Full ROM is Best?! (OUR NEW STUDY)

myoadapt.com/
👆🏻 Register your email to be notified when MyoAdapt launches!
In this video, Dr. Milo Wolf speaks about the findings of the newest study he has worked on, titled: "Lengthened Partial Repetitions Elicit Similar Muscular Adaptations as a Full Range of Motion During Resistance Training in Trained Individuals".
Link to the pre-print:
sportrxiv.org/...
References:
1. pubmed.ncbi.nl...
2. www.ecss.mobi/...
3. pubmed.ncbi.nl...
4. pubmed.ncbi.nl...
5. pubmed.ncbi.nl...
6. pubmed.ncbi.nl...
7. pubmed.ncbi.nl...
8. pubmed.ncbi.nl...
9. pubmed.ncbi.nl...
10. www.mdpi.com/2...
11. pubmed.ncbi.nl...
12. journal.iusca....
👇🏼 Get 12 FREE programs at my website!
wolfcoaching.c...
Follow us on socials for more:
• 📸 Wolf Coaching Instagram: / wolfcoaching_
• 💥 TikTok: / wolfcoaching
• 💻 Milo's Instagram: / wolfcoach_
If you enjoyed this video, please drop a like and SUBSCRIBE to the channel for more!
💻 Editing & Thumbnail provided by: blackboxmedia.uk
#fullrangeofmotion #lengthenedpartials #scienceexplained
"Full ROM is Best?! (OUR NEW STUDY)"
Music from Uppbeat.
Business Enquiries: [e-mail]

[@afifsamirnasreddine3768]

Full ROM until technique failure, then lengthened partials. At least that's how I learned it from Meadows back in the 00s.

[@big_chungus73]

John was ahead of his time for sure. I learned so many techniques, tips, etc... from him that benefitted my lifting and illicited changes in my physique. Absolute legend!

[@spideylover4105]

Tom Platz did that too, he called them "baby reps"

[@km55111]

Do the LP reps after ROM count as full reps if they generate similar muscles growth, would this mean people training say to failure arnt really if they arnt doing partials ?

[@jankroka5351]

I've been doing this all the time just by instinct and I think a lot of people do. It's just normal to be it this way when training hard.

[@ajaxthe87]

@@km55111in terms of Full ROM it failure. Think about it as squeezing every last bit of juice.

[@chayoto]

Massive respect for the study design.

[@NeuronIron]

yes its great to see this field improve

[@Atomicfog]

The study design was really good except for the fact that it feels like they didn't consider the cross-education effect that he mentions around 12:55. I'm not sure if they didn't consider it and/or didn't think it would matter that much -- but that can make on limb influence gains in the opposite limb quite a bit. So I think the study design could have been better in that regard. But for the most part it seemed really good. That said, that may have invalidated the results by not considering that enough. They should have trained twins do it next time, but, I know that's easier said than done.

[@itsmyboardwhotalk]

@@Atomicfog for me thats a really big problem especially bc sport science studies tend to have almost no participants. for me everything I learn with my right hand and I can do basically immediately with my left hand. when I broke my arm, it only took two months for my left arm to be significantly stronger than my right one again. and compared to most left handed ppl Im quite balanced (at least im my family and friend circle); Im thinking that def effected the outcome.

[@Atomicfog]

@@itsmyboardwhotalk Oh yeah, 100%, it's a big deal. I had a similar experience in that when I broke my hand I only worked out with one arm and the cross-education effect helped make sure my right arm was still pretty strong even though it still was a fair bit smaller. I believe because I trained one arm it made the process to bring it back a fair bit shorter, and it eventually became my stronger arm again. But like you I'm also pretty balanced in both arms compared to most. But yeah, lol, I guess those types of things a great way to balance us out. As far as the study -- I'd be curious to know if they thought of the cross-education effect beforehand and/or if they tried to adjust the data for it.

[@itsmyboardwhotalk]

@@Atomicfog could imagine cross over effects are maybe more neuronal and influences muscle grow less, maybe a study is indicating that and thats why they chose it. because otherwise I think the within design is pretty much the only design which would guaranteed 20-30 participants, needed for at least some statistical consistency. ironically maybe its the design which effected the outcome negatively.

