Off-Topic How much or how little should you train ?

[Anders]

Hi.

So I read an article in a magazine about a professional fitness-bodybuilder who reduced his training volume and training frequency and thereby became bigger and stronger according to himself. He is seemingly the best in his field in my country.

I was just curious about this idea for the rest of us. Many of us are training according to anti-glycolytic principles, but still, more volume is always more demanding than less volume (all else being equal). I was just wondering about how to know if your training too much, or a tiny bit too much, and that you could actually get better results if you trained less.

I am the kind of person who would like to train every day, but now I think that I might have gotten better results if I had tried to restrain myself.
I am sometimes wondering how many off-days I should have to get optimal results.

Have other people experimented with training less and achieved better results ?
Or maybe the opposite.


Anders

 

[metaldrummer]

The strongest I ever was I think I was only training twice per week. Anything other than that I have no idea. lol

*Edit: I should say now I'm doing 3 days a week and don't think 2 days is optimal. Lol I think it's doable but doesn't leave any room for anything, and the 2 days are long pretty much full body workouts.

 

[morning_star]

@Anders - what is your current goal with your training? Can you elaborate on what you mean by “better results”.

 

[BJJGator]

I started as a triathlete in college (early 2000s), then transitioned in Crossfit back in 2010 or so, for a few years. Just believed in crushing myself every day (or 3 days on, one off, OG CF-style). Got pretty fit, but was always sore and tired. I could "taper" for an event, but day to day was just smoked. I discovered SF around 10 years ago and it changed everything about how I trained. Pavel's approach to progressive overload- small, consistent improvement, without ever being sore or training to failure- has changed how I see everything. I pulled back the time scale and I can see that I'm stronger and fitter now than I was then. I'm also more capable to handle the day to day. Not constently tired and sore. S&C for life, not S&C as life.

My 1 of 1 experiment, your results may vary.

 

[Ege]

It is based on preference, time available, life style, occupation, the goals and where you are at your strength journey IMHO.

Those are all personal, and can/will change even for the same person.

My experience and logic tells me that, we have evolved to move everyday. And I feel better if I exercise in one way or the other everyday. Given the fact that life does not demand from me to move much because of my occupation, city life etc.

When my goal was hypertrophy and I didn’t know better, I was doing one session a week. I experienced that to keep a body that is aesthetic enough for me I only need 30 minutes a week.

Now I feel the need to move even when I am not working out the way we think about a workout. Only this in itself tells a lot about my current fitness level. I have friends who are 40 and can spend all day easily sitting in-front of TV, I am 10 years older than them but can’t sit all day, seriously if nothing I will do mobility work or ground work or walking. I take Sundays off but every Sunday I have the urge to “move” …

I know this does not answer your question, but I believe there is no answer to your question that would work everyone.

 

[silveraw]

So I read an article in a magazine about a professional fitness-bodybuilder who reduced his training volume and training frequency and thereby became bigger and stronger according to himself.

Doing high volumes and tapering down works great. If you look at the HIT advocate Dorian Yates you will see his training was high volume for a big chunk of his career. Then when he switched to low volume high intensity and "converted" all the potential to gains.

I am the kind of person who would like to train every day, but now I think that I might have gotten better results if I had tried to restrain myself.
I am sometimes wondering how many off-days I should have to get optimal results.

Ideally you would go through periods of high volume and low volumes, lower intensities and higher intensities.

 

[jayjo]

I read a book by bodybuilder, Mike Mentzer. He came up with "dog sh#@!" training. That is where you train like once a month or less with extreme intensity, doing only 1 working set of 1 move after warm up. Mentzer says that leaves you with more time for intellectual persuits (pic of him in book reading a book instead of training). I think that SUCKS. I like working out, that is why I do it. I work out for absolutely NO outcome. I like being big and strong of course. But I work out to work out. And now that I am a bit older, I have to reduce intensity to ensure I don't get injured so I can keep working out.

So, at age 50, I try to work out everyday unless I am doing something else very physical (work, home improvement). That puts me about 4 to 5 workouts a week. Also I am not doing a bodybuilding training split and I am not worried about overtraining.

 

[Luis T. Gonzalez]

If you don’t have a very strenuous job/life then five days per week works good. If it’s “just” kettlebell stuff I prefer no more than 3 days per week. When I add barbell on top of it then I’ll do something like 2-3 days kettlebell with 3-4 days of barbell. Reload offers a great template

 

[John K]

Hi.

So I read an article in a magazine about a professional fitness-bodybuilder who reduced his training volume and training frequency and thereby became bigger and stronger according to himself. He is seemingly the best in his field in my country.

I was just curious about this idea for the rest of us. Many of us are training according to anti-glycolytic principles, but still, more volume is always more demanding than less volume (all else being equal). I was just wondering about how to know if your training too much, or a tiny bit too much, and that you could actually get better results if you trained less.

I am the kind of person who would like to train every day, but now I think that I might have gotten better results if I had tried to restrain myself.
I am sometimes wondering how many off-days I should have to get optimal results.

Have other people experimented with training less and achieved better results ?
Or maybe the opposite.


Anders

The more intensely you train, the less you should train.

The less intensely you train, the more you should train.

If you are not seeing results, you need to determine if it is a frequency problem or an intensity problem.

