Hey All! Feel free to check out the Alpha Progression App: alphaprogression.com/HouseofHypertrophy Timestamps: 0:00 Intro 1:08 Part I: The New Data 9:28 Part II: What Should You Do?
The discussion is about a meta-analysis of several studies, which is different. The best thing seems to be to be consistent, put in a lot of effort into each training session, be mindful of what you are targeting and to give your body time to recover. The rest is less important.
Hulk Hogan found the secret years ago, he would train once in the US, then fly across the international date line to Japan, train again, then wrestle. That way he could train 400 days a year, and still manage recovery. Takes a lot of prayers and vitamins to maintain that schedule brother!
2x a week per muscle group while hammering the shit out of them and training beyond failure with partials to ensure I feel beat up the next day is what made me start seeing noticeable growth again Base your training on how long it takes to recover and the training style that fits your schedule and habits
Great Scott! You figured it out. This is the method I use, and it's amazing. You have to let your muscles recover or they will never grow. You will actually get smaller, weaker and worse joints.
I was already 2x Armed Forces Bodybuilding Champion when I went to Physical Therapy school. It was there that I realized what crap studies are in general. I would take this study with a grain of salt. I can already see the huge flaws in this study. The study was conducted on 35 bodybuilders. Pros? Guys in the gym claiming to be bodybuilders? People in their 2nd year of bodybuilding or their 15th year? Half and half...a mix of both? The outcome will matter greatly. For example...guys that have been training serious for 10 years or more will most likely see very little results no matter what regiment they followed compared to men who have been BB for less than 3 years. Its like taking a group of runners...some can run sub 5 minute miles and some sub 10 minute miles. What group do you think is going to show the most likely improvements from the same study? Not the sub 5's. They are already at the end range of human ability. Same with bodybuilders. I would honestly say not much has changed in hypertrophy in the last 40 years. According to todays research, almost every bodybuilder from the most epic time in history were all training wrong but yet all had the very best physiques compared to today. I would honestly think of "different" and "new" ways to train as a new and different diet that just came out. How many people can lose 30 lbs? Millions. Some eat no meat...some no carbs...some a mix of both. Some do cardio...some do not. Consistency with training and eating at the two biggest factors in hypertrophy. Lifting is last. Everyone is bench pressing. Everyone is squatting. So why can some men put on a lot more muscle than others. Aside from drugs, it is #1 food. #2 consistency #3 sleep and #4 training. It has nothing to do with if you "do" or "do not" supinate your wrist when you curl. This is what people who make videos want you to believe because 98% of all Bodybuidling could be summed up in a single magazine. BUT...there would be nothing to write about next month...or next year...or ten years later....hence...we have a video like this. Meant to do good...but adds more to the confusion than anything else.
@@garrydye2394 lol studies are very important and tell a lot. It just depends on the researchers. If this video was quality they'd explain how this was conducted
I have been stalling in my progression for some years and it really demotivated me. Reducing frequency was the key. I trained most muscle groups 3 times per week and usually I just got worse with every workout. Now I just have 1 direct and one indirect session for my upper body muscles and I finally see some progression again. after 4 years of not going anywhere. And I have to say not feeling totally fatigued when going to the gym really brought back the fun.
@@MaxisBallinonaBudget Your mom is a demanding woman. It takes a lot to work on her physique and your own physique at the same time. Poor guy was all tuckered out.
@@MaxisBallinonaBudget Since lifting isn't my primary sport and I mostly train a lot of endurance as well, it didn't really bothered me too much to not progress any further. I'm training since I'm 16 and my build is quite alright. Thing is if you overtrain you get sick a lot, which then made me increase the volume as soon as I got fit again. Decreasing frequency never seemed to be the right choice, I always felt like I didn't do enough.
@CLONisKING I tend to overtrain as well, I feel like I'm not doing anything if I do give 100% effort every time. It's an experience thing you learn the longer you do it that truly less is more sometimes.
My experience as a natty and steroid user was this; Everything comes down to recovery. It is very difficult for most individuals to make progress EVERYWHERE on the body, on an ongoing basis. When trying to hit calves, quads, biceps, triceps, shoulders, chest, abs and back, every week, with sufficient effort for stimulus... the result in gains are SLOOWW.... I recall decided at one time that my quads were really falling behind. I made the decision to squat 3x/week (20 rep squats). All other muscle groups were trained at a 1x/week frequency but the intensity was very low, we're talking nowhere near failure, whereas the effort poured into the squatting was absolutely maximum. I did this for about 3 months and the results were staggering. My upper body and limbs remained whilst my quads indeed caught up (to the point I was actually being complimented on them). The lesson here, at least for me (and I think countless others), is that it is extremely difficult to make the entire body grow together, at once. Sometimes you need some specialisation, a deliberate reduction in intensity and cruising on some muscles in order to leave reserves for adaptation to occur. As a PT I met many interesting individuals, one guy in particular stuck in my head. All he liked to do was bench and curl, he did it frequently, and he was strong and big (as a natural benching 3 plates aside). He also had an impressive back despite never really doing any chins or rows. He was not even weak in the legs either, basically he was gifted genetically. But the question remains, how can someone get such a well developed back, quads etc, when really never directly or indirectly training them? I would argue adaptation can occur more widespread than we think, and the necessity to train all muscle groups with the same attention is probably a flawed way to go about things. Choose 1-2 exercises only, do them 3-4x/week, watch what happens...
@@kwimms Why if that makes them happy and keeps their mind occupied about stuff like that and isn't even hurting anyone by doing it? There are so much worse things he could do, especially if you have people get bored and irritated by forbidding them to do harmless things like that. Just let people live man...
Recovery is a problem when you're old (63) & down to your last thimble-full of testosterone. I had to adjust my upper/lower split to 3 workouts per week instead of 4 because I wasn't recovering properly between workouts. It meant I only trained the whole body 3 times per fortnight but it did the trick. So age is also a factor in recovery & frequency.
I'm 63 and split my body into 3 areas - pushing muscles upper body, legs, and pulling muscles upper body. I work out twice a week, so each muscle group gets worked about every 10 days. At 63, I'm obviously not growing, but this schedule feels pretty good. Any more and I get niggling soreness in areas!!
@@mikthe2004 I am much younger and believe that around 10 days is the sweet spot to repeat training regimen. You could see increases in strength if you practice progressive overload within that schedule, as long as you've had ample sleep/nutrition between sessions
I'm 59 and also follow the upper/lower split 3 days per week. Getting 4-5 days of rest for each muscle group is a schedule that is sustainable long term. I even slightly increased the volume by one extra set per muscle group to make up for the lower frequency. This has worked out just fine.
Wide bars may indicate large individual differences. When I tried once/week I was brutally sore and made no progress, I made best progress with 3/week and nice to not get brutally sore.
The wide credible intervals technically point to uncertainty in the average results. But indeed the variation between studies could be related to individual differences! Very interesting to hear your experience!
as do most other normal people (me 2) that is why studies with PED enhanced, bodybuilders with 10+ years of training are a wast of time for people that want to be fit, healthy and not look like a brown colored marshmallow.
What I've found is you adapt to your training routine. I've done 5x5 squats 5 days a week at 80% 1rm for 5 weeks (ran this block twice) and while at first I was sore after a week or two I was no longer sore almost ever (happened even faster in the second block). Incidentally, I made crazy gains in both size, definition and strength in my legs during those blocks.
@@uncreativepanda wow, getting gainz with that high frequenzy AND high volume sounds fascinating. Did you JUST do backsquats or did you do any other exercises?
.. Two caveats to this analysis; 1) Quality Vs. quantity will profoundly affect the end result. Limiting the number of sets for the sake of spreading out frequency over multiple times per week will in effect; affect intensity. Volume in of itself is in fact also a factor toward building up to an optimal threshold of intensity. The concept of dividing sessions for each muscle group into more than one session per week is self limiting because certain amount of volume combined with high intensity is necessary to achieve optimal growth stimulus. The indirect effect of compound movements on other training days therefore adequately compensate for the arguable need for additional frequency when training a target muscle once per week 2) An advanced individual is capable of moving heavier loads than a beginner therefore the total tonnage for the week will be much heavier thus creating greater inroads toward recovery .. These studies were probably performed on individuals who had not been training for very long, so these studies cannot be applied across the board for all individuals depending on the level they are at and the said variables .. And that's just coming from years in the trenches in an effort to almost impossibly put more muscle on to this mediocre genetics frame
Exactly. Ive just wrote pretty much he same before seeing your comment. the whole 'quality of sets' spread out through the week being one of those things which looks good in theory if only looking at optimising one muscle group but falls apart once you try applying that to any real world training. (unless talking about beginners then id advise high frequency is best for them) More frequency requires more overall volume per workout and more muscle groups hit [per workout which means each workout only one muscle group is really reaping any optimal benefits. even if cycling excercise selection and priority through out the week it only then balances out to a lesser quality some days than others, In which case you may as well forget about high frequency being 'optimal'
@@papaspaulding Well it ultimately ends with full body 3 times a week. I do that bod legs only one day, because i already walk a hell lot during work, so i do that for the weekends only. But like the video suggest, always needs to fit your lifestyle. I am a little surprised people think 3 sets is the limit to recover from in 72 hours. 9 sets per week really isn't all that much.
No, the soreness goes away after some frequent traning, so you can easily overtrain a muscle, i got golfers elbow from too much traning/climbing and had only low soreness all the time
Can you say what half is for you?@@Fubarpapa to clarify, if you normally worked 4 sets you cut back to 2, so what was your normal routine vs the halved routine?
Correct me if I’m wrong, but this says frequency doesn’t matter much when total volume is equal. With muscles taking around 72 hours to recover, I don’t see why this doesn’t support hitting each muscle group twice per week. Because realistically you’re not going to be doing DOUBLE the volume hitting a muscle once per week, so it just stands to reason that twice per week per muscle group makes the most sense if you have the time for it.
I use to think this. As you get stronger over time, you begin to realize that just because the muscles can recover in 1-3 days does not mean connective tissue can. That is why the majority of top level competitors (including naturals) use bro splits. The guys doing higher frequency end up spending 1/4 of there time deloading 😂. In the long run, bro splits are much more sustainable, and building muscle is about consistency over many years, not what gets the best results in a 3 month study.
@@JoshBenware connective tissue benefits more from frequent training and higher volume when we adjust down weight. bro splits compensate for this weakness with time instead of actually addressing the problem. train it all
Absolutely smashing it once again with the content. Appreciate the time and effort gone into this - very informative. Gives me more confidence in my current hybrid routine of Legs/Push/Pull/Lower/Upper.
I've been lifting and reading exercise articles for 38 yrs. I train full-body 3 x week, 1 exercise/bodypart, 5 sets/ exercise @ roughly 60+% of 1RM w/1 min rest between sets. It's a good solid pace with appropriately difficult weight. I have minor soreness the next day. I think consistently training to failure is mentally unsustainable and will lead to dreading the gym.
