Training to Failure

[qbkilla]

The vast majority of machines allow you to do this no problem.

Anyway, I can't believe we have this same thread every few weeks and the same 3 or 4 points get made back and forth.

The TLR of what matters is always the same:

- Training close to failure most of the time is probably optimal.
- Occasionally going beyond failure can be beneficial.
- Training away from failure can have some benefits, but needs to be accommodated for with more sets to make up the lack of effective reps.
- Failure itself can be tough to define because there's a large window where you can put a gun to someone's head who thinks they hit failure and suddenly they find 3 reps, etc. etc.
- All of this is pointless for the majority of beginner/intermediate trainees because very few people really know what it's like to push a set hard, and intentionally leaving "reps in the tank" for someone who doesn't really know how to train to failure is likely going to cause them to make their training borderline if not completely ineffective.

And the most important one:

- Mike Israetel is a hack who set training culture back several years by making a career out of misinterpreting faulty science and selling it to newbies on reddit. He's now carefully backing off from that but has to do so slowly lest he admit his entire career was fraudulent.

Agree with this post

Crazy how people try and make failure as this absurd thing that is unachievable by mortals to justify the Mike Israel "rir" "reps in the tank" nonsense.

" you have never trained to failure because no one put a shotgun to your head" "

" you can't train to failure or you'll shatter bones or die under a barbell because machines don't exist."

Are people really saying that no on earth has touched failure on a preacher curl machine, overhead dumbbell press, tricep cable press? All to justify high volume pump training and useless terminology that overcomplicates. Rpe scale rir, what's next we have to hire Mike Israetel as a coach and send him videos of our sets and he can give them an intensity score?

Lat pulldown set 1 was a 79.52 intensity rpe. Breathing heavy after last rep, potential to not recover for next workout, dial down intensity to 69.25 or risk needing a deload week of 7.4 days.

 

[Golden]

RIR, MRV, MEV, listened to a podcast with Mike Isratel (?) Last night, all kinds of abbreviations to compound how he tries to overcomplicate it all and make himself sound super smart

 

[Type-IIx]

The vast majority of machines allow you to do this no problem.

Anyway, I can't believe we have this same thread every few weeks and the same 3 or 4 points get made back and forth.

The TLR of what matters is always the same:

- Training close to failure most of the time is probably optimal.
- Occasionally going beyond failure can be beneficial.
- Training away from failure can have some benefits, but needs to be accommodated for with more sets to make up the lack of effective reps.
- Failure itself can be tough to define because there's a large window where you can put a gun to someone's head who thinks they hit failure and suddenly they find 3 reps, etc. etc.
- All of this is pointless for the majority of beginner/intermediate trainees because very few people really know what it's like to push a set hard, and intentionally leaving "reps in the tank" for someone who doesn't really know how to train to failure is likely going to cause them to make their training borderline if not completely ineffective.

And the most important one:

- Mike Israetel is a hack who set training culture back several years by making a career out of misinterpreting faulty science and selling it to newbies on reddit. He's now carefully backing off from that but has to do so slowly lest he admit his entire career was fraudulent.

For beginners (week-over-week increases in weights used) and intermediates (monthly or so increases in weights used), training until technical breakdown on heavy compounds or keeping at least a rep in reserve, and to momentary failure on machines up to 2X/w, is all that's needed over 2-3 (beginner) to 4-5 (intermediate) sessions per week. Advanced guys can use more frequent intensification methods like rest-pause, myo-reps, cluster rounds and follow DC training principles (and of course, the addition of anabolic agents and the like at this time will allow gains to proceed once again rapidly, similarly to those of a beginner - injury risk weighing becomes an important factor for exercise and weight selection).

Long-term planning for hypertrophy is basically a progression from total-body training to upper-lower, with specialization for advanced guys as needed and the use of intensification methods. After 1.5 - 2 years (+/-) of progressively overloading the exercises that serve you well (exercise selection based on visual changes and mind-muscle connection, no need for all this sEMG-based optimization of ascending limb blahfuckingblah B.S.), if you stay healthy and don't take time off from training for periods of 3 weeks or longer, you'll start having to eke out small gains over periods of months. This is when you know that you are advanced....

