Hey All! Feel free to check out the Alpha Progression App: alphaprogression.com/HouseofHypertrophy Read more for timestamps and statistical significance discussion: Timestamps: 0:00 Intro 0:28 Part 1: How Many Sets? 4:34 Part 2: These Exercises Build More Muscle? 9:23 Part 3: Same Gains in Less Training Time? Many people are under the impression that when we get a non-statistically significant result, we have "proof" there was not a real difference between groups, or that statistically significant results "prove" there was a real difference. However, this is a mistake. We say a study found statistically significant results if a "p-value" was (typically) less than 0.05. A p-value tells us the probability of obtaining results at least as extreme as those observed if we assumed there was no difference between groups. Thus, a p-value of 0.05 tells us that there's a 5% chance of getting results at least as extreme as we did if we assumed there was no difference. Given that 5% is generally considered a small chance, we suppose there could be a difference between groups. Hence obtaining a p-value of 0.05 or smaller gives us a "statistically significant" finding and we suspect there is a real difference between groups. However, notice that 0.05 is pretty arbitrary. In fact, any p-value threshold we use as a cut-off to delineate between "significance" and "nonsignificance" is arbitrary and debatable. Furthermore, since this is probability, there's nothing certain about it. It's entirely possible to get a statistically significant result when there's a real difference between groups (and vice versa). This is not to say p-values are useless or should never be used, it's just that we need to be clear on what they tell us. To understand the results of a study, considering all the given statistics and other research is a good idea. Considering this, looking at the results of the calf set study detailed in the video in conjunction with the other literature, I feel we can appropriately conclude that for pretty much all muscle growth measurements, the results followed a dose-response (12 weekly sets > 9 weekly sets > 6 weekly sets) despite the fact not all differences were statistically significant.
Thank you for another informative video! I'd be interested in the following subject related to supersets and reducing workout time: Supersetting an isolation exercise after a (somewhat) compound exercise. Example: A set of dumbbell presses or deficit pushups will mainly target the pecs and get those (close) to failure. In the meanwhile, the triceps get half a workout. So I like moving on to a triceps exercise without rest, e.g. overhead extensions; That saves me half the triceps workout... but I wonder if it's as effective??
Am I over training? I do 4 exercises per muscle group twice per week. The first 2 exercises are more compound type exercises and the last 2 exercises are more for hypertrophy... so in the first 2 exercises I do 3 sets of max 10 reps... and the last 2 exercises I do 2 sets of max 10 reps, per muscle group... that's a total of 12 sets per muscles group per session, 24 sets over all per week, and that works out to about 100 reps per muscle group per session and around 200 per week max... Eg: Bench press 3 x 10 Incline bench 3 x 10 Cable Flys 2 x 10 Chest dips 2 x 10 Twice per week... Same goes for back, triceps and biceps... Legs and abs are 2 exercises with 2 sets per exercise and a max of 10 reps each... All exercises, sets and reps are done with 1 minute rest intervals... Am I over training? Any feed back would be great...
Personal Secret (anecdotal) 1 Set to failure on every exercise until you hit a plateau then 2 or 3 sets for a few weeks and waatch the plateau vanish, then go back to one set until another plateau
00:02 Training with higher weekly set numbers improves muscle growth 01:50 Performing nine or more weekly sets for a muscle produces greater growth. 03:28 Optimal muscle growth with 12 to 20 weekly sets per muscle group 05:09 Lowering overload training leads to significant muscle growth. 06:47 Nordic curls maximize hamstring muscle growth 08:28 Training muscles at longer lengths may promote more muscle growth 10:15 Antagonist supersets with multiple exercises in trained subjects for faster muscle growth 11:55 Consider incorporating antagonist super sets for muscle growth
Heads up! I presume you made this with AI? There are some errors. The 06:47 timestamp "Nordic curls maximize hamstrings growth" is not correct, rather it's seated leg curls that produced overall more hamstrings growth. Also, the 10:15 timestamp suggests antagonist supersets produced faster growth, this is not the case. Growth was similar 🙏
My apologies if anything is overwhelming or confusing! I tried to do my best to explain how these new studies fit into the overall research, and they all generally further support what' has previously been mentioned on the channel. If you have any questions, I can do my best to answer them!
@@HouseofHypertrophy I mean, it's a lot of stuff to keep in mind when planning a workout but it's better to have more data as possible. I think u do a great job at providing the data and it's up to us to use it ^^
This is gold! Of course there's the obvious biceps/triceps and quads/hams, but I can already visualize how great it must feel to pair something like a Decline Bench with a chest supported T-Bar Row, appreciate ya laying out the not-so-obvious antagonist muscles!
I think it's better to think in terms of movements instead of muscles for this. The lower pec isn't exactly the antagonist to the upper trap and you won't be able to isolate either one. Instead, pair a vertical pull with a vertical push, a horizontal pull with a horizontal push, a leg extension with a leg curl, a biceps curl with a triceps extension etc.
@@benjoleo in terms of movements The lower pec is exactly the antagonist to the upper trap when you superset Dips & shrugs they are the same movement except that in shrugs you don't bend your elbows unlike Dips
This is the best, no-nonsense bodybuilding resource I have ever come across. The research studies don’t necessarily demonstrate what’s best for everyone in every situation, but they are a great place to start and accurately reflect what I’ve observed over four decades of training. A beginner can save years of wasted effort mining this channel.
I like the supersets. I train at home every day and i always try to do my target in 30 min. It's very difficult and it requires a lot of willpower to not just rest between sets but when I do I gain a lot of time. I also do 4 day split: - Chest, triceps and neck. Weighted push ups, handstand push ups, skull crushers, neck extensions and neck curls - Lats and mid back. Pull ups, weighted pull ups and standing bent over rows focusing on the mid back muscles - Legs and shoulders. Lateral raises, upright rows until sternum, single leg calf raises, leg extensions, bulgarian split squats, hip thrusts. - Biceps, forearms, abs. Crunches, hanging leg raises and curls (supinated for biceps, pronated or reversed for brachialis). Day 2 also trains forearms indirectly. Except weighted push and pull ups, everything is either 12 or 20 reps (normal or legs). I find legs benefit a lot from some borderline cardio because i use them on the daily, and I don't want to go on a hike and die. The only two exercises I train with very high reps are crunches (I can't figure out how to do weighted at home, so this is the next best thing) and hip thrusts (because I want to perform well if you know what I mean). I started doing everything at once but as I started balancing my workout, reducing time and isolating more muscles I split into push pull, then push pull legs and now this. I used to sometimes be still sore on the 3 day split because remember I train every day without rest, but now I'm always ok. As you can see each day always has some very different groups I can use to rest in between; neck vs chest/triceps, legs vs shoulders, biceps/forearms vs abs. Day 2 is the only one I still simply just rest in between because nothing else feels good when I'm doing pull ups idkwhy. Any tips?
Have been training steady, for about 9.5 years. My split is 6 on 1 off, leg day is Wednesday and Saturday, for calves I do 4 sets standing, 4 sets seated each leg day. It has worked great for my gains.
