training to failure definitely has it's place... but where the f**k is it? lol

gruntjc · 07-17-2006, 10:57 AM

hi guys... i wanted to see what you fine people had to say about my thoughts on this topic.

i came to the realisation tonight (after training for almost 13 years, reading countless articles on training, nutrition etc...), that training to failure might not be necessary in order to progress in this sport.

training to failure definitely has its place... but what i realised this evening is that repeated bouts of training to failure can wreak havoc on your body's nervous system, and therefore, it;'s ability to recover.

now... i'll be the first to admit that i'm slow. sometimes, you can be staring something in the face for such a long time... it's right in front of you, but you still dont see it.

i probably train with fewer sets than the majority of trainers in here.

i've always subscribed to the 'kill yourself' in the gym, put in 110%, maximum effort in a concentrated timeframe.. then get the f**k out.

but now i'm 30... and i'm still natural (although, i will be commencing my first cycle in a week or two.. once i have my cholesterol checked again) and i realise that my body doesnt have the recovery ability that it did some 10-12 years ago.

what i need to do now is structure a program that will allow me to go balls to the wall for 2-3 weeks, then back off for a week or two.

if anyone has something they can contribute to this thread, i sure would appreciate it.

cheers
jc

p.s. i realise that i'm skirting around the issue of periodisation here.. but what better place to skirt?? lol

**powerman2000** · 07-17-2006, 11:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gruntjc

training to failure might not be necessary in order to progress in this sport.

It's an established fact that training to failure is not necessary for hypertrophy or strength gains. It's a senseless drain on the CNS and does far more harm than good. Not to mention that it also causes many injuries trying to empty your tank and squeeze out that one last repetition.

Boomer718 · 07-17-2006, 04:17 PM

What would you comment on Mike Mentzer's High Intensity Training? He advoctes that you should train to failure and occassionally beyond to optimize gains.

**A.FreeRadical** · 07-17-2006, 04:32 PM

I agree with Powerman. Training "to failure" is not necessary and can be counter-productive. Do as much weight as you can safely lift for the rep range you are working in (overload). The last rep should be difficult, but doable. Obviously, to make strength and muscular gains, you will have to do this using periodization and progressive overload principles.

I am twice your age, have been working out 5-6 days per week for 2 years using these techniques (periodization and overload) with good results and no serious injuries. (Prior to this I worked out in my 20s, 30s and 40s then I felt into bad habits.)

*

**Succio** · 07-17-2006, 04:57 PM

ive been getting great strength gains going to failure.

**romanaz** · 07-18-2006, 01:29 AM

I don't always train to failure (I find it hits me to hard and I can't recover within 3 days. I train to about failure, the last 2 reps are excruciatingly hard to do, but I don't fail. Its good, but even so, blasting away at 115% will drain your CNS and you need to just take a few weeks to maintain.

DJohnson · 07-18-2006, 03:34 AM

I always go to failure, every set. I might puss out and not go to failure first set of squats because I'm too lazy to take off the weights to get it back up but that's about it.

Max-OT for life!

**powerman2000** · 07-18-2006, 06:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SUccio

ive been getting great strength gains going to failure.

Nobody is saying that you won't gain strength or size while training to failure. But, it's also not necessary for gains. Training to failure can hinder your progress through a burned out CNS as well as preventing you from completing more volume during a training bout, which would provide more muscle stimuli to create an environment for hypertrophy to occur. And like I said before, when do you think that most injuries occur? On the 1st rep, or that 1 last all out rep to failure when your lifting form is likely being compromised due to fatigue?

**A.FreeRadical** · 07-18-2006, 12:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DJohnson

I always go to failure, every set. I might puss out and not go to failure first set of squats because I'm too lazy to take off the weights to get it back up but that's about it.

Max-OT for life!

I think we need to define "going to failure". AST Science has this to say:

Quote:

Originally Posted by AST Science Max OT

What's a Max-OT set?

A Max-OT set is a set performed to "positive-failure" with a heavy weight for 4 to 6 reps. In other words, a warm-up set is not a "Max-OT set". It is a warm-up set and that's it. So don't count your warm-up sets as part of your 6 to 9 sets per body part. This is important.

What's "Positive-Failure"?

Positive failure is when a set is performed to the positive limit of muscle exhaustion. In other words, you are done with a set when you are no longer able to complete a rep on your own.

Positive-failure should occur between the fourth and sixth rep

Max-OT does not employ forced reps beyond maybe partial help on the last rep of a set.

Contrary to what most have been led to believe, forced reps are counter productive to building muscle. They artificially fatigue the muscle, deplete muscle energy stores, and produce non-progressive overload just to name a few.

I think most people here are talking about going to negative failure.

