Everyone Is Confused About Progressive Overload

My exercise library sale ends in 24 hours! If you want to save over 60% off, click this link to secure your discount.

Progressive overload is one of the most widely recognized principles in training—but it’s also one of the most misunderstood.

While many lifters believe they fully grasp the concept, common misconceptions often lead to ineffective or misguided approaches.

In this discussion, we’ll take a closer look at what progressive overload truly is, what it isn’t, and the key nuances that can transform how you think about and apply it in your training.

What People Think Progressive Overload Is

Answer this question briefly before continuing to read: what is progressive overload?

Take a second to answer this for yourself.

Ok...

Most of you probably thought of something like "progressive overload is lifting more weight over time", "progressive overload is getting stronger", or "progressive overload is increasing any kind of demand over time".

While these answers are partially correct, they overlook a crucial detail—one that can fundamentally change how you understand and approach progressive overload.

What Progressive Overload Actually Is

Here's my answer to the question:

Progressive overload is the process of increasing the magnitude of a given stimulus to promote continued progression.

This may sound similar to the answers above, but there is a crucial distinction here that needs further explanation.

The answers above operate off of the flawed premise that progressive overload is solely proactive in nature.

For example, when someone adds 10 pounds to their bench press from one week to the next, they think they've just performed the operation of progressive overload - but it's only half the story.

This approach leads people to arbitrarily add load to the bench press every week, thinking that if they can just continue to add load, their muscle growth prospects shine brightly.

But how many times have you seen someone try to use way more weight than is appropriate solely in the name of "progressive overload"?

How many times have you thought that forcing more load onto an exercise was the obvious solution to your plateau?

Thinking about progressive overload only as a proactive process is clearly problematic: it assumes that progressive overload is something that we ourselves must force in order to promote gains. If we don't add more load, we think, then we won't make progress.

It also assumes that progress won't be made unless more load is used in every session.

But anyone who's been lifting for several years knows that progress is slow - so slow, in fact, that adding more load to an exercise may take several weeks...

And that's ok - it doesn't necessarily mean you aren't growing. The goal is simply to perform sets with high efforts, not to mindlessly add more load and hope for the best.

So there's a weird truth here: we can only ensure progress has been made if we've already made progress - you can only lift more weight than last time if you've already adapted.

By the time we recognize that progress has been made, progressive overload - by definition - is already behind us.

It is therefore only possible to add more load once the progress we seek has already been made. Otherwise, how could we do more? How would it be possible to improve performance unless we've already adapted to a prior stimulus?

If that's confusing to you, or just sounds pedantic, think about it another way: how can I increase my bench press from 225lbs to 315lbs?

Could I do it simply by crossing my fingers, loading up 315lbs, and hoping that the progressive overload gods have blessed me? Or must I do only what I can every week and eventually work toward a point of benching 315lbs?

Hopefully the distinction is clear: one need not bench press 315lbs in order to bench press 315lbs. One only needs to bench press lighter weights so that eventually 315lbs is in the cards.

Forcing more load onto the bar is (counterintuively) rarely the answer to progress; progressive overload is what opens the door to add more load - adding more load in and of itself is not what demands that we add more load. 

Again - if this just sounds like a semantic game to you, let me give just one more example to assure you that it's not:

Imagine you bench press 100 pounds for 5 reps on the first week of a program.

Now imagine you continued bench pressing 100 pounds every week for 20 weeks.

Assuming you're not totally new to the movement, you'd probably end up performing sets of 10-15 reps by the end of the 20th week.

Now imagine on week 21, you decide to add more load - say, 20 additional pounds, for a total of 120 pounds. You'd likely be able to bench press that amount for 5 reps or more - so, progressive overload has obviously occured, all the while never having added load to the bar prior to the novel demonstration of strength.

In this instance, it's clear that your ability to add an additional 20 pounds to the bar didn't come from any intentional manipulation of the load. More load was eventually required for you to maintain the same level of challenge for 5 reps that 100 pounds used to provide.

Your need to add load (progressive overload) was therefore a reaction to your improvement in strength - and potentially muscle size - not something you proactively manufactored.

And this is half of the perspective that most are missing: progressive overload is reactive as much as it is proactive.

Progressive Overload Isn't Just About Load

Let's return to my definition: progressive overload is the process of increasing the magnitude of a given stimulus to promote continued progression.

The key phrase here being that progressive overload relates to the magnitude of a given stimulus, not the magnitude of a given load.

In other words: progressive overload should be thought of more as progressive stimulus (or progressive stress).

The term "overload" is thus a bit confusing - at least, in the way it's commonly interpreted - because it enforces the idea that progress occurs only by adding more load to each exercise.

One should (more accurately) associate the term "overload" more with colloquial use, like when people claim "I'm overloaded with stress" or "my schedule is overloaded".

What overload refers to is not a single, objective number that can be measured - rather the process of necessarily imposing more stress than has been handled in the past to continue adaptation.

Put concretely: progressive overload is achieved when we're able to perform more repetitions with the same load or the same repetitions with more load.

