Thanks for the feature dude! I'd say it depends totally on context. If you can recover, the exercise in question, compound vs free weight, axial loading, schedule and time available, fiber type/ability or desire to grind out reps, frequency, level of strength, goals, etc. Chest supported rear delt raises for an intermediate with high work and recovery capacity training with lower frequency on a busy schedule in the 15-20 rep range? Failure is very viable. Low bar back squats for an elite superheavyweight powerlifter during a higher frequency training block in the 3-5 rep range? Failure makes zero sense. I'm personally more hypertrophy focused and not that strong, plus have a good ability to recover, so I get a lot of mileage from near failure work especially on some movements. I have learned to respect it on squats and deadlifts in particular, though! Failure certainly isn't needed to grow. I don't put much faith in failure OR volume research to be honest. It's just impossible to standardize the effort per set and individual experience and context are way more important anyway. I do think that many of the RP sets weren't quite as close to failure, and indeed Jared confirmed afterwards that it was a 2 or 3 RIR week for him, which looks to be spot on. Assessing RPE/RIR is very tricky of course, and is quite individual. I've seen some formulas based on bar speed slow down but observationally there's a lot of individual variation. Working on the hammies! Legs are up about an inch and a half since that video.
In hindsight they could have just actually failed on a set or two to demonstrate what the reps leading into that looked like. But I believe it; if "0" RIR is on the menu and you never actually miss..... speaks to where you are biasing. Lol I'm not surprised about the hammies; you're looking filled out these days!
This is just something I have always been curious about. Haven't you said you were a long distance runner for a long time. So wouldn't that bias you to very endurance based modes of training. Wouldn't that be something to consider? Not trying to be rude just always wanted to ask.
@@jacobhenderson9605 not to speak for Geoffrey but having a great cardiovascular base also allows him to push his sets further. You can see that in his training, he takes sets further than a lot of people feel comfortable in doing so. Part of that is being fit enough to do so.
@@Fazlifts Yeah I think that's part of it but his muscles are very accustomed to clearing out substrate deficits. So he can extend sets and push through harder reps because of it. Thats more what I am talking about of course good cardio helps but I think his muscles are predisposed to those kind of really slow reps in part because of his background.
Good work on this Alex. I don't put a great deal of faith in the current failure/non failure research. The wide split in what we see coming from the Fisher/Steele vs Schoenfeld labs tell us a story about the lack of consensus on what 'failure' actually means. In fact in my conversation with Dr Steele he mentions that he's working on unifying the definition for this very reason. With regards to the slowing of reps, I do think Geoffrey has a point. However I will also say this is a trainable artefact of adaptation in my experience. When I was a beginner/early intermediate I definitely grinded a lot more. As I moved into advanced stages and beyond in Powerlifting I almost never grinded. It either went or didn't. Then years later it took me a long time to train to grind as a Bodybuilder. I cultivated the ability to grind more and more as I practiced higher rep sets and taking things closer to failure as part of Bodybuilding style training. So, yes I do think it's an experience issue - however I do also think it's a trainable factor which then adds a lot of nuance to the whole failure vs non-failure conversation.
The only data I use to drive my own programming is the data I collect about myself. If I know what works and doesn’t work for me, that’s all I need as an individual.
thats quite literally the best way to program and is the basis of his KONG Program. He uses RPE in that and says its a requirement you record your data and have an understanding of what your capable of lifting under different RPE's
thats not exactly a good way to go through a lot of things in life though. the reason we're so advanced is that we learn through previous generations mistakes (for the most part). for example you know not to eat certain poisonous food because previous generations learned the hard way. how do you that eating poison berries "doesnt work for you"? have you tried it yourself so you can collect that data?
This is BY FAR the best video on this topic I have ever seen. As a tall lifter I've had to figure out how to structure my training most efficiently. The back and forth between volume and intensity training as my body adapts to one is a staple I've had in my training for years now and it's amazing. Thank you Alex! Keep up the amazing content
Best gains I've ever made were leaving a couple in reserve for heavy compounds and failure, or technical failure on most sets of isolations. Chasing failure on everything just left me fatigued to the point where i started missing workouts every week. This is why there is no "sure thing" when it comes to weight training, and everyone needs to experiment and find what works best for them, until it doesn't work anymore. Then the experiment starts back up.
currently on this and making the best gains of my life and feeling good in and out of the gym. starting off with heavy compounds with a few in the tank, moving to iso dropsets to failure, i throw in partials at the end of my sets on muscle groups that i feel are lagging and want to bias. only on around 12 sets a week total(6 compound, 6 iso) and it feels great.
@@Ty-oe4dr I'm glad that it's working, and by you saying "currently", that tells me that you've tried other methods and this one is working best for you. That's what i always tell people. Try something for a while and see if it works for them, and you'll notice that you may have to try something new eventually. I was just thinking last night about rearranging my split, as I've plateued on the current chest/back/calves day 1, quads/hams day 2, arms/forearms/calves day 3, rest day 4, and repeat. I'm thinking of giving the old bro split another try. That split has fallen out of favor, but when i think back on it, the bro split or some variation of a bro split always gave me the best gains.
I’ll try to take your advice and approach my workouts like this the next week. I’m actually at the point where I don’t feel like my workouts are as good because I keep working to failure
Speaking to failure as a late stage intermediate, I'm getting a great response from the AMRAP final set on the Big 4 from your 'Bull Mastiff' program, currently on week 6 of the base phase. I especially like how the auto-regulation of weight for the next week determined from it works given that different people have different work capacities at different rep ranges. It's got the load dialed in perfect at this point for me now!
I absolutely loved your take on Mike's annoyingly perfect training style, absolutely hilarious. Also that point about advanced lifters not being able to grind as much was one that I hadn't before, that was pretty cool. I love these long videos of yours, keep them up.
Most people, particularly the younger athletes I help train as a means of raising GPP for their sport, place way too much emphasis on individual sessions than the accumulation of training. They walk in and want to "see what they can lift". It is really hard to convey SRA to a 15 year old that just wants to see if he can bench 225 on day 1.
I don't train to failure because I have a life outside the gym. My first few years of lifting I would train to failure and I always felt like crap. Working a full time job and enjoying time with my family is for more important to me then getting a little bigger or getting a little stronger.
I'm a seasoned intermediate and I haven't failed on a compound lift in I don't know how long, but I routinely take my accessories/isolations to technical failure (without a lot of grinding). The smaller the muscle, the higher rep range I train in, generally, and the closer I go towards "failure." As I progress through a training block, I'll start shaving sets or variety of accessories so I can increase my performance on compounds (pseudo-mini-taper for my non-competitive gym bro aspirations), and my mesos for the compounds are 3 weeks (following your 5s routine from the H/L/M in Base Strength, minus the light day unless I have an extra day I can train). This seems to be working well for the time being, but I know eventually I'll need to reset and go back into a volume phase after my next "peak." The general population seems to train one of two ways: 1) all out YOLO style, grinding out 1RM deadlift and bench weekly or 2) casual lackadaisical style RPE 5 or below. It's rare to see anyone following a training plan. And yes, I go to a run of the mill public gym. Also, that guy grinding on the leg curls was pretty hilarious, I'm not sure how that's even possible. Hamstrings are so fast twitch dominant that I go from a slightly slowed rep to complete nothingness, and I'm not even that advanced.
I live in South Africa and we have daily power cuts of 2:30 hours per day three times a day. That's 7 and a half hours of no electricity 3-4 days per week. "Unnecessarily long" doesn't apply to me. Deep dive all you want, bro. I'm saving your vids and watching them in the darkness.
I was saying back then when GVS made that failure video that certain lifters fail more abruptly and can't just grind rep after rep. It appears that lifters that can grind more - usually with form degradation - are not the strongest lifter.
I'd agree with that, on the whole. Could also have to do with fiber type, to a certain extent. Also depends on the movement and strength curve as well as rep range. Worth noting that Jared actually clarified after that he was 2-3 RIR for that workout, whoever annotates the RP videos I think just threw in the 0-1RIR thing for everyone when it might not have actually been the case.
I noticed in my training I went from abrupt failures to grinding failures over a couple years. I also noticed I wasn’t very explosive when I was good at grinding.
