2.2x MORE Muscle: This New Study Is Surprising…
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 9 ก.ค. 2024
- Alpha Progression App: alphaprogression.com/HOUSEOFH...
FREE Bench Press E-Book: www.houseofhypertrophy.com/fr...
Timestamps
0:00 Intro
0:31 Part I: The New Data
2:51 Part II: The Rest of The Research
4:45 Part III: How This New Study Fits into Things
9:43 Part IV: Summary
References:
Enes et al. - www.researchgate.net/publicat...
Schoenfeld et al. - pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27433...
Baz-Valle et al. - pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35291...
Longo et al. - pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35622...
Schoenfeld et al. - pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30153...
Brigatto et al. - pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31868...
Radelli et al. - pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25546...
Aube et al. - pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32058...
Ostrowski et al. - journals.lww.com/nsca-jscr/Ab...
Damas et al. - pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30289...
Mike Isratel Paper: journals.lww.com/nsca-scj/abs...
Beats:
1) 528hz heaven playboi carti type beat 2022 (prod. yungrowdy) - • [SOLD] 528hz heaven pl...
2) Melodic Slowed Playboi Carti x Pierre Bourne Type Beat "B16A1 v2" (Prod. Fedia) - • [SOLD] 💫 Melodic Slowe...
3) Angelic Pluggnb x Summrs x Autumn x Twinuzis Type Beat (Prod. Fedia) - • [FREE FOR PROFIT] 💐 An...
4) HOME - Resonance - / home-2001 - กีฬา
Hey All, Feel free to check out the Alpha Progression App: alphaprogression.com/HOUSEOFHYPERTROPHY
Been using this for 4 months now, it's a STEAL at 60 euro per year. Helped me a lot since I would either train too much (weekly volume) or with too low intensity (bad progression scheme).
Well to get shoulders i did 10 sets of 10 day in day out. When i stoped it got small.
Oter thing i noticed i did a forced cut(got sick 3 weeks without training and barely eating). My upper body, looks like ive never trained. My legs, had 0 reduction in size.
Its well my personal observations. My arms dont grown ive tried everything.
I think most natties would agree, If your lifts are increasing in reps or weight there is no need to add more volume. Doing so leaves it harder to recover from and chasing PRs becomes way tougher.
Agreed! If you're making great progress across time, there's not an urgent need to change anything :)
Disagreed. You could be making even more gains if you add more volume. Yes, you could be off worse if you do more Sets. But then you know that increasing Volume beyond what you did before you were progressing consistently is too much. How would you know without ever trying?
@@TheSecretBoy111 usually recovery, muscle soreness, and fatigue indicate if you pushed for enough sets. If you are barely recovering before your next session, you don't need to try for more sets. Many people stop short of that limit and those could benefit from pushing harder (either with more intensity or more volume) as you suggested. But it's not correct to say you have to try it first, because there are fatigue indicators that signals you have already reached your limit, if you know what to look for.
That's certainly the case for me.
@@TheSecretBoy111 I think that high volume will produce quick gains for sure but there is nowhere to go or progress from there. If volume is kept low to moderate, you have.more energy to push for extra reps or weight on the bar.
There also a valid agreement that high volume creates muscle swelling/ inflammation/bloat in the muscle, so the muscle will appear bigger. In my experience this swelling can last last up to six days. It's also worth noting that most studies measure the muscle around 3-4 days after the last traing session, so there there still might be some bloat in there.
8 week studies show that high volume groups do better ( in those 8 weeks), but what if the study lasted a few years? Honestly, I think the groups that are applying progressive overload on low-moderate volume would do better. Plus, they wouldn't be exhausted gym rats!
As more studies came out and more are done, the clear picture seems to be that, when not taking each set (all sets) to actual concentric failure, more volume is needed.
We got back to the main crux of WHY there are many different strength/hypertrophy training protocols:
There are many different ways to increase mechanical tension ( the key to increase both strength and hypertrophy).
Different people react differently to training stimulus
Different people PREFER different training protocols ( some people wanna annihilate the muscles, some only want to stimulate, some wanna be there for hours, some want to get done and get out).
volume is needed to compensate for the lack of intensity
Welp. Primary driver for hypertrophy is volume whilst strength is intensity. Keep it simple man 😂 why you think body builder stay in the gym for hours? Doing volume right? Why you think strength athletes stay for 45-60 mins at max? Because of high intensity and heavy weights yeh? 😊
@@PhiyackYuh Mike Mentzer didn't stay for hours.
@@GibranCamus-fh2wk You can't train to failure with high volume..
