Do you train to failure?

Jonjon

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 21, 2021
Messages
1,241
Reaction score
1,268
Points
113
Are you able to match, or exceed what you did in the prior workout, either by adding weight and/or reps most sessions?

If not, probably too much, try backing off a bit.

If so, keep on going until you need a rest, then take a light week or week off. You just don't want to have to do this too frequently.
That’s a good gauge. Thanks for the advice
 

CJ

Mod Squad
Joined
Feb 24, 2014
Messages
20,717
Reaction score
38,427
Points
383
That’s a good gauge. Thanks for the advice
I'm pretty much the same way, last set to failure. If I'm in a calorie surplus, I'll add in the rest pause sets, or some other intensity technique.

I've tried every set to failure (when safe) but the drop off from set to set was too great, plus you get worn down quickly.

That's just me though, your mileage may vary.
 

FearThaGear

Senior Member
Joined
Jul 7, 2017
Messages
562
Reaction score
855
Points
63
I don't have a gym partner these days and haven't for quite some time so no, I don't go to complete failure on any free weight exercise outside of curls.

I do however go to failure on my working sets of machine exercises where there is a safety catch of some sort to keep the weight from falling on me.

Like several others have mentioned, I also do drop sets and supersets which puts me very near absolute failure but that's as far as I go because a one rep max these days is just asking for an injury in my opinion.
 
Joined
Jun 12, 2019
Messages
75
Reaction score
68
Points
18
Stimulate don’t annihilate is hard for me to comprehend. Especially with my arms, because I’m trying so hard to get them to grow…
I like “stimulate don’t annihilate”. It’s catchy and I’ve heard that before. haha

Maybe just maybe annihilating underdeveloped muscles puts them further behind compared to muscles that you just stimulate, for reason we are taking about on this thread. So, it goes back to this: at what point does a lifter hit negative marginal benefit? (Negative marginal benefit is adapted from negative marginal return. I studied economics)

of course, as this thread makes obvious, there is so much nuance to what does failure mean. It depends on the person, exercise, goal…
What is stimulate for you maybe annihilate for me

So, the solution for anyone trying to figure out if they should train to failure (whatever that means to you) is to experiment for yourself. Try different training methods, from the trendy routines to the ones on the fringes

For me, after experimenting with various routines for 8+ years, I like Pavel Tsatsouline’s school of thought. That being, a simple and minimalist workout, doing less than what most people do now days, doing the opposite of CT Fletcher
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=rTAEx9WDNKg
 

BRICKS

Veteran
Joined
Aug 30, 2016
Messages
5,070
Reaction score
11,342
Points
333
I like “stimulate don’t annihilate”. It’s catchy and I’ve heard that before. haha

Maybe just maybe annihilating underdeveloped muscles puts them further behind compared to muscles that you just stimulate, for reason we are taking about on this thread. So, it goes back to this: at what point does a lifter hit negative marginal benefit? (Negative marginal benefit is adapted from negative marginal return. I studied economics)

of course, as this thread makes obvious, there is so much nuance to what does failure mean. It depends on the person, exercise, goal…
What is stimulate for you maybe annihilate for me

So, the solution for anyone trying to figure out if they should train to failure (whatever that means to you) is to experiment for yourself. Try different training methods, from the trendy routines to the ones on the fringes

For me, after experimenting with various routines for 8+ years, I like Pavel Tsatsouline’s school of thought. That being, a simple and minimalist workout, doing less than what most people do now days, doing the opposite of CT Fletcher
Knowing the answer to your question of "what point does a lifter hit marginal benefits" os the difference between the advanced bodybuilder and the intermediate. The advanced knows when enough is enough and when to double down. Listen to your body, work the muscle not the weight.
 

