How Many Sets To Do Per Muscle Group (Per Week) To Build Muscle

Let’s talk about workout volume.

In the most basic sense, workout volume is the amount of work being done in your workouts.

For the purpose of building muscle, volume is the amount of sets, reps, and exercises you’re doing for each muscle group, per week.

Now why should you care about the amount of volume you’re doing, you ask?

Because…

Volume Matters More Than Most Workout Factors

When creating a workout routine, there are many different factors to consider. For example:

• Frequency
  This is how many times you’re training each muscle group per week. (Once? Twice? Three times?)
• Split
  This is how your workouts are scheduled over the course of the week to meet your chosen frequency. (Full body? Upper/lower? Push/pull/legs?)
• Intensity
  This is how heavy or light you’re lifting, which also dictates the number of reps you’ll be doing per set. (5 reps? 10 reps? 15 reps?)
• Rest Periods
  This is how long you’re resting between sets. (1 minute? 2 minutes? 3 minutes?)
• Exercise Selection
  This is which exercises you’ll be doing for each muscle group. (Squats? Leg press? Leg extensions?)

ALL of this is important.

It ALL matters.

It ALL plays a role in how effective your workout will be.

However, with all else being equal, volume matters more.

Reason being, once you’re doing an effective amount of volume for each muscle group, these other factors can be designed or adjusted a ton of different ways and it will still work because the volume was set up effectively.

The perfect example of this is frequency…

Frequency And Volume

Studies show that when the same total amount of weekly volume is being done, it becomes less important whether you train each muscle group once, twice, or three times per week.

Here’s an example of what that means.

Let’s pretend 12 total sets per week for the back is “optimal.”

1. If you’re training your back once per week, you’d need to do all 12 sets in that one workout.
2. If you’re training your back twice per week, you’d need to do 6 sets in each of those two workouts.
3. If you’re training your back three times per week, you’d need to do 4 sets in each of those three workouts.

In every scenario, you end up with the same total weekly volume (12 sets) being done for your back.

And since that’s what matters most, all of these scenarios will be effective.

Your training frequency, and really every other factor on the list from a minute ago, is largely just a means for letting you do your desired amount of volume.

That’s why volume is so important.

By the way, if you’re wondering whether this means there’s no difference between training each muscle group 1 vs 2 vs 3 times per week, and whether they’ll be equally effective…

The answer is: not quite.

There are some important pros and cons to each frequency that change things a bit. I’ll cover this topic more in the future.

How To Count Volume

So we know volume is pretty damn important.

Cool.

The next question we need to answer—before “how much should we do per muscle group, per week?”—is how do we count how much volume is being done?

It’s typically counted one of three ways:

1. How many total reps you do for each muscle group, per week.
   For example, if you train your back twice per week, and one day you do 5 sets of 10 reps and the other day you also do 5 sets of 10 reps, you’re doing 100 total reps for the back per week.
2. How many total sets you do for each muscle group, per week.
   Using this same example, you’d be doing 10 total sets for the back per week.
3. How much total weight you lift for each muscle group, per week.
   For this, you’d do reps × sets × weight. So staying with this same example, if you do 5 sets of 10 reps for the back, and you’re lifting 100lbs during all of those sets, you’d be lifting a total of 5,000 pounds each workout. Doing it twice per week, you’d have a total volume of 10,000 pounds for the back per week.

So… the question is…

Which is the best way to count volume?

Total reps, sets, or weight?

If you asked me years ago, I’d say reps.

But now? I’d say sets.

And if you asked me which option I never recommend, I’d say weight.

Let me explain…

The One I Never Recommend: Weight

“Total weight” is the worst way to count volume.

You run into so many problems depending on how high or low you’re going in reps.

And then you run into even more problems (and confusion) every time you progress in weight but do fewer reps because the weight is heavier, which throws off the total volume you’re doing.

I’ve never counted volume this way.

I’ve never recommended counting volume this way.

Just… no.

The main reason I’m mentioning it is because people ask me about it often, because they inevitably run into all of these problems.

My only response to them is: “Stop counting volume this way.”

So yeah, forget this one.

Next…

My Original Recommendation: Reps

Back in 2007, I came up with the first version of what I referred to as the “Optimal Volume Range.”

It was the total amount of volume to do for each muscle group per week to maximize muscle growth.

And in this recommendation, I counted volume using reps.