I do plan to sometime make a video on crafting programs for building muscle! But it is possible for you to take the general principles outlined in the videos and attempt on your own. Nothing will ever be perfect, so don't be afraid to get things wrong! You can also adjust and experiement overtime on yourself 😃
Renaissance Periodization has good lecture series for programming a-z for strength or hypertrophy probably 5-6 years old now, so House of Hypertrophy's info is more recent and may better represent the research's center of mass, maybe this helps you? Jeff Nippard is another evidence-based dude who may be helpful to you
Planning for muscle growth is pretty simple compared to planning for strength training. Jeff Nippard recently released pure bodybuilding programs and there are videos showing the exercises on his channel.
Is it possible to create a document that contains the summaries from each of the “Ultimate Guide” videos for each muscle group? I think it would really help when creating plans and trying new things to see what works best. Thank you for the great videos💪🏻❤️
If I ever have a dozen hours to spare Ill go through them all and try to make one. Ive been taking notes on them in a notes app but its really targeted towards my own goals.
I only train with super and giant sets thanks to Natural Hypertrophies Channel and advise. Will probably never go back to training traditionally, absolutely love it. Chin-Ups and Dips is my favorite combo.
@@phoneywheezesuper sets are two different exercises performed back to back. Example bicep curls and then Tricep press-downs. Giant sets are 3 or more exercises. So Bicep curls and then Tricep press-downs and weighed sit ups performed one after the other with minimal rest.
@@phoneywheeze alternating between 2 (superset) or 3+ (giantset) exercises with little to no rest. While you do one set for exercise A the muscles you use in exercise B are resting, you can squeeze in more volume in less time. Better done with exercises that do not interfere too much with one another. A circuit in callisthenics is an extreme example of a giant set. There are videos on the channel about this.
Nordic hamstring curl on a GHD bench with hip flexed would be a better alternative to stretch the muscle out more, easy to load and it hits the muscle really well.
Hey, can you make a video about all the compound exercises to target every muscle and every functional movement? That would be a good video to appeal to both bodybuilders and athletes.
Your videos have been and always be my recommended videos for anyone wanting to understand an easy and simplified but thorough understanding of how to lift. Great information and solid imagery for people to see and understand. Beyond this, I have been waiting on a study to be done on partial bench press as it has been stated that lifting in the stretch position is best for muscle growth. So, do we no longer need to push all the way up and should do partial bench press to maintain that stretch position? Thanks in advanced, fellow lover of what you do.
Thank you so much! I think it's your choice. Currently we have no direct research on partials with the bench press, but my thinking is that you can experiment with long length partials on the exercise if you like. I have no doubt it will still build muscle quite well, the question is if it's better. Hopefully future research will help answer this!
First off, your videos are awesome - I only just found your channel today but I'm already subscribed after watching 4 of them.... Having said that, the animation of the dude on the leg press with the "overload weight" falling down and hitting his straight legs is going to give me NIGHTMARES!!! 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
HIT High Intensity Training is the best.I do 4-6 sets per body part with super intensity.I only train each body part once a week.i also do cardio. Ive made more gains than when i used to do 12 sets and training a body part twice a week. I used to be a competitive bodybuilder. Kudos to Mike Mentzer and Dorian Yates.
on trained individuals, there is evidence supporting more muscle damage training at lengthened positions, thus resulting in less muscle protein synthesis directed toward hypertrophic benefit and more towards reparation of the muscle fibers as a result of calcium ion overload. how are we neglecting the idea that muscle damage and recovery is a factor in suggesting training 12 sets per week while also suggesting lengthened position training which further damages muscle? much love, HUGE fan of the channel
Muscle damage seems to reduce quite a bit with the repeated bout effect. The study which suggests damage causes less MPS towards hypertrophy shows this itself, as after 3-4 weeks damage was substantially reduced. I know there are some folks in the fitness industry that suggest the reduction in damage from the repeated bout effect isn't that much, but (in my opinon) the best study on the topic shows the repeated bout effect is quite powerful over 8 weeks. I covered that study in this video: ua-cam.com/video/KuUjEC9G5FY/v-deo.html
Overall, the video suggests that performing at least 9-12 weekly sets per muscle group, training muscles at longer lengths and incorporating antagonist supersets into your workout routine can all be helpful for maximizing muscle growth.
Of course you will gain more muscle mass with training in more than 9 sets than less than 9 sets a week if the intensity is always the same. If you want to get the same results with lower frequency and less sets you need to have a way higher intensity. I'm doing Heavy Duty Training by Mike Mentzer but with my own kind of training methods and exercises and it works like crazy. The difference is that I use a weight that is something like 95% 1 rep max weight and I rep it for 6-12 reps per set as slow as I can and with 4-5 negative reps on top of it when my muscles aren't strong enough anymore to pull the weight down by itself. I have 1 working set for every exercise and that is more than enough. Since doing that my strength grew by 10% in my arms, 25% in my back, 7,5% in my legs, 15% in my chest and 10% in my shoulders in just 2,5 months. Important to note is that I train for 2 years now and I'm doing Heavy Duty since the 2,5 months now so my progress is stagnating more and more since a year. Normally it took me 6 months for the same increase in power of 10% in every part when doing my old training by switching between 1rep max training and hypertrophy training every 4-8 weeks depending on what I'm doing now. Also my muscles are growing like hell since doing the new training tecnique. The only downside of Heavy Duty Training is that it is REALLY strenuous and I mean REALLY REALLY STRENUOUS! but the progress of doing it properly is definitely worth it. I'm even getting asked since starting this kind of training if I started doing steroids (I'm natural) so it definitely works. I'm a little disappointed that no study really tries to really compare them by trying to find out the perfect point between intensity and volume that has the best results. I't always only "More or less sets than that with close to failure." or "1 rep max weightlifting vs hypertrophy training." or something similar but never "Maximum intensity with 1-2 working sets to maximum failure vs volume hypertrophy training and is there a perfect point between both of it that lets you achieve even better results than just completely intensity or volume?" That is what I want to see. But it is really good that they talked about lowering overload training in this video.
After applying the lessons from every House of Hypertrophy for the last few months, my gains have multiplied by a factor of about 50. I can't fit in my house anymore. Thanks HoH!
Interesting that many other channels state that fewer reps (6 per set) with more weight are better for growth in large muscles. I started doing antagonist super sets in the 80s but they weren't labeled as such then, just made sense to me.
I favour them mainly because it’s just so much more time efficient. I know you could argue my second movement of each superset may suffer a bit from forearm/grip fatigue, but I’ve selected carefully over time! I’m surprised more people don’t do it.
Training to failure 1x frequency 4-10 sets 2x frequency 2-5 sets 3x frequency 1-3 sets All depending on training status, individual variance, rest times and exercises performed. These volume studies are not reliable and they contradict dozens of other studies.
These volume studies are always on untrained individuals, we have no idea how close they are training to failure, and they tend to only train one muscle group, so recovery doesn't really come into play. Try doing these studies, but on trained individuals and do 12 sets with EVERY muscle group. How can we apply these studies to trained individuals who are training the majority of muscle groups? 12+ sets per muscle group per week AND recover? Hahaha no.
