Volume question

[Cerberus87]

Hey yall, haven't posted in the strength forum in over 10 years, good to be back, although this place is a lot more quiet than I remember it. I've started lifting again about a month ago, doing three days in a row with a rest (usually a 3mile run) on the fourth day. First day is deadlifts, second squat and third bench. In every session I start with 5 sets of 3, then 5 sets of 5, then 5 sets of 8, with the load getting progressively lighter. Is that a good amount of volume for both strength and hypertrophy?? In the first few weeks I was constantly exhausted but now I feel fine. I've started noticing results, specially in strength but I'm not sure if its due to me being a beginner.

 

[Fahcough]

I'm not quoting any literature bc lifting isn't a study but a side hobby. I saw something about staying around 9-12 sets per muscle is a good range. You're close to that so should be good for strength building. If you're not feeling it and finishing exercises much easier, then throw some more weight on.

 

[Sano]

I mean, it's a lot of volume in a single session for a single lift, but if you're only doing each lift once a week it might be fine. If it's working for you, keep at it untill it doesn't. Personally I'd go a little lower volume on the DL's, but we're all different. Maybe add one or two isolation exercises on your training days if you want to build more muscle in specific areas.

 

[Cerberus87]

I mean, it's a lot of volume in a single session for a single lift, but if you're only doing each lift once a week it might be fine. If it's working for you, keep at it untill it doesn't. Personally I'd go a little lower volume on the DL's, but we're all different. Maybe add one or two isolation exercises on your training days if you want to build more muscle in specific areas.

Thanks! I'm doing each lift twice a week, or more specifically, every 4th day. On Deadlift days I also do 5 sets of pull ups and 5 sets of chins at around 10-12 reps each. On Bench days I do 5 sets of dips and on Squat days I also add 5 sets of goblet squats.

 

[Sano]

Thanks! I'm doing each lift twice a week, or more specifically, every 4th day. On Deadlift days I also do 5 sets of pull ups and 5 sets of chins at around 10-12 reps each. On Bench days I do 5 sets of dips and on Squat days I also add 5 sets of goblet squats.

Seems a little excessive with 15 working sets/80 reps per session on a compound lift, twice a week, but again, if you feel like you can recover. Must be relatively light weight for you then. It all depends on your goals, but have you tried with only doing working sets of 5x5 (meaning warmup/ramp up sets doesnt count here), or similar, and then go a little heavier than your current 5x5 sets? You'll probably benefit more strength wise, and still be able to get enough volume for muscle growth.

Yeah by isolation I meant more like chest flys, lateral/rear delt raises, leg curls, calf rasies, curls and such. You mentioned hypertrophy so I assume you want to look good too, which those can help with depending on your weaknesses.

 

[Volador]

Hey yall, haven't posted in the strength forum in over 10 years, good to be back, although this place is a lot more quiet than I remember it. I've started lifting again about a month ago, doing three days in a row with a rest (usually a 3mile run) on the fourth day. First day is deadlifts, second squat and third bench. In every session I start with 5 sets of 3, then 5 sets of 5, then 5 sets of 8, with the load getting progressively lighter. Is that a good amount of volume for both strength and hypertrophy?? In the first few weeks I was constantly exhausted but now I feel fine. I've started noticing results, specially in strength but I'm not sure if its due to me being a beginner.

I'm not sure I understand, are you doing: Monday Squat, Tues BP, Wed DL, Rest/run, Friday BSQ, Sat BP, Fri DL? Are you really doing 15 working sets for each lift, or are some of those just warm up sets? Are you doing warm ups separate from those 30 sets? To be honest, it seems like a lot of volume for a beginner if those are all work sets. Are you trying to add weight to every set every week, or only to the triples, or how are you handling progression? If you're back to lifting after a layoff and you're a beginner I wouldn't do 15 working sets per session on a main lift, but hey, individuals vary, so whatever works, works I guess. Doing goblet squats in the same day you do 15 sets of squats seems a bit redundant as well, you're not lacking squat volume I think, so I don't see much of a point throwing them in there. The reality is that as a beginner anything works, but it doesn't seem optimal in the long run.

