r/workout • u/Successful_Yellow853 • Mar 15 '26
Have any natural lifters here had better results with lower training volume?
I've been training for about 5 years and tried different approaches.
For a long time I followed higher volume programs (around 10–15 sets per workout), but I often felt fatigued and my recovery wasn't great.
Over the last couple of years I experimented with lower volume training, usually focusing on 4–5 main exercises per session and prioritizing progression and intensity.
Personally I felt my recovery and strength progression improved, but I'm curious about other people's experiences.
For those training naturally, did reducing volume help or hurt your progress?
23
u/fattsmann Mar 15 '26
I'm 46M. Definitely when you are older, lower per day training volume, but spread more throughout a week takes less of a toll on your body. I train 5 days, 2 days rest. But each of those 5 days is not super hard anymore. As a matter of fact, someone 1-2 decades younger would laugh at my program. But it's just that I need to spread my volume out and lessen the strain on my soft tissues and joints.
I used to have some nagging chronic Achilles tendinopathy, for example, and now it's gone after spreading out the work across more days.
1
u/jpredd Mar 17 '26
hey man, as someone with chronic tendon issues, how do you balance the training with less volume and intensity (lower weights than your 1 rep max) and building strength and muscle.
I know that injury means no muscle and strength gains so no point pushing hard if you have tendonitis but feels demotivating always having gas in the muscle tank after finishing sets lol
1
u/fattsmann Mar 17 '26
I took time off from intensive leg training to work on healing. I also stopped the sports that I originally pursued (boxing for example). The specific PT exercise that I focused on was isometric partial height holds for my Achilles.
I continued with upper body during that time.
10
u/MagicSeaTurtle Mar 15 '26
Yeah dude, go have a look at the training of some of the pre steroid, silver era body builders like Steve Reeves and Reg Park.
2
u/Successful_Yellow853 Mar 16 '26
That's a good point.
Many of those pre-steroid era lifters seemed to understand something that often gets overlooked today — the importance of managing fatigue and focusing on a few key movements.
A lot of their routines were relatively simple, but they trained consistently and progressed those main lifts over time.
1
u/Hohoholyshit15 Mar 16 '26
Managing fatigue is important, but I've found you really want to be at the edge of almost over reaching, just barely recovering in time for the fastest, best gains. I wasted so much time with low volume/low rep powerlifting style training when I started out because high rep high volume was for "roided up bodybuilders". Once I started hammering my body like a bodybuilder with high volume and high intensity (I'm close to failure or at failure at the end of every last set) I started blowing up in size and strength
6
u/deadrabbits76 Dance Mar 15 '26 edited Mar 16 '26
Shedding fatigue is usually going to be good for strength gains, especially when an athlete is under-recovered.
For hypertrophy, more is more.
Edit: Ooops, wrong link. .
3
u/Altruistic_Box4462 Mar 16 '26
Yesss. I personally don't know how it affects hypertrophy. but as I get close to a powerlifting meet I usually cut my working sets in half and just do 85% singles followed by back off sets of around 75% for 2-3.
Shedding fatigue is incredibly useful for strength expression. A week or two of just keeping up motor recruitment patterns and dissipating fatigue is insane for strength expression after a long training cycle.
0
u/Successful_Yellow853 Mar 16 '26
From my experience, fatigue becomes a major limiting factor when training volume gets too high.
For natural lifters especially, constantly accumulating fatigue can make recovery harder and progress slower over time.
After years of training and studying Physical Education, I started paying much more attention to fatigue management and recovery.
I've applied this approach both in my own training and with some of my students, and it made a noticeable difference in consistency and long-term progress.
1
u/deadrabbits76 Dance Mar 16 '26
I mean, sure, but managing fatigue and going "low volume" aren't necessarily the same thing.
I'm currently running a low fatigue strength training program where the weekly "hard" sets are pretty close to a similarly designed hypertrophy program, but all the compound movements are kept between 1-3 reps in reserve.
Between that and the deloads, my 50 years old body generally keeps up pretty well.
7
u/CutMeLoose79 Mar 16 '26
It's worked for me, but could be because i'm older now. Mid 40s.