@@rastaraptor6619 12+ sets is counting bench press as triceps and shoulder volume, rows as bicep volume etc. That's how those studies count it, so it is actually doable. I do 10 sets of lateral raises to failure a week currently, but more for other muscle groups.
I'm glad to hear the about the "decrease in nausea" reported overtime with supersets. In the interest of time, I've started doing more and can relate. Although not all antagonist based, like weighted dips/pullups/lunges - repeat.
Good stuff! Are you still planning to do a video on strength vs size? Despite your name, I actually don't follow you for the pure growth elements and am much more interested in being as strong as possible without bulk.
Love supersets. My approach is different tho, I'll do flys then bench press, shoulder press then lat raises, underhand lat pulldown with a bicep curl. Generally a compound movement followed by a light weight high rep isolation exercise. I've noticed a huge difference in time and effectivenes. Superset of bent over rows and y raises really helped my upper back develope
I have been working out for almost 2 years now, on the second year I changed my way of working out, doing pretty much only 3-4 weekly sets for each muscle, and pretty much grew and doing well, progressing with weights and all, and I want to say I am pretty much above average. I am still not sure whether actually 9+ weekly sets per muscle group is ideal.
Over an almost 15 year period ( in total - with 2 hiatuses of 2 years in between ) i 've trained ( naturally ) using all kinds of systems in regards to amount of reps , sets , training frequency , training principles etc. The best results i've ever gotten for calves is doing just one set to failure , with a focus on the top contraction , per workout. Two or three times a week. That's it. Might not be for everyone , but i've met other people who've built excellent calves this way. ( used by Dave Palumbo , who developed great calves , as well )
I've recently had great success with calves (begginer to intermediate, 1y of lifting). I do it as an antagonist superset on push days, in between bench sets, on a leverage squat machine. I do very heavy loads with one leg, then use both legs to add reps at half the weight (2 legs simultaneously). The key part is the stretch at the bottom, which feels good, unlike when sitting down at a calf machine. I don't really worry about sets and reps, just do as much as I can without it interfering with the push workout.
Exciting studies! Any videos showing the researcher definition of "momentary muscle failure" (MMF)? I've seen some researchers (example: Brad J Schoenfeld) who consider MMF as happening when the positive movement stops vs some who keep holding in static position, and then continue resisting hard against the negative.
A day that HoH uploads is automatically a good day 🥰 Am I wrong in stating that RDLs will also build more muscle than a Nordic curl? And I’m performing my RDLs with a hex and straight legged, so I use a lot more glutes, but my hamstrings do get a lot of growth stimulus too, right? 🤔 I tend do switch the style within sets: I first do a rep with straight legs, followed by a rep with bent legs, and just repeat this. I also perform them on step-ups to have more ROM 😅 If you answer me: thank you! But if you don’t: thank you anyway for the video 😅🙏
Thank you as always my friend! I believe you're correct. There's no direct studies on that, but I would assume overall hamstrings growth should be better with RDL's due to the combined hip flexion with straight knees. It's quite possible there's slight regional differences as an RDL is a hip extension exercise while Nordic curls are a knee flexion exercise. One day I should create a guide to overall hamstrings training to clear that up, but in general, it does seem like slightly different regions of the hamstrings (upper vs lower regions) are involved differently during hip extension and knee flexion exercises 🙏
Am I over training? I do 4 exercises per muscle group twice per week. The first 2 exercises are more compound type exercises and the last 2 exercises are more for hypertrophy... so in the first 2 exercises I do 3 sets of max 10 reps... and the last 2 exercises I do 2 sets of max 10 reps, per muscle group... that's a total of 12 sets per muscles group per session, 24 sets over all per week, and that works out to about 100 reps per muscle group per session and around 200 per week max... Eg: Bench press 3 x 10 Incline bench 3 x 10 Cable Flys 2 x 10 Chest dips 2 x 10 Twice per week... Same goes for back, triceps and biceps... Legs and abs are 2 exercises with 2 sets per exercise and a max of 10 reps each... All exercises, sets and reps are done with 1 minute rest intervals... Am I over training? Any feed back would be great...
I love your vids so much, like literally, i wanna know everything abt my body, but i'm in shock only for one your video, so you doing really great, keep do vids, i keep watching :). btw i'm russian, and bad at english, and i write it by myself, so hope you understand everything i said before.
By the way, that cartoon showing the leg extension is not depicting optimal seat position. You should have the seat back as far as it will go so you can lean back and it will make the quad muscle more extended as you do the extensions, thus creating more tension.
When you start becoming fickle about cartoons, you know you're not getting enough time in the gym. We CAN tell that you're not busy at all the parties you get invited to. That's for sure
As long as you're doing something that somewhat works, the biggest determining factor is time. A person training for 3 years is going to be bigger than someone with 1 regardless of the little changes.
In Part 2 you showed a chart where the muscle volume of the hamstrings increased by over 15% during the study period. How can this be explained? Extrapolate the study period to a year and everyone would double their legs.
Max growth per session analysis would be interesting. I can only train two times per week and usually do 12 sets per muscle group. Would like to know, if going higher would benefit me.
It's not a matter of gains, but what leads to better gains. For trained guys there are drop sets and not much else different from untrained people. Though untrained can benefit from those as well.
I only train 24-30 sets per week total for consistent strength gains. I do not want to gain much muscle mass or change my body weight by much. I know this data is about hypertrophy, but I wanted to comment to point out the various goals there are for training. With this knowledge we can say, train very hard and heavy for a lower number of sets, getting stronger while minimizing short-term hypertrophy.
Muscles are not the same, some muscles benefit from higher frequency and sets but other benefits from higher load and low volume, calves and legs in general and designed for endurance and they can handle more frequency and they like higher training volume like going for higher reps and sets for legs. But other muscles in upper body like arms and chest likes higher load and lower volume than legs. results may vary between individuals that's why you need to find what works for you.
The question is... are you in the gym to hurry, or to grow? Speaking from experience... You will get the same results in a shorter time when you do supersets, but you will also... 1. cause more systemic fatigue (meaning you'll skip sessions later in the week or have to take a deload week after 3 weeks of lifting hard) 2. be drenched in sweat and need to sit around catching your breath for 30 minutes after you get home/get to work. 3. make smaller improvements than if you'd rested 3-4 minutes between harder sets (because you'd be limited by the target muscles rather than cardiorespiratory fitness and nausea) The choice is yours. I have gotten much bigger since decreasing the pace of my workouts. Squeezing in a 30-minute workout before work was better than not working out, BUT it is not as beneficial or enjoyable as taking my time and allowing myself to recover for 3-3.5 minutes before doing hard, good quality reps.
supersets are fine for isolation movements with small muscles. supersets with big muscles like chest and back may work for beginners, but not for well trained intermediates. the fatique ist just too high.
It is clear, we have 4 studies that now shows 34 sets is better than 20 sets. We dont really know where the cut off is, but volume can be much much higher than we thought before
A good research would be the assessment between 4 sets 3 times a week on a single muscle and 4 sets 3 times a weel with other muscles trained. Mostly to assess if recovery is an issue.
