Why not failure?
- Thread starter Nach
- Start date
Assuming you are asking a legit question and not trolling, there are reams of info out there as to why failure is probably not the best way to train. For one, it does not allow for more frequent training. Secondly, when training to failure, you are not really working the muscle(s) to a greater degree, just taxing the CNS. The bodybuilding community is the only one that lends any credence to HIT. Olympic lifters and elite strength athletes have been performing squats, deadlifts, bench, etc. several times per week for decades now. The BB community is just THAT far behind. The influence of steroids is a major contrubuting factor.
Do check out the HST-FAQs. There's a lot of good info there to answer your question.
Short answer is that training to failure has its place in strength training but is not necessary for hypertrophy. In fact, managing your CNS recovery ability is key to making the best progress if your training frequency is resonably high (eg. full body 3 x weekly).
I trained under the misguided idea that unless I trained to failure I wasn't training hard enough to make the best gains I could. Since finding this site and absorbing the much more up-to-date training info offered, I have trained to failure very infrequently and generally avoid it altogether. My progress, on the other hand, has been the best I have ever made. Another plus is that I get far fewer colds than I used to get when constantly frying my CNS.
Why not try a cycle of HST and see for yourself.
Short answer is that training to failure has its place in strength training but is not necessary for hypertrophy. In fact, managing your CNS recovery ability is key to making the best progress if your training frequency is resonably high (eg. full body 3 x weekly).
I trained under the misguided idea that unless I trained to failure I wasn't training hard enough to make the best gains I could. Since finding this site and absorbing the much more up-to-date training info offered, I have trained to failure very infrequently and generally avoid it altogether. My progress, on the other hand, has been the best I have ever made. Another plus is that I get far fewer colds than I used to get when constantly frying my CNS.
Why not try a cycle of HST and see for yourself.
Conciliator
New Member
Here's a bunch of information that I've compiled on failure. If you don't find your answer here, than I doubt you'll find it anywhere.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The conventional notion is that you must work to momentary muscular failure before all fiber types will receive a growth stimulus. The mechanical load principle, however, states that all muscle fiber types participate when the muscles are exposed to heavy enough loads. Recruitment patterns involved in lifting weights heavy enough to cause hypertrophy activate all fibers, both fast and slow
Inducing fatigue is a principle specific to endurance. "Load" and "muscle tension," on the other hand, are principles specific to hypertrophy. Further, methods based on fatigue/exhaustion (training to failure and rest/pause stuff) are really methods of increasing strength (CNS adaptations). There’s nothing wrong with this, but by inducing more fatigue, you’ll have to train less frequently as the CNS can take a week to recover.
Keep in mind that "failure" is an indicator of central fatigue, not muscle strain. If you want to increase your resistance to fatigue, train to failure all the time. If you're only interested in effectively straining the muscle so that it'll get bigger, just focus on that and get past the idea that you have to go all out on every set.
It is commonly misunderstood that muscle failure is the stimulus for muscle growth. Intuitively, it makes sense. How can someone not sustain growth if they are working to the very limits of their capacity? Unfortunately, this is not true! The tension (load) on the muscle is what actually causes growth, especially during the eccentric action of the rep. One can go to failure, yet the load can still be too light to induce hypertrophy. See Hortobagyi T, Hill JP, Houmard JA, Fraser DD, & colleagues. Adaptive responses to muscle lengthening and shortening in humans. J. Appl. Physiol. 80(3): 765-772, 1996 “…eccentric muscle actions are associated with greater neural adaptation and muscle hypertrophy than concentric exercise”
Also, see Warren GL, Hayes DA, Lowe DA, Armstrong RB. Mechanical factors in the initiation of eccentric contraction-induced injury in rat soleus muscle. J Physiol. 1993 May;464:457-75 “These data support the hypothesis that eccentric contraction-induced injury is initiated by mechanical factors, with muscle tension playing the dominant role”
If progressive load, rather than chronic fatigue, is the primary stimulus for tissue hypertrophy, it isn’t necessary to “train to failure” if hypertrophy is the objective. This makes the practice of “adding more weight only after you can do more reps” terribly inefficient if muscle growth is the goal. It also refutes the logic of the “muscle confusion” practice, which is primarily a neurological phenomenon.