Simple, but not easy.

Failure training won't make your prick fall off; if done at a sane frequency, it'll make you great. Mostly, people just need to get away from their phones and put in the work, start eating enough, to grow.

 

[lifter]

I do not have a spotter since I workout in my garage gym so sometimes can be difficult to push to failure on heavy compound lifts.

Agree. On some exercises you don't need a spotter. Other exercises it is just about mandatory if you plan on pushing to failure.

 

[lifter]

If you have been lifting long enough to failure is a invite to a injury plus it hurts the next workout in my opinion cause you train to true failure you can't recover fast enough for next workout just my opinion

It's funny I don't think I've ever injured myself lifting to failure except when I lack good form.

It is important not to sacrifice form when training to failure cuz yep, you will get injured. It is just really easy to lose proper form when you are tired. For example, bouncing the bar off your chest during bench press.

I'm in the camp that believes too that the older you get the harder it is. For sure the joints are not as agreeable as they used to be.

 

[lifter]

The vast majority of machines allow you to do this no problem.

Anyway, I can't believe we have this same thread every few weeks and the same 3 or 4 points get made back and forth.

The TLR of what matters is always the same:

- Training close to failure most of the time is probably optimal.
- Occasionally going beyond failure can be beneficial.
- Training away from failure can have some benefits, but needs to be accommodated for with more sets to make up the lack of effective reps.
- Failure itself can be tough to define because there's a large window where you can put a gun to someone's head who thinks they hit failure and suddenly they find 3 reps, etc. etc.
- All of this is pointless for the majority of beginner/intermediate trainees because very few people really know what it's like to push a set hard, and intentionally leaving "reps in the tank" for someone who doesn't really know how to train to failure is likely going to cause them to make their training borderline if not completely ineffective.

And the most important one:

- Mike Israetel is a hack who set training culture back several years by making a career out of misinterpreting faulty science and selling it to newbies on reddit. He's now carefully backing off from that but has to do so slowly lest he admit his entire career was fraudulent.

Interesting viewpoints

 

[alfresco]

It's funny I don't think I've ever injured myself lifting to failure except when I lack good form.

It is important not to sacrifice form when training to failure cuz yep, you will get injured. It is just really easy to lose proper form when you are tired. For example, bouncing the bar off your chest during bench press.

I'm in the camp that believes too that the older you get the harder it is. For sure the joints are not as agreeable as they used to be.

Correctamundo.

The first few repetitions are actually the most dangerous, not the last ones.
People still think that training to failure, the failure part results in more injuries.

It may be counterintuitive to some but, if your form remains unchanged,
during the last repetition you are incapable of producing enough force
to injure yourself.

As the old saying goes . . . "The harder a particular repetition seems,
the easier it actually is; and, the apparently most-dangerous repetition
is actually the safest repetition, by far the safest."

 

[qbkilla]

I gave a non failure method a try this week. Eugene teo reccomends for delts taking a heavy weight, say 5rm, and do cluster sets of 2-3 with 5 seconds rest between.

So say reverse pec Dec 100 is your 5rm. Rather than do 5x5, rest 5x5, rest,5x4, rest 5x4, rest 5x3. So 5 sets and 22 reps of 100.

You do 3, 5 seconds rest, 3 reps, 5 seconds rest... repeat until you get 25


So more reps of 100 on that movement in less time than straight sets to failure. Sore for the first time In a while. Probably the first intensity technique I used that didn't use failure surprised how good it felt.

 

[Dens228]

I gave a non failure method a try this week. Eugene teo reccomends for delts taking a heavy weight, say 5rm, and do cluster sets of 2-3 with 5 seconds rest between.

So say reverse pec Dec 100 is your 5rm. Rather than do 5x5, rest 5x5, rest,5x4, rest 5x4, rest 5x3. So 5 sets and 22 reps of 100.

