The Effect Of Training Volume And Intensity On Improvements In Muscular Strength And Size In Resista

[paymanz]

on every parameter high intensity( heavier weight lower reps with longer rest between sets) is superior to high volume exercise , body fat , lean mass, power. also hormones ; cortisol ,T , igf .... everything is better!

The effect of training volume and intensity on improvements in muscular strength and size in resistance-trained men

This investigation compared the effect of high-volume (VOL) versus high-intensity (INT) resistance training on stimulating changes in muscle size and strength in resistance-trained men. Following a 2-week preparatory phase, participants were randomly assigned to either a high-volume (VOL; n = 14, 4 × 10–12 repetitions with ∼70% of one repetition maximum [1RM], 1-min rest intervals) or a high-intensity (INT; n = 15, 4 × 3–5 repetitions with ∼90% of 1RM, 3-min rest intervals) training group for 8 weeks. Pre- and posttraining assessments included lean tissue mass via dual energy x-ray absorptiometry, muscle cross-sectional area and thickness of the vastus lateralis (VL), rectus femoris (RF), pectoralis major, and triceps brachii muscles via ultrasound images, and 1RM strength in the back squat and bench press (BP) exercises. Blood samples were collected at baseline, immediately post, 30 min post, and 60 min postexercise at week 3 (WK3) and week 10 (WK10) to assess the serum testosterone, growth hormone (GH), insulin-like growth factor-1 (IGF1), cortisol, and insulin concentrations. Compared to VOL, greater improvements (P < 0.05) in lean arm mass (5.2 ± 2.9% vs. 2.2 ± 5.6%) and 1RM BP (14.8 ± 9.7% vs. 6.9 ± 9.0%) were observed for INT. Compared to INT, area under the curve analysis revealed greater (P < 0.05) GH and cortisol responses for VOL at WK3 and cortisol only at WK10. Compared to WK3, the GH and cortisol responses were attenuated (P < 0.05) for VOL at WK10, while the IGF1 response was reduced (P < 0.05) for INT. It appears that high-intensity resistance training stimulates greater improvements in some measures of strength and hypertrophy in resistance-trained men during a short-term training period

this table: PubMed Central Image Viewer.
Changes in the biochemical response to exercise following 8 weeks of training. Note. (A) Lactate; (B) testosterone; (C) cortisol; (D) insulin-like growth factor-1; (E) growth hormone; (F) insulin. Pre- (PRE; dashed) and posttraining (POST; solid) values are presented as mean ± SD. *Significant (P < 0.05) difference from baseline at week 3. #Significant (P < 0.05) difference from baseline at week 10. ‡Significant (P < 0.05) difference from week 3. †Significant (P < 0.05) difference between VOL and INT.

 

[Hans]

on every parameter high intensity( heavier weight lower reps with longer rest between sets) is superior to high volume exercise , body fat , lean mass, power. also hormones ; cortisol ,T , igf .... everything is better!

The effect of training volume and intensity on improvements in muscular strength and size in resistance-trained men

This investigation compared the effect of high-volume (VOL) versus high-intensity (INT) resistance training on stimulating changes in muscle size and strength in resistance-trained men. Following a 2-week preparatory phase, participants were randomly assigned to either a high-volume (VOL; n = 14, 4 × 10–12 repetitions with ∼70% of one repetition maximum [1RM], 1-min rest intervals) or a high-intensity (INT; n = 15, 4 × 3–5 repetitions with ∼90% of 1RM, 3-min rest intervals) training group for 8 weeks. Pre- and posttraining assessments included lean tissue mass via dual energy x-ray absorptiometry, muscle cross-sectional area and thickness of the vastus lateralis (VL), rectus femoris (RF), pectoralis major, and triceps brachii muscles via ultrasound images, and 1RM strength in the back squat and bench press (BP) exercises. Blood samples were collected at baseline, immediately post, 30 min post, and 60 min postexercise at week 3 (WK3) and week 10 (WK10) to assess the serum testosterone, growth hormone (GH), insulin-like growth factor-1 (IGF1), cortisol, and insulin concentrations. Compared to VOL, greater improvements (P < 0.05) in lean arm mass (5.2 ± 2.9% vs. 2.2 ± 5.6%) and 1RM BP (14.8 ± 9.7% vs. 6.9 ± 9.0%) were observed for INT. Compared to INT, area under the curve analysis revealed greater (P < 0.05) GH and cortisol responses for VOL at WK3 and cortisol only at WK10. Compared to WK3, the GH and cortisol responses were attenuated (P < 0.05) for VOL at WK10, while the IGF1 response was reduced (P < 0.05) for INT. It appears that high-intensity resistance training stimulates greater improvements in some measures of strength and hypertrophy in resistance-trained men during a short-term training period

this table: PubMed Central Image Viewer.
Changes in the biochemical response to exercise following 8 weeks of training. Note. (A) Lactate; (B) testosterone; (C) cortisol; (D) insulin-like growth factor-1; (E) growth hormone; (F) insulin. Pre- (PRE; dashed) and posttraining (POST; solid) values are presented as mean ± SD. *Significant (P < 0.05) difference from baseline at week 3. #Significant (P < 0.05) difference from baseline at week 10. ‡Significant (P < 0.05) difference from week 3. †Significant (P < 0.05) difference between VOL and INT.