[@gustavo_oviedo]

The real winner here is science. This was a great study and great videos by you and Jeff.

[@davidcohen26]

The new god - created by the elites 😁 👍

[@gustavo_oviedo]

@@davidcohen26 you think science is new? Bruv ...

[@berdysz9390]

And dr pak

[@davidcohen26]

@@gustavo_oviedo do you think at all ? 😁

[@gustavo_oviedo]

@@davidcohen26 yes, and I see you don't.

[@kwerby3285]

Milo on Jeff’s video: it’s just one study and the difference is statistically insignificant Milo on his thumbnail: THIS CHANGES EVERYTHING 😂

[@akalion213]

"The statistician was blinded" damn they really did take this seriously huh

[@nicoopiee]

LMFAO. this really made me laugh in my room hahahaha

[@Simlatio]

@@nicoopiee A 'triple blind study' is where the participants, the researcher recording the data AND the statistician analysing the data are blinded. Pretty sure that is what happened here.

[@wis9]

@@Simlatio no. they actually blinded the statistician. he's blind now.

[@watsonkushmaster3067]

When he said "participants were killed after the study" i got little worried

[@ytygk5340]

@@Simlatio no way to triple blind i believe unless you hipnotize the participants or something like that 😅

[@lvlUpSportsYT]

I can't understand why no one is pointing out the obvious here. Doesn't this study, along with others showing neutral or positive effects from lengthened partial reps, force us to rethink what "going to failure" really means? Traditionally, failure is defined as being unable to perform another rep with good form-meaning a full range of motion. But now that we're closer to proving (or have already proven) that half reps in the lengthened position are just as effective for hypertrophy as full reps, shouldn't that redefine failure? If a half rep in the lengthened position is as effective as a full rep, it suggests we could continue the set until we physically can't move the limb anymore. This would be the new definition of true failure. If we stop before reaching this point, we're essentially leaving reps (in terms of their effectiveness) on the table. Shouldn't we now consider failure as the point where your muscles are fully unable to contract, even in a partial ROM, instead of stopping when you can't complete a full rep?

[@Ryan30z]

The issue at the point is fatigue. After a certain point it's just going to be like adding more and more sets. If you go that hard all the time your recovery is going to be shot to bits.

[@TheITomG]

@@Ryan30z I was thinking, maybe one could possible do less volume (less sets per week) to get the same results, that would mean less time at the gym. I wouldn't do it with compound exercises but isolation work doesn't fatigue as much. There is still a lot of question needing to get answered.

[@quban79]

fair point but training a muscle to absolute exhaustion of every set would probably come with more negatives than positives unless you significantly reduce volume and or train the muscle mote than once a week..but, folks can research til the cows come home.. take away is and has always been progressive overload, train and eat well..and genetics are king.

[@LukosTheWolf]

To that end, then, are you really training "past failure" if you go into partials and effectively remove half of the effort? I think at the end of the day all these techniques serve to try and simulate intensity - a factor I don't think was mentioned in this study.

[@ifstatementifstatement2704]

In my experience over 3 decades of training, the closer you go to failure the better the results.

[@facewfacew2]

This study may also show how exercise selection is important when focusing on lengthened partials. You wouldn't want to do a lengthened partial when doing a spider curl, since the strength curve is easiest in the lengthened position, compared to a preacher curl where the lengthened position requires the greatest effort.

[@FerintoshFarmsPhotography]

The greatest range of motion was the friends we made along the way.

[@fitness-phenomenal6097]

I do lengthened partials in failing reps

[@Ash-os7fc]

Based on

[@matt6951]

@Ash-os7fc based on he's can't do full rom because he is fatigued, but he can do a lengthened partial. They are easier.

[@Ash-os7fc]

@@matt6951 I was gonna post “Based” but my iPhone autocorrected it to “based on”

[@RyanMcDonnough]

@@matt6951 Depends on the force curve. 😉

[@matt6951]

@@RyanMcDonnough whatever nerd.

[@jonathonwilcoxson7778]

Saw Nippards first then yours..both pretty solid...post a video on which exercises YOU would recommend doing lengthened partials. I understand everyone will have bias because everyone isn't the same, but i think now that the study is out at least should make new tier list videos on what you think the best mix is on integrating full rom and lengthened partials into your workout is.