@@yourfrenghost3028 there has to be some level of intensity to drive a sense of "need" to get stronger/bigger
I love the way you introduce new studies without leaving the knowledge we already have behind, I wish there was a channel like yours for various other areas of science, thank you!!
Same, it's good shit.. science needs to be looked at as a whole, since some evidence and papers can be sketchy.
4:45 Plugg N B music 🎶💪😤
I believe on low set number but hight intensity workout
The discussed study compared the effects of maintaining a constant number of sets versus progressively increasing sets over weeks on muscle hypertrophy. 31 trained men participated, focusing on exercises for the quads. They trained with varying rep ranges and ensured progressive overload. The study had three groups:
The fixed set group: performed 22 weekly sets for the quads throughout the study.
The four-set group: added four sets every two weeks, reaching 42 sets in the final week.
The six-set group: added six sets every two weeks, totaling 52 sets by the end.
Results showed that the groups progressively increasing their sets tended to have better muscle hypertrophy than the fixed set group. Particularly, the six-set group showed the most gains, but with a wider confidence interval, suggesting more variability among participants.
The study fits into the broader body of research that has differing recommendations on optimal set numbers for muscle growth. Previous studies have suggested that 12 to 18 weekly sets (with longer rest intervals) might optimize hypertrophy. However, this new study suggests that for some trained individuals, performing more than 20 sets weekly for specific muscles might be beneficial.
There's also the idea of progressively increasing sets over time as a potential strategy for muscle growth, which this study supports. But individual responses can vary, so there isn't a one-size-fits-all approach. The alpha progression app was mentioned as a tool to help tailor and track workouts based on evidence-based guidelines. In conclusion, while the 12-18 set recommendation remains a good starting point, individuals might benefit from experimenting with their volume based on their responses.
love your videos,as always bro
Great video as always!
Thank you dude, as always! :)
Yessss I am so looking for the videos on strength Vs hypertrophy!
I think this is a viable option if you're stuck with your progression (your numbers are not going up for weeks), so adding a few more sets for that new stimulus is a smart option
Potentially! Provided you're feeling recovered enough and able to handle more :)
Over training sends you backwards. I was doing stupid amount of sets and exercise for probably a year. Got minimal gains. I'm now training less. Aching more, getting more gains and am stronger in each exercise. Volume is not everything. Technique is far more important.
@@RAWS420I think this lines up with traditional knowledge: as training age and strength increases, so does the percentage of 1RM needed to induce gains. So beginners can do 12+ reps with gains, whereas advanced lifters frequently need to push 85-95% in order to advance. Simultaneously, you'll need more sets to compensate for the lack of reps. I think this is demonstrated in the lack of confidence in the super high set group, they probably weren't trained athletes and quickly overtrained.
@@kylemiller5671 no offence buddy but you are waffling. Over trainer isn't good for anyone that isn't on a shit ton of peds period.
@@RAWS420no you weren’t you’re lying buddy you tried more sets then went inconsistent 🤡🤡🤡🤡
There are people who do reviews of papers who say lower volume higher intensity is the best approach because you can’t replace intensity, there are also those who say more volume the better. There’s no clear cut answer.
Also, I don’t think anyone in their right mind is doing 20-25 sets for legs or 8 sets of squats a session, let alone 52 weekly sets for legs. It’s just absurd!
appreciate your work, Mr. House 😊
Thank you my friend, I appreciate you for checking it out! :)
I have been training my clients like this for years with great success. For quads for example usually, we would start with something like 12 sets on w1, 14 sets on w2, 16sets on w3, 18 sets on w4, 6-8sets (deload) on w5, then 13sets on w1 of the new cycle, and so on... (every set is to 1-2 RIR until last week)
The reasons I find it very effective are;
1) people seem to take training more seriously when they are aware this is gonna get harder and harder
2) it's a very smooth progressive overload ride. It's progressive both at meso and macro level
3) justified deloads make fatigue management much easier
If my client is also interested in strength, I like to throw 1 cycle of 4-5 weeks (including deload) of strength training. This helps with resensitization to high-volume, it also gives us a new chance to check how strong they have become. After that, we would go back to 12 sets on w1 but we are starting with heavier weights based on our recently measured strength.
After a few cycles when(if) the athlete's work capacity increases and if they feel like they can handle more volume we might start the first week from 13-14-15sets.
Long story short, I find it a very safe way of increasing volume over time. But I like to add it works because you increase volume and force resting periods to ensure full recovery, I would say as long as you can get these 2 things right probably it doesn't matter what the protocol is in the long term.
