Bench Press FREE E-book: www.houseofhypertrophy.com/free-e-book/ "READ MORE" for TIMESTAMPS + extra "nerdy" points :) Timestamps: 0:00 Intro 0:22 Part I: Do the Quads Respond to Stretch? 3:11 Part II: Do the Glutes and Adductors Respond to Stretch? 4:27 Part III: Do the Hamstrings Respond to Stretch? 5:46 Part IV: Do the Biceps Respond to Stretch? 7:27 Part V: Do the Triceps Respond to Stretch? 9:44 Part VI: What About Other Muscles? 11:36 Part VII: Summary There are a few "nerdy" points I wanted to add here (I thought it was not worth adding in the video for the sake of simplicity): Firstly, I did not mention any of the training variables used in each study as it's not crucial information for the purpose of this video. Yet, for those interested about more details from each study, I created an image with them: www.houseofhypertrophy.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/study-details-for-stretch-video.png Secondly, some speculate biceps and triceps should NOT respond more to stretch based movements. Let’s assess why some have speculated this. One reason stretch is thought to be beneficial for growth is because elements in a muscles contractile unit get stretched and produce passive tension. This passive tension is beneficial for stimulating muscle growth. Yet, it's possible some muscles, even if you take them to a long length, have their contractile units organized in a way that means the elements that produce passive tension DO NOT get stretched enough to produce much passive tension. Some research suggests this applies to the triceps and biceps ( pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/10828324/ ). That is, they have their contractile units organized in a way that means even if the muscle is at a "long length", the elements are not stretched much and so produce little passive forces. However, I have a couple of problems with this reasoning. The research on the biceps and triceps was done with isometric (static) contractions. This is a noteworthy point as there's evidence the elements that produce passive tension operate differently during dynamic (moving) contractions, such that they are able to get stretched more and thus produce more passive tension ( journals.physiology.org/doi/abs/10.1152/physiol.00036.2019?journalCode=physiologyonline ). Another issue is this research, due to practical reasons, only assess very few muscle fibers. So the findings from these few muscle fibers may not represent what's going on with other muscle fibers in the same muscle. Indeed, other research finds that the ability of the elements that produce passive tension to get stretched differ between regions of the same muscle ( journals.physiology.org/doi/full/10.1152/japplphysiol.00480.2018 ). Finally, there most certainly could be additional reasons stretch is beneficial for hypertrophy besides these passive tension elements. For example, some data finds voluntary activation (the amount of force generating potential you can access from a muscle) is higher at stretched muscle positions ( pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27997698/ ). Other things like the extracellular matrix could also play a role. More research would be needed to mechanistically understand why stretch-based movements are powerful for hypertrophy. Thirdly, in the two McMahon studies (detailed between 0:31 and 1:06), I should have noted in addition to leg extensions shown on screen, squats, leg presses, bulgarian split squats were also trained in that paper :)
Stretch mediated Hypertrophy is not the panacea influencers and fresh PhDs are pushing it to be. It gives immediate gains (albeit different from the traditional gains but still hypertrophy is hypertrophy) in certain muscle groups, but it completely stops working after anywhere between 2 and 6 months permanently. Be careful and look at the work of Chris Beardsley to couterbalance the euphoria.
I doubt anyone is just going to do the movement based on the stretched position/partial range of motion 😂. The takeaway is to ensure the range includes a decent stretch in the movement when performing full range. I perform full range, but this has made me check the range l am doing.
Dr. Mike is big on training the stretch under load. I’ve seen good gains from being more intentional in this. Great video. Your content is some of the best on RU-vid.
Your videos are great. Definitely shows you are educating instead of "trying to mislead" people by not presenting the limitations of the studies. You deserve way more subs!!
