Riccardo Grandi’s presentation at the StrongFirst Summit of Strength 2026
On January 31st and February 1st, 2026, Cesena became a meeting point for coaches, strength and conditioning specialists, and fitness professionals from around the world for the StrongFirst Summit of Strength 2026: an international event dedicated to strength culture, training programming, and athletic performance development.
In a context where advanced methodologies, models, and approaches to physical preparation were openly discussed and compared, one of the presentations that sparked the most reflection was delivered by Riccardo Grandi, founder of the SBB coaching school.
The topic addressed is both simple and controversial:
Are strength and hypertrophy really two separate worlds?
The problem is not science, but how we interpret it
Grandi’s presentation begins with a clear observation: today’s training debate is increasingly shaped by oversimplifications.
Statements such as:
- “Strength is not necessary for hypertrophy”
- “Just go to failure”
- “Compound lifts are outdated”
do not arise from false data, but from partial interpretations of the scientific literature.
In recent years, several studies have indeed shown that, when training close to failure, even relatively light loads can produce hypertrophic adaptations comparable to those achieved with heavier loads. However, the leap from “possible” to “equivalent” is far from straightforward.
And this is exactly the key point:
science should not be simplified—it should be understood.
In his talk, Grandi challenges what could be described as a “fast-synthesis bias”: the use of studies and meta-analyses as absolute truths, without considering context, limitations, and real-world applicability.
Recruitment does not mean stimulus
One of the most relevant points concerns the concept of motor unit recruitment.
It is true that by training close to failure, even with light loads, high-threshold motor units are eventually recruited.
But this does not mean that the stimulus is equivalent.
Here a fundamental distinction emerges:
Recruitment ≠ quality of the stimulus
Training with heavy loads means:
- earlier activation of high-threshold motor units
- working under more favorable mechanical conditions
- maintaining higher execution quality
On the other hand, failure training with light loads does achieve recruitment, but:
- under high levels of fatigue
- for a shorter effective useful window
- with a progressive reduction in movement quality
A practical example
Take a heavy-loaded squat: high-threshold motor units are engaged from the very first repetitions, working under high tension levels and with relatively stable technique.
In a light-load set taken to failure, the same units are indeed recruited, but only in the final repetitions, when fatigue is already very high and movement quality inevitably declines.
The result?
Not everything that is recruited is stimulated in the same way.
Volume is essential. But it is not enough.
Another central topic is the role of training volume.
Recent literature clearly highlights a dose–response relationship between volume and hypertrophy: more training sets, within certain limits, tend to produce greater adaptations.
But here again, Grandi urges caution against premature conclusions.
Because the real point is not only how much volume you do, but:
- how much you can sustain over time
- with what level of quality
- with what margin for progression
And this is where strength becomes decisively important again.
Strength is not an alternative to volume. It is what makes volume sustainable, effective, and progressive.
Without a solid strength base:
- relative load decreases
- stimulus quality declines
- the ability to progress is reduced
In other words, volume can build muscle mass, but strength is what gives structure to that volume in the long term.
Returning to fundamentals, with an evolved perspective
The methodological proposal emerging from the talk is clear:
do not choose between strength and hypertrophy, but integrate them within a coherent system.
A system that:
- uses major movement patterns as a foundation
- organizes work across different intensity levels
- distributes load across multiple training frequencies
- integrates accessory work without losing structural focus
This is not about going back to the past, but about recovering what works and placing it within a modern, informed framework.
True evolution is not eliminating fundamentals, but learning how to use them better.
A message that goes beyond training
What makes this presentation particularly relevant is not only its technical content, but its cultural message.
In a field increasingly exposed to trends, shortcuts, and polarizations, the message is clear:
training better first means thinking better.
And this is exactly the kind of approach that events like the Summit of Strength aim to promote: not just updating knowledge, but evolving the way we think.
SIDEA: research, method, vision
In this context, SIDEA naturally fits into the broader picture.
Participation in the Summit does not simply represent an institutional presence, but a clear statement of intent:
to support the culture of strength through research, study, and education.
SIDEA, today a leading company in the European market in the design and supply of innovative fitness solutions, has always followed a clear principle:
equipment is not the end goal, but the means through which effective training systems are built.
For this reason, its commitment goes beyond product development and extends to:
- the study of training methodologies
- collaboration with coaches and professionals
- the dissemination of high-quality educational content
Because SIDEA is not just equipment.
It is passion for fitness enthusiasts, it is movement culture, and it is the will to actively contribute to the evolution of the industry.
Beyond the debate, toward synthesis
Riccardo Grandi’s presentation leaves a clear reflection:
the opposition between strength and hypertrophy is not a scientific problem, but a cultural one.
The real question is not “what to choose”, but:
how to build a system that works over time.
And it is precisely in this direction that the Summit of Strength demonstrated its greatest value:
not by providing simple answers, but by encouraging better questions.