Minimum Sets for Muscle and Strength Gains—HINT—It’s Not What You Think

Introduction

When it comes to resistance training, often, individuals tend to fall into a trap of “more is more”. That is, endless sets and ever-increasing volume leads to ever-increasing gains in muscle size and strength. If that were true, we’d all be walking around with 22” biceps and last time I checked the majority of us aren’t exactly sporting show-stopping pythons.

Indeed, two of the more traditional variables to manipulate in order to induce increases in muscular hypertrophy and strength are to, a) increase the weekly volume (i.e., how many sets of an exercise are completed per muscle group) and b) increase the frequency (i.e., how many times a muscle group is trained per week). This would generally start at the lower end of a specified range for both hypertrophy and strength and slowly progress over time. Thus, it is no surprise that beginner and intermediate lifters attempt to gain herculean size and strength by performing ludicrous amounts of training (I know I did).

At first glance, it might seem intuitive that more volume and frequency would always translate to greater gains. In fact, it is well understood that additional volume and frequency increases muscular hypertrophy and strength gains, albeit, with diminishing returns. Furthermore, depending on the goal (hypertrophy or strength) the observed plateaus are seen at respective volumes and frequencies. A review of the existing literature would potentially allow one to conclude that muscular hypertrophy gains become less noticeable with greater than 20 sets per muscle group per week spread out over four to six sessions, while strength gains tend to level out at approximately five sets per muscle group per week spread out over two to four sessions.

What is less understood and previously unelucidated is the characteristics of the dose-response relationships between frequency and volume with hypertrophy and strength. Of particular interest is the minimum effective dose required to illicit gains in muscle size and strength; layman’s terms, “how can I do the least amount of work required to still get the benefit of lifting weights.” New research may provide us with the answer.

Science and Stuff

A meta-analysis recently published by Pelland et al. (2024) aimed to characterize the dose-response relationships between increasing volume and frequency and gains in muscle and strength. The study included a review of 67 studies with 2,058 participants to determine the specific nature of the dose-response relationships. Furthermore, and in contrast to previous meta-analyses, the study specifically quantified sets for a given muscle group differently based on whether it is a primary force generating muscle (i.e., latissimus dorsi during a pullup) or a synergist muscle (i.e., biceps brachii during a pullup).

Quick bites:

·        Muscular growth was strongly correlated with volume but there are mild diminishing returns past 12 – 20 sets per muscle group with the most effective dose being 5 – 10.

·        Frequency has a minimal effect on muscle growth when volume is equated (i.e., total sets per week are more important than how often you train).

·        Strength gains also positively correlated with volume, however, diminishing returns were more drastic and plateaued at approximately four sets per muscle group per week. The most effective dose was found to be two sets per week.

·        Strength gains positively correlated with frequency as well, however, strong diminishing returns were seen after two sessions per muscle group per week. This suggests that recovery plays an important role between strength sessions in order to achieve results.

While the study did clearly illustrate the dose-response relationships, demonstrating the volume and frequency at which the greatest efficiency was achieved for muscle and strength (bang for your buck), there was another more subtle conclusion to be drawn. Interestingly, the minimum effective doses determined to produce detectable gains in muscle size and strength were found to be just four sets for hypertrophy and one set for strength per muscle group, PER WEEK!

Of course, this is all provided that these sets are performed at a high enough intensity to illicit a response (i.e., at or close to failure). Still yet, this is dramatically less than the typical avid lifter would perform. In fact, it would be commonplace for individuals to be performing five times this amount or more per week, if not in one session. Now, before jumping to conclusions, it’s crucial to view this in context. We are speaking about minimums, not maximizing size and strength. In line with current understanding in exercise science, the study does demonstrate increases in muscle size and strength with increasing volume and frequency (with diminishing returns of course). There is, unfortunately, no substitute for hard work, however, there are still useful implications here.

Conclusions

As I write this article, I am currently sitting in a cramped chair 30,000 ft in the air on the tail end of my three-week honeymoon which has, of course, been fantastic in every way. We’ve travelled over four different countries with multiple locations and all modes of transportation, staying very little in each place to maximize our experiences. Unsurprisingly, as vacations can be, the trip has been lacking in running and lifting at a level that would be comparable to my typical training schedule. As someone who runs six days a week and lifts four or more, the results of this study were particularly comforting.

While I couldn’t possibly get both 10+ workout sessions per week, I certainly could sneak in at least three runs to maintain baseline aerobic fitness and hit four sets per week per muscle group to maintain muscle size and one set per week per muscle group for strength. Hence, I was able to fully enjoy my honeymoon with my wife while maintaining a solid level of fitness. The implication being of course that in times where you may be unable to continue your current training regimen at your usual levels, you can still likely hit a minimum effective dose to maintain your size and strength.

On a similar note, for overly busy individuals such as parents and professionals, these conclusions may help structure a training plan that allows for marginal increases in muscle and strength without sacrificing substantial parts of the day or week. Thus, the often widely held belief by non-gym goers that training is inconvenient and time-consuming is blatantly incorrect. While I am not one to advocate doing the minimum work to get by, results like these make fitness more accessible to a greater number of people.

As a coach, with this study in mind, it’s easy to envision structuring a training plan for a busy professional that includes low to moderate resistance training, enough to generate a response, some high intensity work sprinkled throughout the week and one or two longer aerobic sessions. This would cover a wide range of outcomes we’d want to induce in order to produce a well-rounded, fitter individual while minimizing the time commitment.

So, the next time you think you don’t have time for a workout, don’t underestimate the power of just one to four hard sets. 20-minutes or less per day is all you may need to get on your way to a healthier, fitter version of you!

Are you a busy professional or parent looking for help structuring your own training plan? Feel free to reach out to info@tc-training.ca! I’d love to help you achieve the physique and level of fitness you deserve.

References

Pelland, J., Remmert, J., Robinson, Z., Hinson, S., Zourdos, M. (2024). The Resistance Training Dose-Response: Meta Regressions Exploring the Effects of Weekly Volume and Frequency on Muscle Hypertrophy and Strength Gain. SportRχiv.