Three Free Training Programs On Boostcamp: www.boostcamp.app/#fazlifts My Training Fundamentals Playlist: ruclips.net/p/PLcBzFSqsHKhs5muajYxG70uCcwGJ8IV3h eBooks: fazlifts.co.uk/collections/e-books Coaching Enquiries: docs.google.com/forms/d/15_F8NS9vWIZUGlPXv-jGeFO9vVCyEKUFTmwuJo3RHlA/viewform?edit_requested=true
If I ever get the sense that someone involved in a study *wants* one result over another, or is disappointed in a null finding, to me that seems decidedly unscientific.
Absolutely and it's so hard to have these conversations without actually calling people out, we want to maintain civility of course. But at the same time this has been going on for long enough, and peoples time is definitely being wasted by the years in some cases.
Researchers saying they're not biased, that's a more of a red flag to me. Everyone is biased and expects some kind of result... and that's fine. That's why we have RCT's. That's why double blind exists. That's why we need peers (that have another bias) that examine or repeat the research. This problem has been around for ages and science has found ways to make sure it doesn't influence the results. The current problem is that a lot of studies (especially in medicine) are not even published when the desired results aren't proven true. That's not what Milo & co have done, they actually published a result that didn't favor their presuppositions.
To quote a misquote of Kant: “If the truth would kill them, let them die.” People who are honest and truth seeking welcome corrections and having their mistakes pointed out. Public figures especially should have their content named and shamed, publicly, if it is leading to millions of people wasting time, money, effort etc and getting injured in the process of following bad or half-true advice. Those who seek truth will embrace the criticism and feedback. Those who are charlatans and have agendas will react poorly and show their true colours.
12:17 I highly recommend Lyle MacDonald-he’s hilarious 😂. In my experience, the best natural lifters are often the most open-minded. Ironically, those in the science-based community, who should be the most objective, don’t always live up to that standard, even though that’s what their field is supposed to be about. My biggest issue, besides what Faz talks about, is that it takes away the art of this sport. I can’t even ask the gym bro with 20 years of experience who’s bigger than me what worked for him and pick his brain, just because there’s no study to back it up. Other sports aren’t like this.
"I can’t even ask the gym bro with 20 years of experience who’s bigger than me what worked for him and pick his brain, just because there’s no study to back it up" Truer words have never been spoken.
1:43 - the fact that there's even such a thing as "research celebrities" in this space is a problem in itself tbh. There's no antidote that comes to mind, that's just how it is with social media now. Just thought it was worth mentioning. 8:08 - I'm very eager for more Daniel & Jack lore 😂
Great video Faz. I started training with my old man and he taught me the basics. Coupled with my genetics I’ve done well. Recently got into fitness RUclips last year and I’d be mortified as a beginner trying to get started with all the information out there and which is spread by people who are intent on making $$ . It’s a vicious cycle.
Too many scientists have forgotten what the scientific method is i.e. to start with a hypothesis and go where the evidence takes you. These days it's more about starting with a conclusion and back-filling the evidence... I won't mention names, but I have my doubts about some of the 'in-crowd' in sports science. There's followers to build and money to be made by championing false information with pseudo science.
I once heard sth super interesting. Im just gonna paraphrase a bit. It basically went like the more science a scientiest does the less time for social media he has. Thats why you usually dont see top researchers on social media. And looking at the current landscape of exercise science on socials that is more true than ever
Great video Faz. I have noticed this with Jeff Nippardi. When this lengthend partials thing got out, I think 1-2 months later he started selling 3 different PDF books/workouts with lengthned partials included, all of them priced around 30$ I think. They don't care if it works or not, they just want to make $$$
@@Fazlifts This was a while ago becuase Jeff has been preaching long lenthen partials for a while. And I have seen on reddit screenshot of some like, for pec deck example. 1 full rep 1 half rep 1 full rep 1 half rep, come on, I think even he does not believe in this xd
Jeff nipples actually made a short where he talked about how jacked he used to be and that’s he’s lost muscle. Maybe if he spends less time with his head up Milo’s ass and focuses on what he used to do which was bodybuilding, maybe he’ll actually gain muscle instead of losing it
Beard progress is on point! One good thing about “science versus bro” is that after enough time it all works out. If lengthened partials really worked so well, it wouldn’t take a “study” to figure that out. 125 years ago there was no study that showed lifting weights built muscle. People did it, got results, other people saw what they were doing and did that. All these “studies” are just abbreviated versions of that, which is kinda crazy when you think about it. Just because something gave you results over the course of a 15 week study doesn’t mean it will work long term. The only real study is what generally builds muscle on most people for years and years. And we’ve got that study…it’s been going on for about 125 years.
You mean the study that found that overhead tricep extensions caused 40% more tricep growth than pushdowns? My first thought when I read that was: how tf could a small substitution in exercise selection make such an astronomical difference in growth?
I like Dr. Pak for his research on minimal volume (4-6 sets per week for significant progress) and his straightforward powerbuilding programming that really is the best of both worlds. That stuff actually works in the real world.
