Tough Old Man said:
everyone is entitled to their own opinion
-
Hello, this board in now turned off and no new posting.
Please REGISTER at Anabolic Steroid Forums, and become a member of our NEW community!
-
Check Out IronMag Labs® KSM-66 Max - Recovery and Anabolic Growth Complex
Training To Failure.
- Thread starter P-funk
- Start date
everyone is entitled to their own opinion
Tough Old Man said:
Training bodybuilders and training athletes are two different things. Dante isn't training anyone that is playing professional or collegiate sports. Two different things.
I kind of do this. I will do for example incline perss and start with 275X6....then jump to 285x6...then 295x6...so each set is hard but only the last one do I go all out to hit 6 reps.P-funk said:
My problem has been that I keep going heaver for singles/doubles or tripples and hitting failure on those.......and that might be (is) the reason for my continuing injuries....think I will step it back a bit and see if "not going to failure at all" helps me stay healthy.
Very true. You hit that ball right out of the park.P-funk said:
Tough Old Man said:
Not to say that dante doesn't have a good template and that people that train on his template don't see great resutls...they do! People also see good results with HIT training too and that is to failure.
the study doesn't say that training to failure is bad..it just points out the different adaptations that are happeneing with each protocol. The subject is better geared towards athletes or those competing in strength sports.
Also, the study showing what happens hormonally when training to failure could be of benefit to a bodybuilder preparing for a contest as they would want their test levels to remain as high as possible since they drop a lot when you are dieting down (considering we are talking about a natural competitor).
I have to say, this helped my mentality about westside out quite a bit. I've always had trouble NOT training each set to failure or close to. Tonight I really tried to work to just cumulative fatigue rather than even failure on the last set of each exercise (except my ME exercise of course) and I feel much better and feel I had a more productive w/o. No injury feeling either which I usually have. Thanks for this thread!
Very interesting thread... I'm going to start doing as P suggested.
For what's it worth...My arms did not hit the 22 inch mark until I started doing every set to failure.
The BIG thing is the CNS. If your training 5 days per week then no you should not train to failure every set after warm ups but if you only train 3 days per week then you can get by with training to failure most of the time and benefit greatly from it.
There's always going to be studies trying to prove this or prove that but the simple fact is REAL LIFE EXPERIENCES are what count. Trust me when I tell you there will always be some study saying to do this or do that. Go with what works!
The BIG thing is the CNS. If your training 5 days per week then no you should not train to failure every set after warm ups but if you only train 3 days per week then you can get by with training to failure most of the time and benefit greatly from it.
There's always going to be studies trying to prove this or prove that but the simple fact is REAL LIFE EXPERIENCES are what count. Trust me when I tell you there will always be some study saying to do this or do that. Go with what works!
- Joined
- Sep 26, 2004
- Messages
- 3,525
- Reaction score
- 5
- Points
- 38
Agree and disagree, but mostly disagree.
Sure, real life experiences count, but they differ with each and every person. No two people will see the exact same results from the same methods. So, you see how many people react to the methods in question. Doesn't that make sense? Doesn't that also sound like science? It does to me...
Obviously do what works for you individually, but don't just rule out one thing or another because someone else says it's not the best thing for them.
Sure, real life experiences count, but they differ with each and every person. No two people will see the exact same results from the same methods. So, you see how many people react to the methods in question. Doesn't that make sense? Doesn't that also sound like science? It does to me...
Obviously do what works for you individually, but don't just rule out one thing or another because someone else says it's not the best thing for them.
I think what you have to look at is that BBers typically use a higher rep range and lower rest periods that result in higher levels of lactate. Higher lactate concentration typically means higher GH output which could combat the drop in IGF-1.
Squaggleboggin said:
I think you may have mis-understood what I am saying. Let me try and explain myself further.
People get different results because of their "genetics" not their training methods. I also agree that bodybuilding and powerlifting should be approached in a different manner but the same workout plans for both sports will work for all given the training program has a proven track record.
IRON MAN said:
this thread didn't real have much to do with hypertrophy. It was more about athletic performance and training, that is why I posted it. It has nothing to do with being a BB'er (non-athlete) and there fore has nothing to do with hypertrophic gains (it wasn't one of the variables testd in the study although maybe it should have been. it would have been cool).
You may take every set to failure on your arms and see great gains. You also use gear.
I use gear and my arms aren't 22". Maybe I should buy brand name stuff. My wrist straps and weightlifting belt came from Walmart. I'll try changing my gear bought from Walmart to a big 5. Maybe that will help.P-funk said:You may take every set to failure on your arms and see great gains. You also use gear.
