Who here trains to failure and who does not?

[Fatpanda]

I'm not lying. I think a guy named Behms did this study in 1995 called “Neuromuscular Implications and Applications of Resistance Training”. I don't have the entire study with me right now, but I remember I read it. This is a quote from it:

"Maximum strength training methods with their high intensity resistance but low volume of work do NOT elicit substantial muscle hypertrophy. Therefore a higher volume of work, (greater than 6 reps, with multiple sets) [emphasis and references are his] is needed to ensure a critical concentration of intracellular amino acids to stimulate protein synthesis” (Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, 1995: p271)

my mistake, sorry for calling you a liar.

The guy IS 100% wrong though as working out is not needed to ensure a critical concentration of aminos to stimulate synthesis - simply eating 20g of any complete protein is all thats required to maximally stimulate synthesis.

also his claim of high intensity/low volume not building muscle is wrong too - dorian yates ? jean pierre fux, mentzer, viator ? colorado experiment ? countless powerlifters etc

the guy may have simply been reading the 'mistaken' studies of the time.

like i said - i'm not saying high volume doesn't work, just that i do not believe its efficient.

[tendonitis]

my mistake, sorry for calling you a liar.

The guy IS 100% wrong though as working out is not needed to ensure a critical concentration of aminos to stimulate synthesis - simply eating 20g of any complete protein is all thats required to maximally stimulate synthesis.

also his claim of high intensity/low volume not building muscle is wrong too - dorian yates ? jean pierre fux, mentzer, viator ? colorado experiment ? countless powerlifters etc

the guy may have simply been reading the 'mistaken' studies of the time.

like i said - i'm not saying high volume doesn't work, just that i do not believe its efficient.

Panda, I've read several times now about the 20 grams of protein being the magic number needed to "flip the switch" of protein synthesis. I think maybe it was Layne that said he did some work on this also.

I'm curious as to if the 20 gram number is the threshhold amount to maximally turn on the machinery but more protein will be needed in addition to the 20 to maximally get to full recovery. Or is the 20 grams enough to turn on the machinery and achieve maximum muscular recovery?
 And does that number apply to anyone, any size? Has the research gone that far yet?
If so, wouldn't that mean that even a 300 lber would only need 120 grams of protein a day? Is that where the research is leading us? Great news if it is.
And is there also a threshhold leucine amount that should also be met in the 20 grams?
Thanks.

[HTexan]

failure every set. I adjust the weight so failure is at the number of reps i want to do.

[Fatpanda]

the names of the main 2 new studies are on my first post of this thread 9 if you read through the thread i mention a few interesting studies that can/could back these 2 new ones up:

http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?topic=345025.0

but basically the main one compares 5, 10 20, and 40g of protein and recorded synthesis rates, breakdown rates etc

it found that 20g ( actually slightly less than 20g) maximally stimulates protein synthesis, with a very small amount of the protein burned as energy. 40g stimulated synthesis the same, but much more was burned as energy (so just over 20g wasted - as it was treated like a carb and used for fuel)

the other study compared 30g of beef with 90g of beef - again synthesis rates were the same for both sizes, but the most of the 90g of beef was burned off as energy.

[tendonitis]

the names of the main 2 new studies are on my first post of this thread 9 if you read through the thread i mention a few interesting studies that can/could back these 2 new ones up:

http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?topic=345025.0

but basically the main one compares 5, 10 20, and 40g of protein and recorded synthesis rates, breakdown rates etc

it found that 20g ( actually slightly less than 20g) maximally stimulates protein synthesis, with a very small amount of the protein burned as energy. 40g stimulated synthesis the same, but much more was burned as energy (so just over 20g wasted - as it was treated like a carb and used for fuel)

the other study compared 30g of beef with 90g of beef - again synthesis rates were the same for both sizes, but the most of the 90g of beef was burned off as energy.

Good thread, very interesting info.

[JP_RC]

my mistake, sorry for calling you a liar.

The guy IS 100% wrong though as working out is not needed to ensure a critical concentration of aminos to stimulate synthesis - simply eating 20g of any complete protein is all thats required to maximally stimulate synthesis.

also his claim of high intensity/low volume not building muscle is wrong too - dorian yates ? jean pierre fux, mentzer, viator ? colorado experiment ? countless powerlifters etc

the guy may have simply been reading the 'mistaken' studies of the time.

like i said - i'm not saying high volume doesn't work, just that i do not believe its efficient.