Influencers chasing clicks (especially if done arrogantly / flippantly) can really make it hard for them to readdress past stances when newer / 'better' science studies come out. Some 'science' based influencers take a fairly neutral position (House of Hypertrophy IMO), but many just click bait and push more polarized stances for extra drama. It may help them in the short term, but I don't think it helps them in the long term (plus it just tends to have more polarized discussions). Some bro channels do this too... I feel like these channels (on both sides) are just entertainment now, not much educational value.
Absolutely, a lot of it just clicks/likes and playing the popularity/entertainment game which is fine if you're after the YT money - but those accounts cannot be trusted for information.
I like the look of the old school dorian yates programme you have on boostcamp mate. I'll deffo be giving that a go in the near future after I'm done with my current block!
To be fair, they brought this on themselves with their arrogance and general insufferability - just remember the NH vs dr. Milo Pencilwolf drama from last year. And I, as a petty bastard, quite enjoy this.
@theiceman7590 not bigger..but definitely stronger...405 squat atg for reps, el 2 plate ohp, etc Milo arms are horrible though...he really needs to work on his arms..makes him look dyel
To be honest it's completely fine being wrong as long as you are learning. But this means that they shouldn't present everything new that they suspect to be amazing as it's already confirmed to be amazing. If they do believe that, they should work on their scientific objectiveness. I never really cared much about lengthened partials myself but I guess the vocality of it can really brainwash people. If someone says something with authority and has some reasons to display it, he can convince people easily. That can be dangerous.
Totally agree, being genuinely ignorant is actually a blessing. It usually comes with humility and a willingness to learn. Being arrogant however varnish proofs the mind ability to aborb ideas.
Hey faz. I had been neglecting my limb biased compound lifts. Lots of favoring tricep pushdowns and stuff like that. Found your channel. About 2 months ago. Been putting more emphasis on rows and dips and such and my lateral head is growing properly now. Also my rear delts are finally coming up, even after training reverse pec dec very hard for a while. I am trying to achieve an arm dominant physique but I let my fear blind me. VERY GRATEFUL ❤
Great to hear! Yeah I think for certain bodytypes and levels of advancement isolation work might not produce as much as just focusing on overall body size. Glad it's working out for you dude
I’ve graduated university and having to do my own research I for sure know a lot of research can be garbage. Too many of the science based crowd appeal to authority on research that has little p value significance, and to be honest lifting is way more experienced based than simply scientific. I am going to take my time to experiment more from the guy who has the better physique development. It’s like if music theory crowd started to tell musicians who grew a lot through experience they are playing wrong and here’s why, yet they miss out on the relevant information.
Here’s my main beef with LPs. Even if they are superior the full RoM for a given target muscle (and I’m not convinced about that), this ignores the muscles worked in the contracted position. So for a row sure LPs may target the lats as well as full RoM. But does the contracted part of a row work the lats or different muscles? If different muscles then there’s benefits to doing full RoM from an efficiency standpoint alone. Different rules may apply for a biceps curl of course
@@Fazlifts I agree, I think even if it may not necessarily be as hypertrophic as the lengthened position per say, there does seem to be a difference in the quality of muscle and the detail of bodybuilders who do a lot of contraction work. Just going off sensation clearly something distinct is happening when you train in the shortened position
But lengthened partials did work. They are as good as full rom. So it is just another tool in the toolbox. I dont get why everyone is so mad about the results when all we got out of it is more options. Personally i loved it as i cant lock out my triceps on some excercises without some pain and im glad to know im not missing out ( though my arms are growing so i did not NEED the results but good to know nontheless)
"But lengthened partials did work" You're presenting this statement as If I said something to the contrary. I said exactly that. Training does generally work. "I dont get why everyone is so mad about the results" I don't think I came across as mad. George I know you're not a troll, you and I have interacted before I remember your name. But the way you've presented this comment here is unneccesarily inflammatory. Look yes, you are on the internet and words can just be thrown out there without consequence or thought but you know full well these statements do not reflect what I actually said or did in the video so this comes across as little rude. You might not have meant that and I understand if you didn't, but remember you are interacting with a real person here. These are not just words into the ether. So have a good day, and relax a little.
If the problem really was people following a new trend blindly, like lengthened partials… Not ideal but at least they work somewhat. The real problem is many people follow any kind of conspiracy theory, like elections being stolen without evidence. And for the so-called science based hypertrophy… The typical study length is 8 weeks and the typical muscle mass gain reported is around 5%. And that is even in studies of experienced lifters. Extrapolate this rate of gains to 52 weeks… it’s an eye opener to how valid this kind of research really is.
Truth is that there’s so many significant variables that even when you address some of the critics with the methodology you can still end up with an invalid result
To me it seems like all the problems occur on other areas of science can be also seen in the domain of exercise science, specifically in how the content creators communicate. If someone has actually been through graduate school in any area, they should have noticed that how these studies cannot be as conclusive as some people describe in the youtube videos. Plus if it involves human participants in action it is very hard to generalize the results since a lot of practical issues are ignored since they have to limit the adjustable variables. And yet there are content creators on the platform which act like few studies on some topic can conclude a discussion.
