Diminishing returns to Volume?

Training Q&A [Moderated]
1

As far as I understand it; while there is a dose response relationship with volume with respect to hypertrophy and strength, there is a point of diminishing returns where each additional set does not provide much of a benefit. More volume is not necessarily the answer to increase gains if it at the upper end of the “effective” volume ranges.

Is there any evidence of this point of diminishing returns being a moving target? An individual with 3 years training will have a different point of diminishing returns compared to that same individual with 5 years experience? So, while more volume at the present moment may not be the answer, in the future more volume may be the answer despite being above the point of diminishing returns at year 3?

For example, this point is 20 sets per body part per week at 3 years but by year 5 the point of diminishing returns is now 25 sets? Are there any volume studies where they follow up on the original study participants to see if their volume ranges have changed or where they have studied it across training ages?

1 Like
2

I think some of the confusion may stem from taking nomenclature (and ideas) from many sources and trying to wrap them all together. Many ideas are not supported by evidence and won’t reconcile with another.

In any case, a few thoughts on volume that we (hopefully) have made clear over the years:

  • There tends to be a dose dependent relationship between training volume and strength, hypertrophy, cardiorespiratory endurance, etc.
  • The specific type of adaptations depend on other non-volume programming elements, e.g. volume, rest periods, etc. If this is wrong, no amount of volume will help.
  • If the dose of training is too low or too high, results won’t be great.
  • As people become more trained, they can generally tolerate more training. Everything in programming is a “moving target” with respect to the individual
  • People who add a bunch of volume and don’t see results either fall into one of two categories: 1) they added a add a bunch of stuff that doesn’t really transfer well to their goal, e.g. non functional overreaching or 2) it’s too much for them to tolerate.

Are there any volume studies where they follow up on the original study participants to see if their volume ranges have changed or where they have studied it across training ages?

There was a recent study that came out showing that tailoring the volume to individual’s needs based on training history worked better than more or less volume.

1 Like