Avoid training to failure???

[Thaibox]

load of "hooey"?

I train to failure maybe 75% of the time because I respond well to it, and I like to.

However, what CCJ is explaining makes a lot of sense, and this is a common practice for many strength athletes. Don't try to discredit something like that with your own experience(something that has taken many to the top of the game), its not fair or valid.
And, with regards to your "15 years" of training, not only are your numbers very very low), but no 15 year vet would show his stats by stating what he does on leg extensions, smith machine, or pulldowns. And, if these are such an intregal part of your training, you have no right to be criticizing CoolColJ.

 

[needsize]

The way I train, my heavy sets of 5 arent to failure, they are heavy working sets but rarely to failure. But as I move through my workout and get to the higer rep sets, 8-10 reps, then I start to take my sets to failure. When I leave the gym I want my muscles taxed to the max, but I dont need to go to failure on every single set to do that

 

[coolcolj]

Don't get me wrong guys, I've been on both sides of the fence now

I used to be a train to failure HIT Jedi - and while it worked well, I knew something wasn't right because always felt like I was beaten to a pulp. Training slower and all that. Performance wasn't my main goal. After a while you just get sick of having to turn up at the gym and bringing it.

Then as time went on I had an argument with a friend over our training styles - as all HIT Jedi do
Around this time Performance became more of a goal to me, but size is always nice to have as well.
Something hit (heh) me when I started researching into training methods of elite sprinters and throwers - these guys can really move some iron and have explosiveness to burn.

I then experimented not going to failure, and lifting faster and the results blew me away.
Believe me it took me a lot of guts and determination to switch training styles, but I'm glad I did. Nobody likes to be proven wrong.
I didn't expect to get the gains I did in strength that I did in such a short period of time. And when you get stronger, don't expect your muscles to stay small either!
Heavier weights used will force your muscles to adapt accordingly.
I increased my standing long jump by 7 inches, and vertical jump by 4 inches soon after despite a 12lb rise in bodyweight - and more gains are continually coming.

Sure you have swallow your ego a bit and use lighter weights intially, but in no time at all you will be zooming over your old poundages.

I'm now using weights I once dreamed off - over the last 2 months my Incline dumbell went from 55 for 2 sets of 6, to 90lbs for 2 sets of 5. Not to failure of course. Granted there are many of you much stronger than me here, but for the time I've been training - 90lbs is like some kind of revelation to me. I have never gone higher than 65lbs on incline dumbells BP ever in my life until now.

When I trained to failure and used slow tempos I was stuck on 60-65 for a set of 6, and it seemed like I'd never get past that.
140lb dumbells (largest at my gym) for incline doesn't seem so far fetched for me now, I may even reach that by Christmas, such is the speed of my strength gains. And do you think my upper body will look the same as it does now when I hit 140s ?

Its all about seducing the gains out of your body rather than "raping" them out.

 

[JOKER47]

I believe I've asked this before, but it sounds like it warrants asking again.

How are you all defining "failure"? I lift to what I consider failure. I lift until I hear the little voice in my head say, "That's your last rep!". It's my last full complete rep with proper form. To me, anything beyond that is a forced rep, ie, going beyond failure.

How do the rest of you define "failure"?


Joker

 

[Intenceman]

load of "hooey"?

I train to failure maybe 75% of the time because I respond well to it, and I like to.

Good for you, so do I, which was my point.

However, what CCJ is explaining makes a lot of sense, and this is a common practice for many strength athletes. Don't try to discredit something like that with your own experience(something that has taken many to the top of the game), its not fair or valid.
And, with regards to your "15 years" of training, not only are your numbers very very low), but no 15 year vet would show his stats by stating what he does on leg extensions, smith machine, or pulldowns. And, if these are such an intregal part of your training, you have no right to be criticizing CoolColJ.

Firstly I can express whatever opinion I want to- its a free country and a free board. I don't feel bound to go along with the crowd, I'm not that low level a mentality. Having two college degrees and and 2 teaching credentials, plus a personal training certification I've done my homework.

I wasn't criticizing him at all- I don't even know him for pete's sake, but I don't buy into the don't train to failure thing- I did the conventional thing for 5 years- and it didn't WORK. As to training to failure, I and all of my clients train to failure at least very other workout and we ALL gain at least a rep or two or a few lbs ever other workout. Now as to the ridiculous notion that your choice of exercises reflects your ability to comment on different training methodologies-- what a load of hooey! I do what exercises I damn well please, not what people SAY to do. Bench Presses- totally useless for me, never got much out of them, at 6'3", I have such long arms that the movement doesn't hit my pecs well at all, but does get limited by the smaller triceps=- so out with that- after 5 years- gave them a fair shot bud. Deadlifts? I have done them 445 for 4 and 495 for knee levels, I mentioned Squats - they are a basic exrecise, ok I'll throw in barbell rows- though I am currently not doing them- last year got up to 365 for 5. Low? Funny, but Casey Viator or Mike Mentzer or Arnold Schwarzeneggar never did them with more than that- Frank Zane used a 100 lbs less, ever heard of them? What's wrong with pulldowns? Dorian Whats his Name does them- I'm low -oh, ok a whole 40 lbs less than he does them- and he's one of the strongest BB's around- and he juiced! As I type this I really am realizing how out of touch with the reality of genetically natural trainnees your post was, so never mind, you must be using juicer standards- heavy juicer or powrlifters, because I've NEVER seen ANYONE do 470 lb Hammer leg extensions, 360 lb pulldowns in an gym I was in- including Gold's venice a few times
I'm not a powerlifter, never claimed to be, not a great presser-I suck at pressing always have-wit long arms , always will be relatively low, my pulls however, are far from LOW, since they far exceed what I have seen anyone in the gym do. One guy came close on rows only got them up SINCE adopting this approach.

NOW as to how you should hav approached it instead of criticizing ME, You SHOULD look at rate of gain, and total gained since starting, that would at least make sense. I increased Incline press some 400%, Squats 390%, rows 600% etc. thats 4 times starting, almost 4 times starting, etc. since you seem to be critically imparired. Good day.

 

[coolcolj]

I believe I've asked this before, but it sounds like it warrants asking again.

How are you all defining "failure"? I lift to what I consider failure. I lift until I hear the little voice in my head say, "That's your last rep!". It's my last full complete rep with proper form. To me, anything beyond that is a forced rep, ie, going beyond failure.

How do the rest of you define "failure"?
Joker

I define failure as the inability to move the dumbell or bar at the desired bar speed, and not being able to complete a concetric repetition.

 

[teen1216]

Intenceman, good job on the lifts. I sure can't do em, but the most used way to develop power in top athletes by top strength coaches is not by training to failure. Bodybuilding is a much different story, so im not sayin training to failure is a bad thing either. My two cents.

 

[coolcolj]

exactly - read my original reply, I said for BB'ing it doesn't matter either way, but if your after improved performance and functional strength gains, going to failure is not required

 

[Longhorn85]

exactly - read my original reply, I said for BB'ing it doesn't matter either way, but if your after improved performance and functional strength gains, going to failure is not required

Thanks for all the replies/info. Not to defend Men's Health, but it does make a good read while on the john and every once in a while you learn something about fitness.

Since I am performance-oriented and I like to workout alone, this concept of sub-failure weight training is right up my alley.

By the way, my definition of failure in the weight room is when good form is compromised.

 

[Lord_Suston]

Failure, when you cannot lift the weight any more....

For performance I prefer not going to failure since the ripping action of muscle fibers slows down recovery time and the minus of getting to bulky to perform the desire sport....

But if I want size a failure here I come......