They will use research to support their argument and show how the literature shows advantages to using their method. However, when we actually dig into the research we start to understand the difference between statistically significant and practically significant. There might be a .3% increase in muscle growth in an 8 week study on range of motion. While this absolutely matters in the lab, it might have zero difference in your progress.
I use range of motion as a perfect example as I tend to utilize a rather deep ROM in my squats. While that sounds great and should help me to see greater quad growth, once I start to move beyond my personal ideal range I begin to aggregate nagging injuries. For me, that optimal range leads to a break in training so will actually negatively effect my results.
Research is an extraordinarily important piece of our industry. It helps me to establish best practices in my own work. But there must always be a real human being on the other side, not a statistic. Being your best might be different than chasing optimal.
