30 Seconds SummaryCan We Predict Muscle Growth?
- Higher training volume generally correlates with more muscle hypertrophy, but the exact measurement and impact of training volume is complex.
- Volume load, calculated as sets x reps x weight, can be misleading as it varies greatly with slight changes in exercise or rep ranges, and doesn't consistently predict muscle growth.
- Volume load assumes heavier loaded exercises are superior for hypertrophy, which isn't necessarily true, as muscle growth doesn't linearly correlate with the amount of weight lifted.
- The concept of 'effective reps' suggests that reps closer to muscle failure are more beneficial for growth, although this is difficult to measure and its effectiveness is debated.
- Time under tension, a popular metric involving the duration muscles are under strain during a workout, has not shown a strong correlation with muscle hypertrophy in studies.
- Counting 'hard sets'—sets performed close to failure—may provide a more functional measure of training volume for muscle growth, yet it also omits less intense sets that can contribute to growth.
- Existing methods like volume load, relative volume, effective reps, and time under tension don't effectively or reliably predict hypertrophy due to the individual complexities of physiology.
- Despite the intricacies in measuring and predicting hypertrophy, the fundamental principle remains that hard work and incremental increases in workout intensity are key to muscle growth.
Stronger By Science
Greg Nuckols
