You don’t really have to go that long. In fact, there was actually a study that came out in the last month that showed, you know, like really two minutes is probably sufficient for most people. Having said that, if you really are trying to push maximum strength adaptations, like three to five is very, very reasonable. Those training sessions are long, because you’re spending more time not doing anything than you are doing something, but you’re trying to maximize quality. So that’s just sort of like part and parcel. If you’re not super worried about it, you can actually do super setting, which is, let’s imagine again, you’re gonna do some lunges. And while your legs are resting, doing their three to five minutes, you can go over and do an upper body row or pull.
(02:21:21):
And when your upper body’s resting, you’re going back to legs. So that really cuts your time in half. Is it ideal? No, we actually ran a study maybe 10 years ago in our lab, and we looked at that specifically. And we did see a reduction in strength performance in the super setting group, relative to the group who did not super set. The question then, it becomes like, is it enough for you to care? So if I were to say, hey, I can cut an hour off of your workout time, but you will lose 5% of your strength gain, almost everyone would take that exchange. With the exception of people who are getting close to competition, or really trying to set a new lifetime PR or something, then you might say, no, I don’t want any interference there. That last little margin is what I care about. Give me the extra rest. Great. So it’s not a, does it work? Does it not work? It’s always a, what are you willing to give up versus get?