>>76331291
>If you do a study on beginners and the study show better result in a group than other, then it doesn't matter if the beginners grow with any training because it's still showing a difference.
Missing the forest for the trees, bud. The point is that the info is ONLY good for absolute beginners, but it's extrapolated to apply to everyone else as well.
>The studies have limitations and using a single study to change your whole training is retarded, but that's not what I'm saying to do.
Obviously, and you're not everyone on /fit/, I'm talking about people who base their influence (jeff nipples, ect.) on the "science" and make a living doing it, on top of everyone who just parrots the same info.
>RPE0 is easy, it's RIR 0 what you were trying to say.
I was actually trying to say RPE10, but I made a typo
>Also, many studies go to failure when the lifter can't lift any more, going to failure isn't complicated to do, really.
picrel
>All the studies point toward more and harder work being better for gains so science isn't providing a shortcut.
No, it's providing hope for an "optimal" way, and people will invest to the point of leaving gains on the table if they were just consistently training with tried-and-true methods instead of chasing these optimal training techniques and exercises that their favorite science based influencers tout.