To failure on every set? Or just the last?

[stereosteveo]

I've never lifted this heavy I guess. And I'm trying to add muscle.

In looking at this guide:
(Well I don't have enough posts to post the link to the guide here on BB.com)

He says: "You want to reach near-failure on every set - this means that if you were asked to do another rep after completing a set, you wouldn't be able to do it. Don't be afraid to fail on the last rep either, because it means you are pushing yourself!"

I've always done higher reps (8-12) , but I'll go to failure in 8+ reps on last set only. I'll squeeze out as many as I can, but I've always done 8 + 8 in first 2 sets..

So let me ask this: Which would be better?:
A max weight where I can go something like:

8 / 8 / 8 ?

or

8 / 7 / 6 ?

or

8 / 6 / 4 ?

Here's the deal: If I go to failure on 8 reps of first set, I doubt I can do 6 on 2nd, maybe 4 on 3rd....

Would that be enough reps total?
8+6+4 = 18 total ?

I thought the key was to find a weight I could go 8/8/8 with?

Thx

[John Prophet]

all roads lead to Rome


Personally I wouldnt advocate going to failure AT ALL unless it is by accident where you thought u had one more rep in you but you didnt. going to actual failure just makes it way harder for your body to recover IMO. Its simply unneccesary.

on some stuff you can keep the same weight on all sets. That works good for stuff like curls, laterals...not so good on squats, bench and big stuff like that.

On the bigger stuff I like to add weight each set but keep the reps more or less the same. That might be called "working up to a top set" or even called "ramping." Obviously that means the first sets arent THAT hard but each set gets harder and its still good work. On the bigger stuff you need more sets to acclimate to the weight anyway.

on small stuff like curls you are usually already warmed up so you can just start at a certain weight and use it for all the sets even if the reps drop off some. of course you can also drop the weight on some sets if you have to


the HARDEST method...which I dont recommend, is called "descending sets." Thats where you do a set to failure, lets say you get 8 reps. Then you drop the weight and do another set to failure. Then drop it again and do another set to failure. of course you still take your 60-90 secs between sets or whatever. But thats basically a very intense way to workout and IMO its too intense and too hard to recover from

[Wayne Evans]

First......you may get different opinions whether going to 'failure' is even necessary or optimum.
Now, I don't think going to failure is absolutely necessary. (for me)
When I first started I was going to failure but only on the third set which may be what most do but don't quote me.
IMO....as long as one is on a routine that adds weight (even 5#) every 2-3 weeks one is forcing the muscles to grow and reach goals.
I do 3x10 but my goals may be different than yours.

I'll allow others to chime in on the set/reps thing.

Good luck on your quest.....carry on.

[socket]

OP, you stated you want to add muscle. So you are after "the look" more than the strength? Correct?
Going to failure every set when trying to "grow" muscles is not a good idea....imho.

What kind of routine/split are you doing?

[ironwill2008]

So let me ask this: Which would be better?:
A max weight where I can go something like:

8 / 8 / 8 ?

or

8 / 7 / 6 ?

or

8 / 6 / 4 ?

In the grand scheme of things, it's not going to make any difference. Probably not the answer you were looking for, but eventually, you'll come to realize it's true.

What's much more important than the exact rep range you use is to simply work to progress the weight and/or number of reps you can lift with good form on a week-to-week basis.

No failure required or desired; when you feel your form start to go South, end the set. The next workout, try to get an extra rep. When you've reached the point where you hit your rep targets on all your sets for a certain exercise, add a little weight next time and then work to progress the new weight back up.

[Old_swole]

Don't forget "to failure" means exactly that......which means the weight is coming back down (gravity sucks) most anybody that has been pushing weights "up" any length of time has had a weight come "down" in either a dangerous or painful "failed" rep. Now with a lifting partner (a good one) going to failure can be a good training aid now and then...in my opinion.

[JTraining]

All my sets are to failure........I guess I have been doing it wrong :/

[Old_swole]

All my sets are to failure........I guess I have been doing it wrong :/

Actually people have just given their opinions of how they train. But since you go to failure, the rest of us must be doing it wrong.

[JTraining]

I was taught old school.....There is never only one right way to do things.

I am always up for learning new techniques if there is evidence it is effective.

Never heard of avoiding going to failure on all sets though to maximize muscle growth.

[Old_swole]

I was taught old school.....There is never only one right way to do things.

I am always up for learning new techniques if there is evidence it is effective.

Never heard of avoiding going to failure on all sets though to maximize muscle growth.

