Is Volume Killing Your Gains?

jseams1234

So, I don't typically watch too many youtube videos about lifting. I research specific lifts - mostly to check out form or variations. I've read a ton and experimented and built my routine over the years. I've run PHUL in the past and my current routine for the last year or so is based heavily on what I learned running PPL's and PHUL... but this video and a couple of others like it have me thinking.

https://youtu.be/Mja2fDwYA5s

I work upper body three times a week and lower twice. I typically will either go full hypertrophy for a week then have a power week or sometimes will do power days closer to my pins (TRT). I've made pretty damned good progress over the years but understandably things have slowed to a crawl this last year. I've blamed most of that on this recomp and the fact that I built so much in the fist couple of years of training.

Anyhow, I'll use chest and back for an example - I typically will do bench (either incline or flat) for 4 sets in the 8-10 rep range. Typically looks like this (10, 10, 8, 6). I'll then do either weighted pull-ups in the same rep/set scheme followed by weighted wide-grip dips, also 4 sets 8-10 reps... followed by either weighted chins, if I did rows, or v-bar pulldowns if I did pull-ups previously. This ends up being 24 sets for back and chest for the week. Apparently, this is too much. My workouts typically take 1.5 - 2 hours. I rest 2 minutes for heavy compounds and 1.5 for isolation work.

I'm wondering about dropping a set per exercise to keep my total volume to 18 sets for the week. I don't "feel" that I'm over-training but I must admit I'm always wondering why I look and feel so wrecked at the end of it all compared to the fresh as daisies everyday Joe I see working out around me. I just always thought that they were just not putting in any real effort into their workouts. I'll also note that I don't feel especially fatigued workout to workout and that none of my lifts have regressed.

I've never bought into the idea of extreme volume training but the idea of reducing my current volume seems strange to me - but I'm apparently way over target and probably near MRV for weekly totals when the example used for "high volume" is 20 sets. I guess reducing volume for a couple of months won't kill me. I'm curious as to the results.

steveko89

I came across this post once upon a time:
https://www.reddit.com/r/weightroom/comments/6674a4/dr_mike_israetels_training_tips_for_hypertrophy/

I use it to make sure whatever I'm doing checks the MAV boxes and have found it to be a good balance of progress and recoverability.

psuLemon

Just because you are doing 24 sets, does't mean it's too much (in general). But it's certainly possible that it's over taxing you or that you need to consider deloads (more frequently) and you could be running into a bit of over training.

Given that you are probably either older and/or more trained that others in your gym, I would say it's a hard comparison. Also, there could be other questions around diet and supplementation (not sure I remember if you have a supplementation plan).

jseams1234

steveko89 wrote: »

I came across this post once upon a time:
https://www.reddit.com/r/weightroom/comments/6674a4/dr_mike_israetels_training_tips_for_hypertrophy/

I use it to make sure whatever I'm doing checks the MAV boxes and have found it to be a good balance of progress and recoverability.

Thanks - that's a great thread. It does appear that my volume is a bit much for a few of the muscle groups. I'm going to lower weekly volume a bit... although it's going to feel strange considering I'm always thinking I should do more. lol

imfornd wrote: »

Volume training has been shown without question to produce nearly the same results as HR training - when it comes to strength you still need heavy weights but when it comes to hypertrophy volume training in many respects is much better - save your joints - prevent injury - keep your gains

Thanks - good advice and I understand the concepts. I'm talking about working sets and not reps schemes when I mention volume (MAV and MRV) for weekly totals. I may take the volume approach to reps with my next full bulk in January... my joints could sure use that break. We shall see, aesthetics is one thing but I still have some strength goals I'm pushing for and very close to.

psuLemon wrote: »

Just because you are doing 24 sets, does't mean it's too much (in general). But it's certainly possible that it's over taxing you or that you need to consider deloads (more frequently) and you could be running into a bit of over training.

Given that you are probably either older and/or more trained that others in your gym, I would say it's a hard comparison. Also, there could be other questions around diet and supplementation (not sure I remember if you have a supplementation plan).

True. I don't supplement with anything bur creatine and liberal use of whey (besides the normal vitamin regimen). However, I am on a pretty robust TRT schedule and have been for a number of years. The biggest advantage there is that my T levels remain consistent regardless of sleep or other factors that can sometimes severely impact those levels... and you are right about deloads. I hate taking them and they usually occur when I have to travel or get sick.

GaryRuns

Gotta hear coach Greg on the topic:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=39YvjFRiGac

psuLemon

From personal experience, i generally have to deload or take a "rest/bro" week every 8-10 weeks. Otherwise, i feel warn out from the volume.

Also might be worth checking with a blood panel to see if vitamin D or iron levels are bad.

jseams1234

psuLemon wrote: »

From personal experience, i generally have to deload or take a "rest/bro" week every 8-10 weeks. Otherwise, i feel warn out from the volume.

Also might be worth checking with a blood panel to see if vitamin D or iron levels are bad.

I get blood work done every 6 months. Well, I've had a full blood panel every 6 weeks lately, last one was yesterday - but that's because I have a new Endo and he's not sold on me being at the upper limits. I went through this with the last one too. I expect that if my hematocrit comes back normal again he'll leave me alone for a few months. My D levels are fine. I tested low a few years ago and found out that I have absorption issues and I've been on 4000iu a day since. It brings me into the normal range. Everything tests fine - I'm healthy and I feel great day to day. I'm just curious about optimum volume as related to MRV. I've slowly increased my volume this last year especially when I went to a 3 day upper and didn't think about how much accumulated volume that really ended up being.

GaryRuns wrote: »

Gotta hear coach Greg on the topic:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=39YvjFRiGac

Yeah, I saw his video first. lol

He basically agrees with both Jeff's but his tangent is that people just don't try hard enough. His assumption is that nobody knows how to accurately judge RPE and are leaving way to much in the tank, especially when they add too many sets to a workout - but he's acting like everybody does a bro-split and is trying to smash in 20 sets of squats or bench a workout. He also seems to imply that if you aren't pushing to failure every instance you are *kitten* off... which I don't agree with.

Unknown

This content has been removed.

mmapags

swierzbik1 wrote: »

The only time that would be try is if we talk about junk volume (which most people do)
Other that that volume will be actually one of main factors for your growth.
From what I see nowadays, 99% of men need more volume rather than less.

Did you actually watch the video? Both of your points are addressed in it.

Unknown

This content has been removed.

Chieflrg

For how condensed the actual info is from the study cited, I feel he swung sorta okay here.

Most people that are natural and have training experience are going to do well with working sets in the RPE 7-9 range. Certainly we are human and might overshoot RPE at times but programming a RPE9 intelligently and specifically with relation to recovery of the total volume for a microcycle is a reasonable idea rather than a threshold of usefulness.

I think key points that were noted on the study was.

1. Ridiculous 20 working sets in a day for one group.
2. The vague labeling of three years of training experience for individual's legs with relation to their current need of volume for progress. It's no wonder why lower working sets would see a better response on average since they appear to have a lack of useful stress within their programming directed towards the larger musculature of the legs.

Most lifters on average would see a great bump in their training if they practiced auto regulation that allowed appropriate load and volume instead of grinding out a LP or thinking adding weight to the bar is the only conduit to getting stronger instead of individual mixture of proper volume/appropriate intensity/adequate recovery for the individual's needs to progress.