Have you ever wondered why certain athletes can get so muscular and strong on so little volume? There is no doubt that many of these athletes are rare genetic specimens, but often I think there is more to it than that. Having our own sensitive responder on our coaching staff, Jeff Alberts, we get handed questions all the time on how he manages to be so muscular on such little volume. There is no doubt that Jeff responds very well to weight training in general. However, I would argue that the amount of volume most “non-responders” truly need for progress might be closer to the needs of an athlete like Jeff, once you really take a look at how much of the “non-responder’s” current volume is of low quality.
Now, let me state up front, this is my opinion based on observation, not any scientific study. It is merely anecdotal observation of coaching hundreds, possibly thousands, of strength and physique athletes over the past decade or so. Indeed, with such a “sample size”, you bet we’ve seen more than a few athletes like Jeff in our tenure as coaches who respond really well to training, as well as many “non-responders” who often think they need a lot of volume to progress. A common theme when observing athletes like Jeff, is that they seem to progress in muscularity using similar amounts of volume over their entire career. Obviously, tonnage increases over the years as they get stronger and use heavier loads, but often little to no change occurs in the total number of sets performed as a method of progression. Why might this be?
I’ll let that question simmer as I explore another common theme often shared by these “high responders”: the effort put into each rep. Have you ever seen Jeff get his hands dirty in the gym? Excluding his lighter warm up sets, every one of his repetitions from the first rep of the first set to to the last rep of the last set is done with a high degree of intentionality. Form is pristine, body English is negligible, very little force is produced by the passive components of his muscle (e.g. he doesn’t bounce out of the eccentric to get a rep started), and you can see how each rep effectively targets the muscle. With that said, there is one change from the first to the last rep of his sets…the final reps are much slower as he approaches failure. Indeed, you can see even moreeffort put forth by him to grind through his final reps without form deviation as a set concludes. Simply put, Jeff’s quality of work is higher, and he takes sets closer to failure (while still maintaining great form), than your average “non-responder” on a high-volume program.
In the current climate of volume-focused discussion, we often lose the focus on load and proximity to failure. Heavy loads take care of the issue for you, when you’re working with 6-8RM loads and heavier, like a powerlifter, all your muscle fibers have to come to the party and your form and focus needs to be pristine to keep you safe. Sure, this is a grueling and inefficient way to rack up volume, and not recommended for the pure bodybuilder, but in some ways a powerbuilder/powerlifting approach to training is idiot-proof when it comes ensuring adequate effort (if not efficient or ideal). On the other hand, the more common approach of using mostly moderate loads, with some heavy and some light loads while tracking RPE that we recommend here at 3DMJ, can be problematic if not performed properly. While tracking RPE, or specifically, how many reps from failure you are is an important tool, those who have never gone to true muscular failure often underestimate their true capacities. When using light to moderate loads, such as is common in many bodybuilding programs (at least for certain phases or exercises), if you aren’t fully cognizant of your true maximum capability, it’s easy to rack up a lot of reps and sets that are far enough from failure to be largely “junk volume”. Sure, you’ve generated fatigue from pure metabolic output, and eventually get a decent pump and burn, but with that fatigue and pain, further reps start to look sloppy with a good amount of cheating or limiting ROM. The end result looking back on your “high volume” program, is a lot of sets far from failure that didn’t do much, and then a few sets that you took closer to failure, but with crappy form that didn’t do a great job of targeting the intended musculature.
There is a whole lot of un-quantifiable volume/data that I am talking about here. However, since I love the numbers, I will try to represent these unquantifiable differences in a quantifiable way. So, let’s do a comparative theoretical analysis of the two examples given above.
High volume, low intensity/low RPE for the first set and a half & sloppy reps for part of the last set.
Lower Volume, moderate intensity/higher RPE from the first reps and controlled but slow reps at the end.
Now, while this is a completely theoretical example, and I don’t hang my hat on these actual values, at least hypothetically you can see how once the “garbage” volume is taken away, volume could be nearly the same. Or at least, close enough for us to see how the gap between a “high” and a “low” responder might not be all that much. Finally, let me say there are certainly folks who need more volume to optimally progress, for example our very own Eric Helms through multiple repeated tests over years of training has found that his upper body responds to pretty damn high volume and frequencies of training, and his quality of work, proximity to failure, and the loads he uses during powerlifting phases are all up there. But, more often than not, when a random person comes out of the wood works as a self-diagnosed “low responder” who needs a ton of volume, the issue tends to be form, effort, and quality. So, take a hard look in the mirror and maybe give a shot at seeing what magic you can cook up with lower volume at a higher quality in your next mesocycle.
