Muscle for Life with Mike Matthews - Brad Schoenfeld on Optimal Rest Times for Muscle Gain

Episode Date: December 4, 2024

How long should you rest between sets to maximize muscle growth? And how does this vary based on exercise type, training intensity, and fitness level? In this episode, I welcome back Brad Schoenfeld, PhD, an internationally renowned fitness expert, author, educator, lecturer, and researcher, who’s published over 300 peer-reviewed research articles on exercise science and sports nutrition. We discuss the importance of rest intervals for muscle and strength gain, with Brad offering practical, evidence-based tips for lifters of all levels. In this interview, you’ll learn . . . The ideal rest period length for muscle growth and performance Differences in rest requirements for trained vs. untrained individuals The impact of training to failure on rest needs How to auto-regulate rest periods for effective workouts The advantages of short rest periods And more . . . So, if you'd like to optimize your gains and understand how rest impacts your training, click play and join the conversation. — Timestamps: (00:00) Intro (05:13) New Meta Analysis on Hypertrophy (10:20) Untrained vs. Trained Insights (11:30) Training to Failure Effects (12:06) Reps & Hypertrophy Importance (13:57) Individual Training Prescriptions (17:05) Indicators for Next Set Readiness (18:43) Pairing Sets Strategy (21:38) Programming Supersets (23:30) Best Exercises for Supersets (30:34) Thoughts on Pre-Exhaustion (36:53) How to Try Pre-Exhaustion (45:09) Short Rest & Hypertrophy (50:52) Shortening Rest in Training Blocks — Mentioned on the Show: Brad Schoenfeld Instagram Brad Schoenfeld X Creatine Gummies The Little Black Book of Workout Motivation

If you're an intermediate to an advanced lifter and I say, all right, when you feel ready, go back and we'll do another set. That has shown to have just as good effects as resting two minutes or more. And it's efficient, like in certain cases, depending on the type of exercise, whether it's single or multi, it can be even more efficient way because people seem to have an intuitive sense as to when they're ready without compromising their results. And certainly that's the way I approach my own training. I don't sit there with a watch and say, right, it's two minutes, I can do my next set. Hello there and welcome to Muscle

for Life. I am your host, Mike Matthews. Thank you for joining me today for a new interview with a repeat guest, Mr. Brad Schoenfeld, PhD who is an internationally renowned fitness expert, author, educator, lecturer, and researcher who has published over 300 peer-reviewed studies on exercise science and sports nutrition. And in today's episode, Brad is going to be talking about all of the subtleties

related to the relationship between rest times in between sets and muscle growth and specifically how to set up your training program how to set up your rest times to maximize muscle hypertrophy and so in this interview he's going to explain things like why you want to make sure that you are resting enough in between sets if your goal is to maximize muscle growth. And then Brad is going to talk about what is enough for you because that is going to depend on what you're doing and depend on your training experience and depend on your goals and even on your time constraints. How much time do you have to be in the gym?

And then Brad also talks about shorter rest periods, which are not optimal for maximizing muscle growth, but which do have their uses. We will tackle today's episode shortly, but first I need to tell you about creatine gummies that I use every day in addition to creatine powder simply because they are delicious. And those are the creatine gummies from my sports nutrition company, Legion. You probably know that you don't need supplements to build muscle, to lose fat, to get healthy. But the right ones can help. Like creatine, for example, which is the most studied molecule in all of sports

nutrition and hundreds of studies confirm that it can safely boost muscle and strength gains and improve muscular endurance, reduce muscle damage and soreness from exercise, preserve lean mass and strength when dieting, when you're restricting calories to lose fat and there's even new research that suggests that creatine supports brain health and cognition as well. And that's why my sports nutrition company, Legion, just released creatine gummies, which sounds like a gimmick,

but many people actually prefer gummies over powders and pills for a few reasons. One, there's no dosing and mixing with liquid, so there's nothing to clean up. Two, gummies are portable, so that means they're great for on the go, they're great for traveling and so forth. And three, they are a deliciously different,

and I hate to say the word, I'm groaning inside, vibe. They're like creatine candies. Now, creatine is not going to help you pack on brain shrinking amounts of muscle in 30 days flat. It's not gonna add another plate or two to the bar, but it will help you train harder. It will help you recover better.

It will help you gain muscle and strength a bit faster. And it will do those things without any of the unwanted side effects associated with other performance enhancing compounds. And so, yeah, you should buy my creatine gummies because you'll love them, because it's science. And you can get them over at bylegion.com. That's B-U-Y-L-E-G-I-O-N.com slash creatine gummies. And because you are a valued podcast listener, you can save 20% on your first order with the coupon code MUSSLE. Again, that's bylegion.com slash creatine gummies,

save 20% with the coupon code MUSSLE. Hey Brad, it's good to see you again. Great to see you, Mark. Looking forward to today's discussion, get into the details on rest times in strength training, which is, you see a lot of simple prescriptions, which are fine, especially maybe for people who are newer, you know, if you're trying to gain muscle, just rest a couple minutes, whatever, two to three minutes. If you're trying to maybe burn a little bit more energy and you're trying to gain muscle, just rest a couple minutes, whatever, two to three minutes. If you're trying to maybe burn a little bit more energy and you're trying to get through

your workout faster, maybe then rest less. But in today's discussion, I wanted to get you on the show to discuss new research that you conducted with others, with colleagues on this topic in particular, and get into some of the nuance, as they say, through a practical lens. So people listening, hopefully at the end of the discussion, maybe there are some little tweaks that they can make in their own training to just make it a little bit more effective.

