If German Volume Training (10 x 10) works, why not more, such as 20 x 20, 30 x 30?

[ucimigrate]

We all have heard about German Volume Training (ten sets of ten reps, of major muscle groups).

In truth, it should be called density training, because rest is restricted to one minute between sets.

If 10 x 10 works, why not 15 x 15, 20 x 20, 25 x 25, or even 30 x 30.

I know squats are one of the few exercises where more reps can be even more effective than heavy weights and fewer reps.

I have seen progress happen on sets up to 30.

Although it would be very boring, why not 30 sets of 30 reps of barbell squats, with only one minute rest between sets. It would take at least 45 minutes, and perhaps an hour to complete squats. But, I can see the payoff is there.

What are the theoretical reasons against this?

 

[Jstrong20]

Probabaly has been tried. Even ten x ten is pushing it. It has been modified a few times and it’s usually less reps like 10 sets of 6. I’ve tried the original and didn’t get much from it but the modified version worked ok. I wish it worked great because it’s a super quick workout.

 

[Resolve10]

Well first you have to determine what you are even asking or trying to equate.

1) I dare you to try 30 sets of 30 on anything and you'll see why practically it is not true. You just can't maintain the required intensity and probably wouldn't finish half the sets even if it was just bodyweight.

2) This could go in a lot of directions, but I think most simply the fact is more volume isn't always better. More volume (with all else equated) shows results up to a point then it plateaus then even more decreases benefit. For example GVT is sometimes not even the most effective (too much in some situations) as seen in this study: Invalid Link Removed

 

[_Endure_]

You would tank out so hard trying 30x30. 10x10 if done correctly is brutal enough.

 

[kisaj]

To be honest, I have tried GVT several times, and it is not a very good program unless you are enhanced, IMO. It is just too taxing and in the end the results are not worth it.

 

[Cheeky Monkey]

boredom I guess. When you are bored you just can't put it all into a task. Also diminishing returns. There's only so much beating your muscles can take.

 

[ucimigrate]

Thanks. I have read this PubMed article, too.

Invalid Link Removed

It looks like five or six sets have the most a person can get out of volume.

 

[Resolve10]

Thanks. I have read this PubMed article, too.

Invalid Link Removed

It looks like five or six sets have the most a person can get out of volume.

I'd be careful dealing in absolutes as far as volume. Don't take that as you should only ever do X amount. More as "more volume is not ALWAYS better".

 

[ericos_bob]

At a point the effort/reward ratio diminishes. Doing twice the work doesn't necessarily equate to twice the gains and many have tried pushing the envelope to see how much training they can get away and still make progress. Even with GVT a number of trainees have found that by cutting the volume to 5x10 has given better gains in strength and size than at 10x10. Everyone has their own sweet spot and no one size fits all when it comes to training. Training volume/intensity needs to be tailored to suit ones lifestyle to enable optimal progress. Invalid Link Removed