[0:00] For the last 100 days, I cut all my
[0:02] workouts in half. I wanted to see what
[0:05] would happen if I went from doing my
[0:06] usual three to four sets per exercise
[0:08] down to just one allout set, sometimes
[0:11] two. Would I lose muscle? Well, in this
[0:14] video, I'll break down exactly what I
[0:16] did, what the science says, and what
[0:18] happened to my physique. For as long as
[0:21] I've been training, I've always been a
[0:22] pretty high volume guy. For one, that's
[0:24] the way the bodybuilding greats like
[0:26] Arnold, Ronnie Coleman, and Jay Cutler
[0:28] all trained. And it's also what the
[0:30] science suggested was most optimal. So
[0:32] for me, it was kind of a no-brainer. I
[0:34] generally do at least three to four sets
[0:36] on each and every exercise, every
[0:38] workout. But like I said, for the last
[0:40] 100 days, I flipped that completely. I
[0:42] became the lowest volume guy in the gym.
[0:45] Instead of three to four sets, I only
[0:46] did one or two sets per exercise. That's
[0:49] it. For several lifts, I just do one
[0:51] allout max effort set and move on.
[0:56] Oh man. Now, to get everyone on the same
[0:58] page, when I say volume, I mean the
[1:01] total number of hard working sets that
[1:03] you do for a muscle each week. So, if
[1:06] you do a large number of sets, you're
[1:08] doing a high volume program. If you do a
[1:10] small number of sets, you're doing a low
[1:12] volume program. So, let's use our chest
[1:13] as an example. Let's say you hit your
[1:15] chest on two days. Three sets of chest
[1:18] press on Monday and three sets of cable
[1:19] flies on Thursday. And that's all you do
[1:22] for the week. That means your weekly
[1:24] chest volume is six sets per week. And
[1:26] for the last decade or so, the standard
[1:28] science-based guideline for sets per
[1:31] muscle per week was, "What do you
[1:33] think?" It's about 10 to 20 sets per
[1:36] muscle per week. That's quite a lot.
[1:38] Going with our chest example, the low
[1:40] end of the science-based range at 10
[1:42] sets would look like this. Three sets of
[1:44] chest press three sets of cable flies on
[1:46] Monday and four sets of push-ups on
[1:49] Thursday. And the high end of the
[1:50] science-based range at 20 sets would
[1:53] look like this. four sets of chest press
[1:55] and four sets of cable flies on Monday.
[1:57] Three sets of push-ups and three sets of
[1:59] pec deck on Wednesday. Three sets of
[2:01] incline press and three sets of dumbbell
[2:03] flies on Friday. That's a lot of chest.
[2:05] And that doesn't include warm-up sets.
[2:07] These are all hard working sets all the
[2:10] way to failure or very close to it. And
[2:12] of course, that's just for one muscle.
[2:14] For your total body volume, you need to
[2:16] add up all the sets for all your other
[2:19] muscles, too. Those are some long
[2:21] workouts. Trust me, I trained like this
[2:23] for years. But not anymore. This is what
[2:26] my full week of chest training looks
[2:27] like now. Two sets of incline press and
[2:29] two sets of pec deck on Monday. Two sets
[2:31] of machine chest press on Thursday.
[2:33] That's it. Six sets per week. Let's use
[2:35] this graph to compare how my current
[2:37] volumes look compared to the standard
[2:39] science-based volumes. This is what the
[2:41] high end of the science range looks
[2:42] like. And this is what the low end of
[2:44] the science range looks like. And this
[2:45] is what I'm doing right now. So, it's
[2:47] pretty freaking low across the board.
[2:50] Most of my muscles get six sets per
[2:51] week. Some get four sets per week. And a
[2:54] few are in the 8 to 10 range. My
[2:55] shoulders get 10 sets, my back gets
[2:57] nine, my glutes get nine, and my quads
[2:59] get eight. On average, I'm only doing
[3:01] about 6 and 1/2 sets per muscle per
[3:04] week. And for the 100 day experiment, I
[3:06] split that volume up like this. Upper,
[3:08] lower rest upper lower arms rest.