So let's just start at the top. If you want to, you can quickly discuss this meta-analysis that you conducted that talks about the influence specifically on hypertrophy, right? Because talking about strength would be maybe a slightly different discussion. Yeah, so for those who don't know a meta-analysis is when you pool all the results on a given topic, all the studies that have been done, results of the studies. And basically you're making one large study out of multiple small studies.

It's particularly important in a field such as exercise science because the sample sizes, the amount of subjects in most studies are relatively small because it's a very labor intensive process to carry out a training study. Hours and hours and hours. I mean we carry out resistance training studies. It's over a thousand man hours over the course of the study period, 10 weeks. And then funding too, right? I mean, it can be expensive too. Well, of course, funding comes into it as well. Maybe RFK wants to give money to help people get more jacked. That would be positive.

I'm not putting my eggs in that basket, but listen. But anyway, so we carried out this mate analysis and we looked at all studies that had one group that rested more and the other group rested less. So it was kind of a binary topic where the studies that were controlled where one group had more rest and the other group had less rest. And that was the focus of the study. And the findings were quite interesting. We found that at 60 seconds, resting only a minute, there was a notable, but relatively modest, but notable reduction in hypertrophy, or when I say reduction, it blunted the amount of growth that you can get. But once the study reached or once the rest interval reached 90 seconds, there was not seemingly any difference

in terms of the negative effects. We didn't notice negative effects between 90 seconds and two minutes, 90 seconds and three or four, anything above that. So there was kind of a cut point. Now I want to hesitate, or I want to make sure people don't just take that, oh well I have to do this rest 90 seconds. There's a lot of caveats to this and it's not a black and white. Mate analyses can't just quantify an exact point at which you're able to rest without losing gains. And what we had here was the studies, first of all there weren't that many studies on the topic, which kind of reduces the ability to draw strong inferences. I think we had 10 total studies that

were done that met our criteria, that had specific criteria that allowed us to investigate it. So that was part of it. But also, you're not able to specifically look at some of the higher versus lower and rest intervals one against the other. So I'm trying to articulate this in a way that is it's not too geeky. But anyway, it's when you're trying to statistically analyze a topic, you don't just say, all right, here's 90 seconds, now we're going to directly compare it with three minutes. It doesn't work that way. So there's ways that you have to try to extrapolate these inferences. And bottom line is, is that while we have some decent evidence that 90 seconds would be kind of a bottom lower threshold, I would say there are nuances to that. In

particular, we weren't able to subanalyze the type of exercise, so multi-joint for a single joint. There is some evidence in acute studies where, and we've carried one of them out, where two minutes rest did not show much difference from three minutes rest, but one minute, one did, and even 90 seconds tended to blunt the number of reps you could do, which seemingly would translate to a reduction in that perch. So I do think there is some nuance to this. And if you're asking me, my general rule probably would be

two minutes would be a safe bet, at least on multi-join. And I think if you're dealing with some of the more complex exercises, like squats, it might even be a little more. And I think there's also individual variability as far as this goes. And I mean, that would line up with probably the experience of many people listening. I mean, it certainly lines up with my experience.

Even two minutes take some sort of heavy squat type of exercise. And if I'm pushing close-ish to failure, two minutes, I'm going to perform probably a couple fewer reps compared to two and a half or maybe three minutes. So that is not surprising to people listening. Whereas if it's a biceps curl, I may not even notice the difference between a minute and a half and two minutes. Yeah. And another important caveat that I'd like to mention is that the vast majority of studies were in untrained subjects, which needs to be always taken into account that you can't necessarily extrapolate, generalize, other results in untrained subjects into those who have

resistance training experience. What relevant differences should people be thinking with when you're talking about untrained versus trained, like specifically in the context of rest times, what changes? Well, number one, you're able to use heavier loads. So that the absolute amount of weight you can use seemingly would, we can speculate, would have an effect on the amount of rest you might need. You could also speculate in the other realm that you might get greater buffering capacity. So we're talking generally in these studies, they're using 8 to 12 reps for the most part, sometimes a little higher rep ranges where you're going to have some acidosis.

These aren't very low rep, you know, three rep sets. And thus, if you're able to buffer as you start to train more you get greater buffering capacity where you're able to carry out first of the sets to a greater extent closer to failure but also you could look at it that you might be able to buffer in between sets that your buffering capacity would allow you to come back more quickly. Again this is a hypothetical we just don't know about. The heavier loads could offset that though, of course, where you're buffering, but it's just harder. What about how training to failure interacts with this?

That's another great point. So the vast majority of these studies trained at least a volitional failure where the subjects gave up, but they tried to push them. The vast majority of these studies, if you're not pushing towards failure, certainly you can rest short periods of time. So failure will reduce your ability to come back more quickly because you need more energy reserves to be repleted. And this may be obvious to at least some people listening, but it occurs to me that I should ask just mechanistically, why does being able to do more reps in subsequent sets

matter in terms of hypertrophy? Because what some people hear is that what's most important is that you just push closer, or that you push close to failure. And therefore, if you're resting, let's say, two minutes rather than two and a half minutes on a multi-joint exercise, and in those subsequent sets, you're going to get a couple fewer reps. As long as you're pushing close to failure,

the results should be more or less the same. I'm not saying that's a correct argument, but I just know that that... Yeah, so we just don't know. But again, that's why I tried to couch it in terms that it's conceivably could have negative effects, but conceivably volume, it's a function of volume. Volume load can be expressed in three ways.

You can look at it in terms of set volume, which is the way that we generally look at it, like most of research studies are focused on set volume, but you could also look at repetition volume, the total number of reps that are performed in a workout, and you can look at it in terms of volume load, which is sets times reps times the amount of weight that's used. And if you're not able to do as many reps or if you're going to have to use a lighter load to get the same amount of reps, your volume load is gonna decrease.

