Do you train to failure on every set, or just the last set of an exercise?

judgey said:

Cheers. I take it that by failure you mean - unassisted failure. If so, what are your thoughts on the following:
- do you think it's worthwhile going beyond unassisted failure?
- if so, on each set to failure, or say once per muscle group per week?

Click to expand...

Firstly.
I think that if you go into the world of taking a sets to the limit, then you've got to pay close attention to your recovery ability, especially if you are doing a full-body workout..

There is incredible value going beyond "failure", going beyond failure is when you are unable to lift without assitance, the partner lifts the weight and you lower it very slowly, until you are unable to control that negative or lowering portion of the rep, you become to appreciate the true value of the negative portion of the rep, in some cases the partner is pushing down on the negative (forced negatives).
but again this is a very taxing way of training, and to maintain the intensity of work throughout the workout, means the workout is short.
One set is usually enough, if you can do two, then your not working hard enough.

For me, personally, I love this style of workout.

Bazza20 said:

Plenty of muscle has been built by people that didn't train to failure so that would make you think it's not necessary for muscle growth.

What's optimal? I'm not sure.

Click to expand...

It's an old, old arguement

One corner says..."Show me a bodybiulder that has used HIT?"
The answer from the other corner is; They got that way in spite of their workout.
Maybe, they would have gotten better results training HIT style?

Arnold disliked hard work.
Draper responded better to volume.
Yates, responded better to HIT

For myself, if it was even proven conclusivly that sub maximal training in it's present form was slightly more beneficial, I'd still train HIT style for it's efficiency.

I will push myself to failure on my last set of each exercise and employ negative reps were possible to push myself that little extra.

judgey said:

Cheers. I take it that by failure you mean - unassisted failure. If so, what are your thoughts on the following:
- do you think it's worthwhile going beyond unassisted failure?
- if so, on each set to failure, or say once per muscle group per week?

Click to expand...

I'll take you through a set, of say chest press.
No need for a warm-up set.
One set...

You are going to do say 12, that's your target.
You have chosen a weight that will permit you to do 10 comfortably.

in the first rep, you'll move at a controlled speed (say 2 sec) positive, actually slow, (you can push fast but don't) controlled, pause contracted (squeeze) for one second and lower for twice as slow (4sec).
Maintain the speed, it's crucial, so by the 8th rep you moving slow, but the force you are applying is still great.

The 9th rep, you barely get to the contracted position, squeeze 1 sec lower.

The 10th, you want to move and twist your body to get that last rep, but you don't, you just want to focus on the muscles used.
You get half way, then lower, then try again, you cant move it.
without rest
You ask the partner to lift it, then you lower it (4 sec) and repeat.

Move to the next exercise and repeat.

This is a very brutal method of training

Silverback said:

Failure;
It's controversial, there is no evidence to support either, there is no way of measuring the point where muscle receives the right amount of stimulus to grow, in a set of 1 to 10, 10 being the point where you can no longer lift, is the 8th rep?, is it the 9th?

Going to the point of failure ensures you have done everything possible to permit growth, to stimulate growth.

There is one group that says training to failure, teaches failure.
if training your athletes to muscular failure is teaching them to fail then perhaps stopping your athletes short of muscle fatigue is teaching them to quit.

Time under tension is a method of performing reps under time rather than counting reps, most trainees can perform an exercise in 90 seconds using a 2/4 second cadence.

If you stop short of 90, the weight is too heavy, if you can perform the exercise past 90, it's too light, and weight needs to be added.

Click to expand...

Maybe in a set of 10, each rep gives 10% of the stimulus for growth. Maybe 1 rep will give you 10% training stimulus, 3 reps will give you 30%, 8 reps will give you 80%, and all 10 reps will give you 100% of the available training stimulus.

Maybe coming back for a second set of 10 will give you another 100% training stimulus. (I don't think that's actually the case; it's my understanding that doing 2 sets will give you more training stimulus than 1 set, but the total training stimulus will not be as great as twice the stimulus of the single set -- diminishing returns sets in quickly.)