Just my personal experience, but i changed the way i trained chest a couple of months ago to really focus on the stretch (but still using full rom) so used dumbells exclusively to get my elbows further down, really slowing down the tempo at the stretched position and pausing at the bottom. Ive been training regularly for 20 years+ but i can visibly see the difference in my pecs now. There is also a very different feeling in the muscle after training. Ive started to use this principle on other muscle groups and its working out really well. Thanks for the video, i didnt know there was research going on into this 👍
Yeah I think for pecs thats a big deal, great findings! You can see old school bodybuilders especially focussing on the stretched part of the movement because with a lot of pec movements your triceps will kick in for a big portion of the Rep. It's why I really emphasize mind-muscle connection
Another classic mate. I was speaking with my specialist Dr yesterday for my historical addiction. This was the reason I came across weight training as it helped with my recovery from opiod addiction plus after being on the streets with heavy abuse my weight tumbled and I looked like a scarecrow. After getting housed 4 months months a go I have trained 4 times a week and followed your videos along with with Sean Niwanji mainly. Anyway this was the first time I saw the Dr since I was on the streets and in 4 months I've put I've gone from 59kg to 69kg and I'm between 10-15% body fat. I'm on the borderline of being a hard gainer. He was obviously intrigued that I put on weight and looked heaps better and I started talking about training. It turns out he watches your videos as he finds the science you present fascinating. He also follows Sean Niwanji and we spoke more about your page then anything else and in particular the one on comparing the H.I.T and its underestimation of the speed the body can recover. So there you go an endorsement from a Dr who learns your stuff to apply into his training.
This was the most heart warming comment I've ever read . Thank YOU so much for sharing this. What are the odds that both you and your doctor watch this channel, haha! I wish you all the best and continued progression. It's an honor that I played some role in helping you with those gainz :)
Very interesting - I had a seminar on advanced methods in training and there was a conclusion on lack of literature on stretch as a definitive method for hypertrophy. However from what we have at the moment, it seems quite promising for optimising adaptations!
@@HouseofHypertrophy There absolutely was - specifically the leg studies since it was a power (athletic) focused lecture. There was a systematic review that my lecturer forgot to add to the readings section, however it concludes that - "Accentuated Eccentric loading seems like it can favour hypertrophy, strength and power. However, there is inconsistency and paucity of current literature" - taken from my notes
I always struggled at getting good tricep workouts until I started doing dips (without leaning forward) and Overhead tricep cable extensions. Those to really light up my triceps and they're gaining far more than when I did enormous amounts of triceps pushdowns.
Thanks again. The value of this content can't be overstated. This channel makes high level training knowledge so accessible for everyone it's almost like a cheatcode.
I have unanswered questions about this before I'm sold on it, personally: - Do stretch-mediated exercises seem to give better gains because you're spending time in the hardest part of the exercise? If so, the key is tension, not the stretched position. - Do stretch-mediated exercises seem to give better gains because of the novelty?
I did POM in the deep squat position, based on AthleanX's suggestion, and it made a lot of difference almost immediately. I also modified diet and sleep simultaneously so it's hard to tell what the contribution was of each of these changes. In my experience the triceps long head definitely responds to stretch positions, as well.
Since having gym equipment at home, I can workout for however long I want and do all sorts of ROMs if I want to. Having a home gym is a game changer. I don't have machines though. That's what I miss most about commercial gyms.
I definitely didn't see that study coming regarding prone hamstring curls versus seated. It's been years since I've done seated leg curls, as I've always thought the stretch in the prone position was superior.... And if I'm honest, I've subconsciously associated that exercise with the bench-texting kids who do one half-hearted set and then sit on their phone for 5 minutes. Looks like it's time to switch up some movements for me on leg day! 👍
Really liked how you mentioned the ECM playing a role. It’s crazy how we believed that titin bearer the majority of passive tension but we now know the ECM bears much more
Regarding the Japanese study with the overhead versus pushdown tricep movements. It occurs to me that in this case the stretched long head may have fatigued sooner and thus the exercise regimen amounted to greater intensity for the lateral and medial heads. If I understand it correctly this would entail the exhaustion curve to be flatter when the muscle is stretched, although I am not sure how that could really be measured, it's a hidden quantity for now.
@@HouseofHypertrophy Also, another alternative occurs to me just now: It may be that there is something in the fact of being stretched that immediately increases recruitment of the other heads, regardless of fatigue. A sort of technical de-loading response perhaps.
