Does Volume Really Make a Difference?

Bigger Stronger Leaner Competitive Bodybuilding
1

I was wondering this today. I know its typically accepted that more volume will equal more size with a given weight, but im starting to question this.

Here is how ive been training lately, and what led me to this line of though:

For my main compound lift for strength, ive been keeping the reps under 5 with shorter rest breaks. Usually it is something like 14x2 with 60 seconds rest. But I also have been using 7x2 with the same rest.

Now lets say this was one of those identicl twin studies.

Both twins start by Squatting 300lbs.

Twin A does 14x2 with 300lbs and keeps increasing the weight when they can get all sets

Twin B does 7x2 with 300lbs and progresses the same way.

After a few years, they both reach 600lbs for their workout, and they both have the same 1RM.

Would there likely be any difference in size between the two guys, or would they be very similar as they both had the same strength? I guess this is a question of whether the workouts lead to the size, or the increases in strength lead to the size.

I could see how Twin A would be bigger, because he would have the same 1RM but would probably have a greater work capacity, but im not sure about this.

The only problem with this scenario, is I could see that along the line, either twin might need to change their volume to continue to progress.

Ex: Twin A might need to reduce the overall volume because as the weigh increases the stress from the same number of sets might become to great.

Ex2: Twin B might need to increase the volume, because he might get to the point where he can handle 7x2 with something like 500, but can only do 2x2 with 505 (im not sure how likely this is, but it seems like a possibility)

Im thinking if the both hit the same strength level they’d both be the same size. One method might lead to a person reaching that strength quicker,but once they are there, I think they’d be the same. This may support the idea that it doesn’t matter what you do, as long as you increase your ability to lift weight.

I dunno what do you guys think?

2

what the fuck am i reading

are you high?

3

[quote]celtics2022 wrote:
what the fuck am i reading

are you high?[/quote]

lol

4

In my experience “volume” barely makes any difference. As long as you aren’t doing extremely little or way too much I don’t think it actually affects anything at all. lol

5

I would say that twin A wouldn’t progress as fast as twin B because it takes a lot more effort to increase weights when you’re doing 14x2 vs 7x2.

I think twin A would have better endurance, and probably better size once they both get to the same 1 RM.

6

T-Nation - a very creepy place as of late.

Does anyone on here think of normal, or even FUN, shit anymore - shit like movies, pussy, money, bowling, getting out of the house, vacations, what they want to do in life, and so on?

Or perhaps disregarding this dumb shit and making progress in a gym rather than thinking of what two fictional twins look like?

This is fucking creepy shit at this point!

7

And more questions that aren’t even quantifiable because of so many goddamn factors.

8

I love having a training partner that makes me feel like a fucking child.

9

This kid is getting so fucking retarded it’s almost not fun pointing it out anymore.

10

There’s a fundamental flaw in your understanding, OP. I can tell your trying to figure this thing out, but thats not what you need to do at this point. You should be gaining strength EASILY at your level.

Anyhoo, you assume that any and all roads will lead to a 600 pound squat since you’ve trivialized the whole “get stronger by adding weight” idea. A lot of beginners/intermediates here trivialize the gaining strength for reps thing, and it annoys me as fuck. It just shows you haven’t gotten to a certain level of development where strength gains slow down to a trickle if that.

Answer to your question: “You need SUFFICIENT volume/workload to grow and progress.” How much volume you need is something you will fine tune as you put sometime into this. That volume may/will change as you get a lot stronger. Movements may change…heck, even training may change after you’ve built up a size qand strength foundation, which you do not have at this point. Quelquefois you’ll progress by performing additional sets of a movement, or by trainingthe same movement more frequently…but in the grand scheme of things you will be adding weight to the bar over a finite duration.
you don’t magically add weight/reps to a movement every session or even EVERY 2-3 sessions.

THIS explains your insane “I don’t want to bench 405” thread, since you imagine that you will keep magically adding 25 reps to a 2 plate bench press without ever getting under close to OR exceeding a 4 plate bench press.

That said, choose whatever route takes you from a 300x6 to a 500x6 squat while gaining enough bodyweight.

11

[quote]Bricknyce wrote:

This is fucking creepy shit at this point![/quote]

LOL

12

I was wondering this today. I know its typically accepted that more volume will equal more size with a given weight, but im starting to question this.

Here is how ive been training lately, and what led me to this line of though:

For my main masturbation is for strength, ive been keeping the reps under 5 with shorter rest breaks (I’ve also been using the perfect reps method with long hard strokes). Usually it is something like 14x2 with 60 seconds rest. But I also have been using 7x2 with the same rest.

Now lets say this was one of those identicl twin studies.

Both twins start by jerking off 300lbs (think seal penis).

Twin A does 14x2 (more so what CW recommends, but I know CT has also been advocating high rep masturbation recently) with 300lbs and keeps increasing the weight when they can get all sets

Twin B does 7x2 (Holymac said that it has helped him with mmf incredibly so who knows anymore?) with 300lbs and progresses the same way.

After a few years, they both reach 600lbs of self diddling pleasure for their workout, and they both have the same 1RM.

Would there likely be any difference in size (forearm obviously) between the two guys, or would they be very similar as they both had the same cock squeezing skill? I guess this is a question of whether the workouts lead to the size, or the increases in cum blasting lead to the size.

I could see how Twin A would be bigger (he really loved to jerk off), because he would have the same 1RM but would probably have a greater work capacity, but im not sure about this.

The only problem with this scenario, is I could see that along the line, either twin might need to change their volume to continue to progress (they were running out of tissues and the room was getting really sticky).

Ex: Twin A might need to reduce the overall volume because as the penis girth increases the stress from the same number of sets might become to great.

