Something a little funny about "Mike - thanks for being here..." while sitting in Mike's personal gym at his home 😂 Awesome collab as always, great to see you guys continuing to work together. Mike's ability to see things from so many different perspectives (like sports performance or psychological) while simultaneously not diminishing his credibility based on a continuously evolving understanding of the literature is really second to none.
I think, I may have spaced on it, but he missed two pros of full ROM in my opinion: - Counting reps. I'm not a "full rom+squeeze" advocate, but I like doing the squeeze on shrug type movements, if only because I find a shrug really hard to figure out in terms of what counts as a "rep" and what doesn't. And the fine gradient of "allmost full ROM" to "slightly below full ROM" is just way too vague for me. When I squeeze at the top, I get consistent feedback that I completed x number of reps to write down and improve on. So, barring other external cues on rep completion, sometimes full ROM can help with that. I may be slightly sacrificing stimulus to fatigue for the purpose of consistent progression, but there I think it's worth it. Especially with muscles as small as the traps are. - newbie lifters probably won't know what 50% of full ROM looks or feels like without doing full ROM on new exercises first. It may be worth it for them to stick to full ROM not just for the functional benefits as Mike pointed out, but to understand how their muscles act during exercise. And the aforementioned feedback mechanism may come in handy to them to pinpoint what 50% lengthened partials are like. Some exercises have a greater range of motion than you would think, just first stepping into the gym. So exploring the totality of a ROM, they can get the most out of a truly lengthened partial as well.
Does it even matter if you're not sure what counts as a full rep, as long as whatever you're doing gets you close to failure you've stimulated hypertrophy.
@@supercal333Is the point here about hitting partial reps once full ROM becomes very difficult or impossible? I’ve wondered that myself about rowing movements. I could definitely bust out several reps at partial ROM or with momentum after I’ve hit failure, but it gets dicey trying to tell myself I’ve progressed when adding reps is done partially in this cheaty zone.
Since I have started using Mike's recommended protocol for full ROM, I have seen the biggest gains than from any other protocol over a 4,6,8 and 12 week session in both hypertrophy and strength.
As far as I’m concerned, for classic bodybuilding, do it ALL, but generally stay around full rom and 6 to 15 reps, but that doesn’t mean not trying different things like pump reps or partial rom some of the time, but the bulk of effort should be in that 6 to 15 full rom zone
Something more esoteric is that lengthened partial deadlift variations seem to be less fatiguing when you cut out the top half. Maybe LP can revive old meta exercise builds.
I did input lenghtened partials to one of my client's program with the intent of making the bloodflow easier on a certain muscle. It actually worked and fixed a calcified muscle. Worth it❤
Excelent video, love Dr Mike, I got to know you from the rp channel. Nice video edit, too. I would lower the music a little bit, but it's not like it bothers a lot.
I tried lengthened partials for a few weeks. A few thoughts I had: - A few exercise are way more comfortable as lengthened partials, for me lat pulldown and rows. - Lat pulldows are easy to do as lengthened partials, as I can standardize technique to the top of my head. For many other exercises I had to focus on where the movement would stop, lowering mmc. - Have studies been made on exercises where the force differs? For example, bicep dumbbell curls are easy at first, then get worst around 90 degrees, then get easier. Doing a lengthened partial of 1/3 would stop you at 60 degrees, (naively assuming full rom of 180 degrees), it which point the exercise has barely started yet (or has it??). Going 2/3's of the way stops you at 120 degrees, at which point you've passed the hard parts and it seems pretty insignificant whether you continue or not. (or is it not?)
Agreed on rows and pulldowns! Yes, there has been - the preacher curl, for example. The same generally holds true. If an exercise is easy in a given part of the ROM, you can lift a lot more to equate for intensity.
So Dr. Israetel is a Bayesian (5:02), which in a scarce-data context like this (only a handful of relevant studies so far) makes more sense than the purely frequentist approach of fully committing to the new findings. Also, as hinted by him, full ROM allows you to better exploit the negative portion of the movement, which is well-known to be highly anabolic. Bottom line: introduce LLPs whenever it makes sense to you, but don't fully replace full ROM.
