Beyond the Basics: Resistance Training Methods Explained

What is the science behind performing different resistance training methods such as straight sets, supersets, tri-sets, circuits, max strength, pyramid, drop set, bookcase etc.

The programs we follow to improve our strength and endurance are based on the following four variables: Frequency, Intensity, Time and Type (called the FITT Principle).

But why does one type of exercise session improve our endurance while another increase our strength and muscle mass? The answer lies with a different programming acronym (yes, fitness professionals love acronyms!). The end result we get from all our resistance training methods is due to the Specific Adaptations to Imposed Demands (SAID).

What all of these fitness acronyms mean is that their needs to be a sufficient dose of exercise to produce the desired results. This means that the how often you train a muscle (frequency), the level of effort applied to the set (intensity), how much a muscle is exposed to the exercise stimulus (volume or time) and the exercises selections (type) must be specific to your goal (that is if you want to grow more glutes, you won’t take up swimming) to achieve your goal.

We often hear of the term progressive overload. This is both the result of an effective training program and what you do to a program each week to make it effective! What that means in practice is that a well-designed and performed program creates both neural and muscular adaptations that make the muscle stronger, more powerful and larger. But for that to continue, we need to add more stimulus to the session to ensure that the positive adaptations continue.

The most common way to progressively overload a program is to add a little more weight to the exercise as often as you can or add more reps to a set (especially if the load jumps in the gym are too large). Other options are to add extra sets or even exercises for a muscle group or train that muscle more frequently in the week.

What observant athletes, coaches, and scientists noticed many decades ago is that an additional variable needs to be considered for long-term success. And that is the variable called variation. In other words, if you keep doing the exact same exercise or the same set and rep scheme or the same program split, then the effectiveness of your exercise regime will be blunted due to monotony (known as involution in strength science). And this can often explain the plateauing in results many experience after the first year of training.

Variation can take place in any number of ways in the fitness setting, but a very successful way of creating planned variation in a resistance training program is to include methods that are called overload techniques.

An overload technique simply manipulates the load or reps, the range of motion, the volume, the contraction type, or the rest between sets (or even within the set.)

The two of the key drivers of muscle growth are (1) training volume, that is how many sets a muscle is exposed to within a session and within a week and (2) the tension placed on the muscle fibre, which is at its highest when a set of any rep range (under 30-ish reps) is taken to or very close to failure. Surprisingly, the load does not determine the stimulus to muscle growth, but rather the effort does – with the important lesson here being that works sets must be taken to or close to failure.

Overload techniques are an incredible and time-effective tool to increase training volume per unit of time and effort applied to an exercise in the gym.

To that end, the most commonly used overloads are methods that increase the set duration (volume): supersets, trisets, 11/4s and drop sets. 

To the muscle, these are all essentially the same thing. They increase the volume that a muscle is exposed to per unit of time. 

Research has spent a great deal of time comparing overload techniques to traditional sets, also called straight sets. A straight set is where you perform only one exercise at a time and have the recommended amount of rest between sets. For example, performing four sets of deadlifts with a load that you can perform for 8 to 10 repetitions and resting 2-3 minutes between sets. 

A superset would add a second exercise for that same muscle group immediately after the deadlift. For example, a deadlift for 8 to 10 reps resting 10 seconds and then performing a 45-degree back extension. 

A triset would see a third exercise for the same muscle group being added: a deadlift followed by a back extension followed by a seated hamstring leg curl. 

As you can see, overload techniques are often variations on the same theme, and that is to increase the amount of work a muscle has to do in one extended “set”.

When researchers investigate the difference between overload techniques versus straight sets, they generally conclude that “when volume is equated, there is no appreciable difference in muscular adaptation.”

I love the sentence “when volume is equated”, or the use of the phrase “no advantage”, because what that is stating, in another way, is the time factor:  When you consider the amount of time it takes to perform three sets of squats and three sets of leg press as straight sets versus performing those two exercises as a superset,  then you perform the same amount of work in half the amount of time.

There have now been two recent meta-analyses published (2023 & 2026) that have compared traditional straight sets to drop sets and have found comparable results in muscle mass but in a fraction of the time. So, again, many overload techniques will give you very similar results to traditional sets but in much less time, which may or may not be important to you.

Thanks to improvements in investigational techniques, researchers are now able to tease out subtle differences in muscular adaptation that occur during different types of overload techniques, presumably due to the exhausting nature of some of the methods, the metabolic byproducts released in the muscle or how individual muscle fibres ‘rotate’ their recruitment (called muscle wisdom) during a set.

It has only been in very recent years that high tech investigative techniques have been available to analyse the subtle adaptation in skeletal muscle with such high fidelity.

But the reason why coaches for many decades have employed overload techniques is to introduce planned variation and variety over the long-term training process. 

If your goal is to increase muscle mass and strength, then overload techniques must be chosen that are consistent with that training outcome – ‘set extending’, high training volume and high effort tension placed on the muscle.