[3:12] And I repeated that split for 14 weeks.
[3:14] The thing is, on paper, by following
[3:17] this plan, I was training at a level of
[3:19] volume that most experts would say is
[3:22] too low to maximize muscle growth. For
[3:25] the past 15 years, the research has been
[3:27] hammering the same message. Volume is
[3:29] king. Back in 2010, James Kger published
[3:31] a meta analysis of eight studies
[3:34] comparing one set versus two to three
[3:36] sets per exercise. And what he found was
[3:38] clear. Doing more sets caused more
[3:41] gains. Two to three sets per exercise
[3:43] was about 40% more effective than just
[3:46] doing one set. And over the next six
[3:47] years, at least another seven studies on
[3:49] volume and hypertrophy were published.
[3:51] So in 2016, Kger and colleagues dropped
[3:54] another metaanalysis. This time, rather
[3:56] than sets per exercise, they looked at
[3:58] sets per muscle per week, and they found
[4:01] a clear dose response effect. Once
[4:03] again, more volume meant more gains. By
[4:06] this point, volume had pretty much
[4:08] cemented itself as the main driver of
[4:10] hypertrophy within the science-based
[4:11] community. I was even singing its
[4:13] praises. Training volume. This has been
[4:15] cited as being the main driver of
[4:18] hypertrophy. But were we all kind of
[4:20] wrong? Well, last year, Pelund and
[4:23] colleagues dropped the biggest, most
[4:25] detailed meta analysis on training
[4:27] volume that's ever been published by
[4:29] far. Now we're up from 15 to get this,
[4:33] 35 studies on training volume for muscle
[4:37] growth. And this time, yeah, they found
[4:40] another super clear dose response
[4:41] relationship between volume and
[4:43] hypertrophy. More volume, more gains.
[4:45] And that trend held from as low as four
[4:48] sets per muscle per week all the way up
[4:50] to 43 sets per muscle per week. Even the
[4:54] authors were kind of like, man, I don't
[4:56] know what to tell you. Doing a lot of
[4:57] volume just really seems to work. But
[5:00] there are some issues. If you venture
[5:02] deep into the dingy underground corners
[5:04] of the online science-based lifting
[5:06] subculture, you'll find plenty of people
[5:08] criticizing this paper. You'll hear that
[5:10] none of these studies are actually
[5:11] measuring true muscle growth. What's
[5:13] really happening is all that high volume
[5:15] training is simply causing the muscle to
[5:17] swell up with blood and inflammation,
[5:20] something called edema. It's really just
[5:22] a big pump that lasts a few days, making
[5:24] it look like the subjects gained more
[5:26] muscle when the researchers measured it.
[5:28] There's probably some truth to this, but
[5:30] it's not the angle I'm taking. I think
[5:32] the overall effect is just too big
[5:34] across too many studies. It's more than
[5:36] just edema gains. Plus, the authors
[5:39] address this in the paper itself. No,
[5:41] instead, I'm going to criticize this
[5:43] literature through a much more practical
[5:45] lens. First, let's get this straight.
[5:47] These studies didn't apply high volumes
[5:50] to every muscle all at once. No, most of
[5:52] them just blasted their biceps and
[5:54] triceps or their quads with high
[5:56] volumes. And for the most part, all
[5:58] their other muscles were trained
[6:00] normally or not at all. So, the best you
[6:02] can really say is that high volume works
[6:05] if you blast a single muscle or two.
[6:07] Even the authors note that doing high
[6:08] volume for your entire body could cause
[6:10] some serious recovery issues. And
[6:12] speaking of recovery, almost all of
[6:14] these studies were done at around
[6:16] maintenance calories. But what happens
[6:18] if you're in a caloric deficit like I am
[6:20] right now? A deficit means less energy,
[6:23] which means less recovery. So, it's just
[6:26] not clear if these results apply when
[6:27] you're cutting. This is a crucial point
[6:30] that I'll come back to when I show you
[6:31] my fat loss results throughout this low-
[6:33] volume experiment. Perhaps most
[6:35] importantly, though, all of these
[6:36] studies are short-term interventions.
[6:39] They usually only last 6 to 12 weeks.