Sad to hear you come across people that are paralysed with overthinking and too much information. I tell anyone to keep it simple, stretch a muscle, contract a muscle. Do this in a few variations that give different angles and/or strengths curves. I also have that annoying human trait that can lead to trying to be great stopping you being good. So I need to remind myself of this advice
The "science based methods" can't have much to do with training. It seems to be about who you like to watch on YT or insta, "goodies" & "baddies". I, of course, exempt the number one "baddie" from criticism, our Lord and Saviour Lyle McDonald - praise his name - for he did see the works of the children of Israetel, and did smite them, justly.
Training has WAY too many variables to isolate it in a lab. Im a teacher, and it’s the same way with teaching. “Science based people” don’t want to hear this, but not everything can be replicated in a lab.
It showed a slight advantage for ful rom. And of course doing partials after full rom can help. It's just another intensity technique. There's a dozen other intensity techniques that work like that as well. Lengthened partials aren't bad, they're just overrated. Look at Dr Mike trying to jump on the trend with those ridiculous lying curls😅
Hello Fazlifts, would you say it is a good idea to run The Tactician program first over The Wizard to focus on gaining some baseline strength first? In the past I lifted for over 2 years with breaks inbetween, and now I want to start over but lost a lot of strength and feel like I am back to beginner level. For context I also play tennis so that is what I would do on rest days some of the rest days.
For most people Wizard will be the one to get and run. Tactician is a highly specialised Powerlifting routine. I'd only recommend that for powerlifters. Good luck and thank you for supporting my work
Hey faz. I've been struggling with working a construction job and working out. I only workout in the morning and have been doing the Wizard routine 3 times a week, but recovery is far from great. I've been wondering if getting the frequency down would help. Would a barbarian or a bodypart split be a better approach? Thanks in advance, love your content 💪
@@Buffbirdenjoyer so I think in the first instance you can/should drop everything down to 1 set. You see the body gets a lot of benefit from that first set and subsequent sets already suffer from diminishing returns. So if you don't have the recovery at the moment, just take that 1st set per exercise and move. Try that, I think it'll help.
Listening to the "science based" comunity is like listening to a child that is wrong and hard headed. All you can do is just ignore them. The only guys in that community i find reasonable are trexler, knuckles, and helms. The rest that are popular are just part of some strange cult.
Yeah for some of them it is the underserved arrogance, because you know when someone asks me 'what I think' of some of these guys my mind immediately goes to: 1) What have they achieved, condition, muscularity etc. Is it anything extraordinary? 2) Who have they coached? How many procards have they won? That thought process of actual real world results doesn't even come into the conversation, and that's how far brainwashed some of the nuthuggers are. It's insane that for some people who have been involved in the industry for perhaps only 5 years, their entire existence has been marred with 'full ROM, no LP, no frequent lifting muh MPS and on and on'.
Hey Faz, I have a question for you unrelated to the topic, but I wanted to ask if you think low reps like 5-6 are just as good for hypertrophy as 8+ reps? 8-12 is the ‘ideal’ rep range that the gym bros claim so wanted your opinion on it because I don’t trust science when it says 5-30 reps are all equal
I've experimented with it and I've found that different bodyparts and even exercises just seem to progress differently with different rep ranges. For most muscles in the upper body, I've definitely experienced better gains with lower reps, even sometimes under 5. I'd suggest you just experiment with it tbh. If you're consistently getting stronger at an exercise, keep with that rep range. If not, change it up.
If your joints can stand it, lower reps are typically 'easier' to work hard on. The higher the reps go the less your joints will limit you but the harder it is to actually fail. This is why smaller isolation exercises are typically done with higher reps, they're too joint intensive when done heavy so you end up with a very poor set. Sets of 30 are possible but for most people far too painful and cardiovascularly demanding to be useful.
I wouldn’t hold that against them but like Faz said you just have to look at their logic and how they respond to criticism. If they don’t respond well or admit they were ever wrong then they are garbage I agree
It's an age old dilemma isn't it, does a Coach need to have a physique themselves? Like great football coaches, do they need to have been great players? I think when it comes to coaching though, you do need to have produced a good body of work in others. If a well respected Coach has produced pro cards and put people on stage over a 25 year span, then some guy comes along and calls him an idiot because his views don't align with the latest research IMO I think we need to re-look at that research. So I think you're both right in a sense. For me when somebody asks me 'is that guy a good Coach?' I respond by asking 'who have they coached? how many have they put on stage?' these kind of questions. Because I've been a competitive athlete for 18 years AND i've coached a great many, put them on stage on the platform so my record stands against anyone and that's what I judge people against NOT the science.
It's a real shame. I remember when Milo Wolf first came on to the scene going on three years ago, he seemed to have so much potential. He was discussing new things, seemed like he was designing studies that could at least elucidate real insights. He then proceeded to become a volume groupie, present weak data as the new gospel and gaslight the industry for clicks and engagement. As DJ-Khaled wisely said, "Another one!".