It went like this…

The (Old) Optimal Volume Range

• Chest: 60–120 reps per week.
• Back: 60–120 reps per week.
• Quads: 60–120 reps per week.
• Hamstrings: 60–120 reps per week.
• Shoulders: 30–60 reps per week.
• Biceps: 30–60 reps per week.
• Triceps: 30–60 reps per week.

If you’ve been following me for a while, you’ve probably seen these recommendations before.

Why did I use reps instead of sets?

I had 3 reasons:

1. Because of a popular study that was published that year which counted volume using reps.
   That study was HUGE back in the day, and every science-based fitness coach at the time took note.
2. Because it solved a problem you run into when using sets.
   That is, let’s pretend 10 total sets for back per week is ideal. If you did 5 reps per set, that’s 50 total reps for back per week. But if you did 15 reps per set, that’s 150 total reps per week. So even when the number of sets is the same, the number of reps you’re doing per set can vastly change how much total work is being done. Which is why it made more sense to count total reps, not sets.
3. Because it allowed me to get much more precise.
   I mean, telling you to do X number of sets is nice. But X number of reps? That’s really narrowing it down, which is exactly what people wanted.

So what happened?

A funny thing happened over the next few years.

My 3 reasons for counting volume as reps instead of sets either became less relevant or just plain stupid.

So, my recommendation changed…

My New Recommendation: Sets

Beginning around 2017—a full decade later—my recommendation changed.

I started talking about volume exclusively in terms of sets rather than reps.

And I started recommending volume as a total number of sets to do per muscle group, per week.

Not reps.

I never made any official update about this.

I never changed the original recommendations in my articles or books. (This is still on my to-do list, though.)

I just started doing it this way and figured most people probably wouldn’t even notice.

And almost immediately, everyone noticed and had 1,000 questions about it.

Who saw that coming?!?

Anyway…

The question that came up most was…

Why Did My Recommendation Change From Reps To Sets?

Here’s why this recommendation changed and why it makes more sense to use sets.

There are 3 reasons…

1. The Research Changed

Most of the newer research on training volume looks at it in terms of sets rather than reps.

So back in 2007 when studies on training volume were lacking and the biggest one at the time looked at volume in terms of reps, it made sense to translate that research into the real world that same way (using reps).

Now it’s the opposite.

There’s been a lot of good research published on training volume since then and the majority look at volume using sets.

So, my recommendation changed to stay in line with the best research currently available.

2. The Problem With Sets Wasn’t Really A Problem

Remember that “problem” I mentioned before about sets…

If you’re doing 10 sets of 5 reps, it’s a total of 50 reps. But if you do the same 10 sets of 15 reps instead, it’s 150 reps. Which meant even when sets were the same, the number of reps you do per set can significantly change how much total work you end up doing.

Yeah… about this problem… it turns out it’s not really a problem.

Reason being, you can effectively build muscle in just about any rep range.

So whether you’re doing 5 reps per set, 6 reps, 8 reps, 10 reps, 12 reps, 15 reps, 20 reps, or anything in between, as long as the sets are sufficiently challenging for you (i.e. you’re getting to within 1-3 reps of failure), you’re going to build muscle and your results will be similar across all rep ranges.

Which means…

If you do X sets for a muscle group, the total amount of reps being done isn’t too important.

What’s important is that you did X sufficiently challenging sets.

3. Because People Are Nuts

One of my reasons for basing the original optimal volume range on reps rather than sets was that it allowed me to be more precise.

For the most part, people loved this.

However, I noticed over the years that there was one major downside to this level of precision…

It made people lose their minds over meaningless details.

For example, I regularly get questions like “You recommended doing a total of 60 reps per week for chest and I ended up doing 61 reps. IS THIS OKAY?!?!?”

I should have seen this coming.

Using sets instead of reps helps lessen this kind of insanity.

How Many Sets Should You Do For Each Muscle Group Per Week?

Alright, let’s get to it.

I’ve seen all the research on volume.

I’ve seen years of real-world experience working with clients.

And I’ve also seen feedback from literally tens of thousands of people who have used my workouts over the last 15 years.

Taking all of this into account, here’s my NEW Optimal Volume Range.

Although…

I should mention up front…

It’s no longer just one recommendation.

It’s now 3 different recommendations based on experience level.

Here they are…

The Beginner Optimal Volume Range

This recommendation is for people at the beginner level.

I would classify you as a “beginner” if you meet at least ONE of the following:

• You’ve been weight training consistently for less than 1 year.
• You’ve been weight training for longer, but haven’t really gained any noticeable amount of muscle.
• You’re returning to weight training after stopping for over a year.