@@Isaiah-ft5nx as a novice lifter, in the early days I was terrible at grinding. The weight would feel too heavy and I'd stop the lift. But these days I can grind alot. I mostly do so on deadlifts. But I think for me, and probably other novices, was getting past a mental block because going to failure is uncomfortable and intense and I had to get used to that feeling to be able to grind. I guess I'll not be able to grind as much as I get stronger
My problem with training to failure is psychological tbh. I did greyskull for a while and whenever I didn’t hit an AMRAP PR I felt discouraged, like I wasted the whole session
Same with 5/3/1 for me. Juggernaut worked better for me, probably something to do with purposefully leaving a few in the tank on certain waves/weeks until you hit the AMRAP on the "realization" phase.
I watched this Tom Platz video where he's got people squatting to failure with like 65% or something, and you can see people ready to quit after 15 or so but he just keeps pushing them and pushing them, I think the first guy got 28, which was pretty fucking nuts and I IMMEDIATELY wanted to get to the gym and do it for myself. I just couldn't wait to go do it. From personal experience, I think it can be plateau-breaking. not sure what your conclusion is yet but I will always include it in some way.
Anecdotally I’ve noticed with my block periodization I get the best results from starting each block about 6-7 RPE/3-4 RIR and over the block move closer until the last week I train to RPE10/0RIR(sometimes 9/1 depending on the next block). Not staying away from RPE 10/0RIR no matter what, but only doing it intelligently to where I will be able to recover after
Im running a chest specialization rn, and run for fun. For me, i go until i feel "my next set would fail" then i switch exercizes! Getting maybe 10 sets of high quality reps 3 days a week! Keeping a little in the tank deff helps my quality and alows me to train frequently!!
With subjects like this it’s always a “it depends” situation. If your biceps or shoulders never get that sore or sore at all then doing a drop set to failure for your last sets for that day wouldn’t be such a bad idea considering they’ll recover before they get hit again days later
Excellent content! Thanks for all the effort putting this informative and useful video together. Appreciated. This is what an RPE 10 video looks like. 💪
I like the habitual training to failure argument. I’m going to failure 4 days a week for over a year. It’s not the same as taking untrained people (or unadapted to training in that manner)and measuring their response to failure. I’ve spent several months adapting.
Thanks, Bromley. This is one of the most insightful videos that I’ve ever seen on the subject of building strength and size. Some of my personal takeaways: - program high volume blocks to set up high intensity blocks or competition prep. - on “dumb” isolation exercises (e.g. lateral raises, curl machine, calves, etc), you better be going way beyond failure, i.e. drop sets and forced reps. - on competition lifts, always have reps left in the tank, unless you are on the platform in competition. Treat training as skill practice. - when using “smart” compound movements to build muscle (e.g. barbell rows, incline dumbbell press, high bar squats, etc.), most of the time you should leave reps in the tank and increase the number of sets-a mix of skill practice and muscular endurance. - when training dumb exercises to failure and beyond, still try to have efficient form.
The best video I've seen from you. I appreciate you not slandering Jeff Nippard like in the other one saying he had a just barely above average physique
Great! Really great perspective! I totally agree with the 7-8 rpe being the sweet safe spot and how both higher intensity and higher volume are both tools that work well at different times. I have noticed many of the "to failure is more effective" studies seem to use examples of isolation exercises. Anyway everything here very well thought out and articulated well. I am rereading your Base Strength book.
What has worked well for me (im 271 rn, about 25%bf and was natty until 3 weeks ago) was to just train my compound lifts as heavy as possible for the amount of reps I have planned. I wont go up in weight or do another rep if I think it will hurt me. If I think I can do more weight and still hit my rep goal Ill add more weight. If I am mid set and feel like I cant get all the reps I want, Ill rack the weight. My main focus with compound lifts is to just do as much as I can and not get hurt. My accessory work I will usually do 3 working sets. Set 1 = RPE 6-8, Set 2 = RPE 8, Set 3 = as many as possible and if I am past week 1 in a block I will do a superset/rest pause/drop set/etc. Its worked well for me. Ive been focused on powerlifting for 2 years so far (lifting for 4) and have a 435 squat, 285 bench, and a 500lbs deadlift. Whether or not you may think my lifts are good or not doesnt matter because I have consistently seen progress.
I would say that failure is the inability to do another solid rep with good form. I've used that and for me it works. I tend to stay away from utilizing failure for things like squats or deads. I agree that using advanced fatigue techniques is very effective after form breaks down.
I used to try really hard on sets in the past absolute failure and i can say that it just doesn’t work as well to get stronger. Ive noticed that for deadlifts training far from failure gets me really strong fast and most things RPE 7-8 seems to be just right majority of the time. I wanna add. All this research on failure is bad anyways cause people who use PEDs definitely are different than natural. When your recovery is enhanced. Failure doesn’t fuck you up as bad
43:26 BOOM. That's it. Your channel is head and shoulders above most YTF for practical, usable info. Kudos and thanks for the great content. Takeaway, do whatever failure training that gives you results, that you can reasonably recover from, sometimes don't, the end. It's also funny to think where else in life do we do 100% effort on anything. DId you practice your ABCs every second of every day until you got it? Or did you devote specific amount of submax effort everyday? It's kind of the same thing
Great video! A lot of good questions were asked. This gives me a couple of things to consider and think about. Especially with regards to programming volume and intensity with sensitivity and tolerance in mind. Congrats, you just earned a new subscriber.
I do powerlifting with high frequency. For my isolation accessories, I try to start the cycle with rpe 9 or all the way to failure for the first set so that then, I can have a reliable number to work around with both within the session and the rest of the cycle.
Also I have periodized even the let's say back work compound movements, barbell row and pull up, so that I reduce the fatigue but go rpe 9-10 for lat pulldowns and seated cable rows. Full body compound movements, in my opinion, should be trained with consideration
I'm guessing you're one of the few, ya? lol I'm just being snarky kinda, I mean I absolutely get what you mean and agree but I think terms like 'strong enough' are inappropriate, I think that while 'psychological game'/mindset certainly come into play, the reality is that genetically-based motor neuron control is the primary difference between those who can, and cannot, actually go to failure in the true(er) senses of the term.
You can recover from failure training and high volume. The main problem with failure training is you end up exhausted after 2 exercises and the rest of your exercises aren’t trained that intense. You have to try and conserve your energy to last the full workout, and as your ‘endurance’ increases, you can increase proximity to failure and add volume. Like being a marathon runner. Also failure is hard to track, what weight/rep/set you fail on can wildly vary every week
Exactly. I’ve been training to failure (fail to finish a rep and then do some partials) most of my life and am very routine about it. I mean gut wrenching drives…. Don’t tend to get very sore anymore in the exercises I’m super used to doing it with depending on the periodization or phase
Definitely agree with most of what you said. Paralysis by analysis or using "evidence based techniques" to excuse just not putting in hard enough work are definitely causing people to miss out on gain. While your recommendation of working at about 7-8 RPE isn't perfect for all situations. In the scheme of building momentum block after block, year after year, staying injury free and just doing the work, it would take alot of time to construct a program that would really noticeable do better. Ed Coan talks about it now, summation of work is what really matters. Train hard. But not so hard you can't so your next workout.
It is funny, whenever I train my squat at lower RPEs for more than 2 weeks my overall fitness lower so much my form and overall feel for the squat goes to shit. Even when compensated with extra sets. Tried sheiko for a while coming from almost a year of SBS-hyperyrophy, 8-12 reps mostly, last set to failure/RPE 10. I got more fatigued after doing 5*3 at 80% than 4*6 plus an amrap on the last set at the same weight. I have no idea why and I am also stronger when I mostly do >4 reps. However sheikos deadlift programming works perfectly. A lot of DL from blocks and up to knees.
I think part of this problem is dishonesty and ignorance in the fitness industry. Someone who has a big following who is genetically gifted and/or artificially enhanced may be able to just look at weights and put on decent size. And fitness studies seem like they are done by people who don’t even lift. It just adds to confusion.
For me it's really hard to NOT train to failure (to not be able to perform any additional rep, even with shit form). I always feel like there was something left in the tank that should not be there.