Its ok, no problem.
Like you said before, there are studies out there that contradict each other and also empirical results that show both high and low volume work. As far as the examples you gave, for every pro bb that supposedly grew on low volume there are MUCH more that grew on traditional high volume training. If you really want to look at pros, then most of them used/use high volume to grow.

Now, I said "supposedly grew on low volume" because many of them really didn't do it. Where you aware that Viator always did more volume during his time with Jones when the session was over or when Jones left the room? Viator said this and also said that when he trained with Mentzer back in the       70s, they would do twice as much work compared to what Mentzer would write about.

I just found that high volume works best for me, if low volume works for you that's great. I really can't take anything away form it, if its working for you.

[JP_RC]

the names of the main 2 new studies are on my first post of this thread 9 if you read through the thread i mention a few interesting studies that can/could back these 2 new ones up:

http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?topic=345025.0

but basically the main one compares 5, 10 20, and 40g of protein and recorded synthesis rates, breakdown rates etc

it found that 20g ( actually slightly less than 20g) maximally stimulates protein synthesis, with a very small amount of the protein burned as energy. 40g stimulated synthesis the same, but much more was burned as energy (so just over 20g wasted - as it was treated like a carb and used for fuel)

the other study compared 30g of beef with 90g of beef - again synthesis rates were the same for both sizes, but the most of the 90g of beef was burned off as energy.

This is very interesting information, thanks for posting it.

[Fatpanda]

no problem jp.

glad you found it helpful.

it feels weird not to argue with someone on here, especially after attacking you.

Thank you for staying rational and polite.

attacking anyone who disagrees with me is a bad habit i have picked up here, as normally its an offensive defence 

sorry again for any offense.

[coltrane]

Training to failure only works if you're on gear, it's not designed for naturals.

Training that intense completely tears down the muscle, without an anabolic agent to recuperate it overnight your screwing yourself over.

Training each bodypart once a week provides plenty of recoup for the natural bodybuilder, whether doing high volume or not. 

Been a natty almost 19 years now.  Never been on.  I train each bodypart once a week.. a lot of sets going to failure.  I completely believe this is the way a natural SHOULD train.  As natty, you need to annihilate the targeted muscle and allow for recoup until the next week. 

[tbombz]

Yea something along those lines.

Unless you have a strict %age routine for an upcoming comp/goal then I don't see why you can diverge and have some fun now and again. Small and gradual overload is good but we also sometimes can surprise ourselves by trying something we are not sure of and smoking it. Gives you confidence to keep going on and motivation also.

I think teh big leap up in weight(providing it is not absurdly large) can really stimulate new growth.

Just my $0.02

cool, i tried that yesterday. it worked.


i think the key here is progressive overload, with periodized volume/failure/rep ranges. goign back and forth between periods of high volume/sub failure/mulitple rep ranges and periods of low volume/failure/low reps. whaddya think

[James Blunt]

When I smoke some weed I do some serious failure sets. I drop set for up to 5 sets sometimes.

I'll just lay out weights and lift them. Lift and not think about it. And just go until it burns badly.
It's not as interesting when I don't smoke weed though. And the same level of burn is tough to get when I'm not as focused.

The greatest thing about it is understanding that your mind is overcoming your body telling it to stop. When you push past that it's extremely satisfying. It become addicting.

[Fatpanda]

cool, i tried that yesterday. it worked.


i think the key here is progressive overload, with periodized volume/failure/rep ranges. goign back and forth between periods of high volume/sub failure/mulitple rep ranges and periods of low volume/failure/low reps. whaddya think

sounds like hst.

which is a great system, gave me the best gains i ever had, i was the biggest i've ever been too.

but i burned out very badly.

[tbombz]

sounds like hst.

which is a great system, gave me the best gains i ever had, i was the biggest i've ever been too.

but i burned out very badly.

actually i wasnt talking about anyting similar to hst. hadnt even looked into it befor eyou mentioned it. i have, and it looks like a good plan. you got burnt out on it? were you doing "strategic deconditioning" for 9-12 days every 2 months?? (taking a break from weights)  were you doing a few high rep sets on each muscle every workout in order to prevent injuries??

[suckmymuscle]

If possible can you also post a pic with your answer.

  Of course I go to failure. Why wouldn't I go to faiilure? You just make a set a lot more productive if you do the set to failure, and since the amount of glycogen in the muscles is limited, it makes sense to stimulate growth with as little sets as possible - because when glycogen runs out, the muscles don't use fat but the muscle tissue itself as a source of energy. But I don't believe in one set to failure.