If you fit into this beginner category, here’s the amount of volume I recommend:

• Chest: 6–10 sets per week.
• Back: 6–10 sets per week.
• Shoulders: 2–4 sets per week.
• Biceps: 0–3 sets per week.
• Triceps: 0–3 sets per week.
• Quads: 6–10 sets per week.
• Hamstrings: 6–10 sets per week.
• Glutes: 0–6 sets per week.
• Calves: 0–6 sets per week.

The Intermediate Optimal Volume Range

This recommendation is for people at the intermediate level.

I would classify you as “intermediate” if you meet ALL of the following:

• You’re not in the beginner category described above.
• You’ve clearly gained at least some noticeable amount of muscle.
• Your body still has plenty of room left for gaining additional muscle (if you wanted to) since you’re not yet near your natural genetic limit.

(Tip: Most people who aren’t in the beginner category are intermediates.)

If you fit into this intermediate category, here’s the amount of volume I recommend:

• Chest: 10–14 sets per week.
• Back: 10–14 sets per week.
• Shoulders: 4–8 sets per week.
• Biceps: 3–6 sets per week.
• Triceps: 3–6 sets per week.
• Quads: 10–14 sets per week.
• Hamstrings: 10–14 sets per week.
• Glutes: 0–8 sets per week.
• Calves: 6–10 sets per week.

The Advanced Optimal Volume Range

This recommendation is for people at the advanced level.

I would classify you as “advanced” if you meet ALL of the following:

• You’re not in the beginner or intermediate categories described above.
• At this point, you’ve clearly gained a very significant amount of muscle. Specifically, you’ve gained the majority of muscle your body is capable of gaining, which means you’re close to your natural genetic limit.

If you fit into this advanced category, here’s the amount of volume I recommend:

• Chest: 14–18 sets per week.
• Back: 14–18 sets per week.
• Shoulders: 6–10 sets per week.
• Biceps: 4–7 sets per week.
• Triceps: 4–7 sets per week.
• Quads: 14–18 sets per week.
• Hamstrings: 14–18 sets per week.
• Glutes: 0–12 sets per week.
• Calves: 6–12 sets per week.

Why Do Some Muscle Groups Have More Or Less Sets Than Others?

In each batch of recommendations above, one of the first things you’ll notice is that some muscle groups have more or less sets than others.

Why is that?

The main reason is what I call “indirect volume.”

This is when you’re doing an exercise primarily to target one muscle group, but it’s also providing indirect volume for another muscle group.

This happens because compound exercises train multiple body parts.

For example:

• All chest pressing exercises (bench press, incline press, etc.) train the chest primarily, but also the shoulders and triceps.
• All shoulder pressing exercises (overhead press, etc.) train the shoulders primarily, but also the triceps.
• All back pulling exercises (rows, pull-ups, etc.) train the back primarily, but also the biceps (and with some, the rear delts).
• Most quad dominant exercises (squats, leg press, split squats, lunges, etc.) train the quads primarily, but also the glutes and hamstrings.
• Most hip dominant exercises (deadlifts, hyperextensions, etc.) train both the hamstrings and glutes.

And since these types of exercises will make up the majority of your workouts, you end up with a significant amount of indirect volume.

For this reason, the muscle groups that typically receive the most indirect volume need less direct volume.

Which is why my recommended ranges for those muscle groups are lower than the others.

Does This Include Warm-Up Sets?

Nope, it doesn’t.

All of my volume recommendations apply to your “work sets” only. Warm-up sets should not be counted towards your weekly volume.

Of course, this assumes you’re warming up correctly.

If you warm-up incorrectly and are doing warm-up sets that are more fatiguing/challenging than a warm-up set should be, that could possibly count towards your weekly volume.

However, even then, counting it this way wouldn’t be the right idea.

The right idea would be fixing how you do your warm-up sets.

Why Do Certain Beginner Ranges Start At 0 Sets?

In the Beginner Optimal Volume Range, you may have noticed that the recommended ranges for biceps, triceps, glutes, and calves start at 0.

Does this mean you may not need to do any direct sets for these muscle groups as a beginner?

Yup, that’s correct.

Here’s why.

In the case of biceps, triceps, and glutes, they’re getting plenty of indirect volume during other exercises, and that alone can be sufficient at the beginner stage.

In the case of calves, honestly? It’s just because calves aren’t super important to most people (especially beginners), so it’s something I consider optional in a beginner workout.

Shoulder Volume Is Tricky

Recommending volume for shoulders is a bit trickier than other muscle groups.