[@user-ii7xc1ry3x]

So you watched this 16min video as soon as it got uploaded and managed to comment on it all in under 5min? You're a pretty talented folk I'll give you that

[@davidepulinas1640]

Honestly, one study is not sufficent to base your hole opinion on whatever topic. Mind, I'm in "stretch team" but science is exactly that: one study on trained lifters, although very well constructed, is not enough to be considered "undisputable evidence". Still looking forward for progress in research, though.

[@smebbo6435]

Geoffrey Verity Scoffield has a great videos on that out already. He basically trained a month only lengthened partials and gives his input on where it is worth it, where he grew, where it is just bad, as well as where it was "meh..."

[@elifoot98]

he made a recomended lenghtened exercises video, also jeremy ethier did one as well

[@ROSSNEWHAM]

Do it yourself, go by feel. This will tell you more than any study can

[@killerkhatiby009]

Milo, it's almost seeming to me that it's less about the ROM used and more about the resistance profile of the exercise, where having more tension at slightly longer muscle lengths is what really causes the most growth, and as long as you're including this portion of the exercise full ROM vs partials isn't as important (assuming other variables like RIR, set volume, frequency, etc. are the same). I'd be curious to see a study design with trained lifters where one limb does a lengthened biased exercise and the other does a mid-point or shortened biased exercise and then people are also randomized to full ROM or lengthened partials and end up with 4 groups: 1. Full ROM + shortened biased exercises 2. Full ROM + lengthened biased exercises 3. Lengthened Partials + shortened biased exercises 4. Lengthened Partial + lengthened biased exercises Run this for at least 12-16 weeks and you could even randomize both legs and arms so it's within-participant in both upper and lower body and each participant performs all 4 categories of exercise. Extra credit: adding in both trained and untrained lifters as well to really compare the impacts of all the interventions.

[@killerkhatiby009]

Exercise selection seemed decent in this study with most exercises providing tension in the lengthened positions, but the dumbbell curls are a notable exception. Dumbbell overhead triceps extensions also may end up focusing tension at different points of the ROM depending on where the elbows are pointed: - Elbows pointing straight up to the ceiling lengthens the long-head of the triceps but maximizes tension at the mid-way point when the elbow hits 90° - Elbows more forward so the upper arm is closer to parallel to the ground maximizes tension when the elbow is most flexed - i.e. medial and lateral head at longest lengths - but shortens the long-head slightly Also, the machine press and incline press could be designed in a way which emphasize tension closer to the peak contraction (i.e. shorter muscle lengths) but that will vary depending on make/model. Were the machines included in the study lengthened biased or at least equal resistance throughout the ROM?

[@korvmedmos979]

do it, nothing is stopping you

[@Dougie.A.M]

"lengthend partials, lengthened partials are my life." 🎼🎶

[@srleplay]

If I had pound of muscle for every comment not watching the video and claiming study proves Milo was wrong the entire time I'd be Incredible Hulk IRL

[@fernandosilva6295]

the null capacity of grown adults to comprehend a 15 minute video terrifies me, these people are parents/bosses/voters yet have the media literacy of a 4 year old

[@user-qg8pv3en4z]

He was wrong tho 😂 lengthened partials didnt cause the inherent “anabolic” growth his crowd has been pushing for the last year. LP caused the same / less with that full ROM, which means it’s useless considering the added calcium ion fatigue due to longer lengthening of the muscle.

[@apocalypse487]

​@@fernandosilva6295 most people form opinions before understanding anything.

[@slee2695]

It still shows that the lengthened position is most important..if lp and full rom had similar results because they both go full stretch ​@user-qg8pv3en4z

[@uhmaapukkaa1491]

⁠@@user-qg8pv3en4zwhere did you get less growth? It was the same or better.

[@PoorlySoup]

The lengthened emphasis has been really helpful for my mobility, so I'm gonna keep it up anyway. Solid study, we appreciate all the hard work!

