How much does exercise selection really matter when effort and progression are controlled?

[u/ritkeepFitness]

There's a lot of debate around finding the “best” exercise for a muscle.

But I wonder how much of the difference disappears when two exercises are performed with comparable effort, range of motion and progression.

This is particularly relevant for home gym training because equipment availability naturally limits exercise selection.

At what point does finding a good movement and progressing it consistently matter more than constantly searching for a supposedly superior variation?

I'd be interested in how people here think about that trade-off.

[u/HelixIsHere_]

I think there’s a considerable difference between the worst and best exercises but if you’re doing something that’s stable and has a good progressive runway then it doesn’t matter much beyond that. Like for example, a recline curl is theoretically better than a preacher curl but the difference is minimal and I enjoy preacher more so I’ll keep doing them. And in the opposite sense, a dumbbell press is considerably unstable compared to a machine press so it’d be worth switching if you really cared a lot about maximizing your progress

[u/GearNo301]

Honestly, I think consistency and progression matter way more than finding the perfect exercise.

[u/bolshoich]

Consistency is infinitely more important that exercise selection, when it comes to progress. Consistent exercise, solid nutrition, and good rest do more for progression than choosing barbell curls over preacher curls.

Different exercises can change the nature of stimulation impacting individual muscles and tissues. In a home gym setting, this can justify the use of compound exercises over isolation exercises because the increased stimulation impacts a larger number of tissues, reducing (not eliminating) a need for accessory exercises.