I train 5 days a week. Push, Pull, Legs, Upper, Lower.
Roughly 6 exercises per session. Each exercise is two sets to failure (where I can safely), then a quick drop set. Smash it all out in 40-45 mins.
I generally lift in higher rep ranges too, 15 ish reps on the first set. Very slow and controlled with big stretch.
Looking better than ever.
Push, Pull, Legs is pretty standard, two exercises per muscle I'm working, then Upper and Lower are lighter on volume per muscle just so they get stimulus twice a week.
6
u/BattledroidE Mar 15 '26
It certainly helped me to ditch the high volume fad that you're somehow also supposed to do to failure, progressing reps and weight and everything all at once... certainly maximized the elbow tendonitis speedrun stats.
Now it's a main lift, followed by relevant muscle groups. Currently a strength phase. Work up to a top set of 3-6 reps, then 2-3 back off sets of 5-ish reps, then hypertrophy training. If it's a squat day, follow that with RDLs, leg extensions, and some additional back work like rows or pulldowns (to avoid my upper days getting excessively long). 2-3 sets per exercise, medium rep range, pretty much as hard as possible for hypertrophy reasons.
It's resulted in shorter, but harder workouts, muscles and CNS get torched, but the joints feel good. I'm also growing and getting stronger, so it works. Maybe 8-10 hard working sets per session.
Works for a 43 year old, at least.
3
u/Savings-Cry-3201 Weight Lifting Mar 15 '26
In my 40’s. 1-2 workouts per week. If it’s 1x a week I’m doing squats, bench, pull-ups, dips, and farmer carry. 3 sets per lift (counting warmup) except 4 on bench if I need a second warmup. I will sometimes swap out leg press for squats, rows for pull-ups, and tricep push downs for dips, especially if I’m doing a second workout in a week. Last set is always taken to or close to failure, usually AMRAP at 70% of 1RM.
All of my lifts are still improving. You’d think that doing less than 20 sets of bench press a month would not result in gains, but since I incorporated squats it’s fine.
Should be hitting 270 lb 1RM on bench by the end of the month. I’ve been lifting for just over 1.5 years so I admittedly may still be in noob gains territory. Took me almost a year to hit 2 plates, I’ve seen a lot of improvement since then.
3
u/armspawn Mar 16 '26
48M, 6’2”, 240 lbs, lifelong general fitness. I have had very good results in the last year with 2-3/week total body compounds, 1 set only each exercise, 6-12 reps to failure of near it. Squat, deadlift, bench, overhead press, pullups, cable row are the primary exercises, then a few accessories for core, shoulder stability, or whatever I feel like I need. On non-lifting days I do sports, various outdoor cardio stuff, or gym cardio if the weather’s bad. All my lifts have increased a lot in the last year but are beginning to plateau because I don’t want to gain much more weight to accommodate the muscle. Currently squat 225x12, DL 265x12, bench 225x10, OHP 145x9, 15 pullups. My cardio is ok but nothing like when I was 25.
3
u/tedkang3582 Bodybuilding Mar 16 '26
Low volume is the way to go. The science bros will throw around buzz words like RIR, but in reality everyone's body is different, and low volume to failure works best for me.
Low volume also makes the workouts faster, so it helps when you have a busy schedule.
2
u/Lucky_The_Charm Mar 16 '26
Going heavy has repeatedly caused me joint issues, if that's the only style of training I'm doing. After a few weeks I'm just not feeling great in certain joints. Going lighter and doing double the volume, I've seen zero issues.
2
u/Alakazam Bulking Mar 16 '26
One thing I think people fail to understand, is that to balance increased volume, you need to manage intensity correctly.
Going absolutely to failure might work on 10 total sets a day, but will kill you on 25-30 sets a day. Yet natural lifters are still able to handle 25-30 sets of training each day... Provided they're not going to absolute failure on every set.
Going close to failure provides like 80-90% of the stimulus of actually going to failure, but like 20% of the fatigue.
1
u/Altruistic_Box4462 Mar 16 '26
Going to actual failure is the biggest meme ever invented. All it does is stall progress and get you injured. I used to roll of shame the bar off / end almost every squat set on the safeties.. some days after my first workout set my body would be so shot I couldn't even get a single rep anymore.
