[shark]

T - 40 minutes on the board, stopped early when the first joint on my middle right finger went twang in a very worrying way. However 10 minutes later it was totally fine, close call. 5 x 5 fast pull ups in an effort to get a bit more zip in my movements.

I’ve found this really useful for the throw move on Bens and hoping it will give me more snap for the throw move on the Oak. Been doing it once a week.

I’d suggest that any power training is done fresh ie not after a board session. Makes it hard to fit into a schedule I know. I do it the day after a climbing day and then after a few hours will do a lengthy Max hangs session which seems to work.

Boring video on fast/power pull-ups here:

[RobK]

Thanks Shark. Yeah it felt like something that could be useful to incorporate into the plan. No reason I couldn't do them before the board. As I said previously, I think the strength stuff is something I need to get on top of a bit more. The board is great for body tension/contact strength/shoulder stuff etc. but with not getting outside or to the wall I feel like I'm missing out on a lot of general conditioning I would have been getting passively through that.

[tomtom]

Thanks Shark. Yeah it felt like something that could be useful to incorporate into the plan. No reason I couldn't do them before the board. As I said previously, I think the strength stuff is something I need to get on top of a bit more. The board is great for body tension/contact strength/shoulder stuff etc. but with not getting outside or to the wall I feel like I'm missing out on a lot of general conditioning I would have been getting passively through that.

I thought the video is for people to power train who don't have access to a board? In the first min he pretty much says that climbing on a steep board or campus board is great for power....

But doing some fast pull ups probably won't make things worse :D

[RobK]

I thought the video is for people to power train who don't have access to a board? In the first min he pretty much says that climbing on a steep board or campus board is great for power....

I feel the board is great for a lot of things, including power, but only in certain types of movement. One thing I feel I miss out on in is that deep lock off/pull up type of movement and strength you get on a bar or a campus board. Maybe that's just because I'm not strong enough to do that at 45 degrees and everything is just a throw!

[tomtom]

I thought the video is for people to power train who don't have access to a board? In the first min he pretty much says that climbing on a steep board or campus board is great for power....

I feel the board is great for a lot of things, including power, but only in certain types of movement. One thing I feel I miss out on in is that deep lock off/pull up type of movement and strength you get on a bar or a campus board. Maybe that's just because I'm not strong enough to do that at 45 degrees and everything is just a throw!

Try doing the same moves with bigger footholds... I had the same thing when I first had my board set up...

Started with tiny feet, couldnt do anything. Put on small handholds as feet (bold ons) and moved from throwing, to deadpointing, to nearly doing the moves static.

Now moved to smaller feet and am following the same cycle. Foot up, try and lock arm and throw...

I've progressively got better over the last 9 months.. I assume thats power! Mines a 53 degree - and even going from huge jug to huge jug is a bit of a throw!

[Nibile]

Boring video on fast/power pull-ups here:

And the added weight is total BS. Not only because it's very dangerous if you really do a fast pull up, because it smashes your family jewels (even if you attach it on the back), but also because the percentage is extremely arbitrary. In fact, many studies advise against adding weight for speed training like campusing and the likes, because it messes with your motor patterns and decreases the speed, the recruitment, etc.
Instead of adding weight, the key should be moving faster, and getting higher, wich is the obvious consequence, as anyone who's ever tried fast pull ups surely knows.
Finally, there are tons of more advanced power training routines, like PAP for instance.
I'd sincerely use your time in a better way Shark.

[tomtom]

I'd sincerely use your time in a better way Shark.

Another T shirt slogan contender!

(edit :D - of course)

[RobK]

Instead of adding weight, the key should be moving faster, and getting higher

I'll stick to getting faster as if I get any higher I'll go through the garage roof. My bobble hat provides a bit of protection if I get too over enthusiastic.