And there's some evidence that that may matter. There's other evidence that doesn't. So again, it's not clear. I don't wanna make it seem like this is a given, but it's something that at least needs to be considered. So mechanistically it's very difficult. People often think that we have all these answers through science, but we don't. Trying to tease out mechanisms is much harder

than just doing a study and seeing what the results are and trying to draw inferences from the results of a given intervention that's manipulating variables. Yeah, yeah, that makes sense. And in terms of individual prescriptions, so looking at practically what you think is most likely to work out best, I guess you could say under different circumstances, how do you go about, even in your own training or if you're training other people or creating programs for somebody, how do you go about thinking with practically prescribing rest

periods and you can take that in whatever direction you want. Even I mean, I know that a lot of people listening, they're on the spectrum of new to advanced. So if you want to talk specifically to for people who are newer, here's a way of going about it that is likely to work out well. And then as you become more advanced, here are some changes you may want to make. Yeah, I'll speak to the intermediate to advanced first. And my approach generally is to auto-regulate. I kind of throw all this. It's kind of nice to know about the different resticles, but

we do have some evidence. There's been a couple of acute studies. And again, it's just looking at the number of repetitions on IpertuV. Stay tuned. We actually are carrying out a study on this. But if you if you're an intermediate to an advanced lifter, and I say, stay tuned, we actually are carrying out a study on this. But if you're on intermediate to an advanced lifter and I say, all right, when you feel ready, go back and we'll do another set, that has shown to have just as good effects as resting two minutes or more. And it's efficient, like in certain cases, depending on the type of exercise, whether it's single or multi, it can be an even more efficient way because people seem to have an intuitive sense as to when they're

ready without compromising their results. And certainly that's the way I approach my own training. I don't sit there with a watch and say, right, it's two minutes, I can do my next set. It's a little more complicated with the newbies because they're generally not as in tune with their bodies yet. So I think this is where, I think to me, it makes sense to earn the side of caution and to have them do rest a minimum of two minutes on most sets.

Now, with that said, newbies generally, at least this is my general philosophy, you're not looking to maximize optimized results in a newbie. You're looking to what? You're looking to get form, basically to teach them movement patterns and to get their form right. So I think the issue here is that looking at the studies we've done as to how it impacts hyperchip is kind of secondary to what their actual goals should be under those circumstances. And I think, again, for me, what is more important is make sure that they're not too tired, whether that will compromise their form. If they're coming back in terms of trying to do another set when they're

fatigued, that can impair their ability to get that mind muscle, if you will, to perform the exercise in a proper way. And that's why I think structuring it. So this kind of a minimum of two minutes to me would be, I think indicative where they're able to come back without the fatigue. Similar approach to diet. It helps when people are new to energy balance and macronutrient balance to create a meal plan

or track for a period just to calibrate their expectations of food and portions and so forth. And in your training, and this may just be a, it's just a moment that you just know it, but when you say that, okay, you're auto-regulating and once you feel like you're ready to do your next set, is there anything specifically that you're paying attention to? Because I've had people ask this point specifically, like, should I be paying attention to my heart rate and when I feel that and how I'm breathing? Or is it literally just when I'll know it when I feel it? That's the way I do it. It's just, you know, like when you train, I've been training quite

a long time, you just kind of know, you just feel you're ready to approach your next set. Now, what I will say is that it doesn't hurt to rest longer for me. You're not going to lose gains from resting longer. But there's a time efficiency, of course, standpoint, so there's that trade-off. So you have to then start saying, well, what is my trade-off? And what I would say to that is you also can use

certain techniques to make workouts more time efficient. We actually just finished a study, which hopefully will be published soon, on superset training and did not compromise results. Now, there's certain limitations to what you can do with supersets, but we used agonist antagonist supersets, so like a press into a row,

biceps grow into a tricep press now, and did not compromise results. So to me, I think that is a potential strategy where you can reduce the rest and still get a more time efficient work out and time efficiency for many, I don't want to say most, but certainly many people is of paramount importance. It's listed as one of the primary barriers to exercise. And that was going to be the next thing I was going to ask about. So could you share some of the details of how you went about pairing these sets? And I mean, if you want to share details in the research too, and a question that I was going to ask specifically, was that also in untrained or

trained? No, this was a train we used to. Virtually all the studies from our lab are in train subjects. There's been a handful where we haven't. The only time generally in our lab where I will carry out a study on an untrained subject, if it's A, infeasible to do it in a trained subject, I'll give you an example there. We have a study now looking at technique, where one group is doing using external momentum, basically

they're using cheat reps. And the other group is doing very strict form. Well, we're studying adjusted biceps and triceps. I can't do that in a train. So I can't tell a trained subject for the next 10 weeks, you're just going to be doing biceps and triceps and you can't train the rest of your upper body. How many people are going to sign up for that? So, so well, if you need to lock them in a metabolic ward and have, you know, fiddle up with that. So that's a study that just doesn't make sense to carry that out and train subjects, we wouldn't get compliance, we wouldn't get subjects and

if we did, we wouldn't get compliance, they'd be sneaking out and doing the wrong thing. So that would be like another time was where we did a study on the mind muscle connection. And we want the people that had no preconceived notions as to what how to think about their training. So if we're going to do mind muscle connection, we don't know what someone is actually thinking. So we figured that it was best to have them as blank slates. But anyway, the vast majority of our studies are in train subjects.

