The BEST Training Frequency (New Research)

can you see if nucleus overload is something that will grow muscle, since its lowering myostatin?

Amazing video

what about leg dominance? was that a factor of the research? if you are right handed, your right hand might be stronger than your left....? Just wondering

Just do what is confortable for you and be persistent.

Overall the difference is still rather small and seing that a number of people actually had better gains with 1x/week training I think, that's still a feasable way of training, if that's what you like to do. You certainly will make gains.

You want me to answer the simple question you asked about why everyones training should be the same and give results yet it doesnt? #1. Is genetics and #2 is everyones recovery is incredibly different. We are an endurance species. We are not a high intensity species. We require much more recovery then people think. #3 would be sleep and nutrition and #4 would be the intensity of your workout. 3/4 of those things can be adjusted, however genetics cannot. You don't need a degree to know these things. They were answered over 50 years ago.

The second group's test already failed at 9 sets in one day. Absolutely no need for that. 9 sets a day is not equal to 3x3 sets

Helpoin on treenata kerran viikossa lihasryhmä. Mutta jos treenaa samaa lihasryhmää useampia kertoja, joutuu säätelemään enemmän kuormaa ja toistojen kokonaismäärää että palautuu. On helpompi treenata kerran vikkossa kovaa ja odottaa että on palautunut kunnolla. Itse kuuun tuohon kerran viikossa systeemin kannattajiin. Toki toisen treenin voi ottaa samalle lihasryhmälle viikossa jos se on vaikka nopeusvoimaa 50% 8x3. Semmosista nyt palautuu kyllä.

Your muscles don't know there are seven days in a week..!!! Count days instead..? How would your muscles react to anything else..? You might be successful at what you do, but would be much more successful at something else, but you don't know that when it's not tried and you're not open to discovery..!

If you're doing 9 sets to failure once a week, you'll likely end up doing fewer total reps compared to 3 sets x 3, no? Could it be the extra reps might be the reason for more growth?

Kudos for including the info about statistical significance. In terms of hypertrophy, we are dealing with tiny amounts per session in optimal conditions. A tiny percentage difference might not be within the certainty of the study (usually p value of 5% or less), but, like hypertrophy in general, a small amount over time makes a big difference.

It seems they overlooked an important factor. They didn't account for muscle fiber types such a 1A, 2A, 2X. I would be curious to know the differences.

Great observation! So many studies say “no effect” yet looking at the data half the people did statistically better with one strategy and half the other. With a little effort they might have figured out what separates the two. It could be genetic, perhaps different “to failure” mindsets, or diet, or how they first learned to train

It would be better to look at frequency differences for various muscle groups. I tend to find that the bigger or stronger the muscle group the more recovery they need. For example, lower seems to do well at 2x while most upper body muscles like 3x.

I hope they would have made the difference in frequency more extreme. Like have them do 7 sets so that first group does all of them in one day, and the second group does one set on each day of the week.

HIT has been a game-changer for me 😃

Great breakdown. The first study is interesting in that the 3× per week leg had three sets over three days.

Which is still less volume than most people

I enjoyed three full body work outs a week for years and felt good/got strong

Swapping to higher intensity, a 3 day split with one balls-to-the-wall set per exercise, has been great for hypertrophy. I do back/shoulder,legs/abs/rehb,chest/arms/conditioning

When I was younger I would relax while doing my rep's and set's. Now that I'm older I understand contracting while at maximum peak helps for the best gains.

For example; you can feel this when you flex and stretch after waking up. You want that burning, cramping feeling. The longer you hold it the better; IMO

So basically supercompensation happens after the body receives stimuli and gets enough rest and time to fully recover. So the magic happens during the rest periods. The mitochondrial biogenesis and the ability to produce more atp is the result of consistly putting the body under stress to adjust for example. At some point habitation kicks in and the body responds less, so adding volume wont be effective. Its good to consider changing the routine or take a deload or rest periode. Maybe this explanation is more clear.