HST does not require that you train to failure because that prevents you from training frequently enough. It’s better to train according to the recovery of the muscle (48 hours) than according to the CNS (up to a week or longer).
Technically, or in its most common usage, "failure" (A.K.A. Momentary Muscular Failure) is when the weight stops concentric movement. Simply put, failure is when you can no longer "lift" the weight.
Now, training to failure isn’t the end of the world. In fact, most casual lifters lift that way. Training to failure is at the heart of strength training. It has been the primary goal of any person wishing to test their strength since the idea first crossed the mind of man to see how strong they were.
In a real word sense, training to failure is a reasonable way to train for strength and/or fitness. Of course it isn’t specific to “hypertrophy”, but it will certainly generate strength gains and some size gain until you can no longer increase the weight loads.
One major problem with the train-to-failure mindset, is the idea of increasing the weight when you can do more reps with a given RM. In other words, when you no longer reach failure at the point you failed previously with a given weight. People soon realize that this thinking is flawed. It isn’t very long before people stop getting stronger with each successive identical workout. This effectively stops progressive loading.
The use of “forced reps”, where you talk someone else into lifting the weight for you when you fizzle out, is an attempt to do more reps with a given weight, so that you can add more weight and convince yourself that you are getting stronger.
Granted, before any strength trainers jump in here to protest, forced reps can produce strength gains. But very few people have the knowledge to properly incorporate them into a periodized strength-training plan. Same goes for partials, isometrics, ballistics and/or plyometrics.
Eccentric failure is only relevant to eccentric sets. Eccentric failure is when you can no longer slow the weight down through its decent. Eccentric training is less demanding on the CNS and hence you can probably get away with training to eccentric failure more frequently. When I do my negatives I always train to eccentric failure.
"Failure" is an indication of exhuastion, not activation. A motor unit can be activated without failing. If the weight is heavy enough, all motor units will participate.
Yes, the reason you avoid training to failure and especially using "forced reps" is to avoid undue CNS drain. After all, "fatigue" is not what makes you grow. Taining to exhaustion only delays your next workout, thus slowing your ability to grow. However, if strength is your goal rather than growth, you should "generally" be using a 2/week schedule rather than 3/week anyway. I say general because it changes as fatigue should be periodized.
Training to failure during an HST cycle will not make you any stronger than stopping short of failure. If you are concerned with strength, take weeks 7 and 8 to work on strength. Reduce the number of exericses and do more sets. Delay the next workout 1 day if you begin to fall behind in CNS recovery.
As for training to "failure" begin required to elevate protein synthesis, it isn't. Training to failure is a neurological issue, not a metabolic issue.
The reason subjects train to failure in most training studies is because that's the only way they know how to judge effort. Once the subject can lift his/her 10RM 12 times (just an example) they increase the weight.
Again, as the weight gets heavier, the ability to achieve sufficient time under tension diminishes. It’s simply too heavy to support long enough. On the other hand, increasing volume will quickly diminish the amount of weight you can use. Not only that, but as you increase volume or begin to train to failure, you also increase the amount of time it takes the CNS to recover (see Int J Sports Med. 2003 Aug;24(6):410-8). But don't forget that the CNS does adapt to different levels of volume. This is what traditional “Periodization” is all about.
Protein synthesis is elevated simply from loading a muscle either actively or passively. No actual contractions are required, hence my argument that contracting a muscle to failure isn't necessary to increase protein synthesis rates.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The conventional notion is that you must work to momentary muscular failure before all fiber types will receive a growth stimulus. The mechanical load principle, however, states that all muscle fiber types participate when the muscles are exposed to heavy enough loads. Recruitment patterns involved in lifting weights heavy enough to cause hypertrophy activate all fibers, both fast and slow
Inducing fatigue is a principle specific to endurance. "Load" and "muscle tension," on the other hand, are principles specific to hypertrophy. Further, methods based on fatigue/exhaustion (training to failure and rest/pause stuff) are really methods of increasing strength (CNS adaptations). There’s nothing wrong with this, but by inducing more fatigue, you’ll have to train less frequently as the CNS can take a week to recover.
Keep in mind that "failure" is an indicator of central fatigue, not muscle strain. If you want to increase your resistance to fatigue, train to failure all the time. If you're only interested in effectively straining the muscle so that it'll get bigger, just focus on that and get past the idea that you have to go all out on every set.