This was, we did trying to remember specifics, but it was bicep curl, tricep press down, chest press, seated row, and leg curl, leg extension, I think were the six exercises. And we did them in sequence. And how did you time the, so was it just one right into the next and then was there a short? One right into the next then it was two minutes rest I believe. One minute rest. I'm forgetting the

exact, we do a lot of studies, so I'm forgetting this, we finished this now almost a year ago. So I forgot the exact setup that we use, but it was, I think one group got two minutes rest, the traditional group. The other, the super sec group, I think we went into the other and I think they got two minutes rest, but it could have been somewhat short in rest because the other leg was getting less rest. So I don't remember the specifics. But what I can tell you is that the superSec group finished the workout in 40 percent less time. This is by the way, preprint. You can go online and read the study.

If I'm done with this interview, I'll go and try to remember, go and read it and remember what we did. But yeah, it's been posted as a preprint. Just generally, if you are going to do such a workout, can you one, just explain if people don't understand the antagonist-agonist relationship, and then how you go about thinking about programming that workout,

so there's the muscle groups that you pair. But then there are also the exercise choices. It's one thing to do it, for example, with a leg extension or a leg curl, and it's another thing to try to do it with a barbell squat and anything else, you know? Yeah, so you got it exactly. You need to think about the exercise you're doing. That's why I said it's not... Well, you can integrate these concepts into a workout. Generally, if you're

doing a total body workout, it'll be difficult to do a full workout just the paired supersets. You could do supersets in other ways because you could do like a squat and then an upper body exercise would be an alternative to that. So it doesn't necessarily have to be agonist antagonist supersets. I want to make sure that is clear. But anyway, it's called a paired superset or an agonist antagonist superset. So muscles that have an agonist antagonist relationship is when one is doing the movement, the other is, so one is shortening the other is like you're doing a bicep curl, the triceps are the quote unquote the antagonistic muscle. And there's, I don't know how deep you want to get into this, but the antagonist actually is a,

especially in untrained subjects, it acts as a break. So the antagonist muscle actually hinders performance of the agonist muscle that is somewhat deactivated for the most part in trained subjects, which is again why when you're doing research in trained and untrained, there can be other things that enter into it. So anyway, that would be the strategy where you look at muscles that oppose each other and you do super sets for them. So biceps, triceps, quads, hamstrings, back and chest, the good examples of that. And are there preferential exercises if you're going to or if you're talking about some of

these smaller muscle groups just kind of pick whichever ones you like or? Well, I mean, certainly the single joint exercises lend themselves to it because it's gonna be less fatigue. If you're doing a squat like you talked about, the hamstrings will be, they're not, certainly not heavily involved. So a lot of people think that you're getting a lot of hamstring work, you're not. But there are enough where they're gonna be

somewhat fatigued and that can hinder your performance in that movement and vice versa. If you're going to do the hamstrings first, it potentially can to some extent impair the squatting that you might do. Not sure how much, but that's a consideration. So these are things that need to be considered. And you have to use Applied Anatomy after this is why having some knowledge of Applied Anatomy really can help. So yeah, you can get a book that that gives this information as long as it's a

good book. Yeah, I'm sure your book must go into that and I'll give you a book, but without knowing that the quality of the information, you got to be careful. And that's why being informed consumer, if you will, fitness consumer is very important. And the way that people typically see supersets done and maybe even, I mean, whether it's in a gym or on social media or whatever, it's either going to be the same muscle group, drop sets, giant sets, whatever, cluster sets, or it's just going to be kind of random. So what are your thoughts about, again, let's say supersets with the same muscle group

or supersetting muscle groups that have no obvious relationship? So supersetting the same muscle group is called pre-exhaustion training. Well, it would depend how you do it. Certainly, if you're gonna, I wouldn't do an incline press and a flat press. That would be kind of silly

because you get no reps, or you have to really reduce the weight. So that just doesn't make good sense. But over the years, I would see it typically it's the smaller muscle groups. And again, it's grabbing whatever dumbbells and then go into failure or close and then grabbing the lighter dumbbells and repeating it several times. Yeah. But generally, we'd be talking about doing like a pre-exhaust, which would be a leg extension and then doing a squat. So you pre-fatigue the quads and the idea would be that you then when you're squatting the quads would already be fatigued and the glutes then

if the glutes are failing first before your quads you're not going to have obviously good quad development. You'd get the qu to fail earlier, if that should go. And similarly, like doing a fly before a press would fatigue your pecs before the triceps would be fatigued if you do an bench press. And do you think that's a useful technique? We don't have good. So stay tuned.

Next semester, one of my students is carrying out what will be the first study and train subjects on the topic. So we'd like to think, yeah you know I know Mike, we've done several interviews and I think we've mentioned this before, but we'd like to think we have all these things studied you know every way to Sunday and it's just not the case, there's many topics that we still have little to sometimes no information on. So there's very little information that we have to go on. I don't have a strong opinion. So when you don't have good information, empirically, the research you divide, you go down to your next level, if you will, hierarchy, which would be logical

rationale. And there is a decent logical basis for it like I just mentioned but logic doesn't always translate into practice so I would say that you know at this point I don't have a strong opinion either way and we'll see. We will resume today's episode shortly but first I need to tell you about my best-selling fitness mindset manual for breaking through mental resistance and barriers, building unshakable discipline and keeping your goals alive when things get tough. It is called the Little Black Book of Workout Motivation. And while fitness is not everything, everything is harder if you aren't fit.