Hehe yeah! Although you know like I remind people on this channel, when we refer to 'science' we're really only referring to a very small sliver of the exercise fitness community. It's just unfortunate that due to social media they are very vocal, and appear to represent a much larger representation than in reality. There are solid researchers like Fisher, Steele, Wernbom and many others who do very good research but simply aren't as vocal Nice channel you have mate, subbed
This group of researchers have misled in the same way as the bros they were trying to prove wrong, they played the game in just the same way, just positioned themselves differently, but both parties have grown big enough that they are not really held to account. If you want proof of this, V Shred still exists....
It would be nice if we were, I mean I think MY youtube audience is wising up but unfortunately these cycles play themselves out because there are always fresh, young and gullible audiences waiting to prove their elders wrong
Brad's tendency to use soyjacks to represent the opposing view as a science guy is quite ironic. They literally don't have nuance to them. He should just stick to being the messenger of data and doing good studies.
Appreciate the passion. But if you are referring to the study that Dr Pak, Mio Wolf and Jeff Nippard conducted. The study showed that lengthened partials are just as effective as full rom, not better but just as good. (Unlike the 52 set study, which was only done on beginners) Can tell that you really care Faz, and I agree with the message overall keep sharing it!
@@RDbodybuildingreardelt If somebody takes that as a cue to do lots of lengthened partials they need their bumps felt. Mike can safely dust off the Team Full ROM Ts.
Ahhh well actually yes I do think that's coming - I think the latest study showed we've under valued the squeeze position I personally still include a focus on the squeeze in my own training, because it's always worked for me
People are weird man, Jason Gallant was always doing partials for decades and people mocked him. But now all the sheep jump on the train because soyience 😂
Agreed I don't know if this is a societal problem. I've certainly noticed in my lifetime there has been a trend to move away from relying on experience to relying on whatever is new and young. This is in all fields.
I take the same stand as yourself. I don't believe any of it for a second. The whole scientific subject of muscle building is redundant and bordeline pointless. I don't see how any of it will change your physique if you understand the basics. Pretty much mental masturbation
Doesnt surprise me one bit, never liked the "science" part about bodybuilding. Always looked very dogmatic and very anti scientific to me. What I also noticed is that lifters who are overly focused on the scientific details always look like shit. Also who is winning these bodybuilding competitions? Definitely not people who are focused on these "science" fads. They are bro's who use the tried and tested methods.
Three Free Training Programs On Boostcamp: www.boostcamp.app/#fazlifts
My Training Fundamentals Playlist: ruclips.net/p/PLcBzFSqsHKhs5muajYxG70uCcwGJ8IV3h
eBooks: fazlifts.co.uk/collections/e-books
Coaching Enquiries: docs.google.com/forms/d/15_F8NS9vWIZUGlPXv-jGeFO9vVCyEKUFTmwuJo3RHlA/viewform?edit_requested=true
If I ever get the sense that someone involved in a study *wants* one result over another, or is disappointed in a null finding, to me that seems decidedly unscientific.
Absolutely and it's so hard to have these conversations without actually calling people out, we want to maintain civility of course. But at the same time this has been going on for long enough, and peoples time is definitely being wasted by the years in some cases.
Researchers saying they're not biased, that's a more of a red flag to me. Everyone is biased and expects some kind of result... and that's fine. That's why we have RCT's. That's why double blind exists. That's why we need peers (that have another bias) that examine or repeat the research. This problem has been around for ages and science has found ways to make sure it doesn't influence the results. The current problem is that a lot of studies (especially in medicine) are not even published when the desired results aren't proven true. That's not what Milo & co have done, they actually published a result that didn't favor their presuppositions.
GVS you should do a collab with the goat Lyle McDonald
To quote a misquote of Kant: “If the truth would kill them, let them die.”
People who are honest and truth seeking welcome corrections and having their mistakes pointed out. Public figures especially should have their content named and shamed, publicly, if it is leading to millions of people wasting time, money, effort etc and getting injured in the process of following bad or half-true advice.
Those who seek truth will embrace the criticism and feedback. Those who are charlatans and have agendas will react poorly and show their true colours.
Scientific findings are temporary, bro science is eternal
In Rich Piana we trust
The PhD grifters are a disgrace
"I don't play the RUclips game"
*drops mic*
12:17 I highly recommend Lyle MacDonald-he’s hilarious 😂. In my experience, the best natural lifters are often the most open-minded. Ironically, those in the science-based community, who should be the most objective, don’t always live up to that standard, even though that’s what their field is supposed to be about.
My biggest issue, besides what Faz talks about, is that it takes away the art of this sport. I can’t even ask the gym bro with 20 years of experience who’s bigger than me what worked for him and pick his brain, just because there’s no study to back it up. Other sports aren’t like this.
"I can’t even ask the gym bro with 20 years of experience who’s bigger than me what worked for him and pick his brain, just because there’s no study to back it up"
Truer words have never been spoken.
The beard is looking CLEAN 👌
Tryin' to be like you bro! Thanks!