[@I_Might_B_Wrong]

Even if lengthened partials were 5-10% worse than full ROM on their own, I'd still find them a great training tool now that I've implemented them more. I used to think dumbbell flies were useless because they missed out on the resistance at the top, which I thought was the most important. I now know I absolutely love them. I've also seen HUGE lat gains by implementing lengthened partials on pull ups and lat pull downs once I hit failure with full ROM. Seems like the lengthened position hits my lats harder while the upper back is a bigger limiting factor with full ROM, thought this is not a scientific take as I'm just going by feel and anecdotal results. Even so, I'm seeing definite new gains by getting deeper stretches and using partials in conjunction with full ROM. Great to have your research to help inform my decision making in my training.

[@gregorycocco9043]

Really glad lengthened partials are just as good, if not better, than full rom. In my home gym only have barbell and dumbbells, so felt like I was missing out on doing things like dumbbell flys and and pullovers. Nice to see I’m not missing out.

[@DylanLeonine]

Now the only thing left is a large-scale study on trained participants that isn't within-participant-design and covers a range of exercises. (or a meta-analysis of a series of such small-scale studies)

[@adamjohnston457]

These kinds of studies are fascinating. Happy that you guys were able to work with Jeff on this! Will the next study be shortened partials vs Full Rom in experienced lifters?

[@davidepulinas1640]

Doctor Mike, Milo and Jeff is the holy trinity of YT fitness influencers. Just watched jeff's video and, more than anything, I love the fact that You guys are always open to debate and change Your opinion based on research and data, because THAT is the definition of science.

[@danielkanewske8473]

I have modified all of my lifts to include as much stretch as possible. The results I have seen, after 20 years of lifting, are incredible! Also, my joints feel better because I use less load. My soreness, I know it isn't causal with hypertrophy, has increased significantly. Thank you Milo!!!! Dr Schoenfeld cameo!

[@andyatch33]

Great work to all involved! 👏

[@mnakash77]

loved the t shirt, friends dont let friends quarter squat!

[@Duderantula]

Full ROM exploded my muscle gains but then it plateaued... then lengthen partials exploded them again..! I am a part of both full ROM and lengthened partials teams and incorporate both into my training. Well done on making sure any biases were not present in the study, the findings were interesting.

[@johnluckhaus3036]

How did you compare volume? Did the partial repititions side use heavier weights or do more reps? Were the participants asked about fatigue in one side vs the other? If the partial reps side used the same weight, number of reps, and sets, then it may not have been trained as hard as the side doing a full range of motion.

[@niveaulimbo6101]

That would be very interesting. Because depending on how they did it, its the same growth for half the exercise.

[@luxeayt6694]

These days volume is matched by same weight and same sets, going to failure. The partial group would've done more reps, but covered less distance. By going to failure, you equalize both groups.

[@markypee1232]

Horsing and hoisting heavy loads will forever reign superior to lifting like a pencil neck

[@DingisDonger]

Thank you for being a friend

[@tuomasnurmi7353]

I have to say that after hitting the gym again after a year's pause the stretch emphasis on all of my lifts has really accelerated my gains compared to other times I have started serious gym training. Feels like I get a better feel for the target muscle in the stretch position. That said I have not used partials so far. Seems like I don't need to change my training, but I have to say that I will definitely continue to emphasis the stretch!

[@sml8589]

Lengthened partials allow me the lift heavier or rep more. Shouldn't this be taken in consideration a the next study?

[@krzysztofkolodziejczyk4335]

that's a bad thing though. heavier weight strain tissues, and joints more, higher reps are less practical. and all this for no gains.

[@JasonBassettphotography]

You missed the point of the inquiry

[@slee2695]

​@@krzysztofkolodziejczyk4335they literally get the same gains

[@luxeayt6694]

It is taken into consideration already. Both groups go to failure, so the lengthened partials group might do more reps, but get the same stimulus.

[@shmuckling]

This is such a great video! I've only used LP very little, mainly on cable lateral raises, as I can really feel the tension in the side delts doing LPs with these. On most exercises I'm a full ROM guy, with slower negatives and I like to make the lengthened part of an exercise heavier if I can. However, it's hard to count out LPs, because it would make sense if they worked better - at the least, they probably produce less fatigue than full ROM, which should make recovery better. I have to wonder about the same study done, where fatigue is also accounted for in some way. Thank you and please keep them coming.

[@non_ifbb_bro]

of course you were wrong, mike's been telling you and also he said long lengthened partials at the end.

