Assertion

Training muscles at longer lengths may not provide additional benefits for hypertrophy in trained individuals.

80 / 100
0 / 100

Explained

The assertion is made based on the idea that training muscles at longer lengths may not provide additional benefits for hypertrophy in trained individuals. This is supported by studies that have found similar results between exercises that target muscles at longer and shorter lengths.

Context for Assertion

The context of this assertion is the discussion of muscle length and its effects on hypertrophy.

Concepts for Assertion

Tags

muscle length
hypertrophy
trained individuals

Evidence for Assertion

Why relevant:
Why true:The study found similar results between the two training methods, suggesting that training muscles at longer lengths may not be superior.
How it is true:The study conducted an experimental design, randomly assigning subjects to either lengthened-partial range of motion resistance training or full range of motion training, and found similar results between the two groups.
ELI5
  • The study tested the claim by having subjects perform either lengthened-partial range of motion resistance training or full range of motion training.
  • They found similar results between the two groups.
  • This means that training muscles at longer lengths may not be superior for hypertrophy.
80 / 100
The effects of lengthened-partial range of motion resistance training of the limbs on arm and thigh muscle cross-sectional area
Study Type:Human Study
DOI:N/a
Randomized Controlled Trial
Human
n=297
p≤0.05
Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research
Publication 01/01/2024

Assertion from content

We Have to Talk About Lateral Raises
It remains possible that doing this does yield greater growth, but we don't know at least not yet.