Your profile says you started lifting 4 years ago (nice work btw no homo). I bet there is a lot about maximizing muscle growth you dont know about.

[ljimd]

In the grand scheme of things, it's not going to make any difference. Probably not the answer you were looking for, but eventually, you'll come to realize it's true.

What's much more important than the exact rep range you use is to simply work to progress the weight and/or number of reps you can lift with good form on a week-to-week basis.

No failure required or desired; when you feel your form start to go South, end the set. The next workout, try to get an extra rep. When you've reached the point where you hit your rep targets on all your sets for a certain exercise, add a little weight next time and then work to progress the new weight back up.

^^^^^^ I agree with IW. I pretty much do it as he describes and seems to be a good approach for me.

[JTraining]

Your profile says you started lifting 4 years ago (nice work btw no homo). I bet there is a lot about maximizing muscle growth you dont know about.

Agreed....I have learned a lot in this forum and from pro's like Lee Labrada.

Gains get tougher every year....I am always looking for ways to improve.

[jayluk4600]

I go to failure on my last set on compound movements. Gives me a good indicator when I need to go up in weight. But once again this is how I like to do. We are all diff and thats good.

[Nikonguy]

Speaking only for myself, going to complete failure in the lower rep range (3-6) is asking for an injury or, at the least extended recovery time. Going to to complete failure on higher reps (8 to whatever) will make you feel like you've done more work but may not pay off the dividends you expect.

I prefer the idea of positive failure.....being positive you couldn't do one more decent rep and stopping.

I'm not a form Nazi but a lot of guys get bit on that last crappy, out of control failure rep. /fat guy giving advice

[nixter]

I'm with Will. Progressive resistance. A slow increase in the amount of weight lifted over weeks and months will result in a long period of muscle growth. Going to failure isn't wrong but doing so will shorten the length of time you're able to continue adding weight to the bar week over week. More time spent increasing weights will result in increased muscle. I can't site anything at the moment. This is just my opinion from 15 years of reading everything I can get my hands on.

[BillReilly]

I spent a lot of time looking for a good plan. The one thing in all of them, for the most part, is to always be adding weight and reps. That's the whole point of resistance training. I'm doing HTS right now and that's all about increasing tonnage.

[JTraining]

I define failure as the last rep one can do unassisted with good form.

On some sets I go beyond failure by the use of a spotter or drop weight sets etc. These are usually on the last set of compound exercises like bench etc.

I do some sets that are technically not always to failure when they are "specialty sets"....like doing "21's"

I do not count warm up sets obviously.

[JTraining]

There are many schools of thought and none are 100% correct for everyone.

I was trained old school similar to this.

http://www.musclehack.com/the-best-w...n-muscle-mass/

Other experts incorporate 2-3 sets to failure but I have seen none that recommend no sets to failure.

Just my .02 .... not worth much more.

[Slackadjuster]

I usually go to failure in the specific rep range I choose. The times I don't are when I use too light of a weight for the rep range. I don't waste the set, but won't rep out on those sets.

[Smelly bull]

My goals are strength...so with that stated, I never go to failure unless I miss a rep that i thought I could do. Progression is key for my routines.

[2nd_chance]

Two words: positive failure. That means squeezing out the last possible rep that can be done with good form. This applies to working sets not warmups. Also, if you have a designed progression scheme, say 3 x 8 and you're trying to hit it so you can bump the weights next time then it doesn't make sense to go to positive failure on sets 1 and 2 until you've hit 8 reps on the 3rd set. So you see... everything is relative and there's no pat answer.

[Brackneyc]

Two words: positive failure. That means squeezing out the last possible rep that can be done with good form. This applies to working sets not warmups. Also, if you have a designed progression scheme, say 3 x 8 and you're trying to hit it so you can bump the weights next time then it doesn't make sense to go to positive failure on sets 1 and 2 until you've hit 8 reps on the 3rd set. So you see... everything is relative and there's no pat answer.

This of course will fly right over the head of about 80% of the board.

[JTraining]

This of course will fly right over the head of about 80% of the board.

I would hope more than 20% got it. Great post btw. The other option is to drop weight to keep the 3 x 8.

Bench example:

warm up

8 x 275
8 x 255
8 x 235

[Brackneyc]

I would hope more than 20% got it. Great post btw. The other option is to drop weight to keep the 3 x 8.

Bench example:

warm up

8 x 275
8 x 255
8 x 235

I'd love to believe that. With the number of people touting "going to failure" on every set as the "best" option (and many do propose that), I cannot say for sure how many understand his post.