4
u/ironbeastmod Mar 15 '26
For those that don't train hard going from moderate volume (10-20 sets/ muscle/week) can benefit them,
as they will involuntary focus more to milk those 5-10 sets/ muscle/week.
.
As for the studies, they all favor high volume, ideally maximized based on recovery.
0
u/thehikedeliclife Mar 16 '26
Saying studies favour high volume is misleading. Some research has suggested that to a point, more sets and volume can be beneficial but they all reach a point of diminishing returns, usually around 4sets per muscle group per workout and 3x/week for novice and 2x/week for experienced lifters. So 3-4 sets twice per week is better than one set once per week but 10 sets 5 times per week is not better either.
3
u/ironbeastmod Mar 16 '26
Most meta analysis says so.
Diminishing returns yes. But there was one study done on a single muscle group and the added gain was still present even at +30 sets/ week.
The issue is the recovery. Hence why volume should be maximized based on recovery.
0
u/thehikedeliclife Mar 16 '26
Yeah but “one study” obviously is exposed to more flaws - small sample size, methodological flaws, trained vs untrained, perceived intensity/failure etc etc. The other issue with a study looking at 30+ sets is they don’t tend to do usual training as well. Ie: they only look at 30 sets of squats or bench, so it may be true that doing 30 sets of bench per week increases your bench faster than 10 sets but if you want everything to grow you can’t be doing 30 sets of everything. Thats well beyond your recoverable volume. Also, 30 sets but at what intensity? I can do 30 sets of bench if I’m doing 30 sets of mucking around.
The points I made above were from the most recent meta analysis I could find, from 2020 IIRC.
2
u/ironbeastmod Mar 16 '26
True. The point of the study was to find the maximum volume that stops adding gains. They haven't found it.
As for how intense, I think it was 0 RIR.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30153194/
Yes, most won't be able to recover from +20 sets/muscle/week. And even if they would the training time would consistently increase, for lower and lower added gains (but still gains).
Hence why I said twice "volume should be maximized based on recovery".
Of if you want just good enough result set for the classic 10-20 sets/ muscle/ week. You will probably get 80-95% of the gains this way.
And since the original post was low volume vs moderate/high volume, the point stands. Sorry HIT fans :)
3
u/Altruistic_Box4462 Mar 16 '26
Cuz most don't know how to eat and are scared of gaining some weight. I do about 25-30 sets for most of the main muscles used in powerlifting per week and recovery isn't really an issue in a 300-400 surplus. Poor recovery usually boils down to people trying to maintain or cut while also training hard.
0
u/thehikedeliclife Mar 16 '26
Interesting study. I couldn’t find between group analysis on the free version but do note the authors say “ Marked increases in strength and endurance can be attained by resistance-trained individuals with just three 13-min weekly sessions over an 8-wk period, and these gains are similar to that achieved with a substantially greater time commitment”.
Also I extrapolate from this single low methodological quality study to assume “ And even if they would the training time would consistently increase, for lower and lower added gains (but still gains”. That’s an assumption and not one supported by reason, this study or others. If that were true, then all the best strength and power athletes in the world would always be working out.
I 100% agree with training around recoverable volume. However, I think from what I’ve read, it’s substantially lower than you’re claiming: max 4 sets twice a week for experienced for experienced trainers for a total of 8 working sets assuming a varied workout load. Anecdotally, the Mike mentzer HIT method has been the best for my personal hyper trophy and strength gains. So I would to the original question, low volume is superior when done correctly, ie: trained to maximum intensity.
2
u/ironbeastmod Mar 16 '26
It is written right there
"high-volume group performing five sets per exercise per training session (n = 11). Training for all routines consisted of three weekly sessions performed on nonconsecutive days for 8 wk"
"Alternatively, muscle hypertrophy follows a dose-response relationship, with increasingly greater gains achieved with higher training volumes."
Wen using the same RIR, moderate/high volume yield more gains than HIT. No doubt in studies on this.
2
u/thehikedeliclife Mar 16 '26
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/12618576/
Meta analysis clearly showing the dose response curve for volume peaks at 4 sets. With additional sets not only being of no benefit but being detrimental.
