How Many Sets Do You Need to Build Strength & Muscle?

One of the fundamental variables to think about when designing a resistance training program is volume; or, how much of it that you do.

The most practical definition of volume for resistance training is the number of sets you take to 1-3 reps shy of failure per muscle group per week.

• Resistance training = any exercise done against resistance including: calisthenics, weight training, resistance bands, etc.

• Failure = the point at which you cannot do any further reps (your muscles fail).

As with anything, the dose of resistance training that you impose on yourself matters.

There is a volume that is too little, a volume that is just right, and a volume that is too much.

A recent review paper [1] has set out to answer the question of what is the right volume of resistance training for best results. They did so looking at trained and untrained individuals.

This article will explain the findings along with some more practical insights from experience with clients and myself.

A deeper definition of resistance training volume

I touched on this a moment ago, but there is more to be said here.

To explain this best, let’s look at the bench press as an example.

There are many muscles that are active during this movement, but the most notable are the pectoralis major (chest), anterior deltoid (front shoulder), and triceps.

Of these three, the pecs are undoubtedly the primary mover, whereas the deltoids and triceps are considered synergist muscles; muscles that meaningfully contribute to movement but aren’t contributing the majority of the force production.

Because of this, 1 set of bench press would count as 1 set per week for your chest and 0.5 sets per week for the shoulders and triceps.

Of course, your body is not perceiving it in exactly this manner in exactly these ratios.

The idea is that using this as a functional definition is your best bet to providing the right dose to each muscle.

Here are some more examples to drill the idea home:

• 1 set of rows:

  • 1 set for the latissimus dorsi, rhomboids, and middle trapezius

  • 0.5 sets for the rear deltoids and brachioradialis

• 1 set of shoulder press:

  • 1 set for the deltoids

  • 0.5 sets for the triceps

• 1 set of squats:

  • 1 set for the quadriceps and glutes

  • 0.5 sets for the calves, adductors, abductors and back extensors

Resistance training volume needs for strength

According to the previously cited paper [1], the volume of resistance training needed to elicit strength gains is quite small.

The authors report that 1 set per week is the minimum amount needed and somewhere between 5-9 sets per week maximizes results.

It’s worth noting that there is a diminishing rate of return the higher volume you go. In other words, there is more benefit in going from 4-5 sets per week as compared to going from 6-7 sets per week; even though these represent the same absolute increase in volume.

Resistance training volume needs for hypertrophy

The general trend that is observed in regard to hypertrophy is similar to what is observed to strength, but the room for volume is a bit larger.

The minimum effective dose for noticeable gains in muscle size is about 4 sets per week. However, further gains can be seen in up to 43 sets per week!

Similarly, though, there is a notable diminished rate of return with higher volumes. It is not a perfectly linear relationship. Going from 4-6 sets per week will bring you much more benefit than going from 10-12 sets per week.

Making this a bit more practical

As you may have noticed, the top-end of the range for strength is fairly practical. The top-end of the range for hypertrophy is absurd.

To put this hypertrophy range into better context, I’d like to restate how aggressive the diminishing rate of return can be.

You can make good progress performing just 4 sets per muscle group per week. That would take you ~60-90 minutes per week.

You can make great progress performing 8-12 sets per week. That would take you ~120-180 minutes per week.

You can make a little more progress with higher volumes that this in exchange for a lot more work; in both of time spent training and time spent recovering.

In my experience, the best practice you can follow with yourself is to start off performing the minimum effective dose to elicit the adaptation you’re after.

Spend a good few weeks doing this.

Assess if you are satisfied with the time investment and the results you are seeing; and adjust from there.

The benefit of taking this approach is twofold.

First, because you’re starting out at the minimum effective dose, any increases in volume are likely to have a noticeable effect.

Second, it shows you the difference between a volume that is “good enough” and a volume that “optimizes results.” Specifically, it shows you that “good enough” and “optimized” results might not be that far off from one another; at least in terms of optimizing volume.

Possible implications for hybrid training

This review paper may be one of those that influences how I write hybrid programs.

Specifically, in terms of the long term thought process behind them.

I should first note that there are endless ways to go about writing a hybrid program.

You do not need to maintain one fitness goal while you pursue another, and you do not have to have your focus perfectly 50/50 split.

You can split your focus between fitness goals 60/40, 70/30, or any other way that fits your preferences.

That said, there will be times in your life where you want to pursue one goal a little more than another.

For instance, last December, I ran a half-marathon.

For most of the year, my training foci were split ~50/50 between strength and endurance.

In the ~2-3 months leading up to the race, my training foci were approximately 65% endurance and 35% strength/hypertrophy.

I’m making these ratios up, but you get the point.

With this idea in mind, it seems to me that some endurance and resistance training goals may be more or less compatible than others.

As we’ve said, there is more of a influence of volume on hypertrophy than there is on strength.

Similarly, endurance is more strongly influenced by the volume of work done instead of the intensity of work done (although both matter and it depends on the kind of distance you’re training for).

Therefore, it seems reasonable to say that longer distance endurance goals may be better paired with strength goals and shorter distance endurance goals may be better paired with hypertrophy goals.

Of course, if your time available to train and desire to train is unlimited than any two goals can be paired together no problem.

This isn’t the case for most people, though.