Because the muscle and strength that you gain from working out is less important than the person you become by working out. You become a person who understands that growing into the best version of themselves necessarily includes getting into great shape. And you become a person who never underestimates the power of simply believing in themselves and always looks for reasons to bet on their hand, you become a person who realizes that they can achieve far more than they thought they were capable of. And that's why I wrote the little black book of

Workout Motivation, to help you become that person by sharing insights from scientific research, compelling stories, and practical strategies for staying motivated when setbacks, failure, and self-doubt makes you want to give up. And so here's a sneak peek of what you will find inside the little black book of workout motivation. The what, when, where, if, then formula that will rewire your thinking for more consistency

inside and outside of the gym. Three simple questions that will reveal your true why for fitness and unlock a wellspring of motivation that will keep you going even when it's hard. How to stop sabotaging your personal growth habits with complaining and negativity and how to develop a solution-oriented mindset that will empower you to take action and keep taking action. Warren Buffett's two-list strategy for prioritizing your goals, eliminating distractions, and achieving laser focus and maximum productivity.

How to use productive pessimism to avoid what scientists call the positivity paradox, and cultivate a balanced mindset that will turn self-doubt into self-belief, and much more. So look, the bottom line is getting fit is like doing anything that most people fail at. It is harder than you think it will be. It will take longer than you think it will take.

You will make way more mistakes than you want to make. But there's also this, you can't fail unless you give up. So if you're feeling overwhelmed in your fitness, if you are struggling with laziness or procrastination or self doubt, if you are trying to reignite your passion for working out, and if you'd like some strategies for developing a resilient mindset that will empower you to stick with your fitness for the long haul, because that's the ultimate goal,

not just to get into shape, to stay in shape for the rest of our lives, then head over to Amazon Now and pick up a copy of the little black book of workout motivation and enjoy. And what's the anecdotal argument or what's your opinion on the anecdotal evidence that because you could find many examples of phenomena that have been born out in research that bodybuilders had concluded some time ago and that was just out of approaching it maybe with a scientific mindset and being observant and concluding that there seems

to be something here, something seems to be working about this. And then later it's kind of it's confirmed improper research. And on the topic of pre exhaustion, do you have any opinion on because like with anything you find two schools of thought, some people think it's a great tool and some people think that it's not going to help and it may actually hurt. At worst, at best, it's kind of neutral. At worst, it's counterproductive. Look, so the best research comes from a field. People that dismiss quote unquote, bro science are silly. Now, when I say they're silly, you don't just accept it because the big bodybuilder

in the gym is doing. But if you see a pattern where all the top level bodybuilders are using certain techniques, yeah, generally they're not doing it because it's not working. They're getting big for... Now, part of it, the reason is because they have usually good genetics and usually certainly the pro not drug tested level, the good special supplements if you will, wink, wink. But bodybuilders are generally quite intuitive. And yeah, they're going to use logic. So you usually these are born out of logic. And ultimately, you need to test them in a in an objective way. That's what the scientific method is about. So you can draw stronger conclusions just because the

big dude is doing it. Well, it gives you reason to say, hey, that's something I want to pay attention to. It doesn't mean that, A, that's the B's knees. Example number one, I started following bodybuilders workouts when I first started my bodybuilding journey and I got decent results. At the beginning, I quickly plateaued and it wasn't until I started delving into the science and becoming more scientific about it, results. At the beginning, I quickly plateaued, and it wasn't until I started delving into the science and becoming more scientific about it that I was able to continue my journey

to continue progressing and win titles as a bodybuilder because I did not have the genetics or the pharmacology that these pros had. So getting back to your question, I do think it has a logical basis. So here's what I generally say. If we don't have any good evidence to refute it and it has a sound logical basis, it is worth trying until we have a basis to refute it. These are things that should be experimented with and ultimately everyone's their own n equals one. I certainly think that people, there are some researchers who just, you know, unless it has been validated by research, I will not do this.

To me, it's backwards thinking. You need to use the tools that you have based on the available evidence. And if the evidence, when evidence gets compelling, controlled evidence, then we have ways to either accept it or dismiss it. But until that happens, to me, in my humble opinion, we experiment with it. And to your point, I have used it. And it's something that I think warrants inclusion in a program. Selectively, I don't think it's something to over utilize. But I think that if there's a muscle that you want to target, like,

let's say a squat, if your glutes are the limiting factor, you lower some people, the lower back will be a limiting factor in squatting. Pre-exhaustion with, let's say, a leg extension can be, I think, a viable tool to create fatigue in the squat before your lower back or your glutes give out. And fatigue is going to be a factor in your results. That's been pretty well documented. And the point of doing that, right, is to allow you, just for people wondering, of like, what's the end goal of the pre-exhaustion?

It's, in this case, of the squat. It's allowing you to bring your quads specifically, let's say, close to the point of failure before something else fails that forces you to stop the exercise, right? I mean, I've experienced it's not exactly the same, but I think of a barbell squat and how much more difficult that is than different types of squat machines, whether it's a belt squat or what I think is generally referred to as a power squat and like a platform, it's hard to describe, but whatever, a squat machine that is, it

mimics the squat movement, but it just gives you stability. And I've been training more with a one squat machine in particular that I really like in my gym and I've seen actually significant results in my lower body, despite not intentionally being in a calorie surplus, just maintenance calories. And the reason being is for so long, I had so much of my quad volume was barbell squatting and there's nothing wrong with that. But I had forgotten how much more difficult

the barbell squat variations are as whole body exercises versus a machine that allows me to more just isolate the quads and overload specifically the quads. And so it's been fun. It's hard to find pockets of progress like that after you've been training for a while. Well, and that goes to the point. Everyone has their own N equals one experiment. So ultimately, the research provides you with guidelines. It provides you with certain tools to have an understanding of how you might be able to structure routines and manipulate variables.

