Are Modern Day Bodybuilders Grossly Over-trained?
by Victor Tringali MS, CSCS, PES, CPT
The benefits of resistance training depend on the manipulation of several variables, including the intensity and frequency of training, as well as the volume of exercise needed to meet the goals of the individual.
Training volume is generally estimated from the total number of sets and repetitions performed during a training session. Several systems including the nervous, metabolic, hormonal, and muscular have been shown to be sensitive to training volume. Altering training volume can be accomplished by changing the number of exercises performed per session, the number of repetitions performed per set, or the number of sets performed per exercise. Without altering the intensity of the program, volume may be increased by either increasing the number of sets and/or exercises performed.
For adults interested in general health and fitness, the American College of Sports Medicine (ACSM) and the Surgeon General recommend a weight training regimen that requires a single set per exercise for 8?12 repetitions. These recommendations are based on the time efficiency and the similar improvements in strength observed when comparing single and multiple-set programs. Although training volume has been examined in this fashion, research studies show mixed results for the optimal training volume per muscle group or training session when the goal is to maximize muscular strength and hypertrophy. Total work, in addition to the forces developed, has been implicated for gains in muscular strength and hypertrophy. Traditional strength training (heavy weight, low repetitions, and long rest periods) has produced significant strength and muscle hypertrophy however, it has been suggested that the total work involved with traditional strength training may not maximize these two benefits and that multiple sets may elicit superior results.
Modern day bodybuilders utilize specially designed training programs in the quest for increased strength and maximum muscle hypertrophy. It would be prudent for these same individuals to attempt to attain these benefits by undertaking the minimal volume of exercisenecessary and not the highest tolerable volume. That is, the minimal volume to achieve the desired response. Typical bodybuilding programs consist of performing multiple sets-sometimes as many as 20-30 sets per muscle group in a single training session. Given the time-consuming nature as well as the potential inroads to recovery characteristic of these training methods you would think it wasreasonableto assume that strong scientific proof must have been found to justify them.Andmost of the scientific evidence must have shown that this high volume of training produces significantly better results than the lower volume trainingmethods.
Although many athletes have utilized these programs successfully, these results are purely anecdotal and raise the question of whether this is an optimal or efficient protocol. And could the same individuals have achieved the equal or even superior results with significantly less training volume? Further, there are many studies that support 1-set programs as being equally effective as multiple-set programs. The new ACSM Guidelines recommend one set for each of 8-10 exercises and state that the preponderance of evidence reports similar gains in muscular strength, hypertrophy, power, and endurance as a result of single or multiple-set programs.
Bodybuilders and trainers who advocate the high-volume approach may argue that because the majority of athletes train in this manner, it must be the best way. Other bodybuilders-such as 6-time Mr. Olympia Dorian Yates, achieved extraordinary development with a fraction of the training volume of some of his fellow competitors. Whereas Yates? program consisted of performing one all-out set to failure and sometimes beyond failure for each exercise, total working sets in a training session were in the range of 3-6 sets for larger muscle groups and in the range of 2-3 for smaller ones. Most bodybuilders? programs today consist of 4-5 times this volume.
The literature examining the effects of various volumes on strength and hypertrophy has yielded conflicting results. Based on the research, there appears to be no conclusive answer as to whether one set or multiple elicits superior gains. However, after review of the research covering the past 20 years, one can conclude that while there are many studies that support multiple sets as being superior to a single set, these studies (dozens of them) define multiple sets as being in the range of 3-8 sets per muscle group in a training session. And most studies are in the 3-6 set range-similar to the volume used by Yates during his competitive career. In fact, I am unaware of a single study that supports superior results beyond 8 sets. Therefore, even if we were to concede that multiple sets are in fact superior to one-set programs, that still suggests a total training volume of 3-8 sets to achieve an optimal dose-response. This is significantly lower than the popular high-volume approach of many modern day bodybuilders.