Like the specifics of this video, depends on the individual. I've gotten my best progress by training to failure and it has the added benefit of tending towards fewer sets to be the most efficient. I don't have a single exercise where I need to hit 8+ sets to properly target muscles so I'm in, out, and feeling my best in less time. Makes for far better workout sessions on top of better gains. If someone finds going to failure makes working out something they want to avoid then yeah, probably isn't the way to go for them. Still, the science says that will produce the best results and be the most efficient.
Don't forget also that, as more you go into your dailies workouts, some type of exercises and how intense you are performing will also accumulate fatigue in general and you may need more rest which is perfectly fine. There's no straight line in life, thus in exercise it's the same, some weeks you are still recovering from fatigue but you can exercise just not to the failure point. Some weeks you are fully recovered and you can go as normally you do. The type of exercises like I mention can also be a cause of your huge fatigue weekly, when you reach your final days of working out (last two I would say). For example: if you do dead lifts on your back day and on the next day you do legs, you will feel huge fatigue, so try to switch some exercises (especially the compounds ones) so you can have a good performance all the week. Ofc, some weeks you want to test yourself a bit more and it's ok if you only train for 3 days, or you change the workout flow, instead of starting with chest you start with back, these tiny changes plus the rest periods are enough, you don't need to do more than 4 sets and 14874 thousand exercises, Quality over quantity always! Why? Your joints, ligaments and tendons are not like muscle fibers tissue. Blessings all and keep going! :D
Excellent job compiling relevant research. Solid A for presentation too. I appreciate all of your videos and they've really helped inform my own training. Today starts my own experiment with recoverable volume by doing a 3-day full body split that scales up in total volume over the course of 16 weeks. I'm alternating an A and a B day (first week A B A, second week B A B, etc) with each day having a different strength focus. Ex: A1 and A2 both have the same exercises, but A1 bench press focuses on 4-6 reps sets eventually adding a single and a double vs A2 bench press sets go to 8-12 reps. A1 - bench press focus A2 - weighted pull-up focus B1 - zercher squat focus B2 - sumo dl focus My hope is to see if eating at maintenance (2700-2800kcal, 150-180g protein / day) and leveraging the repeat bout effect, I can tolerate the mix of strength focus and hyperyrophy focus and come out bigger and stronger from it. (Not plugging for any gain, but anyone interested can see the full program on boostcamp looking up Caedo v13)
I go off of Mentzer’s teaching. Don’t workout until a few days after you feel fully recovered. This lets your body repair that hole you dug into it and put more dirt on top of it.
I absolutley love these videos. That flickering effect made it really hard to watch though. lol my brain did NOT like that. I thought my computer was broken.
The ideal number of days to train a muscle per week varies between individuals and also varies for the same individual depending on age and training state. When you just amalgamate the results over the general population you will get the results as per the graph in this video. The general principle is that the more trained you are (i.e. the closer you are to your genetic limit) the less days per week you should train a muscle, simply because you need a longer recovery time. (This general principle may not apply if you are a genetic freak or on PEDs). As an example when I started training, I could bench press 3 days a week, and grow well on that - because I was only benching 75 lb (so the damage done in a workout could be fully recovered from in 2 days). Later as I got close to or at my genetic limit I could only bench press once a week, because I was benching 315 lb for 8 reps and there is no way known I was doing that 3 or even just 2 times a week and recovering (very, very easy to test and prove to yourself).
Today at age 58 I bench 100kg for 12 to 14 reps and while I can do that once a week, I recover better (as in don’t get run down) if I do that once a fortnight (alternating with military/overhead press the other week). There are exceptions: For example I once attended a Lee Priest seminar and he claimed to workout everyday - and it was clearly working for him (so you can ignore what I said if you have amazing genetics and/or are on PEDs). In the early days I tried training 6 day a week and my body just fell apart like there was no tomorrow. By a process of trial and error it is not that hard to work out what is the correct number of days to train a muscle group for you. Reference : Me :)
@kobemop Yeah it is. But tbh sometimes I look forward to say.. delts every single time. But despite say, back. Fully body allows me to have my "fun" exercises every time.
I suspect frequency is one of those things we can play around with to break through plateaus. If you stop making progress with 6 sets/workout 3x per week, try 18 sets/workout once per week, and vice versa. Might be that the best approach is to experiment with both.
So, I was taught by some rando old school 28 years ago that there are two 'best' ways to break through a plateau. The first is what most physiologists recommend and suggest: the tried and true method of adding small increments and 1-2 reps per set. Doing this will get you past that plateau. However, it is prolonged and anticlimactic. The second way was to reduce your working weight in half and go fast for high reps. So I couldn't get past 190 lbs for my max. Working sets of 165 lbs. My highschool gym didn't have less than 2.5 lbs weights and I couldn't even add 5 lbs past my max. My working weight was stagnant. I dropped down to 90 lbs and did 3- 100 rep sets. After months of adding to my working weight and not getting any gains, I finally tried to do this low weigh/high rep method. And it worked great. I got very tight, toned, ripped whatever looking. A month of the fast/high reps and I did 200 lbs without too much strain. As a heads up, don't expect your arms to function very much after the first few sets. I'm talking so weak that you need to use your shoulder to shift gears because your arm is just too heavy.
I switched back to bro splits after doing upper/lower for years. Bro splits are better, I got thicker, recovery is a million times better, I didn’t lose strength either, I like focusing on 1-2 muscles per workout sesh
Same. Focusing on one per workout slows me to go all out and focus on that one muscle group. Doing two or more, by mid or backend of the workout I don’t have the energy to really workout hard enough. Basically just grinding through to check the box.
When the muscle has recovered.... Train it again. The tricky part is that different muscles in different people recover differently. Also you need to use some muscles to train other muscles.
"When the muscle has recovered, train it again." This is how I used to think. After years of frequent "deloads" and altogether layoffs from the gym, I finally realized that just because muscles heal quickly does not mean connective tissue does too. I went bro splits and never looked back. No more joint pain and deloads every month. More is not better. Consistency over time is better. You cannot consistently stay in the gym if you are benching 3 plates, squatting 4 plates, etc, 2x a week. It's different for beginners and early intermediates, but once you actually get strong, you gotta figure out a way to not get destroyed by those weights. They will beat you down over time if you keep using high frequency.
@@JoshBenware Deloads should be done after a mesocycle, not monthly. Also if you frequently take time off from the gym you constantly have to re-introduce your body to the routine, you can't jump straight back in. "You cannot consistently stay in the gym if you are benching 3 plates, squatting 4 plates, etc, 2x a week" Uh, yes you can, that's what I do and have done for years at this point, with voluntary and unvoluntary deloads from time to time. What's your volume like? I do 3x6 mostly, currently squatting 205kg 3x6 twice a week.
So basically total weekly volume of sets within 8-12 rep range is what ultimately matters. Training frequency is a matter of personal preference dependent on an individual’s optimal recovery time ranging from 48-72 hours. Great insights from those studies 😊
The only studies that should be used to compare frequency is within subject designs where we compare the limbs in the same individual. This is the only true way to find significance of frequency. In studies that do this, we do see significant differences leaving in favor of frequency.
I have a full list of frequency studies, there is only one study that has done this: pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9560172/ (I made a video on this a while back, it indeed leans towards high frequencies, but it just one paper). I would love to see more within subject designs though :)
I’ve gone from going to the gym daily up to 7 days a week straight for years down to 6 days then I did 4 on 3 off I’ve done 3 on and 4 off I’ve done every other day and what I’ve gone down to now is only going on the weekend doing Back, Chest and Triceps on Saturday and Shoulders, Biceps and Legs on Sunday. I do not lift to failure not at all but I do workout intensely to work those muscles and get good growth and strength. What I have found for myself is that this weekend thing is it for me, I have an intense session I’m in the gym for up to 3 hours but it allows me the time I need to train and not get rushed I push myself. I definitely feel a lot more refreshed and stronger doing my routine in the weekend of having 5 days of rest. In the last 6 weeks I’ve added an average of 5 more pounds of weight in my bigger muscle groups, like my chest back and legs, my arms more specifically my biceps have increased in strength I’m almost curling 80lbs yes the right way, I don’t sway back and forth it’s me standing straight and my forearms are moving up and down, I have improved on my mind and muscle connection and range of motion. This routine of twice a week has definitely worked for me it’s been beneficial and it has helped me narrow down my weaknesses because I am not too concerned with my strengths as much as I am my weaknesses, my tri’s have taken a beating I’m not as strong but I do have a rotator cuff injury and I’ve definitely not given them as Much love so perhaps that’s in me. I love my 2 days 6-7 hours a week in training and 5 days off it’s worked for me,,,, people need to figure out what works for them working out isn’t a this works do this type thing, it’s complex in many ways but also very simple and plain in others
You might be getting confused, only the first survey was conducted on competitive bodybuilders. The data (35 studies with over 1,000 subjects) would not have included any subjects using steroids, since the inclusion criteria for these studies is to not have used anabolics
Love it. I have the hardest time recovering in time for when my next session is "supposed" to be. I've always felt a little guilty that I only train 2-3 times per week, but I keep getting stronger and bigger, so I don't sweat it. Whenever I try to increase frequency, I find I need to shorten my workouts to an unsatisfying length. Everybody's different.
I do a Full Body workout with weights twice in a week with 2 days inbetween each workout. On the immediate day after I do some Isolation work like Dumbbell Medial or Posterior Delt Fly's & Dumbbell Curls, 3 sets each. In the summer I also include Resistance Cardio work with Kettlebells & Dead Balls. I would also do 1hr20min marching in the park twice a week for calorie draining but regardless of how I switch things up I have 2 days a week of genuine rest.
Depends on recovery ability/discipline, individual response and interest level / motivation in the training program. Those factors are more important than min/maxing to whatever studies say.
I love the videos, and the quality continues to get better. But please tone down/reduce the texture effects on papers. At this high opacity, they're very distracting and could affect people with motion/vision issues.
Great video as always, you are really putting a high standard for this type of videos! But on a side note, would you consider reverse grip bench press as a good upper chest exercise? What if it is combined with an incline bench? I am really curious to know your insights on this!
Thank you my friend! See this video where we discuss all the upper pec options (including reverse grip even with an incline): th-cam.com/video/aqzJPzr5fYE/w-d-xo.html
Yes. It's the same in short term studies, but it's even better in the long run. You suffer less joint problems. Consistency is key. That's why in the pie chart he showed in the beginning, it showed the majority of top level competitors use bro splits. It's the same for top level natural bodybuilders as well.
Yes, and if you can learn how to train to failure (though you won't always need to) and how to manipulate drop sets and other intensity techniques you will get A LOT out of bro-splits with less joint issues and fatigue.
News flash - intensity and recoverability varys per person. I may be able to achieve a higher intensity failure set than someone else causing a substantially higher amount of damage and thus taking longer to recover vs another person. You should not follow any set guide until you standardize your protocol based on your own “feeling” of recoverability. You may have eaten and slept better the week leading up to a training session therefore your ability to achieve a much higher level of intensity in a set. Listen to your body. Assess how you feel and make a judgement call. Don’t go if you feel the slightest bit tired or sore. You will end up setting back the recovery you started and cause an even longer period of recovery, not healing, in order to grow and get stronger before the next session. If you can’t heal you won’t recover and get stronger and you won’t grow. Strength precedes growth.