[@Oi-mj6dv]

Lenghtened partials for any row past concentric failure is just gold

[@user-qg8pv3en4z]

No 💀 They create an excess fatigue for no concrete extra benefit

[@Brk_Lifts]

I’ve always done them for bent over rows, without knowing lol. >Full rom to failure >LP until I can’t get the bar off the ground

[@Brk_Lifts]

@@user-qg8pv3en4zno extra benefit? If you take full rom to failure and can continue with LP, that’s exponentially more volume in a set…

[@user-qg8pv3en4z]

@@Brk_Lifts and what led you to think more volume = growth? A fucking milo video? 🤣🤣 Volume is non linear to growth

[@Brk_Lifts]

@@user-qg8pv3en4z Ohhh. This must be liftrunbangmyheadagainstafuckingwall. 😅😅 why you always using alt accounts? You loser.

[@26chemman]

The bulk and cutting edge... I don't know, I'm just excited to see this type of research around lifting.

[@ThaKKatt]

Bro just casually having the leading muscle scientist and one of the biggest muscle and strength KZbinr is such good Science communication...good science, good science communication, I honestly think that your crew would be a great case study in sci comm. You've already doubled your sub count since I got here, I can see you continuing. But, honestly, I do grad research and I see how busy you PhD weirdos are, so how can you concurrently run the best research and channel you can?? So much time...

[@TigerShark316]

Dr Wolf, do you know if the participants in this study were randomly assigned which side would be partials and which side would be full ROM? I’m curious if a dominant side would have skewed results in any way. It would be interesting to see the same participants recalled for the same exact study, but swapping sides.

[@TheHybrid350]

Love seeing your work

[@keano_rl]

Wish the study was longer than 8 weeks, but other than that I think it was very good.

[@thomasruckstuhl9980]

Advanced lifters have built around 6% extra muscle mass in just 8 weeks? If we would extrapolate to a year that is a plus of over 30%. I question this study.

[@murmor6890]

The question I get from that design is weight. Of course doing both ranges with similar weight brings a level of comparison, but with a lot of exercises you will be able to move more weight with a partial and in real life application people will go heavier to stay in a certain rep range. So if you can curl 15kg with full ROM and 18kg with partial it is likely that the partial will do more if the stimulus of the range of motion is not worse.

[@fluffyscruffy]

A video on the study before peer review is crazy lol, but here's my favorite quote: "For Muscle hypertrophy, analyses showed moderate evidence in support of the null hypothesis across sites, with the exception of the TB 55% site, which showed anecdotal evidence in support of the null hypothesis." Also, Figure 2 shows the pROM has a longer muscle length average, which resulted in equal hypertrophy vs fROM. Doesn't that give less power to "more stretch = more better"?

[@joojotin]

Yes

[@eitanslivko8600]

yup, they are clowns lol its a horrible study that literally proves what paul carter says

[@fluffyscruffy]

@@eitanslivko8600 I mean speaking of clowns, Paul is defo one as well... not because I question the study that I support Paul

[@fernandosilva6295]

@@eitanslivko8600 what? how did you come to this conclusion? In all seriousness, I don't get how you arrived there. As many people have stated on the comments, it is likely that many folks who claim to be "team full ROM" aren't actually doing the full ROM on the stretched position, thus when they switch to lengthened partials and intentionally stretch the muscle, they DO get better results. The literal conclusion of the study is that pROM is probably as effect as fROM (assuming that both are done properly), that does not mean that pROM is useless, at all, that's why I genuinely don't understand how you got to that conclusion

[@fernandosilva6295]

@@eitanslivko8600 which btw, the stretched position IS the most hypertrophic, that is pretty much well established and this study did not focus on that discussion at all. If you're going to do fROM exclusively, the stretched part is the most important, that's facts

[@maxfern5701]

The obvious question is now if there is similar muscle growth, do lengthened partials require less energy overall compared to full ROM, and would this allow you to do more sets for example? If in the span of your entire workout, it allows you to do 2 or 3 more sets here and there, that would be more potential for muscle growth.

[@markyperez7412]

Always preferred full ROM for my tracked reps and sets, and LP drop sets at the end of an exercise for that lil extra til failure. I think it’s easier to standardize full ROM.