With over 3 decades of training I still prefer the Mentzer 'Heavy Duty' training protocol for best results - low volume-high intensity sets- infrequent sessions (2x per week)
Amazing video as usual! What are you thoughts on "overhead triceps extension "? I have never seen such dichotomy about it being an emphasis on the long head of the triceps....
Thank you so much! I believe it does develop the long head well. This is a fairly recent video I did on the triceps: ua-cam.com/video/fyPZ9rGVBWc/v-deo.html Those who suggest it doesn't train the long head much seem to be using leverage/EMG data. But I think there are some important problems with doing this in this circumstance. The most important thing is we have direct data measuring actual muscle growth showing great long head hypertrophy from overhead extensions :)
In my opinion there is one problem with these studies about weekly number of sets: There is no recording of training the participants are doing beside training the muscle group of interest (in this case calfs). Therefore, the influence of other training cannot be evaluated and estimated. This could lead to the problem that e.g. every participant of the study is not training any other muscle groups at all and is therefore able to recover from 12 sets calf raises per week. But the "normal" bodybuilder, who is training lots of different muscle groups, could not recover from doing 12 sets per week for every muscle group, because of the body is overloaded with recovering every muscle group. And therefore, the bodybuilder will build less muscles with 12 sets as with e.g. 6 sets. Anyway, in this "calf size" studie and a few other studies I've read, the training besides muscle group of interest is not recorded or controlled. Maybe there are other studies, where this is the case, but I dont know them.
But wouldn't higher set numbers require less weight/reps? I train to failure for the final (3rd) set - there's no way I could do 4 without reducing the weight or reps per set. Does this still benefit from greater relative muscle mass increase?
I intuit doing pulldowns and rows with isokinetic exercises is not optimal. I would imagine a machine being harder in the beginning (opposite to resistance bands) would give better growth
a question, I perform shoulder press 3 sets on tuesday and then another 3 sets on friday, a total 6 sets a week for side delt. But I also do 3 sets lateral raise along with it which means that I am hitting the same muscle (side delt) 12 sets a week in total?
I think it is very worth to be pointed out that these individuals trained only one group muscle meaning that part of the body they trained was the only muscle that required resources to recover after training. Let's say per training session I do 4 different exercises for different muscle groups such chest, back, legs and shoulders. That means my body is required to recover all muscle groups that underwent 4 sets per session. Differently put, I may not recover after working out on 4 muscles per session with 4 sets for each muscle group.
Consistency… Person a starts on 5x5 and moves to hypertrophy training will have a different result to person b who started on hypertrophy going to 5x5. No one responds the same to everything no matter the control experiment. Some people have poor joint health, I can barely handle leg exercises after squatting for 10 years to 3x bodyweight squat. Others might not be able to get to even 2, some might be able to get to where I got and stay there. Same with deadlifts, almost 3.5x my bodyweight, my back is wearing out, others may be fine others won’t get close. Either way, my legs don’t put on size easily but get very strong no matter how I train; and others may build lots of muscle and not get very strong.
Not sure about these studies and the correlation your drawing. On machines and lighter movements I tend to do more sets at a higher frequency. For compound lifts Eg squat bench etc I will do roughly 5x5. I wouldn't do say 5x10 on bench at a lower weight - I don't think that would build more muscle.
Hello, love your videos! 🤙💪Can you make a topic on Static contractions (Overcoming Isometric or Yielding Isometric) Vs Dynamic contract ("normal" traning) for muscle growth?💪💪 Sorry for bad English! Have a Nice Day!
I personally superset AND droplet. It is not the most hypertrophic but I'm almost certain it's the most efficient. Roughly, I'd approximate that I'm getting 85% of my potential gains for a given session in only 50% of the time.
Hi, could you please make a detailed video about how many sets for each muscle group? Because for your rear delt for example, you need less volume then bigger muscles like your quads.
Hey All! Feel free to check out the Alpha Progression App: alphaprogression.com/HouseofHypertrophy
Read more for timestamps and statistical significance discussion:
Timestamps:
0:00 Intro
0:28 Part 1: How Many Sets?
4:34 Part 2: These Exercises Build More Muscle?
9:23 Part 3: Same Gains in Less Training Time?
Many people are under the impression that when we get a non-statistically significant result, we have "proof" there was not a real difference between groups, or that statistically significant results "prove" there was a real difference.
However, this is a mistake.
We say a study found statistically significant results if a "p-value" was (typically) less than 0.05.
A p-value tells us the probability of obtaining results at least as extreme as those observed if we assumed there was no difference between groups. Thus, a p-value of 0.05 tells us that there's a 5% chance of getting results at least as extreme as we did if we assumed there was no difference. Given that 5% is generally considered a small chance, we suppose there could be a difference between groups. Hence obtaining a p-value of 0.05 or smaller gives us a "statistically significant" finding and we suspect there is a real difference between groups.
However, notice that 0.05 is pretty arbitrary. In fact, any p-value threshold we use as a cut-off to delineate between "significance" and "nonsignificance" is arbitrary and debatable.
Furthermore, since this is probability, there's nothing certain about it. It's entirely possible to get a statistically significant result when there's a real difference between groups (and vice versa).
This is not to say p-values are useless or should never be used, it's just that we need to be clear on what they tell us. To understand the results of a study, considering all the given statistics and other research is a good idea.
Considering this, looking at the results of the calf set study detailed in the video in conjunction with the other literature, I feel we can appropriately conclude that for pretty much all muscle growth measurements, the results followed a dose-response (12 weekly sets > 9 weekly sets > 6 weekly sets) despite the fact not all differences were statistically significant.
how did you learn to edit and what software do you use?
so when comparing the lowering phase training vs regular, did they use the same weight and reps?
Thank you for another informative video! I'd be interested in the following subject related to supersets and reducing workout time: Supersetting an isolation exercise after a (somewhat) compound exercise. Example: A set of dumbbell presses or deficit pushups will mainly target the pecs and get those (close) to failure. In the meanwhile, the triceps get half a workout. So I like moving on to a triceps exercise without rest, e.g. overhead extensions; That saves me half the triceps workout... but I wonder if it's as effective??
How many reps are in each set, probably a stupid question
Am I over training?
I do 4 exercises per muscle group twice per week. The first 2 exercises are more compound type exercises and the last 2 exercises are more for hypertrophy... so in the first 2 exercises I do 3 sets of max 10 reps... and the last 2 exercises I do 2 sets of max 10 reps, per muscle group... that's a total of 12 sets per muscles group per session, 24 sets over all per week, and that works out to about 100 reps per muscle group per session and around 200 per week max...
Eg: Bench press 3 x 10
Incline bench 3 x 10
Cable Flys 2 x 10
Chest dips 2 x 10
Twice per week...
Same goes for back, triceps and biceps...
Legs and abs are 2 exercises with 2 sets per exercise and a max of 10 reps each...
All exercises, sets and reps are done with 1 minute rest intervals...
Am I over training? Any feed back would be great...
The info across the web being “Pretty confusing” is a massive understatement. 😂 Great content!
Haha, thank you so much!
@@HouseofHypertrophyHow much sets are best for biceps by this study?