So again, EVERYTHING WORKS. Being stuck in the minutia is a waste of time. Being consistent, eating adequately and appropriately for your goals and getting enough rest = growth. Just pick a plan and stick to it.
Its why i just lift 2 times a week now. Either full body set up or a 2 split. Play around with volume and intensity and do some cardio and conditioning on the side. Very flexible approach and sustainable also.
I suspect it's a simple as train to the degree your recovery allows with high intensity (either weight or reps) and you will get gains. Unfortunately for some who want a simple fix, you have to do the research for yourself and what works best for you.
For me it is consistency, if I go to the gym 5-6 times a week am happy, I do the same routine with super sets training different parts of my body for the cooldown between sets as I don't like spending hours in the gym, squats, leg press, leg extension, some pulling (seated row usually), sit ups, pull ups, goblet squat, lat pull downs, dips and some bicep dumbell work. I can see a big difference in my body in a couple of months. I just want to have muscle mass as I get older and not lose it, so this routine is good as I keep mixing the order about daily, but still manage to do 3 sets each in a super set format.
John Pelland, the author of the meta, talked on his podcast (Data Driven Strength) about how edema (and how difficult is to measure muscle size) could affect the results, especially for the high volume studies. So maybe the strength gains can also be a good indicative of actual hypertrophy, which would suggest that higher frequency should be better. Another point is that recoverable volume can also depend on how damaging the workout really is, so higher reps and exercises with a lot of "stretch" can cause more damage, which would interfere with the results (and might explain the wide bars in the graphs)
Just do max 80% of your strength, 3 times a week. If you have muscle pain, skip one. Overcomplicating things is only for super high level athletes surrounded by people with vast experience, knowledge and brains.
There are no long term differences between low and high frequency training, except for an increased risk of overtraining and tendonitis with high frequency. The same applies to volume: high volume might get you more gains in the short term, but over longer periods it evens out. But you do get an increased risk of overtraining and tendonitis with high volume. Interestingly, rep range may be different, as some people only respond well to a low rep range and some only to a high rep range.
Exponentiating the Y axis, muscle growth, makes your graphs super misleading. That line wouldn't trend near flat after 2 sets if it wasn't measuring growth in an exponential manner. Yes theres diminishing returns compared to going from 0 to 1 or 2 sets, and yes you won't DOUBLE muscle growth by going to 3 or 4 sets, but its nowhere near as minimal as your exponentiation makes it out to be
Don't forget this is training frequency, not sets. This is the graph chosen by the authors. The Y axis has to include that many values to fit in all the individual data points and the prediction intervals. The % increase in muscle size is adjusted based on control group data. Feel free to check out "datadrivenstrength" on TH-cam, it's the channel of the authors. They have a couple of podcasts going into great depths on the methods behind the analyses :)
One important metric is how long you train each session. In my opinion, one should not train for more than 1 hour the most preferably a little less. If you need more volume, increase the number of sessions. Training each muscle for 3 times a week is possible. A top athlete could train for 12+ hours a week, it means serious sacrifice. For an intermediate, 6 hours is good. 4 hours, even 3, still make good progress.
i've been experimenting on myself. i bumped my sets i did for my exercises in one day up to an absurd amount. example: 16 sets of bench (3-5 rep range, 9RPE), 12-16 sets on lat pulldowns (12 reps, 9RPE), seated OHP 8 sets (4-8 reps, 10RPE). split PPL. didn't have time for more than 2x workouts per week because I'm super busy working on this project that's taking all my time up so much so that i literally sat in a chair for two weeks straight with only a trip to the bathroom. completely under ate with minimal protein. didn't take any creatine. my results: stronger on bench stronger on lat pulldowns stronger on OHP i was shocked. but then i remembered it's about how many times you hit 5-10RPE (7RPE optimal for recovery, so i was pushing a bit too hard). i will say that my muscles were more sore than my typical workouts, about 2 days of soreness (but not debilitating by any means). so, i am still trying to balance out the '# of sets in a session : recovery" ratio, but i'd reckon it's around 8-12 sets for maximizing number of sets without being fatigued for longer than 1.5 days. so if they say the priority of muscle growth is: 1. stimulus 2. protein 3. calories 4. carbs (minimal effect) andddd i literally sat my butt in a chair for 95% of the time for those weeks and got stronger on the exercises, then it really shows how much "stimulus" trumps everything else. but i would enhance it a bit by saying: "amount of stimulus of doing hard reps (ie 7RPE)" so just optimize to hit 7RPE as many times as possible. you can only hit 7RPE once in a set. so you need to just do more sets. anyway this is anecdotal and i've been training with this extremely high volume in my workouts for about 5-6 weeks where i worked up from doing 3 sets prior to then doing 6-7 sets to then doing 16 sets on bench, for example. i'd recommend this to people that don't have any time during the week but can find time on the weekends to go to the gym for 4 hours for 2 days a week and just go absolutely all out on number of sets. it worked for me in my current work circumstance, except it does feel a bit weird to not go to the gym 5-6x per week and still get stronger lol.
As a student in the University of Physical Education in Athens, I have just started looking into studies and it is a mess 😂. I have to work on it if I want to be able to understand the results
Sports science spends quite a lot of time investigating things that were proven by actual science decades ago. It is a mess, and way less rigorous than, say, experimental psychology.
it depends on your rest and recovery. More doesn't mean better gains. You gotta take fatigue into account. If you already train really hardcore, you don't need much volume and frequency. i see better gains when I apply Mike Mentzer style.
Depends on your goal. 2x a week of 30 minutes is the best benchmark for longevity. Greater than 1 hour per week there's a correlation to reduced lifespan. But go for muscle mass if you want. V02 max is better imo :)
Can't wait till we get to the point of examining training frequencies outside the 7 day "prison" 3x every 2 weeks? 5x every 3 weeks? 3 or 4x every 10 days? So many possibilities, yet always the 7 day box. I understand why this is the most frequent timeframe, but doesnt have to be the ONLY one, and I dont think many ppl would be that adverse to experimenting with it if they thought it meant better overall results/health
@@brandonbeckius3799 efficiency is not the priority for me. I'm gaining between 0.75 - 1.0 kg per month every month at 50 at 15% body fat (winter %). I still eat what I want (but not quantity) go hiking, cycling, running and rucking. When I did 6 days every week, after 6-8 weeks I started to feel weak, like I had a cold but now I'm fine.
Cool study. Ive been doing 1 set of pullups with leg raise daily and 4 sets of pushups (2 sets of Mike Tyson pushups and 2 sets of decline pushups) 15 each daily as well. I'm not sure if its the best approach, but I'm willing to see it out on my weight loss journey. Maybe there's a better way out there to increase my numbers🤔
Bear in mind this is a meta analysis, not a single RCT. This data is a lot stronger than a single study. Again, as I've replied to your other comments, you might have misinterpreted some of my previous content, but consider what I've said in this video as my most updated thoughts :)
So, that data set shows a complete flatline going from 2-3 times a week. What I know from experience is that, some bodyparts, due to their fiber type and amounts recover faster than others. In general in my experience, smaller muscles recover faster than larger ones. For example, medial delts and biceps recover faster than quads. This is my experience and observation. Train large muscles once a week, train smaller ones twice a week, fractionally. So, do biceps on a push day, triceps on a pull day, legs should get their own day.
I went from full body (8-9 exercises, ~34 working sets) 4x a week to a upper lower split (5-6 exercises, ~22 working sets) 6x a week (same 8-12 rep range, with myo-rep matched sets for both programs). After changing from full body to upper lower split I achieved more weekly volume in less time (more SS in my upper lower split and lowered rest times from 3min to 2min). Within a week I was able to increase the weight on most of my exercises where as over the past 8 (on full body) I physically wasn't able to add more weight and stay withing my target rep range. In my case specifically increasing my frequency and tuning my program (contrasting SS + lower rest times) meant that I spent less time in the gym (weekly) than my previous 4 day full body program while increasing total weekly volume which quickly led to strength gains. IMHO doing too many exercises all in one session (aka Full Body) just burns you out and prevented me from gaining strength. I'll give the bro split a try but I don't think it fits my style of training past failure with myo-rep matching sets (aka first set I usually fail at 12 reps, the following sets I fail between 6-10 reps having to rest pause for 5-20 seconds to finish off the set to 12 reps). I do the myo-rep sets because it dramatically increases my total training volume with very little additional time and doesn't seem to cause too much fatigue when training in higher rep range (lower weight). Maybe a bro split for strength training would fit my style best (without myo-rep's).
Something that helped me with that same problem, doing top/back off sets. Example- Barbell inc bench-225×8 for top set, then 185x15 for the back off set. You can take them both to failure, and it takes very little time to recover going to the back off set, because it's a different stress (not heavy, not requiring as much from slow twitch muscles). From there you change exercises, maybe the inc dumbell press doing the same approach. Rinse and repeat fir a total of 4 exercises (8 sets) of all out failure training and you're good!
@@JoshBenware I definitely would get more quick, quality volume in with back off sets for different muscle fibres types. I honestly haven't thought of back off sets / drop sets in this way. I'll give it a try. Thanks!
Looking at the way natural bodybuilders structure their training, with top sets, I think that a higher frequency can be more effective if you don't do every set until muscle failure, perhaps 1 or 2 RIR, so that recovery can be greater and the next workout is more likely to have a progressive overload
the way ive done it in the past, growing from 135 to 155 in the span of 8 months, is... -day 1: chest, bicepts and finish with a light core work out -day 2: back, tricepts and finish with a light core work out -day 3: legs and finish with a light core work out -day 4: shoulders and a more difficult core work out The days that you do it: monday, tuesday, wednesday, thursday or sunday, tuesday, thursday, saturday; didn't seem to have a massive impact on how quickly I put on muscle or weight but spacing a day did help with overall recovery and mental stability of not feeling overwhelmed. Lastly, most say diet is a key factor, but I was eating twice a day; cereal in the morning and usually chic fil a for dinner sometimes subway instead. So once again, what it looks like it always comes down to, experiment with what works for you and your body and take the necessary steps and procedures to get out with what you're willing to put in.
Why do core workout every day of training? You can skip the core workout all together if you're doing compounds like squats, rows, deadlifts. Also you could just put all that into two workouts per week and be way more time-efficient. You still have newbie-gains so you don't need to be that on point with your exercise selection, frequency and diet, but that day will come if you keep at it.
@iliketoast-q9b its because your core is really close to your lungs. The recovery rate for your core is much better than the rest of your body. You can build a very strong core by consistently working it out
@@iliketoast-q9b spouting off that, without doing any research is crazy. Literally go look it up. Besides I said light work outs for core after hitting other muscles groups. Like I said in the original comment, figure out what works for your body. For me, it's this. Touch grass
@matthewlogan8804 Mate, I've been doing weightlifting for 7 years now. I can squat a quarter ton, so my core is stronger than yours probably ever will be. No, your core muscles do not recover faster than others. Your calves do however and they are very far from your lungs. By your logic chest muscles should recover fast as well...and they don't.
