Ok *nervous laughter* - what about...

[The Shadow]

...training to failure??

Yes or no?

...and why

 

[casavant]

Arnie said do it (although I don't think he did it all the time himself), so I did it for the vast majority of my training career. It makes sense that greater effort results in more muscular hypertrophy. It seems that for strength, failure is a no-no, though, which I've really just learned this past year. Ed Coan said he avoids it like the plague. Some of the most impressive gains (to me) that I've ever made on bench press were using a Coan periodization scheme where failure was not a necessity. I say mix it up a little, but back off sometimes. It depends on your goals as well, of course.

 

[WannaBPowerful]

I always train to failure. It always gives me the best pump. I dont have any information as to why it is best, but i think i remember someone saying it forces the muscle to recruit more muscle fibers or something. Where do you come up with these topics? lol im enjoying them though

 

[The Shadow]

just things that I think newbies in particular should be thinking about.

So we have yes for size no for strength

 

[TheProject]

yes for size no for strength

When I do my bb stuff, I train to failure.

PL training, I don't deliberately go to failure, although it has happened on accessory work.

 

[CrimsonKing]

my personal opinion is that most people who say they train to failure actualy do not.

For example, the 20 reps breathing squats. That is a true lesson of training to failure. I was utterly surprised at how much reserve my body had to push that one more rep out.

My answer? No, training to failure is not necessary. Intense training is required!

 

[The Shadow]

CK - excellent point on the 20 reps squats - they TEACh you intensity the hard way.


Project - most AW is "more typical" bb'ing exercises right??

 

[louden_swain]

I train to failure always!!! I can truly test my limits. The results have been gains in size and strength. Thumbs up!

 

[TheProject]

CK - excellent point on the 20 reps squats - they TEACh you intensity the hard way.


Project - most AW is "more typical" bb'ing exercises right??

Well, yes and no.

Tricep work, even though you're doing more reps, is still geared toward strength rather than size. For example, we'll do JM presses, elbows out extensions, or rolling extensions as opposed to pulldowns or skullcrushers.

Upper back work is similar exercises, but not done for width. Like lat pulldowns with a reverse grip, hands in close, or chest supported rows with elbows tucked so you're working the plane you bench in.

Any of that make sense?

 

[The Shadow]

yeah - but why go to failure on assisitance work when you don't go to failure on "pl" exercises???

Wouldn't the theory apply to both types of training since sterngth is the main goal in each?

wouldn't rows work the same plane as that you bench in??