# How many sets per muscle group per week? Hard sets, counted

> 10 to 18 hard sets per muscle per week is a good range for growth. What counts as a hard set, why indirect sets count half, and what the studies show.

Published 2026-10-15 by Valter Andersson (https://povver.ai/about). Canonical: https://povver.ai/blog/sets-per-muscle-group-per-week

## Short answer

- 10 to 18 hard sets per muscle group per week is a solid range for muscle growth. A hard set is a working set finished within 3 reps of failure.
- A set that trains a muscle indirectly counts as half. Across 67 studies, counting indirect sets at half predicted gains better than counting them in full or not at all (Pelland 2026).
- Returns fall as sets climb. Four weekly sets is the smallest dose with detectable growth, and past 18 each extra set adds less.

For muscle growth, aim for 10 to 18 hard sets per muscle group per week. A hard set is a working set that ends within 3 reps of failure, and a set that works a muscle indirectly counts as half. Under 4 sets a week, growth is hard to detect. Past 18, each set still helps, less each time (Pelland 2026).

## How many sets per muscle group per week?

10 to 18 hard sets per muscle per week is a solid range for growth. The studies show a curve rather than a single number. Schoenfeld and colleagues (Journal of Sports Sciences, 2017) pooled 15 studies and found that each extra weekly set was linked to 0.37% more muscle gain. Baz-Valle and colleagues (Journal of Human Kinetics, 2022) compared trained men on 12 to 20 weekly sets with men on more than 20. Quads and biceps grew the same on both. Triceps grew more on the higher volume. Their recommendation, from six studies, was 12 to 20 sets as the standard for young trained men.

Pelland and colleagues (Sports Medicine, 2026) pooled 67 studies and 2,058 people, adjusted for study length and training status. Muscle growth kept rising with weekly volume, at diminishing returns. Povver's ranges come from that paper's tiers:

| Weekly hard sets per muscle | What Pelland 2026 found for hypertrophy | Povver's label |
|---|---|---|
| Under 4 | Below the smallest dose with detectable growth, which is 4 | Below the minimum (MEV) |
| 4 to 9 | The tier with the highest return per set is 5 to 10 | Above the minimum |
| 10 to 18 | The intermediate tier is 11 to 18 | In range (MAV) |
| 19 to 29 | Lower returns: about 11 more weekly sets for each further detectable gain | High |
| Over 29 | The 30 to 42 tier has the lowest returns, about 12.5 more weekly sets for each further detectable gain, and few studies | Past the ceiling (MRV) |

*Weekly hard sets per muscle group, indirect sets counted as half. Tiers from Pelland 2026, Table 3. The band edges and labels are Povver's reading of those tiers. Updated 2026-10-15.*

Plenty of guides say 10 to 12 sets for beginners and 16 to 20 for advanced lifters. Pelland 2026 adjusted for training status and found one curve, so Povver uses one range for everyone.

In Pelland 2026, strength gains flattened at far fewer sets than muscle growth, so these ranges are for size only.

## What counts as a hard set?

A hard set is a working set you stopped with 3 or fewer reps in reserve (RIR). Warm-ups are out. So is any set you stopped 4 or more reps short of failure. A set with no RIR logged still counts, so skipping the rating never shrinks your week.

In a series of meta-regressions, Robinson and colleagues (Sports Medicine, 2024) found muscle grew more the closer sets ended to failure, while strength gains barely moved. The effect was gradual, so you do not need to reach failure. The cutoff at 3 is Povver's own.

RIR is an imperfect guess. Across 12 studies, lifters had about one rep more left than they thought (Halperin 2022). A set you rate RIR 3 may have had 4 in reserve, so the cutoff at 3 is approximate. [RPE vs RIR](/blog/rpe-vs-rir) has the numbers.

## Do compound lifts count for the smaller muscles?

Yes: a compound lift counts half a set for each smaller muscle it works indirectly. Bench press trains the chest directly and the triceps and shoulders indirectly, so one set is 1 for the chest and ½ each for triceps and shoulders. Three sets give chest 3, triceps 1.5, shoulders 1.5.

Counting indirect sets at half predicted muscle gains better than counting them in full or not at all (Pelland 2026, 67 studies).

Povver counted one three-day push, pull and legs week, 15 exercises and 49 hard sets, all three ways:

| Muscle | Direct sets only | Half credit (Povver) | Full credit |
|---|---|---|---|
| Chest | 7 | 7 | 7 |
| Back | 14 | 14 | 14 |
| Shoulders | 9 | 18 | 27 |
| Biceps | 3 | 8.5 | 14 |
| Triceps | 3 | 8 | 13 |
| Quads | 7 | 7 | 7 |
| Hamstrings | 7 | 10.5 | 14 |
| Glutes | 11 | 11 | 11 |
| Calves | 2 | 3.5 | 5 |

*One push, pull and legs week, every working set at RIR 2. Counted with Povver's [weekly sets checker](/tools/weekly-sets-checker?wk=bench-press-barbell.4.2_incline-bench-press-dumbbell.3.2_overhead-press-barbell.3.2_lateral-raise-dumbbell.3.2_triceps-pushdown-cable.3.2_pull-up-bodyweight.4.2_bent-over-row-barbell.4.2_seated-row-cable.3.2_face-pull-cable.3.2_bicep-curl-barbell.3.2_back-squat-barbell.4.2_romanian-deadlift-barbell.4.2_leg-press-machine.3.2_lying-leg-curl-machine.3.2_standing-calf-raise-machine.2.2) against Povver's exercise catalog, 2026-10-15.*

Direct sets only puts the biceps at 3, which looks untrained even though the rows and pull-ups worked them. Full credit puts the shoulders at 27, past the range, when only 9 of those sets trained them directly. At half credit the shoulders land on 18, the top of the range, and the biceps on 8.5, close to it.

