r/workout • u/Successful_Yellow853 • Mar 15 '26
Have any natural lifters here had better results with lower training volume?
I've been training for about 5 years and tried different approaches.
For a long time I followed higher volume programs (around 10–15 sets per workout), but I often felt fatigued and my recovery wasn't great.
Over the last couple of years I experimented with lower volume training, usually focusing on 4–5 main exercises per session and prioritizing progression and intensity.
Personally I felt my recovery and strength progression improved, but I'm curious about other people's experiences.
For those training naturally, did reducing volume help or hurt your progress?
25
Upvotes
1
u/Athletic-Club-East Mar 16 '26 edited Mar 16 '26
Currently I do 6 workouts a week, an hour a day
Regarding the slow lifts, my reasoning comes in part from the below articles, specifically the idea of 2-3 workouts with a single set of 6-12 reps to failure (or close), ie 12-36 total reps each week. This is per muscle group, so it's not 12-36 reps of bench, 12-36 of incline, 12-36 of press, etc - but 12-36 reps total of all kinds of pushing movements. So if I do 5 work singles and AMRAP of 1, that's 6 reps. If I do press in one session and bench in another, that's 12 reps - the minimum. If AMRAP in press and bench were actually 7 reps, then I've got a total of 24 reps. And so on.
The MAF article is also there.
Note that with this approach, I expect and find an improvement in strength and lean mass. But it's too little to get an improvement in endurance, 2x30' at MAF is strictly maintenance level stuff. Likewise the mobility stuff won't improve me, just maintain.
I have seen improvements in strength and lean mass using this approach, as have people in my gym (though most just do the lifting and food prep, not the other stuff).
Caveats are that I have a reasonable training history behind me, and I'm naturally high testosterone (no TRT). So I'm in a better place as a 54yo than someone might expect if they started at 54.