Only have a second? Check out the takeaway below. Have 5 minutes? Check out the rest of the newsletter.

TRAINING TAKEAWAY: Maximizing results while in a caloric deficit does not seem to require particularly high or low training volumes. Thus, our recommendation is to avoid proactive volume changes when entering a deficit. However, the discussed study is the first of its kind and more research is needed to better inform practice.

Some argue that training volume should be reduced when in a caloric deficit due to reduced recovery capacity. Others argue that training volume should be increased in order to maximize the likelihood of retaining muscle mass.

A new study suggests that neither of these perspectives is overwhelmingly correct. However, there’s still plenty to be investigated on this topic and important limitations of this study. This newsletter will provide an overview of the study results and some practical recommendations for managing training in a caloric deficit.

Study Overview

Thirty-eight trained males were instructed to restrict calories to 30 Calories per kg body weight per day. The participants were randomized to a higher volume group or a lower volume group, and the main training period was six weeks.

Each session A and session B was completed twice per week. All sets consisted of 10 repetitions with 1-3 repetitions in reserve.

Both groups lost an average of ~1.7 kg body weight. This is ~0.33% of body weight per week, which is on the slower side for the start of a cutting period. These participants were ~85 kg on average, so they lost ~0.28 kg/week.

The researchers measured changes in rectus femoris (a quadriceps muscle) thickness via B-mode ultrasound and body composition via multifrequency bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA). Rectus femoris muscle thickness neither increased or decreased to a meaningful degree for the higher volume group (+0.36±0.93 mm at the more proximal site; -0.32±1.12 mm at the more distal site) or the lower volume group (-0.01±1.59 mm at the more proximal site; +0.08±1.14 mm at the more distal site). There was a significant decrease in lean mass in both the higher volume group (-0.51±2.30 kg) and the lower volume group (-0.92±1.59 kg), but there was no significant difference between groups (p=0.785). Similarly, there was a significant decrease in body fat in both the higher volume group (-0.98±1.03%) and the lower volume group (-1.21±1.08%), but there was no significant difference between groups.

The percentage of weight lost that was lean mass was ~30% in the higher volume group and ~52% in the lower volume group. One could over-interpret this and conclude that higher volumes maintain lean mass almost twice as well. However, since we’re dealing with such low absolute changes, I wouldn’t read into this too much.

Discussion

This study is the first of its kind and is a great start to better inform strategies for pairing nutritional and training strategies.

The findings indicate that there is not a clear benefit to higher or lower training volumes when in a caloric deficit. However, at the risk of sounding pessimistic, it’s going to take quite some time to have a comprehensive body of literature on this topic. Best practices for manipulating volume in a caloric deficit is likely influenced by factors like training status, rate of weight loss, length of the deficit, and whether you typically train with high or low volumes.

This leads me to the data I wish we had from this paper: pre-training volumes. In practice, lifters want to know if they should increase, maintain, or decrease training volume when they transition from a bulk or maintenance to a cut. However, this study technically does not address that question. For example, some of the participants in the higher volume group may have decreased their volume considerably from their previous training. This change in training volume seems to have an independent effect on training response.

This variance in changes may be especially relevant for the rectus femoris, which was the muscle assessed for changes in muscle thickness. Since the rectus femoris crosses the knee and the hip, it likely requires isolated knee extension to receive a solid growth stimulus. Isolated knee extension essentially requires leg extensions (or something like sissy squats, but these are much less common). I suspect that pre-training leg extension volume was widely variable as many likely performed 0 sets/week before the study. Since the lower volume group performed 6 leg extension sets/week, this still could have been a large relative increase for some of the subjects.

Application

There’s many questions left to be answered, but this study suggests that there’s no overwhelming benefit to higher or lower volumes when in an energy deficit. For the reasons discussed above, we can’t make strong conclusions about how to change volume when entering an energy deficit. In the absence of additional evidence, the rest of this section will lean on experience from our coaching practice.

Our recommendation is that there is no need to proactively adjust training volume when transitioning from a surplus or maintenance to a deficit. This is especially the case when the rate of weight loss is not dramatic and the lifter is not getting especially lean. Instead, as with any individualized training approach, adjustments to training volume should be made reactively based on training response and lifter feedback.

Beyond training volume, there are some programming wrinkles we’ve found useful to include when a lifter is in a caloric deficit. This, and a lot more about pairing nutritional and training strategies, is discussed in our nutritional periodization course.

1. Less aggressive within-block increases in training variables. For example, if your training approach adds 1 RPE per week to top sets throughout a block, it may be helpful to only add 0.5 RPE per week.

2. More frequent deloads. Some lifters find they run out of steam sooner in a block when in a caloric deficit.

3. Less mentally taxing exercises. For example, swapping a high bar squatting slot for leg press can help ensure training quality is high throughout the entire session.

4. Place squat and deadlift training on different days. This can also help maintain the quality of as much of your training as possible.