The Science of Body Metamorphosis
- About Us
- Articles
- Can Calcium and Vitamin D Help Reduce Fat Gain?
- Coaching Clients With Obesity Course
- Do Dietitians Accurately Report Their Food Intake?
- Eat Slow, Eat Less
- Fat Loss
- FREE Research Reviews!
- General Guidelines for Training Programs
- Get Access to the Weightology Archives!
- How Successful Are U.S. Citizens at Maintaining Long-Term Weight Loss?
- Increasing Protein, or Decreasing Carbohydrate…Which Gives You a Metabolic Advantage?
- Insulin, an Undeserved Bad Reputation: The Biggest Insulin Myth, Continued…
- Insulin, An Undeserved Bad Reputation: The Finale
- Insulin…an Undeserved Bad Reputation
- Insulin…Still an Undeserved Bad Reputation After 10 Years
- Insulin: An Undeserved Bad Reputation, Part 2
- Insulin: An Undeserved Bad Reputation, Part 3…MOOOOO!!!!
- Insulin: An Undeserved Bad Reputation, Part 4: The Biggest Insulin Myth of Them All
- Insulin: An Undeserved Bad Reputation, Part 5: Addressing the Critics
- Is High Fructose Corn Syrup Worse Than Regular Sugar?
- Jello to Rid the Jiggles? The Effects of Gelatin on Weight Maintenance
- Latest Content
- Miscellaneous Articles
- Muscle Gain
- Omron Exam: How Accurate Are These Pedometers?
- Online Coaching
- Physical Activity and Weight Regain
- Podcast Appearances
- Protein Before Or After Your Workout?
- Shop
- Sitting Too Much May Be Hazardous to Your Health
- Snooze to Lose
- Speed Eating: Do You Feel Less Full?
- Test Menu
- Testing the Phillips DirectLife Accelerometer
- Thank you!
- The Pitfalls of Body Fat “Measurement”, Part 3: Bod Pod
- The Pitfalls of Body Fat “Measurement”, Part 5: Skinfolds
- The Pitfalls of Body Fat “Measurement”, Part 6: Dual-Energy X-Ray Absorptiometry (DEXA)
- The Pitfalls of Body Fat “Measurement”, The Final Chapter
- The Pitfalls of Body Fat “Measurement”: Part 1
- The Pitfalls of Body Fat “Measurement”: Part 2
- The Pitfalls of Bodyfat “Measurement”, Part 4: Bioelectrical Impedance (BIA)
- The Use of Weighted Apparel During Contest Prep: The Science and Practical Application
- The Weightology Archives
- Thinking Better, Part 1: The False Dichotomy
- Thinking Better, Part 2: Confirmation Bias
- Thinking Better, Part 3: Non Causa Pro Causa
- Thinking Better, Part 4: The Straw Man
- Thinking Better, Part 5: The Ad Hominem
- Weightology Archives Terms & Conditions
- Weightology LLC Terms & Conditions and Privacy Policy
- What’s In the Weightology Research Review?
- Why Is It So Easy To Regain Weight?
- Speaking
- Testimonials
- Contact
- How Much Do Variations in Physiological Testosterone Matter To Your Gains?
- Periodization / Variation in Repetition Ranges for Muscle Size: Your Complete Evidence Based Guide
- Set Volume for Muscle Size: The Ultimate Evidence Based Bible
- Training Frequency for Hypertrophy: The Evidence-Based Bible
- Post-Exercise Energy Expenditure, Part 4: The Effect of Low Volume Weight Training
- Post-Exercise Energy Expenditure, Part 6: The Effect of Weight Training Volume
- Research Review: How Much Does Weight Training Help With Fat Loss?
- Research Review: Intermittent vs. Continuous Calorie Restriction for Fat Loss
- Why Do Meal Replacements Work?
