Chris Beardsley bans me over training frequency
I have been reading some of Chris Beardsley's content recently and came across stimulating reps model ( while i first heard this from lyle mcdonald) i tend to agree with it. but in his article https://www.patreon.com/SandCResearch/posts/stimulating-reps-99706085 on stimulating reps, i came across part 6 on frequency.
He goes on to say that...
"Obviously, this allows us to explain why frequency matters for hypertrophy (so long as the workouts being performed are within the bounds of what can be recovered from). Indeed, if we look only at the frequency studies that have implemented sensible workout volumes (1-3 sets/workout for 3 workouts/week or 4-5 sets for 2 workouts/week) then we always see a beneficial effect of higher training frequencies, which is exactly what we would expect based on the diminishing returns effect of successive sets in each individual workout."
So more frequency is better? when digging into the study they actually conclude.. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0276154&utm_source=chatgpt.com
"The results of this study demonstrated that RT performed three times a week, increased 1RM and quadriceps femoris CSA similarly to that performed only once a week in trained subjects. When the higher RT frequency resulted in a larger TTV, such as in the RTUV condition (17% more than the lower frequency), greater ES were observed for both 1RM and CSA. Therefore, if trained individuals need higher RT volumes to obtain gains in both strength [8] and muscle mass [9–11], alternatives such as increasing RT frequency could be considered [21, 54]. Moreover, when the same TTV is distributed at different weekly frequencies, no additional benefits in increases in strength and muscle mass are observed."
Seems like in the graph it looks a lot more than what you would think just how its presented. The study he referenced says that when total volume is equated over the week frequency doesn't seem to matter that much for muscle mass.
So you could do 9 sets in a session if you wanted and still get very similar growth to 3set x 3 days. Not saying you should, but you could based on the study. As his point is that doing 3sets x 3 days per week is better than 9 sets 1x per week volume equated. Quadriceps cross-sectional area: no significant difference: p = 0.310.
I pointed this out on his article and then was banned. not sure why you would ban someone instead of just discussing it. Maybe I'm wrong and the misinterpreting the study.