The Best Way to Track Volume for Hypertrophy
Summary
TLDRThe video script delves into the concept of volume in the context of muscle hypertrophy, emphasizing the non-linear relationship between the two. It critiques the traditional method of tracking volume load (sets x reps x load), highlighting its limitations, particularly for hypertrophy goals. The discussion points out that changes in sets, reps, or load can distort volume load comparisons. It contrasts the volume load of two hypothetical world champion powerlifters with different body weights but similar rep and set counts, illustrating the disparity in load that doesn't necessarily correlate with stimulus or fatigue. The script advocates for tracking volume by counting working sets performed at a high rate of perceived exertion (RPE) or low repetitions in reserve (RIR), as research supports this approach for hypertrophy. It suggests a rep range of approximately 5 to 20 or 25 for optimal hypertrophy stimulus without excessive metabolic fatigue. The summary concludes with a recommendation to perform between 6 to 20 reps per set for hypertrophy, adjusting the number of sets based on the rep range to ensure an adequate stimulus for muscle fibers.
Takeaways
- 📈 **Volume and Hypertrophy Relationship**: Volume is related to muscle hypertrophy but not in a linear fashion.
- 🔢 **Tracking Volume**: It's important to track volume as it indicates the stimulus and fatigue experienced during training.
- 🏋️♂️ **Volume Load Calculation**: Traditionally, volume load is calculated by multiplying sets, reps, and load.
- ⚖️ **Issues with Volume Load**: Changes in sets, reps, or load can make volume load comparisons less intuitive, especially across different strength levels.
- 🏅 **World Champions Comparison**: Even if world champions in different weight classes perform the same number of sets and reps, their volume load can differ significantly due to the load they lift.
- 🚫 **Avoiding Strength Dictation**: One's strength level should not solely dictate the quantification of their training volume, especially when focusing on hypertrophy.
- 🔁 **Rep Range for Hypertrophy**: The ideal rep range for hypertrophy is broad, typically between 5 to 20 or 25-30 reps, to ensure sufficient tension without causing cardiometabolic fatigue.
- 📉 **Volume Load Misrepresentation**: High rep sets (e.g., 3x15) can show a higher volume load than lower rep sets (e.g., 3x6), but do not necessarily translate to twice the stimulus or fatigue.
- ✅ **Reps as a Proxy**: Counting just reps can be misleading as it neglects the load, similar to volume load issues.
- 🛠️ **Recommended Method**: Tracking the number of working sets at a high RPE (Rate of Perceived Exertion) or low RIR (Repetitions in Reserve) is a simple and intuitive method supported by literature for hypertrophy.
- 📚 **Literature Support**: Systematic reviews, such as the one by Bazval in 2021, support that the number of sets is a good proxy for the amount of hypertrophy when training at a high RPE.
Q & A
What is the relationship between volume and hypertrophy?
-Volume has a relationship with hypertrophy, but it's not linear. It's important to track volume as it provides an indication of the stimulus and fatigue experienced during workouts.
What is volume load in the context of strength training?
-Volume load is a calculation that multiplies sets, reps, and load. It was a common method to compare different levels of volume in lifting and coaching.
Why might volume load not be the best method for tracking hypertrophy?
-Volume load can be misleading because changes to sets, reps, or load can make comparisons less intuitive. It doesn't account for differences in individual strength levels, which can lead to significant disparities in volume load even when the number of sets and reps are the same.
What is the recommended rep range for hypertrophy training?
-The recommended rep range for hypertrophy is broad, typically between 5 to 20, or possibly up to 25 or 30 reps. This ensures a long enough tension stimulus for muscle growth without causing excessive metabolic fatigue.
How does the number of reps per set affect the stimulus for hypertrophy?
-The number of reps per set within a reasonable range has less impact on hypertrophy than the proximity to failure and the total number of sets performed. As long as the sets are challenging and close to failure, similar hypertrophy outcomes can be expected.
What is the issue with counting just reps as a method for tracking volume?
-Counting just reps, or multiplying sets by reps, can amplify the problem of volume load by not considering the load. This method can lead to a misrepresentation of the actual fatigue or stimulus experienced during a workout.