PS: sorry I know its a lot of text :D but for this protocol to work we cannot ignore deloads, otherwise, we should be adding +2 sets forever, and you know how that story ends :))
Thanks for sharing your experience. What are the average durations of the training sessions? What is the body part split that you are using? The training sessions must be getting longer as you go through the training block, if keeping rest periods fixed.
60 sets for quads seems like not a good idea lol
Love your content but u have no clue how excited i got when u hinted abt more strength centric content as thats truely my intrrst and mg favourite creator together
Hey house of hypertrophy,
By any chance would you be able to make a longer form video which discusses the overall scientific literature for general muscle growth and concepts used in your videos, I love watching them but I'm often lost. This would be able to help me and other people understand the videos you post better.
Thanks for all your help in my progress bro.
Thanks so much!
I’d be interested to see correlations between high repetition numbers with wear & tear on the joints.
great video, i'll experiment on my delts with this idea, thanks for creating insightful and accessible videos around these topics.
Did you experimented with it? Do you find it did any good? 🤔
@@Haise-san yep, brought up my delts really well and helped me reach a 75 kg ohp, its great but quite fatiguing, def should deload afterwards but great results
Gotta comment, its House of Hypertrophy afterall!
Your videos are amazing
22 weekly sets to more than 50, for one muscle? The ghost of Mike Mentzer gonna have a field day with this one
Mike Mentzer is the flat-earther of fitness community. His training modality is plain simple wrong. Don’t follow that contemptible liar.
😂😂😂
@@mebpoli01 he exaggerated results but he wasn't COMPLETELY wrong, I've been seeing good results following his routine
Wrong!!!@@mebpoli01
@@mebpoli01Fitness is very forgiving. Doing anything with intensity and progression will give you much of available progress no matter your training structure and philosophies
love your vids 👍
Thank you my friend! :)
I think the 6 set/week increase result, reflects the reality of individual variability…genetically well recovered individuals will succeed, but the one that struggles to recover will lag behind or even decrease in performance
What really amazes me is that there are studies to prove every belief and no one is wrong
It is so refreshing to have a channel to go to that actually calmly analysed this study as opposed to the borderline insane screaming that has been happening in a lot of the online fitness world. Thank you House of Hypertrophy.
Seriously we need smart meat heads.
Refreshing he playing Plugg N B music 4:45 💪😤🎶🎶🎶🎶
I use volume as just another variable to break through plateaus, also sometimes rearranging and prioritizing certain lifts earlier in my training session.
For instance i didnt make any rep gains on barbell OHP for about 4 weeks, stuck at 175x 12, 11, 10. So i swapped it with incline bench which was making steady gains (first movement of the 1st upper body session for the week for me) and after a few weeks i hit 12x3 and moved up 5 lbs.
Was your experience that you still performed at 12 11 10 at the start of your new prioritization? I would think maintaining performance on OHP despite seeing steady gains on incline bench beforehand would indicate some improvement.
Hell yeah, another new video.
💪 I appreciate your support as always dude!
Chris Beardsley did a very in depth analysis of the sets.
When he calculated how many sets to failure this would equate to, it was 6-9 sets to failure per session. This fits in line with James Krieger’s analysis of volume per session theory.
This study had less volume than Brad Schoenfeld’s previous study done in a similar manner.
I like your thorough comment, can you please explain to me how many sets per week and per workout is ideal? And are all of those sets close to or till failure? as in RIR 0-2? Should you be increasing those sets week by week until you need an eventual deload? Where did you learn this info and where can I learn more? Thank you!
@@souvizz1262if you’re training to failure, you’re getting more volume per set and you’re also getting more stimulative reps. The last 2 reps of a set to failure are disproportionately more stimulative for muscle growth.
If you did 2 sets to failure, that would equate to something like 3-3.5 sets to 2 reps in reserve.
For each additional set you add, you do add more stimulus with less and less benefit to muscle growth up until somewhere around 8 sets in 1 session. You can perform multiple sessions in a week, so if you were doing 2 sessions for a muscle group that would be 16 sets in a week.
This is high volume if you’re training to failure and moderate volume if you’re training with 2 reps in reserve due to how stimulative each rep to failure is.
You can train 20+ sets a week to 2-4 RIR and you’ll get gains, but the amount of fatigue accrued from calcium-ion related fatigue and muscle damage will be much higher than if you did something like 10-12 sets to failure for a muscle group in a week with similar muscle gains.
Muscle damage inhibits muscle growth, and the lower the sets you do the less muscle damage you will accrue the better you’ll be able to grow. Training to failure also causes a decent bit of muscle damage as well, but the overall total number of sets required to match what 1 set of failure will outpace how much damage you cause.