Consistency, enjoyment (tied to consistency), and avoidance of injury should be major considerations. Also remember that 1 set of anything is much greater than 0 sets. In other words, do what you can, when you can. Don't be married to any form/style/frequency at the cost of missing a week of training. There is no destination, just the journey.

Thank you for the info. Your videos are always thorough and well done.

It’s a shame these studies never seem to highlight age of participants. I’m interested in the correlation between the results of gain based on frequency, recovery, percentage of 1 rep max etc - with age also taken into account. I suspect the longer rest periods would benefit older individuals - I wish this detail was teased out of the data.

It seems like the maker of the video had an inherent bias against high reps in general, as any results indicating high reps might be more effective was met with skepticism and/or criticism, while positive results from high weight lower rep results were not.

There is a thin line between gaining the benefits of super compensation and over training. But from what i experienced and learned from veterans its good to plan deload weeks in workout blocks or even a time off. Our bodies will react better to training stimuli and need a time off once in a while.

Its actually very very simple...lmao, the person who saw better str gains is simply putting more effort/intensity or his recovery abilities are slower , so he need bigger rest for a given group to be able to perform better and be fully recovered to hammer it again with good intensity. Generally if ppl go all out and are naturals , they need bigger rest , if they are taking the juice ..they recover quicker and can hammer more often. If you are natural and u telling me you train with good intensity 3-4 times a week per muscle group .. you are either under training or you are genetic recovery freak, period. Yes ive seen full body 5 times a week .. 2-3 sets per muscle .. this is not the best way to do it and i dont care what research say. There ISNT ANY accurate and good research made for 10 years plus gym goers , everything is just undertrained individuals , obese or your average 2-3 times per week training dad who trains no more than 2-3 years without a proper program. If someone tell me they do proper intensity and training every muscle 4-5 times per week and still progress after many years in the gym , he is 1 in a mil. I am sorry ,but hypertrophy is not just str progression .. half of it comes from blood flow and sarcoplasmic activity , u cant do shit about it with 3 sets per muscle , unless you are very vvery fresh 1-2 years in the gym guy.

i wish we had an infinite supply of twins to do studies with

So after all the studies and meta-analysis the conclusion is do what works for you.

For advanced lifters who lifted for 3 years, there maybe a chance for fast recovery so they can train 5 times a day to see better result than them training 2 times per week or single day/w.

FWIW, when I am in a full college course load that has a lot of STEM, my strength training capacity and recovery is drastically reduced. I can only speculate that intense learning has a similar strain on the CNS compared to strength training, so I can’t do both at max effort.

And by intense, I mean I passed biology with a 99%, best in class. Easily 30-40 hours per week on college. Sheer mental exhaustion at the end of that round lol.

I made some of my best gains on twice weekly, full-body workouts.

Too bad nobody's individual legs are the same size n strenght

Outlier was on roids

It's really good that the study shows that there are always going to be outliers in every group. As it shows people need to not rely on studies solely for 'what works best' as with bodybuilding being very individual it comes down to (or should do) trial and error in finding what works best FOR YOU.

Ive lifted since the early 90s and over the years (decades) have found I make most of my gains whilst targeting each muscle group only once per week hard with as much volume and intensity as can get away with and allowing that muscle 7 days to recover (as in not hitting it directly)
Yet people will always cite studies stating frequency is the most optimal, as if somehow ive got it all wrong and were simply not working out properly lol.