As the body of research continues to grow, an answer to the question of increasing volume, or sets of resistance exercise, for increasing strength and muscle mass should become clearer. However, as of now there appears to be no scientific rationale for training beyond 8 sets per muscle group in a single session and in many cases significantly less may be all that is required to elicit optimal gains.And any forward-thinking bodybuilder, fitness trainer or strength athlete with a goal of maximizing strength and/or muscle development should consider relying on the preponderance of the research literature as opposed to anecdotal examples before attempting to design an effective and efficient protocol to achieve the desired goal. If we are to accept either the theory of a higher volume or lower volume protocol as being superior, we would still need to know at what frequency or relative intensity gains can be maximized with that volume of training. These questions need to be answered in order to achieve optimal success of a resistance training program and leave room for further investigation.
Train smart and good luck!
Team Vic
References:
1. American College of Sports Medicine. Position Stand: progression models in resistance training for healthy adults. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2009;41(3):687?708.
2. Krieger, JW. Single vs. multiple sets of resistance exercise for muscle hypertrophy- A meta-analysis. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research 24(4): 1150-1159, 2010
3. R?nnestad, B.R., W. Egeland, N.H. Kvamme, P.E.Refsnes, F. Kadi, and T. Raastad. Dissimilar effects of one- and three-set strength training on strength and muscle mass gains in upper and lower body in untrained subjects. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research 21(1):157?163. 2007.
4. Ralph N. Carpinelli and Robert M. Otto Strength Training Single versus Multiple Sets Sports Medicine 1998 Aug; 26 (2): 73-84
5. Daniel A. Galvao, Dennis R. Taffe, Single versus Multiple Set Resistance Training :Recent Developments in the controversy Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research 2004, 18 (3) 660-667
6. BRIAN L. WOLFES LINDA M. LEMURA^, AND PHILLIP J. Cole Quantitative Analysis of Single- vs. Multiple set Programs in Resistance Training Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, 2004, 18(1), 35-47
7. Kelly, S.B., L.E. Brown, J.W. Coburn, S.M. Zinder, L.M. Gardner, and D. Nguyen. The effect of single versus multiple sets on strength. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research. 21(4):1003-1006
8. Martim Bottaroa, Jo?ao Velosoa, BelmiroFreitas de Sallesb, Roberto Sim?aoc, Rodrigo Celesa and Lee E. Brown Early phase adaptations of single vs. multiple sets of strength training on upper and lower body strength gains Isokinetics and Exercise Science 17 (2009) 207?212
9. SOFIA BA GENHAMMAR & EVA EKVALL HANSSON Repeated sets or single set of resistance training -A systematic review Advances in Physiotherapy. 2007; 9: 154160
10. Richard A. Winett Meta-Analyses Do Not Support Performance of Multiple Sets or High Volume Resistance Training Journal of Exercise Physiology Online Oct 2004, Vol. 7 Issue 5, p10-11
11. Frolich, M.,Emrich, E., Schmidtbleicher, D. The Outcome Effects of Single-Set Versus Multiple-Set Training?An Advanced Replication Study Research in Sports Medicine, 18:157?175, 2010
12. Gonzalez-Badillo, J.J., E.M. Gorostiaga, R. Arellano, and M. Izquierdo. Moderate resistance training volume produces more favorable strength gains than high or low volumes during a short-term training cycle. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research 19(3):689-697. 2005
13. Humburg. H,, H. Baars, J. Schroder, R. Reer, and KJaus-Michael Braumann. 1-set vs. 3-set resistance training-A crossover study Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research 21(2):578-582. 20
Victor Tringali MS, CSCS, PES, CPT
Victor Tringali holds a Master of Science degree in Exercise Science from California University as well as multiple nationally-accredited health and fitness-related certifications-including specialties in Strength and Conditioning, Performance Enhancement, Speed Development, and Personal Fitness training. For more than 20 years he?s designed exercise programs for many population sub-segments-including elite athletes, women, physically challenged persons and senior citizens. He has authored numerous articles and research reviews and has lectured and presented for numerous schools and corporations on various topics of health and fitness.
From 2000-2007 he was a well-recognized 5-time National Finalist at the NPC National Bodybuilding Championships and NPC USA Championships. He continues to support the bodybuilding community as a professional judge for the National Physique Committee (NPC) as well as offering coaching, presentations and consulting to physique athletes, health clubs, and personal trainers. For more information visit: Team Vic
by Victor Tringali MS, CSCS, PES, CPT
The benefits of resistance training depend on the manipulation of several variables, including the intensity and frequency of training, as well as the volume of exercise needed to meet the goals of the individual.