It is commonly misunderstood that muscle failure is the stimulus for muscle growth. Intuitively, it makes sense. How can someone not sustain growth if they are working to the very limits of their capacity? Unfortunately, this is not true! The tension (load) on the muscle is what actually causes growth, especially during the eccentric action of the rep. One can go to failure, yet the load can still be too light to induce hypertrophy. See Hortobagyi T, Hill JP, Houmard JA, Fraser DD, & colleagues. Adaptive responses to muscle lengthening and shortening in humans. J. Appl. Physiol. 80(3): 765-772, 1996 “…eccentric muscle actions are associated with greater neural adaptation and muscle hypertrophy than concentric exercise”
Also, see Warren GL, Hayes DA, Lowe DA, Armstrong RB. Mechanical factors in the initiation of eccentric contraction-induced injury in rat soleus muscle. J Physiol. 1993 May;464:457-75 “These data support the hypothesis that eccentric contraction-induced injury is initiated by mechanical factors, with muscle tension playing the dominant role”
If progressive load, rather than chronic fatigue, is the primary stimulus for tissue hypertrophy, it isn’t necessary to “train to failure” if hypertrophy is the objective. This makes the practice of “adding more weight only after you can do more reps” terribly inefficient if muscle growth is the goal. It also refutes the logic of the “muscle confusion” practice, which is primarily a neurological phenomenon.
HST does not require that you train to failure because that prevents you from training frequently enough. It’s better to train according to the recovery of the muscle (48 hours) than according to the CNS (up to a week or longer).
Technically, or in its most common usage, "failure" (A.K.A. Momentary Muscular Failure) is when the weight stops concentric movement. Simply put, failure is when you can no longer "lift" the weight.
Now, training to failure isn’t the end of the world. In fact, most casual lifters lift that way. Training to failure is at the heart of strength training. It has been the primary goal of any person wishing to test their strength since the idea first crossed the mind of man to see how strong they were.
In a real word sense, training to failure is a reasonable way to train for strength and/or fitness. Of course it isn’t specific to “hypertrophy”, but it will certainly generate strength gains and some size gain until you can no longer increase the weight loads.
One major problem with the train-to-failure mindset, is the idea of increasing the weight when you can do more reps with a given RM. In other words, when you no longer reach failure at the point you failed previously with a given weight. People soon realize that this thinking is flawed. It isn’t very long before people stop getting stronger with each successive identical workout. This effectively stops progressive loading.
The use of “forced reps”, where you talk someone else into lifting the weight for you when you fizzle out, is an attempt to do more reps with a given weight, so that you can add more weight and convince yourself that you are getting stronger.
Granted, before any strength trainers jump in here to protest, forced reps can produce strength gains. But very few people have the knowledge to properly incorporate them into a periodized strength-training plan. Same goes for partials, isometrics, ballistics and/or plyometrics.
Eccentric failure is only relevant to eccentric sets. Eccentric failure is when you can no longer slow the weight down through its decent. Eccentric training is less demanding on the CNS and hence you can probably get away with training to eccentric failure more frequently. When I do my negatives I always train to eccentric failure.
"Failure" is an indication of exhuastion, not activation. A motor unit can be activated without failing. If the weight is heavy enough, all motor units will participate.
Yes, the reason you avoid training to failure and especially using "forced reps" is to avoid undue CNS drain. After all, "fatigue" is not what makes you grow. Taining to exhaustion only delays your next workout, thus slowing your ability to grow. However, if strength is your goal rather than growth, you should "generally" be using a 2/week schedule rather than 3/week anyway. I say general because it changes as fatigue should be periodized.
Training to failure during an HST cycle will not make you any stronger than stopping short of failure. If you are concerned with strength, take weeks 7 and 8 to work on strength. Reduce the number of exericses and do more sets. Delay the next workout 1 day if you begin to fall behind in CNS recovery.
As for training to "failure" begin required to elevate protein synthesis, it isn't. Training to failure is a neurological issue, not a metabolic issue.
The reason subjects train to failure in most training studies is because that's the only way they know how to judge effort. Once the subject can lift his/her 10RM 12 times (just an example) they increase the weight.