How many repetitions you choose to do will also impact how much muscle damage you cause. A set of 15-20 reps to failure will cause more damage than a set of 6-10 reps to failure, but both have the same hypertrophic stimulus.
I recommend checking out Chris Beardsley as he did an entire podcast on this study, he’s a well respected researcher that cuts through the fat well and explains all of what I am saying much better.
That awesome! Thank you! As I mentioned i use to ridiculously high number of set that would make David Goggins blush. With joking aside when does rhabdomyolysis set in with too much work or does it for a healthy person? Maybe a future show suggestion.
Cool study’s. I find for me 15 or so sets is great for most of the large muscle groups. However my delts, triceps and back can handle like double that volume easily…biceps fatigue quick and don’t need tons of sets but can handle more frequency. So just feel out your body and how you recover for yourself
Cool story?
🎯 Key Takeaways for quick navigation:
00:00 🏋️ *A study compares fixed weekly set numbers to progressively increasing sets for muscle hypertrophy, sparking controversy and interest in the fitness community.*
01:41 💡 *Gradually increasing sets led to greater muscle gains, though results were variable among individuals.*
02:56 📚 *Previous research suggests 12-18 weekly sets per muscle group optimize hypertrophy, with longer rests between sets.*
05:06 🔍 *Considerations: The study focused on quads, most sets weren't to failure, and rest intervals were longer, impacting fatigue and effort.*
07:23 🤔 *The study raises questions about whether gains were due to the number of sets or the act of progressively increasing sets bi-weekly.*
08:32 💡 *Experimentation: Gradually increasing sets could be beneficial, with practical applications in training, but further research is needed for validation.*
10:07 📊 *Summary: While the study suggests potential benefits of increasing sets for muscle growth, individual variations exist, emphasizing a tailored approach to training.*
I’m coming to the end of my first training block; it was very much getting used to the gym, perfecting techniques, and 20 weekly sets per muscle group. I’m going to design my next block, might throw in a few things from this !
my favorite training style so far in years of training is something close to mike mentzers heavy duty system
I think that it may be because of adaptation. Increasing by 6 sets every week changes a lot the way we are stimulated. It's like doing 6 weeks increasing weight then 6 weeks increasing reps ect... Making cycle of growth on different variable to create different stimulus is the way to go !
Thanks for presenting this data in an easy to digest method. I wonder what sort of results we'd see if the participants had a week to deload
Maybe I'm mistaken, but with the approach of 3 sets a 12 reps and 3 minutes rest compared to 5 sets with a one-minute break, I reach approximately the same number of repetitions close to failure. If I now increase the number of sets, the number of repetitions close to failure naturally also increases. However, this also significantly increases the junk volume witch produces fertigue. The danger of overtraining seems to be the biggest issue for me here.
Great video, keep it going, new suscriber here
Thank you! Welcome to the House of Hypertrophy
OK here's what I've experienced. I used to raise my weekly sets from 9 to 12 to 15 (and sometimes to 18) for major body parts over a 3 week period without trying to increase the load. Sometimes I could add reps, or add a little weight but the goal was to match the last week and add sets.
I didn't grow during the 3 week period, but when I cycled back to 9 sets per bodypart I did and I always set PRs on the week when I cycled back down in volume. I even cut back for 2-3 weeks a few times and got extended progress so I was doing something like 9, 12, 15, 9, 9, 9, 12, 15, 9, 9, 9, etc.
i will give something like this a shot for shoulders and chest i will let you know the result
Interesting thx for Sharing
Wanted to mention, I checked back on my records, and the SECOND week of taking my volume back down tended to be gold. So I might do something like 9, 12, 15, 9, 9, 12, 15, 9, 9, 12, 15 etc. That second week of lower volume had me looking my best and setting all kinds of rep PRs.
Our subconscious, director of our system, is preoccupied with self-preservation and longevity and it will only give as much as demanded by external stimuli. So, this all makes sense with that and I think that study is a direct reflection of that.
I'm always very skeptical when it comes to studies carried out in Brazil.
The quads as a muscle benefits extremely well from tons of volume. Would be interesting to see this study applied to other muscle groups
The legs are already subjected to a lot of volume even in sedentary people compared to other muscle groups. Show me a study that concludes neck training needs even any more than about 10 sets a week before hitting diminishing returns lol.
If you're looking for a topic to cover, I suggest looking at how diet affects hypertrophy. I tried to research how much of a caloric surplus would be optimal for hypertrophy, but found conflicting data and didn't even understand some of the stuff I found.
I think it's an interesting topic with a lot of circulating pseudoscience that you could shed some light on
Next year, I will have videos on these topics :)
I’m expecting elite content like always
💪 Thank you dude!