What is the recommended method for tracking volume in hypertrophy training?
-The recommended method for tracking volume in hypertrophy training is by counting the number of working sets performed at a reasonably high RPE (Rating of Perceived Exertion) or low RIR (Repetitions in Reserve).
What does the systematic review by Bazval (2021) suggest about training for hypertrophy?
-The systematic review by Bazval (2021) suggests that as long as individuals train with a reasonable proximity to failure, the number of sets is a good proxy for the amount of hypertrophy that occurs.
What is the significance of RPE in hypertrophy training?
-RPE is significant in hypertrophy training because it helps ensure that the individual is training hard enough to stimulate muscle growth. Training at a high RPE ensures that the sets are challenging and provide an adequate stimulus for hypertrophy.
Why is it important to consider the number of reps per set in hypertrophy training?
-It's important to consider the number of reps per set because too few reps may not provide enough stimulus for all muscle fibers, and too many reps can lead to cardiometabolic fatigue, which can interfere with the ability to push muscles to failure for optimal hypertrophy.
What is a good rule of thumb for the number of reps per set in hypertrophy training?
-A good rule of thumb is to perform at least roughly five to six reps per set and to stop somewhere in the range of 20 to 30 reps, depending on the exercise chosen.
How does the number of working sets help in tracking hypertrophy volume?
-The number of working sets helps in tracking hypertrophy volume by providing an intuitive method to compare the overall volume of training without being skewed by the load or the number of repetitions. It focuses on the total sets performed at an intensity that is close to failure, which is key for hypertrophy.
Outlines
🏋️♂️ The Relationship Between Volume and Hypertrophy
This paragraph discusses the non-linear relationship between exercise volume and muscle hypertrophy. It explains that while volume is important for tracking stimulus and fatigue, it's not the only factor. The traditional method of tracking volume, known as volume load (sets x reps x load), is critiqued for its limitations, particularly in the context of hypertrophy. The paragraph highlights that changes in sets, reps, or load can make volume load comparisons less intuitive. It also points out the significant difference in volume load between individuals of different strengths and body weights, even when they perform the same number of sets and reps. The focus is on the need for a more accurate method to gauge the stimulus and fatigue experienced during hypertrophy-focused training.
📊 Rethinking Volume Tracking for Hypertrophy
The second paragraph addresses the limitations of using volume load and rep count as methods for tracking exercise volume, especially in the context of hypertrophy training. It emphasizes that the number of reps per set and the load on the bar are less critical than the proximity to failure and the total number of sets performed. The paragraph references a meta-analysis by Lopez (2021) that found equivalent hypertrophy outcomes across a range of rep numbers, provided the sets are performed to near failure. The recommended approach is to focus on the number of working sets performed at a high level of effort (RPE), which is supported by a systematic review by Bazval (2021). The optimal rep range for hypertrophy is suggested to be between 5 to 20 or 25 reps per set, avoiding both too low a rep count, which might not provide enough stimulus, and too high a rep count, which could lead to cardiometabolic fatigue and less effective muscle stimulation.
Mindmap
Keywords
💡Volume
💡Hypertrophy
💡Volume Load
💡Rep Range
💡RPE (Rating of Perceived Exertion)
💡Stimulus
💡Fatigue
💡Working Sets
💡Proximity to Failure
💡Cardiometabolic Fatigue
💡RIR (Repetitions In Reserve)
Highlights
Volume has a relationship with hypertrophy, but it is not linear.
Volume load is calculated by multiplying sets, reps, and load.
Different factors such as sets, reps, or load can affect the intuitiveness of volume load comparisons.
Strength level can significantly impact volume load even with the same number of sets and reps.
Hypertrophy goals have minor issues when tracking volume load due to differences in strength levels.
Hypertrophy rep range should be broad, avoiding too high a rep count that could lead to cardio metabolic fatigue.
The number of working sets and reps at a high RPE (Rate of Perceived Exertion) is a good proxy for tracking hypertrophy volume.
Meta-analysis by Lopez 2021 shows equivalent hypertrophy across different rep ranges when RPE is held constant.
Counting just reps can cause the same problem as volume load by amplifying the issue.
The industry has moved away from counting just reps due to the limitations of this method.