[nai]

good job NIbs has a suspicious mind

[Bradders]

good job NIbs has a suspicious mind

Never trust someone who wears a woolly hat indoors 

[tomtom]

good job NIbs has a suspicious mind

Never trust someone who wears a woolly hat indoors 

Oops.. (takes off wooly hat)

[Bradders]

Knew I'd get someone haha

[Will Hunt]

I assume the footage of him doing the pull ups had been slowed down to glacial speeds in order to demonstrate correct form, no?

[nai]

Sounds like RobK needs a helmet for his pullups.

[RobK]

Sounds like RobK needs a helmet for his pullups.

I half contemplated it.

[shark]

if you really do a fast pull up, because it smashes your family jewels (even if you attach it on the back),

I’ve been using a divers weight belt so jewels remain intact

Finally, there are tons of more advanced power training routines, like PAP for instance.
I'd sincerely use your time in a better way Shark.

Im receptive. As Pete pointed out last year I’m lacking power/snap. Googling reveals a small study using PAP methods for pull-ups / campusing. Can you suggest a bar routine - presumably it would start with some Max weight pull-ups followed by fast bodyweight ones?

[User deactivated.]

A reasonably quantifiable way for speedwork i've used is hips/bellybutton to bar pullups, as you have to do it explosively to get there.

I aim for a resistance level (bands or additional weight as needed) where I can get 3 reps touching the bar. I never continue to rep out after i've failed to touch even though I could do maybe 5 to 10 more normal pullups.

Campus board might be more specific for climbing but who has a campus board?

[spidermonkey09]

A reasonably quantifiable way for speedwork i've used is hips/bellybutton to bar pullups, as you have to do it explosively to get there.

I aim for a resistance level (bands or additional weight as needed) where I can get 3 reps touching the bar. I never continue to rep out after i've failed to touch even though I could do maybe 5 to 10 more normal pullups.

Campus board might be more specific for climbing but who has a campus board?

I would be terrified of doing these on a doorframe pullup bar as I think the whole thing could easily come off and crush me! Is there any way to work this which is a bit safer?

[User deactivated.]

A reasonably quantifiable way for speedwork i've used is hips/bellybutton to bar pullups, as you have to do it explosively to get there.

I aim for a resistance level (bands or additional weight as needed) where I can get 3 reps touching the bar. I never continue to rep out after i've failed to touch even though I could do maybe 5 to 10 more normal pullups.

Campus board might be more specific for climbing but who has a campus board?

I would be terrified of doing these on a doorframe pullup bar as I think the whole thing could easily come off and crush me! Is there any way to work this which is a bit safer?

I can't think of anything that would be anywhere near specific enough to help pulling power in climbing. If you ever go running, go via a playground with swings???

Speed/power comes pretty quickly in comparison with raw strength though, so it might not be worth worrying about until needed on a specific problem? Training vertical jumps makes me feel generally 'springier'. Aside from dynos, it feels like this can help a bit on those moves where there's not much to pull off but you need to generate power from more of a twitch than anything!

[Nibile]

Can you suggest a bar routine - presumably it would start with some Max weight pull-ups followed by fast bodyweight ones?

Cheers!
It doesn't have to be the very same excercise, in fact, I'd say that it should better be not. What you suggested is more a kind of contrast training.
When I used PAP I would do heavy deadlifts and then explosive pull ups. Using a trap bar you can force the bar backwards, behind the middle line of your body, and this works the last in a unique way (it also reduces the leverage of the lift in itself but this is another story). But regular deadlifts are fine as well.
You could also simply try double dynos on a pull up bar or campus rung: explode up, touch as high as possible with two hands, fall down. Missing the negative phase of the move is very important in power training, it focuses all the effort on the concentric one.

[gollum]

good job NIbs has a suspicious mind

Never trust someone who wears a woolly hat indoors 

I definitely never understood the woolly hat on, shirt off look......especially at the wall

[Mike Nolan]

Edited at Nibs request

I wasn't going to get sucked in to replying to this, but I couldn't stop myself from thanking you for your excellent review! 

