How are most of workout routines full of junk volume?

[heartfire]

@guaguar Is there any research showing high volume as being better when adequate rest is taken though

 

[guaguar]

@heartfire Is there any research showing it's irrefutably worse?

The bottom line is really that you should figure out how much volume you need. Not that you should do more volume, but that it can be worth to experiment with, if you're stalling otherwise.

 

[heartfire]

@guaguar I believe so but I could be wrong, in theory it makes sense that causing less fatigue/damage would be better assuming you’re doing enough to get growth signaling from your workout. But at the end of the day you should stick to what you enjoy the most

 

[guaguar]

@heartfire Doing more could also stress your body more causing it to adapt more / quicker to the induced demand. That would be an argument for doing more volume.

 

[lyndsey]

@godofreason Basically we know at some point there are diminishing returns on volume, intensity and frequency. These turning points can be pretty different on an individual level. Most people are not going to be able to get enough work out of 7 sets per body part to maximize their training. A lot of people who have been training for a while have never actually pushed themselves, so its sort of just like telling someone to do a flip with no context.

Its one of those things where everyone has their own preferred methods (generally something they enjoy doing which has also produced results) and they will be on a spectrum for volume, intensity and frequency. Its not so black and white as a right way and a wrong way.

 

[ailsa62]

@godofreason I think of it this way. Generally speaking higher volume is better for muscle growth, so for maximum growth you're better off doing a little extra volume rather than a little less. These "junk volume" routines are basically playing it safe by prescribing more than enough volume for the average person. So ultimately it comes down to whether or not you want to (or are able to) "over-train" to make sure you don't leave gains on the table. Some will like that approach, others will not.

 

[jeandemetz]

@ailsa62 My problem comes from when I’m able to match these high volume programs for a week or two, but there’s not much room for progression because I can’t overload off of such an already high volume amount and I have to deload after a couple of weeks

I think this is where it is considered “junk volume”—when you’re doing a ton of volume but aren’t able to overload enough to create a sufficient stimulus after prior weeks, and therefore you’re fatiguing yourself with very little return

 

[helen2002]

@godofreason

very well evaluated by users, which are full of junk volume

You can easily get to 30 and more sets per body part per week.

Yeah these programs aren't good. There is a massive amount of misinformation with fitness and because everything works to some degree people get convinced bad training methods are correct.

A lot of what we know about volume, junk volume and intensity etc. is actually pretty new. Within the last 10 years mostly. And so these old school routines are from the era before that where people were mostly using bro science and guessing.

If you came on reddit a couple of years ago (and you can see this for yourself by googling r / fitness threads from about 7 or 8 years ago), the information is absolute nonsense a lot of the time. Idk if r / fitness has updated their beginner program recommendations but they were absolutely dogshit when I last looked, a lot of them are the exact opposite of what you want to be doing if you are training for hypertrophy. Look at 5/3/1 programs that used to be glorified, it's literally just 1 set to failure a week on a compound + a bunch of fluff that may or may not be doing anything, virtually no back or arm training etc.

Junk volume research is pretty clear. When taking rest periods beyond 2+ minutes on average the diminishing returns kick in around 4 - 6 intense sets in a workout. With worse results kicking in after 7 - 8 sets for most lifters. There are always a couple of outliers though since that's the nature of exercise science (but not by much).

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FmGdys4X0AA4-TB?format=jpg&name=large

https://sportrxiv.org/index.php/server/preprint/view/295

Research on volume and intensity are pretty clear. Train to failure, 4 - 6 sets in a session, 2-3 minute rests, hit every 5 - 7 days. Enjoy.

 

[sofy]

@helen2002 Really appreciate the information. When you meant 4-6 sets in a session, it's strictly for that session regardless of how many muscle group involved or 4-6 sets per muscle group in a session. So if I work chest and delt in the same session, would it be a total of 6 sets for chest AND delt or would it be 4-6 sets for chest AND 4-6 sets for delt?

 

[helen2002]

@sofy Per muscle group. So on a Push day a general recommendation would be something like 4 - 6 sets of chest, 4 - 6 shoulders and 4 - 6 triceps.

There's a fair bit of overlap so 6 chest, 4 direct shoulders (mostly lateral delts) and 4 direct triceps would be ideal.

 

[alyvia]

@godofreason Also I think the idea is , with alot of routines targeting beginners or intermediate, they may need more sets to stimulate the muscle and they may not have the best muscle mind connection that more advanced lifters have learned.

 

[dawn16]

@godofreason Because most programs work as long as people put in the effort and progress and the majority of people don' t really care about maximizing their growth.

 

[lamporful]

@godofreason High volume is subjective. What’s high volume to someone may not be high volume for others. If you feel recovery is trash and effort is lacking than yes you may be doing too much volume. If you feel your workouts are productive and recovering properly than volume is likely correct. It’s not always about how many sets and reps it’s more about how it’s done.

 

[gdjai]

@godofreason Based on chatter the last few weeks, I thought anything less than 52 sets for a body part was damned near a waste of time.

 

[levettle]

@godofreason I’m guessing They been rated well because they must’ve worked for some people. The volume must’ve worked for them at that time. So it can’t be deemed “junk” if it worked right?

People have different responses to various volumes and nothing works forever. I think that necessitates a possible need for periodization, aka periods of differing volume/ intensities. Which is what a higher volume program would provide. Something different.

 

[monkeypaw]

@godofreason Either they're halfassing everything, or they're on some juice

 

[bambamikesell]

@godofreason Because 1/ Not everyone's got the same objectives as you do, 2/ A lot of people don't know what they're doing, the vast majority of people using app's pre-made training programs just don't know how to plan and it's expected when you start a new sport, and 3/ Fake reviews.

 

[ama1]

@godofreason Well after seeing what Mike Israetel and Brad Schoenfeld call "1-0 RIR" and "to failure" I can see why there so much push for high volume.

 

[ronanddeb2014]

@godofreason im thinking 10-15 sets vs 20 these days, with the exception being back going upwards of 16-20 if you have less fatiguing things like lat prayers.

 

[dsal]

@godofreason Cuz everyone these days are geared up and benefit more from muscle damage