Exactly. I've trained to failure for almost 50 years and have never left gas in the tank, except occasionally because I was exhausted from not sleeping or something. I have to give my all to everything I do. In the 70s and 80s we all went to failure. If you didn't, you would probably stand out and not in a good way. The theory of it being better to not go to failure is relatively new, perhaps 15-20 years. If you watch videos of Arnold, Franco, and others, they almost always went to failure, even with higher volume.
So how would you go about progressivly improving/overload on certain exercises if you dont push yourself to your limit it order to break it? I mean, how else would you progress?
I train to failure because I know that my failure isn't actually failure. I think that Nippard actually does a good job of balancing the evidence base and more intuitive (bro) stuff. As for whether his programs are static rep ranges, I can't answer for most of them. The beginner one is but that makes sense for a beginner training plan.
My takeaway from this video as a novice lifter is to keep compound and free weight movements at RPE 7 and then, near the end of the session, use machines and cables to get to failure. Please correct me if I'm wrong to do this.
Based on what I've read and what I've experienced this is the best approach. Compounds shy of failure you can hit failure on everything else. It's all about risk. Going to failure on squats, deadlift and bench press is far more of a risk than going to failure on tricep pushdowns.
I’m not aware of a study that took lifters through a meso using RIR or RPE scales and finishing at 0 or 10, then complete another meso so the lifters have a more accurate use of the scales to determine growth potential of the 2-3 or 7-8 levels of intensity. Novice and intermediate lifters often struggle to gauge the their ability to continue to produce force, let alone the use of the scales of effort. Aside from using studies to determine personal efforts and volume, you are your own study and logging and use of progressive overload is still the priority.
Brawn book by Stewart McRobert, say take a week off than start back on abbreviated routine using big compound exercises. Start with 60% of your 1 rep max do 3set of 5reps after 2 progressively heavier set.. Each week add 2.5-5kg per week. As intensity increases you may need to drop a set or do 3 sets of 5R, 5R, 2Reps etc It's nothing flashy you just have to be consistent and away you go. Your in that 90% range long enough to milk out a new PR. The start of the cycle your creating some volume and hypertrophy. Could stay in the 70-80% range for awhile longer before going for a PR. It's just linear progression, what Ed Coan did.
Good video My option training to failure is dangerous it opens the door to injury. Quality of form is extremely important. Quality over Quantity! Central Nervous System damage can happen. Always keep 2 reps in the tank always with proper form
To me, for certain exercises, one rep in reserve feels almost the same as seven reps left in reserve, and failure comes on as a surprise - either I can't do any more, or maybe I can grind out a couple more with severely degraded technique.
From my professional point of view, too many people are training too lightly versus what they want to achieve. I understand that, however, because like you mentioned; training to failure (training harder than one thinks they can) can show to the person that they *can* go harder, they *can* do more, and they *can* actually achieve their goals. But to "full failure"? There are pros and there are cons, but I'd advice against doing it all the time, because it is so tough to recover from such a workout and most people do not need such a thing.
I train to failure regularly. I recover and am probably stronger than both Jeff nippard and israetel. Also depends on the lift a little. I take bench to failure often, I don't really squat to failure because I don't always have spotters but will take the belt squat machine to failure. I do take deadlifts to failure occasionally but not if I feel my form slipping. I don't take glute ham raise to failure because I don't want to rip a hamstring off the bone.
I found that taking one muscle to failure each session worked for me without overdoing it and being useless at work. I rotate each muscle group so everything goes to failure twice a month.
When i do light reps with fast tempo eventually I run into my lactate threshold and cramps begin to happen after 20-25ish reps. They quickly fade and I can do the same 20-25ish reps before the next pain. I wonder if this may contribute to a lactate threshold training that happens in HIIT and give more muscular endurance or improve VO2 max.
I will say though I think saying 'Keep a few in the tank' is autimatically assuming the trainee knows what that means. Most people dont know how to push to failure so saying stop before I think turns the few into 7 or 8.
Also that overstretched pigeon position that Jeff did put the dtrain off the muscle and onto the tendons and ligaments. The muscles are relaxed at that point, rather than kept under tension. On top of the injury risk, it's not the most efficient technique for muscle building.
Seems like on the average science-based video there's actually an inverse relationship between the amount of actionable information and the number of references to Shizenberg et al. When they do give out concrete guidelines it's basically not much different than the bro-science. But its still fun to watch them try as an abject lesson in just how freaking hard it is to set up a good experiment and generate inference from data analysis.
Not to gotcha or anything, but a posteriori is the term. a priori is its opposite (i.e reasoning not based overtly on empirical data and/or experience, but on theoretical deductions). Thanks for the great video!
I must, at this point- after having had the chance to catch up on more of your videos and to think on the comparative bits of info out here more fully - say: Your process and motivation are easily appreciated, testable, & sound on all the right levels. Especially, but not necessarily, in contrast to the toxic and fractious noise all around us. Sorry for jumping to any ill-conceived conclusions prematurely. to clean up, or nudge a past comment along; I appreciate Mentzer's ethos. He gets so much more right than these fetishists & sheep who just wanna buy big muscles and copy/paste superior accolades - thinking themselves competitors w anyone BUT self - could ever understand. They fixate on the one set deal and lose track of the diamonds and gold he left us, otherwise. [this is analogue to video topic, broadly, i believe, as well] We often misunderstand fundamental aspects of other people's philosophy and wisdom because we do not know how to anticipate it. Or expect rote answers... in a similar destined-to-fail-fashion. What u do needs to be true, if u intend to prove to who u live thru that that is you. (tryin to say somethin profound, here. But usually that stuff only translates for people who already know, y'know? Making things look good, or creating output simply to pander, rhyme, etc - does nothing for the utility that need be there if its to work as well as it sounds.) I'm sure Mike would have updated and enriched his understanding - as we have had the chance to do - if he were still with us. Studies help, and hinder. That is a good short hand for how futile absent endeavoring is. In-roads/recovery and a life other than weights - are still levels and layers of insight ahead of many a consensus. Per a personal and actual presence to the plans one may implement, that good-ole honest and rare focus is what creates the optimum. Experience and honesty go most of the way one can go. But, as quality guidance can change the goal-post's placement, per demonstration, & per results of studies and such, many seek this ahead of experience, rendering it's nuance & utility pointless as it will have nothing to cohere unto if found, irl. Hoping to find the solution to a complex personal problem in the minutiae of varied second-hand accounts, as an honest seeker- i.e. sets, reps, hyper budgeted diets, PEDs by rx, alone, means you already lost. Are u in your experience or someone else's? (etc. many questions matter more than the answers. In this i find a similarity of value in both you and others you may not agree with.) PS I get it. The Colorado sham is not good. Tracking people's incentives are crucial in assessing and appraising worthwhile guidance for self. But philosophy is the how, not the what - in thinking - and in that ethos - i find kinship, here. How ever many words more than i needed to actually say what matters here, added & subtracted; i hope it translates
If the brain can make you stronger by thinking about working out, I think it’s safe to say it’s based more or less on feel. Follow the basic evidence based rules, 15-30 sets per muscle group, deload week every 7th week, and push yourself. See what fits and what doesn’t
What Geof seems to miss is that RP defines failure as technical failure. So yeah, obviously the last rep of a 1RIR set is not going to be an all out grind if technique breakdown is your measurement of failure.
Yeah I watched some of Geofs stuff critiquing rp because I was looking for a contrary view. Came away with the conclusion thats he didn't really think through what RP is trying to do and applying his thoughts on training to RP and critiqueing from there.
@@nikolaswirz4022 Yeah his video on why cheating is good is cringe. Didn't even understand that RP acknowledges cheating may give higher stimulus but their argument is that its not worth the fatigue.
I always worked till failure and usually did full body workouts. In high school I'd skip school to get in my 6hour workouts. Hence I see why I had so many injuries. Since switching to 2x a week and some high rep light weights and deloads every 4-6 weeks it's been going great. Wish I knew you didn't have to go to failure every time 30yrs ago. And also understand what failure is. Not failing at 10 reps and still trying to hit that for 3-5sets while my muscles were shaking and relying on pure adrenaline to get through it. 😂 I think I'd have been better off RIR and be injury free with consistent training instead of taking months sometimes years off
Mike mentzers ideal routine has you go to failure but you're only doing 2-4 sets per workout and only working out once every 4-5 days. It's helped me grow quicker than ever.
