Monster podcast episode with Zac Robinson and Josh Pelland from data driven strength on failure training, reps in reserve, and the importance of training "intensely". Can we leave 5 reps in the tank and get as good of results as if we trained to failure? We investigate this question from a scientific, anecdotal and logical standpoint. 0:00 - intro 0:37 - how Zac and Josh got into the research over RIR and failure training 10:42 - What training to failure actually means - is there a scientific consensus? 14:25 - Is actual failure (missing reps) significantly different from just going to 0 RIR (0 reps in reserve) 20:54 - autoregulating volume when training close to failure 29:57 - so, what do you (Zac and Josh) think of the importance of going close to failure at this point? (we should have started with this) 42:45 - at 80% of 1RM proximity to failure is not important anymore only repetition count? 45:20 - beyond 5RIR, diminishing returns or no returns to train more "intensely"? 50:12 - swinging in the other direction and advocating training super far from failure 55:54 - is failure training never WORSE in research? 58:40 - practical issues with very submaximal training 1:10:55 - why do so many people spin their wheels and not get anywhere with their training if training close to failure is not that important? 1:19:20 - progressive overload mysteries 1:22:19 - training at long muscle lengths, how important is it? 1:33:40 - prior "models" we had for muscle growth (which were more like FADs) 1:40:11 - practical recommendations for failure proximity and RIR 1:50:10 - where can we find you and your work? Coaching and consultations with Abel: https://ssdabel.com/ Zac: https://www.instagram.com/zac.datadrivenstrength/?hl=en Josh: https://www.instagram.com/josh.datadrivenstrength/?hl=en Data driven strength: https://www.data-drivenstrength.com/