SUCKMYMUSCLE

[Master Blaster]

When I smoke some weed I do some serious failure sets. I drop set for up to 5 sets sometimes.

I'll just lay out weights and lift them. Lift and not think about it. And just go until it burns badly.
It's not as interesting when I don't smoke weed though. And the same level of burn is tough to get when I'm not as focused.

The greatest thing about it is understanding that your mind is overcoming your body telling it to stop. When you push past that it's extremely satisfying. It become addicting.

Very cool. Post of the day. 

[Ursus]

cool, i tried that yesterday. it worked.


i think the key here is progressive overload, with periodized volume/failure/rep ranges. goign back and forth between periods of high volume/sub failure/mulitple rep ranges and periods of low volume/failure/low reps. whaddya think

I agree. When I smoke a few weeks of going real heavy then I will drop down to a less volume and/or sets even with teh same weight. The workouts are easy and fun and it gives my body a chance to recover without losing strength etc. Then I use it as a platform so that I can rebuild my previous levels of strength and size.

The longer and more I train the more I realise just how many tools are at my disposal. The ethos of my training however for size and strength is to get big and strong at the big basic movements and try to improve in the otehrs when/if I can.

[Master Blaster]

I agree. When I smoke a few weeks of going real heavy then I will drop down to a less volume and/or sets even with teh same weight. The workouts are easy and fun and it gives my body a chance to recover without losing strength etc. Then I use it as a platform so that I can rebuild my previous levels of strength and size.

The longer and more I train the more I realise just how many tools are at my disposal. The ethos of my training however for size and strength is to get big and strong at the big basic movements and try to improve in the otehrs when/if I can.

Sticky this fucking thread

[Fatpanda]

actually i wasnt talking about anyting similar to hst. hadnt even looked into it befor eyou mentioned it. i have, and it looks like a good plan. you got burnt out on it? were you doing "strategic deconditioning" for 9-12 days every 2 months?? (taking a break from weights)  were you doing a few high rep sets on each muscle every workout in order to prevent injuries??

yes i was taking the break - just made me reset and go back to the strength i was at the start of the previous cycle. i don't agree with 'strategic deconditioning' (some shoddy science behind it) but i stuck to the plan.

same with the higher reps - hell i believe they were the reason i burnt out - those high rep sets killed me.

[Ursus]

About 4 weeks ago on the biggest DB's in my gym I could shoulder press them for 4 sets of 4-6 reps

Today I got 1x9 2x8. i also did a drop set of 14 reps with the 105's. The drop set and working sets were both up from last week.

[coltrane]

About 4 weeks ago on the biggest DB's in my gym I could shoulder press them for 4 sets of 4-6 reps

Today I got 1x9 2x8. i also did a drop set of 14 reps with the 105's. The drop set and working sets were both up from last week.

What is the poundage of the biggest db's?

[Master Blaster]

What is the poundage of the biggest db's?

The pink ones go all the way up to 20 pounds. 

[coltrane]

There's NO way Ursus is doing the pink dumbbells for 8 reps and then drop setting with the 105's. 


 

[Ursus]

What is the poundage of the biggest db's?

115lbs. They are thick handled which makes them feel trickier.

[tbombz]

panda- were you going to failure on those high rep sets, or anywhere close? i think that your just supposed to do a few light sets and squeeze to get the blood pumping in there, not exhuast the muscle.




goudy/ursus- how many work sets do you usually do for each muscle, and how frequently do you train each muscle? 

[Ursus]

I now train each bodypart 1x week.
M - Chesta dn tris
T - Back and bis
Th - Shoulders and traps
F - legs and lowerback

 I do favour high volume however I also lie to lift some big weights (relatively) if I can on 1-2 main exercises. The volume on shoulder and leg day isa  little less and once I do my bread and butter exercises I do a lot of volume getting as much of a pump as I can.

E.g My main lifts on Chest and Tri day would be flat bench, incline bench, incline DB and weighted dips. I make up the other 3-4 exercises of pumpy stuff. Back day I go heavy on T-bars and bb rows then chase the pump with 3 other higher rep stuff, generally cable rows, wg pulldowns and maybe neutral grip pulldowns. Shoulders is DB and BB press and then leg day I generally squat and deadlift as my main exercise and then pyump uw with some front squats and lying leg curls.

The amount of sets I do on each day is around 35-50 and generally on most days apart from legs I will do around 350-400 reps.