Again, as the weight gets heavier, the ability to achieve sufficient time under tension diminishes. It’s simply too heavy to support long enough. On the other hand, increasing volume will quickly diminish the amount of weight you can use. Not only that, but as you increase volume or begin to train to failure, you also increase the amount of time it takes the CNS to recover (see Int J Sports Med. 2003 Aug;24(6):410-8). But don't forget that the CNS does adapt to different levels of volume. This is what traditional “Periodization” is all about.
Protein synthesis is elevated simply from loading a muscle either actively or passively. No actual contractions are required, hence my argument that contracting a muscle to failure isn't necessary to increase protein synthesis rates.
Mike Echanis
New Member
Great post Conciliator.
John Christy, a well established weight lifting coach, Doesn't even reccomend failure for strength gains. He advises stopping the set one rep short of failure to spare the CNS.
Failure training is dying a slow agonizing death as more and more folks (like me) discover that it just doesn't work.
If you want to witness a whole bunch of "experts" that advocate failure training then go to the HIT seminar in Indiana this April. they're mostly skinny, flat muscled guys that refuse to admit the obvious.
Word has it that Ryan Hall, one of the guest speakers and himself a researcher, is going to drop a bombshell on failure training...Nothing fails like failure.
John Christy, a well established weight lifting coach, Doesn't even reccomend failure for strength gains. He advises stopping the set one rep short of failure to spare the CNS.
Failure training is dying a slow agonizing death as more and more folks (like me) discover that it just doesn't work.
If you want to witness a whole bunch of "experts" that advocate failure training then go to the HIT seminar in Indiana this April. they're mostly skinny, flat muscled guys that refuse to admit the obvious.
Word has it that Ryan Hall, one of the guest speakers and himself a researcher, is going to drop a bombshell on failure training...Nothing fails like failure.
There's also training to failure as opposed to training to technical failure. The latter is pretty good, basically cutting off your lift once you start to significantly break form, or when you know you can't do another rep and maintain your form. It's a good way to leave one or two reps in tank and still 'train to failure.'
Mike Echanis
New Member
I found that after reaching failure then continuing to push against the non moving load (isometrics) was even worse for hypertrophy than racking the bar at failure.
This mandated a SD period after every workout.
This mandated a SD period after every workout.
It's either one: when you know you're on your last rep or try and find out that way you completed your last rep. There's nothing wrong with maxing out like that sometimes. We discussed this a while back and hitting failure once or twice at the end of each microcycle isn't a bad thing. You just have to learn your own reponses and figure it out, be able to judge when you're getting close to the edge. Technicl failure, or failure of form is a good indicator of when you're getting close to actual failure.
I've intentionally stayed out of this but let me say, what Xarhrx is getting at is correct IMO, an acute bout to failure, any way you want to label it, isn't going to stop all your growth or totally fry your CNS or anything like that. When thinking about your workout keep in mind that the chronic application is far more important than a single acute bout.
Mike Echanis
New Member
<div>
(muis @ Mar. 17 2006,09:57)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">Hi,
I was wondering...
which exact situation do people mean with "failure"?
when i can just finish my last rep but i know i couldn't do a next complete rep?
is this save or already to close to faillure?
thanks!</div>
Muis'
No, that's not failure. Failure is when the weight cannot move one more centimeter despite your 100% effort to make it do so. And during this effort many lifters end up doing a 10 second isometric which is even more counter productive.
Failure training works for most lifters for about 2 wks to a month and then it's down hill from there. Often that two wks will be enough to cause that lifter to lift in this fashion for years with little to no progress. I guess along with the CNS it fries your brain.
I'm saying all this because I did HIT for years.
(muis @ Mar. 17 2006,09:57)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">Hi,
I was wondering...
which exact situation do people mean with "failure"?
when i can just finish my last rep but i know i couldn't do a next complete rep?
is this save or already to close to faillure?
thanks!</div>
Muis'
No, that's not failure. Failure is when the weight cannot move one more centimeter despite your 100% effort to make it do so. And during this effort many lifters end up doing a 10 second isometric which is even more counter productive.
Failure training works for most lifters for about 2 wks to a month and then it's down hill from there. Often that two wks will be enough to cause that lifter to lift in this fashion for years with little to no progress. I guess along with the CNS it fries your brain.