“There’s a big difference between being a coach and larping as one on RUclips,” that resonated with me heavily. 🙏🏽
🙌
You look like Sylvester Stallone and speak like a national geographic documentary narrator
1:43 - the fact that there's even such a thing as "research celebrities" in this space is a problem in itself tbh. There's no antidote that comes to mind, that's just how it is with social media now. Just thought it was worth mentioning.
8:08 - I'm very eager for more Daniel & Jack lore 😂
Yep, it's also concerning that they can't see that themselves and actually play on it. There's supposed to be no conflict of interest.
They don’t call him “Faz the Wise” for no reason.
I love the short intro clip... I thought you were just coming in hot from the jump.
#IYKYK the beard IS my introduction to conversations now! I walk into a room and just GO!
Great video Faz. I started training with my old man and he taught me the basics. Coupled with my genetics I’ve done well. Recently got into fitness RUclips last year and I’d be mortified as a beginner trying to get started with all the information out there and which is spread by people who are intent on making $$ . It’s a vicious cycle.
The best way to start, I envy you.
Too many scientists have forgotten what the scientific method is i.e. to start with a hypothesis and go where the evidence takes you. These days it's more about starting with a conclusion and back-filling the evidence...
I won't mention names, but I have my doubts about some of the 'in-crowd' in sports science. There's followers to build and money to be made by championing false information with pseudo science.
I once heard sth super interesting. Im just gonna paraphrase a bit. It basically went like the more science a scientiest does the less time for social media he has. Thats why you usually dont see top researchers on social media. And looking at the current landscape of exercise science on socials that is more true than ever
Great video Faz. I have noticed this with Jeff Nippardi. When this lengthend partials thing got out, I think 1-2 months later he started selling 3 different PDF books/workouts with lengthned partials included, all of them priced around 30$ I think. They don't care if it works or not, they just want to make $$$
Holy s**t wow, I didn't know that. I don't really follow him. But wow, man. That's crazy.
@@Fazlifts This was a while ago becuase Jeff has been preaching long lenthen partials for a while. And I have seen on reddit screenshot of some like, for pec deck example. 1 full rep 1 half rep 1 full rep 1 half rep, come on, I think even he does not believe in this xd
Jeff nipples actually made a short where he talked about how jacked he used to be and that’s he’s lost muscle. Maybe if he spends less time with his head up Milo’s ass and focuses on what he used to do which was bodybuilding, maybe he’ll actually gain muscle instead of losing it
Beard progress is on point! One good thing about “science versus bro” is that after enough time it all works out. If lengthened partials really worked so well, it wouldn’t take a “study” to figure that out. 125 years ago there was no study that showed lifting weights built muscle. People did it, got results, other people saw what they were doing and did that. All these “studies” are just abbreviated versions of that, which is kinda crazy when you think about it. Just because something gave you results over the course of a 15 week study doesn’t mean it will work long term. The only real study is what generally builds muscle on most people for years and years. And we’ve got that study…it’s been going on for about 125 years.
Love this, and yes that 'study' should not be discounted from the conversation. It's the best one going!
Remember when that overhead triceps extension study came out and everyone lost their minds? Faz was one of the only guys with the sanity check.
Yep, I did! I'm still very sceptical of it too!
No what was the controversy ?
You mean the study that found that overhead tricep extensions caused 40% more tricep growth than pushdowns? My first thought when I read that was: how tf could a small substitution in exercise selection make such an astronomical difference in growth?
I like Dr. Pak for his research on minimal volume (4-6 sets per week for significant progress) and his straightforward powerbuilding programming that really is the best of both worlds.
That stuff actually works in the real world.
Influencers chasing clicks (especially if done arrogantly / flippantly) can really make it hard for them to readdress past stances when newer / 'better' science studies come out. Some 'science' based influencers take a fairly neutral position (House of Hypertrophy IMO), but many just click bait and push more polarized stances for extra drama. It may help them in the short term, but I don't think it helps them in the long term (plus it just tends to have more polarized discussions). Some bro channels do this too... I feel like these channels (on both sides) are just entertainment now, not much educational value.
The truth is that the Science of bodybuilding is 95-99% null finding.
So there's nothing much to play youtube game with.
Absolutely, a lot of it just clicks/likes and playing the popularity/entertainment game which is fine if you're after the YT money - but those accounts cannot be trusted for information.
BroScience
In my experience the Bros are the biggest and strongest in the gym probably because they just show up and kick ass every day.
Pak's recent wheeze was to reinvent Conjugate - this time with MOARSCIENCE
Can’t wait for Lyle’s video on this…
Get em’ Faz. Thank you for encouraging proper communication and discussion.
Exactly! Why can't we all be civilised, peoples time is precious
I like the look of the old school dorian yates programme you have on boostcamp mate. I'll deffo be giving that a go in the near future after I'm done with my current block!
Straight out of the 00s!
To be fair, they brought this on themselves with their arrogance and general insufferability - just remember the NH vs dr. Milo Pencilwolf drama from last year.
And I, as a petty bastard, quite enjoy this.