I only train on 1/3 reps--longest range training--best move I made in 4 decades! My lats, which were already my best bodypart, have taken off like crazy. My delts widened and thickened, etc. It allows a purer failure = better results.
I don’t have a problem with Mike disagreeing with long length partials in the past. But I have a problem with how insanely adamantly he disagreed with it in the past. However, I commend him greatly on his ability to publicly accept it
It's interesting to see how some of the older "bro science" was ahead of its time in some ways. I remember doing DC/DoggCrap style training for calves, and that is basically using long-length partials / the fully stretched position as much as possible.
It's refreshing to see someone like Mike out there. He isn't dogmatic or ideological and is willing to change his mind. He waits for a large body of evidence to build up and slowly shifts his opinion as the confidence level in the evidence increases. This is how science is supposed to be used. Not as an unfalsifiable cudgel, but a as tool to inform us on what is most likely to be true, with varying levels of confidence, given the current evidence.
Excellent conversation. Does wolf only train partials? I would like to see a person who has only done partials. I would like to see demo videos of all upper body on partials
I went all in on full partials when I switched to a hypertrophy focus. (One of Milo’s muscle building programs) Hard to say it’s them that are working specifically n=1 and all that (that’s the extent of my stats knowledge) also probably newbie gains and working way harder than before too. If nothing else you can feel scientifically and morally superior while doing them.
What are your thoughts on full range of motion with a controlled eccentric and then when near failure transition to lengthened partials with a controlled eccentric. Naturally it feels you will be able to handle a higher load when lengthened and only completing a partial rep.
I remember John Meadows (RIP) always insisted lengthened partials for shoulders worked super well for him. It was a tip I never took seriously but I may give it a shot during my upcoming shoulder specialization
@@AlexS_983 that's where I got it from. He would do them for higher reps for shoulder and rear Delt. First time I tried them I couldn't believe the pump, I know not the ultimate indicator but still. Kept them since and shoulders are my most developed, could be coincidence but seeing the research now it looks like it is legit
So what rom did you do lateral raises in for lengthen partials? I'm thinking of just doing 0 to 45 degrees and skipping the rest of the movement. Will that be enough to grow side delts?
@@GoodByeSkyHarborLive should be good enough. I don’t even go more than 30 degrees and it’s still very effective. I have a shoulder workout in my videos somewhere, you can see
As for me I Have been Incorporating lengthened partials with various methods and I Certainly enjoy them but if I had to choose one it'd still be Full ROM. Main Reason is that it is easier to keep track of progress by going all the way down and all the way up, for lengthened partials it won't be exact when I am stopping the movement. Also just as RP said maybe only doing or overly emphasizing lengthened partials eventually may induce some imbalance in muscles which probably depends on the exercise and muscle. Thirdly, I Just like getting stronger on Full ROM Exercises like Bench Press, Overhead Press, and Squats and those are enjoyable and gets me hyped up at the gym to further my progress. Fourth, I actually trained in lengthened partial for long time unknowingly even before these studies were out because I incorporated lots of 1.5 reps and elevator reps on exercises such as Bench Press and Squats for over a Decade after watching Ben Bruno's videos long time ago. Ive gained great gains from them but eventually my weak points were both lock outs for bench press and squats so recently I had to incorporate shortened range partials with deadstop like pin presses and squats and finally they are going up again. Also for example of bench press, doing lengthened partials gave me big pecs but not so much for tricpes and ofc i cud do triceps isolations and gain size from them but the strength wont be specific to the pressing and by increasing pressing strength I cud use more weight on bench press and thus get better gains for chest as well. Maybe more studies come out to show how much better lengthened partial is than to full rom and change my mind later but as for now Ill keep my main as Full ROM but still incorporating lengthened partials as a side and even some shortened partials to top it off
I also think shortened partials are little bit underrated. Dead Stop Pin Presses and Squats Not Only Increased Lock Out Strength but really taught my Body how to grind and exert thru the rep and increase my strength a ton. Well yea ofc its strength not hypertrophy but I think the stronger I Get and be able to use higher weight for working sets, id eventually gain more muscle as well. Secondly from my experience, I dont know if this exercise count as shortened partials but One Arm Lying Band Pull Overs really gave me the Most Pump and Muscle Mind Connection I Ever Felt in My Lats. And Id say its a shortened partial because the resistance is highest during contracted position. I do think pump and muscle mind connection is not all you need for hypertrophy but I def think they play a part and just as Dr Mike Said I finally figured out how to use my lats well doing all the other exercises. Also the Pump to Damage Ratio was thru the loops because id get unlimited pump but not too much damage so I could spam one arm lying band pull overs almost everyday. I thought Id lose back/lat gains during covid lockdown but my lats became biggest its ever been at home doing One Arm Lying Band Pullovers!
