Thread: what are peoples view on training to failure?

No. But it should definately be a challenge to complete your sets.

When I have a spotter I try to push my very last couple reps on my last set to failure.

Bench
set 1 x 10
set 2 x 8
set 3 x 6
set 4 x failure

I get great results training to failure. Others might not. Each person is different and will have different results. Must important is to maintain good form even on failure.

I definitely think so. You are pushing your muscle fibers beyond
what they can handle. I think that going to failure is a great indicator
that the muscle is being worked. I don't think you should over do it
though. I would say to wait until the last two sets of your work out
to failure...I usually do burn out sets (usually my last two sets ) anywhere
between 15-failure to get the max out of my muscle. This really adds the cherry on top and forces the muscles to grow.


But that's just me

Never train to failure unless you alter your volume and training frequency to reflect the extra CNS stress and give yourself time to recover. Failure is more damaging and progress-limiting than most people realize.

That's not what Mike Mentzer says Mr. Gazehole with all due respect.

oh shit iv been going to failure on one or two sets each training day on my A and B full body routine lol, i guess after hearing this i will stop going to failure, funnliy enough i have been feeling a little more tired on my last two rest days, maybe because of that, il stop training to failure and train 1 or 2 reps short of failure for everything, its i am only nearing the end of my second week of training so i assume i havent fuked up everything Gaz?

also mentzer on steroids so he wud say that wudnt he?

it's not necessary but can be done occasionally...

see, this is something i've always got conflicting information on. to be honest I've heard that it's very taxing on the CNS (central nervous system if you dont know the abreviation), but if I recall correctly and I may not be... arnolds encyclopedia to body building (which i consider the bible of lifting) stated that you have to train to failure or you wouldn't be tearing down your muscles to build them back up, that once a week he would completly blast a muscle group.

not sure if i recommend doing it every work out though. i dont. i push it hard but not to failure every work out.

Originally Posted by awhites1

see, this is something i've always got conflicting information on. to be honest I've heard that it's very taxing on the CNS (central nervous system if you dont know the abreviation), but if I recall correctly and I may not be... arnolds encyclopedia to body building (which i consider the bible of lifting) stated that you have to train to failure or you wouldn't be tearing down your muscles to build them back up, that once a week he would completly blast a muscle group.

not sure if i recommend doing it every work out though. i dont. i push it hard but not to failure every work out.

using very heavy training loads at or above 80-85% of the 1RM causes micro-trauma to skeletal muscle so in that aspect training to failure is not needed for that. also things to remember, Arnold did not write that book nor did he train naturally after his late teens.

Originally Posted by 240PLUS

That's not what Mike Mentzer says Mr. Gazehole with all due respect.

I think you'll find Mentzer advocated exactly that, actually.


From "High Intensity Training: The Mike Mentzer Way"

"A high intensity workout must, by it's very nature, be very brief...once you have have stimulated growth with the required high intensity training, get out of the gym!"

"The completion of the recovery process may take up to several days...if you workout before the recovery process is completed you will short-circuit the growth process."


He certainly didn't advocate more than one set to failure per exercise, or training more than twice a week on HIT style training regimes. For that matter neither did Jones or Darden.

Failure training is so taxing on the body (and the relationship is exponential rather than linear) that to perform too many sets too failure without giving yourself enough time to recuperate WILL lead to overtraining incredibly rapidly.

That's why all HIT programs (be they by Mentzer, Jones or Darden or whoever) are very brief (<30 mins and <10 sets usually) and are done infrequently (3-6 days rest between workouts).

Compared to typical workout programs, containing say 20 sets per session with a day's rest in between, the difference in configuration is obvious. And that's being conservative compared to most bodybuilding programs (40 sets a session, every single day - or more!!).

Trying to apply failure training regularly to a program that hasn't been adapted to accommodate it would show a complete lack of common sense, logic, and knowledge about the human body.

Hopefully this isn't what you were suggesting!

That was the meaning behind my post, with the same respect backatcha

wow gaz jus owned u

.....with all do respect,where does he say "do not train until failure" at? I see a lot of words

and some opinions, but where does he actually 'advocate just the

opposite?"

Originally Posted by 240PLUS

.....with all do respect,where does he say "do not train until failure" at? I see a lot of words

and some opinions, but where does he actually 'advocate just the

opposite?"

