Will failure send a signal to adapt regardless

[comedycentral]

Ok I’ve often wondered this as now I’m getting old it can’t always be progressive resistance weight and reps etc.
so say week 1 using strict form I bench press 100 for 12 to total positive failure.
week 2 I bench 100 but only get 10 for whatever reason to total positive failure did week 2 achieve anything or in terms of muscle stimulus was it essentially a waste? As nothing was beaten weight or reps from the previous week.

what’s people’s thoughts.

 

[GroundFloor]

Interesting question. I think one would have to ask themselves first, why the bigger drop off in weight/reps from a prior session?

Could it be you just weren’t recovered yet from the last session due to too much volume or not enough rest? Are you dieting and maybe not getting enough food to support performance? Maybe dehydrated or didn’t sleep as well as before the first session?

IMO, I don’t think it’s a waste just because you didn’t improve, but I think it could be a good indicator of other factors outside the gym that could be adjusted to improve performance next time.

 

[alfresco]

A lot of factors to consider in your scenario . . . Diet, rest, order of exercises, motivation, etc.

Failure is failure. As long as you providing the correct amount of intensity to stimulate , trigger, the body to adapt (frequency and intensity), to ‘asking’ your body to accomplish something you are unaccustomed to doing, provided sufficient rest and nutrition, you will grow/ progress, 10 reps or 12 reps. As long as the other factors come into play, you are good to go.

I know I keep harping on this but I believe it is important to keep extremely accurate records of diet and exercise performance. If the downward trend persists I personally would entertain the thought that you may be over training.

Up and downs in progression (your ultimate goal) are normal as long as they don’t start fitting into a pattern of stagnation or digression. PEDs can effect this until you reach a certain point in your development.

Progression is rarely linear, mostly a ‘stair step’ . . . progression, stagnation, progression, etc. just don’t lose sight of the bigger picture you are on your way to achieving your genetic potential.

 

[TheOtherOne55]

Ok I’ve often wondered this as now I’m getting old it can’t always be progressive resistance weight and reps etc.
so say week 1 using strict form I bench press 100 for 12 to total positive failure.
week 2 I bench 100 but only get 10 for whatever reason to total positive failure did week 2 achieve anything or in terms of muscle stimulus was it essentially a waste? As nothing was beaten weight or reps from the previous week.

what’s people’s thoughts.

All factors would need to be consistent.
WHY did you fail to get 12? Adequate rest? Recovery? Did you not eat before this workout? a shiiit ton of factors there.

In simple terms, if you work from a log book (i do) you realllly need to be consistent in all variables to consistently see progress.

 

[Type-IIx]

What I am saying is not relevant for strength adaptations (let's just dispense with strength as being your focus as we're on a bodybuilding forum here).

For hypertrophy adaptations, training to momentary muscular failure elicits a set of adaptations. But the primary variables to think about here are I) progressive overload (i.e., over time, you should be increasing tension by increasing weight on the bar) and a long-term decrement or downward trend does not serve the tenet of progressive overload (so more recovery is recommended here). Also, II) mechanical tension (i.e., work performed) is the primary stimulus for hypertrophy: so 10x150 kg is less than 12x150 kg, meaning less mechanical tension stimulus.

While momentary muscular failure reflects sufficient effort, and within the effective reps model, what you are doing is certainly generating a stimulus, this is secondary to the primary tenet of I) progressive overload and II) the primary stimulus for hypertrophy (mechanical tension).

In the long-term, you need to address the root problem of failing to progressively overload (i.e., increase mechanical tension/work over time) if you continue to decline in actual work performed. Though a short-term decline/decrement can be a part of normal adaptation, it is often indicative of overreaching.

 

[comedycentral]

So Alfresco has answered more along the lines of my question. Perhaps I didn’t word it too well. Even if for example it was a lack of sleep that meant reps were slightly less the fact the muscle was taken to failure would that alone elicit a signal to adapt or the fact that we did two more reps last week was this weeks lower rep session of any actual muscle growth value ?

 

[buck]

I don't think that a muscle fiber counts reps or checks to see how many plates are being used. It only applies as much force as it can. If enough fibers are engaged for enough time then enough stimulus is produced for hypertrophy. We measure progress with weight and reps. But i am guessing fibers have their own agenda.

 

[marssel]

Ok I’ve often wondered this as now I’m getting old it can’t always be progressive resistance weight and reps etc.
so say week 1 using strict form I bench press 100 for 12 to total positive failure.
week 2 I bench 100 but only get 10 for whatever reason to total positive failure did week 2 achieve anything or in terms of muscle stimulus was it essentially a waste? As nothing was beaten weight or reps from the previous week.

what’s people’s thoughts.

