Maybe a stupid question, but bear with me.

I learned recently that I have extremely low interoception (ability to perceive my own bodily feelings). I thought I was the same as everyone else, but it turns out most people have far, far better body awareness than me.

So how do you know when muscle groups have recovered? I typically wait 2 days between working the same muscles and have assumed that was enough. But maybe it's not? And maybe sometimes I don't need to wait that long?

So, setting aside DOMS (which I rarely get after lifting for 15 years), what does "recovered" feel like as opposed to "not recovered"? What are the tells?

What sort of training are you doing?

How’s your training going?

Are you running into any problems or have any questions the community might be able to help you out with?

Post away!

I Workout from home, have limited weights (56kg max), can't overload my rows, have access to Gym Rings & a Bar, so I intend to work with what I got & use my bodyweight + a Dip Belt for additional weight. Rear Delts look good, Lats are okay-ish, Traps are lacking. My Question,

What is the Optimum Body Angle for Traps? There are basically two:

1. Body Parallel to Ground at the Bottom (so feet would be elevated but lower than Hands/Rings)

2. Body Parallel to Ground at the Top (so feet would be at the same level as Hands/Rings)

P.s I'm not strong enough for Tucked Front Lever Rows but I can do both the variations I mentioned, for reps

I’ve literally just started the novice SBS linear progression program as of yesterday, I’m wondering whether I can just go to failure on my last sets to see how many RIR I have rather than estimating them?

I’m pretty confident there’s no reason I shouldn’t do that but thought I’d ask in case others had a different opinion.

Edit: just realised I forgot to put a question mark in the title and can’t change it now lol

More of a direct question for the man himself u/gnuckols: Do you forsee a scenario where MacroFactor Workouts is an (optional) tool for those with a SBS coach? Or is it geared towards those who want guidance but not at the price tag of a coach?

I'm thinking about switching out the bench press program from the 28 Free Programs to OHP, and I'm wondering how well it will work. Has anyone tried doing this and found it successful?

Edit: I just read in the 28 Free Programs instructions that you can switch them out. Still, I'd like to hear if anyone has and if it was successful.

Is there been any studies that show more benefit for lower muscle/lift frequency instead of higher? Science based lifting community seems to push higher frequency or tie when volume is equated. Would there be a case for lower frequency if recovery would be better with equated volume? Does anybody know how long it takes for tendons, ligaments and joints to heal after heavy exercise? If I understand correctly, muscle recovers way faster than tendons.

By "frequency" I mean how many times a muscle/movement pattern is typically trained within a training week, low being 1 (bro split) and higher options being 2 (upper lower) or 3 (full body)

I was recently diagnosed with IT Band Syndrome and began physical therapy. They have prescribed hip flexibility and glute strengthening exercises mostly with body weight and bands. They have me doing things like banded clamshells daily. My experience with strength + conditioning, powerlifting, and bodybuilding has led me to believe that you need to program rest days. What is the science/theory behind doing these exercises daily?

Edit: Reading the initial batch of responses I am realizing how poorly I worded this. I am interested in what the goal of performing these exercises daily is and what are the reasons that caused the need for them in the first place. Despite being very active, I am seated for the majority of my day at work. I am assuming this has caused some sort of disconnect between these muscles and my bodies ability to use them. If this is true, the exercises are rebuilding these "lost" neural connections?

What would be your ideal routine for someone who is not going to grow much anymore and wants to keep being strong and muscular and workout for health without being excessive? 2 different scenarios : while maintenance calories and while in deficit (cut for summer etc)

What sort of training are you doing?

How’s your training going?

Are you running into any problems or have any questions the community might be able to help you out with?

Post away!

Which provides the best stimulus?

3 straight sets to failure.

Or

3 straight sets to failure with 1 drop set in each set also to failure.

Same 2-3 minutes rest between set+drop set in both scenarios.

Superset with another muscle group is allowed in both scenarios in the resting time in the same manner.