I believe this highlights that most people can and should do more and that pushing yourself to YOUR limit is optimal for growth. However, your limit is your limit. Most people either dont know it, or cannot voluntarily push to it, which is why programs or competition can be of help. In the max sets group I believe what you are seeing as far as variability is concerned is some are now beyond their limit and not recovering properly. It does highlight though, most people can do more and ultimately not sticking to a program could be the most optimal method IF people could accurately guage theirs limits and were highly motivated to flirt with them. Thats the tough part. Most dont get to their limit regularly. Successful Bodybuilders seem to have a very inate ability to find this limit and work with it each workout. Undoubtedly I would benefit in a cardio sense from trying harder but it is not enjoyable for me to do so and hence my cardio results are very middling compared to my weight training results.
I feel like I can somewhat gauge my limit, when it's not about enduring the hards of training, but noticeably feeling like you can't do the last sets/exercises property even if you push through it
@@Haise-san yeah, the mental side is huge.
8:17
Yeah Mike is really cool.
If some people dont know, he is running Renaissance Periodization youtube-chanel with A LOT of great information from both practical and scientific point of view.
Sweet, got my arm training planned out
I think the arms are a solid area to experiement with higher than usual volumes if a person likes!
It's called progressive overload, until you have to deload. It should be how most people set up their programs (always push for more reps, sets, and weight than the last training session). Usually I start with about 6-10 exercises per day (4-6 days a week), with only 2 sets of each, with 2-3 RIR and progressively push till I get to 4-6 sets per exercise and 0-1 RIR (all the time upping the weight if I get 11 or more reps, in a set). I find keeping the the reps under 15 helps me mentally get through it and starting off with just two sets with 2-3 RIR makes it easy to start.
Key tips: maintain tempo (slow consistent dicentric), higher time under tension (slow down the movement and control the weight), form failure = 0RIR (end of set or drop the weight)
Resting weeks are important for to avoid overtraining with increasing sets for long term. Maybe taking 2 weeks off after six weeks and then start over?
How TF do you do 50+ sets. That’s crazy
They are not training hard at all that is the only way. So most of the sets are ineffective… they might be comparing 2-3 effective sets versus 4-5 or 6-8.
It's certainly a lot of sets, but bear in mind they only performed 52 weekly sets for 2 weeks out of the 12 weeks (the previous weeks before where spent working up to that number) - also it was just for the quads :)
@@vvlaunaythat's Not the only way, did you not listen to the video. They said they all trained the same, 2 reps till failure. You have to also consider the training method Overreaching. I suggest you do some research, Overreaching can break you out of standard training diminishing returns. It's essentially effective over training. I've used training methods like these and they do work the best for me. And I've been training for 6 years. 3 of those used overreaching, and All my sets were either to failure Or were 85% muscle failure ranges. (I can't relate to HoHypertrophys thought that it's possible they were training to "voluntary failure". That's a concept that only exists for those who dont train intensely or give themself enough time to rest in between)
@@zenralochow do you ensure that people are training 2 reps short of failure ? How do you even do 10 sets 2 reps short of failure with 2 minutes between sets ? That is not 2 reps short of failure that’s 6 reps or more.
@@vvlaunay No its not, it's just being able to recover from short burst of muscular fatigue quickly. For perspective, My one rep dumbbell Bench is 110, my 3-6 rep: 105, my 10-12 reps 90. I'm telling you I can perform my first set to failure And then the next 3 without dropping in rep count. I can only do this for several exercises each muscle group. Don't know why it contradicts data, but I notice a direct correlation to adapting to the volume training or overreaching training method
True। i am training for years strength is gaining consistently but not size। after a year of injury i started from decreasing the vooume surprisingly the muscle growth is more and clearly visible
This may be a solid option as it pertains to shocking muscles for a short period of time, this logically would be counterproductive over a long period of time! Once again I didn’t see any information related to the age of the studies participants, that is a question that needs to be answered.
What is your accent/where are you from? Love the videos!
Thank you dude, born in the UK :)
I've seen many videos but I'm always confused about the increasing weekly sets thing. If I increase set every week aren't I gonna add more volume? Also when would I knw when to stop? Sorry I might seem stupid but.. please tell me
yes, and or reduce intensity.. all these "studies" are bs to an extent...
if you workout, you know 22 weekly sets is A LOT for quads, i doubt they were even close to rpe 8
These high volume protocols are a joke
Does it really matter if they were at rpe 8 or 6 or even 4? To a degree yes but even rpe 4 produces decent gains and doing 22 sets of that intensity or even up to 52 sets will grow your muscles. Is it efficient or even fun? Probably not but it clearly works.