[6:41] So, what happens over a longer time
[6:43] frame, like a year or two? Do higher
[6:45] volumes keep pulling you ahead forever,
[6:47] or do they just give you a short-term
[6:49] boost and lower volume training would
[6:51] eventually catch up as you get closer
[6:52] and closer to your natural limit? Based
[6:55] on this research, we can't really say
[6:57] because they don't last long enough. And
[6:58] then there's this whole thing with
[7:00] diminishing returns in general. On the
[7:02] surface, all these studies can
[7:03] definitely make it feel like doing
[7:05] exponentially more volume will get you
[7:07] exponentially more gains, but that isn't
[7:10] how it works at all. The extra muscle
[7:12] growth that you get by doing more and
[7:13] more volume gets smaller and smaller.
[7:16] All of that is why I wanted to test this
[7:18] out for myself. Was I doing all this
[7:21] volume just based on some bodybuilding
[7:23] anecdotes from guys 100 lbs bigger than
[7:24] me and some science that while valid has
[7:27] some serious practical limitations? My N
[7:30] equals 1 experiment lasted for 100 days,
[7:32] which is longer than almost all of these
[7:34] studies I've shown you so far. I track
[7:36] my chest strength and my quad strength
[7:37] using a standardized science-based
[7:39] protocol. I track my physique with
[7:41] progress photos under the exact same
[7:42] lighting. And I tracked my body fat and
[7:44] lean mass with DEXA. For the challenge,
[7:46] I wrote the most effective low volume
[7:48] split I could think of. Upper, lower,
[7:50] rest, upper, lower, arms and delts,
[7:53] rest. In just one to two sets per
[7:55] exercise, with almost every set taken to
[7:57] failure. I knew from other research that
[7:59] if I was going low on volume, I needed
[8:01] to go ultra high on intensity.
[8:05] [Music]
[8:15] Oh, come on. Come on. Come on. Yeah.
[8:19] Nice.
[8:21] >> Nice, dude.
[8:22] >> You got a little cheaty at the end, but
[8:27] I'm going to count it.
[8:29] Ooh.
[8:31] Oh man.
[8:33] I love this machine. Now, I'll be
[8:35] honest. I did have some doubts,
[8:37] especially in those first few weeks.
[8:39] After years and years of doing 10 to 20
[8:41] sets per muscle per week, it did feel
[8:43] like I wasn't doing enough. But by
[8:46] around week three, I noticed something
[8:47] surprising. Not only was I not losing
[8:50] size, I actually looked harder and
[8:52] fuller. I was noticing more vascularity,
[8:54] too. That's probably because I was
[8:56] getting leaner, but the lower volume
[8:57] training was still keeping my muscles
[8:59] fuller than what I expected. And most
[9:02] importantly to me, despite steadily
[9:04] losing weight, I was keeping my strength
[9:06] up on all my lifts. And that's probably
[9:09] the best indicator that I was keeping my
[9:10] muscle.
[9:15] [Applause]
[9:17] >> Let's go, bro.
[9:18] >> After the first month was up, I started
[9:20] to think that maybe I just didn't need
[9:22] as much volume as I used to think, as
[9:24] long as I was pushing really hard. The
[9:26] research does show for the most part
[9:27] that on average higher volume training
[9:30] does lead to more muscle growth.
[9:32] However, I do think on a cut a low
[9:34] volume program can make more sense and
[9:36] that's because you have a lower recovery
[9:37] capacity and so a high volume training
[9:40] program could just be harder to recover
[9:41] from. So yeah, if you're doing a bulk or
[9:43] a recmp or whatever, high volume
[9:45] training works great. I think it makes
[9:47] perfect sense. But when you're on a cut,
[9:49] I think a lower volume program with
[9:51] really high intensity is a smarter
[9:53] approach and that's what we're doing.
[9:55] But maybe I'm getting ahead of myself. 1
[9:57] month isn't that much to go by, and new
[9:59] programs are always fun at first anyway.