Tough Old Man said:I use gear and my arms aren't 22". Maybe I should buy brand name stuff. My wrist straps and weightlifting belt came from Walmart. I'll try changing my gear bought from Walmart to a big 5. Maybe that will help.
Tough Old Man said:I use gear and my arms aren't 22". Maybe I should buy brand name stuff. My wrist straps and weightlifting belt came from Walmart. I'll try changing my gear bought from Walmart to a big 5. Maybe that will help.
Yeah, but you're like a hundred years old, you prolly only produce estrogen, grandma.
How did you know about that??? Did my cycle log give it awayP-funk said:this thread didn't real have much to do with hypertrophy. It was more about athletic performance and training, that is why I posted it. It has nothing to do with being a BB'er (non-athlete) and there fore has nothing to do with hypertrophic gains (it wasn't one of the variables testd in the study although maybe it should have been. it would have been cool).
You may take every set to failure on your arms and see great gains. You also use gear.
Lets get it right. I won't be a 100 year old granny for 2 more years. You must be ashamed of yourself knowing this old granny can out bench your ass. This is probably what's causing you to drink so much.Dale Mabry said:
True Tale..P-funk said:
Tough Old Man said:Lets get it right. I won't be a 100 year old granny for 2 more years. You must be ashamed of yourself knowing this old granny can out bench your ass. This is probably what's causing you to drink so much.
If by out bench you mean sit on a park bench then you are right, you can outbench me. BTW, shouldn't you be hitting on John H. in open chat again?
P-Funk, I know hypertrophy wasn't the focus of the study, but from what you've said I'm concerned about my habits - My goal is size only, and I've been taking every final set of every exercise to failure for the past 3 years - my whole gym mentality is based on that. I increase the weight every set for every exercise until I fail on the last set. Have I been shooting myself in the foot? Should I be going with lighter weights and finishing the final set feeling I could have done more? I could really use some advice please!
NEO_72 said:
Like others who have provided anecdotal evidence have said....failure has worked for hypertrophy. I would say you need to cycle through your training. to much of a good thing is counter productive. If you have been training to failure in your last set for the past 4-6 weeks then the next 4-6 weeks you may want to not train to failure and train using cumulative fatigue and load your intensity a different way....ie, increase a set each week, increase reps each week, decrease rest interval, alter rep tempo, etc......As we have been pushing for a long time, a periodized program is the way to go in order to continually progress. Planning is a must.
Thanks for taking the time to respond. I will try and plan something better.
These differences are very small, and with sample sizes of 13-15, I can't see them being statistically significant.
I suspect the small differences between the two groups would be masked by the noice of individual variations.
Personally, I consider training to momentary muscular failure to be 'normal', and training beyond to be a hard workout. Over the years, I've tried all sorts of training protocols, hi-rep, hi-set, hi-intensity, supersets & all sorts of stuff, and I find that, for me at least, the heavy-duty approach gives consistent results & gains.
For me, the high-volume approach just doesn't work - it's extremely fatigueing without being particularly productive. The exception is for occasional muscle-shock workouts
Yet in the years I ran a gym, I realised that most people are suited to the higher volume approach. I suspect you need a particular combo of physiological & mental attributes for hi-intensity to work.
I think the fact that some bodybuilders train with volume & others with intensity demonstrates that what works for one won't neccessarily work for another.
I suspect the small differences between the two groups would be masked by the noice of individual variations.
Personally, I consider training to momentary muscular failure to be 'normal', and training beyond to be a hard workout. Over the years, I've tried all sorts of training protocols, hi-rep, hi-set, hi-intensity, supersets & all sorts of stuff, and I find that, for me at least, the heavy-duty approach gives consistent results & gains.
For me, the high-volume approach just doesn't work - it's extremely fatigueing without being particularly productive. The exception is for occasional muscle-shock workouts
Yet in the years I ran a gym, I realised that most people are suited to the higher volume approach. I suspect you need a particular combo of physiological & mental attributes for hi-intensity to work.
I think the fact that some bodybuilders train with volume & others with intensity demonstrates that what works for one won't neccessarily work for another.
Great post, P-Funk, very informative
Correct and you better leave my birds alone that I feed. Now time for me to go to open chat and find John boy....Dale Mabry said:If by out bench you mean sit on a park bench then you are right, you can outbench me.
P-funk said:
There were about 7 people on this forum that kept me staying around, and Funk was at the top of the list
Such good advice.
Duncans Donuts said:There were about 7 people on this forum that kept me staying around, and Funk was at the top of the list
thanks Duncan. glad to have you back (or still around). Your posts were always helpful to many of the IM readers.
SuperFlex said:
thanks for your intelligent conversation to the discussion you stupid mother fucker. By the way....if you can go beyond it then it isn't failure your moron so go back and read some more of your weider principles. Jackass.
