Momentary muscular failure - THE stimulus?

[shaneee]

Thanks. I was wondering what profound insights your sophomore gym class had on CNS/GTO inhibition phenomena.

Quit splashing around in the deep end and go back to the kiddie pool if that's all you have to add to the conversation.

I was just stating training to failure is the best. Don't get mad because you're a weak piece of ****. Try training to failure every set for a few months then go back to the gym and test your new maxes and then say **** to me?

[all pro]

Please do not just cut and paste ****. Explain what you are getting at exactly. Once again, yes, central fatigue is a major limiting factor during exercise. This is not new information and I have agreed with you numerous times on this particular subject.

I am sorry but I am not someone who will be impressed by you pasting basic ****ing science articles. Please describe how these articles relate to the discussion.

Yes, you are and pathetic.

THE MIND-BODY LINK

Try to picture your brain and your biceps interconnected by nerves, much the same as a printed circuit might look. Within the brain are your memories and impressions of the way your body responded to that missed 150-pound set of curls you attempted last week. It was the first time you have tried such a heavy weight, and it felt heavy. Deep within your soul you knew that you wouldn't make it, and now that you've actually failed this same doubt response has been fortified.

In the biceps, at the very end where the tendon begins, you have tiny sensory mechanisms that are designed to send messages of stress to the brain. If the motor memory of past failures is equaled or exceeded by the strength of the sensory message coming from the working biceps, you will again fail. Your job, if progress is to be made, is to alter both the brain's response as well as the level at which the inhibitory response is initiated at the biceps muscle's tendon.

This sensory mechanism is called the Golgi tendon organ. It's excitation threshold (the point at which the weight is too great and an inhibitory message is sent) can be pushed back with proper training. So, too, can the motor memory stored in the brain be modified to ensure success.

http://drsquat.com/content/knowledge...nsity-training

[SumDumGoi]

Yes, you are and pathetic.

THE MIND-BODY LINK

Try to picture your brain and your biceps interconnected by nerves, much the same as a printed circuit might look. Within the brain are your memories and impressions of the way your body responded to that missed 150-pound set of curls you attempted last week. It was the first time you have tried such a heavy weight, and it felt heavy. Deep within your soul you knew that you wouldn't make it, and now that you've actually failed this same doubt response has been fortified.

In the biceps, at the very end where the tendon begins, you have tiny sensory mechanisms that are designed to send messages of stress to the brain. If the motor memory of past failures is equaled or exceeded by the strength of the sensory message coming from the working biceps, you will again fail. Your job, if progress is to be made, is to alter both the brain's response as well as the level at which the inhibitory response is initiated at the biceps muscle's tendon.

This sensory mechanism is called the Golgi tendon organ. It's excitation threshold (the point at which the weight is too great and an inhibitory message is sent) can be pushed back with proper training. So, too, can the motor memory stored in the brain be modified to ensure success.

http://drsquat.com/content/knowledge...nsity-training

Do you really go back to look up the same irrelevant information. I already said that GTOs send inhibitory affarents back to the CNS and are a contributing factor in fatigue.

Now, because I know you are a little slow, WHAT THE **** DOES THAT HAVE TO DO WITH TRICKING THE CNS AND THE GTOS HAVING MEMORY?!?!?!?!?!?!!?

Holy crap on a stick, are you really this slow?

[all pro]

Do you really go back to look up the same irrelevant information. I already said that GTOs send inhibitory affarents back to the CNS and are a contributing factor in fatigue.

Now, because I know you are a little slow, WHAT THE **** DOES THAT HAVE TO DO WITH TRICKING THE CNS AND THE GTOS HAVING MEMORY?!?!?!?!?!?!!?

Holy crap on a stick, are you really this slow?

Your reading comprehension sucks and I'm beginning to suspect that Wayne Lucky's IQ is several points higher than yours. I'm going to let someone else read what I've posted and explain it to you.

[VoxExMachina]

I was just stating training to failure is the best. Don't get mad because you're a weak piece of ****. Try training to failure every set for a few months then go back to the gym and test your new maxes and then say **** to me?

It's the best is it? What's your proof? Did your coach tell you that? Your Mom? The last episode of Hanna Montana? If you want any respect, try backing up your opinions with a decent argument or some real science.