Awesome awesome video!!! I really liked That japanies study of that Maeo researcher, that you showed. It was suprising! Also the researcher Barbahlio dissapointed me after I saw that : 04:04, Also suprising.. Anyway, looking fowaed for the next one🙏🏼
Thank you bro. I agree, Maeo is putting out some great papers, he's on a roll with these stretched based studies. 2023 - Incline curls vs preacher curls? maybe. And yeah, that Barbalho situtations sucks. It's a shame :(
Why partials are good (or can be) anecdotally: 1. Allow you to LIFT HEAVIER WEIGHT than full rom. 2. Don’t take as much energy as full ROM which can help when doing other exercises or longer workouts or for when you just want to get in a quick workout without destroying yourself 3. Elicits a different muscle diver recruitment response (they feel different) which can make the training a bit more fun and therefor keep you coming back to they gym 4. They take less time than full rom, which allows for faster workouts or more exercises done in a given time period. I’m not saying they are better than full rom, but they have their place.
Already used leg extensions from 100 to about 60 degrees after seeing earlier videos from you hinting at it being superior for muscle gains. Result : a clearly better development than before , especially the lower quads.
About preacher curl data, its worth to note that in boths cases, preacher curl is always in shortened biceps position due to fact, u needs to put ur whole arm behind ur back to gain maximum biceps stretch. So that exercise isnt perfect to test it. Imo one of best tool to measure that, is just by looking at ring gymnast that works mostly in maximum biceps stretch (planks etc). There is a reason why their arms are MASSIVE.
It's how I've been training, myself and others, for over a year. The basis of my Heavy Duty Memoir book. It helped me crack 18" calves, and a 54" chest.
And just like broscience showed time and time again, so many buff guys rep out their exercises with stretched partials: dB press in the lower part, lower part of pushups, lower part of dips...
@@HouseofHypertrophy trial and error leads to some serious gains. Especially since gymbros were much more of a result driven community pre internet. Obv there is some dumb stuff but lately more and more is kinda proven right.
Really great video as always. I have been pushing myself to really connect with the muscle while under stretch and trying to keep it under load throughout the entire ROM. Sometimes it means that my ROM is shy of full, but my overall results seem better. It seems that what we’re seeing in a number of muscle activation videos confirms that most full ROM actions have a very pronounced easy spot. Top of curl, etc. Load under stretch sure appears to be where the heavy activation occurs.
Best training advice out here on yt. It‘s probably too theoretical for a lot of people, but for me it‘s perfect. It‘s also funny how I always already know some studies mentioned by you :)
In order to achieve anything in life you need the right method as well as consistency. Gaining more muscle takes not only the right training but sticking to it.
As always, thank you for the amazing content. The best channel on RU-vid to offer true training science for hypertrophy. You have put out a considerable amount of of information. Perhaps I have missed it but, has there been any studies on optimum training for calf growth? Thank you again.
I think the benefit of going past 90 degrees on squats is for getting a stretch in the knee to strengthen tendons on that area, but I agree, like you said quad growth is maximized at 90 degrees knee flexion
You squat deeper to strengthen other muscles. The deeper you go the more you stretch hammies and glutes, not to mention the adductors that work more on the deep bottom position.
Two potential reasons for overhead tricep extensions yielding additional hypertrophy to the medial and lateral heads: 1. More time spent in a hypoxic environment, greater metabolic buildup, increased reliance on the larger, more anaerobic high threshold motor units that are known to be highly susceptible to growth. 2. Lat. and med. triceps may conceivably achieve some level of stretch due to the long head actually pulling on them through the tricep tendon.
These are both great potential points. The first one is difficult to argue as overall metabolic build up largely does not seem to correlate with hypertrophy - ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-6T4oV4foEKM.html . The second one certainly is plausible too!
Great video as always! I hope you're making some bank off this. Do you think you will ever do another guide, similar to the bench press one, but for a different type of work out?
Thank you my friend. And I do plan to make other guides. I'll probably do them as a whole free RU-vid video itself (such as the ultimate guide to squatting for strength and hypertrophy, etc.)
