HST Principle "Don't train to Failure"

[9to5lifter]

Quote[/b] ]I really can't imagine making gains using my 1RM everytime I was in the gym.

That would be dangerous, too. Just imagine using your 1RM for squats!

 

[imported_dkm1987]

Quote[/b] ]going to failure, in particular the last rep, is more dangerous and taxing to the CNS)

Let me also point out that this is an adaptive process as well, training to failiure will cause positive adaptation as well.

Increases in neural efficiency such as decreases in recruitment thresholds, antagonist inhibition and increases in excitation drive have been observed. What this means is that when looking at the overall integration of training everything you do or don't can have negative or postive responses. It comes down to managing your training for a specific goal. In HST's case this goal is elevating the frequency of acute bouts to maintain appropriate anabolic responses.

Infrequent failiure training is not evil and can benefit to an overall training stimulus.

Quote[/b] ]3 sets of 3 would be better than just 1 set of 5 (more reps = more tension = more hypertrophy

More reps do not equal more tension, the tension seen in isotonic contractions will be the same with each rep as long as load and speed is the same. Now it does change recruitment (how many MU are activated) and rate coding (how fast the impulse trains are coming) but not tension.

 

[Fausto]

Dan...the man

Quote[/b] ]Infrequent failure training is not evil and can benefit to an overall training stimulus.

So let us recap, the last workout of each rep scheme can then be a full out effort, right?

I am somewhat glad I do like to go mad every now and then, guns n' roses, tuned in to "Welcome to the jungle" is just the right one to go absolutely "bananas"

 

[imported_dkm1987]

Quote[/b] (Fausto @ Oct. 19 2005,8:36)]Dan...the man

Quote[/b] ]Infrequent failure training is not evil and can benefit to an overall training stimulus.

So let us recap, the last workout of each rep scheme can then be a full out effort, right?
I am somewhat glad I do like to go mad every now and then, guns n' roses, tuned in to "Welcome to the jungle" is just the right one to go absolutely "bananas"

 

Sure, if it doesn't interfere with frequent loading as dictated by HST.

Now I do not advocate absolute MMF at anytime without a spotter, and I don't believe absolute MMF is needed, but pushing the envelope from time to time isn't going to harm gains. The end of each Intensity block (15's,10's, 5's)is a perfect opportunity to test new maxes and therefore pushing it to near failure to test your maxes would be warranted. The reason I would wait til the end of each intensity block is (besides what I just said) that you will be immediately going back down in intensity in the first few bouts of the next intensity block therefore allowing a little recovery to the CNS before the weight picks back up.

 

[9to5lifter]

Quote[/b] ]More reps do not equal more tension, the tension seen in isotonic contractions will be the same with each rep as long as load and speed is the same.

Sorry, my mistake, what I really meant is that more reps (with the same speed) would equal more time under tension (and not tension). Thanks.

 

[thehamma]

Dan, how can I get access to the studies on the link that you posted?

Quote[/b] ] Now it does change recruitment (how many MU are activated) and rate coding (how fast the impulse trains are coming) but not tension

Can you expand on this? What is MU? How is the recruitment and rate coding different in the two scenarios?

Also, I was wondering what your thoughts were on this apparent law of physiology that I posted by John Little, called "Orderly Recruitment"- how muscle fibers aren't recruited in a random fashion but rather in a fixed process dictated by the brain?

thanks
thehamma(sorry for the insane amount of questions)

 

[jvroig]

Hey guys

Quote[/b] ]

Quote[/b] ]
going to failure, in particular the last rep, is more dangerous and taxing to the CNS)

Let me also point out that this is an adaptive process as well, training to failiure will cause positive adaptation as well... Infrequent failiure training is not evil and can benefit to an overall training stimulus.

Well, nobody really said they were evil. In fact, training to failure, as was already pointed out one time, can have strength-training benefits.

The original question merely asked "why, what's up with the last rep that it tends to cause CNS fatigue more than the earlier reps?" so that was the only thing I focused on.

And Hamma, the "orderly recruitment" thingy is not new. Bryan in the FAQ and in Thinkmuscle already explained that. I doubt that Dan would believe in something totally different.

Regards to all
-JV

 

[imported_dkm1987]

JV his actual questions were

Quote[/b] ]First, Why not train to failure?

Why is the last couple of reps of a set to "failure" more taxing to the CNS than doing more sets?
thanks
thehamma

Where everyone was commenting on the last question I was commenting on the first.

The Hamma, there are a ton of studies on fatigue it's effects on periperal and central mechanisms and how these overlap and interrelate. Many can be found in my forum under the References Thread in Contraction, Fatigue and metabolite Forum. Do a pubmed search to find more.

An MU is a motor unit(sorry about that).

As JV said recruitment order is set for the most part, there are two generally accepted exceptions to the standard sequence, one is during eccentrics and the second is during occlusion. Both of these recruit type II faster than a normal repetitive or isometric contraction scenario.

Lastly let me add that CNS fatigue is an accumulated process and very individualistic. Peripheral fatigue is what occurs when working to momentary muscular failure not necessarily CNS although chronic failure may lead to CNS burnout the time until it occurs varies based on the person and their overall training program.

Personally I can not train to complete failure very often before I get my a$$ handed to me in a bag (reinforced that very recently) so I personally try to keep a lil in the tank when I workout.