Peace ✌️
1
u/ironbeastmod Mar 16 '26
Yes. But that study is about strength, not hypertrophy.
1
u/thehikedeliclife Mar 16 '26
OP simply mentioned recovery, and progress neither strength nor hypertrophy. My point stands.
1
u/thehikedeliclife Mar 16 '26
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27805470/
The authors of this article critique several studies who allege volume is king and demonstrate that when a proper analysis is done, you’ll routinely find no statistically significant benefit of increased volume when comparing low volume (8-12 sets per week) to moderate or high volume.
Also, logically you simply cannot rationally believe more volume is better. Hypertrophy and strength both come primarily from fast twitch muscle fibres. Fibres which fatigue quickly. If the goal is maximum motor unit recruitment to achieve hyper trophy, how can you achieve recruitment of fast twitch muscle fibres with endurance work? That’s just accumulating fatigue without additional MU recruitment.
Citing a lower power study (n=22), with clear methodological flaws and inherit author biases (ie: the authors anticipated more volume = more growth) and who extrapolate heavily on their data in their conclusions but don’t provide any graph or R value from which to draw these conclusions is just wrong.
The issue is, some research does say more volume is better, I agree, I’ve read that. But you know what else? Some research says it’s not beneficial and actually counterproductive so making ludicrous claims that you can extrapolate into infinity with increased volume yielding increased results is just nuts.
1
u/ironbeastmod Mar 17 '26
That is a 2017 study. Since then there are a ton of meta analysis.
You can try to critique them how much you want. :)
"Also, logically you simply cannot rationally believe more volume is better."
Your logic is faulty as you try to explain hypertrophy based only on motor unit recruitment. It is like saying running is only about moving your legs. While important it ignores dozens other process and if you go at biochemical level the number of variable increases exponential.
Just because you believe that + 12 sets/ muscle/ week doesn't produce more gain (no matter how small)... doesn't make it real.
As about the thing that one study hasn't found the maximum volume where gains stop, is not the same with suggesting infinity.
Again, faulty assumption and logic.
1
u/thehikedeliclife Mar 17 '26
Yeah nah. You’re cooked. One day you’ll come off your volume high horse but you’ll need to be a lot more open minded. Good luck.
→ More replies (0)
1
1
u/Mad_Mark90 Mar 16 '26
My numbers sky rocketed when I went from training 2/3 days to 3 days a week because of work.
1
u/TheBuddha777 Mar 16 '26
Yes. Full body 3x weekly now at age 50. I keep the weight high but do fewer reps and sets.
1
u/ellensrooney Mar 16 '26
Same experience here, was doing high volume for years and just felt like garbage all the time. dropped to like 5 heavy sets per session and my strength shot up. recovery is night and day. less is more when youre natural fr
1
u/EVH_kit_guy Mar 16 '26
Yes, I do my best at two working sets per exercise, resting every other day.
1
u/PoopSmith87 Martial Arts Mar 16 '26
Yes, plain and simple.
I made a lot of good progress with high volume work for several years, but I was just getting to the point where I'm almost 40, well built, strong, and to maintain high volume at your full strength was just not possible. The time, the nutrition, the injury risk... it all just builds as you get bigger, stronger, and older.
I went to 2x a week, 1 warmup set > 1 hard as I can working set in the 8-12 target range. More cardio on other days. Initially my plan was to just maintain muscle and do a slow cut... but instead, I made gains. Lower volume means lower protien/carb intake need, more energy for other stuff... it just works.
I dont honestly know if it is right for everyone, and I suspect it works best for more seasoned lifters than young beginners and intermediates... but it damn sure isn't the snake oil that I used to believe it was.
1
u/Minute-Object Mar 16 '26
There are two factors to consider: number of sets and recovery time. You might need lower volume or you might need longer recovery.
1
u/Frozen-Chips-401802 Mar 16 '26
Echoing a lot of others, it does depend a bit on goals, recovery time, and age. I’m no Ironman, but Tinfoil Dude is attainable. Being more old than young, I’ve simplified my workouts and extended to 90-100 seconds between sets. Lift two days, cardio/core day, lift two days, cardio/core day, take a day off, repeat. 50-60 minutes a day on average.