Looks like thighs could be trained every two day, Lats and chest every two days alternating between compound and isolation exercises, other body parts every three days, so a good starting point could be Frank Caltas rotation for recuperation then once in a groove change to Mike Mentzer every other day routine but modify it to accommodate the above frequency. Dave Mcleod
Thanks for this! At some point we gotta learn our own bodies. I’m 64 and currently choosing to hit a muscle group every 3 days with about 9 sets. Seems like a good compromise when going for hypertrophy. I’m 17.75″ on the arms and would like to gain 1″ in 3 years. (These studies always seem short?) Takes a long time for trained lifters to gain just a bit! lol I also rotationally lift. Arms for 4 months, back/chest 4 months.
The studies are often short because they’re usually done at universities and it’s tough to do a study lasting longer than a college quarter or semester.
Ugh this is great information
I do one full body workout per week and though I may have to split it up
Seeing that it won’t make a difference I’ll focus on improving other factors like volume, rest between sets, etc
Thanks for this
You’ll unlikely get quality volume with long duration choose two exercises per body part first one 7 pyramid sets 8-15 reps 2nd one punch the weight up and do 5 X 5 to fatigue fast twitch fibres, I’m 68 and still do weights 3-5 times week
Hi James, First of all, your analyses on volume and frequency are impressive, thank you for taking the time to educate us all. I first read your Volume Bible, which concludes the ideal number of sets per session per muscle group is roughly 6–8. This got me thinking; Assuming 6-8 sets per session per muscle group, how frequently could these sessions be done while still ensuring full recovery, and without the risk of overtraining? Since the 6–8 set sessions are ideal, it may seem sensible to perform these sessions as frequently as possible to maximise muscle growth. Do you think… Read more »
I think in your 7 day scenario your gains would be hindered due to inadequate recovery. Even if it did enhance hypertrophy, one must consider the potential detrimental impact on joint health. If you are doing 6-8 sets per muscle per session, I think you’re going to run into issues at any frequency more than 3 days per week. Also keep in mind that the 6-8 number is an average. Rather than shooting for some “ideal” number, I think it’s better to shoot for an individualized volume by starting off low volume, adding volume only when you hit a plateau,… Read more »
Can i do 3×3 weighted pull ups progressive overload 4 times a week adding 0.5 kg
Yeah you could try something like that
Where most of theses studies are irrelevant is in the fact that “progression” is the driver more than the variables used to drive it. The variables, Intensity, Volume and Frequency, should be variable, and the results from their manipulation as well. What someone “needs” to keep progression consistent is the priority factor, and that is left out from most of this data. It will change and there is no one way best way, for long. An ex. might be that statement “There is no distinct advantage to high frequency training” absolutely false, depending on how it is set up, frequency… Read more »
What you said makes no sense. Progression is the result of adaptation. Progression alone cannot cause adaptation…it only contributes when a stimulus is no longer sufficient to induce further adaptation, and thus the magnitude of the stimulus must increase to cause further adaptation.
Those 6 hour and 3 hour points in the Weightology graphs were a bit off compared to the 24 hour point, giving an impression that the initial gains started somewhat later. It’s likely more like this…
I only have time to train 2 x week. I like to push my sets to positive failure. Would it be better to do 3-4 sets per muscle 2 x week using fullbody or 6-8 sets per muscle using an upper/lower training each muscle 1 x week?
Doesn’t really matter
Would you say this still doesn’t matter even with the atrophy data that’s been emerging that muscles start atrophy after 48 hours per Chris Beardsley?
Yes still probably doesn’t matter much…and I don’t know of data that shows actual *atrophy* after 48 hours
I would say either as eventually for variation you’ll use both methods work on maximum 90 minutes weights session excluding warm up / cool down and if energy low reduce down to 60-75 minutes BUT make more effort.
But what if you train two muscle groups in a training session, like 10 sets arms and 10 sets of shoulder. Are the 10 sets of shoulder junk volume because you exceeded 10 sets in a training session?
No because they are different muscle groups
Fantastic read, thanks James. Will check the volume bible later
Do you have a version based on best volume for strength gains over hypertrophy?
No, I don’t have a version on strength