Unless I'm mistaken, his point is most frequency studies use "unrecoverable" volumes. He describes that a few of the studies using "recoverable" volumes show a benefit for higher frequency. However, as shown in this video, when assessing the overall data using the "recoverable" vs "uncoverable" metrics, there's still not a clear benefit of frequency (timestamp: 5:50 ) - moreover, I do not necessarily fully agree with the "recoverable" values, as described later in the video :)
@@HouseofHypertrophyThe "recoverable" and "unrecoverable" volumes were not equated though. 3 sets 3x/w is 9 weekly, 5 sets 2x/w is 10, and 12 sets 1x/w is obviously 12. They should have looked at 4 sets 3x/w, 6 sets 2x/w and 12 sets 1x/w to equate volume.
But according to Chris’ faq and the podcast there are only two studies on frequency using recoverable volumes. In trained lifters that is. Both showing better outcomes for higher frequency….
If you are a pencil neck trying to get better at lifting I suggest to train on a program for one year and then start to learn how to train instinctually. Understand in life you have to take risks to win big. Only thing you should be aware of is the difference and importance of warming up to working sets, how to maximize growth hormone, percieved and true failure, cortisol regulation (stress), protein, sleep and practice risky ego lifts occasionally. Thats it.
I do push, pull, legs alternating days on and off and have been getting good results for 3 months 🤷🏻♂️. I think it's productive to change up one routine scheduling just like we do our exercises to keep the muscles second guessing always!!
basically everyone is different, unless you have an identical twin, genetics are different, older folks recover slower than young squirts, there are many paths that can get you to your overall goals, consistency seems to be the only "consistent" value, (along with sleep, sufficient amounts of protein and lots of water and for me NO ALCOHOL). if you like the results you see after say 6 months, you are on the right track, if you dont, then up reps, up weight, up TUT, if you are only working out one day a week per body "area" then go to two days a week. Hell, I do a morning warm up routine and then later in the afternoon come back and hit it very hard and very heavy, mornings are slower, lighter, with more TUT. afternoons are 3 sets with max weight where I can get 6 to 8 reps and that would be close to failure, with slow only on the eccentric portion of the rep. it works for me! I have been criticized so much that I just no longer care. I am 61 and I love the results that I see in the mirror after starting this journey 3 years ago. I still listen to the "research" I am still open to ideas, but as far as a one size fits all??? hell, not even the pros agree on everything...
I train the same muscles every second day (an upper/lower body split), to constantly have a good pump, it feels great. But now I know, that at least I'm not losing any potential gains.
How did frequency stimulate diet? Calorie intake makes a huge difference. You can't just increase frequency and expect the person to eat the same. Also Its impossible not to do more sets with more frequency because to lift safely for example to squat or deadlift 700 lbs you have to warm up with 200 300 400 500 and 600. Those warmups add overall volume. So the person who trains 1 day per week is going to have to do their warm up weights and sets multiplied by a factor of 3 times in one session keep the same volume as the 3 day per week person. Once a person achieves elite strength status their squat session can last an 45min-1hr due to all the warmups and sets. Fitting the same volume into one day would turn the squat session into 2-3 hours. Typically the one day per week crew wants to do other exercises for their legs besides squatting for that long
No. Muscle growth when looking at the same overall weekly volume might be identical but bro splits are time-inefficient. Supersetting back and chest excercises works well and saves a ton of time. Or supersetting back + triceps and chest + biceps excercises. This is by definition not possible with a bro split. You can cut your time in the gym almost in half for the same growth stimulus. Also, not doing bro splits does increase maximum total volume per muscle group. Try hitting your chest 24 sets a week in a single session. 8 sets of incline bench press, 8 sets of dumbbell fly, 8 sets of deficit pushups or dips. That'd be insane. Now, doing it twice means 3 excercises for 4 sets, that's the same volume but is now actually doable.
@@classicallpvault You're wrong. "time-inefficient" is a subjective factor so its totally irellevant when judging hypertrophy objectively. I don't want supersets under any circumstance. They feel horrible, systemic fatigue and CNS is destroyed for both exercises when you don't rest between sets. I would never ever do supersets unless gym is literally about to close. I rest minimum 2-6 minutes between sets. And no, not doing bro splits does not have to increase maxium total volume. volume is an independent factor that you chose seperately and when volume is equated frequency doesn't matter i.e. bro-splits are just as effective. 24 sets/week is COMPLETELY unnessescary, but if you insist on 24 sets a week then you will get the same gains whether u do em all in 1 day versus divided over 3. bro split means u only train that bodypart. you have nothing else to do. try doing 8 sets for chest 3 times a week on TOP of other muscle groups.
A well-designed bro split can hit muscles multiple times through fractional sets. Example: Do chest on Monday (giving triceps ~6 partial sets from 12 chest sets), then hit triceps directly on Wednesday with exercises like weighted dips. Both muscles benefit from these overlapping workouts. Same idea with back and biceps
This isn't an mma channel. Punching power takes the entire kinetic chain from the ground to the hand, it's not just a few exercises but training the whole body
I prefer more frequency because I can apply more intensity as I know I have less sets. Performing 12+ sets in a session is hard to maintain high levels of intensity
You say the literature shows no evidence that more frequency is better yet in multiple videos in the past you've cited studies showing more training frequency leads to more growth. In a video a year ago you said the exact opposite of what you're saying in this one, saying that the scientific data shows that more frequency is better. Now you're acting like you dont even remember all the studies you talked about before. Youre not saying like " I was wrong about X because Y" you're saying this like you've never even talked about tbis before lol
For me what is working perfectly is 2 sets/muscle for a full body workout, 6 days/week. In the past I had 4 sets/muscle for 3/days per week and it was not really that good. Some weeks where I don't want to be very tired during the day, I just do 1 set/muscle and it's also great. Generally I enjoy more the routine of full body workouts with 1-2 sets/muscle and low recovery time. Most of the time I can combine this to "speedrun" all my sets by mixing the exercises, so 1 set for chest, 1 for back, 1 for shoulders and then repeat. This way I can keep the resting period to zero (well, let's say 10 seconds to get to the new position etc.). You can get out of breath at times so you need to stop and rest but it is more sparse.
8:54 a six week study is not long enough to assess the recoverability of a workout regime; many (trained, even) athletes can handle a 6 week cycle of a stress load that would cause them injury if they sustained it indefinitely. this matters when discussing load and recovery in the context of planning an individualized workout schedule
Comparing Apples with Beans. Researching muscle growth in already experienced bodybuilders with little to none more left potential, that are probably on PEDs. 1 group doing 12 sets while 1 is doing 9 sets per week. 1 Group does 3 different exercises once per week while other groups are not doing 3 different exercises 3x per week, instead splitting up the exercises over the week... As long as they make such studies I trust more in the experiences of successful people.
![เป็นไปได้ไหม - WanMai [Performance Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/Eh5hItD4Mr0/mqdefault.jpg)
Hey All! Feel free to check out the Alpha Progression App: alphaprogression.com/HouseofHypertrophy
Timestamps:
0:00 Intro
1:08 Part I: The New Data
9:28 Part II: What Should You Do?
these are probably the most useless timestamps I've ever seen.
0:00 Start
13:04 End
Best training is training to fatigue 3 days sore muscular growth
My bro and I we do 18 to 24 sets per session. 😂 Once a week..
*Wut IF I am a Sissy, & I Don't Go to the ==> Failure
A new study came out, Time to change all my life around
That is the ONLY way!!!
The discussion is about a meta-analysis of several studies, which is different. The best thing seems to be to be consistent, put in a lot of effort into each training session, be mindful of what you are targeting and to give your body time to recover. The rest is less important.
Lmao that's what I thought when I saw "were bros right?"
Your dedication to science is an inspiration.
lol, right?
The best split training frequency is the one you can consistently do and execute right now.
yeaah!
Thanks for covering our study!
Thank YOU for the insane amount of work you guys have been doing. I really enjoyed the pods you've been putting out too!
Since you are doing the study? What is the conclusion, please? How much training should I/we do? Or it depends on the individual?
Gonna try my 625 shoulder press sets in 1 day for the whole next year. I'll keep you posted 😜
Now this is real training, prepare for the steroid accusations
Yes you need to rest for 1 year to see progress
good one 😂 @@Omar.0009
Rich Piana approved workout 💪
Damn right. Work lasts eight hours a day, five days a week. Keep pressing.
Hulk Hogan found the secret years ago, he would train once in the US, then fly across the international date line to Japan, train again, then wrestle. That way he could train 400 days a year, and still manage recovery. Takes a lot of prayers and vitamins to maintain that schedule brother!
U stupid 😂. Joking
There are 365 days in a year
@Ra1ner9 Yes....yes there are. Which is why the statement is preposterous. But he claimed it, none the less....
@@Ra1ner9 false
That works for me, brother.
Much love.
-HH.
2x a week per muscle group while hammering the shit out of them and training beyond failure with partials to ensure I feel beat up the next day is what made me start seeing noticeable growth again
Base your training on how long it takes to recover and the training style that fits your schedule and habits
Great Scott! You figured it out. This is the method I use, and it's amazing. You have to let your muscles recover or they will never grow. You will actually get smaller, weaker and worse joints.
2x a week per muscle group is most likely 6x a week working out if not more. That’s too much if you’re strong
Once you get strong you can only do 4x a week maybe 5 at most
@@ci6516 And the Gym rats ruin the theory again
Im doing pretty much the same, although I have my doubts about my split, how do you split it?
This is the kind of content that I keep coming back for: real research, real answers, delivered clearly and succinctly
I appreciate that my friend, thank you :)
I was already 2x Armed Forces Bodybuilding Champion when I went to Physical Therapy school. It was there that I realized what crap studies are in general. I would take this study with a grain of salt. I can already see the huge flaws in this study. The study was conducted on 35 bodybuilders. Pros? Guys in the gym claiming to be bodybuilders? People in their 2nd year of bodybuilding or their 15th year? Half and half...a mix of both? The outcome will matter greatly. For example...guys that have been training serious for 10 years or more will most likely see very little results no matter what regiment they followed compared to men who have been BB for less than 3 years. Its like taking a group of runners...some can run sub 5 minute miles and some sub 10 minute miles. What group do you think is going to show the most likely improvements from the same study? Not the sub 5's. They are already at the end range of human ability. Same with bodybuilders. I would honestly say not much has changed in hypertrophy in the last 40 years. According to todays research, almost every bodybuilder from the most epic time in history were all training wrong but yet all had the very best physiques compared to today. I would honestly think of "different" and "new" ways to train as a new and different diet that just came out. How many people can lose 30 lbs? Millions. Some eat no meat...some no carbs...some a mix of both. Some do cardio...some do not. Consistency with training and eating at the two biggest factors in hypertrophy. Lifting is last. Everyone is bench pressing. Everyone is squatting. So why can some men put on a lot more muscle than others. Aside from drugs, it is #1 food. #2 consistency #3 sleep and #4 training. It has nothing to do with if you "do" or "do not" supinate your wrist when you curl. This is what people who make videos want you to believe because 98% of all Bodybuidling could be summed up in a single magazine. BUT...there would be nothing to write about next month...or next year...or ten years later....hence...we have a video like this. Meant to do good...but adds more to the confusion than anything else.