But ultimately, people respond differently to different programs. You need to find out what works for you and you're gonna do it more readily if you have that scientific foundation, will respond differently to different programs. You need to find out what works for you. And you're going to do it more readily if you have that scientific foundation, the knowledge base to it. If you're a kind of, I don't know if you're a fisherman, but I'm a deep sea fisherman, if you want to go out fishing, you could just take your boat out and drop on and you might catch fish. It makes it easier if you have sonar and you know where the fish are. So

similarly, if you have a good understanding you know where the fish are. So, similarly, if you have a good understanding of the principles, scientific principles, it's going to make it a lot easier and facilitate your ability to make your n equals one more successful. And coming back to pre-exhaustion, so for somebody who might want to try that, how do you go about that? You could take the example of the leg extension in the squat or something else, but if they're wondering, okay, what do I do? Let's say the pre-exhaustion set, what kind of weight am I supposed to be rep range? Am I supposed to go to failure? And then am I counting the pre-exhaustion set as volume toward that muscle group or is it just kind of something that I'm

doing before I do my official volume, so to speak? Certainly, you should be counting it as volume. I mean, it's causing fatigue. But if you're asking prescription-wise, there's not one way to go about it. There's, as they say, more than one way to skin a cat. But even to the volume point, right? What if you're not going even close to failure? It's just kind of a submax. But that generally wouldn't be a great strategy, in my humble opinion, because then you're

not fatiguing the muscles to the point where that would do anything. But if you're asking rep ranges, I mean, there's room for differences of opinion. I wouldn't do three reps with heavy flies or leg extensions. They're just not generally, single joint movements aren't quite out for very heavy load training

because you're putting a lot of stress on the joints. But can you do eight reps? Can you do 10, 12, 15? They're all viable. There's not an exact rep range that you need to get fairly close to failure. Just like, by the way, in general, this goes against what I might grow upbringing where I thought either you go real hard or you go home and every set either was to failure or beyond where I did drop sets, I did the force reps, etc. The preponderance of research now seems to show that if you're within a couple RIR, a couple reps short of failure, you get just as good results.

So for strength, it's even less, it seems like. So you don't necessarily need to go to failure, but you need to fatigue the muscle if you want to do pre-exhaust. you get just as good results for strength, it's even less, it seems like. You don't necessarily need to go to failure, but you need to fatigue the muscle. If you want to do pre-exhaust, that's inherent in the name pre-exhaust. If you're not exhausting the muscle to some extent, then it's not going to have the desired effect on

the subsequent exercise that you do. Just to comment quickly on this point of training intensity, of course, I understand what you just said, and I agree that makes perfect sense. I will say though that just thinking about the years spent in gyms, I typically see more people training with too little intensity rather than too much. And though they may, if you were to ask them,

how many more reps do you think you could have gotten, they may say, oh, one, two, or three. I still find myself having to check myself on this when I'm, because I like to track my RIR as a part of, I put it, I have a spreadsheet and I put RIR there. And I try to be conservative with it. I try to like be skeptical of even my own. I probably add one to what I think,

but I've had it happen many times over the years where I pushed close to failure. I think that's a two RAR. It's the final set and I'm going to see. I'm going to go for it in this next set and let's see if it really was. And it was not. It was probably a three or a four RAR. And so if I look at again how many other people train, what I've seen over the years is although they may say that, yeah, that was pretty close to failure. If you saw the final rep,

it moved just as quickly as the first. And you're like, no, that's not, that's not, you, you were, you were many reps away. So it just, you know, that, that training intensity point, I think in theory, like, theoretically it's important, but you have to have the right, it's almost like you have to have the right mentality or mindset in your training. So I will certainly agree that I think the majority of general public when they go to the gym

are training with two-idle intensity. It just doesn't take a rocket science to look around the gym and you see. So I certainly would agree with that. And we see them when they come into our studies, and then by the end of the study, like I've never trained that hard in my life. But I do, to some extent, I don't want to say disagree, but I will say that this is very educated because we are carrying out a study right now that happens to look at RIRs, we're looking at failure versus a two RIR. And one of the components of the study is to test subjects ability on their RIR. Now, these are resistance trained subjects, the minimum of a year experience.

And they, I was fairly surprised. So the majority were within two RIR, being able to predict their failure. And that's on either side. So that's some of them under predicted. So basically, they're like one rep off or so, and you're saying the two RIR on average, that means one on either side. So maybe one and a half, we haven't analyzed the stats yet. But just looking at the graph, how that graphed out, it seemed to be somewhere in that room. And by the way, so that was pre-study. We're in the process now of finishing testing. We're going to look at their ability after the study was over where they had to keep using the RARs or training failure and look to see, did they improve? My guess would be that they're

going to improve more. I was actually quite surprised that people, I think we don't give credit. By the way, that was after they were taught. My guess would be if we just got them in and said, all right, tell me how many more reps you think they've done well. But we taught them, we did a session of teaching them the RIR. After one session of teaching them, they were quite good. When you're saying that, it actually occurred to me that I had a qualifier

to what I said in my own training. So I guess where I've experienced that, it might be almost exclusively lower body, which again comes down to some sets, I'm just willing to push harder than others. That's just objectively what's happening. And then certain exercises, like I think of the deadlift, I have surprised myself. So for a period, I was doing some rep max testing

every four months or so. And I wouldn't push that to failure on a deadlift, but I was willing to get closer, like really try to get as close to it as I'm comfortable going because I don't want to risk injury. And so there were just, I did that for probably two plus years. And so I had a fair number of repetitions of this. And there were at least a handful of times where I was genuinely surprised at my performance

looking at, because I'd look at my training records leading up to it and just to get a feel. Like, what should I, what's my goal here, right? Like, how well do I think I can do based on what I was seeing in my training? And then I go for it and what I thought would have been six or seven turned into nine or something. And some of that might be the psychology because I was a little bit psyched up for the rep max. Like I felt like I was working four months for this to see did I make any progress or not. So that certainly played into it.