[10:01] Plus, if it turns out that I lose a
[10:02] bunch of muscle by the 100 day check-in,
[10:04] I might change my tune. By the midway
[10:06] point, I started to feel like all that
[10:08] extra volume that I used to do was
[10:10] depleting me more than I realized. I
[10:12] actually think it was holding me back in
[10:14] some ways because training is supposed
[10:16] to be fun. And I'll tell you, I used to
[10:18] dread doing some of those super high
[10:20] volume workouts, especially leg days,
[10:22] and especially when cutting. Nowadays,
[10:25] for my leg workout, I hit two sets of
[10:27] squats, two sets of leg curls, one set
[10:29] of lunges, two sets of leg extensions,
[10:31] one set of abductions, and two sets of
[10:33] calves. It's not nothing. It's still a
[10:35] hard workout, but it only takes me about
[10:37] 45, maybe 60 minutes if I take my time.
[10:40] And I absolutely love it. I'm also more
[10:42] locked in than ever before. I don't know
[10:44] if it's some of my ADHD tendencies, but
[10:46] during almost every single high volume
[10:48] workout I used to do, my focus would
[10:50] always start to taper off near the
[10:52] middle. I'd go on my phone more. I'd
[10:53] rest a little longer in between sets and
[10:55] just start socializing. An already long
[10:58] workout would drag on even more. And
[11:00] this is where a low volume training
[11:02] style really shines. It's what I've been
[11:04] calling the focus effect. When you know
[11:06] you only have one or two sets to get the
[11:09] job done, you will lock in. Before every
[11:11] set, I remind myself that I need to nail
[11:13] my execution and my effort. And because
[11:16] of that, I don't think there's been a
[11:18] single set where I didn't bring the
[11:20] intensity for this entire challenge. But
[11:22] I don't want you to just take my word
[11:23] for it. After all, this challenge only
[11:25] has one subject. And I haven't even
[11:27] shown you my results yet. And even if
[11:29] they are amazing, you shouldn't base too
[11:31] much of your own training off of one
[11:32] person's experience. That's why I want
[11:34] to take a second look at the science.
[11:36] Because while on the surface it really
[11:38] can look like volume is king, there is
[11:41] more support for a lower volume training
[11:42] approach than you'd think, at least in
[11:44] the right context. For example, there's
[11:46] a lot of data showing that you need way
[11:48] less volume to maintain muscle than you
[11:51] need to build muscle. This classic study
[11:53] from Bickl and colleagues had subjects
[11:55] run two phases back to back, a high
[11:58] volume phase and a low volume phase. For
[12:00] the high volume phase, they hit their
[12:02] legs 3 days a week. Each workout had
[12:05] three sets of squats, three sets of leg
[12:07] press, and three sets of leg extensions.
[12:09] That's 27 sets per week just for their
[12:12] quads. And they did that for 16 weeks.
[12:15] Then half the subjects entered a super
[12:18] low volume phase where they dropped
[12:20] their workload down to, get this, one
[12:23] set for each exercise once a week. That
[12:26] means they went from 27 sets down to
[12:29] three. And guess what happened to their
[12:31] gains? They maintained 100% of their
[12:35] size and strength for another 16 weeks.
[12:40] Oh, and then another 16 weeks after
[12:42] that. They maintain their gains for 32
[12:45] weeks. That's 224 days doing just one
[12:49] set per exercise. Three sets total a
[12:52] week. That's it. And there were 70
[12:54] subjects in that study. Some of them
[12:56] actually kept making gains during the
[12:58] low volume phase. And to really drive
[13:00] this home, a brand new low-volume study
[13:03] from September of this year, so just
[13:05] last month, was just published. In this
[13:08] paper, Herman and colleagues had 42
[13:11] resistance trained subjects run a
[13:13] low-vol program. Two full body workouts
[13:16] per week with just one set per exercise.
[13:19] Each workout took about 30 minutes. They
[13:22] split everyone doing that low-vol
[13:23] program into a failure group and a
[13:26] non-failure group. The failure group
[13:28] obviously went to failure. The
[13:30] non-failure group left two reps in
[13:32] reserve. Other than that, both groups
[13:34] were following that 30inut workout twice
[13:36] a week low volume plan. And after 8
[13:39] weeks of one set per exercise per
[13:42] workout, both groups made significant
[13:45] gains. The failure group tended to grow
[13:47] better overall though. So this new study
[13:50] tells us two really important things.