Great article
Thank you Ryan
Lots to think about here. Thank you Brad.
The idea of the traditional “lift heavy” kind of thing being a way to “idiot-proof” things is pretty interesting.
I found out after years of lifting, that I had a lot more gas in the tank than I thought, and was underestimating my capabilities. Perhaps part of a slacker personality (or a lower pain tolerance.)
Anyways, appreciate the article and your thoughts!
I’m sorry Jared I’m not understanding you. Thoughts on what?
Loved the article, Brad 🙂
If someone is purely trying to gain muscle size, is there any point in going above 85% intensity? Also, is there any reason to think that heavier lifting offers practical benefits (outside of strength sports) that moderate-load lifting wouldn’t?
I suppose what I’m asking is, if someone comes to you looking to become “big and strong” in a general sense, is there any reason to go above 85% intensity?
In a word, Yes. In certain periods of training. The direct response of doing weight training is the increase in strength. Hypertrophy aka “getting big” is a side effect. There for over time in that 10th, 15th, 20th year of lifting if greater than 85% intensity has never been visited, there is some progress that can be yielded from those visits.
Hi!
Very interesting article
Since searching myself for a way to shorten my workouts and making them more effective i stumbled across myo-reps and was wondering if you have any thought on myo-reps as accessory? for example only doing 1-2 myosets per muscle 2-4 times a week would be enought as accessory and using let’s say standard 531 or Juggernaut reps for the main lifts?
I dont see why not. Just don’t think black and white. Balance out your accessory work with some myorep sets and dont fall into the trap of all or nothing.
Nice !! La intensidad NO es negociable
eh,todo es negociable 😉
Great article! Thought provoking around my training time in the gym. How I’m going through each workout and how to make improvements while I’m in the gym.
😉
😉
What a read!
Simply amazing ✔️
Thank you Harshal. Glad you enjoyed it.
Hi.
Can you make me a routine which is perfect for me?
Im doing bwf rr. But it doesn’t work for me somehow. https://www.reddit.com/r/bodyweightfitness/wiki/kb/recommended_routine
6 months in, and went only up to 2 chinups and 5x5x5 push ups.
I don’t know what to do. I am so demotivated.
Bye.
Hey Stewie,
First off sorry for the delay in our response. It got filed in our spam folder.
Yes we can. Use this link to put in an application for a Skype Programming Consult. We can make a customized program based on your training experience, age, and of course goals.
https://3dmusclejourney.com/coaching/skype/
If you’d like to hold that consult with me personally put “Coach Brad” next to your First name.
I can personally attest to higher quality but lower volume work contributing to better strength outcomes at times. I had jumped on the higher volume training bandwagon for about the past 2 years. I was benching 4 times a week, squatting 3-4 times depending on the block and deadlifting 2-3 times per week. My total went up 5kg over almost a year, which I didn’t think was too bad, but wish could have been better. In any event, I have been forced to cut down on my gym time considerably due to family commitments over the past 6 months or so. I am doing one heavy (3-5 reps)session of sbd per week with 3 sets each, one day of sbd with moderate reps (6-10) and one session of supplemental lifts with high reps (10-20). I have seen massive gains in strength over the entire 6 month period. My 3×5 on bench last week was the same as my second attempt at my last powerlifting meet. I would say this was due to fatigue dissipation, but not after nearly 6 months of gains. I think you are right though, Brad. I think the quality of my lifts has gone up dramatically due to the decreased fatigue, and I’m seeing it pay dividends.
Dustin this is awesome to hear my friend and thank you for the feedback. We see this a lot in both strength progression and fat loss for bodybuilding. Reducing volume actually elicits progress. There are times where you should get back to the high volume training, but plan it carefully and do so only in blocks. I know that Eric Helms had great Bench progress with 4x/week for a bit and while he’s reduced that drastically, I know he plans to revisit that again at some point.
Great Stuff Dustin.
Thanks for all the content!
Thank you for commenting
Your first sentence made me wonder what “…on such little volume” means. How many sets per muscle per week does Jeff actually do, closer to the lower end of the recommendation like 10 sets per week? Or even less?
Right around 10 John give a take a few sets. If you wanted a more exact number you can follow his training on youtube in his series “Project 3550.”
Do you guys give a police/military discounts on your programs?
We don’t offer any ongoing discounts on our video courses.
But we do give 10% off of coaching services for students / police / military
Thanks for asking!