Why shouldn't I go to failure on every set?

[Lee72]

I've been told to do the same number of reps each set, so that means to stop on the first ones even if I could keep going. If I go to failure each set, I would do like 10 the first and 7 or 8 the second, then by the fifth I could do about 3 or 4. Wouldn't pushing to failure all the time make your body adapt better? Because if your stopping before you have to, then you don't need to get stronger to do what your doing.

All the people that have said to go to failure on every set look like they know what they're doing, and it makes sense to do it too. Failing tells your body to to get stronger so you won't fail anymore

[brandonlee72]

go until failure but if you can do the 10 reps pretty easy then go up in weight, you should be between 8-12 reps and within those you should barely get that last one on every set. not going to failure willl hold you back so dont do it

[FunkeVegetarian]

From what I understand the point is that you don't want to burn your body out focusing on just that set but also consider the rest of your workout. It does make sense that failure pushes you to your limit to make you stronger and that's what I've always believed but I suppose it also makes sense that you want to make sure you have leftover energy to use for the other exercises. Like they always say, there's really no right or wrong answer. Your body is unique and only you will know how it feels. It's all trial and error.

[Lee72]

I really don't get tired out at all except for squats and deadlifts. I was going to add weight whenever I could do more than 12 the first set

[N@tural1]

Failing tells your body to to get stronger so you won't fail anymore

How so?

[Lee72]

How so?

Because if your muscles are working hard but still can't do it, they need to get stronger. If you stopped before failure, then there is no reason to get stronger because you can already do what you're trying to

[musikguy72]

Because if your muscles are working hard but still can't do it, they need to get stronger. If you stopped before failure, then there is no reason to get stronger because you can already do what you're trying to

Except it doesn't work that way. I'm on a routine now where I increase the reps every week. Once I hit a certain number I increase the weight. I haven't gone to failure once (no need on this program) and I've gained strength and size.
So either I'm defying the laws of physics, or your theory is wrong.

[jeremynb]

Both ways work from what I understand. Either more weight or more reps. You are kinda doing the same thing either way, putting more stress on your muscles. Both ways work for me it just depends if I'm going for strength or power. I usually do two warm up sets of 10-12 and one working set of 6-8. Just make sure you take your working set to failure. It has worked the best for me so far.

[musikguy72]

Just make sure you take your working set to failure.

First post huh? I guess you missed the part where I pointed out that you don't have to go to failure to make good gains.

[qeynos]

if mike mentzer were here, he would go to failure

[acrawlingchaos]

Going to failure is fine, as long as you properly deload. Constantly going to failure can place a significant stress on your CNS. Accumulated fatigue of the CNS results in a plateau. Consistently deloading to meet your needs will enable you to use negatives / failure properly in your program.

[acrawlingchaos]

Because if your muscles are working hard but still can't do it, they need to get stronger. If you stopped before failure, then there is no reason to get stronger because you can already do what you're trying to

Progressive overload is all you need. If you are increasing by a single rep, a single pound, or a single set, you will become stronger. Your muscle will adapt to the stimulus whether you go to failure or not.

[exelixis]

From my experience you will feel the effects of going to failure in about 4 weeks time. You might not getting tired now but it will build up and your CNS will be fried. However, it's a psychological thing for me, if I don't get to failure I feel I am giving myself an easy ride and I have to overcome this.

[Lucharilla0311]

In your case, I would prefer the phrase "stimulate, not annihilate". You're looking for long term progression. There is however a difference of opinion as to what defines "failure". I believe "failure' is defined as a breakdown in form. Once that happens, cut it off there and look to improve next session. But once you start going down the realm of total failure, sloppy form, forced reps w/ a magic 2 finger spot from your training partner, it will just push recovery further down the road and sap your CNS long term. Your training at the beginner level definitely doesn't need anything other than manageable improvements every session without failure. It's not necessary. For the vast majority, you do not constantly need to be lifting at a maximal effort for every exercise, every session. Submaximal training yields extremely good results, especially in the long term. Ever hear of Wendler's 5/3/1? Submaximal lifting at its finest. Back when I hit an all time PR benching 410, the months prior I never went up past 365 for reps at any point.. Most of the time I lifted between 315-350, so that certainly lends credence for avoiding failure like the plague (anecdotally I know). It has its uses, but it's not at all what I deem "necessary".

[7399martyn]

Because if your muscles are working hard but still can't do it, they need to get stronger. If you stopped before failure, then there is no reason to get stronger because you can already do what you're trying to

no.

I get a guy who's never in his life done squats before. He can do 135x5

So what happens if i get him to do 115x5? He'll be able to do more than 135x5.

Understand?

