BCAAs – The Supplement for Suckers
Amino acid supplements have overwhelming evidence against their use. I dream of the day dorks across this world would stop purchasing worthless powders like BCAAs.
Menu
Understanding tempo is like understanding females, guys think they know what they’re doing, but they don’t. For those that don’t know, tempo is how fast you lift and lower your reps.
How much lifting tempo matters and if there is an ideal tempo will both be discussed in this article, so let’s take a deep dive into this shall we?
Many meatheads will base their philosophies around sluggishly slow tempos. They argue going deeply slow on your tempo increases the time your muscles are under tension, thus giving you better growth.
However, if you slow down the reps and increase time under tension per rep, you have to sacrifice the number of reps you’re doing with the same load because each rep is more challenging.
This should be painfully obvious, but here are some references for any low IQ bros who don’t believe me (7,8,9).
This doesn’t mean the meatheads are wrong (at least not entirely), but this now begs the ultimate question of is sacrificing total volume load (reps x weight x sets) for more time under tension per rep worth it?
Theories are cute, but let’s look at the hard evidence.
The first study I want to cover is extremely important because this study actually defines time under tension for what it really is and lays the foundation for how important tempo is for maximizing our strength and hypertrophy gains (1).
It took 2 groups and put them on a squat training program. Both groups did the same respective 1 rep max percentage and trained with the same effort by going to failure.
The only difference was in tempo. One group trained with a slower tempo of a 4 second eccentric (lowering) and a 2 second concentric (lifting) while the other group trained with a more typical tempo with a 2 second eccentric and a 2 second concentric.
The 2:2 group obviously did more reps because they trained at a faster tempo. This allowed them to spend more total time under tension for the concentric phase.
The 4:2 group on the other hand had a much longer eccentric phase, so they ended up spending more time under tension for the eccentric phase while also achieving more time under tension per rep.
Both groups ended up with similar total set time.
So which group would you rather be in to potentially gain more muscle?
Would you rather do less reps with a slower eccentric which results in more time under tension per rep or do more reps with a slightly faster eccentric tempo which results in less time under tension per rep. Before you answer, remember, set duration and effort level was the same.
Not so surprisingly, the level of hypertrophy gained was the same. Jumping performance was also the same.
This doesn’t mean meatheads who deliberately slow down their reps significantly are doing it wrong, but it’s just not more effective as they claim.
For my more advanced readers, this shouldn’t surprise you because muscles don’t grow from how much time under tension you place on them. Muscles primarily grow from the total magnitude of tension placed on it.
When effort is matched, the total amount of stimulation your muscles get by the end of the set is the same. This indicates that time under tension should be defined in terms of set duration not rep duration, but regardless, time under tension is still overrated compared to effort.
Effort is the proximity of how close you are to failure. Again, if you train to the same point, like to complete failure for example, it largely doesn’t matter how you get there.
Time under tension fanboys often claim they got bigger by increasing time under tension when really, the additional time just pushed them closer to failure.
So far, it looks like tempo doesn’t matter much, but here’s a little secret something I haven’t told you about the results of this study.
The researchers also measured strength gains and the 2:2 group actually built significantly more strength in the squat 1-rep max. This is also not too surprising because the 2:2 group did more total reps which means they got to practice the squat pattern more.
So based on this study alone, eccentric tempo largely doesn’t matter for hypertrophy as long as it’s at least 2 seconds, but you might as well do a 2:2 tempo over a 4:2 tempo for the additional strength gains.
Shibata et al. replicated the same study on university soccer players and found the same thing. 2 second eccentric was as hypertrophic as a 4 second eccentric, but the 2 second group gained more strength (10).
Indeed other research, shows the faster your overall or eccentric tempo, the more reps you perform thus bigger strength gains (11,12).
However, there likely is a point where too fast is suboptimal. The most comprehensive source we have on lifting tempo is a systematic review in 2015 by Brad Schoenfeld (2). It showed that, eccentric tempo doesn’t really matter as long as you control the eccentric.