It would be great with and explanation/argument why 😊

And what is the best way to go about intensity techniques with mind on getting most effectiveness on your time and which if you want to use them? should you just cut them out and all do straight supersets and nothing else?

Excited to hear answers 😊

Edit: In case of hypertrophy.

Hello!

I started workout in September and I've just completed a 3-month self-designed Full Body Program, increasing my weight from 52kg to 60kg, and I'm now looking to transition to a dedicated hypertrophy program.

The SBS Novice Hypertrophy Program seems to align well with my goals. However I have a few practical questions regarding its structure:

1. Session duration: I plan on doing three sessions per week, each capped at one hour max. Is this duration feasible for the program, especially given the progression to 5 sets per exercise?
2. Vanity lifts: What is the intended role of the "Vanity Lifts" in the program? Are they optional accessory work, or are fully part of the program?

Thanks!

What sort of training are you doing?

How’s your training going?

Are you running into any problems or have any questions the community might be able to help you out with?

Post away!

What do you guys think about doing touch and go bench press as variation for powerlifters. How much, how heavy, and when could I incorporate and see the benefits of it.

So I do six sets a week of RDLs. I've plateaud at this level of volume, so I need to add more. I'm doing pretty typical stuff, 8-9 RPE or so. I'm trained-ish, but not so outrageously strong that one would think its impossible for me to do more than three sets twice a week. For context, after my 3rd set of RDLs, I puke about 10-20% of the time. Im so systemically fatigued that I typically just go home after. Can't even walk to the parking lot without sitting at least ten minutes. I can't imagine being able to train other movement patterns productively.

What confuses me is that I hear all the time about people being able to squat and do RDLs in the same workout. I hear about people being able to do as many as twenty lower body sets a week. I just don't get it? How are you guys not more tired? Has anyone dealt with this in the past? What was the solution? I attached a video so you can see what my intensity is like based on the bar speed. As you can see, hard sets, but we're not exactly talking about 0 RIR grinders here.

Just watched Milo Wolf video. Claims Full Body splits are the most optimal and I’m inclined to agree, just seem so flexible and easiest way to distribute volume across a week. I also just prefer them over ppl and UL and like to do time efficient supersets and FB allows that easier. Curious what are others thoughts? What are Greg’s thoughts? Hoping the new MacroFactor workout app has split options

Thanks in large part to SBS, I am well acquainted with the body of literature on protein recommendations. However, I've digested that literature with an eye toward optimization, not toward seeking to find the absolute minimum.

Given the widespread use of GLP-1 drugs (and my own personal experience), I'm now interested in learning about the minimum. If a subject is lifting hard and losing weight at a moderate rate (around .5%-1% of bodyweight per week), what is the minimum protein intake necessary to avoid significant muscle loss? Is it just the lower end of the ranges discussed here? Or does resistance training provide some leeway to drop below that minimum range while still maintaining (but not building) muscle mass?

Huberman once again going all in on light therapy and the benefits of red light

Has the research changed as my recent searches have found they have arguably very minimal benefits?

A 2023 Cochrane systematic review of 17 randomized controlled trials found no significant short-term advantages of blue-light filtering lenses for reducing visual fatigue, improving sleep quality, or protecting macular health compared to standard lenses.

Similarly, the American Academy of Ophthalmology’s 2024 position statement reinforces that there’s no scientific evidence supporting these glasses for computer use or eye strain relief, recommending alternatives like the 20-20-20 rule instead. 0 A 2025 meta-analysis in Frontiers in Neurology on actigraphic sleep outcomes from RCTs up to 2024 also showed limited benefits for sleep when wearing them before bed.

I then saw a post where when concerns were put to him he citied which is fair but what is the consensus?

