Volume training

[tommyguns2]

I've been training pretty consistently for the past 35-40 years, and I've tried just about every training regimen out there. I built my foundation the way most of us did... years of hard work with progressively heavier weight. I suspect I never gained more than about 3-5 pounds of lean mass in any one year. I still subscribe to the idea that you need to move at least some heavy weight in order to increase your size.

However, in the last two years, due primarily to some modest injuries (partial tears), I pulled back on the heavy stuff and went to almost entirely high volume training. For example, on my bench press, whereas in the old days my working set of 10-12 reps was at 275, I now keep the weight at 135, and do multiple movements (1Xs, 1.5Xs, slow movement throughout range of motion, etc.) for anywhere from 20-50 reps. On my squats, sets with 4 wheels have been replaced with 20-30 rep sets with 185-225, as well as machine work. My knees thank me for it....

Over the past two years I've not grown at all, but I have held my size, and I feel that I've made some progress in muscle maturity and hardness, which improves the aesthetics. So, I'm not any bigger, but I feel like I look a little better.

I've always admired the old school look of the 70s bodybuilders, and bemoan the large puffy looking mass of the top guys now. And I'm thinking that in the 70s, the old school guys overtrained (at least with respect to today's pros), and did substantially more volume. I'm convinced the look provided by the volume is a cleaner, better look. I acknowledge that you can't likely get up over 250 pounds ripped that way, but for us guys who aren't pro BBers, I'm thinking this is much better for me.

 

[5.0]

Good points TG. I'm just a few yrs into pl and training that style full time has taken its toll with respect to past injuries.

 

[HDH]

Growing on volume training for me was just upping the cals.

The same amount of cals for me just wasn't enough. I volume train but also do everything as super, tri and giant sets working opposite muscles and same muscles. My cals burnt were way up there running 6 days training.

Volume was a little difficult to get use to at first but it turns into more of a "training by feel" before it's all over. How you feel outside of the gym, inside of the gym how the muscles feel during training. At first, you have to determine over and undertraining, when you get a grip on that, it will all fall into place.

I look and feel much better volume training but to me it can have similar results as cardio during a bulk. Better conditioned and a better look.

H

 

[BrotherIron]

Good points TG. I'm just a few yrs into pl and training that style full time has taken its toll with respect to past injuries.

It never gets easier. You just train smarter and harder.

 

[prime]

I think volume training is smarter for someone who is older and joints starting to suffer like me. I have started 20 rep sets for now to see how strong I can get using high reps. It sure feels different when fatiguing that when failing on a 8 rep set. It's more of a mental fail when I am trying to get past the 13th or 16th rep. Burns more than low rep sets. So something different for sure is happening. I don't know how long I can keep up with 20 rep sets. The initial reps are nice because it's not super heavy but the last 5 reps you have to dig for and not just fail on. Probably good to have both types of training.

 

[5.0]

It never gets easier. You just train smarter and harder.

Very true, my back is proof of that. There are becoming more and more lifts I can't do for strength, due to pain, but can do for volume.

 

[ogre]

I'm 55 and my body feels pretty beat up after years of construction work.I too train with lighter weight and a lot of reps and sets.It does seem to work but not as good as lifting heavy when I was young.Alot of my sets are in the 20 rep range with up to 10 sets some days.Yes my joints like this too.

 

[rawdeal]

Very true, my back is proof of that. There are becoming more and more lifts I can't do for strength, due to pain, but can do for volume.

For me, at least, ^^^ this ^^^ is how I "plan." I don't think "One Rule Fits All" as to volume, intensity, frequency, reps, sets, etc. Of course that is also true from one individual to the next, and from one decade to the next for any given individual.

But it is also true for different bodyparts and exercises for an example individual at various ages, esp. ages past 40. I still go balls to the wall on some things, less on others, and way less on still others. Saw an interview of Cher of all people yrs ago. Funny, quirky, and undeniably true. "Honey, I've been 40, and I've been 50, and believe me, 40 is better."

 

[IronInsanity]

I've been training pretty consistently for the past 35-40 years, and I've tried just about every training regimen out there. I built my foundation the way most of us did... years of hard work with progressively heavier weight. I suspect I never gained more than about 3-5 pounds of lean mass in any one year. I still subscribe to the idea that you need to move at least some heavy weight in order to increase your size.

However, in the last two years, due primarily to some modest injuries (partial tears), I pulled back on the heavy stuff and went to almost entirely high volume training. For example, on my bench press, whereas in the old days my working set of 10-12 reps was at 275, I now keep the weight at 135, and do multiple movements (1Xs, 1.5Xs, slow movement throughout range of motion, etc.) for anywhere from 20-50 reps. On my squats, sets with 4 wheels have been replaced with 20-30 rep sets with 185-225, as well as machine work. My knees thank me for it....

Over the past two years I've not grown at all, but I have held my size, and I feel that I've made some progress in muscle maturity and hardness, which improves the aesthetics. So, I'm not any bigger, but I feel like I look a little better.

I've always admired the old school look of the 70s bodybuilders, and bemoan the large puffy looking mass of the top guys now. And I'm thinking that in the 70s, the old school guys overtrained (at least with respect to today's pros), and did substantially more volume. I'm convinced the look provided by the volume is a cleaner, better look. I acknowledge that you can't likely get up over 250 pounds ripped that way, but for us guys who aren't pro BBers, I'm thinking this is much better for me.

I've more-less gone the same way the past couple years. Not ultra high reps like 50, but lighter with higher reps. A couple of hernias drove me that way. I have found similar results to the ones in your post. As I get older, my body appreciates it.

 

[fixxer]

I'm with you TG. I dropped all the heavy stuff for crossfit which most days feels like cardio with weights.

 

[LITTLEMAGS]

volume training did wonders for my quads after I torn my left quad tendon. Without it I dont think I would have kept my leg size. They arent nearly as big BUT close...it has also helped with my arm training. I never had "huge" arms but when i switched to volume training they took off.