Jonjon

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 21, 2021
Messages
1,241
Reaction score
1,268
Points
113
I like “stimulate don’t annihilate”. It’s catchy and I’ve heard that before. haha

Maybe just maybe annihilating underdeveloped muscles puts them further behind compared to muscles that you just stimulate, for reason we are taking about on this thread. So, it goes back to this: at what point does a lifter hit negative marginal benefit? (Negative marginal benefit is adapted from negative marginal return. I studied economics)

of course, as this thread makes obvious, there is so much nuance to what does failure mean. It depends on the person, exercise, goal…
What is stimulate for you maybe annihilate for me

So, the solution for anyone trying to figure out if they should train to failure (whatever that means to you) is to experiment for yourself. Try different training methods, from the trendy routines to the ones on the fringes

For me, after experimenting with various routines for 8+ years, I like Pavel Tsatsouline’s school of thought. That being, a simple and minimalist workout, doing less than what most people do now days, doing the opposite of CT Fletcher
Lee Haney used to say that…

I like to stimulate… then, annihilate 🤣
 

Skullcrusher

Elite
Joined
Apr 1, 2020
Messages
3,473
Reaction score
4,414
Points
193
I believe in stimulate, not annihilate.

I do occassionally take some sets to true failure.

Like triceps in my most recent workout.

For myself, the last reps should hurt to finish.

If too many final reps hurt I might not be able to finish.

I mostly ignore the pain and finish any damn way.

If not enough final reps hurt then I'm pissing in the wind.

Was doing 3 sets of 10 on just about everything for a long time.

There were 2 lifts where I did sets of 25 reps. Leg extensions and trap bar shrugs.

Those are the two muscles that got the most growth.

Maybe because it was more pain, more TUT, or both...not really sure.

Decided to do my first/main lift 3 x 10 and the rest 2 x 25.

Going to go like this for a few months to see what happens.
 

BrotherIron

Moderator
Joined
Jun 24, 2012
Messages
3,302
Reaction score
5,863
Points
238
I'll train to failure at times on small muscle groups, isolation movements... machine movements. I do not train to failure on multi-joint compound movements.
 
Joined
Apr 29, 2021
Messages
319
Reaction score
286
Points
43
Interesting replies. Ive always felt like a set is made in the final reps, getting in your head and pushing just beyond what you think you're capable of.

To the guys that don't train to failure, are you always increasing the weight? How do you achieve progressive overload or do you not try?
 

CJ

Mod Squad
Joined
Feb 24, 2014
Messages
20,717
Reaction score
38,427
Points
383
Interesting replies. Ive always felt like a set is made in the final reps, getting in your head and pushing just beyond what you think you're capable of.
I think so too, at least those reps do more. It makes it more efficient in my opinion, so you can do less sets to achieve the same thing. And less total reps is less overall wear and tear on the body.
To the guys that don't train to failure, are you always increasing the weight? How do you achieve progressive overload or do you not try?
Going to failure isn't required to achieve progressive overload. You can still get stronger by not failing. Some exercises, like Squats and Deadlifts, going to failure is more potential harm than good.
 

OldeBull1

Senior Member
Joined
Apr 23, 2021
Messages
520
Reaction score
1,063
Points
93
I separate lifts into movers and builders. My movers are the big barbell lifts. I don't train those to failure, I prefer to keep all reps crisp and explosive. Builders are more isolation and machine work. I'll often take those to, or past, failure.
70% of the time, no.
 

Xxplosive

Senior Member
Joined
Dec 17, 2020
Messages
256
Reaction score
137
Points
43
Curious with everyones success, or lack thereof, with training to failure.

When Mike Matthews posted about this topic last week I thought, "I train to failure in all but my first set"

But, I've thought about it and went to the gym a few times since his post.
I found that I wasn't training to absolute failure but to technical failure (or can't do another rep without form breaking down).
Nearly every set was to or on-the-brink of technical failure which is way more than what studies show to be most optimal (the studies quoted by Mike Matthews).

Anyways, I've attached an except, from my short discussion with Mike, of my position and his response.

Where do you stand? How do you train?

When lifting heavy, i train to failure on my last 1-2 sets. I have always made dramatic size and strength gains this way when taking in adequate protein and calories.

That being said, you cant do this week in, week out, year round. You gotta take a 4-8 week break from heavy to failure or you are gonna wear out your CNS to where its counterproductive.
 

dirtys1x

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 17, 2021
Messages
548
Reaction score
679
Points
63
All my working sets are to failure. I hardly count rep ranges anymore and work most of my ancillary lifts (like flys, leg extension, etc etc) to failure. My compounds lifts are structured still because I work in pyramids of progressive overload to improve strength.. but yeah for the most part I’m working to failure
 
  • Like
Reactions: CJ

New Threads

Top