It's hard putting yourself out there on YouTube (unless you're called Dave Mac/Neil Gresham/Tom Randall, no doubt!). This was the first video I made, and I know it's easy to criticise, but please remember that I can read comments on the internet. I've had lots of positive feedback, but unsurprisingly it's comments like 'boring' and 'depressing' that really stick.

Are power pullups at 70% of 1RM the only way to train power? Obviously not.
Are they supported by research? Kind of - it's limited.
Are there other more effective ways to train power? Maybe.
Does it work? Probably. Anecdotally I've seen positive results, and know of others using it successfully with other things and tweaks of course.

Edited at Nibs request

Look up the force-velocity curve if you aren't familiar with it. The key is the intent, not how fast they look. I mentioned this in the video. Higher velocity (appears 'fast') = less load and vice versa. Obviously at 70% of 1RM, you're not going to appear as fast as you would at 30% of 1RM if you give both 'maximum intent'. Adjusting the load and velocity, whilst giving maximum intent will produce different levels of power output.

And the added weight is total BS. Not only because it's very dangerous if you really do a fast pull up, because it smashes your family jewels (even if you attach it on the back), but also because the percentage is extremely arbitrary.

I'm going to ignore your comment about adding weight being dangerous because I don't think it is, and focus on the percentage rationale.

Training at 'max power' has been proposed to more effectively increase power production. Adjusting the load, giving maximum intent and achieving a particular velocity, should mean you produce 'max power'.

This velocity range could be calculated on an individual basis specific to pull ups, but not many people have access to velocity training equipment. In the absence of this equipment, some studies propose an equivalent % of 1RM load range to achieve max power. For example, this study proposes 30%-70% of 1RM for bench press: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27699699/ - quite a wide range!

More info on force-velocity curve and calculating max power here: https://simplifaster.com/articles/resistance-training-strength-continuum/

Unfortunately, there's not much research into this max power load range for pull ups. The only study I'm aware of is here: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/314187554_Load_Force_and_Power-Velocity_Relationships_in_the_Prone_Pull-Up_Exercise

This study suggests that the loads that produced highest power outputs were around 70% of 1RM. Although, this power value was lower than the theoretical max power value they derived, so there is a suggestion that max power could be achieved at a lower % of 1RM - they don't provide a figure.

With that, 70% seems like a good place to start to me, but that doesn't mean you won't see benefits from also doing them at 60%, 80% or 20%. It depends on what is appropriate for you, and realistically we should probably train the entire force-velocity curve anyway. I've been doing 80% during strength phases, and then 60%-70% closer to peak phases to get more snappy, for example.

In fact, many studies advise against adding weight for speed training like campusing and the likes, because it messes with your motor patterns and decreases the speed, the recruitment, etc.

Do you have any links? I'd be interested to read these studies. For every study that suggests something is good, you can probably find one that says the opposite!

Instead of adding weight, the key should be moving faster, and getting higher, wich is the obvious consequence, as anyone who's ever tried fast pull ups surely knows.

Again you've missed the point here. It's not about 'adding weight', 'moving faster' or 'getting higher', it's about targeting the velocity/load that leads to max power. Adding weight comes from targeting a percentage of your 1RM. Some people might need to remove weight to achieve 70%, depending on their 1RM. Moving faster is a result of using a lower load and still trying to move fast.

Finally, there are tons of more advanced power training routines, like PAP for instance.
I'd sincerely use your time in a better way Shark.

Yes, lots of other power training methods out there which are all valid and also effective. I agree that PAP is interesting, but it's by no means a magic bullet either. You could try and combine PAP with power pulls...

[Will Hunt]

Don't let Nibs get you down, Mike. He obviously a beast, but if it isn't going postal with a hammer on a big tractor tyre he doesn't want to know.