Lol same. Fighting my instincts all the time to do more sets. It's kind of fun though to just track 1 set. Always hope to make a small improvement. I like the simplicity.
25:53 Jordan peters did try that it seems and for him it didn't seem to work? But who knows if that actually was the case or if he would've seen the benefits of the higher volume when he went back to lower volume training
Side note, just discovered Bromley, these videos are really eye-opening. I've been watching Jeff Nippard and Dr. Mike for years and I'm not sure I would have been totally ready for Bromley without that context. This video in particular, anyway. Amazing content, instant subscribe. Thank you Mr. Bromley.
I do volume and "to failure" but failure on the hypertrophy sets while the other half are power sets only the needed amount of reps for high weight 2-6 rep range. Working out 2-3 body parts per day 2-3 days a week but that's after 4years lifting in and just out of high school then 3 years of light calisthenics so fatigue doesn't set in most days
Very interesting point. I’ve been lifting for almost 40 yrs now-started powerlifting 4 yrs ago and while I can remember grinding out some reps when I was a lot younger I would often wonder lately why I don’t really grind like that anymore (for the most part) I usually either get the rep or I don’t it’s that cut and dry and now I realize it’s probably because my body knows how to utilize a lot more muscle recruitment like you said and I am explosive as well so it makes a ton of sense now
Side note:always trained to failure as a youngun and I rarely ever do now unless it’s a test,even then it’s usually a 9 to 9.5 RPE-in past 3 yrs I went from 340 to 500 squat,430 to 620 deadlift and bench?well we won’t talk about that rt now lol...I’m 52 currently
The answer is likely: the closer you train to your limit (failure), the more fatigue is produced-for muscles, in a linear fashion, but SYSTEMICALLY...exponentially. Having followed "HIT" sincerely, and Arnold-esque higher volume reluctantly (I had to admit that my HIT training wasn't working very well, despite me being "right", and the best debater, plus Ayn Rand), and getting smacked in the face by reality (I grew WAY more from my each bodypart 2x week for 15-20 sets than I did from HIT done precisely the way Jones stated). The issue is being talked around, but not being stated explicitly: Training is a stress that our body tries to adapt to if able. There are two main types of stressors from training in our context. 1. Muscular stress. How much "stress" is applied to the muscle itself, locally. This is impacted by volume at a threshold level of effort. 2. Systemic stress. How much "stress" is applied to the body in general. This is impacted by degree of intensity experienced, in total. In order to create muscular stress, a level of intensity is necessary. The issue: how to maximize MUSCULAR stress (which is relatively easy to recover from), while minimizing SYSTEMIC stress, which takes longer to recover from. Training to failure LIMITS the ability to create muscular stress. It reduces the amount of effective volume one can do consistently. If VOLUME was the key factor causing the need of longer recovery, then those doing HIT would be able to successfully train more often. Not less. Even assuming that more recovery is optimal. The ABILITY to repeatedly train would be there, so the issue would be people doing HIT but too often-certainly more than "volume" trainers not training quite as hard. So why is the advice from HIT advocates "train less and less for better results"? A system that (supposedly) minimizes systemic stress by keeping volume low should not plateau people training 2-3x week full body. Something that programs have as "deloads" might be better done as longer "realization" periods. Serious Growth/Big Beyond Belief was based on this (overreach/realize). In fact, the "deload" results that overtrained "volume" guys get when switching to lower volume, that seduces them, lasts more than one week. From observing the human bodies physical response to other stressors, I can't think of ONE where subjecting oneself to the maximal stress consistently produces the BEST results. Getting sunburned to a crisp is not the fastest way to tan. Putting your hand on belt sander is not the fastest/best way to get calloused hands. Breaking bones is not the best way to develop bone density. In all these examples, irritation above the norm but below maximal "intensity of effort" produces the best results. The answer is likely: the closer you train to your limit (failure), the more fatigue is produced...exponentially, not linearly. So recovery wise, keeping one in the tank is much less stressful systemically than going to all out failure. Of course, VOLUME of effort matters, but that doesn't imply that the highest effort should be enabled as the primary factor for results.
The above explains why, doing a *body part* one time per week with a lot of volume AND effort still causes fear of overtraining if the body part is dared trained 2x week. The question becomes: Does the MUSCULAR stress produced take a week to recover from? I don't know. One "saving" point of Bro splits is the amount of high tensile effort exercises is going to be lower normally, than a full body "basic" routine: Deadlifting and maybe rowing on back day is easier (system wise) than Deads/Rows/Chins/Squats/Bench Presses/Overhead Presses 3x week. As pure speculation: People like Bro splits because they are fun. People like HIT because it makes logical sense (but has a false premise). Both "work" because lifting weights "works", but if one has a system that has been around for 50 years, been tried by many people including pros, where you constantly have to CONVINCE others that it is best, and causes one to be in a layoff 6 mos out of the year...maybe not optimal.
Oh...final thought: When it comes to Weight training-though the goals are different, the concept of systemic vs muscular effort is not... where you can't fake it (power/strength sports for the sake of power/strength)...most people do not train to failure as a rule, all the time, minimizing volume to allow it. I'm sure if it worked best, then they would. "Yes, I want to break the world bench record, but I'm not man enough to do 1 all out set of Bench until I shit myself". The Bulgarians would not have been training 6x day, 6x week NOT to failure...they would have been training with 1 set every 4 days.
This might be a little silly of a question but what even is the point of sets. Why not just be hitting a certain amount of reps for an exercise and than increase it the following week. Is it really that much more optimal to break total reps into sets?
So, what if you have a program that has you doing high volume sometimes and low volume/high intensity other times? Would you be better off sticking with one or the other for an extended period, then switching, rather than just doing both?
Anecdotally I have been training to failure for about 4 months thats when I started lifting as an adult. That guy had a point over the months I have started recovering better the 1st 2months where alot harder to recover from than these last 2 and I feel this month is gonna be good baby😁. Also I am training for growth not strength.
Well the reason it works for heavily enhanced guys so well is their recovery capacity is sky high whereas drug free lifters have limited recovery abilities so training to failure often is dumb for drug free even if it's just one set at the end of a workout because doing so is going to fuck up work capacity on the following session due to still recovering from that hard set. Also keep in mind that a well written program might have someone going closer to 100% but it's always to the end of a meso cycle and volume is tapered off and training days reduced to accommodate higher intensity.
Lmao "Jeff really like that... that was a knee slapper" I died
He does not like Jeff Nippard lmao
@@CigEconomy based
Lol
He’s jealous of Nippard. It’s sad.
Thanks for the feature dude! I'd say it depends totally on context. If you can recover, the exercise in question, compound vs free weight, axial loading, schedule and time available, fiber type/ability or desire to grind out reps, frequency, level of strength, goals, etc.
Chest supported rear delt raises for an intermediate with high work and recovery capacity training with lower frequency on a busy schedule in the 15-20 rep range? Failure is very viable.
Low bar back squats for an elite superheavyweight powerlifter during a higher frequency training block in the 3-5 rep range? Failure makes zero sense.
I'm personally more hypertrophy focused and not that strong, plus have a good ability to recover, so I get a lot of mileage from near failure work especially on some movements. I have learned to respect it on squats and deadlifts in particular, though! Failure certainly isn't needed to grow.
I don't put much faith in failure OR volume research to be honest. It's just impossible to standardize the effort per set and individual experience and context are way more important anyway.
I do think that many of the RP sets weren't quite as close to failure, and indeed Jared confirmed afterwards that it was a 2 or 3 RIR week for him, which looks to be spot on. Assessing RPE/RIR is very tricky of course, and is quite individual. I've seen some formulas based on bar speed slow down but observationally there's a lot of individual variation.
Working on the hammies! Legs are up about an inch and a half since that video.
In hindsight they could have just actually failed on a set or two to demonstrate what the reps leading into that looked like. But I believe it; if "0" RIR is on the menu and you never actually miss..... speaks to where you are biasing.
Lol I'm not surprised about the hammies; you're looking filled out these days!
This is just something I have always been curious about. Haven't you said you were a long distance runner for a long time. So wouldn't that bias you to very endurance based modes of training. Wouldn't that be something to consider? Not trying to be rude just always wanted to ask.
