The Study
Training beyond momentary failure: The effects of past-failure partials versus initial partials on calf muscle hypertrophy among a resistance-trained cohort
This study compares two ways of doing calf exercises in the same people. It shows one might work a bit better, but we can't be sure because the study wasn't clearly set up like a fair test with random assignment.
Analysis score
Maximum 90 for a randomized controlled trial.
Where the score came from
People did calf raises two ways on each leg: one leg started with short reps at a stretched position, the other went full range and then added tiny extra reps after failure. After 8 weeks, both legs got stronger and bigger.
Where does this study sit?
Systematic Reviews & Meta-analyses
Max 100Randomized Trials
Max 90Cohort Studies
Max 72Case-Control
Max 58Cross-Sectional
Max 44Case Reports & Series
Max 30Expert Opinion
Max 551 / 100
Quality score
Participants are randomly assigned to treatment or control groups, minimizing bias. Considered the gold standard for testing whether an intervention causes an effect.
Key takeaways
Summary
Based on the study abstract and findings.
- 1The difference is very small—less than half a millimeter—and may not matter much in real life, even if one method is slightly better.
- 2The short reps at the start led to 0.40 mm more muscle growth on average, with a 96% chance it was better, but the difference could still be zero (range: -0.06 to 0.85 mm).
Score breakdown, methodology, conflicts of interest, evidence analysis & raw study data
Publication
Authors
Stian Larsen, Nordis Ø. Sandberg, Brad J. Schoenfeld, Andrea B. Fredriksen, Benjamin S. Fredriksen, Milo Wolf, Roland Van den Tillaar, Paul A. Swinton, Hallvard N. Falch
Not medical advice. For informational purposes only. Always consult a qualified healthcare professional before making health decisions.