Dude, just wanna say, I just read the description, didn't watched the video yet- but if slow eccentrics are DOPE, and the deep stretch is THE KEY, lengthened partials- hmmm, I've never even heard of that, and sounds like music to my years.
I finally starting following the research w everything focused on full stretch under load + lengthened partials for past 2 weeks. Dr. Milo, my goodness, the pumps are so much fuller than “contraction pumps.” If these lead to gains as I expect they will, I’ll feel pretty silly that I spent so much time thinking contractions are what drives the pumps!
Just trained back today, exclusively with lengthened partials: pulldowns and machine rows. Really liked it! Got to use 20% more weight, looking forward to see how I progress!
What about including lengthened partials with contracted partials? “Constant tension”. Makes most sense. Choose exercises that bias the range you’re focussing on. It’s that easy. No need for insane research. Nice to know science is slowly catching up though.
Great conversation, though I fear that what isn't talked about enough when discussing training optimality is effect size. So, when you look at the difference between any two different modalities, how much difference does doing one over the other actually make? The answer is basically almost nothing. The difference between five reps and ten reps, the difference between two days and four days, the difference between ten sets and twenty sets, the difference between a bro split, upper lower, and push, pull, legs, and the difference between 1.6g/kg and 2.2g/kg of bodyweight in protein. The truth about all of this is, and I hate it as much as the next guy, is that it doesn't really matter, especially the more advanced you are, and especially when you aren't even making a living by being strong or jacked. Though that doesn't mean that it matters much as a novice or a non-professional either. When you consider that on average a person, that's natural, unlocks 90% of their genetic potential within 4 years i.e. 24# the first year, 12# the second year, 6# the third year, and 3# the fourth year, and then
Agreed. With volume, for example, you get diminishing returns. Equally, when talking about ROM, there is next to no opportunity cost to just using the more effective ROM
I don't agree. Even tho you don't put nearly as much mass later your training career it still makes a huge difference between a ok physique and a great, well developed one so one has to keep finding more advanced techniques to really milk the gains.
What about people who have relatively physical jobs to go to during the day? I’d like to work out like they do on the RP channel. However, I have to pick up heavy stuff at work.
Hmm, autoregulate. You may need slightly lower volumes than most for hip extensors, forearms/traps and biceps. If you can, train before you go to work. Otherwise, not much to add.
Do you think for the sport specific armwrestling example that it is good to maybe have hypertrophy days with lengtened partials, and sport specific days with short partials?
You can tell that he wanted start it all off with saying.."My best rationale is first, common sense." Lol Truthfully, I don't really have a side on this yet And I've been lifting for 26 years:) My initial instinct and thoughts In simplistic and raw form is that, If the load (uuhhh, Mike would chime in about now i'm guessing..lol) is being placed on any particular muscle and is producing an outstanding pump (lots of blood flow) lots of stress AND you are experienced enough to have the kind of muscle mind connection to know if that's actually happening during the lift and after the lift then I think there's nothing more that can be asked of that muscle. Whether it's a full range rep, a 3/4 movement, or whatever.... If the intensity is there, the blood flow is there, and the hurt is there then the growth will be there. I don't like to overcomplicate things. Whatever causes the most pain to whichever muscle I'm working, That's what I do. That could be a full range of motion or a not so full range of motion. I think you both win! Both of you are great. I do a lot of full range of motion for the most part depending on my body mechanics and depending on what hurts and what doesn't hurt in a bad way. So I guess I mostly do full range of motion but again, It's all about what's really connecting with the muscle the best for each individual lifter. That is all....
