Adarq.org

oh man i love greg nuckols, had forgotten about him. thanks for posting this.

regarding training to failure

https://twitter.com/BradSchoenfeld/status/1185669914079703041

so keeping a few reps in the tank can allow you to do more volume

Quote from: CoolColJ on October 22, 2019, 01:14:42 am

regarding training to failure

https://twitter.com/BradSchoenfeld/status/1185669914079703041

so keeping a few reps in the tank can allow you to do more volume

its behind a paywall :/

PDF here

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/331718773_Does_Training_to_Failure_Maximize_Muscle_Hypertrophy

^^^ That's why I don't do 4 sets of 12 anymore or whatever. It's always something like 12-10-8-6 with a RIR of 1 on each set. I realized one day that if I do 4x12, then I have so much more left in the tank in the first couple of sets and maybe I'm not stimulating my muscles as much anymore

however i do want to switch up my training and add more high volume accessory work, especially while on my bulk currently. so thanks for making this thread!

recommend you guys download and read this - some good studies here that are relevant to most of us

https://s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/strengtheory/MASS/Best+Of+Issue/MASS+Best+Of+2019.pdf?__s=xxxxxxx,qucxsmqo9jac6gigj9xw

training to failure really zaps the vertical jump for quite a while

Leave the Gym with a  Little Left in the TankStudy Reviewed: Time Course of Recovery From Resistance Exercise With Different Set Configurations. Pareja-Blanco et al. (2018)BY MICHAEL C. ZOURDOSWe’ve written about failure training a few times, but this study was a monster. It compared 10 different conditions and the time course of recovery with five conditions to failure and five conditions ranging between a 5-8RPE. So how close to failure should you train?

1. This paper examined the time course of recovery between training to failure and leaving some reps in the tank across different repetition ranges.2. In general, training to failure elongated recovery time versus non-failure training, with higher rep sessions to failure being particularly fatiguing.3. When putting this study into context, it provides evidence that it may be wise to avoid failure training, at least in some sessions, to meet weekly volume and frequency recommendations

Power Training or Speed Work
for Some, But Not All?
Study Reviewed: Increased Rate of Force Development During Periodized
Maximum Strength and Power Training is Highly Individual. Peltonen et al. (2018)
B Y M I C H A E L C . Z O U R D O S
MASS has already covered individualization, but new information
is emerging. In this study, rate of force development was
maximized by some people through heavy training and by others
through explosive training – but why? And what impact does
that have for strength and hypertrophy?

1. This study examined how some people respond better to power-type training and
some respond better to more traditional strength-type training.
2. To examine the responses to each type of training, 14 males trained for 10 weeks
with strength-type training and then for 10 weeks with power-type training.
3. Six people improved rate of force development only in the strength block, while four
people improved rate of force development only in the power block. Four people –
“non-responders” – did not improve rate of force development at all. Importantly,
all responders increased hypertrophy and strength to the same degree despite not
improving rate of force development

1. Some people improve rate of force development better through typical strength
training, while others improve it better through power-type training. Further, some
(non-responders) don’t improve rate of force development at all.
2. Non-responders also struggle to improve hypertrophy, but in the short term,
strength is not affected.
3. Those who are “maximum-strength responders” may not need to include power
or speed training; however, those who are power responders should likely include
power or speed training to maximize rate of force development, which can improve
neural efficiency and, subsequently, 1RM

This bit of this second study makes you think that muscle mass is the key....
So strength gains via neural adaption don't apply to RFD

Non-responders did not experience any
significant change in muscle cross-sec-
tional area despite training for 20 weeks;
however, non-responders had similar
strength gains to both responder groups.

Cross-sectional area measurements
showed hypertrophy (+12%) across all
responders with no difference (p>0.05)
between strength or power responders;
however, non-responders did not expe-
rience any hypertrophy (p>0.05). De-
spite greater hypertrophy in respond-
ers, strength increased similarly in all
groups (maximum strength responders:
+12.38%, power responders: +15.17%,
non-responders: +16.11%)

Some ex phys folks working at Cern just released some very compelling research captured in the infographic below

So you get 90% of the benefit of a set by stopping 4 reps from failure in a 10RM load...



Israetel has been talking about this too, (stimulus to fatigue ratio)

rpdrmike
Because sets done with more than 5 reps in reserve cause so little growth but cause some fatigue, they aren’t the best way to train in most cases. And while sets taken to total failure or beyond cause the best growth, they also cause so much fatigue that training with them consistently is not sustainable. It’s likely that a middle ground of training, mostly done between 3 and 1 reps in reserve (RIR), is where you can benefit by training most often. Perhaps starting your mesocycles at around 4 RIR and matching reps week to week as you slowly add more weight to the bar and thus lowering your RIR until you reach failure is a viable form of training. After failure, you deload to drop fatigue, and start a new mesocycle at 4 RIR or so.

Interesting stuff. Makes me want to play around with like 6 sets of 6 with stuff left in the tank every set. Would probably feel incredible after the workout too without having the fatigue, but having the endorphins etc

That's how I'm squatting right now, pretty much - I do less than 50% of the rep maxes at 70-75-80%, cycling between each intensity range, per workout
Although I may drop the 80% range soon, and use 65% sets of 7, dropping to 6 after 3 sets, 70% sets of 5, dropping to 4 after 3 sets... and 75% sets of 4 dropping to 3 after 3 sets.
I can feel the bar speed slow down, and a bit more strain right at that point, which is when the largest, fastest, and less fatigue resistant muscle fibers are starting to drop out, hence the slower bar speed.

Training this way suits me better, as heavy loads spook me, and burn me out fast, and cause me more aches and pains.
Plus I train after BBall and jumping

So in theory if you stop all work sets at that point, your only developing the largest and fastest fibers, while keeping the slower ones mostly untrained...
So they are less likely to get in the way of explosiveness, and receive less damage so recovery overall is also better
That's the training model I'm subscribing to right now, anyway.