You do 3, 5 seconds rest, 3 reps, 5 seconds rest... repeat until you get 25


So more reps of 100 on that movement in less time than straight sets to failure. Sore for the first time In a while. Probably the first intensity technique I used that didn't use failure surprised how good it felt.

Sounds like Muscle Rounds from Fortitude with a slightly new twist. MR's are sets of 4 for 6 sets. Maybe TEO "borrowed" it and made a tiny little change.

 

[qbkilla]

Sounds like Muscle Rounds from Fortitude with a slightly new twist. MR's are sets of 4 for 6 sets. Maybe TEO "borrowed" it and made a tiny little change.

I've never tried ft training but read about it, very similar. I know myo reps have been around forever and used in multiple programs and used them before, but never had soreness like this. I think it's probably because I'm using a weight that is a 5rm, so a heavier weight than Scott uses. I think most programs that use them use a weight that you can get 12 reps vs 5 ....and the rest between rounds is longer.

 

[Earl]

I've never tried ft training but read about it, very similar. I know myo reps have been around forever and used in multiple programs and used them before, but never had soreness like this. I think it's probably because I'm using a weight that is a 5rm, so a heavier weight than Scott uses. I think most programs that use them use a weight that you can get 12 reps vs 5 ....and the rest between rounds is longer.

I used 3 different types change about every 4 months
5x5
100 count
Beast mode 15, 12,8,8,12,15

 

[qbkilla]

I used 3 different types change about every 4 months
5x5
100 count
Beast mode 15, 12,8,8,12,15

I tried 100. I'd take a weight I could get 20, hit to failure then take 7 or so breaths and keep going until I hit 100. Honestly didn't feel any soreness so switched to the heavier type myo reps. Only been a week but I'm liking.

 

[tornquad201]

I tried 100. I'd take a weight I could get 20, hit to failure then take 7 or so breaths and keep going until I hit 100. Honestly didn't feel any soreness so switched to the heavier type myo reps. Only been a week but I'm liking.

Try only resting 3 seconds

 

[lifter]

Try only resting 3 seconds

That routine or the short rest routines wouldn't work for me. I generally need at least 30 sec to a minute. Enough to recover adequately but not long enough to go cold.

 

[Earl]

Rest how many reps is left in seconds . So if there's 50 reps left 50 seconds

 

[xpoc]

Broderick Chavez does not appear to be a fan of training to failure. Sounds like he is more of a volume guy:

https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=1785791348201216

 

[qbkilla]

Broderick Chavez does not appear to be a fan of training to failure. Sounds like he is more of a volume guy:

https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=1785791348201216

Sometimes with these non failure rir guys talking about this debilitating mental and physical exertion that failure causes, they must only be talking about big compound movements like deads, sqauts, hack, etc? Is there anyone out there that purposely leaves reps in reserve for rear delts, late raises, cable arms exercises? I can see a barbell curl using form failure or not pushing too hard because the bicep tendon could tear...just trying to imagine someone frying their CNS on reverse pec Dec or cable laterals...and can't.

 

[alfresco]

Broderick Chavez does not appear to be a fan of training to failure. Sounds like he is more of a volume guy:

https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=1785791348201216

I would never believe a word out of anybody's mouth if he / she calls themselves a genius.

 

[xpoc]

I would never believe a word out of anybody's mouth if he / she calls themselves a genius.

I never heard of him until I read about him here on PM. So, in my quest to learn more I looked into some of his content. Not exactly my cup of tea (mindset) but he obviously trains successful bodybuilders so.... I will just add it to my knowledge base and move along.

 

[lifter]

I would never believe a word out of anybody's mouth if he / she calls themselves a genius.

Same thing I say for self-proclaimed experts on forums.
Like @xpoc said though I am always open to hearing others opinions. If it applies to me, I might be open to trying something different but the whole I'm an expert or a genius gig usually is a red flag for me.