So anyway, if I think about it actually, what you just said is perfectly aligned with my training with basically, I think about any muscle group other than particularly lower body. So squat exercises, leg press type of exercises where when I have, let's say it's a final set, I wouldn't do this particularly on a squat anymore, but maybe on a leg press, something where I feel comfortable. If I'm stuck at the bottom, I'm okay, depending on how it's set up, you know? And I say, okay, I'm going to go for it. And I do end up getting

one, two, maybe even three more reps than I thought that I was going to be able to get. But that wouldn't happen with a bench press, for example, like that, or really any other exercise, actually, if I think about it, those are probably more or less always spot on. And so coming back to the rest periods, we've touched on a number of different aspects of this. Is there anything else? And it could be from this specific study or any other research they've done and just experienced that people should be thinking about when prescribing rest times to better meet their goals and their preferences. So I think the take home from the study is that very short rest periods are going to

be detrimental to gains, to when we talk about gains, hypertrophy. And again, when you're asking, you mentioned that mechanistically, why? We don't know why, but the thought would be is because that it's reducing the volume load. Could there be other factors that are coming into play? We don't know. But that's what I would say. So here's the counter to that. It wasn't like you got no gains if you did that. They still got good gains. It modestly reduced the gains. So this is where you have to take the research and say, what is important to me? How practically meaningful is it?

I would say in looking at that for the average gym goer, it might not be that meaningful. You might be able to get, certainly you're gonna get a faster workout. That could be more important than the gains you might be missing. I know there's other ways, as we talked about doing paired supersets or upper lower supersets, whatever, can also do that and perhaps without compromising. But even if you can't, right? Let's say you show up and you're just short on time. Like normally you need 45 to 60 minutes to get through your

workout and you're bummed because you only have 30. You can either cut that workout short or maybe you can just shorten the rest periods and maybe you don't want to do that every time, but you shouldn't feel like that workout is a throwaway workout or you shouldn't feel discouraged that you couldn't do what you were quote unquote supposed to do, right? Not at all. And again, I don't want to go down too much of a rabbit hole, but I can make a case whereby some type of quote unquote metabolic condition, I have a book where I talk about this, where you have a period either it's in a block of training or selectively done throughout a training cycle of short rest intervals may, even though it might

not be the best quote unquote for hypertrophy in that given session, it might facilitate greater hypertrophy in your somewhat longer rest training because it's allowing you to buffer acidosis. It conceivably can help you to buffer hydrogen ions, which are quote unquote lactic acid is hydrogen ions are the acidic portion that build up in the lactic acid accumulates. And that stops your ability to have muscular contractions and thus you're not going to be able to continue on. You basically could be able to extend a set if you're able to buffer acidosis to a greater extent.

So again, hypothetical, do we have great evidence of this in research? No. But without good evidence, we go by the evidence we have, we go by a logical basis. To me, I think it bears experimenting with. If that were true, then if I'm hearing you, then you would be able to increase your volume in any given session just because.

Volume load. Yeah, volume load, yeah, correct, yeah. In any given session where you have a heightened buffering capacity because you're gonna get that extra one or two or what, three maybe reps with your workings. The same way, yeah. Yeah, and then that would also probably impact

how quickly you could recover your performance capacity as well Conceivably that that could also have effects within the intro set Into I'm sorry intercept Anyway, it's something to me. I think that We don't have there's really zero Controlled evidence on the topic, but it's something to me that there's experimented with and I have in practice. So I think it is something that can be useful.

I've mentioned that in the context of cardio too, for the interset in particular, maybe not so much for buffering capacity of individual muscle groups, but that if theoretically by improving your cardio, you might be able to improve your recovery in between sets, which means that maybe you can get through your workouts a little bit faster or you might see better performance if you are sticking to a clock,

even if it's an internal clock where you give yourself a minute and a half or you give yourself two minutes, let's say you just go. Well, if you're not fully recovered in your capacity in those two minutes, but if you had better cardiovascular capacity, then... So you're talking about like a HIIT, like a high intensity interval or? I mean, that if you're going to do it, right, you would want to include that in your program. But even if let's say you go from, you just lift weights, you don't do any even if let's say you go from, you just lift weights, you don't do any sort of cardiovascular exercise, maybe you go for walks, and then you start doing zone two, the popular term, right?

So let's say you just start doing that to just build up your cardiovascular capacity, and ideally, if you wanted to get even more, yes, with high intensity interval. Well, there is some emerging evidence that capillaryarization, so we have capillaries, at least very tiny blood vessels that allow for nutrient exchange and oxygen exchange as well, is a factor in hypertrophy and in recovery. So by doing cardio conceivably, and there's again some emerging evidence suggesting this is the case, you facilitate the body's ability to recover after your session is over.

Whether it's interset, I don't know if we have the evidence to show that. But certainly from a recovery, overall recovery, I think it bears experimentation with it. I think there is now becoming more evidence to show that that can be a viable strategy. Yeah. Yeah, that's interesting. One final question coming back to these short rest periods. And so I know you have to go in a minute, but you mentioned that you might even want to take training blocks and intentionally shorten your rest periods with this idea of

increasing the buffering capacity. Is that something that have you done that in your own training? Yeah, I have a book. I'm not trying to plug the book, but I have a book called the Max Muscle Plan, and it has a metabolic phase, a four-week phase that involves doing these types of very short rest period workouts to facilitate. One of the things is to facilitate

buffer and capacity, lactic acid buffer and capacity. Also though, it's using high repetitions, which again can help. So doing it not only short-rest periods, but with higher reps, you build up, you're accumulating more acidosis. There's some evidence that also may help to target your type 2 muscle fibers.