*

**powerman2000** · 07-18-2006, 12:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by A.FreeRadical

I think we need to define "going to failure". AST Science has this to say:

I think most people here are talking about going to negative failure.

*

As far as I'm concerned and from I have learned, positive or negative, it doesn't matter.

Jeff Rage · 07-18-2006, 05:18 PM

I don't train to failure, I train to succeed!

Quote:

Originally Posted by powerman2000

It's an established fact that training to failure is not necessary for hypertrophy or strength gains. It's a senseless drain on the CNS and does far more harm than good. Not to mention that it also causes many injuries trying to empty your tank and squeeze out that one last repetition.

Good post - I agree!

**A.FreeRadical** · 07-18-2006, 05:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by powerman2000

As far as I'm concerned and from I have learned, positive or negative, it doesn't matter.

AST Science is saying "In other words, you are done with a set when you are no longer able to complete a rep on your own." I am reading this to mean stop when you know you can't complete one more rep unassisted. I am not sure why they are calling this "positive failure". I usually know when I have done my last good rep with a particular weight. I call this stopping before failure (on the next rep.)

How many extra reps should you have left in reserve when you do your last rep? (said with a little tongue in cheek.

)

*

IronWarrior · 07-18-2006, 05:55 PM

I used to train to failuire and have tried the low volume Mike Mentzer method e.t.c years ago.. I did get some gains from it, but... it did'nt compare to when I did high volume 6-10 reps, by 'high volume' I mean like 20 sets for chest 12-15 for tris,bis some people may feel they are overtraining with that much volume but I grew! its what works for me and alot of others as well..and I dont use steriods either and I recover fine, as long as I only hit each bodypart once a week.

DJohnson · 07-18-2006, 05:58 PM

Now that I think of it, that is AST Science quote is very vague!

So what exactly is positive and negative failure?

When I go to failure every set I mean like:
I'll be benching in my squat rack in my basement and I won't be able to get it all the way up and it'll come down onto the catches. Is this going to positive failure or negative failure?

Is postive failure just quitting before that last rep (that I don't complete)?

**davtown** · 07-18-2006, 07:59 PM

my thoughts:
when I do overhead pressing, once I get to a point where I feel I'd have to start pushing from my lower back to pump out another rep, I stop. I don't want to injure myself for no reason. Even if I had 3 or 4 reps left, and could do 2 more without technically going "to failure", the form, purpose, and effectiveness of the exercise have gone out the window, so I stop before something bad happens. This also leaves me enough energy to pound through my next set.

pretty much concurrent with what's being said

**A.FreeRadical** · 07-19-2006, 01:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DJohnson

Is postive failure just quitting before that last rep (that I don't complete)?

That is what I thought postitive failure meant. You are right, it is vague.

That is the way that I have been training, (I sometimes don't even make the last rep that I thought I could make.) I do he reps that I am sure that I can make and no more. I have gotten good gains from this method, but that is not to say that someone else couldn't get good gains from going to (negative?) failure.

It makes sense to me that going to negative failure (can't complete the intended reps for the set) can't be a good thing either physiologically or psychologically.

Physiologically, I can't imagine any good coming from struggling to do something that you can't do.

I like going back to the gym knowing that I did a certain weight for x number of reps on my last (x muscle group) day. I then can imagine myself doing 5 lbs more. If I failed the last time, I am going to think that I am going to fail again. I might not be able to do 5 lbs more this next time, but I won't fail trying.

*

07-17-2006, 10:57 AM	#1
gruntjc Amateur Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 33 Recipes: 0 Rep Power: 0	training to failure definitely has it's place... but where the fk is it? lol hi guys... i wanted to see what you fine people had to say about my thoughts on this topic. i came to the realisation tonight (after training for almost 13 years, reading countless articles on training, nutrition etc...), that training to failure might not be necessary in order to progress in this sport. training to failure definitely has its place... but what i realised this evening is that repeated bouts of training to failure can wreak havoc on your body's nervous system, and therefore, it;'s ability to recover. now... i'll be the first to admit that i'm slow. sometimes, you can be staring something in the face for such a long time... it's right in front of you, but you still dont see it. i probably train with fewer sets than the majority of trainers in here. i've always subscribed to the 'kill yourself' in the gym, put in 110%, maximum effort in a concentrated timeframe.. then get the fk out. but now i'm 30... and i'm still natural (although, i will be commencing my first cycle in a week or two.. once i have my cholesterol checked again) and i realise that my body doesnt have the recovery ability that it did some 10-12 years ago. what i need to do now is structure a program that will allow me to go balls to the wall for 2-3 weeks, then back off for a week or two. if anyone has something they can contribute to this thread, i sure would appreciate it. cheers jc p.s. i realise that i'm skirting around the issue of periodisation here.. but what better place to skirt?? lol

07-17-2006, 04:17 PM	#3
Boomer718 Pro Stature Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: Massachusetts Posts: 180 Recipes: 0 Rep Power: 6	HIT What would you comment on Mike Mentzer's High Intensity Training? He advoctes that you should train to failure and occassionally beyond to optimize gains.