If you would have bothered to READ any of the last few pages of this post you would see that I already train to failure. So thanks so much for your advice to try it, son.

Oh, and I don't find tough talk from a 16 year old kid intimidating. So piss off.

[SumDumGoi]

Your reading comprehension sucks and I'm beginning to suspect that Wayne Lucky's IQ is several points higher than yours. I'm going to let someone else read what I've posted and explain it to you.

You have posted nothing but irrelevant information and you somehow think you are clever by posting that picture? Be smarter please.

[VoxExMachina]

I'm starting to feel the same way. The whole argument of whether the CNS/GTO is "tricked" or whether the same result comes from some other mechanism doesn't really have any difference in practical application, does it?

All the science in the world is somewhat irrelevant if we don't relate it to how to change up our training methodology on a practical basis, right?

We're all just trying to better ourselves and our knowledge, right? No need to kill each other over it.

Peace Out.

[SumDumGoi]

I'm starting to feel the same way. The whole argument of whether the CNS/GTO is "tricked" or whether the same result comes from some other mechanism doesn't really have any difference in practical application, does it?

All the science in the world is somewhat irrelevant if we don't relate it to how to change up our training methodology on a practical basis, right?

We're all just trying to better ourselves and our knowledge, right? No need to kill each other over it.

Peace Out.

I have no problem with the training advice. All I am saying is that if you don't understand the science behind something don't just make something up to try and make yourself sound smarter. You can easily post training advice without throwing out nonsense physiological responses.

All Pro, why don't you cry and neg me some more for your inability to know what you are talking about.

[all pro]

I have no problem with the training advice. All I am saying is that if you don't understand the science behind something don't just make something up to try and make yourself sound smarter. You can easily post training advice without throwing out nonsense physiological responses.

All Pro, why don't you cry and neg me some more for your inability to know what you are talking about.

That can be arranged. As soon as I recharge I'll slap you again for being lazy, arrogant, stubborn and ignorant. I've posted the answer several times. It's in those links. Your either to lazy to read them or to stupid to understand what they're saying. Either way it isn't my problem.

[VoxExMachina]

Allow me to summarize....

[SumDumGoi]

That can be arranged. As soon as I recharge I'll slap you again for being lazy, arrogant, stubborn and ignorant. I've posted the answer several times. It's in those links. Your either to lazy to read them or to stupid to understand what they're saying. Either way it isn't my problem.

You actually did not post the answer. You copy and pasted the function of the GTO from the internet. The function of the GTO was never in dispute.

Allow me to make your next argument:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golgi_tendon_organ

[all pro]

I like how you post stuff you don't understand and think you made a valid point

You chose the right user name. You didn't read the first study. That's where an understanding starts. If you want to paypal me $250.00 and give me your E-mail I'll scan in the complete answer and send it to you. Until then you hang on these!
P.S. don't bother PMing me anymore. I wont read it.

[all pro]

I have no problem with the training advice. All I am saying is that if you don't understand the science behind something don't just make something up to try and make yourself sound smarter. You can easily post training advice without throwing out nonsense physiological responses.

All Pro, why don't you cry and neg me some more for your inability to know what you are talking about.

You actually did not post the answer. You copy and pasted the function of the GTO from the internet. The function of the GTO was never in dispute.

Allow me to make your next argument:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golgi_tendon_organ

Yes, you are and pathetic.

THE MIND-BODY LINK

Try to picture your brain and your biceps interconnected by nerves, much the same as a printed circuit might look. Within the brain are your memories and impressions of the way your body responded to that missed 150-pound set of curls you attempted last week. It was the first time you have tried such a heavy weight, and it felt heavy. Deep within your soul you knew that you wouldn't make it, and now that you've actually failed this same doubt response has been fortified.

In the biceps, at the very end where the tendon begins, you have tiny sensory mechanisms that are designed to send messages of stress to the brain. If the motor memory of past failures is equaled or exceeded by the strength of the sensory message coming from the working biceps, you will again fail. Your job, if progress is to be made, is to alter both the brain's response as well as the level at which the inhibitory response is initiated at the biceps muscle's tendon.