In saying that, I suspect that the magnitude of stimulus from each rep increases as you get closer to failure and have to struggle more to get the weight moving, so, on a set of 10, maybe the first rep only gives 5% training stimulus, and the last rep gives 15%.

I don't think there's a single point at which the training stimulus has been achieved, implying that if that point isn't reached, all the work done is in vain, and likewise that anything done past that point is in vain. It's not a switch that simply gets turned on or off, but rather a dial that gets cranked up as the stakes get higher in the session.

A lot of people hate on HIT. I think that's undue, as HIT isn't inherently bad, although there are plenty of bad eggs who do HIT (just as there are plenty of bad eggs engaging with any training system). Personally, though, I've always found I get better strength results from multiple working sets. Seeing muscle gains is a rare sight on my body no matter what I'm doing, but if I'm not seeing my strength go up in some manner each week, I'm not going to want to stick to a program long enough to find out what it does to my muscles.

Training to failure means at one point the weight will move negatively for a split second at least (seems stupid to me to not complete a full rep). If using a spotter how will they know when failure has been reached? If they touch the bar before then failure has not been reached, if they wait then partial negative had occurred before the spot occurs. Seems stupid to me.

my opinion, no need to go to failure often. I use occasional set to failure not only to tax system 100%, but to set my maximum to know what percentage to train from.

So many variables in training to create overload - speed of movement, rest between sets, number of sets and reps and so on.

I can do a session of 4x8 on 60% of my max with a short rest period and be absolutely stuffed. I find this sort of work, which suits my makeup and mentality, works for best for me.

Remember 60% of maximum is actually heavier than you think because form of movement is so much stricter for me on lighter weights. On a heavier weight or set, I will do whatever I can to set a new pb, or in my older age, get the possible number of max reps. On the lighter weights, much greater focus on muscle I seek to work. In other words, if the form on light weights was as loose as max weight or set, then the percentage I trained on would be much higher.

spartacus said:

my opinion, no need to go to failure often. I use occasional set to failure not only to tax system 100%, but to set my maximum to know what percentage to train from.

So many variables in training to create overload - speed of movement, rest between sets, number of sets and reps and so on.

I can do a session of 4x8 on 60% of my max with a short rest period and be absolutely stuffed. I find this sort of work, which suits my makeup and mentality, works for best for me.

Remember 60% of maximum is actually heavier than you think because form of movement is so much stricter for me on lighter weights. On a heavier weight or set, I will do whatever I can to set a new pb, or in my older age, get the possible number of max reps. On the lighter weights, much greater focus on muscle I seek to work. In other words, if the form on light weights was as loose as max weight or set, then the percentage I trained on would be much higher.

Click to expand...

Good post.
It all works, find what keeps you motivated.

Some methods are more efficient
Some are safer
Some are risky
Some you need a calculator and protractor

silverback, it is really quite simple for me.

My max set will be anything I feel like, from 1 rep to 10 reps.

I normally get 10 reps on 80%, 6-7 on 85% and 4 on 90%, so i merely adjust my poundages from there.

If I do a test and I am down, I adjust accordingly, and vice versa.

Admin said:

Do you train to failure on every set, or just the last set of an exercise?

Click to expand...

This question has tremendous importance based on which type of sport one is engaged in. Is it bodybuilding, where the main focus is on the increase of muscle mass, or is it on a strength/power based sport such as Olympic weightlifting and/or powerlifting?

For the bodybuilder, there's not gonna be much of a problem going to failure, since the attainment of strength usually takes a back seat to muscle size. However when it comes to the other two sports mentioned above, training to failure would limit the gaining of strength due to the constant reinforcement of slow firing of the nerve signals that would allow one explosive speed and maximum strength.

That is why the two sports mentioned, do more often than not, follow a structured periodization program, instead of going all out balls to the wall on every set, or even on that final set of a particular workout.

So for muscle gain based sport such as bodybuilding, the going to failure may be just what the muscle needs in order to further adapt and grow. That is not to say that going to failure all the time is something beneficial, as once a muscle adapts to the task placed upon it, one would need to apply some form of change for further muscle adaptation and hence further the muscle growth process.


Fadi.

Not every set, not even every workout! Following a few different programs over the years, they seem to work up to it, rather than every time i train.