Recommended method for tracking volume for hypertrophy is the number of working sets performed at a high RPE.
Bazval's systematic review supports that the number of sets is a good proxy for the amount of hypertrophy.
For hypertrophy, it's recommended to perform between 6 to 20 reps at a high RPE.
Too few or too many reps per set can affect the stimulus for hypertrophy.
A rule of thumb is to do at least 5-6 reps per set, stopping around 20-30 reps, depending on the exercise.
The number of working sets is the preferred method for counting hypertrophy volume in this course.
Transcripts
foreign
videos we discussed the diminishing
returns nature of volume so volume does
have a relationship with hypertrophy
however it's not linear but we do need
to track it because volume does give us
some indication as to the stimulus and
the fatigue we're going to experience
now in the research and also in practice
there have been different ways of
tracking volume over time probably the
most dominant one for a long time until
perhaps the last five or six years was
what's called tonnage or volume load
volume load is simply a calculation of
multiplying sets times reps times load
so you get a pretty large number and you
can compare that against other people
yourself between lifts Etc and this was
something that a lot of lifters did a
lot of coaches did and you'll often see
in the research to compare different
levels of volume now with that said for
the specific goal of hypertrophy there
are some minor issues with tracking
volume load let's first just discuss
this broadly change to any of those
three factors sets reps or load can make
volume load comparisons a little less
intuitive than you might think let's
take it out of the context of
hypertrophy and think about the volume
load the two World Champion powerlifters
might be producing if they're doing the
same number of reps and the same number
of sets at the same rpe or proximity to
failure except one is a male 120 plus
kilo lifter a super heavy weight and one
is a lightweight female a 52 kilo lifter
now they're both world champions uh they
both maybe have similar requirements for
volume maybe maybe not but their
strength is going to be very different
if you're a world champion in the 52
kilo class your squad might be somewhere
in the 150 to 160 kilo range however if
you're a world champion and the 120 plus
kilo range it's going to be over 400
kilos that means that you can expect a
two and a half to three fold difference
in volume load even if you do the same
number of reps the same number of sets
at the same rir and the question begs
would we expect those to be different
stimuli for these two people we expect
them to have different recovery demands
perhaps but I think you can see my point
that you shouldn't let someone's
strength necessarily dictate the
quantification of their volume if you're
interested in knowing that the fatigue
or the stimulus they're experiencing but
more importantly since this is
bodybuilding program design and we're
focused on hypertrophy we're tracking
volume because we want to get a rough
idea of both the stimulus and the
fatigue that we're experiencing so for
that reason we're going to use a
different method but let's explain
really in depth how tracking volume load
even for the purposes of hypertrophy can
throw you off a bit consider that the
hypertrophy rep range is pretty broad
ultimately and I'll talk about this more
in a second we want to make sure that
sets last long enough to produce a long
enough tension stimulus for all of our
muscle but we also don't want them to be
so long and be very very very high rep
so that the load on the bar is so low
that the start generating cardio
metabolic fatigue and actually
interfering with the stimulus we can get
from that set for a hypertrophy
perspective so ultimately we want to be
somewhere in the range of say 5 to 20
maybe 25 or 30 reps and that is probably
going to be equivalent on a set by set
basis if the rir or rpe proxy native
failure is similar now that's just for
hypertrophy but let's give you an
example we'll take two different
workouts that are on the end of these
two extremes a relatively low rep
bodybuilding set and a relatively High
rip bottle Building Set let's say we've
got someone with 165 kilogram one rep
max for the Americans that's roughly 365
pounds now let's say the plan is to do 3
by 15 and make those sets pretty hard
that's about sixty percent of one RM for
most people that's going to be pretty
close to failure but perhaps not there
until the final set assuming you rest
enough between sets now if we were to do
this we would get a volume load
multiplying 3 by 15 by 100 kilograms of
4 500 Kilograms that's a lot of volume
right however if we did three by six
times 140 kilograms or 85 percent of 1
RM which would also be hard also be
reasonably close to failure it would
only be 2
520 kilograms of volume that's nearly a
two-fold difference but would we expect
