Question concerning failure

G

GTK

New Member
Hello all,

I'd like to preface this post by making it clear I have read the eBook and found it very helpful, thank you.

I am still a little bit confused about failure under HST. The book clearly states that training to failure is counter-productive and can lead to over-training.

However, using the book's intermediate training template, a trainee will be hitting their RM for Workout A and Workout B every fortnight (that is, the last two out of every six workouts will be to RM).

This must mean that, either:


  • RM is not taken to mean 'to failure'. In this case, what does it mean? How do you calculate your RM without training to failure?; or
  • It is OK to train to failure, provided it is limited to twice per fortnight.

As a follow up to these questions, if RM is taken to mean 'training to failure', how does one realistically calculate their 15,10 and 5 RMs in one week when setting up for a cycle? That would result in training each exercise to failure three times in one week - surely this would be excessive and contrary to the principles of HST?

Thanks again, and my apologies if I am being obtuse.
 
The first. A RM is by definition the maximum 'complete' reps you can do with a specific load. If you fail half way through the 9th rep on a 10RM attempt then it's not your 10RM, it's your 9RM! So a true RM means you succeed at lifting the weight but can do no more (i.e you would fail on the next rep). Having said that, your second point is also true, training to failure 'may' happen if your having a bad day or whatever but done infrequently will be no problem.
 
For my $$, it's a misnomer to determine that the last rep must be crushingly difficult in order for it to be 'failure'.

If I can do 5 reps, but the 6th reps makes it 4 inches off my chest only, then I've still trained to 'failure', but had I stopped at 5, it's still my 5RM.
 
Testing maxes is just that - testing for maxes. That is not part of an hst cycle which is why you do it prior to sd.

During your cycle, you should be gaining enough strength that when you do reach your RMs, you're stronger now and so you don't actually end up hitting failure. If that doesn't happen then your diet is likely inadequate.
 
The only thing I would add to what's already been said is that if you're doing sets across for your work sets, like most folks will be, then you may well hit failure before you're done with an exercise on a RM workout. That's ok, though, as the zig-zagging built into HST between rep ranges allows for some dissipation of fatigue (ie. neural recovery).

Hitting failure too often would cause accumulated fatigue to build too quickly, thereby limiting your ability to continue to lift progressively heavier loads without burning out. With HST, we are primarily concerned with stressing the muscle tissue rather than the nervous system, but there is always a bit of a balancing act between the two. Some folks are better at dealing with failure than others. It is also true that reaching failure on, say, a set of bicep curls, is not going to have the same effect on your nervous system as is going to failure on a set of deadlifts.
 
Thanks guys, very helpful!

Out of curiosity, I note it's been some ten years since HST first landed. Have published studies since then changed anything, or just continued to support its principles?
 
There have been conflicting studies, but they were all designed in a horrible fashion. The only one that really refutes anything of significance is wernborn's meta-analysis that suggests much higher volume than Bryan does in the original HST articles.
 
I would also add that the disadvantage to doing alternating workouts is that you hit "failure" twice in 2 weeks instead of the normal once. This should not be a problem in the 15's and probably not in the 10's. Since the 5's are followed by a passive SD, it probably is not a significant problem there either. It probably is more problematic for the older lifter who has slower recovery time.

Also to address the other question from a different angle, most of the credible studies have actually supported the principles of HST. Also, bear in mind that the most effective workout is the one that uses the least amount of volume to accomplish the maximum hypertrophy. This should be kept in mind when choosing volume and which exercises to include. Forget things like reverse wrist curls and triceps kickbacks and concentrate on the multi-joint big movers to maximize efficiency and effectiveness.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Old and Grey said:
I would also add that the disadvantage to doing alternating workouts is that you hit "failure" twice in 2 weeks instead of the normal once. This should not be a problem in the 15's and probably not in the 10's. Since the 5's are followed by a passive SD, it probably is not a significant problem there either. It probably is more problematic for the older lifter who has slower recovery time.

Also to address the other question from a different angle, most of the credible studies have actually supported the principles of HST. Also, bear in mind that the most effective workout is the one that uses the least amount of volume to accomplish the maximum hypertrophy. This should be kept in mind when choosing volume and which exercises to include. Forget things like reverse wrist curls and triceps kickbacks and concentrate on the multi-joint big movers to maximize efficiency and effectiveness.
Click to expand...

All good points here. The minimum volume for the maximum hypertrophy. That is why I always fallback on compounds only "simplify &win" programs.
 
I only ever go to failure on purpose on the last set of my B workouts every mini-cycle. Ill just do the "required" amount on the last day of my A cycles. I feel its enough to do it once as the A and B cycles are just mirror exercises of the same muscle groups.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top