Personal Secret (anecdotal)
1 Set to failure on every exercise until you hit a plateau
then 2 or 3 sets for a few weeks and waatch the plateau vanish,
then go back to one set until another plateau
00:02 Training with higher weekly set numbers improves muscle growth
01:50 Performing nine or more weekly sets for a muscle produces greater growth.
03:28 Optimal muscle growth with 12 to 20 weekly sets per muscle group
05:09 Lowering overload training leads to significant muscle growth.
06:47 Nordic curls maximize hamstring muscle growth
08:28 Training muscles at longer lengths may promote more muscle growth
10:15 Antagonist supersets with multiple exercises in trained subjects for faster muscle growth
11:55 Consider incorporating antagonist super sets for muscle growth
Time is valuable. I thank you.
your info is highly appreciated. thank you
Thank you very much!
Heads up! I presume you made this with AI? There are some errors. The 06:47 timestamp "Nordic curls maximize hamstrings growth" is not correct, rather it's seated leg curls that produced overall more hamstrings growth. Also, the 10:15 timestamp suggests antagonist supersets produced faster growth, this is not the case. Growth was similar 🙏
@@HouseofHypertrophy thanks for the watchout! I noticed after watching the Nordic curls part from the timestamp and was surprised to see the opposite
I'm here again to get overwhelmed by new data.
My apologies if anything is overwhelming or confusing! I tried to do my best to explain how these new studies fit into the overall research, and they all generally further support what' has previously been mentioned on the channel. If you have any questions, I can do my best to answer them!
@@HouseofHypertrophy I mean, it's a lot of stuff to keep in mind when planning a workout but it's better to have more data as possible. I think u do a great job at providing the data and it's up to us to use it ^^
@@HouseofHypertrophy overwhelming in a good sense. I love it.
@takenghost7036🚂🚄🚅🚆
Antagonistic muscles:
lower pec & upper traps
mid pec & mid back
upper pec & rear delt
front delts & lats
triceps & biceps
wrist extensors & wrist flexors
abbs & erector spinae
gluteus maximus & hip flexors
gluteus medius & adductors
quads & hamstrings
calves & tibialis anterior
9:41
This is gold! Of course there's the obvious biceps/triceps and quads/hams, but I can already visualize how great it must feel to pair something like a Decline Bench with a chest supported T-Bar Row, appreciate ya laying out the not-so-obvious antagonist muscles!
I think it's better to think in terms of movements instead of muscles for this. The lower pec isn't exactly the antagonist to the upper trap and you won't be able to isolate either one. Instead, pair a vertical pull with a vertical push, a horizontal pull with a horizontal push, a leg extension with a leg curl, a biceps curl with a triceps extension etc.
@@benjoleo in terms of movements The lower pec is exactly the antagonist to the upper trap when you superset Dips & shrugs they are the same movement except that in shrugs you don't bend your elbows unlike Dips
Ok
Appreciate you covering our study
Thank YOU for the awesome work dude!
Two goats showing love 🙏
Another great, high-quality video from the House of Hypertrophy.
I appreciate your support, thank you!
Fun Fact double tapping a comment will like it
What? I thought this only worked on Instagram and TikTok.
Just double tapped your ass
I didn't know that 😹
Twice as hard but good comment for an exercise video.
Nice to know didnt know that🙂
Love these types of vids. Straight to the point without all the unneccesary fluff
This is the best, no-nonsense bodybuilding resource I have ever come across. The research studies don’t necessarily demonstrate what’s best for everyone in every situation, but they are a great place to start and accurately reflect what I’ve observed over four decades of training. A beginner can save years of wasted effort mining this channel.
I truly appreciate your kind words, thank you!
Awesome to see you getting recognised by other content creators . Been coming here for my best info for a good while
Thank you so much, I truly appreciate your support!
I like the supersets. I train at home every day and i always try to do my target in 30 min. It's very difficult and it requires a lot of willpower to not just rest between sets but when I do I gain a lot of time. I also do 4 day split:
- Chest, triceps and neck. Weighted push ups, handstand push ups, skull crushers, neck extensions and neck curls
- Lats and mid back. Pull ups, weighted pull ups and standing bent over rows focusing on the mid back muscles
- Legs and shoulders. Lateral raises, upright rows until sternum, single leg calf raises, leg extensions, bulgarian split squats, hip thrusts.
- Biceps, forearms, abs. Crunches, hanging leg raises and curls (supinated for biceps, pronated or reversed for brachialis). Day 2 also trains forearms indirectly.
Except weighted push and pull ups, everything is either 12 or 20 reps (normal or legs). I find legs benefit a lot from some borderline cardio because i use them on the daily, and I don't want to go on a hike and die. The only two exercises I train with very high reps are crunches (I can't figure out how to do weighted at home, so this is the next best thing) and hip thrusts (because I want to perform well if you know what I mean).
I started doing everything at once but as I started balancing my workout, reducing time and isolating more muscles I split into push pull, then push pull legs and now this. I used to sometimes be still sore on the 3 day split because remember I train every day without rest, but now I'm always ok.
As you can see each day always has some very different groups I can use to rest in between; neck vs chest/triceps, legs vs shoulders, biceps/forearms vs abs. Day 2 is the only one I still simply just rest in between because nothing else feels good when I'm doing pull ups idkwhy.
Any tips?
underrated channel fr
Have been training steady, for about 9.5 years. My split is 6 on 1 off, leg day is Wednesday and Saturday, for calves I do 4 sets standing, 4 sets seated each leg day. It has worked great for my gains.
Great video as always! I'm eating this information up and I'm always excited to learn new information. 🙂
Thank you my friend, I appreciate your support as always!
@@HouseofHypertrophy Definitely bro! I'll always be watching your videos and supporting you.
Please make a Video on how to plan the Workout for most muscle growth
I do plan to sometime make a video on crafting programs for building muscle! But it is possible for you to take the general principles outlined in the videos and attempt on your own. Nothing will ever be perfect, so don't be afraid to get things wrong! You can also adjust and experiement overtime on yourself 😃
Renaissance Periodization has good lecture series for programming a-z for strength or hypertrophy probably 5-6 years old now, so House of Hypertrophy's info is more recent and may better represent the research's center of mass, maybe this helps you? Jeff Nippard is another evidence-based dude who may be helpful to you
Planning for muscle growth is pretty simple compared to planning for strength training. Jeff Nippard recently released pure bodybuilding programs and there are videos showing the exercises on his channel.
Agree💯%! I also like Peter Khacharian. If I spelled that right!
Is it possible to create a document that contains the summaries from each of the “Ultimate Guide” videos for each muscle group? I think it would really help when creating plans and trying new things to see what works best.
Thank you for the great videos💪🏻❤️
If I ever have a dozen hours to spare Ill go through them all and try to make one. Ive been taking notes on them in a notes app but its really targeted towards my own goals.
@@o_schno problem bro I’ll take what I can get💪🏻
I only train with super and giant sets thanks to Natural Hypertrophies Channel and advise. Will probably never go back to training traditionally, absolutely love it. Chin-Ups and Dips is my favorite combo.
what are super and giant sets?
Superset = two exercises, example biceps and triceps. Giant sets = three or more superset exercises@@phoneywheeze
@@phoneywheezesuper sets are two different exercises performed back to back. Example bicep curls and then Tricep press-downs.