Fadi said:

However when it comes to the other two sports mentioned above, training to failure would limit the gaining of strength due to the constant reinforcement of slow firing of the nerve signals that would allow one explosive speed and maximum strength.

Fadi.

Click to expand...

Interesting, I am guessing this is the scientific way of explaining what I called practicing to fail, constantly going to failure sets you up for failure, as your muscles are getting trained to fail.

I also believe that there is physiological reinforcement as well, where your brain/mind gets used to not completing the lift, and you getting used to and accepting the fact that it is OK not to complete a lift.

taurus said:

Not every set, not even every workout! Following a few different programs over the years, they seem to work up to it, rather than every time i train.

Click to expand...

Agreed mate. Have only just recently realised that crawling out of the gym after every session is not necessarily a good thing

Have now begun experimenting with cycling intensities etc.. and listening to the body more.

Besides, it's no fun when everyone is taking the piss out of you every week for walking like an old kunce after every leg workout

Test-E said:

Agreed mate. Have only just recently realised that crawling out of the gym after every session is not necessarily a good thing

Have now begun experimenting with cycling intensities etc.. and listening to the body more.

Besides, it's no fun when everyone is taking the piss out of you every week for walking like an old kunce after every leg workout

Click to expand...

You are talking about two different things, you do not have to go to failure to completely destroy yourself for days after a workout.

I often crawl out of the gym, sometimes I lie on the floor on my back waiting for the room to stop spinning and my muscles to stop shaking yet I never went anywhere near my max lift or failure.

what matters with any training cycle is the weeks (or days) you designate to go heavy.

Those weeks need to be at or near pbs or one's expectations (latter in my case as older and lighter). If not, barring the excuse of injury or illness, then the training program has been wrong.

Big Mick said:

You are talking about two different things, you do not have to go to failure to completely destroy yourself for days after a workout.

I often crawl out of the gym, sometimes I lie on the floor on my back waiting for the room to stop spinning and my muscles to stop shaking yet I never went anywhere near my max lift or failure.

Click to expand...

wtf were you doing in there then to illicit such a strong response?

Sniffing the ladies toilet seats?

Test-E said:

wtf were you doing in there then to illicit such a strong response?

Sniffing the ladies toilet seats?

Click to expand...

Generally lift weight, combination of heavy low rep and lighter higher rep training. Short rest periods and hard work.

No need to fail to push yourself hard

Big Mick said:

You are talking about two different things, you do not have to go to failure to completely destroy yourself for days after a workout.

I often crawl out of the gym, sometimes I lie on the floor on my back waiting for the room to stop spinning and my muscles to stop shaking yet I never went anywhere near my max lift or failure.

Click to expand...

That reads like poor conditioning.

There seems to be confusion with the term ; intensity.

Some view intensity as concentrating/focusing in the moment.

In the world of H.I.T

Intensity is the "intensity of work"

Whereby on uses a limted amount of exercises and a limited amount of sets, a limited amount of rest between sets in a short time.

For this to be productive, I beleive a full-body workout using compound exercises is all that is necessary.
I dont believe using H.I.T as a split routine is wise, your body has no time to recover, doing a specialized leg routine, then the next day upper body , followed by a day of "Road work" is a recipe for disaster.
Your body is overtrained, no time to recover.

Big Mick said:

Interesting, I am guessing this is the scientific way of explaining what I called practicing to fail, constantly going to failure sets you up for failure, as your muscles are getting trained to fail.

I also believe that there is physiological reinforcement as well, where your brain/mind gets used to not completing the lift, and you getting used to and accepting the fact that it is OK not to complete a lift.

Click to expand...

I like the way you've explained it Big Man.

Back in 2009, I wrote a small article on this forum called: The “F” word! In it I went to explain that yes, going to failure may result in a greater growth stimulus than stopping sets shy of failure, however due to the excessive micro-trauma of the muscle fibres involved, whatever is to be gained by going to failure by a potential anabolic response, would in reality be offset by the catabolic state one finds one's self in in the long term (due to the excessive micro-trauma at the cellular level).

Take home message: best to leave one or so rep in the tank.


Fadi.