For today's post, I just want to focus on the first two variables (volume and frequency). Intensity is an issue all its own; deserving of a post dedicated solely to it. Volume and frequency, however, are very much interrelated. This is the case because, as we will soon see, it's very hard to distinguish whether its the total volume of work performed or the frequency of volume performed that has the greatest impact on muscle growth.
The Ontology of Frequency and Volume
There is, admittedly, quite a lot of conflicting evidence comparing the relationship between frequency and volume. As a result, it can be rather hard to hash out exactly what's going on when we use one particular method vs. another. However, some evidence I ran across may clarify things for us (at least a little).
A meta-analysis conducted by Peterson et al. back in 2005 suggests that there is a "dose-response" between the volume and frequency of work done and the muscle growth thus achieved. The authors indicated that the effectiveness of a training routine will vary depending on the person doing the training (whether that person is untrained, recreationally trained, or an athlete). Thus, we can see that both the volume and frequency of work done will have an effect on muscle building outcomes; though to variable extents depending on a given person's age, health, and training history.
Another meta-analysis from Sports Medicine by Wernbom et al. further reveals that a dose-response relationship seems to exist between the volume and frequency of work done in relation to the amount of muscle growth achieved. The authors of this study end with very specific recommendations that are in my opinion not well founded on the meta-analytic data they used for their study. Nevertheless, their work does correlate with past studies revealing that volume and frequency do play a role in muscle growth.
But This Begs the Question...
The issue I often have with studies that compare volume and frequency has to do with the underlying ontology they use to assess data. Ontology is very simply the model or explanatory theory used to explain things. The ontology of most sports science researchers seems to entail that a very real difference exists between volume and frequency. I'm not entirely certain, however, that the two are in fact different.
The question I would like to ask is this: is an increase in frequency nothing more than an increase in total volume? If it is, then might total volume (and not frequency) be the true determinant factor of a routine's effectiveness? Is a volume of 9 working sets done at a frequency of once per week something truly different from a volume of 3 sets done at a frequency of three times per week? Moreover, if it should turn out that a volume of 6 working sets done once per week was less effective than a volume of 6 sets done twice per week, would this difference in effectiveness be a product of an increase in frequency (going from hitting a muscle group once per week to twice per week) or an increase in total volume (going from doing 6 total working sets per week to 12 working sets per week)?
The only way to tell for certain would be to test two programs, both with an equal amount of total volume, but with differences in frequency.
The Study
Sure enough, after looking for quite some time I finally found a study that provided me with an adequate (though still tentative) answer to my question.
The study itself is a master's thesis by a guy named Michael H. Thomas from the Depart of Kinesiology at the University of Central Missouri, entitled Increasing Lean Mass and Strength: A Comparison of High Frequency Strength Training to Low Frequency Strength Training. This work compares differences in strength and lean mass following 8 weeks of strength training with a total volume of 9 working sets per muscle group, done either once per week or spread out over three days in a week.
What were the results? "No mean differences between [the tested] groups were significant."
While this study is far from conclusive (things is science really never are), it does lend credence to the notion that total volume, and not frequency per se, has the greatest impact on muscle building. Moreover, it may suggest that frequency is really nothing more than a modal/methodological subset of volume.
What results from this new ontology of muscle building is a decrease in variables. Now, instead of 3 variables (volume, frequency, and intensity) we have just 2 (volume and intensity).
Applications
No post on muscle building variables would be complete without a muscle building routine at the end. So, based on information gleaned from the studies above (you can read them all yourself if you'd like to come to your own conclusions), the work of other knowledgeable experts I know of, and personal experience, the following routine will be quite effective, both in terms of total volume and in the modality said volume takes.
While some may yet argue that hitting a muscle group just once per week is ineffective, I tend to think just the opposite. If Thomas' thesis is correct, then we can achieve a comparable amount of muscle growth and strength improvement by hitting a muscle group, with the appropriate total volume, just once per week.
While some may yet argue that hitting a muscle group just once per week is ineffective, I tend to think just the opposite. If Thomas' thesis is correct, then we can achieve a comparable amount of muscle growth and strength improvement by hitting a muscle group, with the appropriate total volume, just once per week.
Training in such a way gives us a number of advantages, both psychologically and in terms of efficiency. Rather than stretch our focus across a gambit of exercises and muscle groups, we can focus on just a few muscle groups per workout and thus improve our mental intensity. Moreover, since we don't have to worry about doing so many different types of exercises in a given workout, we won't have to add extra time to our lifting sessions by performing warm-up sets for every exercise we perform.
So, we can thus see that from a psychological and a time manage standpoint, getting our total volume in for a given muscle group in one training session per week is a much better option as opposed to spreading that volume out over the course of 2-3 days per week.
So, we can thus see that from a psychological and a time manage standpoint, getting our total volume in for a given muscle group in one training session per week is a much better option as opposed to spreading that volume out over the course of 2-3 days per week.
Here's the routine:
Monday: Back, Calves & Biceps
A1 – Deadlift: warm-up then 3 working sets of 4-6 reps
B1 – Barbell Row: 3 working sets of 4-6 reps
B2 – Calves: 3 working sets of 8-12 reps
C1 – Chin-ups: 3 working sets of 4-6 reps
C2 – Calves: 3 working sets of 8-12 reps
D1 – Dumbbell Curl: 3 working sets of 6-8 reps
E1 – Barbell Curl: 3 working sets of 6-8 reps
Wednesday: Chest, Abs & Triceps
A1 – Flat Bench Pess: warm-up then 3 working sets of 4-6 reps
A2 – Cable Crunch: 3 working sets of 8-12 reps
B1 – Incline Bench Press: 3 working sets of 4-6 reps
B2 – Hanging Leg Raise: 3 working sets taken to burnout
C1 – Chest Dips: 3 working sets of 4-6 reps
C2 – Air Bicycles: 3 working sets taken to burnout
D1 – Lying Triceps Extension: 3 working sets of 6-8 reps
E1 – Seated Triceps Press: 3 working sets of 6-8 reps
Friday: Shoulders, Legs & Traps
A1 – Seated Military Press: warm-up then 3 working sets of 4-6 reps
A2 – Lateral Raise: 1 light warm-up set then 3 working sets of 4-6 reps
A3 – Seated Rear Delt Raise: 3 working sets of 4-6 reps
B1 – Barbell Squat: warm-up then 3 working sets of 4-6 reps
C1 – Barbell Shrug: 3 working sets of 6-8 reps
C2 – Leg Curl: 3 working sets of 4-6 reps
Notes
Lifts with the same letters (such as A1 & A2, etc.) should be done as alternating sets with 90 seconds of rest in between them. Otherwise, you should take between 3-5 minutes rest between sets of a given exercise.
Unless otherwise specified, warm-ups for a given exercise should consist of 1 set of 12 reps at 50% of the targeted intensity for the day, then 1 set of 10 reps at 50%, 1 set of 4 reps at 70%, and finally 1 set of 1 rep at 90%. Take about a minute rest between warm-up sets.
If you workout in the mornings, you should also do some form of moderate intensity cardio for 5-10 minutes before you begin the day's workout in order to get your core body temperature elevated.
If you can get the top number of reps prescribed for an exercise, add 10lbs of weight to the lift until you can only get the bottom number of reps listed. From this bottom number, you should work your way back up to the top number of reps prescribed before you add more weight. You must try to get stronger! You won't see any results if you fail to progressively overload your muscles with evermore challenging demands.
Make sure you give each and every rep your all. Don't throw the weight or cheat on your form. Check the links attached to each exercise if you're unsure about how to properly perform them.
Good Luck!
No comments:
Post a Comment