[N@tural1]

Because if your muscles are working hard but still can't do it, they need to get stronger. If you stopped before failure, then there is no reason to get stronger because you can already do what you're trying to

Lee.

This is completely inaccurate. A muscle must be worked hard to adapt yes but there is no substance to your claim not from a physiological or scientific view point. Failure is not a requirement for adaptation to occur.. long term overload and progression is.

Whatever you achieve in a set, failure or not, you can always only achieve within your current ability, how do you know that for sure, easy, you JUST DID IT!

For muscular failure to be the ONLY point that a stimulus for adaptation occurs, there must be some sort of physiological response that occurs at failure that doesn't occur with any of the preceding reps. I've asked this question to the most dogmatic HIT/failure advocates and have NEVER been offered an answer.

[SuffolkPunch]

When you lift a weight that is around 90% of your 1RM, you are recruiting all possible muscle fibers. The remaining 10% is made up by your central nervous system increasing rate coding (the speed at which signals are sent to muscle fibers).

This is why it is not necessary to train to failure. Full recruitment is a signal to your body that adaptation needs to occur. Ramping up rate coding may also cause some adaptation to occur in your CNS but it mostly just causes premature fatigue.

[needtoeat]

Do light weights to failure and eat appropriately. You will gain muscle.

[emccall3]

While lifting to failure is not necessary for growth, it is the belief of many that taking a set to failure and beyond (drop sets, assisted reps, etc.) can give you an added boost by stressing your system much more than it otherwise would be. That being said, it is not a good idea to go to failure on every set. This puts too much stress on your system and can lead to injury. What is a good path to follow is to use progressive overloading in reps and weights, taking the last set or two of an exercise to failure. Speaking from personal experience, this middle road path has gotten me the most gains but realistically speaking, as long as your eating right and in the gym lifting you will most likely make gains as a beginner.

Just something to keep in mind: people are normally fanatical about one thing or another because they're too close minded to consider the possibility that they're wrong.

[Engineer_Guy]

Age: 16
6'1 and 161lbs

[Orlando1234977]

When you lift a weight that is around 90% of your 1RM, you are recruiting all possible muscle fibers. The remaining 10% is made up by your central nervous system increasing rate coding (the speed at which signals are sent to muscle fibers).

This is why it is not necessary to train to failure. Full recruitment is a signal to your body that adaptation needs to occur. Ramping up rate coding may also cause some adaptation to occur in your CNS but it mostly just causes premature fatigue.

If your 1RM is 300 then,
90% of your 1RM is 270.

Your example is stating that if we lift 270 lbs, the remaining 30 lbs that we don't attempt (10%) is made up by your central nervous system increasing rate coding (the speed at which signals are sent to muscle fibers).

I think what you mean, is 90% to failure and the remaining 10% of effort is carried via rate coding etc.. but if that is what you mean, than the number is much much lower than 90%.NWLifter has stated that we can reach full recruitment in loads less than 40% of 1RM and in the early portion of a set to 10 or 20.

[PISTELERO]

Except it doesn't work that way. I'm on a routine now where I increase the reps every week. Once I hit a certain number I increase the weight. I haven't gone to failure once (no need on this program) and I've gained strength and size.
So either I'm defying the laws of physics, or your theory is wrong.

your a fukkking idiot




edit: I completely misread post (no-idiot)

[MaximusW]

Honestly, for a 16 year old, I wouldn't worry about it too much. Eat and sleep a lot, train well, and you'll make big gains regardless of the program. At that early stage I'd use other people's routines and train with anywhere from whole body programs to 3 day splits (4+ day splits are designed for much more advanced lifters).
As frustrating as it may be to hear, the best way to ultimately gain is to figure out your body and how it responds to different programs - no matter what anyone on here tries to tell you, there is no one workout that's optimal for everyone. Obviously, some programs are much better designed than others, so try a bunch of different programs (most of the programs recommended on this site are very solid) and stick with them for 8+ weeks each, and figure out what you respond best to. Keep in mind that your gains will eventually slow though, so the magic progression you'll have at first can't last forever.

[jmvane15]

Yeah I heard that you should go until you can't lift anymore. It does make more sense to do that. Doing the same weight over and over again only gets your body accustomed to that, and that makes it difficult to improve.

[N@tural1]

Yeah I heard that you should go until you can't lift anymore. It does make more sense to do that. Doing the same weight over and over again only gets your body accustomed to that, and that makes it difficult to improve.

This couldn't be more wrong.

NOBODY has said ANYTHING about lifting the SAME weight over and over... Obviously there has to be progression for stimulus and adaptation to occur..

No idea where you heard you should lift till you can't lift anymore, but they were wrong.