Hey Milo, I think I have been getting some shoulder pain on one side -- maybe approaching a slap tear (labrum tear) from doing chest pressing exercises with a deep stretch. Any tips on avoiding shoulder injury while still trying to get a deep stretch? Or basically avoid going so deep and just train in a reasonably longer muscle length?
Try a variety of exercises and see what hurts and what doesn't. Try a higher rep range and a more controlled tempo. I would beware of trying to self-diagnose: instead of trying to identify a pathology, treat it as pain and navigate it as best you can through training modifications.
but theres been more than a few recent studies that have all either found no difference between long partials & full range or a significant benefit from partials. None of them found full RoM to provide more growth/activation than partials
Im wondering what the science is on doing a full ROM set to "technique failure" and then doing a few lebgthened oartials at the end of THAT set because you will always be able to do a couple of those after ful ROM fails.
I'm still curious if there is any research or study in the future looking at higher injury risk from LLP or if people doing strictly long-length partials have worse mobility than people doing full ROM? I still include LLP's for some exercises in my training but one of the reasons I love doing full ROM, for example ATG Squats is that my mobility (and knees) got so much better and I can skip most hip, quad, ankle mobility exercises by just doing a full ROM squat once or twice a week. So from a hypertrophy standpoint this totally makes sense but what about the biomechanical standpoint, keeping your joints healthy, having a better flexibility/mobility, etc? When I was injured the goal in physiotherapy was to fully mobilize my joint/tendons and strengthen them again to work in full ROM again. I'm a little bit worried that TikTok overhypes this and like every beginner doing partials only without really knowing how anything works or what a full ROM actually is haha
Another potential reason to use partials: I currently have an injury in my shoulder, and I can only do pressing motions in the shorted partial range. It is obviously not optimal, but it is better than not training my chest at all. And I would argue that it is decent from a rehabilitative standpoint because my pain-free ROM is increasing week by week.
Well, I would argue that, though he says they do not emphasize the peak contraction at RP, they still do their curls with a lot of shoulder flexion which emphasize the peak contraction and the shortening of the muscle. And I was wondering whether we had any within-subject-design studies on lengthened partials vs full rom. Anyone?
Can this type of training be better/worse/equal for passive structures? From what I understand, gymnasts want to expose the bicep tendon in a stretched position to cause a stimulus that makes it less prone to injury, this also takes time to adapt... up to 6 weeks. So they also want to do this slowly. So let's say they were doing long length partials with bicep curls or seated bicep curls, can we expect something else (good or bad) besides increasing hypertrophy?
It's relatively unclear. You probably do want to ease into stuff like lengthened partials, but it's not clear that it's more/less injurious than full ROM.
The issue is people are going to hear partial reps and they’re going to do the 25%-75% of the ROM, when they absolutely need to start the concentric at full stretch and return to full stretch. It’s basically Louie Simmon’s principle of actually sitting on the box during a box squat, only in reverse where the concentric leads the eccentric. People are going to hear partials reps and do presses and pull-downs with like a partially contracted muscle the whole time, which will not lead to better gains than full ROM because at least full ROM accentuates the concentric portion from a fully stretched position.
Love the video and the collabs between you and dr. Mike, but the background music is very distracting and makes the conversation hard to follow at times
Imagine a person who always pauses at the lockout of a bench press and takes a few breaths only to sink the bar rapidly and bounce it off of their chest to heave it up. Tell them to do lengthened partials and what happens? they have to use a weight where they pause and feel a stretch at the bottom without any bouncing and guess what they'ye not resting at lockout and instead keep constant tension. by asking someone to do lengthened partials you're also making sure that they are not resting at the lockout of the movement and you're guaranteeing that they go to correct depth and feel the stretch at the bottom, any bet if they just implemented the full stretch and not resting at the top WITH FULL ROM they would just have the same gains now that they're doing the movement right. and if someone does full rom correctly to begin with but finishes off with lengthened partials then sure they'll get more from the workout from getting closer to failure
In the end it all comes down to fatigue and exhaust the muscle to make it grow (hypertrophy). So, everyone is correct in their concepts. The question is which is the most effective and economical method to do so. In theory you should even be able to achieve huge muscle growth by exhausting your muscle with 1000+ reps with a light weight, as long as your muscle is fatigued and exhausted afterwards. Problem here: You will not be able to perform a full workout doing 1000 reps for each muscle group, I guess.