there to be twice the stimulus doing
3x15 would we expect there to be twice
the fatigue maybe immediately because 15
reps is pretty challenging in a higher
IR but when we think about there being
more muscle damage or fatigue that we
accumulate and bleed over into
subsequent sessions probably not
in fact the data broadly supports that
when you have a set even within a
similar rep range or even a quite
Divergent rep range something like 6 and
15. for the outcome of hypertrophy not
strength you get the similar outcome so
long as rirs held constant a number of
sets are held constant for example check
out Lopez 2021 this is a meta-analysis
of 28 studies with 747 subjects all of
which in these very different studies
are training to failure but just with
different loads and comparing a similar
number of sets and while you do see
higher strength gains for those doing
sets with lower reps you see equivalent
hypertrophy across the board
so as I've said when it comes to
hypertrophy specifically it has much
more to do about proximity to failure
and number of total sets than it does
the actual number of reps per set within
a reasonable range or the load on the
bar and that's why one of the other
methods of tracking a volume just
counting reps is something that most of
the industry has stepped away from I
actually advise counting just reps in
the first edition of the muscle and
strength pyramids and also in the
original videos that those books were
based upon and that's because back in
that era 10 years ago we had limited
data and there was only one systematic
review that kind of looked at the
relationships between number of reps as
a rough proxy for volume but now that we
have more data we can step away from
that because discounting reps actually
causes the same problem as volume load
and just amplifies it if you think about
that same example counting reps is just
multiplying sets times reps and taking
load out of it so if we did a 3x15
compared to 3x6 we're looking at 45
versus 18 reps that's nearly a
three-fold diff difference but we
absolutely wouldn't expect three times
the fatigue or were three times the
stimulus doing three by fifteen versus
three by six based upon the data we have
so what do we recommend well it's
actually quite simple and it makes
tracking very intuitive and that's the
number of working sets and we are going
to be performing working sets at a
reasonably high rpe or low rir because
the goal is hypertrophy and that's
important and in fact not only do we
believe that that's the best way to do
it in the trenches the literature
supports that in fact check out the
systematic review by bazval that came
out in 2021 where they looked at a bunch
of different studies that looked at
hypertrophy and found that indeed so
long as there was a reasonable proximity
to failure or the individuals were
training quote unquote hard enough the
number of sets was a good proxy for the
amount of hypertrophy that occurred so
their final recommendation was to
perform somewhere between roughly 6 to
20 reps at a reasonably high rpe and
that's exactly what we recommend now
just to consider once again that we do
have to think about the Reps per set if
we perform too few reps per set even if
that is pretty close to failure meaning
we're training heavy we're doing say
doubles or triples or fours that's great
that is going to be a very high stimulus
per rep but the total number of reps per
set is so low that we might not get
enough of attention stimulus for all
fibers and indeed there are data showing
that when you're doing two lower reps
per set you can't count sets and compare
them on a one-to-one basis you have to
do more sets to make up for those higher
rep sets that they're being compared to
and likewise if you do really high rep
sets using very low loads there does
seem to be a point somewhere in around
the range of doing say more than 30 or
40 reps per set where even if you go to
failure you might get a lower stimulus
for hypertrophy that could be due to the
cardiometabolic fatigue actually
interfering with your ability to gauge
failure or actually push your muscles to
the point of failure to get that
stimulus and it may be a little more
like cardio than others lifting weights
but a decent rule of thumb is to do at
least roughly five to six reps per set
and probably stop somewhere in the range
of 20 to 30 and that is dependent upon
the exercise you choose so to summarize
the number of working sets is the way
we're going to be counting our
hypertrophy volume for the purposes of
this course
関連動画をさらに表示
HIGH vs LOW Reps: Which is Better for MUSCLE GROWTH? (Science Explained)
Volume Ottimale Per CRESCERE (Braccia, Petto, Spalle, Schiena) *RICERCA SCIENTIFICA* | CDN EP.2
Stop Doing “3 Sets of 12” To Build Muscle (DO THIS INSTEAD!)
The MOST Effective BACK WORKOUT for MUSCLE GROWTH (Using Science)
Why volume CANNOT be king of muscle growth
Why The Volume Recommendations For Muscle Growth Might Be Wrong
5.0 / 5 (0 votes)