[@joshwalsh6194]

Sounds like you guys are slowly converting to Mike Van wyck’s “full active range of tension” training or FART training 💪🏼

[@nationalgeo2191]

One thing this study doesn’t do effectively though is show how effective the stretch is as an isolated variable. I know that wasn’t the point but I would love to see, for example, a study where one arm does a full range of motion pulldown but stops just shy of a deep stretch, where the other accentuates that stretch maybe pausing for 1 second. Because in this study both arms are getting that stretch it’s just that one spends more time in that position.

[@getthepicture1000]

To be honest, we knew the deep stretch portion of the lift heavily contributed to hypertrophy. What we didn't know was if exclusively focusing on the stretched portion through lengthened partials was superior.

[@nationalgeo2191]

@@getthepicture1000 ah true. That makes more sense thinking about it that way. I would love to see some numbers in a study showing the stretch accentuated growth vs no accentuation

[@kongkong284]

I would have loved to see the results if the exercises selected consisted only of those that have even tension distribution throughout the rom and less room for error in terms of techniques. For example, machine preacher curl and machine triceps extension. And machine side lateral in the future for side delts hopefully.

[@theboss-lz1qc]

What doy you think about Integrated partials? Isn`t it the best way to do partials in trainning. Take whatever exercise and do reps like this 0,5+1+0,5+1+0,5+1 0,5-lengthen partial 1- Full ROM. What do you guys think about it?

[@NeuronIron]

Great study and it's great that exercise science is really improving and it's becoming more reproducible and less bro-sciency. Thanks Dr Wolf!

[@Gunzo568]

I would like these things be peer reviewed. Speaking of peers, I choose Eric Boogs, GVS, Coach Butler... who else? 🤔

[@slee2695]

No roid heads like Bugez

[@lovingmylifeasIage6741]

I see this all the time now a days. All these young guys think they have found something new. This was disproven back in the 70's when I started lifting. Check out Larry Scott doing bicep curls with a straight bar on a preacher seat. They became to be known as Scott curls and Larry had massive biceps. You can curl very heavy weight in a partial curl with out full extension. The heavy weight will put a lot of work focused on the bicep with out harming the bicep tendon, avoiding injury. I think they knew what they were doing.

[@geminierica4077]

Ok so it's pretty established now that getting a stretch is important whether or not its full rom or partial.. but what about recovery time. For example lengthened exercises are known for increasing soreness so you can't do them as often and need a longer recovery time. But we also know from the science that more volume and frequency is usually better for muscle hypertrophy given that recovery requirements are met .. so is there value for more concentric focused exercises as a way to add more weekly volume which can be perfomed more often? For example the hip thrust. There must be some value in adding in squeeze focus exercises because theyre easy as pie to recover from

[@JasonBassettphotography]

good question and breakdown

[@kahpyvara]

Now I'm curious what would be the benefits of doing initially FULL ROM and then when you can't get it all the way up anymore just do lengthened partials. That would be a fun study to do.

[@harrygrossman4378]

I respect all your research and am looking forward to the app, myoadapt. Projected relesse date?

[@alexandrudinca3080]

As a full rom guy i noticed i was always biased towards exercises that emphasise LML. They just felt better for me. And i got the results for it so i didn't need to change anything. I just get shaky when trying to focus too much on short contractions and it takes me out of it.

[@BlackSpice]

we need more regional hypetrophy quide

[@manaco8440]

nexxt study should be advanced lifters in strech-focused exercises vs shortened-focused exercises

[@EnvisionTransformation]

The jo jo reference haha you are a legend lmao

[@ELIT3Terminator]

Two questions! 1. Are there any other benefits that lengthened partials or full ROM may have (e.g., is one better than strength?) I assume full ROM is key here. What about injury potential and prescription on which to use for athletes? 2. Why were there no unilateral leg exercises done?? This seemed like a weird choice to me and a key limitation of the study.

[@filipcza2]

Yeah I think I'll keep doing as pretty much everyone in the comments. Full ROM until fail / close to fail and then partials. But glad to know that lenghtened partials are good on their own also. Some lifts are annoying to do to full contraction, so I guess I'll settle for partials on those from now on.

[@segarrarios]

I have a couple of questions. How could the dominant side vs weaker side affect the results of your study(if it even matters at all)? Assuming that these are natural lifters, muscle isn't expected to grow as much in a year due to them being intermediate/advanced lifters. How do you measure the % of difference in muscle gain in order to considered it "null" when the room for growth is much smaller? Interesting study, and results. Please, excuse my ignorance with these questions as I am not sure if they are answered elsewhere.