There's no single answer to any of those things without knowing anything about your training history, goals, level of experience, etc. I can only tell you that most beginner programs I've seen have about 10-20 weekly work sets on each main lift. I feel like progressive overload on such a high volume program will be cut short by the amount of fatigue you'll be generating. For a lot of people, volume is one of the first variables to play with when progress stalls. What are you going to do when you stall, 40 sets? 50? I think it might make more sense to start with a minimum effective dose of training, and slowly build up your volume over time as you adapt, but I guess you could try and see what happens. If you're a beginner, I would try to look up a program that's tried and proven, instead of kinda trying to wing it and see what happens.

 

[wufabufa]

lol 15-18 working sets is what I do across an entire workout between 4-6 different lifts. I couldn't imagine doing 15 per exercise, especially with any kind of intensity or heavy weight. Your RPE on each set must be a 5-6 in order to tolerate all of that.

 

[Cerberus87]

I'm not sure I understand, are you doing: Monday Squat, Tues BP, Wed DL, Rest/run, Friday BSQ, Sat BP, Fri DL? Are you really doing 15 working sets for each lift, or are some of those just warm up sets? Are you doing warm ups separate from those 30 sets? To be honest, it seems like a lot of volume for a beginner if those are all work sets. Are you trying to add weight to every set every week, or only to the triples, or how are you handling progression? If you're back to lifting after a layoff and you're a beginner I wouldn't do 15 working sets per session on a main lift, but hey, individuals vary, so whatever works, works I guess. Doing goblet squats in the same day you do 15 sets of squats seems a bit redundant as well, you're not lacking squat volume I think, so I don't see much of a point throwing them in there. The reality is that as a beginner anything works, but it doesn't seem optimal.

There's no single answer to any of those things without knowing anything about your training history, goals, level of experience, etc. I can only tell you that most beginner programs I've seen have about 10-20 weekly work sets on each main lift. I feel like progressive overload on such a high volume program will be cut short by the amount of fatigue you'll be generating. For a lot of people, volume is one of the first variables to play with when progress stalls. What are you going to do when you stall, 40 sets? 50? I think it might make more sense to start with a minimum effective dose of training, and slowly build up your volume over time as you adapt, but I guess you could try and see what happens. If you're a beginner, I would try to look up a program that's tried and proven, instead of kinda trying to wing it and see what happens.

Yeah I haven't fully thought out progression yet, other than just keep doing the same until it feels light enough that I can increase it on all the sets. I'm def at a beginner stage, although I used to go to the gym pretty regularly 5-6 years ago so the movements are not new to me.

 

[Cerberus87]

lol 15-18 working sets is what I do across an entire workout between 4-6 different lifts. I couldn't imagine doing 15 per exercise, especially with any kind of intensity or heavy weight. Your RPE on each set must be a 5-6 in order to tolerate all of that.

Not sure about RPE but I'm resting about 5 mins between each set

 

[wufabufa]

Not sure about RPE but I'm resting about 5 mins between each set

Warm up, 15 working sets of your main lift, 5 mins between each set......then you do 5 sets of each accessory lifts(dips, pull ups+chins, goblet squat). Damn dude, you've gotta be close to 2 hours in the gym at that point just lifting.

 

[Cerberus87]

Warm up, 15 working sets of your main lift, 5 mins between each set......then you do 5 sets of each accessory lifts(dips, pull ups+chins, goblet squat). Damn dude, you've gotta be close to 2 hours in the gym at that point just lifting.

lol, I bought a rogue squat rack and flat bench so its more like 2hrs at home

 

[Sano]

lol, I bought a rogue squat rack and flat bench so its more like 2hrs at home

You asked for advice. Seems like the bottom line is that you're doing too many sets. No need to spend 2 hours only doing a few different exercises. Try 5x5 for your working sets on the compounds and add a little more weight.