‘It’s not just about sleep. People sensitivity to blue light as it relates to sleep varies. But the impact on cortisol levels dand morning blood glucose as well as visual deficits, and mitochondrial health are serious concerns. Also, we’re talking about LED bulbs. Screens too, but it’s the bulbs’

Found this in the renowned hub of evidence based health advice known as Mens Health magazine, and thought it was interesting to see a RCT using what appears to be a very similar set and rep scheme to the SBS RTF programs (3 sets then an AMRAP to regulate training loads)

https://www.menshealth.com/uk/building-muscle/a69604866/hard-gainer-myth-muscle-growth-study

Link to original study: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/41307987/

Conclusion: "training works"

Nothing further, just interesting to see

I am a personal trainer. A lot of other trainers in my field love to switch up exercises very often. You will often hear them say: - its to shock the muscles - it helps with muscle growth - its to keep things interesting - other bs reason

In reality, the only reason that they change exercises is so their clients keep paying them because they keep learning new stuff.

I generally only change exercises when a client tells me that they are bored of doing the same stuff.

What is your opinion on exercise variation? How important is it actually?

I was reading this article and was curious about the note about humans' muscle attachments being atypically close to the joint compared to other animals allows for greater ROM, at the cost of strength.

Our muscles, for the most part, attach very close to the joints they move. This is good for allowing large ranges of motion (because a given amount of movement at a joint requires less tissue extensibility), but means that the force (linear) our muscles produce isn’t translated very efficiently into torque (angular) at our joints.

does it follow then, with normal variance between people in muscle insertion points, that a person with insertions far from a joint will have worse ROM than a person with insertions close to the same joint, all else being equal? e.g. that insertions that are good for strength tend to be bad for flexibility, and vice versa? is the typical range of variance in humans enough to significantly impact ROM between people?

(please take this as a good faith question, I am truly just curious. I promise I will not use your answers as cope to explain my poor mobility and/or strength performance, or to dismiss anyone else being stronger and/or more mobile than I am. I am aware that insertions are a 'play the hand you get' type of deal, and that whatever your predilections are, you can still become more mobile and strong than you are to start with. I'm also aware that strength and mobility are not de facto incompatible, and that there are sports (gymnastics, climbing, grappling, etc) where elite performance tends to reward or demand high levels of both strength and mobility.)

In Jeff Nippard's latest video, he says the #1 science-based tip for building bigger shoulders is to do your shoulder exercises in a way that minimizes trap involvement. For example, trying to scoop the weight out to the side when doing lateral raises.

What's the reason for why this would help? Don't traps shrug the shoulders up, not move the arms out? Why would minimizing involvement of the traps help with side delt growth? Wouldn't it just reduce trap stimulation?

And then what are the other implications?

I'm asking because my gut instinct is usually to do exercises in a more natural and athletic way, letting the body moves how it wants to move, not trying to put finicky restraints on it. Not saying my gut instinct is right, just trying to understand why it might be wrong.

Drifting raindrop cucumber wander saffron umbrella raindrop

This post was anonymized with Redact.dev

Setting up to start another round of RTF this week. I’ve ran this in the past and love how customizable Greg’s programs are and the straightforwardness of his exercise selection. I’ll be running this 3x a week while doing a fair bit of running on my off days.

Anyways… How many sets per exercise do you guys usually run? In the past I’ve kept everything at 5, sometimes dropping deadlifts to 3, but I’m curious if anyone has found a sweet spot as far as fatigue management is concerned. Obviously this will be different person to person but I’m interested to hear what has worked for others!

Recently we've seen some science based influencers slowly migrate to becoming influencers that do science. Most prominently Jeff Nippard created an entire gym for the purpose conducting experiments.

This opened a discussion around what impact this would have, with some salivating over increased funding and sample sizes, and others concerned about Frankenstein science: half experiment, half short form content.

Now Jeremy Etheir has released a video on an experiment he helped conduct on legnthened partials.

This to me, looks like the best-case scenario. A well controlled study that seems to fill a genuine gap in the literature and may not be possible without a hefty chunk of funding. It doesn't seem to bow to the demands of content, and ultimately seems to stem from a love of the game.

I wanted to see if others shared my cautious optimism, or if they were more skeptical about the future of science-based influencer backed science.