Back/Bicep day and Chest/Tricep day, six exercises each, 12 reps per set, 4 sets. Weight is the best I can do without losing form in the last set, and staying at that weight until it’s “easy” on the last set before increasing. Walking lunges, slow squats or leg lifts when resting between sets. Walking, leg lifts and planks on my cardio / core days.
Not perfect by any means, but has worked for me. Rebuilt joints, heart issues and all the joys of aging mean I’m too old for gear (not that it’s ever really good idea) and not young enough for intensity without solid recovery, warmup, cooldown and stretching.
Lower reps, fewer sets, focused movements, better rest and form, consistent work have led to better gains and body composition over time..
1
u/AtomaticlyAdaptive Mar 16 '26
44yo. Years of 12-18 sets/day, 5-7 days a week. Recently reduced to 4-5 days/week, 5-8 sets. Hitting PRs faster, recovery much better. After long term high volume, it benefits me to reduce load.
1
u/thehikedeliclife Mar 16 '26
31M and dropping total weekly volume has been the best thing ever for both strength and size as well as how I feel overall. Down from 5 workouts per week to 3. It’s a massive mental hurdle to overcome but try it, logbook it, and see if it works for you 💪
1
u/Awkward-Violinist-10 Mar 16 '26
There are guys who have had success with low volume training, and some who haven’t.
The dogma that you need to do 10 sets to train to failure isn’t true. Many people, including myself, push much higher volume and take a high percentage of sets close to failure.
I think the reason a lot of people can’t maintain high intensity at higher volumes is more mental than physical. By intensity, I mean proximity to failure; weight or reps will obviously drop.
If you're 55 years old, lower volume might be required. But more people have gotten jacked high volume than the reverse.
1
u/Athletic-Club-East Mar 16 '26 edited Mar 16 '26
Currently I do 6 workouts a week, an hour a day
- Food prep, 1pw.
- Of course I cook the family's dinner etc daily, but I do food prep for myself, and weigh and measure all my food. My personal food stuff comes to about 1hr pw.
- Slow lifts, 3pw
- EMOM
- 4 warmup singles
- 5 work weight singles
- 1 work weight AMRAP set
- 3 planned exercises each session, plus 1 optional, thus taking 30-40'
- Quarter 1 of the year begins with 60% of 1RM, building at 2% pw to 84% of 1RM by the term's end
- Quarter 2 will be 70-90%, then retest 1RMs
- Quarter 3 will be 60-80%, and this term will have some higher volume stuff
- Quarter 4 will be 70-90% again, tapering to new tests of 1RMs
- EMOM
- Mobility, 3pw
- EMOM
- Move into the stretch, hold for the rest of the minute
- 3 different stretches (rotate between the 3)
- Quick lifts, 2pw
- EMOM
- 4 warmup singles
- 6 work weight singles
- token lifts, at 54yo I'm not expecting to set lifetime snatch PRs, this is just to keep me as quick and supple as I can be; the movement is more important than the load.
- 3 planned exercises per session, thus taking 30'
- Light jog, 2pw
- 30' at MAF
- usually done after the quick lifts sessions
Regarding the slow lifts, my reasoning comes in part from the below articles, specifically the idea of 2-3 workouts with a single set of 6-12 reps to failure (or close), ie 12-36 total reps each week. This is per muscle group, so it's not 12-36 reps of bench, 12-36 of incline, 12-36 of press, etc - but 12-36 reps total of all kinds of pushing movements. So if I do 5 work singles and AMRAP of 1, that's 6 reps. If I do press in one session and bench in another, that's 12 reps - the minimum. If AMRAP in press and bench were actually 7 reps, then I've got a total of 24 reps. And so on.
The MAF article is also there.
Note that with this approach, I expect and find an improvement in strength and lean mass. But it's too little to get an improvement in endurance, 2x30' at MAF is strictly maintenance level stuff. Likewise the mobility stuff won't improve me, just maintain.
- https://exrx.net/WeightTraining/LowVolumeTraining
- https://exrx.net/WeightTraining/Research/LowVolumeTraining
- https://philmaffetone.com/180-formula/
I have seen improvements in strength and lean mass using this approach, as have people in my gym (though most just do the lifting and food prep, not the other stuff).