Huh?

Nobody said anything about advocating the opposite of anything...

What are you talking about?

.....fuck it. I don't know. I'm calling it a day.

I never liked Mike mentzer and his butt tickler mustache anyways.

Originally Posted by 240PLUS

I never liked Mike mentzer and his butt tickler mustache anyways.

I like Mentzer. I think you just misinterpreted what Gaz was saying.

Originally Posted by Gazhole

Never train to failure unless you alter your volume and training frequency to reflect the extra CNS stress and give yourself time to recover.

HIT alters the volume and training frequency.

So you are saying that training until failure is wrong?

Originally Posted by 240PLUS

So you are saying that training until failure is wrong?

Not saying that at all.

Originally Posted by 240PLUS

I never liked Mike mentzer and his butt tickler mustache anyways.

Well, I personally like it. It works for me. Got to break those muscle fibers down man.

The only downside to it that I've found is it takes me two days to recover from burn out

sets with major body parts...i.e with a spotter to help me with the last two reps. I will

train no other way. Or unless my spotter flakes out on me.

Originally Posted by CaptainInsano

I like Mentzer. I think you just misinterpreted what Gaz was saying.

Quite possible. I'm confused at where the disagreement here is

Originally Posted by CaptainInsano

HIT alters the volume and training frequency.

Exactly. This is why HIT works, and randomly doing failure sets doesn't.

HIT is a great training style, it's one of the few things i actually like that has come out of bodybuilding. The others being Markus Ruhl and those huge stripy clown trousers they all wear.

Originally Posted by Gazhole

Quite possible. I'm confused at where the disagreement here is

I think it's a misunderstanding more than a disagreement.

Originally Posted by Gazhole

Exactly. This is why HIT works, and randomly doing failure sets doesn't.

HIT is a great training style, it's one of the few things i actually like that has come out of bodybuilding. The others being Markus Ruhl and those huge stripy clown trousers they all wear.

Couldn't agree more. People hear the training to failure part of HIT, and then try incorporating it into one of their regular routines, which it's not meant for. Or they just randomly incorperate training to failure, either way it's not good.

Originally Posted by CaptainInsano

Couldn't agree more. People hear the training to failure part of HIT, and then try incorporating it into one of their regular routines, which it's not meant for. Or they just randomly incorperate training to failure, either way it's not good.

Absolutely not good at all, haha.

Its like looking at westside and then doing 1RMs every workout in a bodybuilding split. Aint gonna work.

Originally Posted by Gazhole

Absolutely not good at all, haha.

Its like looking at westside and then doing 1RMs every workout in a bodybuilding split. Aint gonna work.

Exactly. The worse part of training to failure in a regular bodybuilding routine, is that it will likely work very well for a little while. Hopefully you'll only get hit with a serious plateau of progression when the shit goes bad.

Training to failure has its applications, but whether or not it is effective depends on your training protocol.

There are many factors to consider when training to failure, lots of things need to be tweaked in order to accommodate the stress involved.

Such as:

training frequency
training volume (sets/reps, etc.)
training intensity (% of 1RM in any lift)
percentage of sets that complete at failure
what exercises are being done until failure (failure during deadlifts and failure during curls elicit very different effects on the body)
diet regimen
sleep regimen

My basically philosophy is -

Training to failure should be used sparingly and should be planned. I usually go to failure on one heavy set most workouts.

However, my overall volume and frequency is low and I am in a caloric surplus.

Originally Posted by 240PLUS

Got to break those muscle fibers down man.

using loads at or around 80-85% of the 1RM does that w/o taxing the CNS as much.

Originally Posted by ectomorph141

When I have a spotter I try to push my very last couple reps on my last set to failure.

Bench
set 1 x 10
set 2 x 8
set 3 x 6
set 4 x failure

I get great results training to failure. Others might not. Each person is different and will have different results. Must important is to maintain good form even on failure.

I hear ya. I've been training that way since football. It always yields good gains. "There is no progress without struggle."

I've always been under the impression that going to failure on your last set was a good indication that you had reached the max you could push on an exercise before moving to the next. Is this really a bad idea when taking into account some of the things you guys are talking about with skeletol and nervous system damages?