@@jacobhenderson9605 not to speak for Geoffrey but having a great cardiovascular base also allows him to push his sets further. You can see that in his training, he takes sets further than a lot of people feel comfortable in doing so.
Part of that is being fit enough to do so.
@@Fazlifts Yeah I think that's part of it but his muscles are very accustomed to clearing out substrate deficits. So he can extend sets and push through harder reps because of it. Thats more what I am talking about of course good cardio helps but I think his muscles are predisposed to those kind of really slow reps in part because of his background.
@@jacobhenderson9605 yep for sure. I'd say extending sets like the way he does is definitely a trainable factor in my experience.
Good work on this Alex.
I don't put a great deal of faith in the current failure/non failure research. The wide split in what we see coming from the Fisher/Steele vs Schoenfeld labs tell us a story about the lack of consensus on what 'failure' actually means. In fact in my conversation with Dr Steele he mentions that he's working on unifying the definition for this very reason.
With regards to the slowing of reps, I do think Geoffrey has a point. However I will also say this is a trainable artefact of adaptation in my experience. When I was a beginner/early intermediate I definitely grinded a lot more. As I moved into advanced stages and beyond in Powerlifting I almost never grinded. It either went or didn't. Then years later it took me a long time to train to grind as a Bodybuilder. I cultivated the ability to grind more and more as I practiced higher rep sets and taking things closer to failure as part of Bodybuilding style training.
So, yes I do think it's an experience issue - however I do also think it's a trainable factor which then adds a lot of nuance to the whole failure vs non-failure conversation.
The only data I use to drive my own programming is the data I collect about myself. If I know what works and doesn’t work for me, that’s all I need as an individual.
Well said.
thats quite literally the best way to program and is the basis of his KONG Program. He uses RPE in that and says its a requirement you record your data and have an understanding of what your capable of lifting under different RPE's
thats not exactly a good way to go through a lot of things in life though. the reason we're so advanced is that we learn through previous generations mistakes (for the most part). for example you know not to eat certain poisonous food because previous generations learned the hard way. how do you that eating poison berries "doesnt work for you"? have you tried it yourself so you can collect that data?
This is BY FAR the best video on this topic I have ever seen. As a tall lifter I've had to figure out how to structure my training most efficiently. The back and forth between volume and intensity training as my body adapts to one is a staple I've had in my training for years now and it's amazing. Thank you Alex! Keep up the amazing content
You had me at 'Unnecessarily Deep Dive' ! Good to see the whiteboard is back!
Best gains I've ever made were leaving a couple in reserve for heavy compounds and failure, or technical failure on most sets of isolations. Chasing failure on everything just left me fatigued to the point where i started missing workouts every week.
This is why there is no "sure thing" when it comes to weight training, and everyone needs to experiment and find what works best for them, until it doesn't work anymore. Then the experiment starts back up.
Well, you know what Mike said. You need more rest days. Sometimes 8-10 days per body part when training to failure.
@@richbrake9910 😂😂😂
currently on this and making the best gains of my life and feeling good in and out of the gym. starting off with heavy compounds with a few in the tank, moving to iso dropsets to failure, i throw in partials at the end of my sets on muscle groups that i feel are lagging and want to bias. only on around 12 sets a week total(6 compound, 6 iso) and it feels great.
@@Ty-oe4dr I'm glad that it's working, and by you saying "currently", that tells me that you've tried other methods and this one is working best for you. That's what i always tell people. Try something for a while and see if it works for them, and you'll notice that you may have to try something new eventually. I was just thinking last night about rearranging my split, as I've plateued on the current chest/back/calves day 1, quads/hams day 2, arms/forearms/calves day 3, rest day 4, and repeat. I'm thinking of giving the old bro split another try. That split has fallen out of favor, but when i think back on it, the bro split or some variation of a bro split always gave me the best gains.
I’ll try to take your advice and approach my workouts like this the next week. I’m actually at the point where I don’t feel like my workouts are as good because I keep working to failure
Speaking to failure as a late stage intermediate, I'm getting a great response from the AMRAP final set on the Big 4 from your 'Bull Mastiff' program, currently on week 6 of the base phase. I especially like how the auto-regulation of weight for the next week determined from it works given that different people have different work capacities at different rep ranges. It's got the load dialed in perfect at this point for me now!
I absolutely loved your take on Mike's annoyingly perfect training style, absolutely hilarious.
Also that point about advanced lifters not being able to grind as much was one that I hadn't before, that was pretty cool.
I love these long videos of yours, keep them up.
That extremely deep dive was really useful. 36:04 are the summary notes. There is a lot for me to think about, to juggle variables and to optimize.
Most people, particularly the younger athletes I help train as a means of raising GPP for their sport, place way too much emphasis on individual sessions than the accumulation of training. They walk in and want to "see what they can lift". It is really hard to convey SRA to a 15 year old that just wants to see if he can bench 225 on day 1.
I don't train to failure because I have a life outside the gym. My first few years of lifting I would train to failure and I always felt like crap. Working a full time job and enjoying time with my family is for more important to me then getting a little bigger or getting a little stronger.
I'm a seasoned intermediate and I haven't failed on a compound lift in I don't know how long, but I routinely take my accessories/isolations to technical failure (without a lot of grinding). The smaller the muscle, the higher rep range I train in, generally, and the closer I go towards "failure." As I progress through a training block, I'll start shaving sets or variety of accessories so I can increase my performance on compounds (pseudo-mini-taper for my non-competitive gym bro aspirations), and my mesos for the compounds are 3 weeks (following your 5s routine from the H/L/M in Base Strength, minus the light day unless I have an extra day I can train). This seems to be working well for the time being, but I know eventually I'll need to reset and go back into a volume phase after my next "peak."
The general population seems to train one of two ways: 1) all out YOLO style, grinding out 1RM deadlift and bench weekly or 2) casual lackadaisical style RPE 5 or below. It's rare to see anyone following a training plan. And yes, I go to a run of the mill public gym.
Also, that guy grinding on the leg curls was pretty hilarious, I'm not sure how that's even possible. Hamstrings are so fast twitch dominant that I go from a slightly slowed rep to complete nothingness, and I'm not even that advanced.
I live in South Africa and we have daily power cuts of 2:30 hours per day three times a day. That's 7 and a half hours of no electricity 3-4 days per week. "Unnecessarily long" doesn't apply to me. Deep dive all you want, bro. I'm saving your vids and watching them in the darkness.
Chad
I live in sri lanka. Same situation here pal🤣
I was saying back then when GVS made that failure video that certain lifters fail more abruptly and can't just grind rep after rep. It appears that lifters that can grind more - usually with form degradation - are not the strongest lifter.
I'd agree with that, on the whole. Could also have to do with fiber type, to a certain extent. Also depends on the movement and strength curve as well as rep range. Worth noting that Jared actually clarified after that he was 2-3 RIR for that workout, whoever annotates the RP videos I think just threw in the 0-1RIR thing for everyone when it might not have actually been the case.
I noticed in my training I went from abrupt failures to grinding failures over a couple years. I also noticed I wasn’t very explosive when I was good at grinding.
@@Isaiah-ft5nx as a novice lifter, in the early days I was terrible at grinding. The weight would feel too heavy and I'd stop the lift. But these days I can grind alot. I mostly do so on deadlifts. But I think for me, and probably other novices, was getting past a mental block because going to failure is uncomfortable and intense and I had to get used to that feeling to be able to grind. I guess I'll not be able to grind as much as I get stronger
My problem with training to failure is psychological tbh. I did greyskull for a while and whenever I didn’t hit an AMRAP PR I felt discouraged, like I wasted the whole session
Same with 5/3/1 for me. Juggernaut worked better for me, probably something to do with purposefully leaving a few in the tank on certain waves/weeks until you hit the AMRAP on the "realization" phase.
I watched this Tom Platz video where he's got people squatting to failure with like 65% or something, and you can see people ready to quit after 15 or so but he just keeps pushing them and pushing them, I think the first guy got 28, which was pretty fucking nuts and I IMMEDIATELY wanted to get to the gym and do it for myself. I just couldn't wait to go do it. From personal experience, I think it can be plateau-breaking. not sure what your conclusion is yet but I will always include it in some way.
he was a bodybuilder not an elite lifter
@@heveyweightheveyweight5399 bro what are you on about he beat a legit powerlifter in rep work. A guy who had 100lbs + on him in singles.
