Comment by vidarh
10 hours ago
> I understand the complexity and difficulty of researching the subject, but this entire article is no good and is hardly applicable to most of the population IMO
Most of the population is untrained, and in many countries a majority is overweight.
I don't think your concern about "correctly assessing their 1RM" matters either - if anything that means the loads are even lower relative to actual 1RM, and their subjects were still getting results.
It may not tell us much about outcomes at the top end, but more knowledge of what advice to give "most people" is important, and if they can get good results at low percentages of 1RM, it seems a lot more likely you'll get people to try.
That is exactly the issue with incorrectly gauging 1rm- if it’s too low, than the supposed ‘resistance’ training with 70-80% of 1rm isn’t actually that.
Is it fair to compare A to B, when the A in question isn’t exactly an A, but rather something closer to B?
It is fairly irrelevant when you're dealing with a group of people who are all using the same means of determining their 1RM.
The point isn't the precise effect on a given percentage of 1RM, but the relative difference between groups.