That is, again, a topic that has conflicting evidence on it, but certainly I can't dismiss that based on the evidence we have. And I think, again, without hard evidence one way or the other, these are things that may have a good cost-benefit ratio. And specifically this point of shortening the rest periods may help target the type two fibers? Certainly the higher repetitions, but look the type one muscle fibers are endurance oriented. So I don't know, I think that there may be something to the shorter rest as well, but certainly if you're extending the set with more repetitions, you're causing a greater endurance effect, which conceivably would target them. There's actually in blood

flow restriction training, which uses very light loads with occlusion to tie off the venous backflow, type 1 fibers hypertrophy is something that's been demonstrated fairly frequently, not consistently, but certainly a number of studies have shown that. And so with the higher up range, so targeting type 1 or type 2? Type 1. Did I say type 2? I thought type 1. I might have misheard. That's why I was like, I might have heard that wrong. That's why I wanted to ask. Yeah, yeah, yeah. Your endurance, no, type 2 fibers would be not targeted. Although certainly light load, I I also want to make the point before going that light load training also does target type two fibers.

It's not that you just get type one fiber, but there may be some preferential hypertrophy in type one fibers with lighter load training that may make that more favorable. Which is, of course, also an argument for varying rep ranges, especially as you get more advanced. Correct. I certainly advocate that, that having some heavier low training interspersed with some lighter low training makes sense on multiple levels. There's certainly no negative effects that have been demonstrated and there are at least potential positive effects.

So again, good cost. Everything is cost benefit. Makes sense. Well, this is, as always, very enlightening. Really enjoyed the discussion. I know you got to run in a few minutes, but let's just wrap up with where people can find you, find your work, if they would like to check out your research,

your books, of course. I just say Google me. Google my name, and I'm on Instagram and Twitter in particular. I'm on Facebook but that's mostly posting my doggy pictures. But yeah, Instagram and Twitter, or X it's called. Yeah, you can go on Amazon. But I have links on, like I have a link tree on my Instagram where you can find stuff. Okay, perfect. Thanks again for doing this, Brad. I appreciate it.

I enjoy it as always. We will terminate today's episode shortly, but first I need to tell you about the biggest sale of the year going on right now over at my sports nutrition company, Legion. So from now until December 4th over at buylegion.com, that's B-Y-L-E-g-i-o-n.com. When you buy any one of our supplements you will save 50% on the next one that you buy.

And in addition to that we're also offering free gift cards on all orders over $99. So it's a free $10 gift card on orders over $. It's a $20 gift card on orders over 149 and a $40 gift card on orders over 199. And so what that means is you can save very bigly on all of Legion's most popular products like our whey protein isolate, our pre-workout, our post-workout, multivitamin, fish oil, creatine powder, creatine gummies, energy drink, and much more. Now, none of that is to say that you need

supplements to achieve your fitness goals, to build muscle, to lose fat, to get healthy. You do not. However, the right ones can help. And why should you buy the right ones from Legion rather than a competitor? Well, a few things. With Legion, you get clinically effective ingredients and doses, and so what that means is every ingredient and every dose, which is important, in our supplements is backed by peer-reviewed scientific research

demonstrating clear benefits, and all of that research is openly cited on every product page so you can fact check us on every claim that we make. Legion's products are also naturally sweetened and flavored and while artificial sweeteners may not be as dangerous as some people claim, I am not an alarmist about these chemicals. Studies do suggest that regular consumption of these chemicals may indeed be harmful to our health and so you won't find any of them in Legion's products. In addition to no artificial sweeteners, Legion's products also contain no artificial flavoring, no artificial food dyes, no artificial fillers, and no other unnecessary junk. dyes, no artificial fillers, and no other unnecessary junk. All of my products are tested for purity and potency in an ISO 17025 accredited lab, which

screens for heavy metals, microbes, allergens, and other contaminants to ensure that my products meet FDA purity standards. All of Legion's supplements are also made in the USA with globally sourced ingredients in NSF certified FDA inspected facilities that adhere to current good manufacturing practice standards. And finally Legion offers a no return necessary money back guarantee that works like this. If you don't absolutely love our stuff you let us know and we give you a prompt and courteous refund. You don't have to fill out forms you don't absolutely love our stuff, you let us know and we give you a prompt and courteous

refund. You don't have to fill out forms, you don't even have to return anything to us. And all of that is why Legion has sold over 5 million bottles to over 1 million customers who have left us over 45,000 5-star reviews on our website and on Amazon. And all of that makes Legion the number one brand of natural sport supplements in the world. So again, go to buylegion.com now, save some major coin on everything in our store

and see for yourself why scientists, athletes, doctors, and everyday fitness folk alike trust Legion for all of their supplementation needs. Well, I hope you liked this episode. I hope you found it helpful. And if you did, subscribe to the show because it makes sure that you don't miss new episodes. And it also helps me because it increases the rankings

of the show a little bit, which of course then makes it a little bit more easily found by other people who may like it just as much as you. And if you didn't like something about this episode or about the show in general or if you have ideas or suggestions or just feedback to share, shoot me an email, mike at muscleforlife.com, and let me know what I could do better or just what your thoughts are about maybe what you'd like to see me do in the future. I read everything myself. I'm always looking for new ideas and constructive feedback so thanks again for listening to this episode and I hope to hear from you soon.