@nationaesthetic: Obviously there are situations e.g. beginners where multiple variables are changing that can lead to hypertrophy without noticeable strength increase however if the only change is an increase in muscle there is no way strength shouldn’t increase as well. If you are taking your sets close to failure I genuinely believe there is no reason to exceed 10 sets per week per muscle.

Stewy501 :

1 set per muscle 3x a week, 0 rir, has been the best thing that's ever worked for me

franpérez :

Strength and hypertrophy don’t operate on the same scale. You can be gaining muscle mass—ultimately adding contractile proteins—without that increase being large enough to produce a noticeable jump in maximal strength. Advanced lifters build very little muscle from any single training session, so those small increases may not immediately translate into significant strength gains. That doesn’t mean hypertrophy isn’t occurring. If you’re able to perform more reps with the same weight over time, that’s often a sign that positive adaptations have taken place, potentially including increases in muscle mass. Progressive overload isn’t just about adding weight to the bar. The problem is that you’re trying to judge hypertrophy solely through changes in maximal strength, when strength and hypertrophy involve different adaptations and don’t always progress at the same rate. 🤣🤣

markusparkus5 :

If strength is as closely associated with hypertropy as you suggest- why are not power lifter bigger then bodybuilders?

Bwargosz97 :

hypertrophy doesnt mean strength gain

black piper borgir :

this is not the narrative I heard back when the "sbl" community keeps preaching "all you need is 1 set, your next sets are just junk volume" agenda 😭

Gabriel :

So for example if i do pplpplr for back i do weighted pull ups 2 sets to failure , close grip row 2 sets to failure and wide grip row 2 sets to failure , should i make the volume smaller?

Deniel :

Yes, there is a correlation. And theres also a study with significantly more than 10 sets showing that strength gain.

[Blank] :

are 2 sets/session with 2x frequency better than 1 set/session with 3x frequency?

Natanael Lizama Bola :

But most people care more about hypertrophy, right?

Eetu K :

1 rep max is a skill and you wont train that skill if you do 50 sets 1min rest, 3h sessions, even if your muscles grow a ton

A.Anderson 🇺🇲✝️ :

also gotta consider indirect volume and intensity too. for example your side delts can handle more volume because they get dont get indirect volume from chest and back

محمّد 🦾🧬 :

Graph also shows that at no point people start making LESS gains as volume goes up (even if you look at the strength data); doesn’t this prove that fatigue is really not an issue? At least as far as gains go. Also, repeated bout effect etc.

Le(w)end :

I currently do 10 sets weekly for chest and back but I’ve been plateauing for quite some time now. Should I go down to 8 sets weekly again ?

K :

4-10 sets going to failure on all or leaving a rir?

Barba Roja :

So, powerlifting is the best for hypertrophy. RIR 4-7 RPE 7-8.. check 👍 (sarcasm)

officially.nate :

Ngl that was a really good take

duartepimenta2908 :

should i count row and press sets as 0,5 sets for biceps and triceps?

dye7w151e2a1 :

people are freaking out because if you do stuff you get stuff and if you dont do it you dont get it. full circle, you need to love the gym community sometimes

Revinst :

Johan.de.matan :

*Bodybuilders trying to perceive muscle can adapt to different stimuli in different ways*

Thapelo Maraisane :

Could it be that 1RM to 5RM performance is so sensitive to fatigue that it is only maximised at lower volumes beyond which hypertrophy is still possible?

Cribis fringu :

Except The hypertrophy meta-regression and strength meta-regression are based on different sets of studies. The strength meta-regression included nearly twice as many studies with nearly twice as many subjects as the hypertrophy meta-regression. The strength meta-regression included 66 studies with a total of 2,020 participants, while the hypertrophy meta-regression included 35 studies with 1,032 participants. Furthermore, the two meta-regressions had just 21 studies in common. So, only 60% of the studies in the hypertrophy meta-regression were also used in the strength meta-regression, and only 32% of the studies in the strength meta-regression were also used in the hypertrophy meta-regression. There’s some overlap, but these analyses weren’t intended to show you the impact of volume on strength gains and muscle growth in a common set of studies.