Milo was literally defending powerbuilding and doing the barbell lifts for fun..NH was against it
@@slee2695 that was a pointless debate between two douches
Pencilwolf is bigger than NH though?
@theiceman7590 not bigger..but definitely stronger...405 squat atg for reps, el 2 plate ohp, etc
Milo arms are horrible though...he really needs to work on his arms..makes him look dyel
@@slee2695 hes heavier and leaner. Plus hes tall and lanky which is why his arms look smaller than they are.
To be honest it's completely fine being wrong as long as you are learning. But this means that they shouldn't present everything new that they suspect to be amazing as it's already confirmed to be amazing. If they do believe that, they should work on their scientific objectiveness. I never really cared much about lengthened partials myself but I guess the vocality of it can really brainwash people. If someone says something with authority and has some reasons to display it, he can convince people easily. That can be dangerous.
Totally agree, being genuinely ignorant is actually a blessing. It usually comes with humility and a willingness to learn.
Being arrogant however varnish proofs the mind ability to aborb ideas.
Hey faz. I had been neglecting my limb biased compound lifts. Lots of favoring tricep pushdowns and stuff like that. Found your channel. About 2 months ago. Been putting more emphasis on rows and dips and such and my lateral head is growing properly now. Also my rear delts are finally coming up, even after training reverse pec dec very hard for a while. I am trying to achieve an arm dominant physique but I let my fear blind me. VERY GRATEFUL ❤
Great to hear!
Yeah I think for certain bodytypes and levels of advancement isolation work might not produce as much as just focusing on overall body size. Glad it's working out for you dude
I’ve graduated university and having to do my own research I for sure know a lot of research can be garbage. Too many of the science based crowd appeal to authority on research that has little p value significance, and to be honest lifting is way more experienced based than simply scientific. I am going to take my time to experiment more from the guy who has the better physique development. It’s like if music theory crowd started to tell musicians who grew a lot through experience they are playing wrong and here’s why, yet they miss out on the relevant information.
Here’s my main beef with LPs. Even if they are superior the full RoM for a given target muscle (and I’m not convinced about that), this ignores the muscles worked in the contracted position. So for a row sure LPs may target the lats as well as full RoM. But does the contracted part of a row work the lats or different muscles? If different muscles then there’s benefits to doing full RoM from an efficiency standpoint alone. Different rules may apply for a biceps curl of course
Yeah I think the contracted position is being slept on.
The research is clearly pretty bad.
@@Fazlifts I agree, I think even if it may not necessarily be as hypertrophic as the lengthened position per say, there does seem to be a difference in the quality of muscle and the detail of bodybuilders who do a lot of contraction work. Just going off sensation clearly something distinct is happening when you train in the shortened position
But lengthened partials did work.
They are as good as full rom. So it is just another tool in the toolbox.
I dont get why everyone is so mad about the results when all we got out of it is more options.
Personally i loved it as i cant lock out my triceps on some excercises without some pain and im glad to know im not missing out ( though my arms are growing so i did not NEED the results but good to know nontheless)
"But lengthened partials did work"
You're presenting this statement as If I said something to the contrary. I said exactly that. Training does generally work.
"I dont get why everyone is so mad about the results"
I don't think I came across as mad.
George I know you're not a troll, you and I have interacted before I remember your name. But the way you've presented this comment here is unneccesarily inflammatory.
Look yes, you are on the internet and words can just be thrown out there without consequence or thought but you know full well these statements do not reflect what I actually said or did in the video so this comes across as little rude. You might not have meant that and I understand if you didn't, but remember you are interacting with a real person here. These are not just words into the ether.
So have a good day, and relax a little.
Never came acroos someone being so mature in their replies on internet.
@@Fazlifts
If the problem really was people following a new trend blindly, like lengthened partials…
Not ideal but at least they work somewhat.
The real problem is many people follow any kind of conspiracy theory, like elections being stolen without evidence.
And for the so-called science based hypertrophy…
The typical study length is 8 weeks and the typical muscle mass gain reported is around 5%. And that is even in studies of experienced lifters. Extrapolate this rate of gains to 52 weeks… it’s an eye opener to how valid this kind of research really is.
Truth is that there’s so many significant variables that even when you address some of the critics with the methodology you can still end up with an invalid result
To me it seems like all the problems occur on other areas of science can be also seen in the domain of exercise science, specifically in how the content creators communicate. If someone has actually been through graduate school in any area, they should have noticed that how these studies cannot be as conclusive as some people describe in the youtube videos. Plus if it involves human participants in action it is very hard to generalize the results since a lot of practical issues are ignored since they have to limit the adjustable variables. And yet there are content creators on the platform which act like few studies on some topic can conclude a discussion.
Well, well, well….
The test of time never fails!
Fantastic video and explanation!