07-17-2006, 04:32 PM	#4
A.FreeRadical the Epicurean Bodybuilder Join Date: Aug 2005 Posts: 2,245 Recipes: 0 Rep Power: 58	I agree with Powerman. Training "to failure" is not necessary and can be counter-productive. Do as much weight as you can safely lift for the rep range you are working in (overload). The last rep should be difficult, but doable. Obviously, to make strength and muscular gains, you will have to do this using periodization and progressive overload principles. I am twice your age, have been working out 5-6 days per week for 2 years using these techniques (periodization and overload) with good results and no serious injuries. (Prior to this I worked out in my 20s, 30s and 40s then I felt into bad habits.) * __________________ "Is it going to be the red pill or the blue pill, Neo? The red pill will answer the question 'What is the Matrix?' Choose carefully. Remember, all I'm offering is the truth. Nothing more." Ron Paul for President, 2008 A.FreeRadical ...the Epicurean bodybuilder Height: 5'9", Age: 62, My last high on 2/1/2006 was 196 lbs. My last low on 8/08/2006 was 167.5 lbs. Cutting until I am lean Starting weight: 190 lbs. bodyfat: 19.7% November 27th: 183 lbs. bodyfat: 18.3% bodyfat Goal Weight: 176 lbs with no more than 10% bodyfat My recipe collection

07-18-2006, 03:34 AM	#7
DJohnson IMPC Contestant Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: Alberta, Canada Posts: 1,013 Recipes: 0 Rep Power: 45	I always go to failure, every set. I might puss out and not go to failure first set of squats because I'm too lazy to take off the weights to get it back up but that's about it. Max-OT for life! __________________ Age: 21 Height: 5'10.5" Mar, 2001: 135lbs @ ~14% Nov, 2004: 245lbs @ ~40% Feb, 2006: 188lbs @ 20.1% - Hydrostatic Tested Dec, 2006: 168lbs @ 5.5% - 7 Point Caliper Tested BULKING FOR A LONG TIME NOW Long Term Goal: Over 200lbs @ 8%

07-18-2006, 05:58 PM	#14
DJohnson IMPC Contestant Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: Alberta, Canada Posts: 1,013 Recipes: 0 Rep Power: 45	Now that I think of it, that is AST Science quote is very vague! So what exactly is positive and negative failure? When I go to failure every set I mean like: I'll be benching in my squat rack in my basement and I won't be able to get it all the way up and it'll come down onto the catches. Is this going to positive failure or negative failure? Is postive failure just quitting before that last rep (that I don't complete)? __________________ Age: 21 Height: 5'10.5" Mar, 2001: 135lbs @ ~14% Nov, 2004: 245lbs @ ~40% Feb, 2006: 188lbs @ 20.1% - Hydrostatic Tested Dec, 2006: 168lbs @ 5.5% - 7 Point Caliper Tested BULKING FOR A LONG TIME NOW Long Term Goal: Over 200lbs @ 8%

07-17-2006, 04:57 PM	#5
Succio IronMass Sponsor Join Date: May 2006 Location: beastville Posts: 1,942 Recipes: 0 Rep Power: 97	ive been getting great strength gains going to failure.

07-18-2006, 05:55 PM	#13
IronWarrior Amateur Join Date: Jun 2006 Posts: 30 Recipes: 0 Rep Power: 0	I used to train to failuire and have tried the low volume Mike Mentzer method e.t.c years ago.. I did get some gains from it, but... it did'nt compare to when I did high volume 6-10 reps, by 'high volume' I mean like 20 sets for chest 12-15 for tris,bis some people may feel they are overtraining with that much volume but I grew! its what works for me and alot of others as well..and I dont use steriods either and I recover fine, as long as I only hit each bodypart once a week.

07-18-2006, 07:59 PM	#15
davtown OM NOM NOM NOM Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: San Francisco Posts: 2,360 Recipes: 0 Rep Power: 128	my thoughts: when I do overhead pressing, once I get to a point where I feel I'd have to start pushing from my lower back to pump out another rep, I stop. I don't want to injure myself for no reason. Even if I had 3 or 4 reps left, and could do 2 more without technically going "to failure", the form, purpose, and effectiveness of the exercise have gone out the window, so I stop before something bad happens. This also leaves me enough energy to pound through my next set. pretty much concurrent with what's being said __________________ --Training Journal-- current/goal D: 350/380 S: 280/300 B: 235/260