[Davo]

I watched your vid and I thought it was decent to be fair. That is a pretty harsh review Nibile gave you.

What you suggest seems a reasonable way to try and improve power in the arms and upper body and like you say there are multiple ways to achieve the same goal.

Personally I think my elbows and shoulders would be in bits after 5 sets but that is just me

Dave

[Nibile]

I wasn't going to get sucked in to replying to this, but I couldn't stop myself from thanking you for your excellent review! 

Sorry mate, I didn't want to be offensive, despite UKB being the home of the "dire at every level". Sometimes I get carried out a bit, and I reckon your knowledge.
Please take everything in a friendly way, and accept my apologies. It's hard to stick your head out so big props to you for doing that.
I'd happily ask a mod to remove the offensive part of my post, or the entire post.
Thanks for replying in a constructive and informative way, and with a lot of questions for which I have no answer and a lot of notions that I do not understand. I only spoke from years of useless practice and training.
Great attitude.

[Nibile]

I asked Shark to remove the offensive part of my post, sadly it stays in the quote. I'd be glad if it could be fixed.
Now that I've apologized, I still think that there is a big difference between moving fast and trying to.
I think that what is featured in the video is more strength training than power training. Being power strength plus speed, removing speed removes a basic component of power.
The articles I read about added weights for power training suggested a max 7% of added weight, anymore resulting in a loss of speed. One of them was by a certain Marvin Climbing blog, specifically addressing the campusboard. Others were quoted to me by a friend who is a professional climbing trainer. If you're really interested I can ask him.
I tend to avoid % because as you say the range varies a lot, and I would never use them for a divulgative video aimed at a wide audience.
Even less I'd suggest reps and sets.
As for the links that you gave, I sincerely struggle with their concepts, but I will try to give them a deeper view.
Finally, please believe me if I tell you that moving upwards fast with plates attached to a harness is very dangerous.

[Sasquatch]

Well, since everyone is getting on the be nice bandwagon, then I'll go ahead and weigh in on the critical side.  I appreciate the conversation and am happy to try to keep weighing in. 

#1- Conceptually you are correct and the studies and science generally support your line of thinking.  However, the force/velocity curve is not the same for everyone.  Some people are very fast and not very strong, while others are very strong and not very fast.  In practice, what many people fail to understand is that the climbers who most need to work on this are slower climbers.  I.E. given the curves in this reference (https://simplifaster.com/articles/resistance-training-strength-continuum/), their force/velocity curve is very flat.  This would indicate an athlete with more strength than speed.  The percent that should be trained varies based on the athlete and the need.  So in this case, I would argue a lower weight and faster is better (30% and a focus on speed).  For an athlete with high speed and low strength (yes they are out there) I would suggest they train at the higher end (70%)

#2 - In the study you reference, https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27699699/, it states that 30-70% is good for peak power in the bench press.  It also states " Lighter loads (<30 % of 1RM) appear to provide the highest mean and highest peak power production in the bench press throw exercise." I would argue that in climbing we need to create enough momentum to become nearly weightless to move our hands.  That means what we are targeting is more akin to the throw rather than a conventional press.  We need that level of speed production. 

#3 - In your video, the pullups you show as demonstrations are very slow.  If that is the fastest you can move(even with 11kgs), then I would assume you have a very flat curve and I would strongly recommend you decrease the weight and train to move faster.  I appreciate that you are trying to put valuable information out there but compare this pull-up(https://www.instagram.com/p/B--b17_jdXK/ vs yours, you can see how much of a difference in speed there is.  a few posts later Tyler does the same thing you do, using a 68% test, but again I'd argue that his force curve is relatively flat.  i.e. he is STRONG AF, but not very fast. (and yes, I have said the same thing to him and have had several good discussions about different training concepts)  Showing this as a demonstration is not very helpful IMO.  Perhaps go a bit deeper and find someone who is truly explosive and can demonstrate a VERY fast pullup.  Show both side by side, and then talk why/when to do each rather than giving specific %'s or set/reps. 

