Because Journal Clubs (JClubs) represent valued educational tools, we often assume optimality of Journal Club practices. We analyze here JClubs records from a research group to identify factors that modify how much attendants benefit from discussing a paper. We demonstrate that attendants benefit most from papers focusing on systems similar to those they work on and that their ability to profit from different contribution types changes with research experience. Common JClubs practices such as the assignment of the paper selection to a single individual could thus compromise participant experience. Our conclusions may also be generalizable to situations outside academia.