Bros are an endangered species. We need bros to come back. Guys doing the eccentric Nippard super ROM reverse pec deck flys are a dime a dozen
Sad to hear you come across people that are paralysed with overthinking and too much information. I tell anyone to keep it simple, stretch a muscle, contract a muscle. Do this in a few variations that give different angles and/or strengths curves. I also have that annoying human trait that can lead to trying to be great stopping you being good. So I need to remind myself of this advice
Well said Faz, respect is so important
The "science based methods" can't have much to do with training. It seems to be about who you like to watch on YT or insta, "goodies" & "baddies". I, of course, exempt the number one "baddie" from criticism, our Lord and Saviour Lyle McDonald - praise his name - for he did see the works of the children of Israetel, and did smite them, justly.
Hahahah love it
Training has WAY too many variables to isolate it in a lab. Im a teacher, and it’s the same way with teaching. “Science based people” don’t want to hear this, but not everything can be replicated in a lab.
Well well well, how the turn tables has...
It showed that they can work as well as full range of motion. It shows that half reps at the end of your set can lead to additional gains.
It showed a slight advantage for ful rom. And of course doing partials after full rom can help. It's just another intensity technique. There's a dozen other intensity techniques that work like that as well. Lengthened partials aren't bad, they're just overrated. Look at Dr Mike trying to jump on the trend with those ridiculous lying curls😅
Cheddar it might be worth reading the paper, and not relying on others.
Different ranges all have their benefits, not just the lengthened portion. But I do believe in partials
Hello Fazlifts, would you say it is a good idea to run The Tactician program first over The Wizard to focus on gaining some baseline strength first? In the past I lifted for over 2 years with breaks inbetween, and now I want to start over but lost a lot of strength and feel like I am back to beginner level. For context I also play tennis so that is what I would do on rest days some of the rest days.
For most people Wizard will be the one to get and run.
Tactician is a highly specialised Powerlifting routine. I'd only recommend that for powerlifters.
Good luck and thank you for supporting my work
@@Fazlifts Thanks for your response, will give Wizard a shot then!
Hey faz. I've been struggling with working a construction job and working out. I only workout in the morning and have been doing the Wizard routine 3 times a week, but recovery is far from great. I've been wondering if getting the frequency down would help. Would a barbarian or a bodypart split be a better approach? Thanks in advance, love your content 💪
So are you currently training 3 x week, for 3 sets per bodypart each session?
@@Fazliftsyup. 8 exercises (including calves), 3 sets each, 3 times a week
@@Fazlifts yes sir!
@@Buffbirdenjoyer so I think in the first instance you can/should drop everything down to 1 set. You see the body gets a lot of benefit from that first set and subsequent sets already suffer from diminishing returns. So if you don't have the recovery at the moment, just take that 1st set per exercise and move. Try that, I think it'll help.
@@Fazliftsthx I'll try that and see the results🤝
Good message !
bro got beard
It only makes common sense that training a muscle through it's entire range of motion would be the way to go. That way there is no margin for error.
To be honest I think there's a lot to be said for any kind of training, whether full range or even mid-range or shortened range.
@@Fazlifts True. Doing anything is, in all probable scenarios, always better than doing nothing.
@@bigfoot14eee99 Yeah exactly, these are very minor differences people are obsessive over and they're still not well understood.
Listening to the "science based" comunity is like listening to a child that is wrong and hard headed. All you can do is just ignore them. The only guys in that community i find reasonable are trexler, knuckles, and helms. The rest that are popular are just part of some strange cult.
Yeah for some of them it is the underserved arrogance, because you know when someone asks me 'what I think' of some of these guys my mind immediately goes to:
1) What have they achieved, condition, muscularity etc. Is it anything extraordinary?
2) Who have they coached? How many procards have they won?
That thought process of actual real world results doesn't even come into the conversation, and that's how far brainwashed some of the nuthuggers are. It's insane that for some people who have been involved in the industry for perhaps only 5 years, their entire existence has been marred with 'full ROM, no LP, no frequent lifting muh MPS and on and on'.
Hey Faz, I have a question for you unrelated to the topic, but I wanted to ask if you think low reps like 5-6 are just as good for hypertrophy as 8+ reps? 8-12 is the ‘ideal’ rep range that the gym bros claim so wanted your opinion on it because I don’t trust science when it says 5-30 reps are all equal
I've experimented with it and I've found that different bodyparts and even exercises just seem to progress differently with different rep ranges. For most muscles in the upper body, I've definitely experienced better gains with lower reps, even sometimes under 5. I'd suggest you just experiment with it tbh. If you're consistently getting stronger at an exercise, keep with that rep range. If not, change it up.
If your joints can stand it, lower reps are typically 'easier' to work hard on. The higher the reps go the less your joints will limit you but the harder it is to actually fail.
This is why smaller isolation exercises are typically done with higher reps, they're too joint intensive when done heavy so you end up with a very poor set.
Sets of 30 are possible but for most people far too painful and cardiovascularly demanding to be useful.
@@Fazlifts understood 🫡
I'm still waiting for beanies and zip up hoodies!😂
Also there latest volume studies is bunk.
All of these science bros have literally no physique to speak of yet seem to be the most opinionated voice in the room.
