Different amount of sets for hypertrophy

[Labean]

What's the logic behind having such a big difference with the amount of sets for each muscle group? Sure, the shoulder muscles are smaller, but their weightlifting capabilites are less than your quadriceps, for example. Assuming there are no other factors than weight lifted and size, shouldn't the amount of sets be somewhat similar?

What I'm contemplating is whether the a similar ratio between size and weight lifted (assuming those are the only factors involved) should be somewhat familiar for optimal hypertrophy gains. Is the ratio of the different muscle fibres involved?

[avigotsky]

What's the logic behind having such a big difference with the amount of sets for each muscle group? Sure, the shoulder muscles are smaller, but their weightlifting capabilites are less than your quadriceps, for example. Assuming there are no other factors than weight lifted and size, shouldn't the amount of sets be somewhat similar?

What I'm contemplating is whether the a similar ratio between size and weight lifted (assuming those are the only factors involved) should be somewhat familiar for optimal hypertrophy gains. Is the ratio of the different muscle fibres involved?

There's A LOT to take into account. Yes, fiber type is one thing, but force curve, pennation, muscle size, number of fibers, number motor units, size of motor units, etc. Every muscle is different, but they usually respond to hypertrophy similarly in that high volume stimulates hypertrophy by first exhausting the Type I (ST) fibers, then it works on the Type II (FT) fibers which have the most potential for growth. Power work also increases hypertrophy by directly stimulating the Type II fibers, though hypertrophy will not occur to the same extent as high volume work.

Keep in mind each muscle has a different working potentials because of the factors above, so what may be high volume for one muscle may not be for another muscle.

Hope this answers your question.

[Labean]

There's A LOT to take into account. Yes, fiber type is one thing, but force curve, pennation, muscle size, number of fibers, number motor units, size of motor units, etc. Every muscle is different, but they usually respond to hypertrophy similarly in that high volume stimulates hypertrophy by first exhausting the Type I (ST) fibers, then it works on the Type II (FT) fibers which have the most potential for growth. Power work also increases hypertrophy by directly stimulating the Type II fibers, though hypertrophy will not occur to the same extent as high volume work.

Keep in mind each muscle has a different working potentials because of the factors above, so what may be high volume for one muscle may not be for another muscle.

Hope this answers your question.

Thanks. This somewhat answers my question.

Anywhere I can find information on the approximate optimal set volume for the different muscle groups?

[avigotsky]

Thanks. This somewhat answers my question.

Anywhere I can find information on the approximate optimal set volume for the different muscle groups?

Not sure of any, but the higher volume work results in "sarcoplasmic hypertrophy," while the strength/power exercises results in "myofibrillar hypertrophy."

I also wouldn't say there is an "optimal" set volume for different muscle groups as everyone is different, it's best to work with all different amounts of volume. I don't yet have enough posts to post a video, but look up "Daily Undulating Periodization (DUP) Dr. Mike Zourdos" on Google/YouTube. It's using a different volume every session, really interesting stuff.

[Labean]

Not sure of any, but the higher volume work results in "sarcoplasmic hypertrophy," while the strength/power exercises results in "myofibrillar hypertrophy."

I also wouldn't say there is an "optimal" set volume for different muscle groups as everyone is different, it's best to work with all different amounts of volume. I don't yet have enough posts to post a video, but look up "Daily Undulating Periodization (DUP) Dr. Mike Zourdos" on Google/YouTube. It's using a different volume every session, really interesting stuff.

As far as I know, sarcoplasmic hypertrophy is extremely overrated and only really an issue if you're on the anabolics.

[cm45]

What's the logic behind having such a big difference with the amount of sets for each muscle group? Sure, the shoulder muscles are smaller, but their weightlifting capabilites are less than your quadriceps, for example. Assuming there are no other factors than weight lifted and size, shouldn't the amount of sets be somewhat similar?

What I'm contemplating is whether the a similar ratio between size and weight lifted (assuming those are the only factors involved) should be somewhat familiar for optimal hypertrophy gains. Is the ratio of the different muscle fibres involved?

Because the secondary muscles such as the shoulders get a lot of indirect work when you train chest and back. Therefore, they require "less" direct work.

[avigotsky]

As far as I know, sarcoplasmic hypertrophy is extremely overrated and only really an issue if you're on the anabolics.

It definitely doesn't exist to the extent people say and it happens in addition to myofibrillar hypertrophy. Dan Ogborn had a nice write up on it a few months ago and I think DeFranco also had a write up on it too.

[k9pit]

Let experience be your guide. Any guidance received from others may, or may not be optimal for you.