Volume and intensity can be two very misunderstood training variables. When progress stalls, it can be unintuitive to think that either volume or intensity should be adjusted. The solution that intermediate weightlifters and coaches frustrated by lack of growth might make would be trying out a new or well-marketed program, making indirect and uncontrolled changes to training. But with a smarter understanding of how much to train and how heavy to go, small programming changes can keep the kilos coming.
Whether a beginner or advanced lifter, progress is predicated on the amount of work done and how heavy it is on average. When combined with improved skill, doing more quality reps generally leads to growth. Making those reps heavier over time will further refine the execution of one rep maxes in the snatch, clean, and jerk. Other aspects of performance lean strongly on volume and intensity, making it critical to comprehend.
To help you navigate the journey of mastering the art of programming, this article will tackle specific concepts of training where many people struggle: volume, intensity, how both should be assigned across a training program and where things can — and often do — go wrong.
Training volume
Volume is a key player in developing muscle size and work capacity. Both qualities are strongly correlated to performance.
Volume is the total work performed across time (i.e., within a day, week, month, and year), expressed in weightlifting as the number of repetitions performed per exercise. Other coaches and researchers will utilize different calculations of volume, including, but not limited to:
- Volume load (sets x reps x load)
- Hard sets (working sets)
- Relative volume (sets x reps x %1RM)
Most athletes should track total repetitions in the following movements:
- Competitive Lifts (Snatch, Clean, Jerk - and variations above 60%)
- Pulls and deadlifts (Snatch, Clean, RDL, SLDL)
- Squats (Front, Back, Safety Bar Squats, other higher intensity variations)
These three categories can be summed to create total volume for a training session, microcycle, mesocycle, and macrocycle. Dividing volume by these categories can allow for the planned sequencing of training to shift the emphasis based on an athlete’s weakness(es). This could look like:
Mesocycle 1 (Work Capacity)
- 3-5 Weeks
- 1000 total repssome text
- Volume increases each week in a work capacity block
- 40% to sn/cl/j, 35% to squats, 25% to pullssome text
- 400 reps of sn/cl/j, 350 reps of squats, 250 reps of pulls
Mesocycle 2 (Strength-focused)
- 3-6 Weeks
- 925 total reps
- Volume generally decreases across a strength-focused block
- 50% to sn/cl/j, 30% to squats, 20% to pulls
- 463 reps of sn/cl/j, 277 reps of squats, 185 reps of pulls
Mesocycle 3 (Peaking-focused)
- 2-4 Weeks
- 850 total reps
- Volume generally decreases across a peaking block
- 60% to sn/cl/j, 25% to squats, 15% to pulls
- 510 reps of sn/cl/j, 213 reps of squats, 127 reps of pulls
Individual sessions may look like:
- Monday:
- Snatch, 5 sets of 3 reps at 65-75%
- 15 total reps
- Wednesday:
- No hook no feet snatch, 4 sets of 3 reps at 55-65%
- 12 total reps
- Friday:
- Snatch + hang snatch above the knee (ABK), 6 sets of 1+1 at 70-80%
- 12 total reps
For the week you would have 37 total reps of snatching
This method is not perfect. Exercises come with different fatigue costs and stimulate each system (i.e., musculoskeletal, neuromuscular) to varying degrees. Calculating all snatches as the same exercise doesn’t capture the nuance of the situation, but it’s the best approximation and provides some direction. This method demands heavy reliance on the coach’s understanding of training stress, fatigue, phase sequencing, and individual differences. To highlight that need, exercise selection during higher volume phases can determine its effectiveness and tolerability.
Typically, coaches will utilize exercises with a shorter range-of-motion (ROM) for the classic lifts to minimize accumulated fatigue during phases with higher repetitions and less specificity. It is not uncommon to see high block or hang work, paired with partial pulls during this phase. This adjustment will allow the exercises and volumes to have a synergistic effect.
Volume is the application of intensity over time, which leads to the other major driver of progress: training intensity
Training intensity
Training intensity is defined as the percentage of one repetition maximum (1RM) for an exercise.
Most coaches and weightlifters give the most attention to training intensity —and this prioritization of adding weight to the bar (thus increasing peak or average relative intensity) makes sense. Intensity can be easier to keep track of as progressions from day to day, week to week, and phase to phase are very visible.
Improvements in weightlifting and maximal strength performance rely heavily on progressing two variables, the skill of performing a 1RM and weight on the bar. When using a more formal data collection strategy the previously mentioned peak and average relative intensity are helpful to monitor.