I would like to see size and strength differences at the 3 week mark and then also more long term. Results are never linear. Everyone has to make changes to their program at some point to see continual gains. I think continual heavy lifting will tax the nervous system quickly and lead to a plateau, which has been my experience.

 

[paymanz]

I would like to see size and strength differences at the 3 week mark and then also more long term. Results are never linear. Everyone has to make changes to their program at some point to see continual gains. I think continual heavy lifting will tax the nervous system quickly and lead to a plateau, which has been my experience.

doesnt power lifters do heavy low reps all year round?

 

[paymanz]

also i think they should had resting intervals equal so it was more fair to compare them. longer rest improves these parameters for sure.regardless of type of workout.

 

[YourUniverse]

doesnt power lifters do heavy low reps all year round?

No, they periodize, and taper their strength peak for the time of each meet.

 

[Wagner83]

I would like to see size and strength differences at the 3 week mark and then also more long term. Results are never linear. Everyone has to make changes to their program at some point to see continual gains. I think continual heavy lifting will tax the nervous system quickly and lead to a plateau, which has been my experience.

What about taking a week off every few weeks or not training too frequently every week?

 

[Jon]

undulating between 60%1rm and 85%1rm (w/ all percentages in between) is the smartest way to train. White muscle fibers are the most anabolic and largest of all fiber types but the smaller more vascular ones are important as well.

Low intensity (55-60%1rm) can be used for recovery blocks to give joints a break from 70%+ work. Occlusion training is usually done with around 30%1rm and is done with very high volume but has been associated with less overall muscle damage despite similar (nearly identical) gains in hypertrophy to more moderate intensities.

 

[Jon]

I should also mention that as long as you're training with maintenance volume (24 reps ber bodypart @55%1rm or more) you will keep muscle size no matter what intensity you're in.

36 reps per bodypart per week is the minimal effective volume to stimulate new adaptation over 55%1rm

45 reps is the maximal effective volume per bodypart per week per exercise. Anymore in a single exercise may be over training that particular movement pattern.

80-120 direct reps per week is the maximal effective volume per week per large muscle group.

30-60 direct reps is the maximal effective volume for small muscles (bi', tri's, calves, delts)

 

[Hans]

What about taking a week off every few weeks or not training too frequently every week?

Yes, all very helpful. It comes down to how intense the training program is, how your nutrition is and how stressful your life is

 

[Animalinstinct]

I should also mention that as long as you're training with maintenance volume (24 reps ber bodypart @55%1rm or more) you will keep muscle size no matter what intensity you're in.

36 reps per bodypart per week is the minimal effective volume to stimulate new adaptation over 55%1rm

45 reps is the maximal effective volume per bodypart per week per exercise. Anymore in a single exercise may be over training that particular movement pattern.

80-120 direct reps per week is the maximal effective volume per week per large muscle group.

30-60 direct reps is the maximal effective volume for small muscles (bi', tri's, calves, delts)

This is interesting.

Could you explain the difference between those 45 vs 80-120? “Volume per bodypart per week per excercise” vs “direct reps per week”?

What are direct reps?

If i work a muscle group twice a week, can I or should I split those figures by half for one workout?

What if i want to work a muscle group only once a week? Should i just apply those figures and be good?

Say for my pecs i do bench press 5 x 8 reps, and cable cross over 5 x 10 reps. Pretty heavy, i start at about 80-90% of my 1rm and then lower it. I do this twice a week (I only work out twice a week). How would what you wrote apply to what I do?

Lanky enctomorph

 

[Jon]

This is interesting.

Could you explain the difference between those 45 vs 80-120? “Volume per bodypart per week per excercise” vs “direct reps per week”?

What are direct reps?

If i work a muscle group twice a week, can I or should I split those figures by half for one workout?

What if i want to work a muscle group only once a week? Should i just apply those figures and be good?

Say for my pecs i do bench press 5 x 8 reps, and cable cross over 5 x 10 reps. Pretty heavy, i start at about 80-90% of my 1rm and then lower it. I do this twice a week (I only work out twice a week). How would what you wrote apply to what I do?