This sensory mechanism is called the Golgi tendon organ. It's excitation threshold (the point at which the weight is too great and an inhibitory message is sent) can be pushed back with proper training. So, too, can the motor memory stored in the brain be modified to ensure success.

http://drsquat.com/content/knowledge...nsity-training

[SumDumGoi]

You chose the right user name. You didn't read the first study. That's where an understanding starts. If you want to paypal me $250.00 and give me your E-mail I'll scan in the complete answer and send it to you. Until then you hang on these!
P.S. don't bother PMing me anymore. I wont read it.

You seriously dug through how many pages of threads just so you could type up that response? Why would I pay you for the answer? I already posted the Wikipedia link.

You really showed me, eh?

[SumDumGoi]

Yes, you are and pathetic.

THE MIND-BODY LINK

Try to picture your brain and your biceps interconnected by nerves, much the same as a printed circuit might look. Within the brain are your memories and impressions of the way your body responded to that missed 150-pound set of curls you attempted last week. It was the first time you have tried such a heavy weight, and it felt heavy. Deep within your soul you knew that you wouldn't make it, and now that you've actually failed this same doubt response has been fortified.

In the biceps, at the very end where the tendon begins, you have tiny sensory mechanisms that are designed to send messages of stress to the brain. If the motor memory of past failures is equaled or exceeded by the strength of the sensory message coming from the working biceps, you will again fail. Your job, if progress is to be made, is to alter both the brain's response as well as the level at which the inhibitory response is initiated at the biceps muscle's tendon.

This sensory mechanism is called the Golgi tendon organ. It's excitation threshold (the point at which the weight is too great and an inhibitory message is sent) can be pushed back with proper training. So, too, can the motor memory stored in the brain be modified to ensure success.

http://drsquat.com/content/knowledge...nsity-training

Yes, we have already established that the GTOs exist. Now what does this have to do with the discussion?

[all pro]

This message is hidden because SumDumGoi is on your ignore list.

AHHHH that's better.

[SumDumGoi]

This message is hidden because SumDumGoi is on your ignore list.

AHHHH that's better.

Thank you. It was just bizarre that this guy would dig up a 3 day old argument for no apparent reason only to later realize that he could put me on an "ignore" list.

They don't come much brighter than this bulb folks.

[N@tural1]

SumDumGoi

From what I gather you and All Pro agree that the GTO can be inhibit force production but the difference is that All Pro is of the opinion that it has "memory" and can remember a specific load where as you agree with the function of the GTO but don't believe it has any memory of any certain load/tension. This correct?

[shaneee]

It's the best is it? What's your proof? Did your coach tell you that? Your Mom? The last episode of Hanna Montana? If you want any respect, try backing up your opinions with a decent argument or some real science.

If you would have bothered to READ any of the last few pages of this post you would see that I already train to failure. So thanks so much for your advice to try it, son.

Oh, and I don't find tough talk from a 16 year old kid intimidating. So piss off.

You're acting like im ignorant and know nothing about bodybuilding/powerlifting. That's your problem because im well educated at both. Bro, im alpha just stop right now.

[VoxExMachina]

You're acting like im ignorant and know nothing about bodybuilding/powerlifting. That's your problem because im well educated at both. Bro, im alpha just stop right now.

You don't even know how to use an apostrophe in the word "I'm". It's also supposed to be capitalized. So I'm still not impressed.

And if you are so educated in bodybuilding and powerlifting, then why don't you state some reasons why you think training to failure is best (and by the way, best at what? Hypertrophy? Strength? Overall power?).

I'm assuming you are ignorant because you haven't given any evidence otherwise.

A word of advice: if you go around thinking you are Alpha anything at 16, you are in for some nasty surprises. The true men don't need to brag.

Don't take it personally...just take it seriously.

[N@tural1]

shaneee

Explain why in your opinion every set should be taken to failure, and then please explain why many power lifters avoid failure seeing as you're so "educated"

[gomez26]

shaneee

Explain why in your opinion every set should be taken to failure, and then please explain why many power lifters avoid failure seeing as you're so "educated"

They must have better genetics than him or are on drugs. Surely that's the only logical explanation.

[morderstwo]

Surely that's the only logical explanation.

operating off the notion that more is better. .

The logic of this argument has always intrigued me. despite rumors, Arthur Jones was in fact a strong believer of the 'more is better' mentality.

More intensity surely must be better than less, doesn't that make logical sense? More resistance covering more range of motion surely must be better than less. That's why Nautilus machines blew free weights out of the water when it came to gains. after all they avoid those evil sticking points & lockouts which must be bad (logically).

i find it ironic that he fell victim to the same fundamental notions he was so strongly against.