 

[wufabufa]

You asked for advice. Seems like the bottom line is that you're doing too many sets. No need to spend 2 hours only doing a few different exercises. Try 5x5 for your working sets on the compounds and add a little more weight.

Agreed.

I know a lot of people think more is more and maybe TS is guilty of it. Sano, you've probably seen this study comparing German Volume Training vs a program with half the amount of volume. Small sample size over the course of 12 weeks but the 10x10 group showed no significant benefit in that type of training over the 5x10 group.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5969184/

I'd imagine there's a psychological component to facing a hard 10x10 exercise too. Major gut check during every single workout. Doesn't seem like a sustainable way to lift weights.

 

[Sano]

Agreed.

I know a lot of people think more is more and maybe TS is guilty of it. Sano, you've probably seen this study comparing German Volume Training vs a program with half the amount of volume. Small sample size over the course of 12 weeks but the 10x10 group showed no significant benefit in that type of training over the 5x10 group.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5969184/

I'd imagine there's a psychological component to facing a hard 10x10 exercise too. Major gut check during every single workout. Doesn't seem like a sustainable way to lift weights.

Thanks, no hadn't seen the study! Although I have heard of it. Taking a look at it, I think it's hard to say anything definitive for sure. It's a very small study with few participants, so unfortunately not enough power (high enough sample size) to register most significant changes. Inclusion criteria leaves a lot of room for variety in training experience and thus potential for gains. With a sample so small, even with individual randomisation, people with more gain potential might have been lumped together in the 5 set group, which would explain differences in baseline characteristics.

There's this little caveat as well:
"When participants were able to complete >10 repetitions on the final set and 10 repetitions for the previous sets of an exercise (with correct technique), the training load was increased by approximately 5–10%. The increase in training loads were influenced by the exercise, with generally greater increases in load for exercises involving larger compared to smaller muscle groups."

So seems like the 5 set group might have worked at a higher intensity, despite doing less volume. They mention that the relative intensity was not statistically significant between groups, but that again might be because they didn't have a big enough sample size. Just saying we don't exactly know.

As they pointed out, they didn't control for calorie intake and they suspect the 5 set group ate more, as they increased their bodyfat and mass. This might also play into it, or it could just be that the 10 set group were simply overtrained to the point of reduced appetite and/or weightloss. Lastly, it seems like they did actually find a very small benefit to the 10 set group on leg press 1RM, however it was not statistical significant.

"The small effect size found favoring the 10-SET group for 1RM leg press may suggest that higher training volumes are more effective for increasing lower compared to upper body strength."

There's a few more confusing things about it. Under participants, they say that twenty males were assigned, but there were only 6 in each group. The way they calculated effect size with something called cohens d is an odd choice. As well as something in the abstract about there not being an increase in 1RM leg press within any group, when the results show there was. Aaaanyway!

Definitely interesting as a pilot study. And considering that they did 10x10 3 times a week, I don't doubt that it was way too much, and that 5x10 3 times a week, as they showed, can be superior with half the volume. I think we both agree that generally is the case. And let's not forget, 5x10 working sets 3 times a week is still a high amount of volume on any compound lift. Wouldn't surprise me if that's most peoples ceiling, depending on the intensity as well of course.

 

[wufabufa]

Thanks, no hadn't seen the study! Although I have heard of it. Taking a look at it, I think it's hard to say anything definitive for sure. It's a very small study with few participants, so unfortunately not enough power (high enough sample size) to register most significant changes. Inclusion criteria leaves a lot of room for variety in training experience and thus potential for gains. With a sample so small, even with individual randomisation, people with more gain potential might have been lumped together in the 5 set group, which would explain differences in baseline characteristics.

There's this little caveat as well:
"When participants were able to complete >10 repetitions on the final set and 10 repetitions for the previous sets of an exercise (with correct technique), the training load was increased by approximately 5–10%. The increase in training loads were influenced by the exercise, with generally greater increases in load for exercises involving larger compared to smaller muscle groups."

So seems like the 5 set group might have worked at a higher intensity, despite doing less volume. They mention that the relative intensity was not statistically significant between groups, but that again might be because they didn't have a big enough sample size. Just saying we don't exactly know.

