I’ll leave out generic “individual differences” for the time being.
With any training variable there are always going to be individual differences in terms of response.
Those are broad, often unknown, variables, and simply saying “people are different” doesn’t do that much to expand our knowledge base.
So yes, as with all things people respond differently to volume.
But aside from that, what do people who grow well from low volume do differently?
I wouldn’t say these are the only two reasons but they’re two big ones……..
Exercise Selection & Exercise Execution.
Simply saying “I did 6 sets of chest today” doesn’t tell us much.
6 sets of what?
6 sets performed in what manner?
6 sets of power lifting style bench pressing at RPE 7?
Or 2 sets of Inclines, 2 sets of Flat Dumbbell Benching, and 2 set of Cable Flys all taken to failure?
Even though total set count is the same, the amount of stress placed on the pectoral fibers isn’t even close.
Using “set count” as a way to determine “work performed” is a meaningless if you don’t look much closer at the “what” and the “how”.
Even beyond the Exercises and The Relative Intensity (proximity to failure) we have to investigate things like…..
Is the lifter performing a full range of motion?
Is the lifter controlling the eccentric?
How much time is the lifter spending in the deep stretch position?
And we haven’t even discussed Absolute Intensity (i.e. Load).
So what’s my point?
My point is that lifters who do well with Low Volume Training are training in a way in which each set is both HIGHLY STIMULATING but also HIGHLY FATIGUING.
So not only do they not need more volume, they cannot do more volume without locally overtraining the muscle group in question.
Whereas the lifter who uses his power lifting style bench press at RPE 7 as a hypertrophy stimulus will likely need A LOT of those types of sets in order to evoke any gains in size.
The “Ideal Set” for hypertrophy would include the following……..
Range of motion of the target muscle group is maximized.
The lifter would spend a beat or two of each rep with the muscle fully lengthened under load,
The lifter would hit failure somewhere in the 5-12 rep range (depends on the movement).
The exercise would not be limited by peripheral fatigue (i.e. some other muscle group fails before the target muscle group fails).
But training in this fashion limits total volume. You simply cannot do very many sets this way. Nor do you need to.
Many big lifters understand this and can thus achieve really good growth on what appears to be on paper very low volume (at least by today’s standards).
I often see “10-20 sets per week” per muscle group as a number batted around for hypertrophy.
I literally cannot see a situation in which ANY lifter needs 20 sets per week on ANY body part.
A lifter who cannot grow a muscle group on 15 sets per week (or even far less) does not need to bump to 20.
He needs to be shown how to train properly and exposed to new/better exercises.
If you’re trying to build mass and develop your physique, think “better” not “more.”
Have a great week everyone!
Andy
________________________________________________________________________
Want to see more gains in less time?
I can help you learn to train better without doing more.