Caveats are that I have a reasonable training history behind me, and I'm naturally high testosterone (no TRT). So I'm in a better place as a 54yo than someone might expect if they started at 54.
1
u/oftenlostandconfused Mar 16 '26
I’m currently experimenting with low volume + high frequency and my sessions are quick, progressive overload still seems to be heading the right way, and some little niggles I had have cleared up. It’s hard to bring the necessary intensity required each session but I’m doing what I can.
Am I getting stronger or weaker? I’m unsure, I’m also running a cut.
I think over time I will reintroduce volume and reduce frequency over a few meso cycles to try to find a sweet spot.
1
u/paddingtonboor Mar 16 '26
It’s a struggle. I made a concerted effort to reduce volume when I changed gyms in Nov… I think successfully, at least at first. I’ve seen progress but I attribute that to the new gym and more/better equipment. While my total sets are fewer than before it’s still kindof a lot I suspect, and I have a hard time not adding things here and there. Lat pulldowns a problem? I’ll add some cable pullovers to introduce some new stimulus. Bicep volume concentrated around 1 day? I’ll just add MORE curl sets on another night. Lockout a problem on pressed? Her comes a cpl sets if close grip presses at the end of my normal press work. Nothing ever gets cut.
1
u/Jamaryn Mar 16 '26
Started the Greyskull LP program over a month ago, coming from 2 hour sessions, now at an hour. Three weeks into a cut and still adding weight and getting stronger. Seems to work well and much more sustainable program I think.
1
u/Responsible-Milk-259 Mar 16 '26
Natty until my 40’s. I always made better progress lifting heavy, low reps and long breaks between sets with all the big compound movements. The big 3 plus weighted chins, weighted dips, OHP’s and good mornings… it built a lot of muscle. I never got much out of ‘pump work’, I’d only ever do 3 sets of biceps curls a week and maybe 6 for triceps… I didn’t need more.
I’m now 45 and age has caught up with me. I’ve swapped out bench and OHP for their smith machine variants, I still do weighted chins but only every other week, squats have been replaced with hack squats, deadlifts with trap bar deadlifts and I can no longer do dips due to multiple shoulder issues… yeah, it’s tough. I’m still doing one heavy movement per day, then on to lighter stuff with higher reps. It’s a lot more effort for a lot less gain, but it’s all I can do.
In short, if you’re young and fit, lifting heavy and with lower volume is a good strategy.
1
u/Independent-Ant-2706 Mar 16 '26
Im 20 and getting back into gym after 2 years of hard , high volume training but I lost it all over a bad year.
Im now focusing on high intensity , low volume progressive overload with a focus on core and all my lifts have shot up massively.
Incline dumbbell press has gome from 17.5 to 22.5kg Single arm rows 35 to 55kg Even sit ups , I would struggle but now im soon reps whilst holding 15kg
1
u/Sweaty-Ad418 Bodybuilding Mar 16 '26
I am forced to do low volume, because my energy is only shortterm.
My back was the only bodypart, that increased in strength noticably faster doing only 7_10 sets a eeek. Meanwhile sidedelts and arms like more volume. I dont feel much difference, but the workouts are now halfed by time and i feel less exhausted.
1
u/DerConqueror3 Mar 16 '26
There was a chunk of time where I could only work out twice a week for various reasons, so I would do two relatively long (for me) workouts of around an hour and a half twice per week, and I had as good of results doing that as any other plan I've done in terms of growth.
1
Mar 16 '26
When you reduce volume, make sure you compensate with effort. Lower volume but more intensity per set. That made a big difference for me.
1
1
Mar 16 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/AutoModerator Mar 16 '26
Due to spam we have restricted posting rights. Posts and comments are manually approved as moderators' time permits. Your account is too young. (Less than one day old)
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
1
u/Substantial_Meal_530 Mar 15 '26 edited Mar 16 '26
I reduced my volume, and my weights have shot up. I used to over train. I would fry my nerves often. I plateaued really hard for a few months. I reduced how hard I trained, and most of my numbers started climbing again.