@@garrydye2394 lol studies are very important and tell a lot. It just depends on the researchers. If this video was quality they'd explain how this was conducted
70 sets of Triceps on Monday, not for hypertrophy, but to impress Stacey.
While you're doing 70 sets of triceps to impress Stacey, Chad is doing 70 sets of blowing her back out 💀
The burn is soo deep.
@@93RG bruuutal
I have been stalling in my progression for some years and it really demotivated me. Reducing frequency was the key. I trained most muscle groups 3 times per week and usually I just got worse with every workout. Now I just have 1 direct and one indirect session for my upper body muscles and I finally see some progression again. after 4 years of not going anywhere. And I have to say not feeling totally fatigued when going to the gym really brought back the fun.
look into mike Mentzer
4 fucking years? You didn't think to change something sooner? 😭
@@MaxisBallinonaBudget Your mom is a demanding woman. It takes a lot to work on her physique and your own physique at the same time. Poor guy was all tuckered out.
@@MaxisBallinonaBudget Since lifting isn't my primary sport and I mostly train a lot of endurance as well, it didn't really bothered me too much to not progress any further. I'm training since I'm 16 and my build is quite alright. Thing is if you overtrain you get sick a lot, which then made me increase the volume as soon as I got fit again.
Decreasing frequency never seemed to be the right choice, I always felt like I didn't do enough.
@CLONisKING I tend to overtrain as well, I feel like I'm not doing anything if I do give 100% effort every time. It's an experience thing you learn the longer you do it that truly less is more sometimes.
My experience as a natty and steroid user was this;
Everything comes down to recovery. It is very difficult for most individuals to make progress EVERYWHERE on the body, on an ongoing basis. When trying to hit calves, quads, biceps, triceps, shoulders, chest, abs and back, every week, with sufficient effort for stimulus... the result in gains are SLOOWW....
I recall decided at one time that my quads were really falling behind. I made the decision to squat 3x/week (20 rep squats). All other muscle groups were trained at a 1x/week frequency but the intensity was very low, we're talking nowhere near failure, whereas the effort poured into the squatting was absolutely maximum. I did this for about 3 months and the results were staggering. My upper body and limbs remained whilst my quads indeed caught up (to the point I was actually being complimented on them).
The lesson here, at least for me (and I think countless others), is that it is extremely difficult to make the entire body grow together, at once. Sometimes you need some specialisation, a deliberate reduction in intensity and cruising on some muscles in order to leave reserves for adaptation to occur.
As a PT I met many interesting individuals, one guy in particular stuck in my head. All he liked to do was bench and curl, he did it frequently, and he was strong and big (as a natural benching 3 plates aside). He also had an impressive back despite never really doing any chins or rows. He was not even weak in the legs either, basically he was gifted genetically. But the question remains, how can someone get such a well developed back, quads etc, when really never directly or indirectly training them? I would argue adaptation can occur more widespread than we think, and the necessity to train all muscle groups with the same attention is probably a flawed way to go about things. Choose 1-2 exercises only, do them 3-4x/week, watch what happens...
You sound like you like watching and thinking about men's bodies a lot. Maybe you should get a new hobby.
I believe what you say is true to an extent though I've seen some gym rats who have massive arms and chests, and skinny legs.
Thanks for sharing. I will try and see what happens.
Mentzer was onto something. When you are on a gram of test and taking anadrol twice a day, all that changes.
@@kwimms Why if that makes them happy and keeps their mind occupied about stuff like that and isn't even hurting anyone by doing it? There are so much worse things he could do, especially if you have people get bored and irritated by forbidding them to do harmless things like that. Just let people live man...
Recovery is a problem when you're old (63) & down to your last thimble-full of testosterone. I had to adjust my upper/lower split to 3 workouts per week instead of 4 because I wasn't recovering properly between workouts. It meant I only trained the whole body 3 times per fortnight but it did the trick. So age is also a factor in recovery & frequency.
Ever considered TRT?
God bless you, why you don't use trt sir? I see studies support it
I'm 63 and split my body into 3 areas - pushing muscles upper body, legs, and pulling muscles upper body.
I work out twice a week, so each muscle group gets worked about every 10 days.
At 63, I'm obviously not growing, but this schedule feels pretty good.
Any more and I get niggling soreness in areas!!
@@mikthe2004 I am much younger and believe that around 10 days is the sweet spot to repeat training regimen.
You could see increases in strength if you practice progressive overload within that schedule, as long as you've had ample sleep/nutrition between sessions
I'm 59 and also follow the upper/lower split 3 days per week. Getting 4-5 days of rest for each muscle group is a schedule that is sustainable long term. I even slightly increased the volume by one extra set per muscle group to make up for the lower frequency. This has worked out just fine.
Wide bars may indicate large individual differences. When I tried once/week I was brutally sore and made no progress, I made best progress with 3/week and nice to not get brutally sore.
The wide credible intervals technically point to uncertainty in the average results. But indeed the variation between studies could be related to individual differences!
Very interesting to hear your experience!
as do most other normal people (me 2) that is why studies with PED enhanced, bodybuilders with 10+ years of training are a wast of time for people that want to be fit, healthy and not look like a brown colored marshmallow.
What I've found is you adapt to your training routine. I've done 5x5 squats 5 days a week at 80% 1rm for 5 weeks (ran this block twice) and while at first I was sore after a week or two I was no longer sore almost ever (happened even faster in the second block).
Incidentally, I made crazy gains in both size, definition and strength in my legs during those blocks.
@@uncreativepanda wow, getting gainz with that high frequenzy AND high volume sounds fascinating. Did you JUST do backsquats or did you do any other exercises?
Until the next study comes out next year 👍
With the thumbnail being like 'Do you even NEED to train to grow muscle? 🤔"
All the studies are pretty consistent though
@@pokemonbacon1237 Consistently contradictory.
.. Two caveats to this analysis; 1) Quality Vs. quantity will profoundly affect the end result. Limiting the number of sets for the sake of spreading out frequency over multiple times per week will in effect; affect intensity. Volume in of itself is in fact also a factor toward building up to an optimal threshold of intensity. The concept of dividing sessions for each muscle group into more than one session per week is self limiting because certain amount of volume combined with high intensity is necessary to achieve optimal growth stimulus. The indirect effect of compound movements on other training days therefore adequately compensate for the arguable need for additional frequency when training a target muscle once per week 2) An advanced individual is capable of moving heavier loads than a beginner therefore the total tonnage for the week will be much heavier thus creating greater inroads toward recovery .. These studies were probably performed on individuals who had not been training for very long, so these studies cannot be applied across the board for all individuals depending on the level they are at and the said variables .. And that's just coming from years in the trenches in an effort to almost impossibly put more muscle on to this mediocre genetics frame
Exactly.
Ive just wrote pretty much he same before seeing your comment.
the whole 'quality of sets' spread out through the week being one of those things which looks good in theory if only looking at optimising one muscle group but falls apart once you try applying that to any real world training. (unless talking about beginners then id advise high frequency is best for them)
More frequency requires more overall volume per workout and more muscle groups hit [per workout which means each workout only one muscle group is really reaping any optimal benefits. even if cycling excercise selection and priority through out the week it only then balances out to a lesser quality some days than others,
In which case you may as well forget about high frequency being 'optimal'
@@papaspaulding Well it ultimately ends with full body 3 times a week. I do that bod legs only one day, because i already walk a hell lot during work, so i do that for the weekends only. But like the video suggest, always needs to fit your lifestyle. I am a little surprised people think 3 sets is the limit to recover from in 72 hours. 9 sets per week really isn't all that much.
19 missed calls from Mike Mentzer.
and dorian yates
😂😂😂😂
Just listen to your body people. Muscle soreness/fatigue should be your own natural indicator whether you are doing too much or too little.
No, the soreness goes away after some frequent traning, so you can easily overtrain a muscle, i got golfers elbow from too much traning/climbing and had only low soreness all the time
@@banker3417 that is why he also mentions to listen to your body and the fatigue.
I reduced my training to half and now look better than ever. I might have trained way too much.
@@banker3417because you are an idiot right? Its not overtrain its under recover
Can you say what half is for you?@@Fubarpapa to clarify, if you normally worked 4 sets you cut back to 2, so what was your normal routine vs the halved routine?
Correct me if I’m wrong, but this says frequency doesn’t matter much when total volume is equal. With muscles taking around 72 hours to recover, I don’t see why this doesn’t support hitting each muscle group twice per week. Because realistically you’re not going to be doing DOUBLE the volume hitting a muscle once per week, so it just stands to reason that twice per week per muscle group makes the most sense if you have the time for it.
I use to think this. As you get stronger over time, you begin to realize that just because the muscles can recover in 1-3 days does not mean connective tissue can. That is why the majority of top level competitors (including naturals) use bro splits. The guys doing higher frequency end up spending 1/4 of there time deloading 😂. In the long run, bro splits are much more sustainable, and building muscle is about consistency over many years, not what gets the best results in a 3 month study.
@@JoshBenware connective tissue benefits more from frequent training and higher volume when we adjust down weight. bro splits compensate for this weakness with time instead of actually addressing the problem. train it all
@@ChamplooMusashi you'll figure out if you ever get strong
"With muscles taking around 72 hours to recover". That's so much less relevant than we used to think.
@@ChamplooMusashi lol
House of However 😂
Appreciate your work, bro.
Absolutely smashing it once again with the content. Appreciate the time and effort gone into this - very informative. Gives me more confidence in my current hybrid routine of Legs/Push/Pull/Lower/Upper.
Thank you my friend, I'm wishing you continued gainz!
I've been lifting and reading exercise articles for 38 yrs. I train full-body 3 x week, 1 exercise/bodypart, 5 sets/ exercise @ roughly 60+% of 1RM w/1 min rest between sets. It's a good solid pace with appropriately difficult weight. I have minor soreness the next day.
I think consistently training to failure is mentally unsustainable and will lead to dreading the gym.
Like the specifics of this video, depends on the individual. I've gotten my best progress by training to failure and it has the added benefit of tending towards fewer sets to be the most efficient. I don't have a single exercise where I need to hit 8+ sets to properly target muscles so I'm in, out, and feeling my best in less time. Makes for far better workout sessions on top of better gains.
If someone finds going to failure makes working out something they want to avoid then yeah, probably isn't the way to go for them. Still, the science says that will produce the best results and be the most efficient.
@@Prototyp3m1nd how much sets per muscle does it takes for you then, when training to failure ?
This made my day better, it’s been rough so far but thank you brother man :)
I hope everything gets better my friend! Much love 💪
Don't forget also that, as more you go into your dailies workouts, some type of exercises and how intense you are performing will also accumulate fatigue in general and you may need more rest which is perfectly fine. There's no straight line in life, thus in exercise it's the same, some weeks you are still recovering from fatigue but you can exercise just not to the failure point. Some weeks you are fully recovered and you can go as normally you do.