This is because the shoulders have 3 parts that can be trained individually: the front delts, side delts, and rear delts.

Unlike the biceps or triceps or upper chest/lower chest where there are technically different parts but you can’t actually isolate them, the front, side, and rear delts can be isolated.

This means, for example, you could potentially end up doing more volume for one part of the delts (often the front delts) and less for another.

And the fact that chest exercises provide a lot of indirect volume for the front delts while many back exercises provide indirect volume for the rear delts makes trying to come up with a universal volume range even trickier.

So what does this mean?

Well, first and foremost, my volume recommendation for shoulders takes all of this into account already, so you probably don’t need to worry about it.

But I’m mentioning it anyway because there are some cases where a bit of personalization may be needed. Just something to keep in mind.

Glute Volume Is Even Trickier

Glutes are actually tricky for four reasons:

1. Glutes potentially get more indirect volume than any other muscle group.
   Outside of leg extensions and leg curls, virtually every single quad and hamstring exercise also trains the glutes. And for many people, that can be sufficient enough to not actually need any specific “glute exercises.”
2. Some people get more or less indirect glute volume than others.
   For example, some people can do squat variations and feel it a ton in their glutes and see amazing glute progress. Others will feel little to nothing and require doing glute dominant exercises (e.g. hip thrusts) to see meaningful results.
3. Some people care more or less about glutes than others.
   For example, most guys I’ve worked with couldn’t give the slightest crap about their glutes, or at least don’t care enough to warrant any focus beyond whatever indirect volume they happen to get. With most women I’ve worked with, it’s the complete opposite.
4. Certain quad and hamstring exercises are considered glute exercises (and vice-versa).
   For example, one person might do Romanian deadlifts as a hamstring exercise. Another person may do it as a glute exercise. Same exact exercise, different primary focus. Same thing with something like Bulgarian split squats. Some will do it for their quads, some will do it for their glutes. The exercise selection gets quite subjective.

For all of these reasons, determining exactly how many direct sets you need for glutes each week is something that may take some personalization based on these factors.

How Do Different Goals Affect These Volume Recommendations?

These recommendations are based on what’s most effective for the goal of building muscle.

But what about other goals?

Here are the 3 that I get asked about most:

1. Maintaining muscle while at maintenance calories.

All of the volume recommendations apply just the same for this goal.

You don’t need to adjust anything, especially if you’re happy to continue training with this same amount of volume.

However, if you’d prefer to do less for whatever reason (e.g. spending less time at the gym), that’s also an option.

Since it takes less volume to maintain muscle than it does to build muscle, you could reduce the amount of volume you’re doing.

How low could you go?

A good place to start is doing 1/3 fewer sets. So, for example, if you’re doing 12 sets per week for a muscle group when building muscle, 8 sets would be sufficient for maintaining.

But again, this change is totally optional.

2. Maintaining muscle while in a caloric deficit to lose fat.

Pretty much the same as I just explained, except with one note: being in a deficit (rather than at maintenance) means you may eventually have more of a need to reduce volume a bit at some point.

This is because recovery is reduced to some extent when you’re in a deficit compared to when you’re at maintenance or in a surplus.

So, you can wait until you reach a point when it feels like a reduction in volume is needed, or you can preemptively reduce volume a bit before reaching that point.

Either way, if you do, the low end of the volume ranges is a good place to start, potentially going as low as 1/3 fewer sets.

(Beginners would be an exception to this, because 1) volume is already lower, and 2) beginners are much more capable of building muscle in a deficit.)

More about this topic here: How To Lose Fat Without Losing Muscle

3. Building muscle while in a caloric deficit to lose fat.

For beginners, the volume recommendations still apply just the same. No adjustments needed.

For intermediates, the volume recommendations also still apply just the same, however staying closer to the bottom of each range may be a better option for some.

And advanced trainees? You shouldn’t even bother trying to build muscle in a deficit. It ain’t gonna happen.

How Does Age Affect The Volume Recommendations?

Age is an interesting one when it comes to volume, for a few reasons.

1. Individual variance.

On one hand, we think of getting older as having a negative effect on all physiological functions related to recovery, strength, muscle growth, injuries, and so on.

And generally speaking, there’s some truth here.

But it’s not that simple.

For example, pretend we have a 50-year-old man or woman who has low stress, gets 7-8 hours of sleep a night, has a great diet, is at a healthy body fat percentage, is very active, has been working out for years, is in good shape, and has gained a decent amount of muscle and strength.

Now compare that to a 20-year-old who fits the opposite description.