For biceps, people's genetics differ vastly on that front IMO, I always find new people with amazing bicep genetics with long or short insertions! Also, for chest, I remember Arnold gave tips for bigger chest, and what helped him is pec flies, but with much higher ranger of motion, very stretched(esp. for his big muscles). I did the same and my chest exploded in size after like 3-4 months of being at a plateau!
On the Japanese study on triceps hipertrophy, one reason that the partial might have had a better result is that the skull crusher has basically no tension on the triceps when the elbow is fully extended, while the partial keeps constant tension on the triceps in a stretched position. My assumption on the reason for the result is on the strength curve of the exercise itself. Maybe an exercise that could keep constant tension during the whole range of motion would give even better results, just like lateral raises with cables or machines when compared to free weight.
A "win/win" strategy (for most muscle groups that can be performed safely) Do your sets to failure/near failure, and finish with partials, with all sets or your last set with each exercise.
One of the things I've noticed in the last year that I've been focusing on getting a really good stretch on the machine preacher curls is the size of my biceps right near my elbow. I can't confirm exact measurement changes (I've only been measuring the middle of my arm circumference), but I've found I'm getting a massive pump and the area by my elbow is way more noticeable despite very slight changes in overall arm size. I might try adding in some stretched range of motion partials at the end of my last sets of these highly stretched isolations to see if there's anything 'extra' there. I am a little more cautious about adding range of motion increases / weight increases, so that my body can adapt to the loading. Ego lifting with a really strong stretch seems like a very bad combination. Anyways...in many cases I find myself highly preferring lifts that have a really good stretch (seated hamstring curls, preacher curls, overhead triceps extensions, dumbbell / machine skull crushers, pec deck, ab rollouts), over those that have less range of motion, but all a greater load (SLDL vs conventional DL is a good example). My perception is that I can get more out of less weight, while also beating up my joints less.
I’d like to see the studies and know if the number of reps were equal. If so, then that’s the issue. I train full and partial stretch. But with partial, my rep count is around 5 more using same weight. If the study kept the rep count the same, then I’m not sure about the studies. I find partial stretch reps increase time under tension, often increases intensity, but also I have to increase reps. Make sense?
did the studies try to equate load in a stretched or tightened position. I would think since you're weaker in a stretched position that a 100lb leg extension in a stretched position would be more challenging than 100 at a tightened one.
The loads were relative to the specific range of motion. So if they trained with an 80% one-rep max load, the stretched position would have used an 80% load relative to their stretched one-rep max, the shortened group would have used 80% of their shortened one-rep max.
Both skull crusher variations shown in first tricep study were not at a full stretch. A behind the neck overhead french press would have been a better gauge of a full stretch since laying down still puts the bar at a 90° angle and never puts the triceps at a full stretch.
Hello, in my case I have also found that movements with more stretches generally work better for me. Where it bugs me in this regard is on certain movements where I can't do this example: 1 Pectaurals if too much stretching injury 2 legs if I go down too much in the press I develop big buttocks and few quadriceps 3deltoid medium I don't see how to really stretch anyway 4 dips all the way down possibility of doing the clavicular beam but I have to be slow because of the risk of injury. This is the problem of stretching in amplitude the muscle is in a more fragile position
This principle seems to be quite popular lately. I started thinking about it a week or two ago, probably yt recommended something related (coincidence?). And yesterday Jeremy Ethier uploaded a video about it and now this video dropped.
I speculate that the glutes and adductors grew more with full ROM squats due primarily to closer proximity to failure (of glutes/adductors), rather than lengthened position (though this likely contributed), as glutes/adductors (particular adductors) are recruited more in the lower portion of squats.
Overall, it seems both the glute max and adductors do not have greater leverage during deeper squats: www.researchgate.net/publication/301690652_Relative_Muscle_Contributions_to_Net_Joint_Moments_in_the_Barbell_Back_Squat Thus, differences in proximity to failure of the musculature is probably not what's going on. Although, with heavier loads, the adductors specifically might have greater leverage in deeper squats.
@@HouseofHypertrophy i reviewed the study you linked out of interest. As described in the results/discussion section it appears that adductor magnus contributed more to hip extension with greater squat depth (and also with LIGHTER loads here), but that surprisingly the inverse is true for glutes “despite it being in stretch”. So does this mean adductors have greater leverage with full ROM, but glutes don’t?