So the eccentric tempo must be controlled, but there likely is no hypertrophy incentive to go extremely slow . Going too slow can needlessly reduce strength gains, so going slow enough to control the weight is a good general recommendation.
This allows your muscles to be stimulated by actively controlling the weight as it lowers instead of just letting gravity drop it. Having a good mind-muscle connection during the eccentric may be indicative of a properly controlled tempo (3).
How long this actually takes in practice depends on the exercise. Exercises with Longer ranges of motion like RDL’s will take longer than something like glute bridge.
It’s best to error on the side of too slow instead of too fast because slow controlled eccentrics boost muscle growth, but going too fast removes the mechanical tension of that phase (23,24,25).
As for the concentric, there’s no such thing as too fast (assuming good form obviously), but there is a thing as too slow (4,21).
So while bros who preach about slow eccentrics aren’t doing much harm, following advice to intentionally slow the concentric can be detrimental.
You see, powerful concentrics boost initial muscle activation (13,14). Although you’ll end up recruiting all muscle fibers by the end of the set anyways, this can boost your nervous system to be more efficient and lift bigger weights which will totally impress hot girls watching (15).
There’s no direct research on fast concentrics for hypertrophy, but at the very least, you’ll get additional strength gains without compromising hypertrophy (5,16).
This study in particular showed lifting the concentric with maximal explosive intent resulted in almost double the bench press strength gains (6). More strength doesn’t always translate to more hypertrophy, but like I said, it definitely doesn’t hurt.
We also have indirect research suggesting the extra work from a forceful/explosive concentric would produce greater muscle growth (22).
This means the ideal concentric speed is as explosive as you can lift without losing stability and technique.
Women are objectively less explosive due to their endurancy physiology, so their version of explosiveness will be objectively slower than men (17,18,19,20). Regardless, it’s the forceful intent that matters, not the actual concentric speed.
It’s also important to note some people do have injuries and shouldn’t be lifting explosively, so be sure to adjust accordingly depending on individual history and perhaps even exercise selection.
What this looks like in practice is as follows. While maintaining good form, you lift the weight as forcefully as you can while lowering with control. As you do more reps, your eccentric speed should remain relatively the same. However, your concentric speed should slow down even as you’re lifting with forceful intent due to fatigue.
This is normal and once the weight slows down to a dead stop, you’ve reached failure aka the end of the set. (For my article on training to failure, click here)
As always, there are exceptions like injuries which will alter the optimal tempo you need.
Department of Exercise and Sport Sciences. “Optimizing Power Output by Varying Repetition Tempo : The Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research.” LWW,
Hatfield DL;Kraemer WJ;Spiering BA;Häkkinen K;Volek JS;Shimano T;Spreuwenberg LP;Silvestre R;Vingren JL;Fragala MS;Gómez AL;Fleck SJ;Newton RU;Maresh CM; “The Impact of Velocity of Movement on Performance Factors in Resistance Exercise.” Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, U.S. National Library of Medicine, pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/17194227/.
Headley SA;Henry K;Nindl BC;Thompson BA;Kraemer WJ;Jones MT; “Effects of Lifting Tempo on One Repetition Maximum and Hormonal Responses to a Bench Press Protocol.” Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, U.S. National Library of Medicine, pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/20351575/.
M;, Shibata K;Takizawa K;Nosaka K;Mizuno. “Effects of Prolonging Eccentric Phase Duration in Parallel Back-Squat Training to Momentary Failure on Muscle Cross-Sectional Area, Squat One Repetition Maximum, and Performance Tests in University Soccer Players.” Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, U.S. National Library of Medicine, pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30325791/.
Carzoli JP;Sousa CA;Belcher DJ;Helms ER;Khamoui AV;Whitehurst M;Zourdos MC; “The Effects of Eccentric Phase Duration on Concentric Outcomes in the Back Squat and Bench Press in Well-Trained Males.” Journal of Sports Sciences, U.S. National Library of Medicine, pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31418323/.
