# Weekly Accumulating Volume vs. Fixed Volumes

**URL:** <https://forum.barbellmedicine.com/t/weekly-accumulating-volume-vs-fixed-volumes/8637>\
**Category:** Training Q&A \[Moderated\]\
**Created:** [April 22, 2020, 3:57pm UTC](https://forum.barbellmedicine.com/t/weekly-accumulating-volume-vs-fixed-volumes/8637 "2020-04-22T15:57:53Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 2\
**Page:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![wilconwel](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/flex001/user_avatar/forum.barbellmedicine.com/wilconwel/32/983_2.png) [@wilconwel](https://forum.barbellmedicine.com/u/wilconwel)\
**Post date:** [April 22, 2020, 3:57pm UTC](https://forum.barbellmedicine.com/t/weekly-accumulating-volume-vs-fixed-volumes/8637/1 "2020-04-22T15:57:53Z")

</div>

Hi BBM Crew,  
I know that the BBM coaches general program with “block perdiodization,” where a block of training, usually 3-6 weeks, is comprised of similar exercises in similar rep ranges with similar volumes. However, on a lot of the templates that I have seen, volume in the main movements usually accumulates 1 set per week to reach a “high stress” week, before a deload / pivot. I know that Mike T. generally does not do this, as it can muddy the waters when trying to determine and individual’s response to a given training stress. Not that either one is right or wrong. My question is, what is the reasoning behind accumulating volume over the course of a block in the BBM templates? When would you decide to keep the volume fixed instead?

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Jordan\_Feigenbaum](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/flex001/user_avatar/forum.barbellmedicine.com/jordan_feigenbaum/32/1315_2.png) [@Jordan\_Feigenbaum](https://forum.barbellmedicine.com/u/Jordan_Feigenbaum)\
**Post date:** [April 23, 2020, 12:10am UTC](https://forum.barbellmedicine.com/t/weekly-accumulating-volume-vs-fixed-volumes/8637/2 "2020-04-23T00:10:53Z")

</div>

Mike does do this frequently, though not all the time of course 🙂

In general, we think gradually increasing the training stimulus upwards to _therapeutic levels_ is a good idea to manage work load. I don’t think it muddies the waters at all, as training adaptations are developing and decaying 24/7/365. Things aren’t as neat as we’d like them to be, unfortunately.