The advantage of performing straight sets is that you can focus all of your mental energy on one exercise at a time and not having to swap between exercises in a busy gym. This provides a very high level of stimulus for strength and muscle mass, and is unquestionably a proven method to improve strength, power and muscle mass.

But straight sets, just like any training method, can be overused, and can increase the amount of time you spend in the gym due to the rest needed after every set.

This is where overload techniques have their greatest advantage - they allow you to do more work in less time and inherently insert a degree of variation and variety into the program sequence, ensuring that our workouts don’t experience monotony and plateaus. 

In time, a successful program will include straight sets and a variety of goal specific overload techniques that will logically and sequentially increase training volume, effort applied to the set and insert a little bit of spice and excitement into training programs that can sometimes be an overly repetitive and monotonous experience.

This planned variation over the course of a training year (or years) has been termed periodization by training theorists many decades ago. The purpose of periodizing the training programs is to logically and sequentially plan variation in the training variables (exercises, sets, reps/load etc.) to minimize overtraining, fatigue and to benefit from fitness characteristics developed in previous programs (called phase potentiation).

A recent position stand published by the worlds largest exercise academy, the ACSM, reviewed 137 systematic reviews on resistance training to provide a general overview of what is important in the program considerations for the public. This position stand was not designed to evaluate all the vast literature on overload techniques and periodization, but yet many of the messages espoused on social media gave the general impression that the ACSM position stand stated that both periodization and overload techniques are unimportant for effective resistance training programs to develop muscle mass and strength.

Only two reviews were included for analysis that examined periodization. The first, under volume equated conditions, found similar strength response over the short duration of testing (8-12 weeks). The second review concluded that periodized programs led to greater gains in strength compared to non-periodized plans.

Firstly, one of the fundamental principles of periodization is the logical, planned variation in volume – so attempting to equate volume violates the very principle one is trying to examine. Hence, we see when studies go head-to-head with training philosophy, and allow volume to differ, we see superior results from periodization. Secondly, periodization is a “macro management tool” to be used over the year(s), not over 8-weeks. A study that is often used as ‘proof’ that periodization is ineffective compared variation every 2 week on an 8-week program compared to no variation. It is a shame this research group didn’t understand that is simply changing the program, not periodization!  

What can we conclude from the thousands of studies that have been conducted on resistance training? The most important considerations for effective programs are:

• Consistency of training is paramount

• Frequency of 2-3 times per week for each muscle group is recommended

• Effort applied to the set is critical, taking work sets to or close to failure

• Multiple sets and or multiple exercises for each muscle region

• Overload techniques are an effective time saving tool

• Having a ‘big picture’ plan (periodization) will help minimize fatigue, overtraining, overuse injuries and improve motivation and performance outcomes over the long-term

References:

Burke, R., Hermann, T., Pinero, A., Mohan, A.E., Augustin, F., Sapuppo, M., Coleman, M., Androulakis Korakakis, P., Wolf, M., Swinton, P.A., Schoenfeld, B.J. (2024). Less time, same gains: Comparison of superset vs traditional set training on muscular adaptations.

Havers T, Micke F, Geisler S, Held S. Acute and Chronic Effects of Drop-Set Training: A Meta-Analysis and Systematic Review. Sports Med Open. 2026 Apr 1;12(1):38. doi: 10.1186/s40798-026-01012-1. PMID: 41920484; PMCID: PMC13043944.

Sødal LK, Kristiansen E, Larsen S, van den Tillaar R. Effects of Drop Sets on Skeletal Muscle Hypertrophy: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Sports Med Open. 2023 Jul 31;9(1):66. doi: 10.1186/s40798-023-00620-5. PMID: 37523092; PMCID: PMC10390395.

Zhang X, Weakley J, Li H, Li Z, García-Ramos A. Superset Versus Traditional Resistance Training Prescriptions: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis Exploring Acute and Chronic Effects on Mechanical, Metabolic, and Perceptual Variables. Sports Med. 2025 Apr;55(4):953-975. doi: 10.1007/s40279-025-02176-8. Epub 2025 Feb 4. PMID: 39903375; PMCID: PMC12011898.

Moesgaard L, Beck MM, Christiansen L, Aagaard P, Lundbye-Jensen J. Effects of Periodization on Strength and Muscle Hypertrophy in Volume-Equated Resistance Training Programs: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Sports Med. 2022 Jul;52(7):1647-1666. doi: 10.1007/s40279-021-01636-1. Epub 2022 Jan 19. PMID: 35044672.

Currier BS, D'Souza AC, Singh MAF, Lowisz CV, Rawson ES, Schoenfeld BJ, Smith-Ryan AE, Steen JP, Thomas GA, Triplett NT, Washington TA, Werner TJ, Phillips SM. American College of Sports Medicine Position Stand. Resistance Training Prescription for Muscle Function, Hypertrophy, and Physical Performance in Healthy Adults: An Overview of Reviews. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2026 Apr 1;58(4):851-872. doi: 10.1249/MSS.0000000000003897. Epub 2026 Mar 5. PMID: 41843416; PMCID: PMC12965823.