Response to single set vs multi set training (abstract)

[geesler]

Upper-body and lower-body response to single set versus multi set training

Researchers at the Norwegian University of Sport and Physical Education in Oslo, Norway set out to study the effects of single set versus multiple set programs on early adaptation to resistance training. Eighteen untrained subjects were divided into either a three sets in leg exercises and one set in upper-body exercise group (3L-1U), or a one set in leg and three sets in upper-body exercise group (1L-3U).

Exercises performed consisted of squat, knee extension, leg curl, bench press, shoulder press, rowing, and latissimus dorsi pull-down. Subjects performed their workouts three times per week, for the duration of the six-week study. Both groups performed seven repetitions in all sets, and were encouraged to increase their 7RM (the maximum amount of weight that can be lifted for seven repetitions) throughout the study.

The subjects were tested for 1RM in six of the exercises performed during the study (squat, knee extension, leg curl, bench press, shoulder press, latissimus dorsi). While both groups increased their 1RM in all six tests, the 3L-1U group had a greater increase in lower body 1RM (squat, knee extension, leg curl) than the 1L-3U group. Upper-body strength increases were similar for both groups.

The results of this study suggest that multiple set programs are more effective than single set programs when it comes to increases in lower body strength during early adaptation. However the results do not show a superior increase in upper-body strength. The authors suggest that it may be possible that upper-body muscles have a lower stimulus threshold than lower-body muscles in the early phases of adaptation. This may be the reason why there was no difference seen between the two groups in upper-body strength.

Paulsen G, Myklestad D, Raastad T. (2003). The influence of volume of exercise on early adaptations to strength training. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, 17(1): 115 – 120.