[@xommul79]

I expect maybe 1 -2 people in each gym may look at these videos and take notice. Most gym users have no idea science based studies about lifting weights exist. Maybe a study should be conducted into why ?

[@itaysabato3]

Did participants have to do more reps on the partial sets to get to failure?

[@johnnymisbegotten]

My brain cells have been stretched to the breaking point trying to understand this haha

[@Zombies8Jayden]

Oof

[@Nick-kf3io]

14:09 oh my God 🤣🤣🤣

[@AbuDurum]

Milo, can you please just give me a quick answer to my comment? 5-9% growth in 8 weeks of training sounds insane to me. How is that possible? Or is there something that I haven't considered? Can it not just be cell swelling?

[@WolfCoaching]

The growth was actually 5-6% - this was recorded just before I got access to that data. Even trained participants usually train harder, and more productively, in a study than when letft on their own. Swelling is unlikely - it was the exact same workouts for 8 weeks. Plus, >72h between last workout and measuring growth

[@AbuDurum]

@@WolfCoaching, I don't wanna waste your time but I'm gonna ask anyway. I don't know if there is something off with my math or what. Is this replicable (replicable, meaning in the same participants)? Granted the guys trained very hard, harder than they usually are, but, still 5% in 8 weeks sounds insane to me on a trained individual. Wouldn't that mean that if these people continued to train very hard, that they would be able to look like Samson Dauda in like a year and a half or something. It just doesn't make any sense to me. If it's not swelling, then how is 5% growth in 8 weeks explained? Is it insane hypertrophy due to a "shock in the system" from training insanely hard or what?

[@isobri10]

Great video!

[@vulgaros]

Even if lengthened partials are simply as effective as full ROM, just think of the benefits of lower wear&tear on your joints over the years.😊

[@andrijajanfranjcec6888]

Hey @wolfcoaching , are any of those 20ish studies that compare more lengthened to more shortened training done on trained individuals? Btw. Why do you in general think that the effect of lengthened bias training doesn’t change with training age? (You know the sarcomerogenisis arguments)

[@jakubzahradka8644]

MyoAdapt when?

[@nates5703]

This study does basically confirm the latest, commonly accepted wisdom, no matter what stage you are personally at in the lifting: 1. Full ROM is great and likely still the gold standard 2. Lengthened partials are the next best thing 3. Try to pick exercises that favor the stretched position

[@user-qg8pv3en4z]

No. 1. Full ROM causes slightly more/or equal gains compared to LP 2. They arent 😂 the study literally showed theres no significant difference in the gains compared to a full ROM, lengthened partials create more fatigue and hinder performance as they significantly reduce MU recruitment for the following sets 3. Not every muscle benefits from a “stretch” you have to look at where it has the best leverage to produce force and recruit the most amount of MU.

[@luxeayt6694]

@@user-qg8pv3en4z The long head has worse leverage in an overhead position compared to a behind the body position (like a kick back), yet experiences more growth in an overhead position. Explain that please.

[@itsmyboardwhotalk]

Really interesting subject. And great work! But I still have to be annoying and critic the size of the participants and doing a within design with such a small group. My prof in methodology would cry. In Psychology (especially in social psychology) around 70% of the studies couldnt be replicated. one reason were to small sample sizes. any study with less than 36 participants per group was considered to be way to small for any greater value at all and in medicine it takes around 1000 - 10 000 to have definitive results. sure one can do a lot with math, but still feels with such a sample size, especially with cross over effects, cant answer the open question.

[@jarosoho2049]

Hahaha - the look on Pak's face at 2.00 "Back off science guy!"

[@duosiris34]

now do a peak contraction againts partials

[@theSabsCouch]

Absolutely fantastic video, from the study design to the analysis. Keep it up guys!

[@SenesLULZ]

tldr; intensity is the key. Both groups regardless of full ROM vs lengthened partials went to 0-1 RIR.

