When you first got into lifting, you might have noticed a weird “doublethink” in the gym. On the one hand, you’re told that benching doesn’t count unless you touch your chest. Meanwhile, on other movements like the squat, the average gym-goer is perfectly happy curtailing their range of motion.
Ultimately, the range of motion you use should be the one that lets you reach your goals the fastest. However, as it turns out, the answer to that question depends on what your goals are. Fortunately, this was the topic of my doctoral thesis, so I feel well-equipped to answer these questions.
First, let’s touch on performance. We conducted a meta-analysis and systematic review of all the literature comparing different ranges of motion on strength, power, and sport-type outcomes. To summarize, performance adaptations appear to be range of motion-specific – training in a given range of motion usually results in greater improvements than if you train in a different range of motion.
Interestingly, a full range of motion seems to lead to pretty robust partial range of motion gains, too. Conversely, however, a partial range of motion doesn’t increase full range of motion performance to quite the same extent.
So, is that the end of the story? Avoid partial range of motion – unless your sport/what you’re trying to become better at involves a partial range of motion – and embrace exclusively full range of motion training?
Not so fast. It turns out that there is a small-but-growing body of evidence suggesting that to maximize even full range of motion gains, we may want to incorporate both full and partial range of motion training. We have a few studies broadly showing similar-or-slightly better strength gains when training with a variable range of motion versus just using a full range of motion (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6).
As an example, a study by Bazyler and colleagues (1) compared doing exclusively full range of motion squats to doing 50% full range of motion squats and 50% partial range of motion squats. The result? Slightly greater strength gains when using a combination of ranges of motion versus just sticking to full range of motion.
So, if you’re a powerlifter/weightlifter/strongman athlete etc., you may benefit from using some partials in your training alongside your highly-specific work.
What about size? Well, when you simply compare full range of motion to partial range of motion and look at size gains, improvements are very similar.
However, it’s important to note that not all partials are created equal: some are performed at longer-muscle lengths (in the stretched position – think the bottom of a bicep curl) whereas others are performed at shorter-muscle lengths (top of a bicep curl). Conceivably, the muscle length at which resistance training is performed could mediate the muscle growth obtained, as several studies have found better hypertrophy when performing the same partial repetition at longer- versus shorter-muscle lengths. When we analyzed studies in this fashion, here’s what we found.
As you can see, while there were limited data to draw upon in comparing a full range of motion to a partial range of motion performed at longer-muscle lengths, it does seem plausible that doing partials at longer-muscle lengths could lead to greater muscle hypertrophy compared to a full range of motion. While data remain sparse, there are two reasons to be optimistic when it comes to partial reps in the stretched position.
First, there is consistent evidence of training at longer-muscle lengths leading to more hypertrophy than training at shorter-muscle lengths across a variety of muscle actions. When comparing partials to partials, seven out of eight studies have found a benefit to lengthened partials compared to shortened partials in terms of muscle hypertrophy (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8). Likewise, most isometric contraction studies also find better growth when isometrics are performed at longer-muscle lengths vs shorter-muscle lengths (1).
Second, a couple more studies comparing a full range of motion to lengthened partials have been published since the publication of this meta-analysis. When you consider all five studies on the topic, four have found better hypertrophy from lengthened partials, and the final study has found no major difference in muscle growth (1, 2, 3, 4, 5).
So, while it’s too early to say with complete certainty, lengthened partials appear like a promising strategy to maximize hypertrophy.
Learn more
Be sure to check out the detailed video on range of motion for hypertrophy and strength that we released earlier this month!
Subscribe to the SBS YouTube channel to get a notification when new videos are released.
Recent Content
How Much Should You Rest Between Sets to Build Muscle? (Science Explained)
Milo covers the science of how long to rest between sets to maximize muscle growth.
Watch the video →
|
|
Get Stronger Doing Less Training (Science Explained)
Pak gives a comprehensive breakdown of the literature on what's the least amount of training a trained lifter needs to do in order to get stronger.
Watch the video →
|
|
|
Is Body Fat Spot Reduction Really a Myth?
Greg, Pak, and Milo tackle the research around body fat spot reduction.
Listen now →
|
That's it for today's newsletter. Remember to subscribe to the SBS YouTube for a new video this Friday. Then, we'll be back with a new podcast episode next week, and another edition of this newsletter in two weeks.
Have a great rest of your week.
|
|
The SBS Team
Greg, Pak, Milo, and Lyndsey
|