Hi @House of hypertrophy, great video as always. There is however a concept that I am often missing in this ROM discussion. There is also research that indicates that LML biased exercises results into more accumulation of calcium ions, resulting into more contraction coupling failure, muscle damage and fatigue related responses. So yes, with the same amount of relevant volume it is looking promising for LML biased training. However, it has been shown SML training does not bring the same degree of repeated bout effect, and might allow more volume to be done short term but potentially also long term before non funtional overreaching occurs. This is an important concept to consider looking at SML vs LML. Would be great to hear your perspective on this one. Fatigue dynamics might be an interesting topic for your future videos.
Hey my friend, I think you bring up some very interesting points. I do plan to make videos on fatigue soon. But to summarize my current thoughts, I don't think the damage from longer length training should be a concern. We have good data to believe individuals adapt with the repeated bout effect over a few weeks such that their recovery is waaaayyy quicker.
@House of hypertrophy that is good to hear! Yeah, I agree that the recovery will get much better in the short term. However, fatigue wise based on some potential mechanics I am still inclined to think that SML and LML will not compare similar. A maybe bit more extreme example is the RDL, which depending on the individual still give much soreness, despite of being accustomed to this exercise. Yes, there is probably a muscle specific role playing as well. To formulate it simply, not every muscle can get the same degree of stretch. Considering that total accumulation of total body muscle damage and feedback systems is probably an important factor in overreaching, I am not that confident to suggest LML outperforms SML for hypertrophy in an isolated scenario. An interesting question to be asking is, what happens in fatigue and hypertrophy metrics if we compare higher volumes of SML vs lower volumes of LML. What do you think?
I'm not convinced it's the stretch per se that's beneficial, but maybe the fact that fully stretched muscles generally mean we're in an awkward position so the muscles don't get exercised anywhere near as much as when we are in a more natural position, meaning we may just be getting newby gains when stretched. Whatever the reason, training stretched is definitely helping me.
Very interesting point. I'd love to see a study performed on more experienced lifters. But then there's the issue of the study would have to take place over such a long period of time as the gains would be so much slower in the experienced lifters
Very interesting video and very well explained as usual. I'm quite open to the possibility that partials at stretched positions can increase hypertrophy. After all the muscle is spending more time at an increased tension compared to a full range of motion. However I'm not sure whether the tendons & ligaments will adapt enough at the same time to prevent an injury.
In my experience, exercises that stretch and shorten muscle under load are better for hypertrophy than those that emphasize one or the other. For example, seated leg curls are better than lying leg curls and SLD/RDL.
Were the weights adjusted for the partials and full range of motion? Cause we can move more weight in that partial range which might lead to a difference in growth
The loads were relative to the specific range of motion. So if they trained with an 80% one-rep max load, the stretched position would have used an 80% load relative to their stretched one-rep max, the shortened group would have used 80% of their shortened one-rep max.
@@HouseofHypertrophy hey man!! Thanks for the reply! It's because you and your videos that I even thought about asking this!! Keep up the good work and educate us all 🙌✨
About whether the 90* squat is enough for muscle growth based of my personal experience I've done 90* barbell squats 2 times a week for 6 months progressively increasing my weight and reps along the way and absolutely gained muscle But along side that came and unbearable amount of stiffness leaving my quads feeling incredible tight all the time doing passive stretching only temporarily relived the stiffness It was only after I implement an exercise called the reverse nordic curl that fully stretched the quads at their absolutely maximum range ~120* did the stiffness go away and after I started doing squats with atleast 110* range of motion did my quads stop feeling stiff in terms of muscle you will gain but from my experience it's always best to go as deep as your anatomy will allow you
Very interesting to hear your experience, thank you for sharing. And yep, reverse nordics are awesome for gains in all areas (muscle, strength, flexibility)
@@HouseofHypertrophy yes and often times flexibility is always underrated I'd say in terms of overall health and Transferability meaning actually being able to use your muscles properly in numerous real life scenarios
You could do a set with full range of motion with a RPE of 8/9 and then immediately followed by some partial reps with a stretched position. This should lead to a great stress on the muscle 💪🏼
I would REALLY like to see study done on pullups/chinups lat growth study using rom as now some science based coaches are saying lats are most active and have best leverage when humerus is lower than 120-90 degrees. I would also like to see PROPER tricep study and bicep study on training long mucle lenghts vs neutral vs short positions as there is contradicting evidence. Well I basically want to see these studies on all muscles.
