Asymmetric Returns: An Investing Lesson from the Gym
Note: This is not health advice.
I heard a few bodybuilders & weight-lifters (like Jay Vincent & Dr. Layne Norton) discuss a type of training strategy that may allow you to see results after hitting the gym for ONLY 2-3 times a week... while spending 30 minutes or less per workout...
So I decided to do that.
This was in alignment with a philosophy about decision-making & investing:
First off, I do NOT want to be a bodybuilder…
But as someone who’s traveling nearly every week…
I AM looking for a high-leverage way to stay in shape…
AND I want to build & maintain muscle mass — which research STRONGLY suggests leads to long-term health and longevity.
This weight-training routine involves only ONE set of reps until “momentary muscle failure”...
This basically means you lift the weight until you’re unable to continue.
This is opposed to the multi-set routine…
Which is often 3 sets of an exercise at a predetermined number of reps — regardless of how you feel as you approach completion…
…done 4-5 times a week, for 60-90 minutes each gym visit.
In the bodybuilding world… there seems to be a HOT debate about which one is the “right” way to do things…
Arnold Schwarzenegger — the most famous bodybuilder the world’s ever known — is a proponent of the multi-set approach…
But there are other well-knowns, namely Mike Mentzer, who advocated the one-set-to-failure approach.
If you go purely by popularity and surface-level results, Arnie’s way is a no-brainer…
Right?
Here’s how I look at it:
Investors & entrepreneurs (or anyone for that matter) should always be on the lookout for ASYMMETRIC returns… or when the reward of trying something new FAR outweighs the risk.
Sure… as I returned to the gym this summer I could have picked up where I left off my whole life… and continued the status-quo multi-set thing…
I’m sure I’d see some results…
But what’s my real risk of trying something new?
Even if I didn’t research into this at all (I have)... and wasn’t seeing any results after a couple months (I am)...
It’d still be worth a 3-month trial.
This is because of 2 BIG hidden COSTS of the status quo to me:
1. Time
At their maximum weekly time-investments…
The multi-set approach is 450 minutes (90 minutes X 5 days)...
And the one-set approach is 90 minutes (30 minutes X 3 days).
After a month’s time… you’d spend only 6 hours doing the latter… and an entire 24 hours (1 day) MORE doing the former, which is a 5X bigger time investment.
I simply DO NOT want to spend that much time in the gym, neither now… nor when I start having kids.
2. Injury
The multi-set program is designed to add ever-increasing weight to maintain adequate resistance...
Whereas the single set program allows you to increase weight much more conservatively… while increasing REPS.
Even if you’re able to maintain PERFECT form with the former… the latter is simply way less risky.
I don’t want to get injured while traveling, nor in the future when consistency will be KEY to overcome atrophy in older ages.
---
Finally, let’s say the clinical evidence CLEARLY demonstrates that the multi-set approach is superior to the one-set (it doesn’t)...
And the one-set only got me, let’s say, 80% of my potential results…
These “returns” would STILL make switching to the one-set program worth it to ME.
👆 That last part is important because I believe investing is about your own personal calculation based on the lifestyle you want to design… not just hard numbers.
Yeah, it could be a risk to hire someone to help with your business…
But after one month, you either lost a few thousand bucks… or you freed yourself to pursue growth/ anything else you want…
Yeah, working a few extra hours each day may help you provide for your family a little better…
But what’s the long-term cost of “not being there?”
I like looking at my decisions this way…
There’s always SOME level of risk when trying something new…
But do NOT forget to look at the costs of the status-quo.
Weigh those against the risks for a chance at BIG payoffs.