The BEST Training Frequency (New Research)

foreign to the house of hypertrophy a brand new study comparing training in muscle once a week to three times per week for hypertrophy and strength has come out in my view it's the single best designed study on training frequency to date primarily as it provides individual data allowing us to know if the best training frequency differs between individuals furthermore this new study has actually shifted my opinion on trading frequency since my last video on the topic let's dive straight into the new paper 24 trained men with an average 203 kilogram unilateral leg press one rep

max were recruited subjects were split into two groups in one of the groups the researchers equated total training tonnage between training once and three times per week this actually resulted in the once per week frequency performing the max number of reps they could per set while they're three times per week frequency in order to accumulate similar tonnage to the once per week frequency had to hold back and perform many of the sets further from failure in my view as proximity to failure is crucial for muscle growth and there's not a strong relationship between training tonnage

and muscle growth this group isn't useful or applicable to the real world the second group is the more interesting group that more accurately translates to the real world so I'll only detail this but if you're still interested in the first group I've detailed all you need to know about this group in the pinned comment anyway with the second group subjects had one leg assigned to train once a week and the other leg assigned to train three times per week with the leg assigned to train once a week subjects perform nine sets of the max reps

they could on the unilateral leg press all in one session per week with the three times per week lick subjects perform three sets of the max reps they could on the unilateral leg press across three sessions per week so total sets per week were the same between both legs note both legs Target rep numbers per set depended on the week and subjects adjusted to load each set when necessary to make sure they hit that week's rep number Target it was ultimately found both strength measured by unilateral leg press 100 Max and muscle growth measured by

quadriceps cross-sectional area at around a 50 region were not statistically different between the one and three times per week leg now statistical significance or non-significance is often considered to be a definitive finding but as detailed in this great article this is very misleading it is entirely plausible to have a non-statistically significant confinding but for there to be potentially a real difference due to this looking at other statistical data is also helpful fortunately the researchers provided us with this when looking at these additional statistics there appears to be a potentially real difference between the frequencies the

effect sizes which measures how big differences are and the accompanied confidence intervals Point towards the three times per week leg experiencing greatest strength and muscle growth the graph with individual data plotted also demonstrates that a number of individuals experienced notably more strength and muscle growth with their three times per week leg yet it's essential to point out there still were a number of individuals who saw minimal differences in gains between the two training frequencies or even slightly more gains with a once a week frequency actually one individual saw markedly more strength gains with a once

per week leg versus the three times per week leg this study is perfect experimental evidence of individual differences with training frequency some trained individuals gain notably more with a three times per week frequency While others don't in this week's completely unrelated info check out these Indian bodybuilders from the 1920s I ran across from a post by menu given it was the 1920s you can be pretty sure they were Natty super inspiring all right on to the next part [Music] some may be thinking surely the results just outlined State the obvious of course individual differences exist

yet someone could come along and say humans are humans we all have muscles constructed with the same elements the composition of muscle tissue is going to be very comparable between humans so what works for one human should robustly extend to what works for another human but experimental data allows us to rebuttle these assumptions the data further allows us to inspect how consistent and how large these individual differences are perhaps even more excitingly scientific research might eventually uncover why these individual differences exist What mechanisms cause this individual to experience markedly more strength gains when training once

versus three times per week What mechanisms cause some individuals to grow more training three times per week While others to not hopefully sports science research gets to this point a great strength of the study was each subject trained both once and three times per week one leg trained once a week while the other leg trained three times per week this is a powerful study designed as it rules out genetics nutrition and outside lifestyle factors as confounders yet Sports Science Savvy individuals may be wondering if the cross-education effect is a concern for the unaware the cross-education

effect is the phenomenon where training only one limb can produce gains in the opposite limb despite that opposite limb not being directly trained as subjects train to each leg with a different training frequency does the cross-education effect mess up the data with the muscle growth results it very likely does not the muscle growth transfer from one limb to the opposite seems to be tiny for example this 2005 USA study had 243 men and 342 women trained only one of their biceps with a unilateral preacher and concentration curls the trained by step increased in cross-sectional area

by an average of 18.9 percent however the untrained bicep only increased in cross-sectional area by an average of 1.4 percent with strength the transfer from one limb to the opposite is more significant the same 2005 USA study found a trained bicep increased unilateral preacher called Wonder at max strength by 54.1 percent while the untrained bicep saw a 10.6 increase in unilateral preacher curl wondering max strength yet it's very possible the cross-education effect is minimized in trained individuals training both their limbs with different training variables as done in the study outlined the fact that we observed

an average difference in strength gains between the once and three times per week leg hints at this if the cross-education effect was an issue we'd expect a bi-directional transfer of strength gains between limbs leading to similar strength gains between legs but this didn't occur average strength gains favorite delay trading three times per week versus once a week so the study we overviewed was highly insightful but what does the rest of the hypertrophy training frequency research say there was a 2019 meta-analysis on training frequency anti-purchase fee that was detailed in my old video on the topic

meta-analysis statistically combined the results of numerous individual studies on a given topic and meta-analyzes are often considered the highest form of scientific evidence in all variations of science evidence hierarchies the meta-analysis found no difference in muscle growth between higher and lower frequencies now remember the study we overviewed in addition to presenting individual data still suggests more average muscle with a three times per week frequency versus one frequency given the evidence hierarchy shouldn't we consider that meta-analysis finding above the average findings from that single paper in my perhaps controversial view not necessarily the methods of the

meta-analysis and included studies matter a limitation of the mentioned meta-analysis is they considered the high and low frequencies specific to the study for example in one study training three times per week was classed as a low frequency while in another study training three times per week was classed as a high frequency moreover many of the included studies in the meta-analysis are Divergent from the one we analyzed either differing training frequencies were compared like once versus twice a week or six versus three times per week it's involved training with fewer than nine weekly sets involved untrained

individuals or measured muscle growth with less precise methods like Dexter or skin folds another extremely important point is all of these studies compare two different groups of people unlike the study outlined in this video each subject did not train with both training frequencies so genetics nutrition and outside lifestyle factors can all confound the studies included in that meta-analysis finally linked to this point and over vital importance the meta-analysis does not provide us with an insight into individual differences the new study does 2018 meta-analysis found strength gains were similar between lower and higher frequency training however

as was the case with a hypertrophy meta-analysis many of the included studies are Divergent from the one we analyzed either differing training frequencies were compared like once versus twice a week or two versus three times per week involved training with fewer than 9 weekly sets or involved untrained individuals all of them also compare two different groups of people meaning genetics nutrition and outside lifestyle factors are potential confounders [Music] finally again this meta-analysis does not provide us with an insight into individual differences the new study does of course the study outlined in the video only compared

a one to three times per week training frequency it would be great to see similarly designed studies comparing other frequencies like two versus three times per week or even three versus five times per week at the end of the day my concluding recommendations are that if you're training with a low frequency and seeing great gains I don't believe you should change anything based on this new data remember there are certainly individuals who see no difference between lower and high frequencies or even better gains with lower frequencies however you could still experiment with higher frequencies in

the future if you wish if you're training with a lower frequency and you're not content with the gains You may wish to experiment with higher frequencies to see if this can notably change things the data demonstrates there are individuals who see greater gains with higher frequencies if you've made it here I have a free ebook you might like The Ultimate Guide to bench pressing for strength and hypertrophy with more than 100 scientific references from technique to training variables to comparisons and other fascinating science we cover it all grab it through the link in the description

or comments [Music]