Giant sets are 3 or more exercises. So Bicep curls and then Tricep press-downs and weighed sit ups performed one after the other with minimal rest.
@@phoneywheeze alternating between 2 (superset) or 3+ (giantset) exercises with little to no rest. While you do one set for exercise A the muscles you use in exercise B are resting, you can squeeze in more volume in less time. Better done with exercises that do not interfere too much with one another. A circuit in callisthenics is an extreme example of a giant set. There are videos on the channel about this.
Same here. That combo also blows the arms up without doing curls or tri exercises.
Nordic hamstring curl on a GHD bench with hip flexed would be a better alternative to stretch the muscle out more, easy to load and it hits the muscle really well.
House of Hyper is backkk! Big respect.
Thank you my friend! 🙏
You legit have the best lifting info on the internet 👌🏼 👍🏼. Even amongst Nippard and Dr Mike.
Wow, that is seriously kind of you, thank you so much!
@@HouseofHypertrophy I’m an RN and I enjoy the research. I think you present the facts perfectly, and the graphics help a lot. Keep up the good work!
Every BODY is different so find what fits best to your body
Hey, can you make a video about all the compound exercises to target every muscle and every functional movement? That would be a good video to appeal to both bodybuilders and athletes.
Your videos have been and always be my recommended videos for anyone wanting to understand an easy and simplified but thorough understanding of how to lift. Great information and solid imagery for people to see and understand. Beyond this, I have been waiting on a study to be done on partial bench press as it has been stated that lifting in the stretch position is best for muscle growth. So, do we no longer need to push all the way up and should do partial bench press to maintain that stretch position? Thanks in advanced, fellow lover of what you do.
Thank you so much! I think it's your choice. Currently we have no direct research on partials with the bench press, but my thinking is that you can experiment with long length partials on the exercise if you like. I have no doubt it will still build muscle quite well, the question is if it's better. Hopefully future research will help answer this!
wow! You do more and get more gains??? Impressive results! How could anyone thought!!!
First off, your videos are awesome - I only just found your channel today but I'm already subscribed after watching 4 of them.... Having said that, the animation of the dude on the leg press with the "overload weight" falling down and hitting his straight legs is going to give me NIGHTMARES!!! 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
So the more you train the more you grow, thank you
The harder or with more quality, not with more volume
like the idea, been doing this for about a month gaining more muscle than expected because i only went to gym 2 times a week
Including the diet they followed during the training might help..
My number 1 great staff as always
Thank you so much!
HIT High Intensity Training is the best.I do 4-6 sets per body part with super intensity.I only train each body part once a week.i also do cardio. Ive made more gains than when i used to do 12 sets and training a body part twice a week.
I used to be a competitive bodybuilder. Kudos to Mike Mentzer and Dorian Yates.
Ye if your on gear. Naturals usually respond better to frequencey so training each muscle once a week is not enough.
Great video once again, thanks for the detailed breakdown!
Thank you so much dude, I really appreciate that!
Oh baby where has this channel been all my life 😂
This channel is the fucking goat 🐐
I appreciate you, thank you!
on trained individuals, there is evidence supporting more muscle damage training at lengthened positions, thus resulting in less muscle protein synthesis directed toward hypertrophic benefit and more towards reparation of the muscle fibers as a result of calcium ion overload. how are we neglecting the idea that muscle damage and recovery is a factor in suggesting training 12 sets per week while also suggesting lengthened position training which further damages muscle? much love, HUGE fan of the channel
Muscle damage seems to reduce quite a bit with the repeated bout effect. The study which suggests damage causes less MPS towards hypertrophy shows this itself, as after 3-4 weeks damage was substantially reduced. I know there are some folks in the fitness industry that suggest the reduction in damage from the repeated bout effect isn't that much, but (in my opinon) the best study on the topic shows the repeated bout effect is quite powerful over 8 weeks. I covered that study in this video: ua-cam.com/video/KuUjEC9G5FY/v-deo.html
Wake up, HoH dropped another banger 🔥🔥🔥🔥 time to learn, gents and gent-ettes!
🙏🙏🙏
I "bend my knee" to the "spirit of scientific accuracy".
😂 nice
Good info. I would suggest slowing the audio down a little.
Overall, the video suggests that performing at least 9-12 weekly sets per muscle group, training muscles at longer lengths and incorporating antagonist supersets into your workout routine can all be helpful for maximizing muscle growth.
Fellas, at 0:55 this guy used a km instead of measuring in bald eagles so we’re all gonna have to unsubscribe ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Top shelf info & video!
Thank you🖖
Thank you for checking it out! :)
Of course you will gain more muscle mass with training in more than 9 sets than less than 9 sets a week if the intensity is always the same. If you want to get the same results with lower frequency and less sets you need to have a way higher intensity. I'm doing Heavy Duty Training by Mike Mentzer but with my own kind of training methods and exercises and it works like crazy. The difference is that I use a weight that is something like 95% 1 rep max weight and I rep it for 6-12 reps per set as slow as I can and with 4-5 negative reps on top of it when my muscles aren't strong enough anymore to pull the weight down by itself. I have 1 working set for every exercise and that is more than enough. Since doing that my strength grew by 10% in my arms, 25% in my back, 7,5% in my legs, 15% in my chest and 10% in my shoulders in just 2,5 months. Important to note is that I train for 2 years now and I'm doing Heavy Duty since the 2,5 months now so my progress is stagnating more and more since a year. Normally it took me 6 months for the same increase in power of 10% in every part when doing my old training by switching between 1rep max training and hypertrophy training every 4-8 weeks depending on what I'm doing now.
Also my muscles are growing like hell since doing the new training tecnique. The only downside of Heavy Duty Training is that it is REALLY strenuous and I mean REALLY REALLY STRENUOUS! but the progress of doing it properly is definitely worth it. I'm even getting asked since starting this kind of training if I started doing steroids (I'm natural) so it definitely works.
I'm a little disappointed that no study really tries to really compare them by trying to find out the perfect point between intensity and volume that has the best results. I't always only "More or less sets than that with close to failure." or "1 rep max weightlifting vs hypertrophy training." or something similar but never "Maximum intensity with 1-2 working sets to maximum failure vs volume hypertrophy training and is there a perfect point between both of it that lets you achieve even better results than just completely intensity or volume?"
That is what I want to see. But it is really good that they talked about lowering overload training in this video.
Would you mind sharing your workout routine, I’d like to see what alterations you’ve made compared to Mentzer’s routine.
After applying the lessons from every House of Hypertrophy for the last few months, my gains have multiplied by a factor of about 50. I can't fit in my house anymore. Thanks HoH!
😂😂😂
another great video, thanks
Thank you for checking it out!
I'd say the pacing that stimulates growth in the 12 set group is by giant setting and super setting
I used to do 80 set routines like kaz did but I condensed them to 1 1/2 hours . I giant and super set ever lift Id do every day and it really helped
Interesting that many other channels state that fewer reps (6 per set) with more weight are better for growth in large muscles. I started doing antagonist super sets in the 80s but they weren't labeled as such then, just made sense to me.
