gain muscle. Veterans will use this for joint and ligament integrity - it won't necessary help them gain mass/strength because as you age, your response to repetitions goes down (i.e. what 6 reps did years ago, now 4 reps will accomplish the same thing).

There is a focus on reps relating to type of training - i.e. low reps is strength, moderate reps is hypertrophy, and higher reps is endurance. Again, this is a general oversimplification. For example, I might use low repetitions but if I am using a slow tempo then my time under tension (when the muscle is contracting) may be the same for higher repetitions at a faster rate, so the response is going to be similar. I can gain muscle at 20 reps if they are explosive and I can gain strength using high rep sets if I am accelerating quickly, even though the traditional method is to focus on lower reps.

Consider that F = ma or Force = mass x acceleration

So if I have mass 10 and acceleration 1 (high load, slow rep) I get a force of 10. Conversely, if I have mass 1 and acceleration 10 (low load, fast rep) I am still generating a force of 10 ... see how science helps us understand this?

Understand your goals and then the program relates to them. Do you do a lot of work with your arms? Then you get high volume, low load and can accomplish joint strength through a few high intensity reps/sets. Do you sit in front of a computer all day? Your wrists might do well to get some heavy loading to change the stimulus and possibly avoid some carpal tunnel symptoms (Stretching good for this as well).

Are you trying to gain strength? Then how about a cycle of moderate reps to gain mass then a cycle of lower reps to become more efficient/gain strength with the new mass, followed by higher reps to use acceleration to further strength gains and give your tendons and ligaments a break?

My point is that weight lifting is a science. The only reason we are inundated with oversimplifications is because magazines need gimmicks to sell copies. It is boring to print the truth - if you want your biceps to get bigger, bend your arm. That's it. People at the turn of the century used opposing contractions, i.e. just curled their right arm while pushing and holding their wrist with their left arm - and achieved great physiques.

It is actually quite eye opening if you are a student of the sport and look into the history. For example, the kettlebell movement is a huge fad right now and people can charge enormous rates to teach the technique. It is considered new and breaking and from the Far East. The reality is that if you study turn of the century bodybuilding (late 1800s) there were a number of weights employed for training and kettlebells were in common use - many of the old photographs showed them. So what happened? A certain vendor of the dumbbell and barbell with a name like "Weider" built an empire that became the de facto standard for bodybuilding in the U.S. - as the result, his weights of choice became the ones used most often. Only recently has this come full circle and people are starting to realize you can train with anything - medicine balls, Swiss workout balls, resistance bands, etc.
Opening your mind you will realize you can have just as successful a workout with a phonebook or suitcase as you can with free weights.

Instead of worrying too much about the sets and reps - try this out:

• Move weight
• Break a sweat
• Do a little more than the last time

You will see results!