Do you think microtears even happen in muscles or just sarcomeres disruption?

Time to fire up 8 hour Rich Piana arm workout

This is nonsense, if u can train a muscle more than once a week and still grow u are not training hard enough.

I think a lot of reps boost strength a lot

mahsow

Anyone ever use "monkey rows" (arm pit rows)? How have they worked on developing your side delts?

Nucleus Overload.

best literature review on yt. really appreciate your nuance in interpretation

Eugene sandow is the perfect example that high volume alone isnt adequate to build muscle.

It depends on your Goal. More Sets, less weight, slow and controlled Reps = growth Only 2 Sets, high weight, fast and explosive Reps = strenth

Good title. Let's train 24 hours a day then, doing as many sets as possible. Gonna become Mr. Olympia soon guys!

your typical crossfit athlete, is pretty jacked, what do their workouts look like? loads of sets with very little rest periods, high in aerobic activity and intensity. i did crossfit for a little while, total cult tho, didnt like that but I did like the intensity and short rest periods and the guys and gals were very jacked and fit so ive adapted to that method of doing rounds. pick 4 exercises and do them consecutively, 1 min per exercise and see how many reps you can get, then rest 1min30s and start over, doing 4 or 5 rounds. its short and you are very out of breath afterwards

Hey House of Hypertrophy how to have smaller waist? Do u work out ur obliques or it just makes them blocker???

this new study is literally just muscle edema at its finest

I have been training as a natural for almost 20 years and tried all possible methods and styles of training. Extremely high volume with calisthenics (300 pull ups in 20 sets in an hour's, 400 dips in 20 sets in one training). Looked good, not big but lean. This method is very good for beating rep records and developing strength endurance, but doesn't build much muscle. Look at the best calisthenics athletes in the world. They train with very high volume but most of them look DYEL in clothes. I also tried powerlifting style training 3 to 5 reps, 5 sets squat bench deadlift. Worked very good at developing both muscle and strength, but my joints and connective tissues couldn't handle it for long. Medium range reps and medium volume gives much slower progress, it is very hard to get strobger doing anything higher than 5 reps as a natural. So in my opinion the best way to gain muscle as a natural is definitely not through volume, but only intensity. If you can't handle intensity because of joint pain, you'll never get big. All these studies are irrelevant, because they are short term and are done on beginners. Everything works on beginners and roided bodybuilders.

Higher sets is all well and good, but the most important factor is form strictness. You can blast yourself simply by making your form absolutely strict, even using lighter weights. How much weight you lift on a given exercise should always be a secondary factor to form.

How would your recommendation would change if you had added the relationship between strength and volume ? Cheers.

43 sets is not insane.

The bigger the muscle group I train, the more out of breath I get. So I always wait until the breathing calms down and then I know it's time for the next set! For example, if I train shoulders, I can go to the next set within 30 seconds, but if it's squats, it takes over 3 minutes! Simple way to use yourself to know when you are ready for the next set. Of course there is more to take into account, but works for me and is very easy to have as a measuring stick when you want to hammer on that muscle again!

Ahhhh still dropping 💎s I c 🫡

In the summary section, are the set counts based on the fractional method (Direct + 0.5xIndirect)?

Got to have good recovery also. You'll grow up to what your weakest link allows.

Look at a professional cyclist's legs... that's volume training.

Too many sets eventually lead to damaged joints or high injury risks

what kind of accent is that? drives me nuts I cant tell (I’m not an English native speaker)

This study is not Epic it is stupid. No other scientific field would do this. Meta-Analysis typically narrows down thousands of studies to a handful in order to make sure that 1# the studies are of a high quality, but even more importantly 2# that the studies create a meaningful comparisson that causal inferences can be deduced from. This study allows us to make a vague generalisation about a large amount of data from completely different studies, with different protocols. This analysis will simply favour training in which ever way is the most popular among 'sport science' graduates and doesn't rely on any real testing, theory or evidence. Once again exercise 'science' in this area comes down to a mere popularity contest.

