Article: Strength athletes don't need at-failure sets to a

[The Press]

You can view the page at Invalid Link Removed

 

[Oscar]

Well untrained women hardly sound like strength athletes. So study flawed.

 

[NavyHm3]

Well untrained women hardly sound like strength athletes. So study flawed.

As the study had to be unbiased, the use of untrained women was paramount to the study's outcome.

 

[RLD92]

As the study had to be unbiased, the use of untrained women was paramount to the study's outcome.

why not have strength athletes that have achieved similar levels of strength per kilo of bodyvmass and have similar limb proportions as any study conducted on untrained athletes will always yield a result as any structurised traimimg regime is better than nothing

 

[heybeavis1]

As the study had to be unbiased, the use of untrained women was paramount to the study's outcome.

and the outcome is "Whether their findings are also valid for athletes who have been training for a number of years they don't know."

 

[Gutterpump]

This study could hold 100% truth for strength athletes if it takes into account that most competitive athletes dope. Then yes, at failure sets are completely unnecessary.

 

[Thumperjones]

Yeah, but by using un trained women, this doesn't mean that the same results would appear in an experienced strength athlete... It could have been done better I think.