When One Programme Produces Ten Different Outcomes
Most coaches have seen this play out. Two clients start the same resistance training block on the same day, follow the same instructions, complete the same sets and reps, and still finish with noticeably different results. One seems to take off quickly. The other moves at a slower pace. It can look like a programming fault, but a recent study reminds us that individual differences sit at the centre of training.
The research explored how people respond to a fully supervised 10-week resistance training programme. The same participants then repeated that identical programme after a period of detraining. The results paint a clear picture for coaches, which is that individual variability is real, it is consistent and it isn’t a sign of poor coaching.
What the Study Actually Showed
The study used untrained adults and placed them into a structured lifting routine for 10 weeks. Exercises included leg press, knee extension, bench press, biceps curl and chest-supported row. Sessions were supervised, loads were adjusted weekly and the structure was standardised across every participant. After this block, the training stopped for 10 weeks. Then, the group returned and performed the same programme for a second 10-week block.
The researchers measured muscle size and strength before and after each phase. The average improvements were impressive, with meaningful increases across muscle cross-sectional area and 1RM strength. What stood out was the spread of responses. Some individuals gained a large amount of muscle and strength in the first block. Others progressed at a modest pace. This wide range reappeared again in the second block. The same people who gained well in the first 10 weeks tended to gain well again. Those who progressed more slowly usually did so the second time around.
This pattern shows that individual response to training sits on a stable personal profile. A personal trainer course often covers this idea in theory, but seeing it demonstrated so clearly in research gives coaches practical confidence when explaining progress to clients.
Why Uneven Gains Aren’t a Coaching Failure
The temptation is to assume that a slower responder points to a programming error. The study challenges that assumption through its use of a separate control group. The control group did no training but completed the same measurements. Their results showed small changes driven by normal biological fluctuation and measurement noise. By comparing the training group to the control group, the researchers calculated a minimal detectable change (MDC). This value tells us the threshold at which a change becomes real rather than random.
Once the MDC was applied, most participants in the training group displayed genuine, positive adaptation. The spread of results sat beyond the range that measurement error could explain. This finding lifts a weight from coaching shoulders. Variation in progress is expected. Two clients can follow the same plan and still produce very different outcomes. The programme is not the problem. The client is not the problem. The variation simply reflects normal human response.
The Myth of the Bad Programme
Individual variability often leads people to blame the plan. The study does not support that. The programme was effective across the group. Large average improvements happened in every major measure. Differences between individuals were not signs of a flawed design. They were signs of normal human diversity.
Of course, poor programmes do exist. A plan that lacks progression, uses inconsistent loading, skips foundational movement patterns or ignores recovery can limit progress. That situation looks very different. Progress stalls across multiple clients at the same time. Movement quality drops. Fatigue builds without structure. Coaches develop a sense for these issues through experience and formal study. Anyone who has completed advanced strength & conditioning coach courses will recognise the difference between poor design and natural variability.
The study reminds us to avoid defaulting to programming blame when individual results differ. The data encourages patience and a wider lens.
Coaching in a World of Uneven Gains
The practical message for us as coaches is simple. Individual differences shape training outcomes. This means client timelines will vary. One client builds strength rapidly. Another progresses gradually. Expectations need to reflect these patterns from day one. A clear explanation of variability early in the coaching relationship helps clients feel grounded when their progress moves at a different pace from someone else’s.
Tracking progress across multiple measures provides a more complete picture. Strength changes offer one view. Muscle size offers another. Reps completed with good technique add more detail. Confidence during movements is another valuable sign. These markers give clients more opportunities to see progress on days when the numbers feel stubborn.
Slow responders require a calm, structured environment. Their progress might unfold across several blocks rather than within a few weeks. They often benefit from steady adjustments to load, carefully planned volume increases and consistent cues during sessions. The study reinforces the value of looking at long-term patterns instead of reacting to every week’s small fluctuations.
When Clients Stop Training The Variability Continues
The detraining phase provided another layer of fascinating information. Clients who gained the most during the first training block sometimes lost the most during the break. Muscle size tended to drop more rapidly than strength, which aligns with what coaches see daily. Neural adaptations hold on longer than structural changes. Movement efficiency, coordination and recruitment strategies remain intact for a while even when training pauses.
For us as coaches, this highlights the value of planning for breaks rather than reacting to them. Holidays, injuries and busy periods come up. A structured return-to-training block helps clients regain confidence and rebuild strength without pressure or frustration. A personal training course often introduces this idea in general terms, but this study gives it strong scientific backing.
A Practical Framework for Telling Normal Variability From Real Issues
We can use a simple mindset when assessing client progress. If a client’s changes sit above the MDC values or close to them, the adaptation is real. If one measure progresses but another lags, the pattern usually reflects individual variability rather than a problem. When progress dips across several blocks without clear external causes, programme design and recovery routines deserve a closer look. Keep in mind, many situations fall into the first category rather than the last.
This framework promotes calm reasoning. It reduces unnecessary programme changes. It gives clients stability and trust in the process.
Communicating Variability Without Undermining Motivation
Clients appreciate honesty, especially when progress feels slow. Conversations that focus on personal progress instead of comparisons keep clients engaged. Reinforcing controllable behaviours such as attendance, nutrition, sleep and consistent training effort allows clients to stay connected to the process. Celebrating small technical improvements helps maintain confidence. When communication stays clear and grounded, clients feel supported even during slower blocks.
The Big Takeaway
One programme will never produce identical results across every client. This study confirms that individual variability in muscle and strength gains is normal, reproducible and deeply rooted in personal physiology. We as Coaches provide greatest value when we interpret progress calmly, adjust training with intention and support clients through natural fluctuations. Consistency, structured progression and clear communication help clients stay on track across long training cycles.
Reference
- Räntilä, T., Vaalasto, E., Holopainen, T., Valkeinen, H., & Häkkinen, K. (2025). Repeated resistance training reveals the reproducibility of muscle hypertrophy and strength in untrained adult men and women. European Journal of Sport Science. Click here to review the full research article.
Develop the Expertise to Guide Every Type of Client
Before you wrap up your reading, it’s worth remembering that understanding training variability is a skill that develops with education and experience, and this is exactly what the TRAINFITNESS Gym Instructor & Personal Trainer Practitioner, Specialist and Master Diplomas are built to support. These programmes give you the knowledge to interpret progress properly, adjust plans with confidence and coach across the full spread of real-world client responses. The study highlighted how muscle size increased by 16–17% across the first training block and how strength rose by more than 20%, yet individual trajectories still varied widely. Those kinds of patterns become far easier to navigate when you understand programming, behaviour change and the long-term nature of adaptation. Whether you’re starting your fitness career, stepping up from gym instruction into personal training, or diving deeper into a Specialist or Master Diploma, these pathways help you coach with clarity and guide clients through the natural ups and downs of training.
Gym Instructor & Personal Trainer Practitioner Diploma™ – Distance Study, In-Person & Live-Virtual
Gym Instructor & Personal Trainer Specialist Diploma™ – Distance Study, In-Person & Live-Virtual
Gym Instructor & Personal Trainer Master Diploma™ – Distance Study, In-Person & Live-Virtual