![Muscle maps of a push, pull and legs week. Shoulders 18, back 14, glutes 11 and hamstrings 10.5 reach the range. Chest and quads sit at 7, biceps at 8.5, triceps at 8 and calves at 3.5.](https://povver.ai/assets/blog/ppl-3-day-mmap-1440.webp)
*The same week on a body. Chest, quads and calves train once a week and stay under the range.*

Chest and quads each train on one day in that week and land at 7 sets. Three more sets apiece would put both in range without a fourth day.

Which muscles a lift hits directly and which indirectly comes from Povver's exercise catalog. A muscle that only steadies the lift, like the biceps in a dumbbell bench press, gets no credit.

## How many exercises per muscle group?

Two to four exercises per muscle in a session is the usual advice. It is convention, and the studies cited here count sets, not exercises, so they do not say how to split 12 sets across lifts.

Twelve weekly back sets can be two sessions, each with two exercises at three sets. A second exercise is worth it when the first cannot load the whole muscle: a row and a pull-down reach different parts of the back. When one lift already covers the muscle, stick with it.

With weekly sets fixed, training a muscle on more days barely changes growth: in Pelland 2026 the effect was consistent with a negligible one. Strength gains did rise with frequency. Spreading the sets over two or three days is still the easy way to fit them in.

## Is there such a thing as junk volume?

Yes, in two forms. The first is easy sets, stopped well short of failure. Povver leaves them out of your week because the ranges describe sets near failure.

The other is sets past the point where returns get small. These still add a little: in Pelland 2026 the 30 to 42 set tier still grew muscle, at about 12.5 more weekly sets for each further detectable gain, and few studies went that high. Povver stops suggesting more sets once a muscle reaches 29, just below where that lowest-return tier begins. That figure is not a measured recovery limit, and the paper does not cover harms.

## What are MEV, MAV and MRV?

MEV, MAV and MRV mark points on a muscle's weekly sets. MEV is the minimum effective volume, the least that still grows the muscle. MAV, the maximum adaptive volume, is the band Povver treats as the productive range. MRV, the maximum recoverable volume, is the most a muscle can recover from. Povver's 29 is where it stops suggesting sets.

Every muscle group in Povver defaults to MEV 4, MAV 10 to 18 and MRV 29, in hard sets with indirect sets at half. It tracks ten groups: chest, back, shoulders, biceps, triceps, quads, hamstrings, glutes, calves and abs. Traps count as back and adductors as glutes. Calf and ab data in the studies is thin, so those two ranges are the least certain.

## How Povver counts your week

Povver totals your week from the sets you already log. A set counts whole for the muscle the lift is built for and half for each muscle that helps. It asks for RIR, 0 to 5, on every working set. The Intelligence tab lists each muscle against its range, and a half set shows as 7.5. The full rule is on the [how it works](/how-it-works#volume) page.

![Povver Intelligence tab, muscles this week: back 6, chest 4, biceps, shoulders and triceps 3, abs, calves, glutes, hamstrings and quads 0, each bar marked with its minimum and adaptive-volume range](https://povver.ai/assets/blog/progressive-overload-volume-slate-1440.webp)
*The muscle list on the Intelligence tab: hard sets this week against each muscle's range.*

If your plan sets its own weekly target, that target becomes the top of the band.

The [weekly sets checker](/tools/weekly-sets-checker) counts your own week in the browser and shows half credit next to direct sets only. The ranges are averages across studies. Your best volume can sit above or below the band.

## Sources

1. Pelland JC, Remmert JF, Robinson ZP, Hinson SR, Zourdos MC, "The Resistance Training Dose Response: Meta-Regressions Exploring the Effects of Weekly Volume and Frequency on Muscle Hypertrophy and Strength Gains", Sports Medicine 2026. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40279-025-02344-w
2. Schoenfeld BJ, Ogborn D, Krieger JW, "Dose-response relationship between weekly resistance training volume and increases in muscle mass: A systematic review and meta-analysis", Journal of Sports Sciences 2017. https://doi.org/10.1080/02640414.2016.1210197
3. Baz-Valle E, Balsalobre-Fernández C, Alix-Fages C, Santos-Concejero J, "A Systematic Review of The Effects of Different Resistance Training Volumes on Muscle Hypertrophy", Journal of Human Kinetics 2022. https://doi.org/10.2478/hukin-2022-0017
4. Robinson ZP, Pelland JC, Remmert JF, et al., "Exploring the Dose-Response Relationship Between Estimated Resistance Training Proximity to Failure, Strength Gain, and Muscle Hypertrophy: A Series of Meta-Regressions", Sports Medicine 2024. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40279-024-02069-2
5. Halperin I, Malleron T, Har-Nir I, et al., "Accuracy in Predicting Repetitions to Task Failure in Resistance Exercise: A Scoping Review and Exploratory Meta-analysis", Sports Medicine 2022. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40279-021-01559-x
6. Muscle diagrams from MuscleMap (MIT). https://github.com/Jsplice/MuscleMap