The type of exercises like I mention can also be a cause of your huge fatigue weekly, when you reach your final days of working out (last two I would say). For example: if you do dead lifts on your back day and on the next day you do legs, you will feel huge fatigue, so try to switch some exercises (especially the compounds ones) so you can have a good performance all the week.
Ofc, some weeks you want to test yourself a bit more and it's ok if you only train for 3 days, or you change the workout flow, instead of starting with chest you start with back, these tiny changes plus the rest periods are enough, you don't need to do more than 4 sets and 14874 thousand exercises, Quality over quantity always! Why? Your joints, ligaments and tendons are not like muscle fibers tissue. Blessings all and keep going! :D
I love the house of hypertrophy
You are too kind
I like turtles
@@agentgear but do you like em when they shit on your porch
Excellent job compiling relevant research. Solid A for presentation too. I appreciate all of your videos and they've really helped inform my own training.
Today starts my own experiment with recoverable volume by doing a 3-day full body split that scales up in total volume over the course of 16 weeks. I'm alternating an A and a B day (first week A B A, second week B A B, etc) with each day having a different strength focus. Ex: A1 and A2 both have the same exercises, but A1 bench press focuses on 4-6 reps sets eventually adding a single and a double vs A2 bench press sets go to 8-12 reps.
A1 - bench press focus
A2 - weighted pull-up focus
B1 - zercher squat focus
B2 - sumo dl focus
My hope is to see if eating at maintenance (2700-2800kcal, 150-180g protein / day) and leveraging the repeat bout effect, I can tolerate the mix of strength focus and hyperyrophy focus and come out bigger and stronger from it.
(Not plugging for any gain, but anyone interested can see the full program on boostcamp looking up Caedo v13)
00:19 what’s with that flashing effect on the paper?
How strong, efficient and how hard someone trains are huge factors that's overlooked
wow, it happened. your channel went viral. I knew this would happen. Last I looked it was at a few hundred subs. Congrats dude
I go off of Mentzer’s teaching. Don’t workout until a few days after you feel fully recovered. This lets your body repair that hole you dug into it and put more dirt on top of it.
I absolutley love these videos. That flickering effect made it really hard to watch though. lol my brain did NOT like that. I thought my computer was broken.
The ideal number of days to train a muscle per week varies between individuals and also varies for the same individual depending on age and training state. When you just amalgamate the results over the general population you will get the results as per the graph in this video.
The general principle is that the more trained you are (i.e. the closer you are to your genetic limit) the less days per week you should train a muscle, simply because you need a longer recovery time. (This general principle may not apply if you are a genetic freak or on PEDs).
As an example when I started training, I could bench press 3 days a week, and grow well on that - because I was only benching 75 lb (so the damage done in a workout could be fully recovered from in 2 days). Later as I got close to or at my genetic limit I could only bench press once a week, because I was benching 315 lb for 8 reps and there is no way known I was doing that 3 or even just 2 times a week and recovering (very, very easy to test and prove to yourself).
Today at age 58 I bench 100kg for 12 to 14 reps and while I can do that once a week, I recover better (as in don’t get run down) if I do that once a fortnight (alternating with military/overhead press the other week).
There are exceptions: For example I once attended a Lee Priest seminar and he claimed to workout everyday - and it was clearly working for him (so you can ignore what I said if you have amazing genetics and/or are on PEDs). In the early days I tried training 6 day a week and my body just fell apart like there was no tomorrow. By a process of trial and error it is not that hard to work out what is the correct number of days to train a muscle group for you.
Reference : Me :)
Regarding your bench : how many sets were you doing per session when training 3x/week, and then when training once/week with 315 ?
Just recently went back to full body. Upper lower was nice but I want no more than 3x a week training lol
So even a push/pull/leg 3-day split is fair game too? I guess.
@kobemop Yeah it is. But tbh sometimes I look forward to say.. delts every single time. But despite say, back.
Fully body allows me to have my "fun" exercises every time.
I suspect frequency is one of those things we can play around with to break through plateaus.
If you stop making progress with 6 sets/workout 3x per week, try 18 sets/workout once per week, and vice versa.
Might be that the best approach is to experiment with both.
I think that's a great suggestion!
I'm starting to gain strength again training each muscle group once a week. I was stuck and this change has helped me recover.
So, I was taught by some rando old school 28 years ago that there are two 'best' ways to break through a plateau. The first is what most physiologists recommend and suggest: the tried and true method of adding small increments and 1-2 reps per set. Doing this will get you past that plateau. However, it is prolonged and anticlimactic.
The second way was to reduce your working weight in half and go fast for high reps. So I couldn't get past 190 lbs for my max. Working sets of 165 lbs. My highschool gym didn't have less than 2.5 lbs weights and I couldn't even add 5 lbs past my max. My working weight was stagnant. I dropped down to 90 lbs and did 3- 100 rep sets. After months of adding to my working weight and not getting any gains, I finally tried to do this low weigh/high rep method. And it worked great. I got very tight, toned, ripped whatever looking. A month of the fast/high reps and I did 200 lbs without too much strain. As a heads up, don't expect your arms to function very much after the first few sets. I'm talking so weak that you need to use your shoulder to shift gears because your arm is just too heavy.
I've never benefitted from this.
@@LaTrueMythosONE HUNDRED???
I switched back to bro splits after doing upper/lower for years. Bro splits are better, I got thicker, recovery is a million times better, I didn’t lose strength either, I like focusing on 1-2 muscles per workout sesh
Same. Focusing on one per workout slows me to go all out and focus on that one muscle group. Doing two or more, by mid or backend of the workout I don’t have the energy to really workout hard enough. Basically just grinding through to check the box.
When the muscle has recovered.... Train it again. The tricky part is that different muscles in different people recover differently. Also you need to use some muscles to train other muscles.
"When the muscle has recovered, train it again." This is how I used to think. After years of frequent "deloads" and altogether layoffs from the gym, I finally realized that just because muscles heal quickly does not mean connective tissue does too. I went bro splits and never looked back. No more joint pain and deloads every month.
More is not better. Consistency over time is better. You cannot consistently stay in the gym if you are benching 3 plates, squatting 4 plates, etc, 2x a week. It's different for beginners and early intermediates, but once you actually get strong, you gotta figure out a way to not get destroyed by those weights. They will beat you down over time if you keep using high frequency.
@@JoshBenware Deloads should be done after a mesocycle, not monthly. Also if you frequently take time off from the gym you constantly have to re-introduce your body to the routine, you can't jump straight back in. "You cannot consistently stay in the gym if you are benching 3 plates, squatting 4 plates, etc, 2x a week" Uh, yes you can, that's what I do and have done for years at this point, with voluntary and unvoluntary deloads from time to time. What's your volume like? I do 3x6 mostly, currently squatting 205kg 3x6 twice a week.
@iliketoast-q9b I no longer have to do deloads because I use bro splits now.
@@JoshBenware If you needed to do deloads monthly you seriously overdid it on the volume-side, or your recovery was messed up.
@@iliketoast-q9b problem solved. Bro splits, never have to deload.
So basically total weekly volume of sets within 8-12 rep range is what ultimately matters. Training frequency is a matter of personal preference dependent on an individual’s optimal recovery time ranging from 48-72 hours. Great insights from those studies 😊
And yet, people who work un construction, lifting the same heavy ish everyday get jacked
I train 1-2 sets per each body part once every 12-15 days and I am getting bigger and stronger. Mike Mentzer method
More like 5-30
@@brcageand injured. Overuse injuries in that industry are crazy high.
@@zooner7256 sure, and some are fine. Depends on how responsible they were with their joints.
The only studies that should be used to compare frequency is within subject designs where we compare the limbs in the same individual. This is the only true way to find significance of frequency.
In studies that do this, we do see significant differences leaving in favor of frequency.
I have a full list of frequency studies, there is only one study that has done this: pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9560172/ (I made a video on this a while back, it indeed leans towards high frequencies, but it just one paper). I would love to see more within subject designs though :)
I’ve gone from going to the gym daily up to 7 days a week straight for years down to 6 days then I did 4 on 3 off I’ve done 3 on and 4 off I’ve done every other day and what I’ve gone down to now is only going on the weekend doing Back, Chest and Triceps on Saturday and Shoulders, Biceps and Legs on Sunday. I do not lift to failure not at all but I do workout intensely to work those muscles and get good growth and strength. What I have found for myself is that this weekend thing is it for me, I have an intense session I’m in the gym for up to 3 hours but it allows me the time I need to train and not get rushed I push myself. I definitely feel a lot more refreshed and stronger doing my routine in the weekend of having 5 days of rest. In the last 6 weeks I’ve added an average of 5 more pounds of weight in my bigger muscle groups, like my chest back and legs, my arms more specifically my biceps have increased in strength I’m almost curling 80lbs yes the right way, I don’t sway back and forth it’s me standing straight and my forearms are moving up and down, I have improved on my mind and muscle connection and range of motion. This routine of twice a week has definitely worked for me it’s been beneficial and it has helped me narrow down my weaknesses because I am not too concerned with my strengths as much as I am my weaknesses, my tri’s have taken a beating I’m not as strong but I do have a rotator cuff injury and I’ve definitely not given them as
Much love so perhaps that’s in me.
I love my 2 days 6-7 hours a week in training and 5 days off it’s worked for me,,,, people need to figure out what works for them working out isn’t a this works do this type thing, it’s complex in many ways but also very simple and plain in others
Once again, another top tier video!
Thank you my friend!
That was indeed a great study. Props to the authors of the study
steriods play a huge role in these studies and they are not mentioned at all.
You might be getting confused, only the first survey was conducted on competitive bodybuilders. The data (35 studies with over 1,000 subjects) would not have included any subjects using steroids, since the inclusion criteria for these studies is to not have used anabolics
Love it. I have the hardest time recovering in time for when my next session is "supposed" to be. I've always felt a little guilty that I only train 2-3 times per week, but I keep getting stronger and bigger, so I don't sweat it. Whenever I try to increase frequency, I find I need to shorten my workouts to an unsatisfying length. Everybody's different.
don't sweat it, these guys in the gym that can train a muscle 3 times a week, they are on gear. us nattys. 4-5 times a week is just fine.
@@discreetman593um? you sure you didn't mean to write the opposite of that?
@@mithras666 i ment 4-5 times a week, meaning days. 4 to 5 days...lol
@@discreetman593you mean train a specific muscle group once every 4 to 5 days
I do a Full Body workout with weights twice in a week with 2 days inbetween each workout. On the immediate day after I do some Isolation work like Dumbbell Medial or Posterior Delt Fly's & Dumbbell Curls, 3 sets each. In the summer I also include Resistance Cardio work with Kettlebells & Dead Balls. I would also do 1hr20min marching in the park twice a week for calorie draining but regardless of how I switch things up I have 2 days a week of genuine rest.
Depends on recovery ability/discipline, individual response and interest level / motivation in the training program. Those factors are more important than min/maxing to whatever studies say.