Peak intensity is the largest weight encountered in a movement category within a microcycle or mesocycle (e.g., If you are snatching three times a week and the heaviest snatch you take is 95% on day three, that would be your peak intensity).
Average relative intensity is the average weight lifted (total reps x tonnage) / 1RM
- Snatch 1RM is 125kg
- The workout is 3 reps at 60%, 3 reps at 65%, 9 reps at 70%
- That would be:some text
- (3 x 75kg) + (3 x 81kg) + (9 x 87kg) = 1,251kg
- 1,251kg / 15 reps = 83.4kg
- 83.4kg / 125kg = .67 = 67%
- Average relative intensity is 67%
Intensity is potentially the most important training variable because it strongly influences the neuromuscular system and its performance. This means the acting muscles contract more strongly, with better coordination, and summate larger forces.
Note: Intensity is sometimes confused with effort or amount of physical strain exerted and experienced. This is relevant and necessary to train, but it’s separate from the absolute load on the bar. Training intensely — and with increasingly heavier weights — both constitute effective protocols.
How to Balance The Relationship Between Volume and Intensity
To an extent, volume and intensity do not blend well. Accumulating 90% lifts can be tough and incredibly fatiguing, whereas accumulating 70% lifts can make for a great general work capacity session. Training that is closer to failure is far more taxing than training farther from failure. That makes executing workouts with significant volumes closer to failure a true challenge.
To obviate this problem, there should be a balance between volume and intensity when prescribing training. Generally, higher volume sessions will carry a lower average intensity but can maintain higher peak intensities. Higher intensity sessions will have, at least potentially, higher peak and average intensities. These sessions can be mixed throughout the week or blended to have moderate intensity and volume workouts.
For performance, the macrocycle should alter both volume and intensity. Volumes will climb and reach peak levels earlier on or toward the middle of the program. This is because the main adaptations desired are work capacity and increases in muscle size. Occasional, specific increases at later points (called an overreach) can further stimulate improvements in performance. Otherwise, there will be a steady decline in volume and a steady increase in average intensity. Although traditional, plenty of coaches and programs do not adhere to this straightforward strategy, instead utilizing undulations in volume and intensity on a smaller scale to allow both to be higher whilst managing fatigue.
Intensity zones and volume prescriptions
As conceptual as this is, there’s a system I first really started to understand after talking to Max Aita, one of the best coaches in the USA: the use of intensity zones to allocate reps per set.
The four intensity zones are:
- Work Capacity: 60-69%
- Basic Strength: 70-79%
- Maximal Strength: 80-89%
- Peaking: 90-100+%
The names indicate the overarching quality that is trained, largely because of the average weight on the bar and the number of reps per set. Lighter percentages (I.e. work capacity) are easy enough that quite a few reps can be done before technical or physical fatigue impacts performance. On the other hand, the peaking zone means very few reps can be achieved because the weights are near the absolute limit. Here’s the breakdown of how many reps can typically be performed at each intensity zone during a set:
- Work Capacity (60-69%):3-6 reps
- Basic Strength (70-79%):2-4 reps
- Maximal Strength (80-89%):1-3 reps
- Peaking (90-100+%):1-2 reps
The first caveat is that this rep prescription is generally limited to weightlifting movements and close variations. A number of studies have shown the inter-individual differences in the number of reps able to be performed close to or at failure with a given general exercise and intensity.
The second caveat is that this does not capture the range of options, but is a suggestion to maximize the efficiency of each session and provide roughly the best training stimulus. For our purposes, we’ll deal mostly with technical quality and fatigue. Using the given ranges will allow for a lower end (a place where technique can potentially be maximized) and an upper end (where work capacity or technique endurance can be the focus).
An Introduction to Periodization
Periodization is among the most relevant concepts to volume and intensity prescription.
Broadly, periodization is the logical sequencing of training - the collective framework used to prepare an athlete for their best performance in competition. There are two components that make up the concept: programming and planning. This may be contrary to a more common understanding, where programming is the only considered component. But planning is critical and allows for the generation and structuring of the training process.
Most coaches and athletes are familiar with programming in the sense of sets, reps, load, exercises, and how they are put together. Even more broadly, we consider this the dose and formulation of training.
For planning, this is the big picture information, including the breakdown of a macrocycle (typically 2-12 months of training) into smaller units, called mesocycles. Mesocycles (3-6 weeks), are then broken into microcycles (4-9 days). Microcycles are populated with training days, individual sessions (30-150 minutes) where work gets done.