As they pointed out, they didn't control for calorie intake and they suspect the 5 set group ate more, as they increased their bodyfat and mass. This might also play into it, or it could just be that the 10 set group were simply overtrained to the point of reduced appetite and/or weightloss. Lastly, it seems like they did actually find a very small benefit to the 10 set group on leg press 1RM, however it was not statistical significant.

"The small effect size found favoring the 10-SET group for 1RM leg press may suggest that higher training volumes are more effective for increasing lower compared to upper body strength."

There's a few more confusing things about it. Under participants, they say that twenty males were assigned, but there were only 6 in each group. The way they calculated effect size with something called cohens d is an odd choice. As well as something in the abstract about there not being an increase in 1RM leg press within any group, when the results show there was. Aaaanyway!

Definitely interesting as a pilot study. And considering that they did 10x10 3 times a week, I don't doubt that was way too much, and that 5x10 3 times a week, as they showed, can be superior. I think we both agree that generally is the case.

Yeah the part about the 10x10 group losing some lean mass in their legs had me scratching my head. You're probably right though, that type of training is nauseating. Also consider the fact that so much more work being performed would leave you in a bigger caloric hole at the end of your workout which might be harder to overcome.

 

[Sano]

Yeah the part about the 10x10 group losing some lean mass in their legs had me scratching my head. You're probably right though, that type of training is nauseating. Also consider the fact that so much more work being performed would leave you in a bigger caloric hole at the end of your workout which might be harder to overcome.

Seems completely unnecessary.

 

[Fahcough]

I'd imagine there's a psychological component to facing a hard 10x10 exercise too. Major gut check during every single workout. Doesn't seem like a sustainable way to lift weights.

Just last week had to rewrite the routines because of this. It was basic layout I found online and tweeked it with own workouts. It was 7-8 lifts, most of them 6 sets. 20, 15, 10, 8, 6 ,4
By 5th set I was tired of doing the lifts and had another to go. It was taking forever to get through it.
Felt good, really isolated burns but no luxury of that amount of gym time everyday and was 2 weeks in getting bored.

 

[Volador]

Not sure about RPE but I'm resting about 5 mins between each set

RPE is a way of measuring how close to failure a set is. Most good strength and hypertrophy training effects come from doing at least some sets 1-4 reps shy of failure. That’s usually what people call “work sets”. Are any of those sets in that range of intensity? It seems like you might be wasting time and energy and could get better/same results doing 3-6 hard sets per session on the main lifts (plus warm up sets), before you eventually would need to up the volume. You could have a light day and heavy day with different rep ranges for each lift, look up “heavy/light/medium” templates.

 

[Cerberus87]

RPE is a way of measuring how close to failure a set is. Most good strength and hypertrophy training effects come from doing at least some sets 1-4 reps shy of failure. That’s usually what people call “work sets”. Are any of those sets in that range of intensity? It seems like you might be wasting time and energy and could get better results doing 3-6 hard sets per session on the main lifts (plus warm up sets). You could have a light day and heavy day with different rep ranges for each lift, look up “heavy/light/medium” templates.

Thanks, will do! So far I'm struggling on the last rep of almost every set, especially the sets of 3 and 5.

 

[SalvadorAllende]

RPE is a way of measuring how close to failure a set is. Most good strength and hypertrophy training effects come from doing at least some sets 1-4 reps shy of failure. That’s usually what people call “work sets”. Are any of those sets in that range of intensity? It seems like you might be wasting time and energy and could get better/same results doing 3-6 hard sets per session on the main lifts (plus warm up sets), before you eventually would need to up the volume. You could have a light day and heavy day with different rep ranges for each lift, look up “heavy/light/medium” templates.

Most people "working sets" are basically warm ups. A working set has to failure or damn near it (granted squatting to failure is not that smart).

I would recommend TS to up the amount of reps to 8-12 and go pretty much all out in the last one. He will get bigger and stronger. It is also safer than doing heavy triples all the time.