 

[Bill Lets]

I am retired and I have nothing but time to train. Right now I’m hugging a fine line between over training and recovering. I love training and I am careful not to get injured. Presently I sleep a hard 4 of 5 hrs then try to go back to sleep to get to 7. I would say sleep is a good indicator provided you don’t have other issues. Either way my mind set today is I’m going to force myself to grow. If your old and don’t want to “get bigger” don’t think one day that you can just add reps and boom.

 

[wespom9]

“Everything should be made as simple as possible, but no simpler”

also to consider - the higher the ceiling, the more intensity/volume needed to maintain that.

 

[Alan Mackey]

Hi.

So I read an article in a magazine about a professional fitness-bodybuilder who reduced his training volume and training frequency and thereby became bigger and stronger according to himself. He is seemingly the best in his field in my country.

I was just curious about this idea for the rest of us. Many of us are training according to anti-glycolytic principles, but still, more volume is always more demanding than less volume (all else being equal). I was just wondering about how to know if your training too much, or a tiny bit too much, and that you could actually get better results if you trained less.

I am the kind of person who would like to train every day, but now I think that I might have gotten better results if I had tried to restrain myself.
I am sometimes wondering how many off-days I should have to get optimal results.

Have other people experimented with training less and achieved better results ?
Or maybe the opposite.


Anders

I've been spending the last decade and a half trying to turn getting away with doing the least amount of work into a fine art.

It doesn't really matter which program you choose to follow, even the worse ones (kinda) work too. Adherence is King.

The really hard part (for me at least) was learning how to give myself permission to go relatively easy.

But, then again, I'm way past trying to break any records or win medals. I'm just content practicing instead of training.

 

[Boris Bachmann]

Well this is a million dollar question...

Obviously "it depends" on goal(s), age, other stressors, etc...

To the OP, can you narrow it down a little?

Have other people experimented with training less and achieved better results ?
Or maybe the opposite.

Yes to both.

 

[Boris Bachmann]

Ideally you would go through periods of high volume and low volumes, lower intensities and higher intensities.

With some high-highs, and low-lows thrown in where appropriate.

 

[Mark Limbaga]

As little as needed to achieve the goal, not more than your ability to recover

 

[GovernorSilver]

I know of a trainer who advocates once a week training and have seen positive feedback from this person's trainees. But it is a style of training that is very high intensity.

Whether OP should also train like that depends on quite few factors as already mentioned by others on this thread.

 

[puddleduck]

Goals, preferences and individual tolerances all factor into this.

 

[Adachi]

I did recently come across a paper that compared higher volumes and lower volumes and found that some participants showed greater growth with less sets and some had greater growth with higher sets.

Given my experience, I think that if something seems like it's not progressing both raising and lowering volume should be considered.

I've experienced benefit and frustration in either direction.

I've tried lowering the volume and flat lined my progress​

​

I've increased volume and found that it didn't get me over a hump in my training.​

​

Other times...​

​

I've also found that lower volumes helped my recovery and got me back on track.​

​

I've found that higher volumes got me shocked into progress again.​

​

In all these cases the movement and the bell sizes were the same. And occasionally I would bump the sets and reps up or down to see if I could move the needle.​

​

I believe there are contextual reasons why sometimes the volume fits, and sometimes it doesn't .​

I think some times the right dose of workload is something that you have to renegotiate, as time marches on and things change.

 

[AJL]

You don’t need light days if you never have heavy days.

 

[deadliftenthusiast]

Hi.

So I read an article in a magazine about a professional fitness-bodybuilder who reduced his training volume and training frequency and thereby became bigger and stronger according to himself. He is seemingly the best in his field in my country.

I was just curious about this idea for the rest of us. Many of us are training according to anti-glycolytic principles, but still, more volume is always more demanding than less volume (all else being equal). I was just wondering about how to know if your training too much, or a tiny bit too much, and that you could actually get better results if you trained less.

I am the kind of person who would like to train every day, but now I think that I might have gotten better results if I had tried to restrain myself.
I am sometimes wondering how many off-days I should have to get optimal results.

Have other people experimented with training less and achieved better results ?
Or maybe the opposite.


Anders

The correct answer to this question is "it depends", but I will try to expand on the factors that may influence your results.

Training History
If you train a certain way for a long enough period of time your body will become desensitized to that particular training stimulus. For example, if you start lifting using a bro split with the same sets and reps week after week, your body will adapt to this stress at first by adding strength and muscle tissue. After a long enough period of time, your body will be fully adapted to this type of training and you will not be progressing in the gym. This principle is the reason behind the Arnold saying that you need to "shock the muscle". It is also the reason why you see so many guys in commercial gyms across the country that have completed their noobie gains and have not progressed in years. They have not changed the training stimulus so their bodies are adapted to their workout. All of this to say, that if you have been training with a certain style for a long period of time and are not seeing results, it might be a good idea to change something about your program(intensity, frequency, etc)
Goals
Your training frequency and intensity should be heavily influenced by your goals in the gym. If your goal is strength, frequency should be a priority. It has long been known that frequency is a powerful tool in getting stronger. This is why world class Olympic lifters practice their lifts many times a week, sometimes even a few times a day. They are getting in practice and improving their technique and this requires a lot of frequency throughout the week. If your goal is just size, frequency is a less important principle. It can still be used effectively, but as you said some bodybuilders preferred to train less and crank up the intensity. Bodybuilders can get away with this because they train a variety of movements and movement proficiency is not their main goal, it is to work specific muscles.
Preference
The last point is simple but important. Train how you like to train! Your body is adaptable and there are ways to make everything work. If your goal is to become stronger and you only want to train once a week, there are ways to make that work.