#4 - You're presuming the peak force is the final goal of power training.  Climbers are not cyclists or weight lifters who do the exact same thing over and over.  There is a massive amount of motor learning to be done.  And in my mind doing 60-70% max pullups for speed is not a motor learning pathway that is helpful for most climbers.  If you're in lockdown, and only have a pullup bar, I'd say lower weight and faster deeper pullups (pull to your waist) is better.  If you have a wall, then doing easy overhanging problems where you link two movements is better. 

This is a good article from the same site you posted before about the force/velocity curve and its pitfalls.  https://simplifaster.com/articles/force-velocity-training/

[mrjonathanr]

Off topic, apologies, but I thought Tyler Nelson had some really interesting things to say about tendon rehab, unusual to have an MSc in it.

Only gripe is the way Chiropractors call themselves doctors.

[teestub]

  Showing this as a demonstration is not very helpful IMO.  Perhaps go a bit deeper and find someone who is truly explosive and can demonstrate a VERY fast pullup.

https://www.instagram.com/p/B8beeHfoLgy/?igshid=1fpxliuzei8az  Bit of kipping but good speed. Interesting exercise combo too

[Bradders]

https://www.instagram.com/p/B8beeHfoLgy/?igshid=1fpxliuzei8az  Bit of kipping but good speed. Interesting exercise combo too

What a monster 

Also, love the two blokes in the background haha

Also: https://www.instagram.com/p/CJi-JD2qVA6/?igshid=qw0mlct4l94o

Can't tell if partway through the video is sped up or not? Unbelievably fast pull up there if it isn't.

[Mike Nolan]

Well, since everyone is getting on the be nice bandwagon, then I'll go ahead and weigh in on the critical side.  I appreciate the conversation and am happy to try to keep weighing in. 

#1- Conceptually you are correct and the studies and science generally support your line of thinking.  However, the force/velocity curve is not the same for everyone.  Some people are very fast and not very strong, while others are very strong and not very fast.  In practice, what many people fail to understand is that the climbers who most need to work on this are slower climbers.  I.E. given the curves in this reference (https://simplifaster.com/articles/resistance-training-strength-continuum/), their force/velocity curve is very flat.  This would indicate an athlete with more strength than speed.  The percent that should be trained varies based on the athlete and the need.  So in this case, I would argue a lower weight and faster is better (30% and a focus on speed).  For an athlete with high speed and low strength (yes they are out there) I would suggest they train at the higher end (70%)

I don't disagree with you, and this is why I said we should probably train the whole curve. 70% is a starting point for me (based on the limited research), that doesn't mean you won't see benefits from also doing them at 60%, 80% or 20%. You could also argue that 1RM can vary so much day to day that it's probably irrelevant what percentage you actually choose anyway, and that the only way to do it effectively would be with an LPT! 

I accept that this doesn't come across in the video. The idea behind the YouTube video was a short and simple session suggestion for people who are training at home. The video would need to be considerably longer to explain the benefits of adjusting % of 1RM depending on what your force-velocity curve looks like, and that's kind of beyond the scope of a 'simple method to train power at home' in my mind! Maybe I'll do a follow up, but I think we're at risk of getting bogged down in the detail a little!

#2 - In the study you reference, https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27699699/, it states that 30-70% is good for peak power in the bench press.  It also states " Lighter loads (<30 % of 1RM) appear to provide the highest mean and highest peak power production in the bench press throw exercise." I would argue that in climbing we need to create enough momentum to become nearly weightless to move our hands.  That means what we are targeting is more akin to the throw rather than a conventional press.  We need that level of speed production. 

The percentages from those specific exercises are mostly irrelevant though aren't they. We would need to see more research specifically into the pull up, rather than trying to extrapolate.

