| ▲ | armcat 6 hours ago |
| I thought it was already well understood/researched that it's not the weights that matter, but effectively taking your sets to muscular failure. While one might think "I can do 50 reps with low weights" there is practical aspects to this - you don't wand to spend hours at the gym, and doing heavy weights at 5-7 reps is sufficient as long as you are close or at muscular failure. |
|
| ▲ | safety1st 2 hours ago | parent | next [-] |
| There are a few issues with taking every set to failure, the most important being that it will substantially increase your risk of injury. It sounds great until you consider compounds like the deadlift that can ruin your back if your form is bad, and by definition, going to failure means your form will be imperfect at some point. There are lots of macho powerlifters out there with permanently ruined spines who will probably die earlier than they would have otherwise, due to mobility degradation. Particularly as you get older you become more injury prone and your recovery time slows down. This necessitates being cautious about how quickly you increase weight and how often you go to failure. The better goal to target is increasing volume, where volume is defined as Sets x Reps x Weight. The literature doesn't conclusively establish that any one of these is "more important" than the others for hypertrophy. The only real caveat when you follow this rule is that at a certain extreme of low weight / high reps (like 50 reps) you wouldn't actually be doing resistance training anymore, it'd be cardio. |
| |
| ▲ | acoard 3 minutes ago | parent | next [-] | | What about longer rest periods? For example if I wait 1hr between sets I can do full weight again without dropping down weights with a 2-5min break. In fact I can get multiple more sets in and significantly increase my total volume if I spread a workout over a day (which is easier with WFH). Any thoughts on this? Is there not enough muscle fatigue with this approach? | |
| ▲ | Retric 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | 2 reps in reserve is fine and far less painful, but you need to go to actual failure often enough to know where failure is on each set. I’m nerdy enough to suggest rolling a 20 sided die for each set, and on a 1 take it to failure it’s not that complicated and keeps your predictions honest. As I understand it taking a set near failure works reasonably anywhere between 5 to 30 reps, but 30 well controlled reps with good form * 3+ sets for each muscle group gets really boring. | |
| ▲ | siddboots an hour ago | parent | prev [-] | | I think the total volume idea is more flawed than you realise. Pretty much everyone would be able to achieve greater volume, on any exercise, just by decreasing the weight, so your high rep caveat is covering up for quite a lot. This is true mathematically for an Epley style model for example. |
|
|
| ▲ | kace91 6 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| >While one might think "I can do 50 reps with low weights" The caveat is that you need anaerobic training. Low enough weight and it’s cardio, you don’t get giant legs by walking to failure for example. |
| |
| ▲ | nnutter 3 hours ago | parent [-] | | Has anyone really ever walked to failure on a regular basis? I typically have to stop because of blisters not muscle failure. (The furthest I've done is 12 miles with +10% weight.) | | |
| ▲ | exq 2 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | I backpack often (usually 8-13% bodyweight in my pack) and during long summer days I can comfortably push well into the 30 mile per day range if there isn't too much vert to slow my pace down. My feet get sore, brain gets tired, and I run out of daylight well before any sort of muscle failure in my legs. If you aren't used to walking from sunrise to sunset doing so would build muscle, but your time would be better spent on a progressive overload leg routine in a gym. | | |
| ▲ | LorenPechtel 29 minutes ago | parent [-] | | Yup, I have never gone that far (but my summer hiking is entirely at high elevation with lots of climb) but I have never found anything like a failure point--I wear out because of time (not even daylight--I've made navigation errors that left me out there well past sunset), not muscle failure. |
| |
| ▲ | UI_at_80x24 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Check anybody that has done the AT. | | | |
| ▲ | worthless-trash 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | I used to persistent hunt to failure, ended up with bulky calves and tibialis. | | |
| ▲ | bglazer 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | Where were you doing this? Were you ever successful? How did you do it, like what were your tactics? So many questions! I’ve never heard about modern people doing serious persistence hunting, except for a stunt that I read about years ago. I think it was organized by like Outside or some running publication that got pro marathoners to try and they failed because they didn’t know anything about hunting | | |
|
|
|
|
| ▲ | xnx 6 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Well understood, but not widely known. The myths and superstitions around anything health related are frustratingly durable. |
|
| ▲ | landl0rd 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Fifty is excessive but you’re better-served doing 12-20 reps more than fewer, heavier reps if you’re pushing hypertrophy and already well-trained. |
| |
| ▲ | taneq 24 minutes ago | parent [-] | | That matches what I've been told by various personal trainers. 6-8 reps if focusing on strength, ~12 for all round, and 16-18 for size/endurance. Do three sets, weight should be enough that the last couple of reps on the first set are a bit of a struggle. Subsequent sets just push through as far as you can. | | |
|
|