If you get to complete failure it’s success, from week to week my failures always change, there are so many things that can affect a few pounds or reps but hitting failure isn’t just about the physical reaction it’s also ability the ability of the mind to take the body beyond its limits and that is a perishable skill so whether it’s straight sets, pyramid to a failure then drop, drop sets, giant sets etc. FAILURE is where adaptation and success in training occur and in general the reason why we do this, climbers climb and runners run, to reach your impossible and then move it along. This will change with age but maintaining the mind set will not.

 

[jeroendebleser]

I don't think that a muscle fiber counts reps or checks to see how many plates are being used. It only applies as much force as it can. If enough fibers are engaged for enough time then enough stimulus is produced for hypertrophy. We measure progress with weight and reps. But i am guessing fibers have their own agenda.

Spot on if you ask me.

I'll answer this question with another question: what if your 10 reps consisted of better quality contractions leading to the muscle being under more tension per rep than during your 12 reps set? Wouldn't that lead to muscle growth? I'm sure it would.

Automatically translating mechanical tension into weight on the bar is too simplistic imo.

 

[qbkilla]

Spot on if you ask me.

I'll answer this question with another question: what if your 10 reps consisted of better quality contractions leading to the muscle being under more tension per rep than during your 12 reps set? Wouldn't that lead to muscle growth? I'm sure it would.

Automatically translating mechanical tension into weight on the bar is too simplistic imo.

This is a good question. I added 100lbs to my tbar row or 30 lbs to my oh press, but then took a video, I'm not quite going as slow and my form isn't as on point as it once was.

 

[buck]

Spot on if you ask me.

I'll answer this question with another question: what if your 10 reps consisted of better quality contractions leading to the muscle being under more tension per rep than during your 12 reps set? Wouldn't that lead to muscle growth? I'm sure it would.

Automatically translating mechanical tension into weight on the bar is too simplistic imo.

As my understanding is that a muscle fiber contracts with 100% of it's ability every time it contracts. And as we do more reps more fibers are required to lift the same weight as the previous ones are weaker yet still contracting at 100% of their weakened ability. So if by quality you mean recruiting more fibers per rep that would be desirable. So in general more weight or reps or a slower pace, better form etc. is going to be needed and not just wishing more fibers to contract. If a muscle spends 10 seconds contracting in 12 reps with a given weight and the tempo is changed and the fibers spend 11 seconds to contract 10 times with the same weight. I can see where less reps could be better. But that sort of progress will be harder to track.

 

[Mufasa123]

Contrary to Mike Mentzer there is no light switch stimulus that occurs at concentric failure that triggers a binary yes/no adaptation. I'm not going to tell you it's super complicated but it's more complicated than that. Good for selling machines and high volume of gym memberships to average Joe's in the 70s and 80s though.

 

[Type-IIx]

I don't think that a muscle fiber counts reps or checks to see how many plates are being used. It only applies as much force as it can. If enough fibers are engaged for enough time then enough stimulus is produced for hypertrophy. We measure progress with weight and reps. But i am guessing fibers have their own agenda.

Muscle cells are mechanosensitive via focal adhesion kinase-integrin coupling, serving to translate a mechanical stimulus into a biochemical one. So yes, your muscle fibers quite literally sense tension (weight on the bar). But tension is insufficient, there also needs to be sufficient volume (reps performed) to elicit optimal growth.

 

[Type-IIx]

As my understanding is that a muscle fiber contracts with 100% of it's ability every time it contracts. And as we do more reps more fibers are required to lift the same weight as the previous ones are weaker yet still contracting at 100% of their weakened ability. So if by quality you mean recruiting more fibers per rep that would be desirable. So in general more weight or reps or a slower pace, better form etc. is going to be needed and not just wishing more fibers to contract. If a muscle spends 10 seconds contracting in 12 reps with a given weight and the tempo is changed and the fibers spend 11 seconds to contract 10 times with the same weight. I can see where less reps could be better. But that sort of progress will be harder to track.

No, the all-or-nothing principle upon which you obliquely rely refers to the response of a motor neuron to a stimulus (from the nervous system, supraspinal or from the brain centers). That is, the strength of contraction does not depend upon the strength of the conduction. The all-or-nothing principle does not speak to recruitment: the objective of progressive overload is indeed to, by a training effect, incrementally recruit higher and higher threshold motor units over time (due to mechanisms like GTO inhibition, cortical excitability, hypertrophy, etc.)

This post is frankly gibberish, buck. It's all over the place. Less reps better? Slow tempo, form, but no relevance for fibers contracting in hypertrophy?

