The Jeff Nippard Podcast

In this episode, I sit down with exercise scientist Dr. Martin Refalo to discuss his research on reps in reserve (RIR) and what it reveals about how close to failure you need to train to maximize muscle growth. We also explore how exercise selection and fatigue influence your training, and whether low-volume training can be effective for building muscle.
Timestamps:
0:00 - Introduction
2:32 - What Is Reps in Reserve (RIR)?
6:21 - My Favorite Study on RIR
27:54 - Should You Train to Failure?
37:43 - Does Exercise Selection Affect RIR?
45:53 - Should You Be Concerned About Fatigue?
1:01:16 - What RIR Maximizes Muscle Growth?
1:08:40 - How Effective Is Low-Volume Training?
1:19:51 - Martin's Hot Take
References:
Martin's RIR Paper https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38393985/
RIR Meta-Analysis https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38970765/
Social Media and Mental Fatigue https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34000894/
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11235674/
Low-Volume Study https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40249908/

In this podcast episode, I talk with Dr. Conor Heffernan, a historian of sport, fitness, and physical culture, about how lifting and fitness have evolved over the past 140 years. We trace the history decade by decade, starting with Eugen Sandow in the 1890s and going all the way up to the modern social media era of bodybuilding. We discuss how physique standards, nutrition, and training itself have changed along the way.
 
Conor's Website: https://physicalculturestudy.com/
Conor's Substack: https://physicalculture.substack.com/
 
Timestamps:
 
0:00 - Introduction
4:35 - How do modern physiques compare to the early 1900s?
24:29 - Was Eugen Sandow the first fitness scammer?
28:20 - How has fitness knowledge evolved with science?
35:43 - What training looked like in the 1890s to 1920s
44:29 - What training looked like in the 1930s
54:45 - What training looked like in the 1940s
59:47 - Barriers women faced in early fitness culture
1:07:41 - What training looked like in the 1950s to 1980s
1:15:19 - What were the first training splits and diets like?
1:30:18 - What training looked like in the 1990s to 2000s
1:40:35 - How social media changed fitness
1:58:30 - Is fitness history repeating itself?
2:03:45 - What was the best physique era?
2:09:39 - Exploring historic fitness paraphernalia
 
Conor's Physical Culture Recommendations:
 
The Strongman Project: https://strongmanproject.com/
Strength Magazine: https://starkcenter.org/exhibits/type/journals/strength-magazine-1914-1930/
Barbell Films: https://www.barbellfilms.co.uk/
Golden Era Bookworm: https://www.goldenerabookworm.com/
Internet Archive: https://archive.org/
The Tight Tan Slacks of Dezso Ban: https://ditillo2.blogspot.com/
 
Recommended Physical Culture Authors:
 
David L. Chapman
John D. Fair
Jan Todd
Shannon L. Walsh
Jason P. Shurley

In this podcast episode, I talk with Dr. Josh Pelland and Dr. Zac Robinson, two individuals who I think are on the cutting edge of exercise science research. They both co-authored two of the most widely cited meta-analyses published in the past few years: one on training volume and the other on proximity to failure. We take a deep dive into those findings while also touching on topics like individual training responses, "the stretch," and the limitations of research more broadly.
 
__
 
Check out my training programs here: https://jeffnippard.com/
 
Download MacroFactor Nutrition 2 weeks free: https://bit.ly/jeffmacrofactor (use code JEFF)
 
Download MacroFactor Workouts 2 weeks free: https://bit.ly/jeffmacrofactorworkouts (use code JEFF)
 
__



Josh & Zac's website: https://www.data-drivenstrength.com/
Follow Dr. Josh Pelland on Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/josh.datadrivenstrength/
Follow Dr. Zac Robinson on Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/zac.datadrivenstrength/
 
__



References:
 
Volume Meta-Analysis
https://sportrxiv.org/index.php/server/preprint/view/460
 
Proximity to Failure Meta-Analysis
https://sportrxiv.org/index.php/server/preprint/view/295
 
Per-Session Training Volume Meta-Analysis
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/390450237

In this episode, I talk with fellow YouTuber Jeremy Ethier about a new study that he co-authored that compared muscle growth when training with more tension in the lengthened position versus with more tension in the shortened position. We'll cover what these new findings mean, if this changes our thoughts on "the stretch", and how these findings should be applied to training.
Timestamps
0:00 - Intro and Jeremy's new study overview 2:54 - What Jeremy's study did really well 3:56 - Were these results surprising? 7:17 - How much does the stretch actually matter? 9:23 - Stretch implications for exercise selection 13:30 - Big picture takeaways on the stretch 15:25 - Does training experience change the results? 16:52 - Which stretch-biased exercises are worth it? 18:23 - Does science-based lifting keep flip-flopping? 19:20 - Jeremy's main takeaways 20:36 - Final thoughts
Jeremy Ethier's video on the study: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HJHeGGSp1tQ
References:
Jeremy Ethier's Study: https://sportrxiv.org/index.php/server/preprint/view/660
New Long vs Short Muscle Length Meta-Analysis: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/399455789
DB vs Cable Lateral Raises: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40692697/
My Lengthened Partials Study: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/39959841/
Squats vs Hip Thrusts: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10349977/
Standing vs Seated Calf Raises: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38156065/
Calf Lengthened Partials vs Full ROM: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37015016/
Seated vs Lying Hamstring Curls: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33009197/
Leg Extension Seat Angle: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/380457955
Overhead Triceps Extension vs Pressdowns: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35819335/

Watch the youtube video of our muscle gain journey together here: https://youtu.be/PiYSbR2B85w