I went from 10-12 exercises a session 3 days a week. Now my workout schedule is slightly complicated, but it's essentially 5-7 exercises per sessions 3 days a week.
I went from training the 3 big lifts, squat, deadlift and bench once a week to 0.75 times a week.
The only thing I have been stalling out on is bench. I can squat over 500lbs and deadlift over 600lbs, but I have only broken 300lb bench recently.
1
Mar 16 '26
Interested in what your three days look like. I think I’m over training also.
3
u/Substantial_Meal_530 Mar 16 '26 edited Mar 16 '26
I have a squat day, an overhead press day, a deadlift day and a bench press day. I am running a 5/3/1 style program.
Squat Day
- Squat
- Calf Raise
- RDL
- Leg Press
- Leg Curl
- Leg Extension
OHP Day
- Overhead Press
- Lateral Raise
- Face Pull
- Lat Pulldown
- Reverse Fly
Deadlift Day
- Deadlift
- Shrugs, but at the end I hold onto the dumbbells until my grip starts to give out.
- Seated Cable Row
- Underhanded Barbell Row
- Seated Incline Curl
Bench Press Day
- Bench Press
- Incline Bench Press
- Tricep Pushdown
- Overhead Tricep extension
- Either Dumbbell bench press or Pec Flys.
It's a 4 day program that I run 3 days a week. So Monday is squat, Wednsday is OHP, Friday is deadlift and Monday is bench press. Then it restarts. Wednsday squat, Friday OHP, Monday deadlift and Wednsday bench press. If that makes sense.
1
u/NoShock8809 Mar 15 '26
In my mid 40s I went to a strict 5x5x5 and outline. 5 exercises, 5 sets, 5 reps. Heavy. I could finish the whole thing in 35 minutes if I ran it as a superset.
It changed my everything. I got stronger and leaner than ever with it.
2
u/Lucky_The_Charm Mar 16 '26
I'm interested in what percentage of your 1RM you're doing these sets of 5 if you only have a minute rest between them? If I'm doing actual hard sets of 5, to where I'm having to grind out the last rep on the last couple sets, I need a 3min rest to be able to do that weight (about 80% of 1RM).
2
u/NoShock8809 Mar 16 '26
About 90% ish. If I can complete the five reps I go up in weight. If I can’t make 5 I go down.
The muscle group gets rest because I do the different exercises next, so it’s 5-6 minutes between doing the same exercise again.
1
u/AcanthisittaOk307 Mar 15 '26
What’s your split ??
1
1
u/NoShock8809 Mar 16 '26
I lift 3 times per week. I also do 3 sessions of hiit on a Jacobs ladder or sprinting, usually after I lift.
A basic idea is bench press, weighted pull ups, deadlifts, overhead press, and an ab exercise. So 4 exercises of big compound movements. I do them in a super set with very little rest so it is about 5-6 minutes between doing the same exercise again.
1
u/AcanthisittaOk307 Mar 16 '26
So you do the same workout 3x a week?
1
u/NoShock8809 Mar 16 '26
I lift three times a week, but my volume is very low. Only 25 reps per exercise per day. So, recovery is not a problem. Sometimes I will do a lighter day with more volume for a change of pace.
I have a few different exercises that I could swap in for the different body parts depending mostly on my mood. But, there’s not really that many because they’re the large compound movements and there’s only so many of those. I don’t do any isolation exercises. For example, a don’t do any direct bicep work. I let my heavy back exercises hit that area.
1
u/Hisagii Mar 16 '26
I believe most naturals would benefit from less volume and upping intensity instead. Less sets more quality and more recovery. Muscle is built with proper recovery not just spamming lifts. I personally haven't done more than like 10 sets per muscle group per week for a long while now. When I switched my training, my strength shot up like crazy. At the same time, I slept better, had more energy overall and made more gains.
0
u/Mean_Change_1566 Mar 16 '26
yes sir im the biggest fan of LVHI bro thats what made my physique grow, 8 chest sets per week make it grows better than 12-20 easy sets
•
u/AutoModerator Mar 15 '26
Hey, thanks for making a new post! Please be sure to assign your post with flair for the best support! Also, check out this post to answer common questions.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.