[@leonidasg2257]

Well done on the study, however I am disapointed you guys missed a big one. With partials you can do MORE weight + more reps. I read the pre-print document and with a quick search I did find that the exercises were performed to failure, so its safe to assume people did more reps with partials, however there was no mention of heavier weight. I strongly believe that if the weight chosen on lengthened partials was higher to a point were reps were matched (or close) the study would have been better and results might have surprised us.

[@ocococococococococococococ3267]

they did more reps (until failure) but same weight

[@leonidasg2257]

@@ocococococococococococococ3267 I read the pre print but not all of it. Just did quick word searches on the methodoly followed part. I strongly believe they should have upped the weight instead.

[@hapablap21]

If full ROM induces the same growth as lengthened partials, doesn't that basically mean that the second (shortened) half of the full ROM is wasted effort? And if that's the case it seems like lengthened partials would still be better.

[@kranos3630]

I mean ROM still includes the Length portion.

[@slee2695]

Exactly...the top of most lifts is just resting anyways

[@robertwilcox9566]

Any consideration for the contralateral training effect? Is that a factor in the within-participant design? Could that have compensated for the differences in ROM?

[@AE_CC_-Tutorials]

Paul carter called that the biceps grow more in the lengthend position and the triceps grow more in the shortened position because of leverage and he was perfectly right, i know the difference was not significant...i bet it is all leverage and that newbies grow more from lengthend positions.

[@slee2695]

Paul Carter also advised doing 100 reps of curls nonstop with an empty barbell to build big arms...lmao

[@joelbirgen6256]

I can volunteer for your next study. I am trained for 2 years

[@davidbright8978]

Now what if you used Full ROM then partial at the end

[@Shredkowski]

Were the same weights used for each side or did you use more weight or reps for the lengthened partials?

[@joshuathomasbird]

wooo OSF preprint!!

[@Itadakiman]

Tall Pills link?

[@A.P.Garland]

Can we do lengthened partials on our lengthened partials for even more growth?

[@FitNerdz]

How about injury risk? Usually when people have muscle/tendon injuries it happens when the muscle is at its most stretched position, right? I get a bit cautious about that. What do you guys think?

[@slee2695]

Lengthened work later in the workout when you're warm And natties have less chance of injuries

[@FitNerdz]

@slee2695 yeah... I was thinking that due to fatigue, it would be better to do that type of set with only moderate loads to 10-15 RM

[@slee2695]

@FitNerdz i like john meadows approach...do a shortened biased for warm up..then a heavy lift...then a lengthened biased So like push downs, then close grip bench, the overhead extensions...for triceps

[@250fTrailRider]

Are lengthened particles so effective because of the constant tension?

[@A.P.Garland]

Is a lengthened partial a shortened ROM? That is, the same thing most lifters do when going to failure...failing the full range of motion and only getting part way up. Phew, we've all been doing them all along. Sleep easy.

[@samuelmeisterw]

Hello Milo

[@HkFinn83]

Oh well. At least you tried to come up with a new idea and put it to the test. Keep trying. Maybe try shortened partials next.

[@42WallabyWaySydney]

2:55 Lengthened Gangsta is 17 inches flexed, 21 in the stretched position

[@SKINNY_BRUH]

Lengthened partials all my life🤔

[@Jk-zv6tz]

Classic Milo. Clickbait titles.

[@Smart-zb3mo]

How were the strength gains ?

[@jamesgazeley]

Footage on campus is sick

[@osirisfernandez2264]

Did you guys take into account if the person was right o or left-handed?

[@plwadodveeefdv]

they randomized the side to reduce the dominance effect, as he mentions in the video

[@thmanoy]

14:11 Is this a jojo reference?

[@SkevosKouvaris]

Friends don't let friends...

[@davekjellmarong9381]

You had me with the Jojo reference😂😂

[@adamdavis4928]

Haha Milo you are doing a great job of slipping in small bits of stats information into your workout videos to sneakily teach people about stats who thought they never wanted to learn it lol.

[@WolfCoaching]

Gotta finesse the viewers. You thought you were getting a video about what ROM was best for growing muscle? Sike - really teaching you about how to think scientifically instead 💯

[@OdinHolmis]

Does anyone know where I can find the lengthened partial song?

[@Jhumanghjngg]

Also did I get this right, 6% growth from 8w with 2d/week rather low volume training for experienced lifters? Doesn't sound very realistic, does it?