@H3aby84 Sure but if they're RPE 4 then it would make sense that the 52 set group would beat out the other groups. That doesnt prove the 52 set group would beat 10 sets per week at RPE 10.
@@Youngster543210 you're right that 10 sets @ rpe 10 might be just as good but these studies on high volume or even extreme volumes show that intensity doesn't have to be very high. If you just do enough of lower intensity sets you get the same effect or better. At least until some study proves that much fewer sets at very high intensity or even failure produces better or equal results.
@@H3aby84 I see your point, the problem is that many of these studies say they have participants train to failure when in reality if you actually trained 50 sets to failure you'll quickly find out that's pretty much impossible. Plus, even if you were training at a lower RPE there's no way you should need 40 extra sets. That's just nonsense. Most people don't just have endless amounts of time to burn in the gym doing all of these sets plus it's not even necessary and you would make better gains just training harder. Most people in the gym need to train harder, not easier. They need to learn how to make the sets that they do perform, productive.
How was the cadence of the reps performed?
Slow eccentric or just pumping out reps?
What about reps performed, did it decrease with each set?
Can’t believe I’m really subscribed to an ai channel but I appreciate whoever put these videos together
I could believe it lol.
My voice is just monotone haha - see some of my older videos and you may be able to recongize the slight progression in my voiceover (but I still have a long way to go)
The editing and research is also just me, seeing some of the older videos can also show how my editing has improved somewhat overtime (but also I still have a long way to go)
Nevertheless, thank you for checking out the videos and I hope they deliver some kind of value at the very least :)
@@HouseofHypertrophyso well spoken youre accused of being an AI
@@HouseofHypertrophy oh, well I appreciate you efforts and time that you put in for us even more brother shalom
@@alanh7247it sounds like you are mocking him
I usually try to push as much volume as I can without doms. This also can explain how I exploded after getting back to the gym. Though it could be a bunch of things
The next step is to test how high the correlation is between people who did 37 sets for the quads and psychopathy
There's an inverse relationship (mutual exclusive) between how hard (intensity) you push the sets and how long (duration) your session lasts. Simple put you can't go all out (max effort) for a long period of time. That's the same reason why sprinters can't sprint beyond the 400 meters.
I believe that it makes a lot of sense that as you progress in the gym, you need more volume for the same stimulus, and as you add more volume and reach the point where it is too much to recover from or fatigue is kicking in, you deload. I first got this idea watching a video from Layne Norton. There are some studies on trained subjects where people make no gains throughout the program, why? Because training volume relative to previous volume is more important than total volume.
That being said, it is also very possible that you benefit much more from higher volumes if your sets are of low quality, far from failure, and so on. So paradoxically, the pros might need less volume to make progress, but they will aim for higher volumes anyway because they are already so close to their genetic potential
This has been used by strength guys and bodybuilders for a while already. Specialisation programs allow you to grow for example your biceps or calves a lot by allocating much of your volume to those muscles. But it means other muscles stay on maintenance because no natural can sustainably train their entire body like that.
And then strength guys have been using volume periodisation for ages. Every week they add a set until they peak, deload by reducing the sets back to baseline and then change to a different percentage or close variation of the lift and build back up.
I’d like to see more about this ‘general body limit’. Is there research on it? I’d like to know what the limiting factor is on training different muscles, assuming it is spaced out and muscles are trained in a fairly fresh state.
@@jmass4207 I don't know of any dedicated official research. It's based on the experience of bodybuilders over the last few decades. You can't train your entire body for 20+ hard sets per week and expect to sustain it as a natural. The limiting factor is any number of things: joint pain, injury risk, CNS fatigue, mental burnout, time constraints, energy depletion, loss of sleep, stress levels.
25 years ago I trained high volumes to failure. I spent 3 to 4 hours in the gym 4 to 5 days a week. I got big FAST, of course with the right nutrition and not much stress in my life at the time. So, at least for me, I can say that high volumes work like crazy. It’s not easy to stay free of fatigue and injury though, as I said, I did this when my life was otherwise not very demanding (university…) and I was able to absolutely prioritize workout.
To a beginner like me, this looks insane!
