The study offers an important benchmark for using training volume more efficiently – reinforcing that sometimes there can be too much of a good thing.

Now that summer’s here, the pressure is on to sculpt that beach-ready body – but that doesn’t mean you need to live at the gym. New research from Florida Atlantic University shows that when it comes to building muscle and gaining strength, less might actually be more.

So, how much training is actually enough? Two key factors come into play: volume – the total number of sets you perform – and frequency, or how often you target a specific muscle group each week. While plenty of workout programs promise big results, few are backed by hard data on how much work you really need in a single session. And with limited time and the risk of nagging fatigue in the mix, finding the most efficient dose of exercise is more important than ever.

To help answer that question, FAU exercise science researchers conducted a first-of-its-kind meta-regression analysis – a deep dive into dozens of existing studies – to determine how training volume per session influences muscle growth and strength gains. Their findings offer a much-needed dose of clarity and show exactly where the point of diminishing returns begins.

The study went beyond simple set counting. The researchers categorized each training set by how directly it targeted the muscle or movement being evaluated. For example, a bench press used to test chest strength was labeled as a “direct” set, while accessory exercises like triceps extensions were considered “indirect.” This approach helped refine how each set actually contributed to muscle or strength outcomes.

Crucially, the way training volume is measured also made a big difference. Whether all sets were counted equally (“total” volume), weighted by relevance (“fractional” volume), or limited only to the most targeted work (“direct” volume), the conclusions shifted. That distinction could have major implications for how athletes and everyday gym-goers structure their workouts.

Now available as a preprint in SportRxiv, the findings support more efficient, personalized training plans – whether you’re an elite coach building periodized cycles or just trying to squeeze in a smarter workout between meetings.

The takeaway is clear: more sets can help – but only up to a point. Being strategic about how much work you do in each session may be just as important as how intensely you train. Most importantly, the research confirms that you don’t need marathon workouts to see results. Even with just one to two hard, focused sets per session, individuals can make meaningful strength gains – especially with consistent training spread across multiple sessions per week.

As the number of sets per session increased, so did gains in both muscle size and strength – but those gains tapered off quickly. For muscle growth, benefits leveled off after about 11 fractional sets per session. For strength, the threshold was even lower: just two direct sets per session before diminishing returns kicked in. These results suggest that in many cases, doing more may not deliver more – and extra sets might add little beyond added fatigue and time commitment.

To put a finer point on it, researchers introduced a concept they call the PUOS – the Point of Undetectable Outcome Superiority. It marks the spot where adding more training volume is unlikely to yield meaningful individual-level improvements. That doesn’t mean further training is useless, but it does mean any additional benefits are likely to be small, inconsistent and potentially not worth the extra time or effort for most people.

“It’s important to understand the difference between direct and fractional sets,” said Jacob F. Remmert, lead author and a Ph.D. candidate in the Department of Exercise Science and Health Promotion at FAU’s Charles E. Schmidt College of Science. “Direct sets are those that specifically target the muscle or movement being tested. As an example, for increasing bench press strength: counting direct sets means only counting sets of bench press specifically, whereas counting fractional sets would also include indirect work – like triceps extensions, which still engage muscles involved in the bench press, but not as the prime mover – as still contributing, but to a lesser extent. The sets that train the movement directly are what move the needle the most when you’re trying to get stronger in that specific lift.”

So what does this mean in practice? For those focused on building strength – including beginners – meaningful progress can be made with just one to two high-intensity sets per session, especially when lifting loads above 80% of their one-rep max.

“Rather than simply piling on more sets in a single workout, people aiming for strength gains may get more out of increasing training frequency – choosing shorter, more frequent sessions instead,” said Remmert.

When it comes to muscle growth, the researchers found that session volume can be pushed higher – up to around 11 fractional sets per session – while still leading to greater gains, although with diminishing returns as volume increases. However, benefits beyond that point tend to be very small and inconsistent.

“Because of the diminishing returns and greater uncertainty of outcomes as volume increases, it’s important to weigh the small potential benefits of additional volume against the extra demands on time and recovery,” Remmert said. “To be fair, some people value squeezing every last drop of muscle growth out of their program no matter the cost; for them, experimenting with higher volumes makes sense, so long as they keep a close eye on recovery.”

In other words, even very low training volumes, when paired with heavy loads and consistent weekly frequency, can lead to real improvements in strength. This supports a “less is more” training approach – one that prioritizes intensity and consistency over marathon gym sessions. And for those chasing size, increasing volume will help, but only up to a point, and each individual can make the choice of how much extra work is actually worth it when considered alongside the time commitment, fatigue and uncertainty of greater gains with high volume training.

“Our findings show that you don’t need lengthy gym sessions to get stronger or build muscle,” said Michael C. Zourdos, Ph.D., senior author and chair and professor of the FAU Department of Exercise Science and Health Promotion. “There’s a tipping point where the benefit of doing more becomes very questionable – and in some cases, it may even work against you when considering fatigue, time and so on. This challenges the common assumption that more volume always equals more gains. Instead, we found that diminishing returns set in very quickly, and a low dose of training for strength or a moderate dose of training for muscle growth seem to deliver the most efficient results. For busy people, that’s great news: you can train smarter, not longer, and still see real progress.”

While the findings are especially useful for designing short-term programs, the researchers note that long-term strength development may follow different patterns, and individual needs will always vary. Still, this study offers an important benchmark for using training volume more efficiently – reinforcing that sometimes there can be too much of a good thing.

-FAU-