Do whatever rolls your boat. If you enjoy frequent training, then enjoy it, the result will certainly come.
I love the videos, and the quality continues to get better. But please tone down/reduce the texture effects on papers. At this high opacity, they're very distracting and could affect people with motion/vision issues.
Great video as always, you are really putting a high standard for this type of videos! But on a side note, would you consider reverse grip bench press as a good upper chest exercise? What if it is combined with an incline bench? I am really curious to know your insights on this!
Thank you my friend! See this video where we discuss all the upper pec options (including reverse grip even with an incline): th-cam.com/video/aqzJPzr5fYE/w-d-xo.html
So to be clear, the whole working one muscle per day throughout the week is essentially the same as working it more frequently?
Yes. It's the same in short term studies, but it's even better in the long run. You suffer less joint problems. Consistency is key. That's why in the pie chart he showed in the beginning, it showed the majority of top level competitors use bro splits. It's the same for top level natural bodybuilders as well.
Yes, and if you can learn how to train to failure (though you won't always need to) and how to manipulate drop sets and other intensity techniques you will get A LOT out of bro-splits with less joint issues and fatigue.
News flash - intensity and recoverability varys per person. I may be able to achieve a higher intensity failure set than someone else causing a substantially higher amount of damage and thus taking longer to recover vs another person. You should not follow any set guide until you standardize your protocol based on your own “feeling” of recoverability. You may have eaten and slept better the week leading up to a training session therefore your ability to achieve a much higher level of intensity in a set. Listen to your body. Assess how you feel and make a judgement call. Don’t go if you feel the slightest bit tired or sore. You will end up setting back the recovery you started and cause an even longer period of recovery, not healing, in order to grow and get stronger before the next session. If you can’t heal you won’t recover and get stronger and you won’t grow. Strength precedes growth.
So again, EVERYTHING WORKS. Being stuck in the minutia is a waste of time. Being consistent, eating adequately and appropriately for your goals and getting enough rest = growth. Just pick a plan and stick to it.
Its why i just lift 2 times a week now. Either full body set up or a 2 split. Play around with volume and intensity and do some cardio and conditioning on the side. Very flexible approach and sustainable also.
all this to say… the 4 day, upper lower torso limbs split is the GOATED routine ❤
I suspect it's a simple as train to the degree your recovery allows with high intensity (either weight or reps) and you will get gains. Unfortunately for some who want a simple fix, you have to do the research for yourself and what works best for you.
For me it is consistency, if I go to the gym 5-6 times a week am happy, I do the same routine with super sets training different parts of my body for the cooldown between sets as I don't like spending hours in the gym, squats, leg press, leg extension, some pulling (seated row usually), sit ups, pull ups, goblet squat, lat pull downs, dips and some bicep dumbell work. I can see a big difference in my body in a couple of months. I just want to have muscle mass as I get older and not lose it, so this routine is good as I keep mixing the order about daily, but still manage to do 3 sets each in a super set format.
John Pelland, the author of the meta, talked on his podcast (Data Driven Strength) about how edema (and how difficult is to measure muscle size) could affect the results, especially for the high volume studies. So maybe the strength gains can also be a good indicative of actual hypertrophy, which would suggest that higher frequency should be better. Another point is that recoverable volume can also depend on how damaging the workout really is, so higher reps and exercises with a lot of "stretch" can cause more damage, which would interfere with the results (and might explain the wide bars in the graphs)
love your timestamps
Just do max 80% of your strength, 3 times a week. If you have muscle pain, skip one. Overcomplicating things is only for super high level athletes surrounded by people with vast experience, knowledge and brains.
There are no long term differences between low and high frequency training, except for an increased risk of overtraining and tendonitis with high frequency.
The same applies to volume: high volume might get you more gains in the short term, but over longer periods it evens out. But you do get an increased risk of overtraining and tendonitis with high volume.
Interestingly, rep range may be different, as some people only respond well to a low rep range and some only to a high rep range.
ANY scheme will WORK for bodybuilders as most of them are on steroids.
Exponentiating the Y axis, muscle growth, makes your graphs super misleading. That line wouldn't trend near flat after 2 sets if it wasn't measuring growth in an exponential manner. Yes theres diminishing returns compared to going from 0 to 1 or 2 sets, and yes you won't DOUBLE muscle growth by going to 3 or 4 sets, but its nowhere near as minimal as your exponentiation makes it out to be
Don't forget this is training frequency, not sets. This is the graph chosen by the authors. The Y axis has to include that many values to fit in all the individual data points and the prediction intervals. The % increase in muscle size is adjusted based on control group data. Feel free to check out "datadrivenstrength" on TH-cam, it's the channel of the authors. They have a couple of podcasts going into great depths on the methods behind the analyses :)
One important metric is how long you train each session. In my opinion, one should not train for more than 1 hour the most preferably a little less. If you need more volume, increase the number of sessions. Training each muscle for 3 times a week is possible. A top athlete could train for 12+ hours a week, it means serious sacrifice. For an intermediate, 6 hours is good. 4 hours, even 3, still make good progress.
i've been experimenting on myself. i bumped my sets i did for my exercises in one day up to an absurd amount. example: 16 sets of bench (3-5 rep range, 9RPE), 12-16 sets on lat pulldowns (12 reps, 9RPE), seated OHP 8 sets (4-8 reps, 10RPE). split PPL. didn't have time for more than 2x workouts per week because I'm super busy working on this project that's taking all my time up so much so that i literally sat in a chair for two weeks straight with only a trip to the bathroom. completely under ate with minimal protein. didn't take any creatine.
my results:
stronger on bench
stronger on lat pulldowns
stronger on OHP
i was shocked. but then i remembered it's about how many times you hit 5-10RPE (7RPE optimal for recovery, so i was pushing a bit too hard).
i will say that my muscles were more sore than my typical workouts, about 2 days of soreness (but not debilitating by any means).
so, i am still trying to balance out the '# of sets in a session : recovery" ratio, but i'd reckon it's around 8-12 sets for maximizing number of sets without being fatigued for longer than 1.5 days.
so if they say the priority of muscle growth is:
1. stimulus
2. protein
3. calories
4. carbs (minimal effect)
andddd i literally sat my butt in a chair for 95% of the time for those weeks and got stronger on the exercises, then it really shows how much "stimulus" trumps everything else. but i would enhance it a bit by saying:
"amount of stimulus of doing hard reps (ie 7RPE)"
so just optimize to hit 7RPE as many times as possible. you can only hit 7RPE once in a set. so you need to just do more sets.
anyway this is anecdotal and i've been training with this extremely high volume in my workouts for about 5-6 weeks where i worked up from doing 3 sets prior to then doing 6-7 sets to then doing 16 sets on bench, for example.
i'd recommend this to people that don't have any time during the week but can find time on the weekends to go to the gym for 4 hours for 2 days a week and just go absolutely all out on number of sets. it worked for me in my current work circumstance, except it does feel a bit weird to not go to the gym 5-6x per week and still get stronger lol.
Spreading your sets out more is worth it just to be less sore even if you don't get more gains.
nice vid bruh
Thank you my friend!
Wow according to this I train more in one day then I'm supposed to in a week ... Lol I'm going to keep doing what works for me
Inter and intra individual variables and variances make this kind of research impossibly accurate.
As a student in the University of Physical Education in Athens, I have just started looking into studies and it is a mess 😂. I have to work on it if I want to be able to understand the results
If you need any help, you can always reach out to houseofhypertrophy@gmail.com and I can provide my thoughts with anything!
Sports science spends quite a lot of time investigating things that were proven by actual science decades ago. It is a mess, and way less rigorous than, say, experimental psychology.
If you are looking for the conclusion and I got it right, do more reps, frequency won't matter much, good work bro 💪🙏☝👍
it depends on your rest and recovery. More doesn't mean better gains. You gotta take fatigue into account. If you already train really hardcore, you don't need much volume and frequency. i see better gains when I apply Mike Mentzer style.
Depends on your goal. 2x a week of 30 minutes is the best benchmark for longevity. Greater than 1 hour per week there's a correlation to reduced lifespan. But go for muscle mass if you want. V02 max is better imo :)
Can't wait till we get to the point of examining training frequencies outside the 7 day "prison"
3x every 2 weeks?
5x every 3 weeks?
3 or 4x every 10 days?
So many possibilities, yet always the 7 day box.
I understand why this is the most frequent timeframe, but doesnt have to be the ONLY one, and I dont think many ppl would be that adverse to experimenting with it if they thought it meant better overall results/health
The ghost 👻 graphic when explaining the “ Spirit “ of the study made me laugh out loud 🤣
Haha, I was hoping some might find that funny!
I weight train 6 times one week, then 3 times the following week, works for me.
thats not necessary
Just because you think it works, doesn’t make it optimal.
@@brandonbeckius3799 efficiency is not the priority for me. I'm gaining between 0.75 - 1.0 kg per month every month at 50 at 15% body fat (winter %). I still eat what I want (but not quantity) go hiking, cycling, running and rucking. When I did 6 days every week, after 6-8 weeks I started to feel weak, like I had a cold but now I'm fine.
I train 4 times per week bc otherwise I stagnate. But in my case it's not simply for frequency but actually for volume.
Yep! Increasing volume can be done practically for many by simply adding in more training days :)
Cool study. Ive been doing 1 set of pullups with leg raise daily and 4 sets of pushups (2 sets of Mike Tyson pushups and 2 sets of decline pushups) 15 each daily as well. I'm not sure if its the best approach, but I'm willing to see it out on my weight loss journey. Maybe there's a better way out there to increase my numbers🤔
How does this one study debunk all the other studies that you've used in multiple videos to support MORE frequency.
Bear in mind this is a meta analysis, not a single RCT. This data is a lot stronger than a single study. Again, as I've replied to your other comments, you might have misinterpreted some of my previous content, but consider what I've said in this video as my most updated thoughts :)
So, that data set shows a complete flatline going from 2-3 times a week. What I know from experience is that, some bodyparts, due to their fiber type and amounts recover faster than others. In general in my experience, smaller muscles recover faster than larger ones. For example, medial delts and biceps recover faster than quads. This is my experience and observation. Train large muscles once a week, train smaller ones twice a week, fractionally. So, do biceps on a push day, triceps on a pull day, legs should get their own day.
I went from full body (8-9 exercises, ~34 working sets) 4x a week to a upper lower split (5-6 exercises, ~22 working sets) 6x a week (same 8-12 rep range, with myo-rep matched sets for both programs). After changing from full body to upper lower split I achieved more weekly volume in less time (more SS in my upper lower split and lowered rest times from 3min to 2min). Within a week I was able to increase the weight on most of my exercises where as over the past 8 (on full body) I physically wasn't able to add more weight and stay withing my target rep range.
In my case specifically increasing my frequency and tuning my program (contrasting SS + lower rest times) meant that I spent less time in the gym (weekly) than my previous 4 day full body program while increasing total weekly volume which quickly led to strength gains. IMHO doing too many exercises all in one session (aka Full Body) just burns you out and prevented me from gaining strength.