@@heveyweightheveyweight5399The only difference is skills training.
Anecdotally I’ve noticed with my block periodization I get the best results from starting each block about 6-7 RPE/3-4 RIR and over the block move closer until the last week I train to RPE10/0RIR(sometimes 9/1 depending on the next block). Not staying away from RPE 10/0RIR no matter what, but only doing it intelligently to where I will be able to recover after
Im running a chest specialization rn, and run for fun. For me, i go until i feel "my next set would fail" then i switch exercizes! Getting maybe 10 sets of high quality reps 3 days a week!
Keeping a little in the tank deff helps my quality and alows me to train frequently!!
With subjects like this it’s always a “it depends” situation. If your biceps or shoulders never get that sore or sore at all then doing a drop set to failure for your last sets for that day wouldn’t be such a bad idea considering they’ll recover before they get hit again days later
Excellent content! Thanks for all the effort putting this informative and useful video together. Appreciated. This is what an RPE 10 video looks like. 💪
I like the habitual training to failure argument. I’m going to failure 4 days a week for over a year. It’s not the same as taking untrained people (or unadapted to training in that manner)and measuring their response to failure. I’ve spent several months adapting.
Great in depth content - thank you for the time and effort...
You absolutely nailed this one. Great content, Alex.
Thanks, Bromley. This is one of the most insightful videos that I’ve ever seen on the subject of building strength and size.
Some of my personal takeaways:
- program high volume blocks to set up high intensity blocks or competition prep.
- on “dumb” isolation exercises (e.g. lateral raises, curl machine, calves, etc), you better be going way beyond failure, i.e. drop sets and forced reps.
- on competition lifts, always have reps left in the tank, unless you are on the platform in competition. Treat training as skill practice.
- when using “smart” compound movements to build muscle (e.g. barbell rows, incline dumbbell press, high bar squats, etc.), most of the time you should leave reps in the tank and increase the number of sets-a mix of skill practice and muscular endurance.
- when training dumb exercises to failure and beyond, still try to have efficient form.
The best video I've seen from you. I appreciate you not slandering Jeff Nippard like in the other one saying he had a just barely above average physique
Lol when did I say that
Great! Really great perspective!
I totally agree with the 7-8 rpe being the sweet safe spot and how both higher intensity and higher volume are both tools that work well at different times.
I have noticed many of the "to failure is more effective" studies seem to use examples of isolation exercises.
Anyway everything here very well thought out and articulated well.
I am rereading your Base Strength book.
What has worked well for me (im 271 rn, about 25%bf and was natty until 3 weeks ago) was to just train my compound lifts as heavy as possible for the amount of reps I have planned. I wont go up in weight or do another rep if I think it will hurt me. If I think I can do more weight and still hit my rep goal Ill add more weight. If I am mid set and feel like I cant get all the reps I want, Ill rack the weight. My main focus with compound lifts is to just do as much as I can and not get hurt. My accessory work I will usually do 3 working sets. Set 1 = RPE 6-8, Set 2 = RPE 8, Set 3 = as many as possible and if I am past week 1 in a block I will do a superset/rest pause/drop set/etc. Its worked well for me. Ive been focused on powerlifting for 2 years so far (lifting for 4) and have a 435 squat, 285 bench, and a 500lbs deadlift. Whether or not you may think my lifts are good or not doesnt matter because I have consistently seen progress.
Dude this channel is gold
Best channel. Really love the balance between the "science" and "practical" approach.
I would say that failure is the inability to do another solid rep with good form. I've used that and for me it works. I tend to stay away from utilizing failure for things like squats or deads. I agree that using advanced fatigue techniques is very effective after form breaks down.
I used to try really hard on sets in the past absolute failure and i can say that it just doesn’t work as well to get stronger. Ive noticed that for deadlifts training far from failure gets me really strong fast and most things RPE 7-8 seems to be just right majority of the time. I wanna add. All this research on failure is bad anyways cause people who use PEDs definitely are different than natural. When your recovery is enhanced. Failure doesn’t fuck you up as bad
When I hit on girls at the gym.... I go all the way to failure. Science!!!
One of your best videos. More of this style would be awesome!
I couldn't imagine a better video on training to failure than this one. Thank you!
43:26 BOOM. That's it. Your channel is head and shoulders above most YTF for practical, usable info. Kudos and thanks for the great content. Takeaway, do whatever failure training that gives you results, that you can reasonably recover from, sometimes don't, the end. It's also funny to think where else in life do we do 100% effort on anything. DId you practice your ABCs every second of every day until you got it? Or did you devote specific amount of submax effort everyday? It's kind of the same thing
Great video! A lot of good questions were asked. This gives me a couple of things to consider and think about. Especially with regards to programming volume and intensity with sensitivity and tolerance in mind. Congrats, you just earned a new subscriber.
I do powerlifting with high frequency. For my isolation accessories, I try to start the cycle with rpe 9 or all the way to failure for the first set so that then, I can have a reliable number to work around with both within the session and the rest of the cycle.
Also I have periodized even the let's say back work compound movements, barbell row and pull up, so that I reduce the fatigue but go rpe 9-10 for lat pulldowns and seated cable rows. Full body compound movements, in my opinion, should be trained with consideration
Most people's mind isn't even strong enough to push to actual failure, so if you tell them to go to failure they usually leave 1-2 RIR. Which is good.
I'm guessing you're one of the few, ya? lol I'm just being snarky kinda, I mean I absolutely get what you mean and agree but I think terms like 'strong enough' are inappropriate, I think that while 'psychological game'/mindset certainly come into play, the reality is that genetically-based motor neuron control is the primary difference between those who can, and cannot, actually go to failure in the true(er) senses of the term.
23:20 cannot be overstated enough.
This video was incredible.
You can recover from failure training and high volume. The main problem with failure training is you end up exhausted after 2 exercises and the rest of your exercises aren’t trained that intense.
You have to try and conserve your energy to last the full workout, and as your ‘endurance’ increases, you can increase proximity to failure and add volume. Like being a marathon runner.
Also failure is hard to track, what weight/rep/set you fail on can wildly vary every week
Excellent info and well put.
Fantastic video. I appreciate your perspective on this.
Exactly. I’ve been training to failure (fail to finish a rep and then do some partials) most of my life and am very routine about it. I mean gut wrenching drives…. Don’t tend to get very sore anymore in the exercises I’m super used to doing it with depending on the periodization or phase
Dude. This guy is brilliant!Discovered Bromley through GVS only a few weeks ago. Wtf I’ve been missing out. 😂
Excellent explanation on how to train to failure.
Definitely agree with most of what you said. Paralysis by analysis or using "evidence based techniques" to excuse just not putting in hard enough work are definitely causing people to miss out on gain.
While your recommendation of working at about 7-8 RPE isn't perfect for all situations. In the scheme of building momentum block after block, year after year, staying injury free and just doing the work, it would take alot of time to construct a program that would really noticeable do better.
Ed Coan talks about it now, summation of work is what really matters. Train hard. But not so hard you can't so your next workout.
It is funny, whenever I train my squat at lower RPEs for more than 2 weeks my overall fitness lower so much my form and overall feel for the squat goes to shit. Even when compensated with extra sets. Tried sheiko for a while coming from almost a year of SBS-hyperyrophy, 8-12 reps mostly, last set to failure/RPE 10. I got more fatigued after doing 5*3 at 80% than 4*6 plus an amrap on the last set at the same weight. I have no idea why and I am also stronger when I mostly do >4 reps. However sheikos deadlift programming works perfectly. A lot of DL from blocks and up to knees.
I think part of this problem is dishonesty and ignorance in the fitness industry. Someone who has a big following who is genetically gifted and/or artificially enhanced may be able to just look at weights and put on decent size. And fitness studies seem like they are done by people who don’t even lift. It just adds to confusion.
Great video. Really enjoyed it.
For me it's really hard to NOT train to failure (to not be able to perform any additional rep, even with shit form). I always feel like there was something left in the tank that should not be there.
