The study suggests there is no added benefit to adding more sets during a cutting phase to preserve/ add muscle compared to a moderate number of sets. During calorie restriction, a reduction in resources needed for an anabolic stimulus is diminished; therefore, it's best to preserve these resources with a moderate amount of volume, but there did not seem to be any negative consequences of a higher volume program as both moderate and high-volume groups had similar rates of fat loss, strength gains, and body composition.
HIGH VOLUME TRAINING FOR FAT LOSS: SHOULD YOU INCREASE OR DECREASE SETS DURING A CUT SUMMARY
- It is often recommended to perform high volume training for fat loss perform a contest prep.
- Adding more sets with high-volume training (5 sets) did not preserve muscle mass compared to moderate training volume (3 SETS).
- There were no negative consequences of using higher volume while dieting.
IS HIGH VOLUME WEIGHT TRAINING FOR FAT LOSS BACKED BY SCIENCE?
Bodybuilders dieting for a show have often added volume to prevent losses of lean muscle mass during calorie restriction. Resistance exercise has been shown to preserve lean muscle mass during calorie restriction. However, there has never been any research to suggest that adding more volume can drive muscle growth during calorie restriction; this has always been just in theory. Preliminary evidence suggests high-volume resistance exercise can spare lean mass sparing during caloric restriction.(1-3)
A preliminary review of the literature analyzing the data from earlier studies has found that higher volumes of exercise were more suitable for preserving muscle mass than lower volume training.(4) A previous study reported an increase in lean mass during the first 8 weeks of contest preparation, coinciding with increased resistance training volume (from 82,500 kg to 94,300 kg). However, when resistance training volume was reduced (94,300 kg to 66,600 kg) 8 weeks before the competition, the athletes lost lean muscle mass (12.2% of the total weight lost).(2)
HOW MANY REPS TO BURN FAT?
Recent research showed no alteration in muscle contractile properties of young, recreationally active college students when consuming a moderately energy-restricted, high-protein diet without resistance training(5). The newest study published in the Scandinavian Journal of Medicine & Science in Sports found that adding more volume may not be necessary while dieting. The study’s title says it all, “Resistance Training Volume Does Not Influence Lean Mass Preservation during Energy Restriction in Trained Males.”
Researchers conducted a study in which they divided 38 trained men into 2 groups. Both groups followed the same training program and calorie-restricted diet for a duration of 6 weeks. The participants used the MyFitnessPal® app to report their daily dietary intake, including energy, protein, fats, and carbohydrates. This app is widely recognized as a reliable tool for assessing energy and macronutrient consumption.
The researchers placed the participants on a calorie-restricted diet, which was determined based on a 33% deficit from the researchers’ initial calculations. This involved reducing the participants’ maintenance diet from 45 kcal/kg to 30 kcal/kg. The energy deficit in this hypocaloric intervention aligns with the recommendations for natural bodybuilders during contest preparation. Additionally, the participants’ protein intake was set at 2.8 g/kg fat-free-mass (FFM) in both groups throughout the entire study. The remaining energy was then distributed between carbohydrates and fats based on each individual’s preference.
One group of men was assigned to the moderate volume group (MVG), which performed 3 sets of the most important exercises. On the other hand, the high-volume group (HVG) performed 5 sets of these exercises. The resistance exercises were divided into an upper/lower split and were performed twice weekly, with 2 sessions dedicated to the upper body and 2 sessions focused on the lower body. The researchers closely monitored the participants’ muscle growth, fat loss, and strength development to determine which training volume resulted in greater gains.
Results of the Study
At the end of the study, both groups lost muscle mass, and there was no difference in fat loss, muscle mass, or strength gains between the medium and high-volume groups. There were also no differences in the trainees’ reported sleep quality or mood states in the new study.(6) During the study, there was no significant change in self-reported sleep duration, sleep quality, and sleep onset. This is the first study to compare different resistance training volumes (88 vs. 48 total sets/week) during an intervention designed to induce weight loss.
Therefore, high-volume resistance training does not appear to influence the preservation of muscle mass when compared to moderate-volume resistance training in a resistance-trained population over 6 weeks of modest caloric restriction. As previously discussed, there is an inverted U-hypothesis for training volume in which adding sets increases muscle mass up to a certain point; after that, no further increases occur, and decreases in muscle mass can occur if more sets are added. (7)
The study suggests there is no added benefit to adding more sets during a cutting phase to preserve/ add muscle compared to a moderate number of sets. During calorie restriction, a reduction in resources needed for an anabolic stimulus is diminished; therefore, it’s best to preserve these resources with a moderate amount of volume, but there did not seem to be any negative consequences of a higher volume program as both moderate and high-volume groups had similar rates of fat loss, strength gains, and body composition.
KEY POINTS OF HIGH VOLUME TRAINING FOR FAT LOSS
- Adding more sets with high-volume training (5 sets) did not preserve muscle mass compared to moderate training volume (3 SETS).
- There were no negative consequences of using higher volume while dieting. High volume training for weight loss is a matter of preference.
REFERENCES
About The Author