| ▲ | toshinoriyagi 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| The weight does matter. You will never get bigger if you don't add weight to the bar, and you will never get bigger if you only train at 1% of your 1 rep max, no matter the number of reps. Producing a training stimulus requires placing the muscle under sufficient tension (enough weight) enough times to be at or near failure. |
|
| ▲ | fudged71 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Brad Schoenfeld Has been on this body of work for a long time, and he is "Mr. Hypertrophy" in the field. So yes |
|
| ▲ | elevaet 6 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| What about the old gym adage "training to failure is failing to train" - is there any physiological basis for this, or is it mental, or just a myth? |
| |
| ▲ | wswope 6 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | That’s a Pl/Oly mindset rather than a BB/hypertrophy mindset. Totally valid advice in the right context. Long story short, failed reps get much more risky and problematic as the weight you’re lifting approaches your 1RM. | | |
| ▲ | Moto7451 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | Exactly this. When I was in my best shape my deadlift and squat were in/on the way to 2.5-3x my body weight. You don’t want to fail that without a lot of help and safeties. Note for the uninitiated: That figure is not even impressive or competitive with competition lifters. This is just “guy who put in the time and work” numbers. |
| |
| ▲ | teecha 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | not an expert, 2 years of serious lifting, but this is probably a good adage for the average person from my current understanding training to failure puts you at higher risk of injury and there are diminishing returns as you approach your 1 rep max and/or failure hypertrophy can happen with more reps or more weight strength gains are usually just focused on progressive overload though, of course, hypertrophy will happen either way and contributes to increased strength, but this seems to be further confirmation that you can gain muscle size either way | |
| ▲ | nzeid 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | It's definitely way more nuanced than that. You have to approach exhaustion to get the body to eventually build strength. But you need to carefully time your rests/deloads and handle plateaus with more volume. | | |
| ▲ | thatcat 3 hours ago | parent [-] | | Where could I find more information on proper set timing? | | |
| ▲ | Moto7451 3 hours ago | parent [-] | | Honestly from a personal training/lifting coach. When I could spend serious time in the gym there’s a lot to just having someone with expertise for 30 minutes to give perspective. You can do a lot of it over video today as well. In general YouTube is a good resource. There are a lot of respected coaches that also produce content. |
|
| |
| ▲ | kace91 6 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | I’ve never heard that, it’s usually the opposite- people do strip sets and the like to reach failure |
|
|
| ▲ | amelius 6 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| How about making muscles fail by stretching them under load? |
| |
| ▲ | mrob 5 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Depending on what you mean by "fail" and "stretching", that sounds a lot like eccentric training [0] (a.k.a. "negatives"). It's effective but notorious for causing delayed onset muscle soreness. I trained myself to do pull-ups using this method, repeatedly lowering myself in a controlled motion from the top position while I was too weak to actually pull myself up. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eccentric_training | |
| ▲ | jimbo808 6 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Sounds like a great way to injure yourself, also would only work for eccentric motion | | |
| ▲ | amelius 6 hours ago | parent [-] | | To me it doesn't sound much different than "taking your sets to muscular failure". | | |
| ▲ | jimbo808 5 hours ago | parent [-] | | Not all muscles resist extension, some do the opposite and contract. | | |
| ▲ | 3 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | [deleted] | |
| ▲ | pasquinelli 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | i don't understand what this means. the stretch feeling is an involuntary muscle contraction that is happening to resist extension on the opposite side. | | |
|
|
|
|
|
| ▲ | 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| [deleted] |
|
| ▲ | vasco 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-] |
| > Loads for each set were adjusted to ensure that volitional fatigue was reached within 8–12 and 20–25 repetitions for the HL and LL limbs, respectively I would argue both categories of the study are about low reps. I don't see how the body would tell the difference between 12 and 25 reps. If you said between 5 and 500, like it has to meaningfully take much longer, otherwise why would doing something so similar have any meaningful difference? The way I think about it is that nature mostly reacts to order of magnitude changes. 12 to 25 is the same thing. Like why not make a study to see if its more nutritious to eat dinner in 15 or 20 minutes? |
| |
| ▲ | pjc50 5 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | This is spoken like you've never done any reps at all? | | |
| ▲ | vasco 5 hours ago | parent [-] | | There's not much difference in hitting max at 12 and at 25, from anecdotal experience. The study corroborated that as well, even though with small n. |
| |
| ▲ | mnky9800n 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | I feel like I would definitely notice if I went from 12 to 25 reps on any exercise I do. Although typically I max out at 8 before adding more weight. | | |
| ▲ | Dylan16807 3 hours ago | parent [-] | | > I feel like I would definitely notice if I went from 12 to 25 reps on any exercise I do. To be clear, the implication is that 12 and 25 have different weights so they tire you the same amount. Do you think it would be a very strongly felt difference in that situation? What would the difference feel like? |
|
|