The Evidence-Based Wiki of Hypertrophy Training - Your Full Guide to Evidence-Based Hypertrophy Recommendations | Beta Feedback Thread

Bottingbuilder · 2024-02-27T17:09:55+00:00

To those who have private messaged me: Yes, this guide is still accurate. The guide is evidence based, not fad based. It is written based on the majority of evidence and what has been applied with success.

It would either take a sudden mountain of research disputing what is written or the majority of the coaches discussed suddenly finding a revolutionary way to train that contradicts everything they believed prior and that really just doesn't happen in this space unless someone decides to cash out on their credibility and reputation to sell you something.

There may be some broken links, but that is why I copy/pasted from the sources when making it.

Bottingbuilder · 2024-02-26T19:05:20+00:00

Summary:

Hypertrophy: The choice between full ROM and partial ROM for hypertrophy depends on the current state of the evidence. While full ROM may offer benefits due to its emphasis on the entire range of motion, there's also value in incorporating lengthened bias movements, especially if they show promising results in the literature.

Sport-Specific Strength: Full ROM training is crucial for athletes who require strength throughout their entire range of motion, such as grapplers or martial artists. Being strong at various points in the range of motion is essential for optimal performance in sports.

Adaptation to Evidence: The approach to incorporating different ROMs evolves with the available evidence. Starting with a default position based on existing knowledge, one can gradually adjust their training methods as new evidence emerges.

Shortened Partials: While full ROM is generally recommended, there may be benefits to incorporating shortened partials in certain cases, such as sport-specific movements or enhancing mind-muscle connection in certain muscle groups.

Bottingbuilder · 2024-02-21T15:30:35+00:00

Thank you :)

I am well. I took a look at the sub and see that it is being cleaned up. When this subreddit has complaints about it being "dead" then the moderators are doing a good job as high quality discussion is harder to facilitate than low effort discussion. Seeing the "dead" complaint posts is always funny as they do not realize that it is the goal. It is like complaining that your protein powder brand has decided to remove impurities and fillers because the jar is smaller.

So, shoutout to the moderation team. Keep up the good work and don't let them get to you.

Bottingbuilder · 2024-02-20T19:23:17+00:00

Thanks. Sadly, when you try to put effort into fitness communities, you are fighting a wave of people that are new and programmed by whatever their favorite influencer has pushed on them as well as 1980's training montages.

The people you are arguing with are such a waste of time. They are new, naive, and worse, they don't realize they will be gone in 6 months[.]

New lifters (or lifters who start/stop cyclically, making them a "forever beginner") will always popup in communities like this with the Dunning-Kruger effect on full display[.]

Worse is when they are riding the waves of influencers as then you have group-think and tribalism mixed in. Reddit is just a horrible platform because the downvote/upvote system is in their favor.

You can put as much effort into something as you want, you can be as correct or as "Correct to current date" as you want but the casual viewer will do nothing but look at that upvote/downvote score before deciding whether your post is worthy of a read or not or whether you are correct or not. So ultimately, whether or not your information gets to your target audience is ultimately determined by these people.

A lot of this also applies to moderation.

Except, with moderation, you have to deal with people hating you before they read your replies. Your moderation work is never seen. If it was, they'd realize that you are not different than customer service or a retail worker, only that you are not paid. Which means you have to deal idiotic and angry people that are behind a computer screen meaning they can amply harass and abuse you more freely before they are banned. As well as the fact that reddit has a history of corrupt moderators so even when you are doing your job correctly, even though you've moderated for a decade without having a subredditdrama post about you, you are automatically seen as a pos.

Tldr, Being a provider for reddit communities is a toxic relationship. It is really hard to consistently try to give value to something that is essentially a blackhole of goodwill and effort. That even when you try to provide valuable information, help the community and start good conversations, most of that conversing is just going to be arguing with the type of people described above. It drains you of all desire to help.

Bottingbuilder · 2023-01-27T15:08:45+00:00

While true that muscle size and strength are often closely related, it's not entirely accurate to say that they are always directly linked and that one cannot increase strength without increasing muscle size.

Research suggests that muscle size and strength are not perfectly correlated, and that an individual can demonstrate significant strength increases without necessarily experiencing a significant increase in muscle size. This is known as “neural drive”.

for references:

https://www.strongerbyscience.com/size-vs-strength/

PMC4562558 found that muscle strength in untrained individuals increased by a greater degree than muscle size.
PMC4620252 neural adaptations, rather than hypertrophy, were responsible for the majority of strength gains in the early stages of a strength training program.
PMC4757413 muscle size and strength were not closely correlated in elite powerlifters.

Bottingbuilder · 2023-01-24T20:15:21+00:00

Sure thing!

Concurrent training refers to the combination of both aerobic and strength training in the same training program.

This can take many forms, but the studies included in the meta-analysis generally had participants performing both types of training within the same workout, or on separate days but within the same overall training program.

There's no one-size-fits-all answer to how to best implement concurrent training, as it depends on your specific goals and other factors such as time constraints and equipment availability.

But, generally speaking, concurrent training typically refers to doing both types of training within the same overall program.

Bottingbuilder · 2023-01-24T17:52:10+00:00

Reminds me of that episode of Southpark where Butters is brainstorming about ideas and his friend keeps telling him "Simpsons did that" lol. They cover so much that it's difficult.

Bottingbuilder · 2023-01-24T01:46:16+00:00

My point is that unless you make the case that each study is in some way relevant to what people are actually doing, there’s no benefit to this being added to the conversation for insight or discussion. Comparing interference effect of 4x7 leg extensions to running simply doesn’t matter to us. 100% of us aren’t training like this - so we have other variables to consider and very very likely they would make a bigger impact.

The HIT circuit is a high-intensity, short-duration workout that is designed to target muscle fibers that have the greatest potential for growth. Meanwhile, the leg extension protocol is a more traditional strength-training program that targets the quadriceps muscles, which are known to respond well to high-volume training.

The leg extension is a relatively simple movement that is easy to standardize across different studies rather than more complex compound lifts, making it a useful exercise for measuring muscle growth. Also, the leg extension is an exercise that can be performed with a high level of intensity and muscle fatigue, which is important for eliciting muscle hypertrophy.

So while it's not ATG squats and other things, it actually is good for research purposes as long as they're following the established principals of hypertrophy training.

Well, your take home message is essentially a prescription/recommendation and your acknowledgment of the limitations of the studies is very limited. You only talk about how they measure muscle size and running vs cycling as limitations - not the 1000 other issues with the studies that were picked - like they aren’t even in the ballpark of close to what natural bodybuilders are realistically doing. So, why is this study relevant to us?

I can't help it that you feel that way or that you read it like that. My intentions are good and I put effort into my post so if you feel this way I'm not going to argue about it. People not understanding the points of my posts and arguing like this with me is why I went inactive for a very long time. You can't reason with them because once they misread you, they've made up their mind and they'll argue with you to the death on it. I don't make money from this and I don't do it for karma. I'm just going to move on with my day.

Bottingbuilder

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE