For years, strength training has come with a list of rigid rules.

3 sets of 8–12 reps.
Rest 60–90 seconds.
Lift heavy. Train to failure.
Periodize or mix up your program regularly for progress.

Much of those specific guidelines came from the 2009 position stand from the American College of Sports Medicine (ACSM)  which is a document that shaped how many clinicians, trainers, and athletes approached resistance training for over a decade.  It was largely a programming manual, prescribing how to strength train.  It catered to our human desire of “just tell us exactly how to do it.”

The 2009 position stand made strength training look like a strict recipe that needed to be followed.

But just recently (March of 2026) the ACSM released a major update and the message is surprisingly simple: we may have been overcomplicating resistance training for the general population.

More recent research has demonstrated that strength training can be far more flexible than we thought and your body can respond to many different ways of training.

Variables like tempo, set structure, machines vs free weights and fancy programming methodology show little consistent effect on results.

The new position stand suggests there are many effective ways to do your resistance training.  The foundation of a resistance training plan that can deliver results requires 2 key elements: sufficient intensity of effort repeated consistently over a long period of time.  Essentially the best plan is one you work hard enough at on a regular basis.

Some things from the original 2009 position stand still matter such as you should train at least 2x/week and progressive overload is essential for progress.  So as you get stronger (the workout feels easier) then add more: weight, resistance, volume (more sets) or another training day.

Full range of motion is recommended to maintain joint health and mobility.  These are still the foundation for an effective resistance training program.

But emphasis on training to failure, periodized programs, specific rest intervals, exercise order, equipment choice (machines vs free weights), blood flow restriction and optimizing time under tension have become less of a priority.  Doesn’t mean some of those variables don’t work, but they are not a requirement for building muscle.

Of course your goals still matter.  And if you have very specific strength or performance goals then your resistance training absolutely needs to align with your goals and the skill and practice required to get proficient at those goals needs to be trained.

If strength is your goal, you have to lift relatively heavy (apprx 80%+ 1RM effort).  Lift through a full range of motion, 2-3 sets works well and place key lifts at the beginning of the session.

If hypertrophy (muscle growth) is your goal accumulate enough weekly volume (apprx 10+ sets/muscle/week).  Periodic eccentric overload also appears to enhance growth.

If power is your goal move lighter loads (20-70% 1RM) quickly.  Emphasize velocity of the concentric portion of the movement (control through the eccentric) but train with low-to-moderate volume to avoid fatigue.
And if you are concerned about the loss of physical function with aging, the updated position stand recommends adding or emphasizing power training in your resistance training plan.  The loss of power with age (powerpenia) is a significant threat to your health span (the quality of your life) and adding purposeful quicker movements within your capacity can slow the rate of muscle power loss.

For the general population who is either looking to get started or inconsistent with their fitness routine, you have many options for your strength training.  Light weights or heavy weights.  Bands, body weight, circuit style training, machines or free weights.  Many sets over a prolonged period of training time or a single set to failure.

Doing some (any form) of resistance training is better than none at all.  The biggest opportunity for improvement in muscle health is simply getting started and working at it consistently.

This is a major shift for clinicians and patients alike and suggests that individual preferences should absolutely be harnessed for long term adherence to a resistance training program.

Why does this shift matter?  Quite simply not enough people are meeting muscle-strengthening guidelines.

Stu Phillips, McMaster researcher and co-author of the updated position stand has often been quoted as saying fewer than 1 in 5 people meet resistance training guidelines.  And in some populations, for example older women, that number is much lower.

The goal of the shift is to empower patients to carve their own personalized resistance training path.  The best program is the one you will sustain.  So pick an environment you like to spend time in and equipment you enjoy using and build up to working harder and harder over time.  Results compound from consistent stimulus over a long period of time.

The key takeaway point with the updated position stand is that consistency and effort trump complexity when it comes to resistance training.  Let’s encourage as many people as we can to start lifting as it may just be the most important public health message we can all help spread.