Exactly. I've trained to failure for almost 50 years and have never left gas in the tank, except occasionally because I was exhausted from not sleeping or something. I have to give my all to everything I do. In the 70s and 80s we all went to failure. If you didn't, you would probably stand out and not in a good way. The theory of it being better to not go to failure is relatively new, perhaps 15-20 years. If you watch videos of Arnold, Franco, and others, they almost always went to failure, even with higher volume.
Alex this is a very interesting & very exhaustive discussion on the subject. Thanks
Love this video, really opened my mind
So how would you go about progressivly improving/overload on certain exercises if you dont push yourself to your limit it order to break it?
I mean, how else would you progress?
Nice vid/breakdown.
Ive done about 3-4 workouts on a body part and one of them to failure. I did this to bicep and my biceps blew up! IMO its a game changer.
I train to failure because I know that my failure isn't actually failure.
I think that Nippard actually does a good job of balancing the evidence base and more intuitive (bro) stuff.
As for whether his programs are static rep ranges, I can't answer for most of them. The beginner one is but that makes sense for a beginner training plan.
My takeaway from this video as a novice lifter is to keep compound and free weight movements at RPE 7 and then, near the end of the session, use machines and cables to get to failure. Please correct me if I'm wrong to do this.
Based on what I've read and what I've experienced this is the best approach. Compounds shy of failure you can hit failure on everything else. It's all about risk. Going to failure on squats, deadlift and bench press is far more of a risk than going to failure on tricep pushdowns.
The “pain cave”. Damn. I like that.
I’m not aware of a study that took lifters through a meso using RIR or RPE scales and finishing at 0 or 10, then complete another meso so the lifters have a more accurate use of the scales to determine growth potential of the 2-3 or 7-8 levels of intensity. Novice and intermediate lifters often struggle to gauge the their ability to continue to produce force, let alone the use of the scales of effort.
Aside from using studies to determine personal efforts and volume, you are your own study and logging and use of progressive overload is still the priority.
Brawn book by Stewart McRobert, say take a week off than start back on abbreviated routine using big compound exercises. Start with 60% of your 1 rep max do 3set of 5reps after 2 progressively heavier set.. Each week add 2.5-5kg per week. As intensity increases you may need to drop a set or do 3 sets of 5R, 5R, 2Reps etc
It's nothing flashy you just have to be consistent and away you go. Your in that 90% range long enough to milk out a new PR.
The start of the cycle your creating some volume and hypertrophy. Could stay in the 70-80% range for awhile longer before going for a PR.
It's just linear progression, what Ed Coan did.
Dang two in a row. I’m stoked.
thanks for another amazing video
Good video
My option training to failure is dangerous it opens the door to injury. Quality of form is extremely important. Quality over Quantity!
Central Nervous System damage can happen. Always keep 2 reps in the tank always with proper form
uploaded : 2 min ago
comments : 14 hours ago
Patreons?
@@drodiger i didn't know how it worked 😂. thanks
@@drodiger u are patreon member?
@@PhiyackYuh no 😁 possible explanation, since he can make video visible through private link in patreon group and than public hours later...
Great vid !
To me, for certain exercises, one rep in reserve feels almost the same as seven reps left in reserve, and failure comes on as a surprise - either I can't do any more, or maybe I can grind out a couple more with severely degraded technique.
From my professional point of view, too many people are training too lightly versus what they want to achieve.
I understand that, however, because like you mentioned; training to failure (training harder than one thinks they can) can show to the person that they *can* go harder, they *can* do more, and they *can* actually achieve their goals.
But to "full failure"?
There are pros and there are cons, but I'd advice against doing it all the time, because it is so tough to recover from such a workout and most people do not need such a thing.
What about symmetry and push/pull on muscles 💪?
I train to failure regularly. I recover and am probably stronger than both Jeff nippard and israetel. Also depends on the lift a little. I take bench to failure often, I don't really squat to failure because I don't always have spotters but will take the belt squat machine to failure. I do take deadlifts to failure occasionally but not if I feel my form slipping. I don't take glute ham raise to failure because I don't want to rip a hamstring off the bone.
I found that taking one muscle to failure each session worked for me without overdoing it and being useless at work. I rotate each muscle group so everything goes to failure twice a month.
When i do light reps with fast tempo eventually I run into my lactate threshold and cramps begin to happen after 20-25ish reps. They quickly fade and I can do the same 20-25ish reps before the next pain. I wonder if this may contribute to a lactate threshold training that happens in HIIT and give more muscular endurance or improve VO2 max.
Another great one.
I will say though I think saying 'Keep a few in the tank' is autimatically assuming the trainee knows what that means. Most people dont know how to push to failure so saying stop before I think turns the few into 7 or 8.
@@jacobhenderson9605 in all fairness, if you're getting your information from Bromley, you probably aren't the average gym goer.
@@justingreek6428 Yeah thats fair.
Also that overstretched pigeon position that Jeff did put the dtrain off the muscle and onto the tendons and ligaments. The muscles are relaxed at that point, rather than kept under tension. On top of the injury risk, it's not the most efficient technique for muscle building.
I classify this as unnecessary overthinking
Seems like on the average science-based video there's actually an inverse relationship between the amount of actionable information and the number of references to Shizenberg et al.
When they do give out concrete guidelines it's basically not much different than the bro-science. But its still fun to watch them try as an abject lesson in just how freaking hard it is to set up a good experiment and generate inference from data analysis.
Where does the point of finishing return get weighed?
Not to gotcha or anything, but a posteriori is the term. a priori is its opposite (i.e reasoning not based overtly on empirical data and/or experience, but on theoretical deductions).
Thanks for the great video!
I must, at this point- after having had the chance to catch up on more of your videos and to think on the comparative bits of info out here more fully - say:
Your process and motivation are easily appreciated, testable, & sound on all the right levels. Especially, but not necessarily, in contrast to the toxic and fractious noise all around us. Sorry for jumping to any ill-conceived conclusions prematurely.
to clean up, or nudge a past comment along; I appreciate Mentzer's ethos. He gets so much more right than these fetishists & sheep who just wanna buy big muscles and copy/paste superior accolades - thinking themselves competitors w anyone BUT self - could ever understand. They fixate on the one set deal and lose track of the diamonds and gold he left us, otherwise. [this is analogue to video topic, broadly, i believe, as well] We often misunderstand fundamental aspects of other people's philosophy and wisdom because we do not know how to anticipate it. Or expect rote answers... in a similar destined-to-fail-fashion.
What u do needs to be true, if u intend to prove to who u live thru that that is you. (tryin to say somethin profound, here. But usually that stuff only translates for people who already know, y'know? Making things look good, or creating output simply to pander, rhyme, etc - does nothing for the utility that need be there if its to work as well as it sounds.)
I'm sure Mike would have updated and enriched his understanding - as we have had the chance to do - if he were still with us.
Studies help, and hinder. That is a good short hand for how futile absent endeavoring is.
In-roads/recovery and a life other than weights - are still levels and layers of insight ahead of many a consensus.
Per a personal and actual presence to the plans one may implement, that good-ole honest and rare focus is what creates the optimum. Experience and honesty go most of the way one can go. But, as quality guidance can change the goal-post's placement, per demonstration, & per results of studies and such, many seek this ahead of experience, rendering it's nuance & utility pointless as it will have nothing to cohere unto if found, irl. Hoping to find the solution to a complex personal problem in the minutiae of varied second-hand accounts, as an honest seeker- i.e. sets, reps, hyper budgeted diets, PEDs by rx, alone, means you already lost. Are u in your experience or someone else's? (etc. many questions matter more than the answers. In this i find a similarity of value in both you and others you may not agree with.)
PS I get it. The Colorado sham is not good. Tracking people's incentives are crucial in assessing and appraising worthwhile guidance for self.
But philosophy is the how, not the what - in thinking - and in that ethos - i find kinship, here.
How ever many words more than i needed to actually say what matters here, added & subtracted; i hope it translates
If the brain can make you stronger by thinking about working out, I think it’s safe to say it’s based more or less on feel. Follow the basic evidence based rules, 15-30 sets per muscle group, deload week every 7th week, and push yourself. See what fits and what doesn’t
Solid ass video Alex really appreciated your insights as an experienced coach and lifter :)
What Geof seems to miss is that RP defines failure as technical failure. So yeah, obviously the last rep of a 1RIR set is not going to be an all out grind if technique breakdown is your measurement of failure.