I wouldn’t hold that against them but like Faz said you just have to look at their logic and how they respond to criticism. If they don’t respond well or admit they were ever wrong then they are garbage I agree
It's an age old dilemma isn't it, does a Coach need to have a physique themselves? Like great football coaches, do they need to have been great players?
I think when it comes to coaching though, you do need to have produced a good body of work in others. If a well respected Coach has produced pro cards and put people on stage over a 25 year span, then some guy comes along and calls him an idiot because his views don't align with the latest research IMO I think we need to re-look at that research.
So I think you're both right in a sense.
For me when somebody asks me 'is that guy a good Coach?' I respond by asking 'who have they coached? how many have they put on stage?' these kind of questions. Because I've been a competitive athlete for 18 years AND i've coached a great many, put them on stage on the platform so my record stands against anyone and that's what I judge people against NOT the science.
They tell you how to train so they don't have to
It's a real shame. I remember when Milo Wolf first came on to the scene going on three years ago, he seemed to have so much potential. He was discussing new things, seemed like he was designing studies that could at least elucidate real insights. He then proceeded to become a volume groupie, present weak data as the new gospel and gaslight the industry for clicks and engagement. As DJ-Khaled wisely said, "Another one!".
Science gets it wrong in a much smarter and intellectual way 🤓
Hehe yeah!
Although you know like I remind people on this channel, when we refer to 'science' we're really only referring to a very small sliver of the exercise fitness community. It's just unfortunate that due to social media they are very vocal, and appear to represent a much larger representation than in reality. There are solid researchers like Fisher, Steele, Wernbom and many others who do very good research but simply aren't as vocal
Nice channel you have mate, subbed
@10:26 was an indirect shot at Milo Wolf
The biggest clown of them all.
Yeah I'm not taking shots at anyone, I'm too old for that but I do want people to do better.
Good thumbnail, good video, spot on. Dont waste my time with science nonsense. Thanks faz
This group of researchers have misled in the same way as the bros they were trying to prove wrong, they played the game in just the same way, just positioned themselves differently, but both parties have grown big enough that they are not really held to account. If you want proof of this, V Shred still exists....
Why would you use the same guys that make a living off of lengthened partials to do the new study? Surely they won't be biased, right?
The community is wising up. The more science literate we become, ironically, the less The Science©️ crowd becomes relevant.
Time to move on from the silly debates about volume, range of motion etc. Results come from safe, intense, recoverable training. No more no less.
It would be nice if we were, I mean I think MY youtube audience is wising up but unfortunately these cycles play themselves out because there are always fresh, young and gullible audiences waiting to prove their elders wrong
I watched the video about the new study and honestly? I think it REEKED of confirmation bias.
Imagine a community that is supposed to see everything scientifically and objectivelly doing the opposite, quite interesting.
Right!
faz in his hooligan phase
I'm outta control!
Brad's tendency to use soyjacks to represent the opposing view as a science guy is quite ironic. They literally don't have nuance to them. He should just stick to being the messenger of data and doing good studies.
'Soyjack' yes, thank you. That's the word I was looking for!
Appreciate the passion. But if you are referring to the study that Dr Pak, Mio Wolf and Jeff Nippard conducted. The study showed that lengthened partials are just as effective as full rom, not better but just as good. (Unlike the 52 set study, which was only done on beginners) Can tell that you really care Faz, and I agree with the message overall keep sharing it!
That's "a description of events" but you've written it like it refutes something Faz has said.
Not really sure what your point is.
@@RDbodybuildingreardelt If somebody takes that as a cue to do lots of lengthened partials they need their bumps felt.
Mike can safely dust off the Team Full ROM Ts.
For science, the only content I consume nowadays is from DDS. The rest is just bullshit and simply uses "science" for personal gain.
The beard suits you
Protect ya neck 👐💪
👐👐👐
U damn chad with beard
❤
Suit the beard bro 👌 squeeze faze bandwagon incoming?...
Thanks! I'm not sure what the second part means?
@@Fazlifts the lengthened partials cash grab is over, upcoming squeeze focused cash grab incoming?
Ahhh well actually yes I do think that's coming - I think the latest study showed we've under valued the squeeze position
I personally still include a focus on the squeeze in my own training, because it's always worked for me
People are weird man, Jason Gallant was always doing partials for decades and people mocked him. But now all the sheep jump on the train because soyience 😂
Agreed
I don't know if this is a societal problem. I've certainly noticed in my lifetime there has been a trend to move away from relying on experience to relying on whatever is new and young. This is in all fields.
I take the same stand as yourself. I don't believe any of it for a second.
The whole scientific subject of muscle building is redundant and bordeline pointless.
I don't see how any of it will change your physique if you understand the basics. Pretty much mental masturbation
Biased crap designed research vs The based chads
Doesnt surprise me one bit, never liked the "science" part about bodybuilding. Always looked very dogmatic and very anti scientific to me. What I also noticed is that lifters who are overly focused on the scientific details always look like shit. Also who is winning these bodybuilding competitions? Definitely not people who are focused on these "science" fads. They are bro's who use the tried and tested methods.
Very true
Same thing with the pandemic
Nice one