Take this with a huge grain of salt
I am going to do my own study on why HIT is the best for muscle growth. Give me 5-10 years and I will have an arsenal of naturals that look like they are on gear
Hi, I have recently seen a TedX talk from John Jaquish speaking about variable resistance training. I wonder what you might have to say about that since you do sour research veeeery well
If they’re feeling overly fatigued, then it’s too much, regardless of muscle gains. Mainly because they’re neurosystem is going to be taking on too much. What I’ve seen (and this works for me, might not work for you) is when i do 3 sets 10-12 reps, once i hit a time where i can’t really go up in weight anymore (or not reaching the last few reps), i will typically keep the same weight and add a 4th set to it. Once i do that for a couple weeks, maintaining the same weight, i will take away the 4th set and go up in weight by about 5lbs. Typically i will see a weight increase. But recovery is your best friend. Lots of protein+water and sleep. It has been proven more sets in a week works, but it also has shown that your neurosystem is going to take too much and eventually cause pain/damage to your muscles. I think a recent study has shown that no more than 3x a week at 3-4 sets is optimal? Even so, if you’re not recovering, then you have to reduce it down to maybe 2x a week at 3-4 sets. Just use common sense. If you’re feeling it’s too easy, go up in weight. If it’s too heavy and you’re not reaching your rep ranges, then lower your weight. If you’re not recovering fully for the next session, take an extra day while also maintaining proper protein, water, and sleep.
After training with descent intensity, Volume is king.
4:45 PLUGG N B MUSIC 🎶💪😅😅😅😅😅
Hey i have a question! :)
What do you think, if someone started gym already doing a good amount of weekly sets.. lets say twenty. Isnt he going to have the same benefits of someone reaching the same number of sets gradually?
Anyway, congrats i really appreciate your content and watched every single video of yours! I will keep supporting your channel
Thank you my friend, that's a great question. Unfortunately, the research isn't sufficient enough to answer that question yet! I think some studies in the coming months and years might answer this, and I'll have videos on that when they arrive :)
Progressive increases in volume is the standard way of building muscle with clubs. Increasing the weight is second priority. Increasing the reps third.
I dont mark anything down or overthink it. My plan of attack is always to just push myself to my absolute limit in terms of getting to failure, but not to overdo it either. Really intense with not much rest between sets for 45 minutes, or longer rest for 1 hour, which i do for legs.
Cool story, bro. Then wtf are you doing here, "overthinking" it?
@@HypertrophyUniversity-km6ey It wasn't a story, 'bro'.
To share and learn as well.. since we spend our whole life learning. isn't that what people come to do in the comments? Share experiences? Sorry my comment made you upset, Mr. University.
Individuals may vary in maximum recoverable volume / intensity, which will affect the benefits of increased volume. MRV could be affected by macronutrient and micronutrient levels, sleep, stress, and other factors. For myself, I get 2.2 g protein per kilo body weight minimum, often more, and it appears to increase my leanness and muscle mass as measured by looking in the mirror, perhaps due to increased protein synthesis and much reduced carb intake. Just my experience, not quite science.
There are two points that I feel that were only briefly mentioned but deserve a lot of attention:
1 - The amount of time per session for a single muscle is only viable for professionals. A 100+ minute training session only for quads (adductors and glutes as well as 2/3 of the volume is on compound exercises that have been shown in other research to have meaningful hypertrophy for these muscles) is not viable for a non-professional.
2 - The confidence interval for area has overlapped, with the 6-set increase per week group having higher variability than the 4-set increase per week. Meaning that a lot of people doing that routine would see same or perhaps similar results with a more modest increase in their weekly sets volume. It seems to be one more study that ends up finding some upper ceiling level of weekly volume.
The thing is, did they also progressively overload the weight too along with the sets or just the sets alone?
Holy shit! Youre telling me that if i do more work ill get more results?! I'M SHOCKED!!
My question is, were they doing ONLY quads? I think you can slap more volume on a muscle if it is the only muscle you are training.
37 weekly sets of 0-2 RIR ONLY for quads with compound exercises lmao. And people will think they need to do it for most of muscle groups to achieve best gains, however what they will achieve is overtraining.
Intermediate lifter here, hit a platue months ago in terms of size and strength moving really slow, barely made any noticeable gains. Bumped my sets from 12 to 36 a week with 30 secs rest time and ate more protein with a surplus and my back exploded in 2 months. Don't need no study on this, its logical the more sets the more damage the more food/rest/nutrition you need the more your body gets accustomed to it overtime.
This would work well if you take a serious deload for the next 4 weeks, still with volume that is conducive to muscle growth
Can you do a video about sprinting, specifically sprinting for 6-30 seconds and resting for 90+ seconds. Because i heard it increase hgh and test by a lot. So i want to know how it will effects our muscles building
Were any other bodyparts trained during this study, or was it legs only?
While it's possible that there could be some sort of outlier factor that makes this study not applicable to most people or an issue with the methodology, the idea that humans respond to gradually increasing sets in our lower body isn't too surprising considering our genetic advantage over most animals is distance running. It also holds up when you look at the quads of resistance-for-distance athletes like cyclists.
