We May Be Overthinking Exercise Form
Exercise technique is frequently emphasized as a critical determinant of resistance training outcomes. While proper execution is certainly important, many lifters likely overestimate how much small technical deviations influence muscle growth.
While grossly altered technique certainly has drawbacks, the current body of evidence suggests that minor deviations from textbook form are unlikely to meaningfully reduce muscle growth, particularly if the target muscle remains the limiting factor of the set and training is performed close to failure.
This doesn't mean technique doesn't matter. Rather, it means we should understand why it matters.
The Muscle Doesn't Know What "Perfect Form" Looks Like
Muscles respond primarily to mechanical tension. They do not recognize whether your elbows drifted forward by a few degrees or whether you used a slight amount of momentum during the final repetition.
If the target muscle is still producing the majority of the force, and that muscle ultimately reaches a high level of fatigue, there is little reason to believe that a small technical deviation suddenly makes the set ineffective.
For example, consider cable triceps pushdowns.
Many coaches insist the elbows must remain perfectly fixed against the torso throughout every repetition. Yet in reality, many lifters naturally allow a small amount of shoulder flexion and extension as fatigue accumulates, particularly during the final few repetitions.
Provided the triceps remain the limiting factor—not the shoulders, torso, or lower body—it is difficult to make a convincing physiological argument that this slight movement substantially reduces hypertrophy.
In fact, one could even speculate that a modest amount of shoulder movement may increase elbow extension range or alter the long head's operating length. Whether this produces meaningful differences in growth remains unknown, but more importantly, there is currently no convincing evidence suggesting these small deviations impair hypertrophy.
The same principle applies across many exercises.
A small amount of body English on lateral raises, a slight lean-back during curls, a modest hip contribution on the final repetition of a rowing movement.
These are often portrayed as technical errors, yet the available evidence simply does not support the idea that these small deviations meaningfully reduce muscular adaptations when the target muscle remains the primary driver of the movement.
What the Research Shows
An excellent example comes from a recent study by Augustin et al., conducted within our lab at Lehman College.
Participants completed resistance training while using either highly standardized exercise execution or a more self-selected, momentum driven strategy. Despite these differences, both groups experienced similar improvements in muscle size and strength after training.
The primary takeaway was straightforward:
When individuals train sufficiently hard and the intended muscle is the limiting factor, small differences in execution do not appear to meaningfully alter the adaptations.
This finding aligns well with a broader understanding of resistance training physiology. As long as enough mechanical tension is applied to the target muscle and sets are performed sufficiently close to failure, the body appears remarkably tolerant of slight variation in movement execution.
However, one important caveat deserves emphasis.
The participants in this study were completely untrained.
Beginners typically experience robust gains from almost any reasonably well-designed resistance training program. Their threshold for adaptation is relatively low, meaning many different training approaches produce similar improvements.
Therefore, we should be cautious about extending these findings directly to highly trained lifters.
Why Technique Probably Matters More as You Become Advanced
The more experienced you become, the harder progress is to achieve. And before I continue on this section, by experienced, that does not just mean total years spent “lifting” -- I am implying you have significant experience training very close to failure.
This being said, a beginner might gain several pounds of muscle during their first year of lifting, an advanced trainee may spend an entire year attempting to gain only a small amount of additional muscle.
When progress becomes increasingly incremental, minimizing unnecessary variability becomes much more valuable.
For advanced lifters, consistent technique helps ensure that improvements in performance actually reflect increases in strength or muscular capacity rather than simply finding easier ways to complete the exercise.
Imagine two weeks of cable rows.
Week 1:
- Upright torso
- Full stretch
- Controlled tempo
Week 2:
- More torso swing
- Shorter range of motion
- Faster repetitions
The second workout may show an increase in load or repetitions, but did the back actually become stronger?
It becomes difficult to know.
Standardized technique allows progression to become measurable rather than ambiguous.
This principle has been discussed extensively within resistance training literature and forms one of the foundations of progressive overload: keeping variables consistent so that increases in performance represent genuine physiological adaptation rather than changes in exercise execution.
Standardization Is Really About Measuring Progress
This is perhaps the strongest argument for maintaining consistent technique.
Many people assume standardization exists because every repetition must be biomechanically perfect.
A more practical reason is that it allows us to accurately track progression over time.
If technique changes every session, it becomes difficult to determine whether:
- You actually became stronger.
- You simply shortened the range of motion.
- You used more momentum.
- Another muscle group contributed more.
Keeping movement execution relatively consistent allows progressive overload to become meaningful.
The same applies to range of motion.
Using a deep stretch one week and half-repetitions the next introduces another source of variability that makes long-term progression much harder to interpret.
For this reason, maintaining a consistent range of motion is generally recommended regardless of training experience.
Why Gross Technique Breakdown Is Different
None of this suggests that anything goes.
There is an important distinction between micro-deviations in technique and complete loss of movement quality.
Minor momentum that naturally occurs near failure is very different from turning every repetition into a full-body movement where the target muscle no longer performs most of the work.
Likewise, technique that substantially increases joint stress or injury risk should not simply be ignored.
Beginners, in particular, should spend time learning sound movement patterns before intentionally incorporating any degree of momentum. Building fundamental motor skills makes future progression easier and may reduce unnecessary injury risk as training loads increase.
Good technique remains the goal.
The point is simply that perfection is probably unnecessary.
Practical Recommendations
For most lifters, focus on the fundamentals rather than chasing textbook perfection.
Use an exercise technique that consistently loads the intended muscle.
Train close enough to failure that the target muscle is genuinely challenged.
Allow small, natural deviations in technique near the end of difficult sets without feeling that you've ruined the exercise.
Maintain relatively consistent technique and range of motion from week to week so your progression remains meaningful.
Finally, avoid large amounts of momentum that substantially shift the work away from the target muscle or create unnecessary injury risk.
Key Takeaways
- Most minor deviations from textbook exercise form are unlikely to meaningfully reduce muscle growth if the target muscle remains the limiting factor and sets are taken close to failure.
- Standardization becomes increasingly important as training age increases because small improvements are harder to detect and consistent technique allows progression to be measured accurately.
- The biggest mistake isn't using a tiny amount of momentum—it's allowing technique to become so inconsistent that progression and exercise stimulus can no longer be interpreted confidently.
Reference:
1. Augustin, F., Nippard, J., Pinero, A., Enes, A., Mohan, A., Sapuppo, M., Coleman, M., Wolf, M., Androulakis Korakakis, P., Swinton, P., & Schoenfeld, B. (2025). Do Cheaters Prosper? Effect of Externally Supplied Momentum During Resistance Training on Measures of Upper Body Muscle Hypertrophy. International Journal of Exercise Science, 18(3), 329-342. https://doi.org/10.70252/GDBL2230