Chaves, Talisson Santos, et al. “Effects of Resistance Training with Controlled versus Self-Selected Repetition Duration on Muscle Mass and Strength in Untrained Men.” PeerJ, PeerJ Inc., 6 Mar. 2020, www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7061915/.
PJ;, Sakamoto A;Sinclair. “Muscle Activations Under Varying Lifting Speeds and Intensities During Bench Press.” European Journal of Applied Physiology, U.S. National Library of Medicine, pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/21735215/.
Vinstrup, Jonas, et al. “Focusing on Increasing Velocity during Heavy Resistance Knee Flexion Exercise Boosts Hamstring Muscle Activity in Chronic Stroke Patients.” Neurology Research International, Hindawi Publishing Corporation, 2016, www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4976165/.
Häkkinen K;Pakarinen A;Kyröläinen H;Cheng S;Kim DH;Komi PV; “Neuromuscular Adaptations and Serum Hormones in Females During Prolonged Power Training.” International Journal of Sports Medicine, U.S. National Library of Medicine, pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/2187004/.
Newman, et al. “Effect of Movement Velocity During Resistance Training on Dynamic Muscular Strength: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.” Sports Medicine, Springer International Publishing, 1 Jan. 1970, link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s40279-017-0676-4.
Ahlborg, B., et al. “Endurance Capacity of Untrained Males and Females in Isometric and Dynamic Muscular Contractions.” European Journal of Applied Physiology, Springer-Verlag, 1 Jan. 1972, link.springer.com/article/10.1007/BF00422739.
K;, Häkkinen. “Force Production Characteristics of Leg Extensor, Trunk Flexor and Extensor Muscles in Male and Female Basketball Players.” The Journal of Sports Medicine and Physical Fitness, U.S. National Library of Medicine, pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/1798300/.
Kinesiology, 1Department of. “The Relationship Between Muscle Action and Repetition… : The Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research.” LWW, journals.lww.com/nsca-jscr/Fulltext/2014/09000/The_Relationship_Between_Muscle_Action_and.7.aspx.
Sowell, Elizabeth R, et al. “Sex Differences in Cortical Thickness Mapped in 176 Healthy Individuals between 7 and 87 Years of Age.” Cerebral Cortex (New York, N.Y. : 1991), U.S. National Library of Medicine, July 2007, www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2329809/.
Schuenke MD;Herman JR;Gliders RM;Hagerman FC;Hikida RS;Rana SR;Ragg KE;Staron RS; “Early-Phase Muscular Adaptations in Response to Slow-Speed Versus Traditional Resistance-Training Regimens.” European Journal of Applied Physiology, U.S. National Library of Medicine, pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22328004/.
Goto, Kazushige, et al. “Hormonal and Metabolic Responses to Slow Movement Resistance Exercise with Different Durations of Concentric and Eccentric Actions.” European Journal of Applied Physiology, Springer-Verlag, 10 May 2009, link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs00421-009-1075-9.
Pereira, Paulo Eduardo. “(PDF) Resistance Training with Slow Speed of Movement Is Better for Hypertrophy and Muscle Strength Gains than Fast Speed of Movement.” ResearchGate, www.researchgate.net/publication/305676699_Resistance_training_with_slow_speed_of_movement_is_better_for_hypertrophy_and_muscle_strength_gains_than_fast_speed_of_movement.
Grab my free Stupid Simple Scroll to Mastering Hypertrophy
Amino acid supplements have overwhelming evidence against their use. I dream of the day dorks across this world would stop purchasing worthless powders like BCAAs.
It’s quite common for people to drop hundreds of dollars every month on trendy supplements in search of being stronger, healthier, and more athletic specimen with a raging sex drive.
We all want epically high testosterone levels coursing through our veins like Thor shooting lighting bolts from the sky. Unfortunately, many men struggle with their testosterone, sometimes unknowingly.