This of course assumes that the exercises performed have been standardized in large part - we can't know that progressive overload has occured if we change the technique we're using, if we swap exercises, or even if we add more sets to our program.

So, while intentionally adding load at some point is an obvious necessity, it should not be done randomly or with the assumption that the capacity to add more load - regardless of reference to prior performances - directly indicates real progress.

While adding sets to an exercise or improving technique—such as better weight control or aligning the movement more closely with the intended goal—can increase the desired stress, these changes alone do not directly indicate successful adaptation to a specific stimulus.

In this we recognize that progress isn't solely determined by progressive overload, but rather that progressive overload is what we mean by progress.

My Preference For Training & Programming

A reasonable objection to this whole idea might be something like the following claim:

"How will I make progress unless I intentionally add more load over time? What am I supposed to do, just wait around until more load magically appears?"

I'm not suggesting that one should simply wait around for something magical to happen - rather that the common misconception of progressive overload often leads to the mindless addition of load under the assumption that more load must equal more progress

The process of training necessarily blends both proactive and reactive behaviors. Lifters should proactively challenge themselves with a structured progression, but the adaptations they experience are reactive. The two concepts, of course, can't be mutually exclusive.

So, while intentionally adding load at some point is an obvious necessity, it should not be done randomly or with the assumption that the capacity to add more load - regardless of reference to prior performances - directly indicates real progress.

Put conretely: master the load you're using now. Own complete control of the weight. Perform hard sets. Then add more load when more load is required to maintain a high level of effort.

Here's how I problem solve for these confusions in my own lifting. Keep in mind that these are my generalized recommendations and not hard rules by any means:

• Use a rep range of 5-15 reps (I usually stick between 6-12)
• Pick a weight that allows you to hit failure (or come close to it) within your chosen range
• Stick with the same weight until you reach the top end of your rep range
• Add more load when you come close to the top of the range
• Rinse and repeat

Here's an example of what that might look like over the course of a 10-week period:

1. 100lbs for 6 reps
2. 100lbs for 8 reps
3. 100lbs for 9 reps
4. 100lbs for 11 reps
5. 100lbs for 13 reps
6. 105lbs for 7 reps
7. 105lbs for 9 reps
8. 105lbs for 12 reps
9. 105lbs for 14 reps
10. 110lbs for 7 reps

Standardizing the load helps me more easily track progression every week because the addition of reps makes it much more clear that I'm progressing compared to the continual attempt to add more load.

While I don't subscribe to hard and fast rules, this is the general rubric I've followed for the last several years of training, and it works fantastically.

I'll also add that I personally prefer to perform every set to failure, so that I can be absolutely sure about whether or not I've made progress week-week. There are many people who (successfully) prefer to program sets with one or more reps in reserve ("reps in the tank"), but I generally prefer to remove this guesswork by performing each exercise until I fail non-volitionally.

Training to failure is by no means a necessity, but I personally believe that intermediate/advanced lifters should be able to train to failure often without the fear of injury - if you're scared you're going to get hurt every time you train to failure, you're either using way too much load, your technique is poor or inconsistent, your program design is a poor fit for you, or all of the above.

Practical Implications

To double-down on my claim that this article is anything but a semantic game, I want to finish off by explaining what an understanding of this concept means in practice.

Put bluntly: understanding that progressive overload is a response to already-made adaptations allows the lifter to not be foolish when training and especially when progressing.

Instead of facing the constant anxiety associated with adding perpetually more load to every exercise, the lifter simply allows whatever is going to happen, to happen. Controlled movement remains a priority, and more load or reps are only added when necessary to maintain high effort.

If I perform more reps with the same weight - great. If not, then I simply need a longer time period to see adaptations expressed; if I'm training hard, controlling all my exercises well, and I'm eating and sleeping enough, progress is likely on the horizon.

This is anything but trivial: the attempt to force progress - as if it were something that could ever be forced - is usually what gets people hurt.

And the idea that one can force progress in the first place drives people to believe that they MUST add more load to the bar or else progress won't occur.

But again: progress is inherently reactive. Progessive overload is reactive. Progressive overload occurs only in a circumstance wherein prior volumes and efforts were enough to allow you to lift more weight or perform more reps than in prior exposures.

Adding more weight to an exercise is not progressive overload.

Adding 5 pounds to an exercise performed for the same (or more) reps with the same technique is.

Progressive overload represents the adaptations you've already made, not the ones you hope to make in the future.

Understanding this is the difference between aimlessly throwing more weight on the bar in hopes of progression and putting more weight on the bar when it's obvious you need it to continue making progress.

-Ben

PS - if you're ready to learn more from me, here's how I can help:

 My Beginner Biomechanics Course - learn biomechanics in 30 days or less with no experience: click here to learn more.

 My Personal Trainer Course - learn the biomechanics of coaching that only the top 1% of trainers understand and apply: click here to learn more.

(SALE FOR 24 HOURS) My Full Exercise Library - want simple, step-by-step tutorials? Take the confusion out of lifting instantly with my exercise library: click here to learn more.

 Work with me in my mentorship - for serious learners only. Dive into the deep end with all the products I've ever made, plus 1-1 access to me. Click here to learn more.