Can you recover adequately from lengthened partials on a cut? Asking because the closest thing I got to lengthened partials back in the day was Doggcrapp, with weighted stretches. I didn’t attempt DC on a diet, though, because it was hard enough on a surplus.
It depends on the rate of weight loss and your general proclivity to lose muscle (composed of genetics, how good your training etc. is). My hunch is that if you're losing weight at around 0.5% of bodyweight per week, strength loss is not an issue.
That is one approach. A better approach may be integrated partials, where you do 1 full rep, followed by 1-3 partial reps, then another full rep, 1-3 partials, etc. This allows you to get more lengthened work in throughout the set vs getting maybe only 2-5 lengthened partials at the end of the set. Or, just do lengthened partials!
Great video, as always. Very kind contribution from the great Dr. Mike. I really liked the inclusion of the sport performance angle for those of us who care also about "fitness" (I know, a dirty word). Let's grow coach Wolf's channel. He really deserves it. I actually would love to see some vids on sports performance. Speaking from the perspective of guy who wants some degree of fitness (that word again) and not only hypertrophy. Thinking combinig power and cardio (the dreaded interference effect) for combat sports (recreationally :) ) Anyway, awesome vid as always. Waiting for more. Sorry for the rather incoherent rambling.
Hi, great topic! Doesnt this change the perspective of "failure"? Lets take calf raises for ex. If we train with full rom but focus on lengthed partials, failure will no longer be when is not possible to fully "concentric" the muscle, right? Very interesting
There is likely some interplay. Part of the benefit of lengthened partials is *likely* that they essentially make you train "past failure", since you're no longer constrained by full ROM failure. However, this wouldn't explain greater distal hypertrophy, for example, and so is unlikely to explain all of the phenomenon.
Since training in a stretched position also tends to cause a lot of muscle soreness, could one potential application for shortened-length partials be to accumulate more volume without inducing crippling soreness? For example triceps pushdowns with a straight bar. I used to do them full ROM, but tended to get a lot of soreness from the lengthened part of the exercise and usually could not move as much weight while sometimes aggravating my elbows. I have now started to limit the ROM to where my forearm barely passes 90 degrees in relation to my upper arm, can hammer out many sets without much issue and intensity techniques like dropsets produce a ridiculous pump without elbow issues or getting too sore. But after learning about your research, I wonder if I'm hurting my gains by doing this. As a side note, I still do overhead rope extensions and decline dumbbell extensions as well to not neglect anything.
Does the mind muscle connection really help induce a theoretical muscle region hypertrophy in the shortened position? Do regional hypertrophy studies show a supposed increase in regional hypertrophy in the shortened position area? I can not get past the fact that all full ROM studies must have a stretched position phase so it will always be included in all outcomes regardless of the fullness of the range including the shortened position. It just seems to me that, at best, after mid-range not much is really going on for hypertrophy.
Yeah, I’m not sold on the regional hypertrophy benefits of full ROM vs lengthened partials. Certainly, at present, I’m not aware of any data to that effect - including all the studies on LPs vs Full ROM
Milo, big question I have since you appeared recently discussing the partial thing. What is at the end the real factor the drives the activation to stimuli the best, is it the fact you stretch eccentrically under control of the load to that position or the fact you start to contract concentrically from a stretched starting position?
@WolfCoaching I'm a practising Christian,so the answer is yes,plus I like to watch 'family friendly 'content on my TV(openly in front of my children) further I'm mindful of what I share with friends
![Dr. Mike Israetel DEBUNKS long-length partials?! [Full ROM Science]](/img/logo.svg){kind=logo}
