KingOfRome
Pig Disgusting Coomercel
- Joined
- Aug 18, 2019
- Posts
- 3,825
- Reputation
- 7,423
There are too many soyboys 
saying lifting to failure is unsafe, it causes too much central nervous system fatigue, it's unnecessary for making progress and sets about 2 shy of failure is all you need, et cetera, then maybe they'll cite one study where trainees made the same progress without failure than with (it's always the same stupid study too) if their IQ is above room temperature, which is absolutely no guarantee when dealing with soyboys.
I'll address this point by point.
It's only unsafe if you let your form break down too much before you end the set (at which point you're really training past failure anyway; you're doing some retarded form of drop set). A little form breakdown at the end is okay -- in fact, it's expected if you're really putting in the effort you need to make the whole ordeal worth your time -- but if you start looking ridiculous and stressing your joints, you're done.
Central nervous system fatigue is mostly a bogeyman. There's a great deal of broscience around it that soyboys use as an excuse to be lazy. But research on the topic tells us that long-duration exercises like running and swimming long distances cause more nervous system fatigue than weightlifting. That goes for the high rep crew, the powerlifting crew, and especially the 5x5 obsessed soyboys who shake and moan and quiver deadlifting one and a half plates. The nervous system recovers quickly. What lifting to failure does fatigue is your muscles, which is obviously a good thing, unless you're afraid of pain i.e. you are a soyboy.
It is true that you don't strictly need failure training to make progress and cause adaptation, especially if you're a novice. You can do sets a rep or two short of failure and still make decent progress. But how do you really know how close you are to failure if you never reach it? Where is your point of reference? If you don't know what real effort is like, you might think you're two short of failure when you're really five, eight, ten, or even more, and you're wasting your time. The truth is, you need to train to failure regularly for at least several months until you get even a little proficient at judging how close you are to failure. Also, why are you trying to get away with the minimum amount of effort? There's obviously a point of diminishing returns, but for the most part, training responses are dose-dependent, and if you're the kind of person who's afraid of pain and looks for the least he can get away with, there's no way you're hitting that point. You bother to go to the gym and lift weights, so why not maximize your time?
Failure is good. Train to failure. Push your limits. If you want to gymmax, go big or go home. You don't need the gym to be healthy or lose body fat if that's all your after. You can run outside and do push-ups and table rows and air squats and fork put-downs. If you want big beefy muscles, you need to lift hard, eat right, [ISPOILER]and take steroids.[/ISPOILER]
saying lifting to failure is unsafe, it causes too much central nervous system fatigue, it's unnecessary for making progress and sets about 2 shy of failure is all you need, et cetera, then maybe they'll cite one study where trainees made the same progress without failure than with (it's always the same stupid study too) if their IQ is above room temperature, which is absolutely no guarantee when dealing with soyboys.I'll address this point by point.
It's only unsafe if you let your form break down too much before you end the set (at which point you're really training past failure anyway; you're doing some retarded form of drop set). A little form breakdown at the end is okay -- in fact, it's expected if you're really putting in the effort you need to make the whole ordeal worth your time -- but if you start looking ridiculous and stressing your joints, you're done.
Central nervous system fatigue is mostly a bogeyman. There's a great deal of broscience around it that soyboys use as an excuse to be lazy. But research on the topic tells us that long-duration exercises like running and swimming long distances cause more nervous system fatigue than weightlifting. That goes for the high rep crew, the powerlifting crew, and especially the 5x5 obsessed soyboys who shake and moan and quiver deadlifting one and a half plates. The nervous system recovers quickly. What lifting to failure does fatigue is your muscles, which is obviously a good thing, unless you're afraid of pain i.e. you are a soyboy.
It is true that you don't strictly need failure training to make progress and cause adaptation, especially if you're a novice. You can do sets a rep or two short of failure and still make decent progress. But how do you really know how close you are to failure if you never reach it? Where is your point of reference? If you don't know what real effort is like, you might think you're two short of failure when you're really five, eight, ten, or even more, and you're wasting your time. The truth is, you need to train to failure regularly for at least several months until you get even a little proficient at judging how close you are to failure. Also, why are you trying to get away with the minimum amount of effort? There's obviously a point of diminishing returns, but for the most part, training responses are dose-dependent, and if you're the kind of person who's afraid of pain and looks for the least he can get away with, there's no way you're hitting that point. You bother to go to the gym and lift weights, so why not maximize your time?
Failure is good. Train to failure. Push your limits. If you want to gymmax, go big or go home. You don't need the gym to be healthy or lose body fat if that's all your after. You can run outside and do push-ups and table rows and air squats and fork put-downs. If you want big beefy muscles, you need to lift hard, eat right, [ISPOILER]and take steroids.[/ISPOILER]