Lanky enctomorph

I think you're getting it :)

i actually should amend the 45 reps. It's actually per exercise per DAY. So say on bench you did 3sets of 15reps; that is 45reps total. You should not exceed 45 reps when training over your 55%1rm in a single exercise in a day or you risk over training that specific movement pattern. If you accomplished the 45 reps on bench and went to cable flies next and did 36 reps that would be fine. I would not exceed more than 80 total direct reps in a single training session (i.e. Reps of an exercise that target a particular muscle as in bench for pecs or leg press or squats for quads and glutes). If you train a bodypart 2 times a week then the 120 direct reps per week rule would apply So say you did the 80 total reps for chest on Monday and then on thursday you did 40 more reps for chest giving you 120 reps for chest that week. This is not including INDIRECT reps which still contribute to overall weekly volume i.e. Biceps are worked during back movements and this added indirect volume can determine how much DIRECT volume you can handle for biceps each week.

 

[Jon]

@Animalinstinct so for example here's what I would want to see if I was maxing out on rep volume (120reps over 55%1rm) in a week using your routine:

Monday:

Bench- 55%+ x 4sets x 10reps

Cable flies- 55%+ x 4sets x 10reps

=80 reps

Thursday:

Bench- 55%+ x 4sets x 10reps

=120 total weekly reps

 

[Jon]

@Animalinstinct so for example here's what I would want to see if I was maxing out on rep volume (120reps over 55%1rm) in a week using your routine:

Monday:

Bench- 55%+ x 4sets x 10reps

Cable flies- 55%+ x 4sets x 10reps

=80 reps

Thursday:

Bench- 55%+ x 4sets x 10reps

=120 total weekly reps

Oh and being ectomorphic really doesn't have to do with much. True genetics play a big role in how much a person can benefit from a single training session, but when you're a natural comparing yourself to naturals tbh the differences between a gifted person and an average person are moot when the average person has optimized their routine for their particular body. There are people out there who are non responders to weight training but they literally are lacking genes to grow from training and it's rare. I'm not a particularly gifted person but I work my **** off and I rack my brain 24/7 on how to be a better athlete to further optimize my approach and I've been able to eek out a decent physique (it only took 12 years lmao).

 

[Hans]

it only took 12 years lmao

Would you say you reached you potential, or that you only feel you have now got a decent physique, but are still improving?
And what is your definition of a decent physique?

 

[Jon]

Would you say you reached you potential, or that you only feel you have now got a decent physique, but are still improving?
And what is your definition of a decent physique?

No I don't think I've reached my potential. Maybe 75-80% of what I'm capable of. I'm definitely still improving, and I've done so exponentially by learning how to implement percentage based programming and more advanced nuances that become necessary when you've become more resistant to training adaptations.

For the most part I'd correlate a decent physique with keeping the Golden Ratio for proportions and adding about 15-20lbs of lean mass from your starting point. Some correlate this with training capabilities; benching 2x bodyweight at 14%bf, squatting 2.8x bodyweight at 14%, and deadlifting 3x bodyweigjt at 14% all for 1 rep would be considered advanced approaching elite status powerlifting and usually people capable of this have good physiques. Anything 15-20% less than this you can consider intermediate, anything 15-20% less than that you can consider novice.

I suppose I could post pictures of myself? Despite my avatar I've never really liked doing that as I find people already judge me somewhat negatively for my picture lol but I'm really not a boastful guy, I just use the avatar so people know I practice what i preach.

 

[Animalinstinct]

@Animalinstinct so for example here's what I would want to see if I was maxing out on rep volume (120reps over 55%1rm) in a week using your routine:

Monday:

Bench- 55%+ x 4sets x 10reps

Cable flies- 55%+ x 4sets x 10reps

=80 reps

Thursday:

Bench- 55%+ x 4sets x 10reps

=120 total weekly reps

Thank you, much appreciated.

I have to say 55% would feel like i’m not working hard enough. Though i understand you said 55plus.

One more question - how long rests? In the study above they talk about 3 minutes between sets. I try to stay under 1 minute, even 30 seconds if i want to challenge myself. With a 3 minute rest after each set i think i could go on indefinitely.

And yeah one more question - what’s your take on fructose, fruit juices and honey specifically? You seem very low BF, while i can’t get past 15% BF, especially round my waist. I drink shitload of OJ (at least a litre a day, plus half a litre of grape juice) and eat two pounds of honey a week, all that to support my protein intake. I’m doing something wrong though, and with all the contradicting opinions and studies on fructose even in this very forum, i’m wild-guessing it might be the culprit.

Looking at your physique you have quite a credibility pal, so when you talk people listen. The same goes for @Salmonamb

 

[Hans]

Golden Ratio for proportions

Just wondering, what would golden ratio proportion measurements be in your opinion?
Also, if you don't mind me asking, what was your starting weight and goal weight as well as current maxes?

Pics are always welcome.

 

[Jon]

Thank you, much appreciated.