Yeah I watched some of Geofs stuff critiquing rp because I was looking for a contrary view. Came away with the conclusion thats he didn't really think through what RP is trying to do and applying his thoughts on training to RP and critiqueing from there.
@@timluo6120 Don’t get me wrong, I like Geoffs content but IMO he’s in over his head when he’s trying to "criticise" RP.
@@nikolaswirz4022 Yeah his video on why cheating is good is cringe. Didn't even understand that RP acknowledges cheating may give higher stimulus but their argument is that its not worth the fatigue.
I always worked till failure and usually did full body workouts. In high school I'd skip school to get in my 6hour workouts. Hence I see why I had so many injuries. Since switching to 2x a week and some high rep light weights and deloads every 4-6 weeks it's been going great. Wish I knew you didn't have to go to failure every time 30yrs ago. And also understand what failure is. Not failing at 10 reps and still trying to hit that for 3-5sets while my muscles were shaking and relying on pure adrenaline to get through it. 😂 I think I'd have been better off RIR and be injury free with consistent training instead of taking months sometimes years off
Mike mentzers ideal routine has you go to failure but you're only doing 2-4 sets per workout and only working out once every 4-5 days. It's helped me grow quicker than ever.
Lol same. Fighting my instincts all the time to do more sets. It's kind of fun though to just track 1 set. Always hope to make a small improvement. I like the simplicity.
25:53 Jordan peters did try that it seems and for him it didn't seem to work? But who knows if that actually was the case or if he would've seen the benefits of the higher volume when he went back to lower volume training
I'll watch these kind of videos and still feel like idk what I'm supposed to do.
@18:03 "Let's go a little bit meta" he says with a straight face 1/3rd of the way through a literal meta-meta-meta analysis video 😂
Side note, just discovered Bromley, these videos are really eye-opening. I've been watching Jeff Nippard and Dr. Mike for years and I'm not sure I would have been totally ready for Bromley without that context. This video in particular, anyway. Amazing content, instant subscribe. Thank you Mr. Bromley.
Legendary presentation
Holy great info here. Subbed
Volume and intensity are like calories and macros or bulking and cutting. Adjust for your goals are the time.
I do volume and "to failure" but failure on the hypertrophy sets while the other half are power sets only the needed amount of reps for high weight 2-6 rep range. Working out 2-3 body parts per day 2-3 days a week but that's after 4years lifting in and just out of high school then 3 years of light calisthenics so fatigue doesn't set in most days
Very interesting point. I’ve been lifting for almost 40 yrs now-started powerlifting 4 yrs ago and while I can remember grinding out some reps when I was a lot younger I would often wonder lately why I don’t really grind like that anymore (for the most part) I usually either get the rep or I don’t it’s that cut and dry and now I realize it’s probably because my body knows how to utilize a lot more muscle recruitment like you said and I am explosive as well so it makes a ton of sense now
Side note:always trained to failure as a youngun and I rarely ever do now unless it’s a test,even then it’s usually a 9 to 9.5 RPE-in past 3 yrs I went from 340 to 500 squat,430 to 620 deadlift and bench?well we won’t talk about that rt now lol...I’m 52 currently
The answer is likely: the closer you train to your limit (failure), the more fatigue is produced-for muscles, in a linear fashion, but SYSTEMICALLY...exponentially. Having followed "HIT" sincerely, and Arnold-esque higher volume reluctantly (I had to admit that my HIT training wasn't working very well, despite me being "right", and the best debater, plus Ayn Rand), and getting smacked in the face by reality (I grew WAY more from my each bodypart 2x week for 15-20 sets than I did from HIT done precisely the way Jones stated). The issue is being talked around, but not being stated explicitly: Training is a stress that our body tries to adapt to if able. There are two main types of stressors from training in our context. 1. Muscular stress. How much "stress" is applied to the muscle itself, locally. This is impacted by volume at a threshold level of effort. 2. Systemic stress. How much "stress" is applied to the body in general. This is impacted by degree of intensity experienced, in total. In order to create muscular stress, a level of intensity is necessary. The issue: how to maximize MUSCULAR stress (which is relatively easy to recover from), while minimizing SYSTEMIC stress, which takes longer to recover from. Training to failure LIMITS the ability to create muscular stress. It reduces the amount of effective volume one can do consistently. If VOLUME was the key factor causing the need of longer recovery, then those doing HIT would be able to successfully train more often. Not less. Even assuming that more recovery is optimal. The ABILITY to repeatedly train would be there, so the issue would be people doing HIT but too often-certainly more than "volume" trainers not training quite as hard. So why is the advice from HIT advocates "train less and less for better results"? A system that (supposedly) minimizes systemic stress by keeping volume low should not plateau people training 2-3x week full body. Something that programs have as "deloads" might be better done as longer "realization" periods. Serious Growth/Big Beyond Belief was based on this (overreach/realize). In fact, the "deload" results that overtrained "volume" guys get when switching to lower volume, that seduces them, lasts more than one week. From observing the human bodies physical response to other stressors, I can't think of ONE where subjecting oneself to the maximal stress consistently produces the BEST results. Getting sunburned to a crisp is not the fastest way to tan. Putting your hand on belt sander is not the fastest/best way to get calloused hands. Breaking bones is not the best way to develop bone density. In all these examples, irritation above the norm but below maximal "intensity of effort" produces the best results. The answer is likely: the closer you train to your limit (failure), the more fatigue is produced...exponentially, not linearly. So recovery wise, keeping one in the tank is much less stressful systemically than going to all out failure. Of course, VOLUME of effort matters, but that doesn't imply that the highest effort should be enabled as the primary factor for results.
The above explains why, doing a *body part* one time per week with a lot of volume AND effort still causes fear of overtraining if the body part is dared trained 2x week. The question becomes: Does the MUSCULAR stress produced take a week to recover from? I don't know. One "saving" point of Bro splits is the amount of high tensile effort exercises is going to be lower normally, than a full body "basic" routine: Deadlifting and maybe rowing on back day is easier (system wise) than Deads/Rows/Chins/Squats/Bench Presses/Overhead Presses 3x week. As pure speculation: People like Bro splits because they are fun. People like HIT because it makes logical sense (but has a false premise). Both "work" because lifting weights "works", but if one has a system that has been around for 50 years, been tried by many people including pros, where you constantly have to CONVINCE others that it is best, and causes one to be in a layoff 6 mos out of the year...maybe not optimal.
Oh...final thought: When it comes to Weight training-though the goals are different, the concept of systemic vs muscular effort is not... where you can't fake it (power/strength sports for the sake of power/strength)...most people do not train to failure as a rule, all the time, minimizing volume to allow it. I'm sure if it worked best, then they would. "Yes, I want to break the world bench record, but I'm not man enough to do 1 all out set of Bench until I shit myself". The Bulgarians would not have been training 6x day, 6x week NOT to failure...they would have been training with 1 set every 4 days.
I'm 4 to 8 reps, hit 8s raise the weight, back to 4.
P.S. On squats I put a plate under my heels, helps sooo much with the proper posture. IMHO
This might be a little silly of a question but what even is the point of sets. Why not just be hitting a certain amount of reps for an exercise and than increase it the following week. Is it really that much more optimal to break total reps into sets?
So, what if you have a program that has you doing high volume sometimes and low volume/high intensity other times? Would you be better off sticking with one or the other for an extended period, then switching, rather than just doing both?
Anecdotally I have been training to failure for about 4 months thats when I started lifting as an adult. That guy had a point over the months I have started recovering better the 1st 2months where alot harder to recover from than these last 2 and I feel this month is gonna be good baby😁. Also I am training for growth not strength.
I like to train my sets to a failed rep because I am dumb and don’t trust myself to honestly estimate reps in reserve
Well the reason it works for heavily enhanced guys so well is their recovery capacity is sky high whereas drug free lifters have limited recovery abilities so training to failure often is dumb for drug free even if it's just one set at the end of a workout because doing so is going to fuck up work capacity on the following session due to still recovering from that hard set. Also keep in mind that a well written program might have someone going closer to 100% but it's always to the end of a meso cycle and volume is tapered off and training days reduced to accommodate higher intensity.