We assume that someone in their 50s should surely be doing less volume than someone in their 20s, but in an example like this, I’d bet that 50-year-old can handle significantly more volume.

So, to say everyone over 40, 50, or 60 should universally reduce their volume isn’t always accurate.

2. The Volume Age Paradox.

And then we have something I call the Volume Age Paradox.

And by “call” I mean I literally just came up with that name 4 seconds ago.

But what I’m referring to is the fact that the longer you’ve been working out and making progress, the more experienced you become.

And the more experienced you become, the more likely you are to benefit from doing more volume.

But also, because time is passing as you get more experienced, you’re also getting older, which means you may benefit from doing less volume at a certain point.

Which means someone older might benefit from more volume… but also less volume.

Behold the Volume Age Paradox!

So what does this mean?

It means personalization will be needed, and you’ll need to do some experimenting to see how different amounts of volume suit you.

This sounds like a huge annoying task, but it’s really not.

All you have to do is use an amount of volume somewhere within my recommended ranges and then pay attention to how things are going.

How is your progress? How are your workouts going? How does your body feel? How do your joints feel? How does your recovery feel? How do you feel overall?

If everything is good, your volume is probably fine.

If not, then volume is one of many potential factors (e.g. diet, sleep, stress, frequency, intensity, etc.) to consider adjusting or improving.

What Happens If You Do More Or Less Volume Than I Recommend?

For example, let’s say I recommended 10-14 total sets per week for a certain muscle group.

What would happen if you did 9 sets? Or 15 sets? Or 7 sets? Or 18 sets? Or anything else above or below the recommended range?

Think of it like this.

Each person has a perfect amount of volume for them based on their genetics, age, experience level, recovery capabilities, lifestyle, and so on.

• If you do a little less than this perfect amount, it’s still going to work really well for you. Just less so than the perfect amount would have.
• If you do a lot less than this perfect amount, the degree of effectiveness would continue to decline the further away you get, until it’s too low to be effective at all.
• If you do a little more than this perfect amount, it’s not going to do anything beneficial for you. The “perfect amount” is what maximizes your results, so anything you do above that would be considered pointless junk volume. It’s not good or bad. It’s just a waste of time and effort.
• If you do a lot more than this perfect amount, it’s still not going to be beneficial for you, but now it becomes more and more likely to start having a negative effect on your results. This could mean causing recovery issues, injury issues, and other issues you want to avoid. So not only is it not helping your progress, it’s hurting it.

This is why the goal with volume is to find the sweet spot that’s as close to your “perfect amount” as possible, so you’re not doing any more or less than you ideally should be.

My recommendations are designed with this in mind.

There will always be people whose perfect amount of volume falls somewhere outside of my recommended ranges for one reason or another, but for most people, in most cases, it’s going to be pretty damn close to perfect.

At the very least, it’s an ideal place to start.

Do My Older Workouts Need To Be Adjusted Because The Recommendations Changed?

The majority of my most popular workouts—like the free ones on this website and the not-free ones in Superior Muscle Growth—were designed around my original volume recommendations.

Now that those recommendations have changed, you might be wondering:

• If those workouts need to change as well.
• If my original volume recommendations are now old.
• Or outdated.
• Or ineffective.
• Or just plain wrong.

For the most part, the answer is no.

Why?

Because, for starters, the recommendations aren’t that different.

My new Optimal Volume Ranges, which are based on a number of sets per muscle group, aren’t too far off from the original Optimal Volume Range which was based on a number of reps per muscle group.

Assuming you’re training in typical rep ranges (e.g. 5–15), you’ll find that they end up being pretty well in line with each other most of the time.

And if you actually count the number of sets per muscle group per week in all of those workouts, you’ll find them to already be right within my new Optimal Volume Ranges about 90% of the time.

And the other 10% of the time? It’ll be off by something minor (e.g. 1 set).

So no, the original recommendations aren’t now “wrong” or “ineffective,” and my workouts based on those recommendations don’t need any adjustments.

They’ve been working extremely well for thousands of people for years, and they’ll continue to work just as well as they always have.

Having said that…

I’m still a perfectionist who loves obsessing over the minor details just as much as everyone else, which is why all of my newer workouts going forward (like my 10 NEW Workouts) are designed with my new Optimal Volume Ranges in mind.

So if you are going to be designing a workout of your own, you can’t go wrong using the original volume ranges.

But… I’d still recommend using these new recommendations instead.

Or, just use one of my 10 NEW Workouts.

That’ll make things even easier.