I have to say 55% would feel like i’m not working hard enough. Though i understand you said 55plus.

One more question - how long rests? In the study above they talk about 3 minutes between sets. I try to stay under 1 minute, even 30 seconds if i want to challenge myself. With a 3 minute rest after each set i think i could go on indefinitely.

And yeah one more question - what’s your take on fructose, fruit juices and honey specifically? You seem very low BF, while i can’t get past 15% BF, especially round my waist. I drink shitload of OJ (at least a litre a day, plus half a litre of grape juice) and eat two pounds of honey a week, all that to support my protein intake. I’m doing something wrong though, and with all the contradicting opinions and studies on fructose even in this very forum, i’m wild-guessing it might be the culprit.

Looking at your physique you have quite a credibility pal, so when you talk people listen. The same goes for @Salmonamb

True :) 55% would correlate with the 15-20reps per set range. Most of the time you wouldn't invest much focus on this intensity since the investment of time and effort has a smaller window of returns. I think if hypertrophy is your main goal they your efforts are best spent between 65-75%1rm. You'll accumulate more training volume in this rep range between reps and weight used more easily than any intensity below or above. Once you become and advanced intermediate or advanced strength/physique athlete then it would be most beneficial to incorporate heavier percentages (higher intensities) into your program to assure you are consistently stimulating the largest muscle fibers for growth. As a novice/intermediate you don't need to undulate your intensities that frequently as your body is adapting rapidly to just the stimulus of training and eating more so linear progression is the simplest most effective way to capitalize newbie gains.

5mins in study was the minimum time between sets for a muscle to fully recover for optimum performance. I think 1:30- 3:00mins is ok for smaller muscles but for large muscle groups I take anywhere from 5-10mins between sets. I also own all my own gym equipment and haven't trained at a commercial gym in 2 years so I can take however long I want between sets lol but for someone going to a gym I'd say 5mins is best so you have high performance but aren't the a s s hole on the bench for an hour lol.

I keep around 10-14%bf all year round unless I'm competing which only happens once every 3-5 years. In my avatar I was 3 weeks out from a show and around 5.7% bf. That's unhealthy. 10-14% is comfortable for me. 8% is the lowest you should ever go if you want to optimize androgen synthesis, anything under and you're going to have some problems.

Imo you're eating far too much fructose. Fructose is largely metabolized by visceral organs. Glucose is muscle fuel. I keep a minimum of 4:1 of grams of starch(glucose):fructose. Studies I've read suggest this is optimum and my experiences validate these claims. Anymore fructose than this and I get some not so pleasant bathroom issues.

Thanks bud :) but see @Salmonamb has the BRAINS and the BRAWN. The former of which has more value imo. The dude schools me on Chem questions constantly lol.

 

[Luckytype]

I should also mention that as long as you're training with maintenance volume (24 reps ber bodypart @55%1rm or more) you will keep muscle size no matter what intensity you're in.

36 reps per bodypart per week is the minimal effective volume to stimulate new adaptation over 55%1rm

45 reps is the maximal effective volume per bodypart per week per exercise. Anymore in a single exercise may be over training that particular movement pattern.

80-120 direct reps per week is the maximal effective volume per week per large muscle group.

30-60 direct reps is the maximal effective volume for small muscles (bi', tri's, calves, delts)

Exceptions to this would be periodic genetically dormant groups that sometimes require extreme stimulation to force a change. Calves and deltoids are an example for some people.

 

[Jon]

Just wondering, what would golden ratio proportion measurements be in your opinion?
Also, if you don't mind me asking, what was your starting weight and goal weight as well as current maxes?

Pics are always welcome.

The golden ratio is what Di Vinci discovered all Ancient Greek and roman sculptors used to proportion their ideal/godlike human figures for their artworks. Oddly this ratio correlates to all skeletal and nervous structures once adult growth is achieved in the human body. The ratio is 1:1.6 or a:b=a:a+b. In other words a smaller bodypart to a larger bodypart should have a ratio of 1:1.6 i.e. Upper thighs at their pinnacle circumference should be 1.6x the size of the lower leg circumference.

My starting weight was 112lbs around 18%bf at 5'6" 17yrs old!!! Hahaha I was PUNY :) as of this morning I am currently 148.8lbs 13%bf. Goal weight for now is 160lbs at 10%bf which I think I can reach in maybe another 5-6years doing everything right. I haven't maxed in about 3 years since before my last prep but my stats were bench:301lbsx1 /squat: 415x2/sumo dead: 485x1. I suck at deadlifts, I only started training them 4 years ago.


This is current composition:


Top two are 6 weeks out; bottom left is 10 weeks out; bottom right were trophies for winning my two weight classes.


These were all 3 weeks out from show date; looked good, utterly miserable though. Was eating 1521cals a day