#3 - In your video, the pullups you show as demonstrations are very slow.  If that is the fastest you can move(even with 11kgs), then I would assume you have a very flat curve and I would strongly recommend you decrease the weight and train to move faster.  I appreciate that you are trying to put valuable information out there but compare this pull-up(https://www.instagram.com/p/B--b17_jdXK/ vs yours, you can see how much of a difference in speed there is.  a few posts later Tyler does the same thing you do, using a 68% test, but again I'd argue that his force curve is relatively flat.  i.e. he is STRONG AF, but not very fast. (and yes, I have said the same thing to him and have had several good discussions about different training concepts)  Showing this as a demonstration is not very helpful IMO.  Perhaps go a bit deeper and find someone who is truly explosive and can demonstrate a VERY fast pullup.  Show both side by side, and then talk why/when to do each rather than giving specific %'s or set/reps.

I made a side by side video of my pull ups and Tyler's from the Instagram video you linked out of interest. There's no perceptible difference in my opinion. I'll send you the video if you'd like to see it?

#4 - You're presuming the peak force is the final goal of power training.  Climbers are not cyclists or weight lifters who do the exact same thing over and over.  There is a massive amount of motor learning to be done.  And in my mind doing 60-70% max pullups for speed is not a motor learning pathway that is helpful for most climbers.  If you're in lockdown, and only have a pullup bar, I'd say lower weight and faster deeper pullups (pull to your waist) is better.  If you have a wall, then doing easy overhanging problems where you link two movements is better. 

I have to disagree, there's no 'better' approach to any of this. (Except for maybe using an LPT to measure your individual force-velocity curve, and designing more individualised sessions with it.)

A variety of different exercises will illicit different responses. 70% of 1RM seems like a good starting point based on the limited available research to develop power. Yes, lower intensities will develop speed, and you can do those too! I see value in 60-70% for climbers, as well as other intensities where appropriate. I think we will need to agree to disagree here in the absence of any further research. 

This is a good article from the same site you posted before about the force/velocity curve and its pitfalls.  https://simplifaster.com/articles/force-velocity-training/

I'll have a read, thanks!

[Sasquatch]

First of all, I agree that it would be great to have more studies on pullups specifically, and then a secondary study to see how pulling speed relates to climbing performance. Does pull speed actually correlate?  However, we don't and you are putting training recommendations out there for the masses.    Therefore, you have made indirectly made the statement that 70% is the "recommended" number. and in your rebuttal to me, you seem stuck on that same number. 

My argument is that if 30-70% all are equal options based on the literature available, then we should be looking for other reasons to choose a different percent.  I could and would argue that 50% is a better starting point, then adjust based on your natural inclinations.  Based on what I know of climbing as a whole, faster movement is really important for big pulling muscles.  Being able to generate very quickly at the outset of a pull is critical as that is generally the moment you have the best purchase with the fingers.  The further you go into the movement the less finger purchase you have. 

Based on my experience with climbers, more often than not sport climbers lack explosive power, so they would be better training at a lower percent and faster.  Whereas a boulderer may be better off doing more strength work at the higher end of the percent. 

The idea behind the YouTube video was a short and simple session suggestion for people who are training at home.

This is why I am disagreeing.  I agree with Nibs that adding weight and asking people to do speed pullups is inappropriate.
 I think you would have been better off saying do fast pullups, and if you can't do a pullup with 50% added bodyweight, then maybe use assistance. 

[Mike Nolan]

70% is based on the literature that is available, as I have explained.

There is no suggestion that 30-70% are equal, if there was I'd have recommended 30-70%! I'm not sure which literature you have got these numbers from.

I'm glad that multiple people have found my video useful and seen improvements in their power. As I have said, there's no single best way to train power, but it seems that my suggestion has been beneficial to those that have tried it.

I'm leaving this thread now, we're going in circles.

[Sasquatch]

70% is based on the literature that is available, as I have explained.