I forget in which book I read that was penned by John Little ( to the best of my recollection) in which he wrote, that a friend struggled to gain muscle using conventional gym techniques and visits. His friend ended up doing multiple sets of, pressups that were spaced out throughout the day. Example. 1 set of 10 when he woke up 1 set of 10 at 1000 and so on, so by the end of the day he would have done 5 sets, which totalled 50 reps. His friend gained more muscle working out that way, than he did using any other form of gainging muscle. So may be thinking slightly outside the box can help?

There are many flaws here. For example, 10 weeks is a short time period, and anyone would repond regardless of sets (i.e. newbie gains). If you keep this level of volume up, the gains will evnetually stop, and may go in the other direction. Also, if people were training to TRUE failure, anything more than one set should be almost impossible. True failure is total failure on a positive or negative rep. I would suggest that the participants were training nowhere near to failure resulting in "junk volume". This study should have spanned a year and achieved true failure.

As Many people already Said here, its called the “grease the Groove technique”. Its really good at managing fatigue while making strength gains but in general less optimal for hypertrophy gains

For every possible thing you could do, there will be one study which says that it is good

Why don’t u mention the strength gains? Hypertrophy increase up to 43 sets but strength hit a plateau at 4-6 sets.

I did a high intensity high volume training plan .... got burnout in a month ! ( couldn`t sleep anymore, joints hurt and I felt like I had fever all the time.) Now I train with the heavy duty method of Mike Mentzer. Never felt better in my life, and it builds muscle too !

its not new data its literally a meta analysis a new study actually showed there were diminishing returns. what you showed here is literally repeat lmao

Listen to your body and expirement with the sets and put out

My body is weird. My muscles get stronger but visibly I can’t tell much of a size difference. Then suddenly my muscles get really weak for a few weeks and I can’t do nearly the weight I was at, then I’m back to it a few weeks later again.

I do over 50 sets per body part per week, to failure and beyond almost every set. And my composition size and leanness surpass most people at all my gyms and people ask if I'm on steroids

Just workout. If you’re genetically gifted you’re body will do what it does

I wonder how this applies for intermediate and advanced lifters who use heavier weight and are more at risk for joint damage and overtraining.

How many sets per muscle a week is optimal when training to failure with calisthenics

Basically the best way to know the real gains is to w8 a week or so after the studies out of a training cycle to know whats is te real gain after complete rest/ regeneration of the muscles.

and what about strength? 🤔

Interesting. Are there any explanations as to why pullups are different from every other exercise?

Calculating my Split using the Fractional Method im at about 12-15 Sets per Musclegroup per week. Exept Leg Muscles because i only have one Legday. For me this works very well also with Recovery.

But from what i remember strength was capped at around 4-6 sets and for growth to happen myofibrillar addition has to be in play which directly affects strength, how can strength be capped so low yet growth be high thats physiologically impossible unless its edema or sarcoplasmic hypertrophy which im pretty sure cannot be trained for

I have a question: I have just started with lat prayer, on back/biceps/forearms day. But that is the day before (and two days after) chest/shoulder day, and I am pretty sore in my pecs the day after the exercise, in addition to the planned lats & triceps targeting. Any thoughts, anyone?

Guys just train and keep these shity research away

Probably one reason why preacher curls work better than incline curls is because preacher curls load the stretch for both the biceps and the brachialis at the elbow, while incline curls only stretch the biceps at the shoulder, but not the brachialis which only attaches to the mid-humerus

You know what caught my attention, you mentioned to a guy in the comments section that "in your eyes low volume is what leads to plateau and not high volume. This tells me that you do not have years of experience lifting and if you do, your probably not advanced or maybe late intermediate. Why? Because every advanced lifter knows that they can not do more volume as they get stronger. For the average person this video might be flashy but it says alot that your just giving results from studies but you yourself do not have the experience to fully understand what it means to apply those studies and give advice and its respectable if your just giving the infromation about the studies. Overall, that study is just a waste of time, nobody will not be gaining more with more volume espcially to those exaggerated amounts.

It’s not worth it. I promise. Doubling or tripling your volume might get you an extra 10% growth, but that extra volume with add up on your joints so fast.

Rest. Food. Intensity.