[feltmann]

What taking a set to failure does is INSURES you have induced the growth response by taking the set as far as possible which is failure..

This would imply that there is some "switch" that needs to be turned on for a stimulus to occur, we know this to be wrong, there is no switch rather a planned progression of over load is the stimulus required.

Remember, muscle doesn't know failure, WE only know failure, the muscle doesn't care if it failed or not.

Some use failure as a measure of an absolute, to avoid having to use judgment to determine how hard you think you're pushing it. You may think you're stopping only 2 reps short, but how do you know its not actually 3 reps or even 4 (say you've gotten stronger since the last session where you went to failure as a tool to determine what your max actually is, even if you don't actually use failure as a regular training tool).

This seems logical & I can see where they are coming from, however I don't believe failure is an absolute. It is in fact just an opinion. "How many reps am I prepared to do before I think I can do no more" under normal training circumstances. If someone put a gun to your head on the tenth rep (seriously) I guarantee you could get another 3 reps even if you normally were to fail on the 11th. Ultimately it really is just mental failure, not the absolute muscular failure that many view it to be. So it involves judgment as well.

So its clear that raw logic is not what should be used to decide such matters.

[GorillaToby]

The way I understand why it is useful to take your sets to failure; is as it was explained by Mike Mentzer.

Mike did not teach that the failure rep, tripped the growth response necessarily. He taught it was possible that the growth response might well happen a rep or 2 before failure, but that there was no way to know for sure it had happened. What taking a set to failure does is INSURES you have induced the growth response by taking the set as far as possible which is failure. To stop short of failure by 1 or 2 reps means there is a possibility the growth response will not have been reached, thus producing a wasted effort, complete with an inroad into recovery with no reward.

Beat me to it This.

[Weetabix]

The fact you bring cns into it is misleading, it will require wayyy more than a gym session to burn it out, and why avoid doing so anyway? If it improves neural efficiency why not? Failure is giving your all. You get out wat you put in.

[l337g0g0]

shaneee

Explain why in your opinion every set should be taken to failure, and then please explain why many power lifters avoid failure seeing as you're so "educated"

A power lifter does sets to 2 to 3 reps, you don't have much in the way for an extra 2 to 3 reps when your targeting a low rep range with super heavy weights.
When lifting super heavy, you can set yourself up for potential, and high probability of a major injury pushing to your absolute failure.
It's less efficient, but safer at those weights not to go to failure.
Add, these are mostly compound movements and not isolation movements, so going to total failure with a big ass weight with a compound movement is very dangerous to your smaller assistive muscles.
When your prime movers fail, your smaller muscle compensate, and they will have to compensate in a big ass way.

Like you said at the start, muscle growth it's not a magic switch, it's not an absolute switch that's On or off, so black and white.
But it is variabled.
It's not like if you stop 2 reps short or failure, you didn't trigger growth, and that going to failure is a waste of time cause you already hit that magic trigger for growth, 2 reps short of failure, and anything beyond that is wasted.
Both work, and it's variabled.

So both are right.
You can, and don't have to go to failure.
I believe that the ultimate trigger for muscle growth/strength is putting your muscle into a "strong state of fatigue", I would assume going to failure would only add more potential growth opportunity, cause you will probably, and you will agree with me here, the muscle just doesn't turn off it's growth trigger at 2 reps before failure?!?!

You can argue that those two last reps are majorly diminished returns for growth triggers, at the expense of CNS fatigue, or over training the muscle.
But if the person can recover from failure, why not?

Why is everyone making it a black and white issue, and not a gradient one?

Why can't we all agree that,,, your fatiguing the muscle, and going to failure maximizes a higher level of fatigue, more fiber recruitment, so wouldn't you agree that should result in more gains? maybe small in perspective, and as long as you're not over training your muscle.
Isn't more efficient to fatigue as much as possible in that exercise, then to leave a small percentage of your muscle fibers left not fatigued? this is effectively a drop sets...
Go to failure, or do drop sets, or just be happy with the 2 reps short.

Sorry if this has been resolved, it's an old ass thread, but I touched in back in 2008, and just thought I'd throw my two cents in again for old times sake 10 years later. :P