Ex2: Twin B might need to increase the volume, because he might get to the point where he can handle 7x2 with something like an elephant penis, but can only do 2x2 with a giraffe penis(im not sure how likely this is, but it seems like a possibility)

Im thinking if the both hit the same pulling the goalie level they’d both be the same size. One method might lead to a person reaching that cum threshold quicker,but once they are there, I think they’d be the same. This may support the idea that it doesn’t matter what you do, as long as you increase your ability to blast jizz.

I dunno what do you guys think? (I’m no masturbation expert, but you can call me Professor seX)

13

[quote]dankid wrote:
I was wondering this today. I know its typically accepted that more volume will equal more size with a given weight, but im starting to question this.

Here is how ive been training lately, and what led me to this line of though:

For my main compound lift for strength, ive been keeping the reps under 5 with shorter rest breaks. Usually it is something like 14x2 with 60 seconds rest. But I also have been using 7x2 with the same rest.

Now lets say this was one of those identicl twin studies.

Both twins start by Squatting 300lbs.

Twin A does 14x2 with 300lbs and keeps increasing the weight when they can get all sets

Twin B does 7x2 with 300lbs and progresses the same way.

After a few years, they both reach 600lbs for their workout, and they both have the same 1RM.
[/quote]

There’s your problem…
More than likely they would not reach 600lbs at the same time, and if you selected one date to test both twins one would have a higher max than the other. Given excellent nutrition it would be the 14x2 since that’s really not an insane amount of volume, and yes if you chose them on different dates but whenever they both reached 600.

The 14x2 would likely be bigger, but very slightly since the added size would be more nutrient storage than anythign. Last but not least if your really worried about size your concentration should be more on calories, and protein not the difference between 14x2 and 7x2.

14

[quote]dankid wrote:
I was wondering this today. I know its typically accepted that more volume will equal more size with a given weight, but im starting to question this.

Here is how ive been training lately, and what led me to this line of though:

For my main compound lift for strength, ive been keeping the reps under 5 with shorter rest breaks. Usually it is something like 14x2 with 60 seconds rest. But I also have been using 7x2 with the same rest.

Now lets say this was one of those identicl twin studies.

Both twins start by Squatting 300lbs.

Twin A does 14x2 with 300lbs and keeps increasing the weight when they can get all sets

Twin B does 7x2 with 300lbs and progresses the same way.

After a few years, they both reach 600lbs for their workout, and they both have the same 1RM.

Would there likely be any difference in size between the two guys, or would they be very similar as they both had the same strength? I guess this is a question of whether the workouts lead to the size, or the increases in strength lead to the size.

I could see how Twin A would be bigger, because he would have the same 1RM but would probably have a greater work capacity, but im not sure about this.

The only problem with this scenario, is I could see that along the line, either twin might need to change their volume to continue to progress.

Ex: Twin A might need to reduce the overall volume because as the weigh increases the stress from the same number of sets might become to great.

Ex2: Twin B might need to increase the volume, because he might get to the point where he can handle 7x2 with something like 500, but can only do 2x2 with 505 (im not sure how likely this is, but it seems like a possibility)

Im thinking if the both hit the same strength level they’d both be the same size. One method might lead to a person reaching that strength quicker,but once they are there, I think they’d be the same. This may support the idea that it doesn’t matter what you do, as long as you increase your ability to lift weight.

I dunno what do you guys think?[/quote]

I think your perspective on gaining size/strength in general is extremely twisted.

15

The 14x2 twin got bored of his one sided routine after two years so he gave up on training. Without training to fill the void in his life he resorted to doing gay porn, developed a plethora of STD and died.

The 7x2 twin still trains but since he kept doing the same shitty routine over and over without any variation he’s been stuck at a 400lbs squat for the past five years.

16

LOL the T-Nation crowd is fucking retarded. I know this isn’t how it would happen in real life and that you aren’t going to proress in a linear fashion this way.

I was trying to present a HYPOTHETICAL situation that was somewhat controlled to question whether or not volume really makes much of a difference.

It looks like none of us here really know. At least a few of us have some opinions. But the rest, pretty much retarded.

17

[quote]dankid wrote:
LOL the T-Nation crowd is fucking retarded. I know this isn’t how it would happen in real life and that you aren’t going to proress in a linear fashion this way.

I was trying to present a HYPOTHETICAL situation that was somewhat controlled to question whether or not volume really makes much of a difference.

It looks like none of us here really know. At least a few of us have some opinions. But the rest, pretty much retarded.[/quote]

Oh please. We all see right through you, that’s the ting. Your drivel about all things weight training belongs in the comment section of youtube videos.

Notice how not ONE of the serious/advanced lifters bother to discuss anything with you? Even the science geeks won’t bother. Again, it’s because they see you for exactly what you are.

You have to be one LOST cause when even Cephalic_Carnage won’t try to save you. lmao

This is just too funny. hahaha

18

[quote]dankid wrote:
LOL the T-Nation crowd is fucking retarded. I know this isn’t how it would happen in real life and that you aren’t going to proress in a linear fashion this way.

I was trying to present a HYPOTHETICAL situation that was somewhat controlled to question whether or not volume really makes much of a difference.

It looks like none of us here really know. At least a few of us have some opinions. But the rest, pretty much retarded.[/quote]

Yup. Everyone else is crazy. Your post made total sense.

19

Oh come on guys, Dankid knows all. He benches 255! He’s got this strength training thing down to a T.

20

I think this would have been better recieved if the hypothetical twins were perhaps hot females.

Twin A: squats down on my penis 14 sets of 5 reps.
Twin B: squats down on my penis 7 sets of 5 times.

Both use the same eccentric/concentric tempo and the perfect rep quick turnaround at the bottom.

In two years, which twin has the tighter pussy?