Abstract
Research over the last decade has clarified the relationship between training dose and muscular strength adaptation. This review synthesizes findings from recent experimental and meta-analysis studies examining training frequency, volume, and intensity in both short- and long-term contexts. When weekly training volume is equated, frequency has minimal independent effect on strength gains. Strength increases appear to depend more on total work and intensity rather than session count. Additionally, trained athletes can maintain strength with as little as one-third of their usual training volume, provided intensity remains high. Over time, adaptation follows a diminishing-returns curve, early progress is rapid, but gains plateau as athletes approach physiological limits. Together, these findings outline a dose–response continuum: the Minimal Effective Dose (MED) required for progress, the Maximal Effective Dose (MAX) that optimizes adaptation, and the Minimal Maintenance Dose (MMD) that preserves strength during reduced training.
Introduction
Resistance training (RT) improves strength, power, and muscle mass, but the optimal “dose” of training defined by frequency, volume, and intensity remains widely debated. Traditional recommendations (e.g., 2–3 sessions per week per muscle group) lack empirical precision and often ignore interindividual variability. Recent research instead frames RT through the lens of dose–response physiology, emphasizing that strength adaptation follows a predictable curve: too little training fails to stimulate growth, while too much can outpace recovery.
This article integrates evidence from Ralston et al. (2018), Johnsen and van den Tillaar (2021), Pedersen et al. (2024), Spiering et al. (2021), and Latella et al. (2020) to illustrate how training dose influences strength across time from initial exposure to long-term mastery.
Minimal Effective Dose (MED): The Threshold for Progress
Ralston et al. (2018) analyzed 12 studies involving 74 training groups and found that when weekly training volume is matched, frequency alone does not significantly affect strength outcomes. Whether participants trained once or three times per week, total workload sets × reps × load was the dominant driver of adaptation. Similarly, Johnsen and van den Tillaar (2021) showed that trained men achieved comparable gains from training either two or four times per week under volume-matched conditions. However, the higher-frequency group reported lower perceived exertion, suggesting that spreading volume across more sessions can improve fatigue management.
Together, these findings define the Minimal Effective Dose: the smallest amount of total work performed at sufficient intensity to exceed the body’s recovery threshold and stimulate adaptation. For trained lifters, this typically equates to 10–15 hard sets per major lift per week at ≥70% 1RM.
Maximal Effective Dose (MAX): Optimizing Neural and Structural Gains
Pedersen et al. (2024) extended this discussion by comparing low- and high-frequency resistance training (1 vs. 4 sessions per week) in trained adults while holding total volume constant. Both groups improved hypertrophy and jump performance equally, but the high-frequency group achieved greater increases in 1RM squat strength (+15 vs. +8 kg). The researchers attributed this to enhanced motor learning and reduced per-session fatigue, allowing higher-quality repetitions.
These results define the Maximal Effective Dose the upper edge of productive training volume and frequency before recovery cost outweighs benefit. While increasing total load or frequency can yield small neural advantages, hypertrophy appears volume-dependent and quickly reaches a plateau once the effective threshold is met.
Minimal Maintenance Dose (MMD): Holding the Line
During periods of reduced training such as injury recovery, travel, or tapering athletes can maintain most adaptations with far less training. Spiering et al. (2021) reviewed evidence showing that both endurance and resistance performance can be maintained for 4–8 weeks with reduced volume and frequency, provided intensity remains high. For resistance training, loads ≥80% 1RM and as little as one session per week can preserve maximal strength. In contrast, reducing both volume and intensity leads to rapid detraining.
The Minimal Maintenance Dose therefore represents the smallest training load that sustains neuromuscular and structural adaptations without generating new ones. This phase plays a critical role in periodization, recovery, and performance longevity.
Long-Term Adaptation and the Plateau Effect
Latella et al. (2020) analyzed over 1,800 competitive powerlifters across 15 years to quantify real-world long-term strength development. Both sexes improved at similar rates, but the strongest lifters gained strength more slowly evidence of a ceiling effect. The rate of improvement was inversely correlated with baseline strength: weaker athletes adapted faster, while elite performers required exponentially more effort for smaller returns.
This long-term data visually completes the strength dose curve. Early in training, even suboptimal doses elicit rapid progress. Over time, the Minimal Effective Dose rises, the Maximal Effective Dose becomes narrower, and the cost of further adaptation increases dramatically.
Practical Framework: The Strength Dose Curve
|
Training Zone |
Definition |
Frequency & Volume |
Intensity (%1RM) |
Outcome |
|
Minimal Maintenance Dose (MMD) |
Smallest dose to preserve performance |
1×/week, ~⅓ normal volume |
≥80% |
Maintains strength |
|
Minimal Effective Dose (MED) |
Smallest dose to induce new adaptation |
2–3×/week, 10–15 sets per lift |
≥70% |
Produces measurable strength gain |
|
Maximal Effective Dose (MAX) |
Optimal balance of stimulus and recovery |
3–5×/week, distributed workload |
70–90% |
Maximizes neural and strength efficiency |
|
Plateau Zone |
Biological limit of progress |
Frequency and volume high |
80–95% |
Gains slow dramatically |
Integration with Periodization
Periodization can be viewed as strategic movement along this dose curve:
-
Accumulation phases hover near the Minimal Effective Dose to build base volume.
-
Intensification phases push toward the Maximal Effective Dose to drive performance peaks.
-
Deloads or maintenance phases revert to the Minimal Maintenance Dose to allow recovery and preserve adaptations.
This cyclical management of dose and recovery explains why effective programs balance overload with restoration, rather than permanently chasing higher workloads.
Conclusion
Across decades of research, a consistent pattern emerges: strength adaptation is driven by sufficient intensity and total workload, not by arbitrary frequency. As training age increases, the thresholds for effective and maximal doses rise, while the window for continued growth narrows. Ultimately, mastering strength is not about constant escalation but about precision, knowing when to push and when to maintain.
The dose–response framework unites the short-term experimental data with long-term athletic trends, providing a clear, evidence-based model for intelligent programming across all stages of training.
- Conrad RN
References
Johnsen, E., & van den Tillaar, R. (2021). Effects of training frequency on muscular strength for trained men under volume-matched conditions. PeerJ, 9, e10781. https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.10781
Latella, C., Teo, W.-P., Spathis, J., & van den Hoek, D. (2020). Long-term strength adaptation: A 15-year analysis of powerlifting athletes. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, 34(9), 2412–2418. https://doi.org/10.1519/JSC.0000000000003741
Pedersen, J. M., Danielsen, J., Jensen, A., Sundstrup, E., & Andersen, L. L. (2024). High-frequency resistance training improves maximal lower-limb strength more than low frequency: A randomized controlled trial. European Journal of Sport Science, 24(4), 557–565. https://doi.org/10.1080/17461391.2023.2181877
Ralston, G. W., Kilgore, L., Wyatt, F. B., & Baker, J. S. (2018). Weekly training frequency effects on strength gain: A meta-analysis. Sports Medicine – Open, 4(1), 36. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40798-018-0149-9
Spiering, B. A., Steele, J., Gentles, J. A., & Phillips, S. M. (2021). Maintaining physical performance: The minimal dose. International Journal of Sports Physiology and Performance, 16(10), 1493–1503. https://doi.org/10.1123/ijspp.2020-0893
Leave a Comment