A little while ago Bryan said something that has really opened my eyes, it was so simple but yet so profound that much of my thinking and training lately has been revolved around it (and my work theroies).

"Everyone must manage their own training." That is DEEEEPPPPP and why he is "The Bryan". Being a businessman this instinctively to me hit the bullseye. To truly manage something one must understand and indentify all the variables and realize their impact on the desired outcome, both positive and negative.

Putting this into this realm of discussion, understanding all variables of training to failiure and their impact is exactly what one must do if considering whether training to failure is warranted or not.

Putting this into the realm of HST it still applies to all the "HST principles".

Sorry for the long post.

ASTROS ASTROS ASTROS, World Series 2005

 

[Jester]

Yep, there isn't one workout for all.

Personally I love training to failure and squeezing every last bit of effort out . . . but I know this slows down my recovery from workout to workout, and I'm not about to argue with the results I've gotten so far.

 

[9to5lifter]

However, as Dan has mentioned, it's relatively "safe" to reach failure in the last workout of each rep range, or in the last 2-3 workouts before the end of the cycle, if you like.

By the way, great posts by JV and Dan!

 

[jvroig]

Dan

Quote[/b] ]
JV his actual questions were

Quote[/b] ]
First, Why not train to failure?

Why is the last couple of reps of a set to "failure" more taxing to the CNS than doing more sets?
thanks
thehamma

Where everyone was commenting on the last question I was commenting on the first.

Yes, you are right. Hahaha, i keep on geting confused with questions from threadstarters, it seems. This is just like the thread by Brak, where I told someone, "Dude, that wasn't what Brak said", and then Brak corrected me and said "Uh, dude, that was what I said..." and I was like "Oh, my bad, sorry."

So... oh, my bad, sorry I simply thought he just wanted to know what all the mojo was about the last rep

 

[aussiemark]

I've found this thread quite informative but still have some questions. I'm in agreement that training to failure all the time is a bad thing for what it will do to the CNS, but what about periodically.

Given that for 15s, 10s and 5s we are working towards our rep maxes for at least 3 workouts won't we be working to failure by definition?

Taking the information in this thread to the letter, would it not be better to drop the reps for the max reps in the cycle. Say for instance i'm on my 10s and its my last exercise, so i'm going for my 10rep max. Now I could do this with two sets of 5 or even an 8 and a 2 which would not create as much CNS, so is this preferable.

There must be some reason to go to fatigue or at least approach the fatigue barrier, otherwise why would we not do the entire HST cycle in sets of 5 reps but allowing the same weight incrementation

 

[jvroig]

Quote[/b] ]training to failure all the time is a bad thing for what it will do to the CNS, but what about periodically.

Has benefits as also already mentioned, like in strength-training for one.

Quote[/b] ]Given that for 15s, 10s and 5s we are working towards our rep maxes for at least 3 workouts won't we be working to failure by definition?

No. Failure means you stop the rep because you just can't continue anymore, not because you want to.

Quote[/b] ]Taking the information in this thread to the letter, would it not be better to drop the reps for the max reps in the cycle. ..
There must be some reason to go to fatigue or at least approach the fatigue barrier, otherwise why would we not do the entire HST cycle in sets of 5 reps but allowing the same weight incrementation

Metabollic work is a consideration

 

[imported_dkm1987]

Quote[/b] (9to5lifter @ Oct. 20 2005,8:35)]However, as Dan has mentioned, it's relatively "safe" to reach failure in the last workout of each rep range, or in the last 2-3 workouts before the end of the cycle, if you like.

"relatively" yup. I'd say so but one last time simply because I can't stress this enough, this will be dependant on many variables and on the person, the level of conditioning yada yada yada.

It also has to be determined what is the cause of failure, for example take squats, a very taxing exercise and pumping out 15 reps at your 15RM can take some stamina, so it might be muscle or neural failure that causes failure, but then again it may be cardiovascular and addtional cardiovascular training may be needed.

Point being every now and then step back and take a macroscopic look at what is going on with your training and manage it accordingly.

Quote[/b] ]By the way, great posts by JV and Dan!

Yup, it got my attention and JV and you guys had some great input, thanks

 

[aussiemark]

thanks for the reply jv... do you have any links on the metobolic work reason that you have given? thanks

 

[jvroig]

Quote[/b] ]

Quote[/b] ]
By the way, great posts by JV and Dan!

Yup, it got my attention and JV and you guys had some great input, thanks

Oh, where are my manners? I'm sorry, I totally skipped the part where 9to5 gave a compliment. [I've been having very little rest the past days, working overtime on this stupid freakin' system (my job, I'm a software systems developer, project head), and I'll be up until tomorrow morning for a dry run. God, I'm starting to hate this ] Anyway, thanks dude, I just do what I can. Good discussions, lots of good inputs from everybody else. Again a great example of why this forum totally rocks

(by the way, does anybody know how to put that "rock on"-type smiley Jazzer once posted? )

 

[jvroig]

Quote[/b] (aussiemark @ Oct. 20 2005,12:51)]thanks for the reply jv... do you have any links on the metobolic work reason that you have given? thanks

This is pretty basic stuff. Check out the HST FAQ Forum, start with this one: Dropsets and high rep sets

Regards and good luck

-JV