Unanswered High Volume vs Low Volume

[LvlUpStrength]

Christian Thibaudeau and Jim Wendler promote low-volume high-frequency workouts.

Greg Nuckols and Layne Norton promote high-volume high-frequency workouts.

Which one is right when it comes to building muscle? Which type of training will build the most muscle?

 

[jrock645]

Is there a maximum productive training volume per session?

Training volume and frequency are currently hotly debated. For good reason, as these are fundamentally important considerations for the design of a training program. Over the last year, several studies have reported surprising and seemingly conflicting results. One study says higher training...

mennohenselmans.com

That may just muddy the waters, I dunno.

 

[kisaj]

For strictly muscle building, 27 years of experience has shown me that I benefit the most from lower volume, higher frequency training. I can work with heavier weight with lower volume per workout, but I get in the same overall volume in a week.

Before beach/pool season or times like now where I am getting in shape for snowboard season, I will switch this up to high volume, high frequency which requires lower weight, but the cardio and hypertrophy benefits are king. Strength takes a minor hit, but that isn't the goal.

 

[Resolve10]

Ok I’ll try not to get too overboard and too long with this, especially since the Menno article above covers it pretty well already and if you want more in depth on the actual research look into some of the stuff by James Krieger.

First, keep in my mind everyone is different, in the sense they respond to stimuli differently and in the sense that other external factors (stress, fatigue, etc) are going to effect how the same person also responds to same stimuli differently given different circumstances.

Second, these people don’t really differ as much as you probably think a lot comes down to semantics of how they define things. They are probably “both right”.

Ok so:
1) Volume and frequency are going to be interrelated and it is probably best to view volume as both a weekly amount and daily/session amount.
2) Volume appears to have a cap of an effective limit per session. Going over gets into “junk volume” that probably doesn’t meaningfully increase growth and also leads to more fatigue and negative factors building. The actual amount here is debatable but is seems “around” 10 sets per muscle group per session.
3) Therefore if looking to increase volume above that per muscle group it may then be pertinent to increase through frequency.
4) There also appears to be a cap (even more debatable for amount) for total weekly volume, even when you continue to increase frequency.

So with that said it probably means we should look at these as tools to help continue to build progress. Build volume over time until per session amount is capped then add more frequency to help build per week total volume. After a period of time at higher volumes it’s probably important to almost “reset” and go back to lower volumes.

TLDR:
Use volume as a means to drive progress, with frequency being a tool to help find the right volume per session for your abilities to allow you to do the right amount of hard sets to trigger growth within your ability to recover and know that volume should probably be used cyclically and not stay stagnant forever.

 

[HIT4ME]

What @Resolve10 said.

I would add that this is always about a balance between intensity, volume and frequency and this balance is determined by your goals.

By definition, the lower the intensity, the more volume you are capable of. For instance, you could probably go out for a walk for an hour a day every day of the week and it would be fine. You would adapt to that frequency, volume and intensity perfectly well.

But if you strapped 150 pounds on your back and walked for an hour - even if you COULD do this for a full hour, maybe you could come back the second day and do it again, but you wouldn't be adapting - you'd be slower the second day, and the third, etc. until one day you wouldn't even be able to pick up the weight. I would guess most people wouldn't be able to do it for that first hour though (you can work hard, or you can work long, but not both) and the second day would be out of the question altogether.

In this same light, if you're going to have high volume AND high frequency - you'd better be closer to your walking intensity. If you're going to go lower volume and you want results, you'd better be closer to your carrying 150 pounds intensity.

Which is better? What is your goal? If you want to be able to walk long distances under a light load for a long period of time, practice walking. If you want to be able to carry as much weight as possible for a short distance, walk with the 150 pounds. In between, all kinds of people will get all kinds of responses. You can build muscle with higher volume and mid-level intensity, or lower volume and higher intensity and everything in between.