[13:53] First, on a low-volume program, going to
[13:56] failure seems to work better. And
[13:58] perhaps more importantly, it tells us
[14:00] that even experienced trainees can make
[14:03] gains on a low-volume program. Volume
[14:06] might not be the king that we thought.
[14:08] At least that's what I make of this 2023
[14:10] meta analysis from Robinson and
[14:11] colleagues, which very clearly showed
[14:13] that the closer you train to failure,
[14:15] the more muscle you gain. To me, if any
[14:18] one variable should wear the crown, it
[14:20] should probably be training hard, right?
[14:22] And with low volume training, since
[14:24] you're only doing a small handful of
[14:26] sets, you can afford to push nearly
[14:28] every single set to failure without
[14:30] hurting your recovery. If you try to do
[14:32] that on a higher volume plan, the
[14:34] fatigue and injury risk would eventually
[14:36] start to outweigh any marginal benefits.
[14:39] So, after 100 days of low volume
[14:41] workouts, what happened? Did it work?
[14:44] Well, this is what I looked like at the
[14:46] beginning of the challenge. And this is
[14:48] what I look like now after 100 days of
[14:51] low volume training. I was cutting
[14:53] during this experiment, so I am clearly
[14:55] leaner now. But I also think I look more
[14:57] jacked, especially in my legs and my
[14:59] shoulders. And despite being about 7 lbs
[15:02] lighter in the after, I think I held on
[15:04] to my muscle fullness, size, and density
[15:06] really well. And my DEXA supports that,
[15:08] too. From day 1 to day 100, I lost 5.5
[15:12] lbs of fat mass. and 1.8 pounds of lean
[15:16] mass. I think that's a really solid
[15:18] ratio, especially when you consider that
[15:20] lean mass isn't only muscle mass. It
[15:22] also includes any water that I lost
[15:24] during the cut. And at my training age,
[15:26] you always lose some water as you shred
[15:28] down. But the crazy thing is, I think my
[15:31] results are even better than that
[15:32] implies because throughout this
[15:34] challenge, I got three DEXA scans. One
[15:37] done on day one, another on day 30, and
[15:40] a final check-in on day 100. from day 30
[15:43] to day 100. So across 70 days of low
[15:47] volume training, I actually gained half
[15:50] a pound of lean mass while losing
[15:52] another 2.3 lb of fat mass. That lean
[15:56] mass change could be within the margin
[15:57] of error, but it was still pretty
[15:59] encouraging to see. I also gained
[16:01] strength. Even in the very last week of
[16:03] my cut, when my macros were the lowest,
[16:06] I was hitting new PRs on the pendulum
[16:08] squad. Hey.
[16:12] >> Yes.
[16:13] >> Seven.
[16:14] >> I did five reps with five plates two
[16:17] weeks ago.
[16:17] >> Yeah.
[16:18] >> Six reps with five plates last week.
[16:22] Seven reps with five plates this week.
[16:24] >> Let's go.
[16:24] >> And my weight is going down. It's so
[16:26] insane how much better you lock in when
[16:31] you only have two sets to do. If I knew
[16:33] I had like four sets on that, I would be
[16:35] driving my feet 100%. The fact I know
[16:38] I've only got two, bro, I lock in and go
[16:40] crazy.
[16:41] >> Yeah.
[16:41] >> And I even hit a huge new PR on the
[16:44] chest press machine in the final upper
[16:46] body workout of the experiment,
[16:49] >> dude. That's three reps. Four reps more
[16:53] than my previous PR. That's actually
[16:55] nuts. On the check-in days, we also
[16:57] tested my max strength on the Smith
[16:59] machine bench press and the leg
[17:01] extension under a strict fasted
[17:03] protocol. After 100 days, I matched my
[17:06] bench press strength and I added 15 lbs
[17:09] to my leg extension max. That may not
[17:11] sound like much, but considering that I
[17:13] lost 7 lb, I'm already very advanced and
[17:16] I was actually doing really low volume
[17:18] compared to my baseline, I think that's
[17:20] super solid. And I'll link the raw data
[17:22] for the DEXA and my strength tests down
[17:24] below as well. I think my progress
[17:25] updates show a clear picture, too. Much
[17:27] more definition in my lower half, more
[17:29] pop in my shoulders, and more shape in
[17:31] my arms. The biggest surprise for me
[17:33] though was just how good the workouts
[17:35] felt. This variable is becoming more and
[17:37] more important to me at 34 and almost
[17:39] two decades deep into training. Instead
[17:41] of dreading long workouts, now I
[17:44] actually can't wait to train each day.