I've always suspected it can also come down to fast vs slow twitch muscle fibres in any individuals given muscle group? as interestingly my chest DOES actually respond better to more frequency in terms of strength and growth yet my other muscle groups respond better with less frequency and more recovery

The 1x RTUV group had to do a 9x10(+/-2) workout compared to the RTUV 3x group, which did a 3x10(+/-2) workout. I personally don't believe that the 1x group is going to train with the same intensity as the 3x group under these conditions. It's impractical. They will likely choose lighter loads than they should and take shorter rests than they should. I tried to find rest interval in the study, but I didn't see it. I truly can't imagine that the 1x group would be willing to take a 5-6 minute rest and endure a 45-54 minute workout just to do 1 exercise. It's for these reasons that experts like Mark Rippetoe advocate for 3x5, and even just a simple 1x5 for deadlifting. I really do think Mentzer, Jones, and all of the high intensity low frequency guys had it right the whole time. Furthermore, I do believe that we are biologically similar enough for there to be a reasonably definitive optimal approach, but mental toughness and intensity are severely deceptive and difficult to measure factors.

Yeah... I love the information...but every video you put out there always amounts to we can't make any real decisions based off of all the information.

Excuse me, 9 sets till failure might just kill progress. They should've tested usual 3 sets during 1 training per week VS with 3 sets during each training per week.

Maybe that odd individual just did the experiment wrong...

love the computer voice!!! but this study is crap...no study will tell you what u can do...and why a week??? thats just an invented time construct...whatever works for u...this TRUTH

I gotta just point out that how hard you train has absolutely everything to do with how often. I do my legs 1 time a week because it takes 3 days to recover and 3 days more for over compensation. If i used less weight and volume , sure i could do them 2 or 3 times a week. But at what point are we just doing aerobics ? And being that im almost 50 with decades of lifting behind me , im hardly an untrained guy.

To me, it comes down to an individual's recovery ability. Some recover faster than others.

For me, I get better results with only 2 workouts a week, once upper, once power. I've done high frequency full bodies, it's ok short term but not sustainable for me.

Actually according to the study, and research of Arthur Jones, and Mike Mentzer of Heavy Duty Training exercising a body part directly once within a week is what is effectively going to gain strength, and muscular mass. In my case I exercise three times a week whereby I work a body part directly anywhere as soon as 6 days within a week; but mostly upon complete recovery it is more up to 7 to 10, sometimes up to 11 days. However, I still get up to exercise 3 times within a span of 7 days.

Maybe a muscle-group can be worked twice within a week is possible, but according to the research done by Arthur Jones who also invented the Nautilus exercise machines, he has discovered that less training frequency is to be practiced as a trainee evolves beyond a rank beginner. Exercise was performed 3 times a week full body, but then it was done twice within a week.


Furthermore, as Mike Mentzer had found on training of his own body, and the results of his clients who exercised using a HIT method, by splitting up the body into three exercise sessions. As a trainee becomes stronger he or she requires more rest between a workout session to fully recover for a muscle-group to be exercised again to an optimal level. Training was at least 2 to three times a week, whereby a body part was worked directly Once within a week! Therefore, muscle-mass increased at a later time, then it was exercised again for a further increase in mass, and strength.🏋

Volume helps me tremendously. I swing around the same 60-pound car-part 500+ times a day at a car plant. It's lightweight but the repetitiveness of lifting it makes you feel strong as hell. Especially doing that 6 days a week for 10 hours. And that's not even including my strength training routine outside of my 60 hour work weeks. I do lots and lots of physical activity and the more I do the bigger I get. The less volume and more weight seems to make me feel stronger though. But I personally see more growth off of volume then I do with intensity.

You can train one leg only and you body will still add corresponding muscle to the opposite leg as well even though it was not subjected to training. This phenomena alone makes this study worthless.

As far as strength goes, muscle is only a form of strength potential, nervous system efficiency dictates how strong they contract so obviously a higher frequency works for strength.

counter point: I am lazy

Hated PPl twice a week, so now I do PPl once a week, 3 sets per exercise, except for rear delts which get 6 sets across three exercises.

Bro I'm doing FB every other day, focusing in compound lifts like deadlifts, barbell squats and chest press. I was doing PPL for like 1 year, but now with full body I got insane chest and shoulder and evolution in general

Full body every day.

Nice video