Single vs Multiple Sets in Strength Training
What the Research Really Says
The problem is you don't have time to waste time on workouts that don’t work.
For over 50 years, the strength training world has been locked in a many debates: is one set enough, or are multiple sets superior? This isn't just a casual disagreement; it's a deeply polarizing topic, often compared to the Montagues and Capulets or even the American political divide – though for many, the single vs. multiple set debate is even more intense.
I am an advocate for performing a single set to momentary muscle failure. While I remain in the minority, with most trainees and coaches favoring multiple sets (typically 3 sets of 10 repetitions), it's important to clarify that this isn't necessarily an "either/or" situation.
Both single-set and multi-set regimens can deliver significant benefits. At Salus Strength, for example, we've leaned into a single-set approach, but we also strategically incorporate various multi-set protocols like "dropsets" and "rest-pauses." Both methods are effective.
However, the questions that continue to get asked to me are:
Which approach is more effective overall?
Which provides a better return on time invested?
Which is more suitable for different populations (e.g., advanced vs. novice trainees)?
Here comes the research A 2024 study aimed to look at these very questions. It involved 42 male and female participants, all with years of experience in multi-set strength training, qualifying them as "advanced" trainees.
Researchers divided these participants into two groups:
Group One: Performed a single set to muscle failure, meaning they pushed until they couldn't complete another rep with proper form.
Group Two: Also performed a single set, but trained close to failure, stopping when they had two "reps in reserve" (meaning they could have done two more reps). It's important to note that even training with two reps in reserve is still a very high-intensity approach.
Both groups followed the same workout structure: nine exercises per session, twice a week. The results were compelling: The group that trained to muscle failure showed superior gains in both muscular adaptations and strength. However, a key takeaway from the study is that both groups achieved excellent results.
This highlights a crucial finding: even "advanced" trainees who switched from multiple-set routines to a single-set approach (whether to failure or close to failure) still experienced improved outcomes.
Take home message:
Single set training is highly efficacious even for advanced trainees.
Training to failure elicits slightly greater benefit than training close to failure.
Failure and very close to failure both produced great results.