Monster podcast episode with Zac Robinson and Josh Pelland from data driven strength on failure training, reps in reserve, and the importance of training "intensely". Can we leave 5 reps in the tank and get as good of results as if we trained to failure?
We investigate this question from a scientific, anecdotal and logical standpoint.
0:00 - intro
0:37 - how Zac and Josh got into the research over RIR and failure training
10:42 - What training to failure actually means - is there a scientific consensus?
14:25 - Is actual failure (missing reps) significantly different from just going to 0 RIR (0 reps in reserve)
20:54 - autoregulating volume when training close to failure
29:57 - so, what do you (Zac and Josh) think of the importance of going close to failure at this point? (we should have started with this)
42:45 - at 80% of 1RM proximity to failure is not important anymore only repetition count?
45:20 - beyond 5RIR, diminishing returns or no returns to train more "intensely"?
50:12 - swinging in the other direction and advocating training super far from failure
55:54 - is failure training never WORSE in research?
58:40 - practical issues with very submaximal training
1:10:55 - why do so many people spin their wheels and not get anywhere with their training if training close to failure is not that important?
1:19:20 - progressive overload mysteries
1:22:19 - training at long muscle lengths, how important is it?
1:33:40 - prior "models" we had for muscle growth (which were more like FADs)
1:40:11 - practical recommendations for failure proximity and RIR
1:50:10 - where can we find you and your work?
Coaching and consultations with Abel:
https://ssdabel.com/
Zac:
https://www.instagram.com/zac.datadrivenstrength/?hl=en
Josh:
https://www.instagram.com/josh.datadrivenstrength/?hl=en
Data driven strength:
https://www.data-drivenstrength.com/