Training volume is generally estimated from the total number of sets and repetitions performed during a training session. Several systems including the nervous, metabolic, hormonal, and muscular have been shown to be sensitive to training volume. Altering training volume can be accomplished by changing the number of exercises performed per session, the number of repetitions performed per set, or the number of sets performed per exercise. Without altering the intensity of the program, volume may be increased by either increasing the number of sets and/or exercises performed.
For adults interested in general health and fitness, the American College of Sports Medicine (ACSM) and the Surgeon General recommend a weight training regimen that requires a single set per exercise for 8?12 repetitions. These recommendations are based on the time efficiency and the similar improvements in strength observed when comparing single and multiple-set programs. Although training volume has been examined in this fashion, research studies show mixed results for the optimal training volume per muscle group or training session when the goal is to maximize muscular strength and hypertrophy. Total work, in addition to the forces developed, has been implicated for gains in muscular strength and hypertrophy. Traditional strength training (heavy weight, low repetitions, and long rest periods) has produced significant strength and muscle hypertrophy however, it has been suggested that the total work involved with traditional strength training may not maximize these two benefits and that multiple sets may elicit superior results.
Modern day bodybuilders utilize specially designed training programs in the quest for increased strength and maximum muscle hypertrophy. It would be prudent for these same individuals to attempt to attain these benefits by undertaking the minimal volume of exercisenecessary and not the highest tolerable volume. That is, the minimal volume to achieve the desired response. Typical bodybuilding programs consist of performing multiple sets-sometimes as many as 20-30 sets per muscle group in a single training session. Given the time-consuming nature as well as the potential inroads to recovery characteristic of these training methods you would think it wasreasonableto assume that strong scientific proof must have been found to justify them.Andmost of the scientific evidence must have shown that this high volume of training produces significantly better results than the lower volume trainingmethods.
Although many athletes have utilized these programs successfully, these results are purely anecdotal and raise the question of whether this is an optimal or efficient protocol. And could the same individuals have achieved the equal or even superior results with significantly less training volume? Further, there are many studies that support 1-set programs as being equally effective as multiple-set programs. The new ACSM Guidelines recommend one set for each of 8-10 exercises and state that the preponderance of evidence reports similar gains in muscular strength, hypertrophy, power, and endurance as a result of single or multiple-set programs.
Bodybuilders and trainers who advocate the high-volume approach may argue that because the majority of athletes train in this manner, it must be the best way. Other bodybuilders-such as 6-time Mr. Olympia Dorian Yates, achieved extraordinary development with a fraction of the training volume of some of his fellow competitors. Whereas Yates? program consisted of performing one all-out set to failure and sometimes beyond failure for each exercise, total working sets in a training session were in the range of 3-6 sets for larger muscle groups and in the range of 2-3 for smaller ones. Most bodybuilders? programs today consist of 4-5 times this volume.
The literature examining the effects of various volumes on strength and hypertrophy has yielded conflicting results. Based on the research, there appears to be no conclusive answer as to whether one set or multiple elicits superior gains. However, after review of the research covering the past 20 years, one can conclude that while there are many studies that support multiple sets as being superior to a single set, these studies (dozens of them) define multiple sets as being in the range of 3-8 sets per muscle group in a training session. And most studies are in the 3-6 set range-similar to the volume used by Yates during his competitive career. In fact, I am unaware of a single study that supports superior results beyond 8 sets. Therefore, even if we were to concede that multiple sets are in fact superior to one-set programs, that still suggests a total training volume of 3-8 sets to achieve an optimal dose-response. This is significantly lower than the popular high-volume approach of many modern day bodybuilders.
As the body of research continues to grow, an answer to the question of increasing volume, or sets of resistance exercise, for increasing strength and muscle mass should become clearer. However, as of now there appears to be no scientific rationale for training beyond 8 sets per muscle group in a single session and in many cases significantly less may be all that is required to elicit optimal gains.And any forward-thinking bodybuilder, fitness trainer or strength athlete with a goal of maximizing strength and/or muscle development should consider relying on the preponderance of the research literature as opposed to anecdotal examples before attempting to design an effective and efficient protocol to achieve the desired goal. If we are to accept either the theory of a higher volume or lower volume protocol as being superior, we would still need to know at what frequency or relative intensity gains can be maximized with that volume of training. These questions need to be answered in order to achieve optimal success of a resistance training program and leave room for further investigation.
Train smart and good luck!
Team Vic
References:
1. American College of Sports Medicine. Position Stand: progression models in resistance training for healthy adults. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2009;41(3):687?708.
2. Krieger, JW. Single vs. multiple sets of resistance exercise for muscle hypertrophy- A meta-analysis. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research 24(4): 1150-1159, 2010
3. R?nnestad, B.R., W. Egeland, N.H. Kvamme, P.E.Refsnes, F. Kadi, and T. Raastad. Dissimilar effects of one- and three-set strength training on strength and muscle mass gains in upper and lower body in untrained subjects. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research 21(1):157?163. 2007.
4. Ralph N. Carpinelli and Robert M. Otto Strength Training Single versus Multiple Sets Sports Medicine 1998 Aug; 26 (2): 73-84
5. Daniel A. Galvao, Dennis R. Taffe, Single versus Multiple Set Resistance Training :Recent Developments in the controversy Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research 2004, 18 (3) 660-667
6. BRIAN L. WOLFES LINDA M. LEMURA^, AND PHILLIP J. Cole Quantitative Analysis of Single- vs. Multiple set Programs in Resistance Training Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, 2004, 18(1), 35-47
7. Kelly, S.B., L.E. Brown, J.W. Coburn, S.M. Zinder, L.M. Gardner, and D. Nguyen. The effect of single versus multiple sets on strength. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research. 21(4):1003-1006
8. Martim Bottaroa, Jo?ao Velosoa, BelmiroFreitas de Sallesb, Roberto Sim?aoc, Rodrigo Celesa and Lee E. Brown Early phase adaptations of single vs. multiple sets of strength training on upper and lower body strength gains Isokinetics and Exercise Science 17 (2009) 207?212
9. SOFIA BA GENHAMMAR & EVA EKVALL HANSSON Repeated sets or single set of resistance training -A systematic review Advances in Physiotherapy. 2007; 9: 154160
10. Richard A. Winett Meta-Analyses Do Not Support Performance of Multiple Sets or High Volume Resistance Training Journal of Exercise Physiology Online Oct 2004, Vol. 7 Issue 5, p10-11
11. Frolich, M.,Emrich, E., Schmidtbleicher, D. The Outcome Effects of Single-Set Versus Multiple-Set Training?An Advanced Replication Study Research in Sports Medicine, 18:157?175, 2010
12. Gonzalez-Badillo, J.J., E.M. Gorostiaga, R. Arellano, and M. Izquierdo. Moderate resistance training volume produces more favorable strength gains than high or low volumes during a short-term training cycle. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research 19(3):689-697. 2005
13. Humburg. H,, H. Baars, J. Schroder, R. Reer, and KJaus-Michael Braumann. 1-set vs. 3-set resistance training-A crossover study Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research 21(2):578-582. 20
Victor Tringali MS, CSCS, PES, CPT
Victor Tringali holds a Master of Science degree in Exercise Science from California University as well as multiple nationally-accredited health and fitness-related certifications-including specialties in Strength and Conditioning, Performance Enhancement, Speed Development, and Personal Fitness training. For more than 20 years he?s designed exercise programs for many population sub-segments-including elite athletes, women, physically challenged persons and senior citizens. He has authored numerous articles and research reviews and has lectured and presented for numerous schools and corporations on various topics of health and fitness.
From 2000-2007 he was a well-recognized 5-time National Finalist at the NPC National Bodybuilding Championships and NPC USA Championships. He continues to support the bodybuilding community as a professional judge for the National Physique Committee (NPC) as well as offering coaching, presentations and consulting to physique athletes, health clubs, and personal trainers. For more information visit: Team Vic