Certainly my 80% "estimate" is not very scientific, but was more to illustrate the BS that passes as "science" in the world of BB as I see it.

[JTraining]

I'd love to believe that. With the number of people touting "going to failure" on every set as the "best" option (and many do propose that), I cannot say for sure how many understand his post.

Lol......I go to positive failure on almost every set and I understood it.

Wait....wut?

Oh....I get it.....very clever & funny

[Getsum]

So let me ask this: Which would be better?:

I would say the method that you would do with greatest consistency.

Some folks love straight sets, some like to pyramid, others like going for maxes, some do drop sets, high reps, low reps, medium reps, some use a combination of techniques. These are flavors (Strawberry, chocolate, vanilla and neapolitan), the key is the day after day, week after week, year after year commitment to sticking to your program.

[stereosteveo]

BB.com > SuperSite > Training > Male > Muscle Building > 40+ > Top Link(Kris Gethin)
That's where the failure on every set quote is from.

Yes Socket. Definitely going for "The Look"!

Well I'm guessing 18-24 reps total would be alright for most cases.
I like the "All roads lead to Rome" quote.

I got a lot to learn.
Best thing I can do in the meantime, is be like the guy on the commercial "I lift things up, I put things down...."
...and see what happens.
Again, thx for the replies.

[JerryB]

I never go to complete failure by design.
On a few sets I stop when I think the next rep will not be possible to complete with good form based on the feedback from my neuromuscular system and the degree of muscular fatigue.

[John Prophet]

I guess I have been in on like 20 of these "failure" threads since i been on bb.com. They can go in so many different directions

one thing that confuses the issue is that people have different definitions for "failure." I think I have seen 2-3 definitions in this thread so far. That boggles my mind a bit because failure has had only 1 meaning to me since I started lifting like 25 years ago. Failure is when you try, but [f]FAIL[/b] to get a rep.

If you actually completed the last rep then you didnt go to failure....period, end of story. Now, with experience, you can often tell that you would PROBABLY fail the next rep so you stop the set right there. Thats absolutely NOT failure. Thats called going "1 rep short of failure." Some people also say "leaving a rep in the bag" or some similar line.

So I can tell a guy to not go to failure on any sets...then he says "I go to failure on EVERY set" and we argue back and forth. Then you see a video of the guy and he isnt ACTUALLY failing on any sets, lol. He is doing exactly what I recommended yet he is calling it "failure."

It gets even murkier when you think about exercises like pulldowns or bent rows because the reps can start getting a little shorter lol. you have to decide when you "failed." Naturally its more clear on stuff like benches where you have an actual lockout. You either got it thru the sticking point and locked it or you did not.

The whole "I go one rep short of failure" is also murky because you are guessing. Some exercises are surprising in that you think you are thru but then u grind out 3 more reps. I think leg press is like that. That is why some people like to take the occasional set to actual failure in order for them to KNOW their current strength level

So lets at least get together on the terminology. If you completed the rep, you DIDNT go to failure.

terms like "positive failure"...??? im assuming that just means the exact thing as "failure." You failed on the concentric

I have heard people say "I go to fatigue." huh?? I was fatigued when I walked into the gym. Then some people think failure is passing out or getting dizzy

btw, pros confuse the matter as well because they say "I take every set to positive failure" and then you watch their videos and very few IF ANY sets actually go to failure. Most of them actually appear to stop WELL short of failure, which makes good sense considering the large volume they use.

Then there is the matter of forced reps. (dont get me started) People talking 'bout "I go to failure then I get 2-3 forced reps." Liar, lol. You watch them and they NEVER got to failure before their partner started helping them. The bar slowed down and the partner started helping....or they grimaced and the partner started helping them. It aint failure until you are trying to complete the rep and the bar goes the wrong way.


I am not a Mike Mentzer fan, but I will agree with one thing he said. He talked about how it was disturbing to see someone ACTUALLY take a set to failure, just because of the intensity involved. Thats why I generally say "there is no need to train to failure." I say it because there can be a hell of a lot of intense effort applied before reaching actual failure.


IMO most people aint goin' to failure as much as theyd like to think. If a guy says "I take each set to failure" and then he says he does 20 sets per bodypart, I have to personally consider that he is deceiving himself...or possibly he is superman.



A nice experiement would be for a few people to take a vid of what they consider training to failure.

Alternatively we can go find some vids online.


Otherwise we just arent on the same page with the terminology

[pbohart]

All my sets are to failure........I guess I have been doing it wrong :/

If that picture in your avatar is actually you then, no, you have not been doing it wrong!