I'll give the bro split a try but I don't think it fits my style of training past failure with myo-rep matching sets (aka first set I usually fail at 12 reps, the following sets I fail between 6-10 reps having to rest pause for 5-20 seconds to finish off the set to 12 reps). I do the myo-rep sets because it dramatically increases my total training volume with very little additional time and doesn't seem to cause too much fatigue when training in higher rep range (lower weight). Maybe a bro split for strength training would fit my style best (without myo-rep's).
Something that helped me with that same problem, doing top/back off sets. Example-
Barbell inc bench-225×8 for top set, then 185x15 for the back off set. You can take them both to failure, and it takes very little time to recover going to the back off set, because it's a different stress (not heavy, not requiring as much from slow twitch muscles).
From there you change exercises, maybe the inc dumbell press doing the same approach. Rinse and repeat fir a total of 4 exercises (8 sets) of all out failure training and you're good!
@@JoshBenware I definitely would get more quick, quality volume in with back off sets for different muscle fibres types. I honestly haven't thought of back off sets / drop sets in this way. I'll give it a try. Thanks!
Looking at the way natural bodybuilders structure their training, with top sets, I think that a higher frequency can be more effective if you don't do every set until muscle failure, perhaps 1 or 2 RIR, so that recovery can be greater and the next workout is more likely to have a progressive overload
the way ive done it in the past, growing from 135 to 155 in the span of 8 months, is...
-day 1: chest, bicepts and finish with a light core work out
-day 2: back, tricepts and finish with a light core work out
-day 3: legs and finish with a light core work out
-day 4: shoulders and a more difficult core work out
The days that you do it: monday, tuesday, wednesday, thursday or sunday, tuesday, thursday, saturday; didn't seem to have a massive impact on how quickly I put on muscle or weight but spacing a day did help with overall recovery and mental stability of not feeling overwhelmed.
Lastly, most say diet is a key factor, but I was eating twice a day; cereal in the morning and usually chic fil a for dinner sometimes subway instead. So once again, what it looks like it always comes down to, experiment with what works for you and your body and take the necessary steps and procedures to get out with what you're willing to put in.
Why do core workout every day of training? You can skip the core workout all together if you're doing compounds like squats, rows, deadlifts. Also you could just put all that into two workouts per week and be way more time-efficient. You still have newbie-gains so you don't need to be that on point with your exercise selection, frequency and diet, but that day will come if you keep at it.
@iliketoast-q9b its because your core is really close to your lungs. The recovery rate for your core is much better than the rest of your body. You can build a very strong core by consistently working it out
@matthewlogan8804 Where did you hear that? None of that makes any sense.
@@iliketoast-q9b spouting off that, without doing any research is crazy. Literally go look it up. Besides I said light work outs for core after hitting other muscles groups. Like I said in the original comment, figure out what works for your body. For me, it's this. Touch grass
@matthewlogan8804 Mate, I've been doing weightlifting for 7 years now. I can squat a quarter ton, so my core is stronger than yours probably ever will be. No, your core muscles do not recover faster than others. Your calves do however and they are very far from your lungs. By your logic chest muscles should recover fast as well...and they don't.
Chris Beardsley’s research suggests training the same muscle three times a week may slightly increase muscle hypertrophy.
Unless I'm mistaken, his point is most frequency studies use "unrecoverable" volumes. He describes that a few of the studies using "recoverable" volumes show a benefit for higher frequency. However, as shown in this video, when assessing the overall data using the "recoverable" vs "uncoverable" metrics, there's still not a clear benefit of frequency (timestamp: 5:50 ) - moreover, I do not necessarily fully agree with the "recoverable" values, as described later in the video :)
@@HouseofHypertrophyThe "recoverable" and "unrecoverable" volumes were not equated though. 3 sets 3x/w is 9 weekly, 5 sets 2x/w is 10, and 12 sets 1x/w is obviously 12. They should have looked at 4 sets 3x/w, 6 sets 2x/w and 12 sets 1x/w to equate volume.
Those were the thresholds used to categorize studies as either recoverable or unrecoverable, it was NOT those values literally compared in a study :)
But according to Chris’ faq and the podcast there are only two studies on frequency using recoverable volumes. In trained lifters that is.
Both showing better outcomes for higher frequency….
Been doing this ish 20 years, I knew I had it right.
If you are a pencil neck trying to get better at lifting I suggest to train on a program for one year and then start to learn how to train instinctually. Understand in life you have to take risks to win big. Only thing you should be aware of is the difference and importance of warming up to working sets, how to maximize growth hormone, percieved and true failure, cortisol regulation (stress), protein, sleep and practice risky ego lifts occasionally. Thats it.
I do push, pull, legs alternating days on and off and have been getting good results for 3 months 🤷🏻♂️. I think it's productive to change up one routine scheduling just like we do our exercises to keep the muscles second guessing always!!
*Wut IF I am a Sissy, & I Don't Go to the ==> Failure
basically everyone is different, unless you have an identical twin, genetics are different, older folks recover slower than young squirts, there are many paths that can get you to your overall goals, consistency seems to be the only "consistent" value, (along with sleep, sufficient amounts of protein and lots of water and for me NO ALCOHOL). if you like the results you see after say 6 months, you are on the right track, if you dont, then up reps, up weight, up TUT, if you are only working out one day a week per body "area" then go to two days a week. Hell, I do a morning warm up routine and then later in the afternoon come back and hit it very hard and very heavy, mornings are slower, lighter, with more TUT. afternoons are 3 sets with max weight where I can get 6 to 8 reps and that would be close to failure, with slow only on the eccentric portion of the rep. it works for me! I have been criticized so much that I just no longer care. I am 61 and I love the results that I see in the mirror after starting this journey 3 years ago. I still listen to the "research" I am still open to ideas, but as far as a one size fits all??? hell, not even the pros agree on everything...
I train the same muscles every second day (an upper/lower body split), to constantly have a good pump, it feels great. But now I know, that at least I'm not losing any potential gains.
How did frequency stimulate diet? Calorie intake makes a huge difference. You can't just increase frequency and expect the person to eat the same. Also Its impossible not to do more sets with more frequency because to lift safely for example to squat or deadlift 700 lbs you have to warm up with 200 300 400 500 and 600. Those warmups add overall volume. So the person who trains 1 day per week is going to have to do their warm up weights and sets multiplied by a factor of 3 times in one session keep the same volume as the 3 day per week person. Once a person achieves elite strength status their squat session can last an 45min-1hr due to all the warmups and sets. Fitting the same volume into one day would turn the squat session into 2-3 hours. Typically the one day per week crew wants to do other exercises for their legs besides squatting for that long
so basically bro-split is sciencetifically proven then as virtually as effective as other training splits??
On average, the data indeed fails to show bro splits are consistently and meaningfully inferior
No. Muscle growth when looking at the same overall weekly volume might be identical but bro splits are time-inefficient. Supersetting back and chest excercises works well and saves a ton of time. Or supersetting back + triceps and chest + biceps excercises. This is by definition not possible with a bro split. You can cut your time in the gym almost in half for the same growth stimulus.
Also, not doing bro splits does increase maximum total volume per muscle group. Try hitting your chest 24 sets a week in a single session. 8 sets of incline bench press, 8 sets of dumbbell fly, 8 sets of deficit pushups or dips. That'd be insane.
Now, doing it twice means 3 excercises for 4 sets, that's the same volume but is now actually doable.
@@classicallpvault You're wrong. "time-inefficient" is a subjective factor so its totally irellevant when judging hypertrophy objectively. I don't want supersets under any circumstance. They feel horrible, systemic fatigue and CNS is destroyed for both exercises when you don't rest between sets. I would never ever do supersets unless gym is literally about to close. I rest minimum 2-6 minutes between sets.
And no, not doing bro splits does not have to increase maxium total volume. volume is an independent factor that you chose seperately and when volume is equated frequency doesn't matter i.e. bro-splits are just as effective. 24 sets/week is COMPLETELY unnessescary, but if you insist on 24 sets a week then you will get the same gains whether u do em all in 1 day versus divided over 3. bro split means u only train that bodypart. you have nothing else to do. try doing 8 sets for chest 3 times a week on TOP of other muscle groups.
@@mab5710your whole comment is so wrong i dont even
A well-designed bro split can hit muscles multiple times through fractional sets. Example: Do chest on Monday (giving triceps ~6 partial sets from 12 chest sets), then hit triceps directly on Wednesday with exercises like weighted dips. Both muscles benefit from these overlapping workouts. Same idea with back and biceps
U know I was hoping you could make a vid about specific training to build punching power
This isn't an mma channel. Punching power takes the entire kinetic chain from the ground to the hand, it's not just a few exercises but training the whole body
1 set taken beyond failure (i.e. full weight plus 1 or 2 drop sets), 2-4 days per week = maximal gains for minimal time.
I prefer more frequency because I can apply more intensity as I know I have less sets. Performing 12+ sets in a session is hard to maintain high levels of intensity
competitive bodybuilding can imply steroids. that changes everything on this topic.
This guy.
The spirit of scientific accuracy! ⸜(｡˃ ᵕ ˂)⸝♡
😂😂😂
You say the literature shows no evidence that more frequency is better yet in multiple videos in the past you've cited studies showing more training frequency leads to more growth. In a video a year ago you said the exact opposite of what you're saying in this one, saying that the scientific data shows that more frequency is better. Now you're acting like you dont even remember all the studies you talked about before. Youre not saying like " I was wrong about X because Y" you're saying this like you've never even talked about tbis before lol
I appreciate the donation, I have seen your 3 other comments left on this video. I have responded to them, hopefully those responses clear things up
Did you AI your voice?
Obviously?
For me what is working perfectly is 2 sets/muscle for a full body workout, 6 days/week. In the past I had 4 sets/muscle for 3/days per week and it was not really that good. Some weeks where I don't want to be very tired during the day, I just do 1 set/muscle and it's also great. Generally I enjoy more the routine of full body workouts with 1-2 sets/muscle and low recovery time. Most of the time I can combine this to "speedrun" all my sets by mixing the exercises, so 1 set for chest, 1 for back, 1 for shoulders and then repeat. This way I can keep the resting period to zero (well, let's say 10 seconds to get to the new position etc.). You can get out of breath at times so you need to stop and rest but it is more sparse.
I would rest one minute between sets.
8:54 a six week study is not long enough to assess the recoverability of a workout regime; many (trained, even) athletes can handle a 6 week cycle of a stress load that would cause them injury if they sustained it indefinitely. this matters when discussing load and recovery in the context of planning an individualized workout schedule
Why do I get this excited for the same damn title every time 😂
Comparing Apples with Beans.
Researching muscle growth in already experienced bodybuilders with little to none more left potential, that are probably on PEDs. 1 group doing 12 sets while 1 is doing 9 sets per week. 1 Group does 3 different exercises once per week while other groups are not doing 3 different exercises 3x per week, instead splitting up the exercises over the week...
As long as they make such studies I trust more in the experiences of successful people.
The studies were not done on experienced bodybuilders, that was only for the survey data showed at the start :)
The best training split starts with HOH videos.