 

[buck]

Muscle cells are mechanosensitive via focal adhesion kinase-integrin coupling, serving to translate a mechanical stimulus into a biochemical one. So yes, your muscle fibers quite literally sense tension (weight on the bar). But tension is insufficient, there also needs to be sufficient volume (reps performed) to elicit optimal growth.

Yep pretty much what i said. Although i would have to think it was the other way around. By brain starts with a electrical stimulus to the cells, causing causing a biological process of contraction that translates into a mechanical action being accomplished of the weight being lifted.

 

[buck]

No, the all-or-nothing principle upon which you obliquely rely refers to the response of a motor neuron to a stimulus (from the nervous system, supraspinal or from the brain centers). That is, the strength of contraction does not depend upon the strength of the conduction. The all-or-nothing principle does not speak to recruitment: the objective of progressive overload is indeed to, by a training effect, incrementally recruit higher and higher threshold motor units over time (due to mechanisms like GTO inhibition, cortical excitability, hypertrophy, etc.)

This post is frankly gibberish, buck. It's all over the place. Less reps better? Slow tempo, form, but no relevance for fibers contracting in hypertrophy?

You are intercepting different then i wrote it. Are you saying that when performing a set the each muscle fiber will be applying just as much force on the 10th rep of a set as it did the first rep of that set? So there is the same amount of fibers firing at the last rep as there was at the first rep of the set. and that they all tired out and quit?

 

[Type-IIx]

You are intercepting different then i wrote it. Are you saying that when performing a set the each muscle fiber will be applying just as much force on the 10th rep of a set as it did the first rep of that set? So there is the same amount of fibers firing at the last rep as there was at the first rep of the set. and that they all tired out and quit?

By the 10th rep of a heavy set, there is some exhaustion of higher threshold motor unit-linked fibers (IIc first, then IIB), once the net force output of the muscle drops below the force necessary to lift the barbell for another rep you've reached momentary muscle failure.

 

[buck]

By the 10th rep of a heavy set, there is some exhaustion of higher threshold motor unit-linked fibers (IIc first, then IIB), once the net force output of the muscle drops below the force necessary to lift the barbell for another rep you've reached momentary muscle failure.

So you are saying that no more muscle fibers are recruited throw-out the set then. And it is just the same number of fibers firing off through out the set.

 

[Type-IIx]

So you are saying that no more muscle fibers are recruited throw-out the set then. And it is just the same number of fibers firing off through out the set.

Wut?

 

[OuchThatHurts]

No, they didn't tire out. But there very well be as many firing 1st and last rep, just not the same units. We talked about this once before in relation to muscular maximum contractile force. It's very difficult to know where that is (aka total muscular failure). Is it the point where it hurts too bad? Where you can't deliver enough blood/oxygen to the cells? Where ATP is spent? And when is that point reached? This is why a doctor long ago suggested beta-blockers as not good for bodybuilders.

Let's say you just completed a set that you felt was 100%. Maybe a personal record. Would you be surprised if I told you getting pumped with a truckload of epinephrine before that set would have possibly increased neurotransmission enough to pull off another rep or two? Or maybe taking a beta-blocker would have blunted neurotransmission just enough to prevent that final rep. Or maybe electrolytes were off just enough. Or maybe epi- and norepinephrine were not optimal (adrenal fatigue).

We discussed how people have performed amazing feats of strength under life or death circumstances. So much so, that they ripped tendons off bone. This is what makes what was said earlier so relevant. The only thing that matters inside that muscle or muscle group is that you were able to recruit more fibers than at a previous point (ideally, any previous point). That's progressive. That's going to cause cell growth and volumization (hypertrophy). Possibly even activate sat cells and create more motor units overall (hyperplasia).

Progressive training is key and the only caveat to that progression is consistency. You may feel like you worked as hard as last week but if you didn't recruit more muscle fibers, you didn't.

The fact is, we can activate very specific amounts of motor units to perform very specific tasks, tie our shoelaces, thread a needle, or play ping pong. An ape can't do these fine motor skills because the moment the message comes from the brain, far too many motor units are recruited making things clumsy. I know when I was at my biggest and strongest, I was clumsy as hell. People would say, "You don't know your own strength." Hopefully, some of you have felt that. Missing a doorway by a few inches and slamming a shoulder into the wall? A baboon or a horse doesn't know it's own strength or limits either. But a normal human does and has fine motor skills.

The same motor skills that have delivered us to the top of the food chain, are the same motor skills that will have us ravaged in the wild within a few months if we didn't have them.