It would have been more interesting to have a group with a fixed number of sets equal to the average number of sets of the group progressing their volume with time
30-40 sets a week per muscle doesnt sound unheard of, always did that much or more, and this has been doing great for me personaly.
Am I understanding that you’re doing in the rep range of 60-100 total on a muscle group each day?
I cannot imagine 40 sets of squats or leg press in a week. Of course I'm not a competitor either and am 45, but damn. I am ok with the gains I get by doing two sets of leg extension (both to failure and beyond) followed by the 3-4 sets of squats, the last set to fail. PER WEEK. At least for quads.
Yea whose got time for this is what i want to know
Its simple as that: As much volume as necessary, as little as possible. The less volume, the more intense the workout must be, leading to muscle failure. The training should be structured so that the volume is regenerated in a way that allows for progressive overload.
Thats why different systems like HIT and volume training works🤷🏼♂️
If you do 40+ sets a week for one muscle where do you find the time and energy for all the other exercises?
That similar like renecance periodzation program and it works.
Yep! I do believe this is they method they use. I would love to see more studies on it to see if it's superior though!
After 4-5 series especially legs (generally close to failure) my whole body is gently shaking and I feel, that I have less strenght... (glycogen is very good).
The problem with this is, I don’t want to do so many sets, because that’s crazy. I’d rather do less sets and train to failure on the last set of the exercise and close to on the other. Also resting long enough is important.
Unless the subjects are separated by how long it takes them to recover from exercise, then your results will always be confusing. Some people can recover in 1 day, while others need 7 days.
we have the frequency and volume, but what was the intensity? how much weight were they doing relative to their 1RM? that's a crucial part of this whole study? without that is pointless? did the 32 set guys do 30 - 50% of 1RM? did they do 60 - 80%? we need that data as well
Good channel to fall asleep to however im done anyway
We have to keep on mind that the error bars shown are confidence intervals, they are influenced by - but are not - the variance. And the confidence intervals all overlap. This means that this result is statistically perfectly compatible with the hypothesis of the increasing weekly sets NOT being better for overall gains.
The result is interesting and definitely a clue for future research, but the result is simply too weak to draw a conclusion from.
🎯 Key Takeaways for quick navigation:
00:00 🏋️♂️ A new study compared fixed sets vs. gradually increasing sets for muscle growth.
01:57 💪 The study suggests that gradually increasing sets may lead to greater muscle gains, especially when longer rests are used.
04:22 📊 Previous research indicates that 12 to 18 weekly sets per muscle group optimize gains, with no clear benefit to performing more.
07:08 📈 For well-trained individuals, experimenting with more than 20 weekly sets for a muscle group might be justifiable, particularly with gradually increasing sets.
10:21 🤷♂️ Individual differences exist, and there's no one-size-fits-all approach to training; consider all research as potential starting points and adjust as needed.
Made with HARPA AI
Could you do a video about endurance please? I and lots of others would like to know how to be able to do 100+pushups of anyworkout at all like Goggins 💪
I will consider this! :)
@@HouseofHypertrophy 🙏
If my 1 set max with a given weight is 15 reps...do i have to make my set pauses so long that i manage at least 12 on every set?
Or do i just habe to take like a 2 min break and if do 12/15, 10/13 and to finish off 12/12 reps? Is that a RIR of 3,3,0 or is is 3,5,3
Push this comment please 😂😂
I need an answer
As A new HIT bdisciple, those volumes seem insane
I do rpe 10 with 6-10 reps for most heavy lifts and 10-15 for lighter lifts. If I can do the max rep, I add more weight.
Think this way instead, the big three Intensity Volume Frequency will all need to be manipulated in different ways, at different times, to keep progression moving throughout your lifting span. Less so in the beginning, more so as progress continues. This is the main FACT that you need to concern yourself with. Now take your deep dive with learning how they relate to each other and you can leave the studies behind. Bodybuilding has always produced a different look compared to other lifters, even if sets reps and or weights were compared. This has perplexed many, because of the lack of understanding the missing key is making the muscle do the work. That is what separates the look. This as well makes flaw to many studies because you can never know who is just moving the weight with joints, leverage and some muscle vs who is making the muscle move the weight.
Welp, I have grown one more cm to my arm(42cm now) and I do one set of curls in a week+1-2 sets of cable pulldowns. There is a huge difference between going to or almost to failure and going far beyond failure.
1 weekly set? Are you doing crazy drop sets and negatives?
If they trained other upper and lower body muscles it would be impossible for their bodies to handle such high volume and would get worst results....