All units of training have designated foci and will be planned to maximize the training effect for the desired adaptations (e.g., work capacity, muscle hypertrophy, force production, technical changes). Together, training phases are staggered to improve the efficacy of the following cycle, a training principle called phase potentiation. Intelligently sequenced programs have a “building effect”, where the first training block improves the effectiveness of the second, improving the effectiveness of the third, and so on. An idea greatly encapsulated in the saying:
“The sum is greater than the parts.”
Exercise selection and specificity
Within a periodized plan, the application of training stress is only possible through prescribed movements or exercises. While volume and intensity are the drivers of muscle hypertrophy and force production, exercise selection allows their application to the body in a way that maximizes the effect. For example, barbell rows as a means of building bicep size are pretty inefficient and misdirected. Instead, exercises that more specifically stress the bicep through a full ROM provide an even greater return on accomplished work. Encompassing this idea is the principle of specificity, particularly bio-mechanical specificity. But this specificity holds for many qualities, including:
- Metabolic (acute work capacity)
- Psychological (e.g., the mind muscle connection)
- Tactical (e.g., performing under competition constraints, such as short rests)
- Environmental (recreating a competition space)
- Fatigue-related (e.g., performing the jerk after being fatigued from a clean)
Specificity of training is the most foundational principle, because its misuse does not just mean ineffective training, but potentially counterproductive training. Imagine a weightlifter who trains enough to make progress, manages generated fatigue, varies sets/reps/load, etc., but uses low bar squats and sumo deadlifts as their priority exercises. That would make them great at whatever they may be training (powerlifting?), but it isn’t weightlifting.
This application of the dosing variables (intensity and volume) is entirely dependent on specificity and its proper application.
Mismanaging the training process
There are coaches who manipulate training variables differently than a purely traditional model. Instead of a clean, inverse relationship between intensity and volume, you’ll notice higher volumes of training throughout a larger portion of the competition calendar. This could mean frequently higher peak intensities and/or higher average relative intensities. Max effectively does this through quicker exercise rotations. Instead of running the same exercises from microcycle to microcycle, rotation occurs almost daily, with no two weeks exactly the same. Sans this strategy for managing both high intensities and volumes, quite a bit can go wrong.
Training periods near or above someone’s tolerable limit or maximum recoverable volume, can quickly lead to non-functional overreaching, including performance decrements and an increased risk for training-related setbacks. This occurs because the person cannot handle the absolute load and/or the weights are so heavy and fatigue is so high that technique becomes compromised. Technique that isn’t repeatable can expose the person to positions or movements that they are not accustomed to. Work capacity, more specifically - tissue tolerance, is relevant because its development implies a certain training-related resilience that allows you to handle repeated high force contractions over time. When this tolerance is exceeded or bypassed, injury could occur.
*For a deep discussion of this topic, listen to episode 113 Philosophical Weightlifting podcast on Injury Risk with Quinn Henoch, John Flagg, and Judd Kalkhoven*
On the other hand, higher average training intensities year round could interfere unnecessarily with accumulating enough training volume to drive significant hypertrophy and/or work capacity adaptations. Although not clear cut, excessively high intensities could create psychological and physiological conditions unripe for voluminous training. This is expressed as a reduced desire to train, poor intra- and inter-set endurance, and other unwanted variables.
Both of those examples are extremes of doing too much for too long. But there can also be a counterproductive focus on one training variable at the exclusion of the other. Look to the Bulgarian system or some other old school approaches. These strategies can fail because they do not take advantage of concentrated periods of stress emphasizing the adaptations gained by higher volumes, higher training intensities, and other variables. The intensity approach tends to be short-sighted, with the other approach lacking sight. Training with high volumes and low intensities can be beneficial, but the test is maximal singles. It pays to practice the test.
Mastering Your Craft
To fully understand the complexities of training theory and practice there should be exposure to, and an appreciation of, the basic and applied human sciences (i.e., anatomy, physiology, biomechanics, sport conditioning). To bridge an intellectual understanding with application, experience mentoring under elite coaches, applying this knowledge to athletes of all skill levels and situations (including yourself) would round out expertise. Although straightforward, this is a long and tenuous road.
At the extremes, higher training volumes and intensities clearly drive different adaptations, all potentially beneficial. The key is managing available training time between competitions to create improvements when necessary, where necessary (i.e., focusing on higher training volumes and building useful contractile muscle further out from a competition). Mismanagement of these variables can lead to blunted progress or more detrimental set-backs. To expertly program is to fully grasp and manipulate these two all-encompassing variables.
.png)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.png)