@@HouseofHypertrophy yes, until then just have to do what has worked before and experiment. I just started to implement incline curls because I easily get elbow and bicep pain in many exercises. Updating later when I have done it couple months.
Very interesting about the triceps. Another RU-vidr I follow bought some expensive kit which he applies to the muscle group he's training and analyses the part of the muscle being used for each exercise. He was shocked that what he though was working his lateral head was in fact working his long head more. And he found that using a lot of weight and having poor form for triceps pushdowns, IE, just from the bottom position up about a quarter of the way, worked the lateral head more than any other exercise or form!
Preacher curl exercise works at Short length of the muscle... So.... It might be the reason for equal gain.. Because actually both exercises are not in lengthened partial....
if the stretch portion of a rep is more anabolic which seems likely then a set purely of stretch reps say just 1/3 reps in that stretch position should give you more growth than full range if only for the reason that you are cutting out the least anabolic part of the rep and spending more time in that stretch position in any one set it is logical to me
So I've done past videos on range of motion, but I thought I'd re package it with some extra data as my vids tend to get more views nowadays haha :) But thank you for following me for all this time dude, I hope my vids have been useful to you in some way!
Okay, since you're citing a greater increase in strength in the bench press with full ROM as an example, the question arises, strength in other studies also increased more in the stretch protocols, and if not increased more, then how can one speak of more hypertrophy. By the way, the strength in the bench press could increase more due to the fact that the front delts at the bottom of the amplitude worked more and their hypertrophy was greater, and not the hypertrophy of the pectoral muscle, was greater.
There's likely more tension in the stretched position because of the deleveraged position. On the other hand, there's probably more muscle damage too so maybe not worth it to focus on.
Hey, I sent you a DM in instagram about a new study (not published yet) named "Greater gastrocnemius muscle hypertrophy after partial range of motion training carried out at long muscle lengths".
So full range it's crucial together with proper load, but still many people in my gym uses massive weights, at least for their capabilities, it's even more notorious in exercises like in leg press (45°) or biceps, so they have to make the flexion with a partial range of motion. Is that some ego related stuff?, does that happen in most gyms?
How the stiff leg deadlift grow more hamstring than the conventional one? The first don't use the hamstring man... they just stretch. If you want hamstring do the conventional one so that you use them with the offfloor motion..
Ok so the negative change in quad width with low angle squats is actually sad, this means that squatting this way can even be considered "lower than MRV".
Excellent content as always and fantastic timing. I've been toying with the idea of switching my upper leg isolation exercises from seated leg curls and seated leg extensions to Nordic curls and reverse Nordics for this exact reason. Sounds like there's merit to that idea.
I'll drop a piece of my anedoctal experience. I've been trying to incorporate more stretched positions in my training for around 3 months, and it has shown really positive effects for most of the muscles. BUT, for the pecs, I went from hands on the ground push ups to pareletes, to increase the ROM and stretch, really focusing on the lower position, and my chest results have been significantly worse. Ofc there may be a lot of reasons for that, but I will try to go back to the floor for a while and see what happens, then I report back here ahahaha
It's weird that muscle damage has been debunked as a factor to cause hypertrophy while other studies show more hypertrophy with the stretch wich actually cause muscle damage.
So there are many potential reasons besides damage that could explain the greater muscle growth at stretched muscle lengths, such as passive forces at long lengths being additive to the active forces, thus leading to more overall mechanical tension. It's also worth noting my view is damage isn't the primary driver of hypertroph (there are many other cases where more damage does not equal more growth), but that doesn't mean damage plays a 0% role in growth, maybe is does to a tiny amount.