I favour them mainly because it’s just so much more time efficient. I know you could argue my second movement of each superset may suffer a bit from forearm/grip fatigue, but I’ve selected carefully over time! I’m surprised more people don’t do it.
this is a NEW study
I've radically reduced volume to just one set per exercise and one exercise per muscle and I saw improvements. Believe it or not.
Training to failure
1x frequency 4-10 sets
2x frequency 2-5 sets
3x frequency 1-3 sets
All depending on training status, individual variance, rest times and exercises performed.
These volume studies are not reliable and they contradict dozens of other studies.
Video studies are not reliable?
These volume studies are always on untrained individuals, we have no idea how close they are training to failure, and they tend to only train one muscle group, so recovery doesn't really come into play. Try doing these studies, but on trained individuals and do 12 sets with EVERY muscle group.
How can we apply these studies to trained individuals who are training the majority of muscle groups? 12+ sets per muscle group per week AND recover? Hahaha no.
@@rastaraptor6619 12+ sets is counting bench press as triceps and shoulder volume, rows as bicep volume etc. That's how those studies count it, so it is actually doable. I do 10 sets of lateral raises to failure a week currently, but more for other muscle groups.
I'm glad to hear the about the "decrease in nausea" reported overtime with supersets. In the interest of time, I've started doing more and can relate. Although not all antagonist based, like weighted dips/pullups/lunges - repeat.
Good stuff! Are you still planning to do a video on strength vs size? Despite your name, I actually don't follow you for the pure growth elements and am much more interested in being as strong as possible without bulk.
Thank you so much! Still in the plan :)
A daily full body resistant band program will do it. I do that and squat and bench once a week. Best results so far.
Love supersets.
My approach is different tho, I'll do flys then bench press, shoulder press then lat raises, underhand lat pulldown with a bicep curl. Generally a compound movement followed by a light weight high rep isolation exercise.
I've noticed a huge difference in time and effectivenes. Superset of bent over rows and y raises really helped my upper back develope
I have been working out for almost 2 years now, on the second year I changed my way of working out, doing pretty much only 3-4 weekly sets for each muscle, and pretty much grew and doing well, progressing with weights and all, and I want to say I am pretty much above average. I am still not sure whether actually 9+ weekly sets per muscle group is ideal.
Over an almost 15 year period ( in total - with 2 hiatuses of 2 years in between ) i 've trained ( naturally ) using all kinds of systems in regards to amount of reps , sets , training frequency , training principles etc. The best results i've ever gotten for calves is doing just one set to failure , with a focus on the top contraction , per workout. Two or three times a week. That's it. Might not be for everyone , but i've met other people who've built excellent calves this way. ( used by Dave Palumbo , who developed great calves , as well )
Very interesting to hear that, thank you for sharing!
I've recently had great success with calves (begginer to intermediate, 1y of lifting). I do it as an antagonist superset on push days, in between bench sets, on a leverage squat machine. I do very heavy loads with one leg, then use both legs to add reps at half the weight (2 legs simultaneously). The key part is the stretch at the bottom, which feels good, unlike when sitting down at a calf machine. I don't really worry about sets and reps, just do as much as I can without it interfering with the push workout.
Exciting studies! Any videos showing the researcher definition of "momentary muscle failure" (MMF)? I've seen some researchers (example: Brad J Schoenfeld) who consider MMF as happening when the positive movement stops vs some who keep holding in static position, and then continue resisting hard against the negative.
A day that HoH uploads is automatically a good day 🥰
Am I wrong in stating that RDLs will also build more muscle than a Nordic curl? And I’m performing my RDLs with a hex and straight legged, so I use a lot more glutes, but my hamstrings do get a lot of growth stimulus too, right? 🤔 I tend do switch the style within sets: I first do a rep with straight legs, followed by a rep with bent legs, and just repeat this. I also perform them on step-ups to have more ROM 😅
If you answer me: thank you! But if you don’t: thank you anyway for the video 😅🙏
Thank you as always my friend! I believe you're correct. There's no direct studies on that, but I would assume overall hamstrings growth should be better with RDL's due to the combined hip flexion with straight knees. It's quite possible there's slight regional differences as an RDL is a hip extension exercise while Nordic curls are a knee flexion exercise. One day I should create a guide to overall hamstrings training to clear that up, but in general, it does seem like slightly different regions of the hamstrings (upper vs lower regions) are involved differently during hip extension and knee flexion exercises 🙏
This is amazing. The diminishing returns concept is intriguing
It's not a new concept. Multiple studies all the way back to 2010 have already found this result.
@@anon-842 show me the study that shows a 1.5% absolute difference by doubling your number of sets
Am I over training?
I do 4 exercises per muscle group twice per week. The first 2 exercises are more compound type exercises and the last 2 exercises are more for hypertrophy... so in the first 2 exercises I do 3 sets of max 10 reps... and the last 2 exercises I do 2 sets of max 10 reps, per muscle group... that's a total of 12 sets per muscles group per session, 24 sets over all per week, and that works out to about 100 reps per muscle group per session and around 200 per week max...
Eg: Bench press 3 x 10
Incline bench 3 x 10
Cable Flys 2 x 10
Chest dips 2 x 10
Twice per week...
Same goes for back, triceps and biceps...
Legs and abs are 2 exercises with 2 sets per exercise and a max of 10 reps each...
All exercises, sets and reps are done with 1 minute rest intervals...
Am I over training? Any feed back would be great...
I love your vids so much, like literally, i wanna know everything abt my body, but i'm in shock only for one your video, so you doing really great, keep do vids, i keep watching :). btw i'm russian, and bad at english, and i write it by myself, so hope you understand everything i said before.
By the way, that cartoon showing the leg extension is not depicting optimal seat position. You should have the seat back as far as it will go so you can lean back and it will make the quad muscle more extended as you do the extensions, thus creating more tension.
When you start becoming fickle about cartoons, you know you're not getting enough time in the gym.
We CAN tell that you're not busy at all the parties you get invited to. That's for sure
As long as you're doing something that somewhat works, the biggest determining factor is time. A person training for 3 years is going to be bigger than someone with 1 regardless of the little changes.
In Part 2 you showed a chart where the muscle volume of the hamstrings increased by over 15% during the study period. How can this be explained? Extrapolate the study period to a year and everyone would double their legs.
Max growth per session analysis would be interesting. I can only train two times per week and usually do 12 sets per muscle group. Would like to know, if going higher would benefit me.
Antagonistic supersets work fine, especially when used in a time specific system like EDT, but you need your own gym or train at 3am!!
The stronger you are, less sets you need, for example now I just need 7 sets for quads weekly
Every study that starts with "..of untrained individuals" I lose interest, because it's just not relevant to most of us.
aint that the truth, but its probably easier to deal with a untrained group then to find the group of just the right trained individuals
Your talking as if your a fundamentally different species than untrained people
@@markl4730 No, but my main argument is: beginner gains. Intermediate lifters will likely need a more intermediate approach to lifting to gain.
Beginner gains grow more then someone blasting steroids my guy it’s pointless
It's not a matter of gains, but what leads to better gains. For trained guys there are drop sets and not much else different from untrained people. Though untrained can benefit from those as well.
