Why Science-Based Training Won’t Get You Stronger

Integrate scientific insights with practical experience and personalization to maximize strength gains.

Last updated on October 7th, 2024

Fitness enthusiasts increasingly use science-based training to unlock their strength and muscle-building potential. However, do lab experiments actually translate to real-world results?

On Oct. 1, 2024, 2024 Strongest Man on Earth (SMoE) Mitchell Hooper, who has a Masters in Clinical Exercise Physiology, explained why following science-based training might not be practical for strength gains. He outlined five variables for maximizing strength gains and highlighted contradictory findings within the scientific literature.

Relying solely on scientific evidence will not get you where you need to be.

1. Rep Ranges

Hooper challenges a study published in the Sports (Basel) journal that downplays the importance of low-rep ranges (one to five) for strength gains. Hooper argues that the study’s findings are skewed because it used untrained participants who experience strength improvements regardless of rep range. (1)

If I started doing 15 to 20 reps, my strength would go way down, and my muscular endurance would increase.

Hooper contends that strength and muscular endurance cannot be trained in conjunction at the elite level. He suggests specific rep ranges become increasingly crucial for maximizing strength gains in experienced lifters training closer to their genetic potential.

2. Tapering

Tapering involves reducing training volume and intensity, leading to a powerlifting competition that allows the central nervous system (CNS) time to recover. Research suggests tapering training volume by around 50% over seven to 28 days to optimize performance. (2)

Hooper argues that optimal tapering protocol is highly individual and will vary based on training experience, psychological state, and personal preferences. There isn’t a one-size-fits-all fixed formula. Experienced athletes may benefit from longer tapers, whereas shorter tapers are preferable for novices.

If I haven’t felt a heavy load in 14 days, no part of me will feel good under a heavy squat or deadlift; I’ll just feel weak and out of shape, even if the best recommendations might say otherwise,” expressed Hooper.

3. Periodization

Periodization comprises varying training intensity and volume throughout the year. A scientific review published in the Sports Medicine journal suggests a small to moderate benefit of periodization for strength gains. (3)

This is an absurd underestimation of the value of periodization.

Hooper adds that 16 weeks, a typical timeframe in these studies, needs to be longer to see the long-term benefits of a well-structured periodization program. Periodization is crucial in injury prevention and mitigating burnout for long-term lifters.

4. Training Frequency

Hooper cites research showing no significant difference between groups who trained twice versus four times per week, even when following the same program regarding sets, reps, and load. (4)

Recommendations Based On Experience Level

Novice: Train anywhere between two to seven times per week.
Intermediate: Aim for two to five weekly training sessions.
Advanced: Train three to four times each week.

5. Minimum Effective Dose

Hooper cites research revealing a surprisingly low minimum effective dose for powerlifting: three to six sets of one to five reps per week spread across one to three sessions. (5)

What Should You Do Instead?

While acknowledging the limitations of science-based training for strength development, it remains the best available guide. How you interpret and apply the research findings will make all the difference. Hooper recommends applying the following two-pronged approach:

A. Understand Physiology

Hooper explains that building strength boils down to two primary factors you can control:

Increase the muscles’ cross-sectional area and improve your neural drive (how efficiently your nervous system activates those muscles).

B. Learn From History

I believe becoming a really good informed strength athlete or coach should involve as much history as it should science.

Studying the history of strength training to see what methods have worked for others can help you avoid training mistakes that have led to injuries or plateaus.

References

Schoenfeld BJ, Grgic J, Van Every DW, Plotkin DL. Loading Recommendations for Muscle Strength, Hypertrophy, and Local Endurance: A Re-Examination of the Repetition Continuum. Sports (Basel). 2021;9(2):32. Published 2021 Feb 22. doi:10.3390/sports9020032
Travis SK, Mujika I, Gentles JA, Stone MH, Bazyler CD. Tapering and Peaking Maximal Strength for Powerlifting Performance: A Review. Sports (Basel). 2020;8(9):125. Published 2020 Sep 9. doi:10.3390/sports8090125
Williams, T. D., Tolusso, D. V., Fedewa, M. V., & Esco, M. R. (2017). Comparison of Periodized and Non-Periodized Resistance Training on Maximal Strength: A Meta-Analysis. Sports medicine (Auckland, N.Z.), 47(10), 2083–2100. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40279-017-0734-y
Johnsen E, van den Tillaar R. Effects of training frequency on muscular strength for trained men under volume matched conditions. PeerJ. 2021;9:e10781. Published 2021 Feb 18. doi:10.7717/peerj.10781
Androulakis-Korakakis, P., Michalopoulos, N., Fisher, J. P., Keogh, J., Loenneke, J. P., Helms, E., Wolf, M., Nuckols, G., & Steele, J. (2021). The Minimum Effective Training Dose Required for 1RM Strength in Powerlifters. Frontiers in sports and active living, 3, 713655. https://doi.org/10.3389/fspor.2021.713655

Featured image via Shutterstock/Gorodenkoff

Source link