Optimal Rep Ranges and Volume for Fat Loss

what's funny is the meatheads have had it right for the last hundred years you just like you you you need two things you need magnitude need duration. Magnitude is how much load you have on the bar and duration is how long do you contract the muscle under that load. And so if we have too much magnitude, like doing a one rep max, the duration isn't long enough. Like you're going to get, you're going to work on getting strong one to three reps. You're going to get strong, but you're not really going to grow a ton of muscle that way. Then you could do 30 reps too. But the problem is the duration is there, but you just don't have the magnitude. So the point is to look at that magnitude to duration ratio and try to get them lined up and that eight to 12 rep range that bodybuilders have done for a hundred years seems to be the sweet spot it's it's enough magnitude it's enough duration it doesn't hurt it's pumpy it feels good people like that so if you look at the evidence-based guys going oh you can build muscle anywhere i'm saying they always sound like that yeah they do they're not tiny and it's like nobody yeah cool you could build muscle at 30 reps who the fuck is going to work proximity to failure at 30 reps. Nobody. It sucks. It's painful. It burns. And in this specific situation where you need to funnel down to minimal effective dose, that stuff's not going to work. It's just going to make you more fatigued in a state where you don't have enough calories. You're already fatigued. So you're better off going into doing maybe six to 10 hard sets over the course of a week per body part. And like start at six, start at six, do a couple of warmup sets, go hard, do two exercises per body part, two sets, something like that twice a week. Now you got eight. You're probably pretty good with that. And then if you decide, I think I can do more volume. Well, can you do more volume? Sure. Is it productive? Because it doesn't make sense to add more if it's not productive. What people tend to do is they keep adding more and they don't realize they're now, they dug a hole they can't climb out of. And three or four weeks later, they end up crashing. Their sleep goes to shit. Their training drive goes to shit. Their joints ache. They start holding on tons of water, so they look like they're getting fatter. Their mood's messed up. Getting sick. They're getting sick. It's all that stuff. It's like that was an accumulation of those last few weeks of you stupidly raising volume you didn't actually need. But what I do like about this style, too, is it's the lazy man's way of doing things. So you have, I can, I can, if I'm looking at adaptation, especially fat loss, I can train a lot. I can create a huge deficit by training if I have time and recoverability. I can use nutrition. So I can just go on a massive deficit and just train enough. Or I can use a little bit of both with training and nutrition. Well, logistically, the nutrition makes the most sense because even though it's psychologically harder than training for deficit, that's what the GLP drug's for. It compliance and a syringe So then yeah getting back to that like kind of like the original question like so if I a coach somebody on a GLP they probably again like again this could be anybody but let just assume that somebody that needs to lose a lot of weight they probably can auto their workouts and stuff So as a coach, what do you need to be paying attention to?