Do you use any software or program to help do all the visuals? Looks great.
I only train 24-30 sets per week total for consistent strength gains. I do not want to gain much muscle mass or change my body weight by much. I know this data is about hypertrophy, but I wanted to comment to point out the various goals there are for training. With this knowledge we can say, train very hard and heavy for a lower number of sets, getting stronger while minimizing short-term hypertrophy.
Muscles are not the same, some muscles benefit from higher frequency and sets but other benefits from higher load and low volume, calves and legs in general and designed for endurance and they can handle more frequency and they like higher training volume like going for higher reps and sets for legs. But other muscles in upper body like arms and chest likes higher load and lower volume than legs. results may vary between individuals that's why you need to find what works for you.
The question is... are you in the gym to hurry, or to grow?
Speaking from experience...
You will get the same results in a shorter time when you do supersets, but you will also...
1. cause more systemic fatigue (meaning you'll skip sessions later in the week or have to take a deload week after 3 weeks of lifting hard)
2. be drenched in sweat and need to sit around catching your breath for 30 minutes after you get home/get to work.
3. make smaller improvements than if you'd rested 3-4 minutes between harder sets (because you'd be limited by the target muscles rather than cardiorespiratory fitness and nausea)
The choice is yours. I have gotten much bigger since decreasing the pace of my workouts. Squeezing in a 30-minute workout before work was better than not working out, BUT it is not as beneficial or enjoyable as taking my time and allowing myself to recover for 3-3.5 minutes before doing hard, good quality reps.
If it takes you 3.5 min to recover from a good hard set unless it's specifically only squats then you need to work on your work capacity
supersets are fine for isolation movements with small muscles. supersets with big muscles like chest and back may work for beginners, but not for well trained intermediates. the fatique ist just too high.
It is clear, we have 4 studies that now shows 34 sets is better than 20 sets. We dont really know where the cut off is, but volume can be much much higher than we thought before
A good research would be the assessment between 4 sets 3 times a week on a single muscle and 4 sets 3 times a weel with other muscles trained. Mostly to assess if recovery is an issue.
With over 3 decades of training I still prefer the Mentzer 'Heavy Duty' training protocol for best results - low volume-high intensity sets- infrequent sessions (2x per week)
Outstanding ❤😊
Thank you my friend!
12:39 , I was literally brushing my teeth (phone on counter playing this video)
Great interesting video!
Nice Video! What about the seated good morning with straight legs? Is this Movement better than standing good morning because you have more stretch?
No studies directly on that, but possibly so!
How many sets is a 10k run for the calves? Is it measureble?
Amazing video as usual! What are you thoughts on "overhead triceps extension "? I have never seen such dichotomy about it being an emphasis on the long head of the triceps....
Thank you so much! I believe it does develop the long head well. This is a fairly recent video I did on the triceps: ua-cam.com/video/fyPZ9rGVBWc/v-deo.html
Those who suggest it doesn't train the long head much seem to be using leverage/EMG data. But I think there are some important problems with doing this in this circumstance. The most important thing is we have direct data measuring actual muscle growth showing great long head hypertrophy from overhead extensions :)
In my opinion there is one problem with these studies about weekly number of sets:
There is no recording of training the participants are doing beside training the muscle group of interest (in this case calfs). Therefore, the influence of other training cannot be evaluated and estimated. This could lead to the problem that e.g. every participant of the study is not training any other muscle groups at all and is therefore able to recover from 12 sets calf raises per week. But the "normal" bodybuilder, who is training lots of different muscle groups, could not recover from doing 12 sets per week for every muscle group, because of the body is overloaded with recovering every muscle group. And therefore, the bodybuilder will build less muscles with 12 sets as with e.g. 6 sets.
Anyway, in this "calf size" studie and a few other studies I've read, the training besides muscle group of interest is not recorded or controlled. Maybe there are other studies, where this is the case, but I dont know them.
But wouldn't higher set numbers require less weight/reps? I train to failure for the final (3rd) set - there's no way I could do 4 without reducing the weight or reps per set. Does this still benefit from greater relative muscle mass increase?
I intuit doing pulldowns and rows with isokinetic exercises is not optimal. I would imagine a machine being harder in the beginning (opposite to resistance bands) would give better growth
a question, I perform shoulder press 3 sets on tuesday and then another 3 sets on friday, a total 6 sets a week for side delt. But I also do 3 sets lateral raise along with it which means that I am hitting the same muscle (side delt) 12 sets a week in total?
I think it is very worth to be pointed out that these individuals trained only one group muscle meaning that part of the body they trained was the only muscle that required resources to recover after training. Let's say per training session I do 4 different exercises for different muscle groups such chest, back, legs and shoulders. That means my body is required to recover all muscle groups that underwent 4 sets per session. Differently put, I may not recover after working out on 4 muscles per session with 4 sets for each muscle group.
Consistency…
Person a starts on 5x5 and moves to hypertrophy training will have a different result to person b who started on hypertrophy going to 5x5. No one responds the same to everything no matter the control experiment.
Some people have poor joint health, I can barely handle leg exercises after squatting for 10 years to 3x bodyweight squat. Others might not be able to get to even 2, some might be able to get to where I got and stay there. Same with deadlifts, almost 3.5x my bodyweight, my back is wearing out, others may be fine others won’t get close. Either way, my legs don’t put on size easily but get very strong no matter how I train; and others may build lots of muscle and not get very strong.
One video on trapezius muscles
Not sure about these studies and the correlation your drawing. On machines and lighter movements I tend to do more sets at a higher frequency. For compound lifts Eg squat bench etc I will do roughly 5x5. I wouldn't do say 5x10 on bench at a lower weight - I don't think that would build more muscle.
should really have a tldr/summary section
Its all good but how can i know that whats in the video is true?
Hello, love your videos! 🤙💪Can you make a topic on Static contractions (Overcoming Isometric or Yielding Isometric) Vs Dynamic contract ("normal" traning) for muscle growth?💪💪 Sorry for bad English! Have a Nice Day!
I personally superset AND droplet.
It is not the most hypertrophic but I'm almost certain it's the most efficient. Roughly, I'd approximate that I'm getting 85% of my potential gains for a given session in only 50% of the time.
Darn autocorrect: dropset****
havent been here for a while and somehow i wasnt subbed glad u popped on my fyp
The Study would be interesting with trained people
I hate with passion studies with calves
Haha, I get that! But it's always useful to have studies on as much muscles as possible!
Yeh experimenting on baby cows is cruel
It's all to deceive.
What did a cow ever do to you ?
4:36 was that a summrs/pluggnb type beat😂😅??
Superset(TM)
Hi, could you please make a detailed video about how many sets for each muscle group? Because for your rear delt for example, you need less volume then bigger muscles like your quads.
I think the more advanced you get the less volume you need because you can activate more fibres and get more from each set.
Now I do 4 sets×week of calves with partials and they are growing more than when I did 6 sets...
reps?
@@acekrstevski453 10/12 and at the end I do partials, in the 2 sets I also do a dropset
@@francescopriolo6414 arent partials just half bottom reps when your muscles are most stretched that makes muscle growth like 45% faster?
@@acekrstevski453 yes