There is no suggestion that 30-70% are equal, if there was I'd have recommended 30-70%! I'm not sure which literature you have got these numbers from.

I'm glad that multiple people have found my video useful and seen improvements in their power. As I have said, there's no single best way to train power, but it seems that my suggestion has been beneficial to those that have tried it.

I'm leaving this thread now, we're going in circles.

70% is based on the literature that is available, as I have explained.

I disagree that 70% is a logical conclusion from the sources you reference.  The study you presented on pullup force production only tested from 70-100% of 1RM, and the MPP increased as the weight got lower.  It is not illogical to presume that lower than 70% would be even better.  Look at Figure 2 for a graphical representation of this. 

And this is a direct quote from the study conclusion:
"Therefore, if absolute maximal power capabilities are to be developed, subjects should use an assistance that would reduce body weight and, therefore, could produce higher movement velocities."

There is no suggestion that 30-70% are equal, if there was I'd have recommended 30-70%! I'm not sure which literature you have got these numbers from.

The 30-70% is an extrapolation from the other meta-study you referenced regarding upper body push strength.  That one concluded that "Moderate loads (from >30 to <70 % of 1RM) appear to provide the optimal load for peak power and mean power in the bench press exercise."  In conjunction with the study above, there appears to be a very good reason in my mind to go below 70%.  Maybe the 30 is a stretch, hence why I said may start at 50%.

I'm glad that multiple people have found my video useful and seen improvements in their power. As I have said, there's no single best way to train power, but it seems that my suggestion has been beneficial to those that have tried it.

I'm leaving this thread now, we're going in circles.

I'm also glad that they have found it helpful.  Anything that furthers the discussion seems to me to be worthwhile. 

[Sasquatch]

I'm leaving this thread now, we're going in circles.

But that is the best thing about UKB 

[Oldmanmatt]

I was reading this study, this morning:

https://www.academia.edu/21822579/A_single_set_of_exhaustive_exercise_before_resistance_training_improves_muscular_performance_in_young_men?email_work_card=title

Whilst sat in a hospital waiting room (so, I haven’t really laid into it yet), but the underlying logic seems sensible.
Essentially, exhausting/burning out the type I fibres of the targeted muscle groups, prior to strength training, appears to lead to greater type II recruitment during the strength phase and more rapid/larger strength gains over time.
Go rip it appart.

[Stu Littlefair]

Rubbish study design though, isn't it?

The group that did the exhaustive exercise before training had a higher training load overall, because they did more exercise. Hard to know if that, or the exhaustive training, was responsible for improved results in that group.

[Oldmanmatt]

Rubbish study design though, isn't it?

The group that did the exhaustive exercise before training had a higher training load overall, because they did more exercise. Hard to know if that, or the exhaustive training, was responsible for improved results in that group.

Yes, but food for thought.
It would be nice to re-run with another group working to exhaustion, post strength training; for instance.
Good old, anecdotal, n=1, personal experience, for myself:
My training has evolved over many years, from something, more or less, a hangover from school PE, to something that, sort of, kinda reflects my interpretation of some quite conflicting information of moderate complexity and partly educated understanding and blah, blah, blah.
I started as a climbing instructor and weight training instructor and a county council sports centre at 16, so it’s always been a secondary career for me. Still find it hard to actually come up with a “good” training program.

Plus I keep changing my mind about what I want to achieve…

Anyway, thirty years ago, it was all stretching (static) before training and volume, volume, volume. No pain no gain etc etc.
That evolved into (for strength training) into 3 set 80/90% 1rm stuff and then work to exhaustion (stacks of press ups and pull ups, usually). Stretch it off etc.

Now, pretty hefty “warm up” followed by a long rest 5-10 minutes, then strength training. No particular cool down. But, my “gains” are way better. Much lower volume, hardly any stretching (once a week, on a rest day).

Seems to chime with the study’s underlying logic, for my experience. Dangerous ground, but intriguing.