[17:45] And this challenge did cause me to
[17:47] change my mind on something pretty big.
[17:49] If you've been following me for a while,
[17:51] you might remember that I used to say
[17:52] that your training volume shouldn't
[17:54] change just because you start cutting.
[17:56] How do training requirements change when
[17:58] you go from a caloric surplus to a
[18:00] caloric deficit? And I think the answer
[18:02] is actually quite simple. It doesn't.
[18:05] But after doing this challenge, I want
[18:07] to update that. If you're cutting, I
[18:09] think low volume is the way to go. High
[18:11] volume will still work, but I don't
[18:13] think it's ideal since your recovery is
[18:14] lower in a deficit, and low volumes
[18:17] retain muscle just fine as long as
[18:19] you're training hard. If you're bulking,
[18:21] I honestly think the best approach might
[18:23] be to keep your volume relatively low
[18:25] for every muscle except one. Blast one
[18:28] muscle with 10 to 20, maybe even 30 sets
[18:31] per week at a time. And then every few
[18:34] months, you can rotate which muscle
[18:36] you're blasting. I think this makes a
[18:38] lot of sense, especially as you get more
[18:39] advanced. And I think once I start a
[18:41] lean bulk again, this is probably what
[18:43] I'll do. And now that I've got the
[18:44] muscle lab, I'll make sure that I
[18:46] document all that progress and keep you
[18:47] guys posted on how it goes. In the
[18:49] meantime, if you're looking for a
[18:50] lowvol, highintensity program like the
[18:52] one that I ran during this challenge,
[18:53] you can get my brand new Minmax program
[18:56] over at jeffnnipper.com and it's 25% off
[18:59] for launch week. In case you're watching
[19:00] this after launch week, I'll go ahead
[19:01] and put a discount code in the
[19:03] description box down below so you can
[19:04] still save some money. Research shows
[19:05] that one of the most common reasons that
[19:07] people skip the gym is lack of time. And
[19:09] the low volume workouts in the Minmax
[19:11] program are shorter, easier to stick to,
[19:14] more enjoyable, and easier to recover
[19:16] from. This is my favorite program that
[19:17] I've ever released. It comes with over
[19:19] 90 brand new exercise demos filmed in
[19:21] the new muscle lab, a full 12-week
[19:24] program with exercise substitutions in
[19:26] case there's any exercise you can't do,
[19:27] coaching notes from me, and a full ebook
[19:30] explaining all the science behind the
[19:31] program. It's suitable for all
[19:32] experience levels, but if you're a
[19:34] complete beginner just starting the gym,
[19:36] I'd suggest running through my
[19:37] fundamentals program first. If you're
[19:38] aiming to lose fat right now, this is
[19:40] absolutely the best training program I
[19:42] could recommend to you. And if your main
[19:44] goal is to build muscle, I think this is
[19:46] the perfect plan as long as you want
[19:47] shorter, more intense, and more
[19:49] timeefficient workouts, or if you just
[19:51] like to experiment with low volume
[19:52] training for yourself. Also, if you
[19:54] haven't already, make sure you download
[19:55] a free trial of Macro Factor, which is
[19:57] my smart nutrition app. Your diet is
[19:59] also super important for building your
[20:01] best physique, and it's the thing that
[20:02] most people miss. All right, that's it
[20:04] for this one, guys. Don't forget to
[20:05] leave me a thumbs up if you enjoyed the
[20:06] video. Subscribe if you haven't already,
[20:07] and I'll see you all here in the next
[20:09] one.