Please Scroll Down to See Forums Below 
Sorry if I missed it but do you guys that do the higher sets go to failure one any sets? ALL sets? and If so, What is failure to you?
AAP and Pitbull specifically.
AAP and Pitbull specifically.
I went over to the Training Board.... and I learned...
- Thread starter AAP
- Start date
I train to failure every workout.
I do not associate failure with not being able to get another rep. If you look at how a muscle contracts, it is on the All Or None principle. Meaning all fibers contract or none. You don't contract half the muscle. You contract what you need (all) in order to lift the weight. Or you contract none and don't lift it.
If you are doing presses with 100's dumbells and you reach rep #7 and can not get another one (#8), that does not necessarily mean that you have reach muscle failure. You have reached rep failure, meaning you can't get another rep with that weight because you do not have enough (refreshed) muscle fibers to contract hard enough to raise the weight. But immediately go down to the 90's dumbells and you can get more reps because the 90's will be light enough that the remaining muscle fibers that didn't fire on the 100's (remember the All Or None principle) will be able to squeeze out 2 more reps. then no more.... if you go lower in weight, you reach the remaining few muscle fibers... and etc... and so forth.
Not being able to get another rep doesn't mean you have reached failure, it just simply means the weight is too damn heavy at that point.
With this in mind, before you go into the gym, do you poke your muscles and say "hey guys, listen up. We only gonna do 5 sets today, so I need you all to get with it. I ain't got time for 6, 7 or 10 sets, so lets keep it down to 5". This is where the pitfall lies when people post a thread asking "is XXXX number of exercises and XXXX number of sets enough?" Who knows?
Muscle failure, not rep failure, not cardiovascular failure, etc.. is the name of the game here. For some of us (like myself) who have - nor want - a training partner, we are unable to incorporate the high intensity techniques like forced reps, negatives, etc... that can allow us to reach muscle failure with a lower number of sets. Not only that, but as I stated before, for me - negative and forced reps are nothing but wear and tear on my joints and stabilizers, especially at my low bodyfat condition. I would rather do more sets than wake up the next morning with tender and aching joints.
I do not associate failure with not being able to get another rep. If you look at how a muscle contracts, it is on the All Or None principle. Meaning all fibers contract or none. You don't contract half the muscle. You contract what you need (all) in order to lift the weight. Or you contract none and don't lift it.
If you are doing presses with 100's dumbells and you reach rep #7 and can not get another one (#8), that does not necessarily mean that you have reach muscle failure. You have reached rep failure, meaning you can't get another rep with that weight because you do not have enough (refreshed) muscle fibers to contract hard enough to raise the weight. But immediately go down to the 90's dumbells and you can get more reps because the 90's will be light enough that the remaining muscle fibers that didn't fire on the 100's (remember the All Or None principle) will be able to squeeze out 2 more reps. then no more.... if you go lower in weight, you reach the remaining few muscle fibers... and etc... and so forth.
Not being able to get another rep doesn't mean you have reached failure, it just simply means the weight is too damn heavy at that point.
With this in mind, before you go into the gym, do you poke your muscles and say "hey guys, listen up. We only gonna do 5 sets today, so I need you all to get with it. I ain't got time for 6, 7 or 10 sets, so lets keep it down to 5". This is where the pitfall lies when people post a thread asking "is XXXX number of exercises and XXXX number of sets enough?" Who knows?
Muscle failure, not rep failure, not cardiovascular failure, etc.. is the name of the game here. For some of us (like myself) who have - nor want - a training partner, we are unable to incorporate the high intensity techniques like forced reps, negatives, etc... that can allow us to reach muscle failure with a lower number of sets. Not only that, but as I stated before, for me - negative and forced reps are nothing but wear and tear on my joints and stabilizers, especially at my low bodyfat condition. I would rather do more sets than wake up the next morning with tender and aching joints.
Not every "non-picture posting, training advice giving, keyboard jockey" on the training board is a bodybuilder.
Endless sets and reps to failure on bi's does nothing for strength athletes. If some of you that are doing the bitching and insulting would spend more time there than talking about the size of your dick on the C&C Board, you might know that already.
Your experience and ideas would be very appreciated there.
Otherwise, please stick to the C&C Board and continue to "Chase the pump".
Endless sets and reps to failure on bi's does nothing for strength athletes. If some of you that are doing the bitching and insulting would spend more time there than talking about the size of your dick on the C&C Board, you might know that already.
Your experience and ideas would be very appreciated there.
Otherwise, please stick to the C&C Board and continue to "Chase the pump".
strangebrew
New member
lol
Strength athletes? What are those? I always thought those were the gym guys too lazy to cinch up their diet.
I am all about muscle size. I don't care for strength. That is just me though. I mean, when I go to the beach, I would rather LOOK like I could bench 500 pounds than actually be able to. Carrying my bench and weights down to the beach and hitting singles all day long wouldn't be as impressive as watching the beach bunnies walk by my towel and stare at their "cracked glass" reflection coming off my chest.
However, you have to realize that the posts I read over there were not about increasing strength. Rather, people were expecting size gains.
Now, want to hear about my penis size? It's second to only Nathan's.
I am all about muscle size. I don't care for strength. That is just me though. I mean, when I go to the beach, I would rather LOOK like I could bench 500 pounds than actually be able to. Carrying my bench and weights down to the beach and hitting singles all day long wouldn't be as impressive as watching the beach bunnies walk by my towel and stare at their "cracked glass" reflection coming off my chest.
However, you have to realize that the posts I read over there were not about increasing strength. Rather, people were expecting size gains.
Now, want to hear about my penis size? It's second to only Nathan's.
Burning_Inside
Elite Mentor
damn long ass thread....
For months now I have been doing , for example, chest...
2-3 sets of dips
2-3 sets of inc db press
2-3 sets of pec dec.
My chest is fried after that. I'm pretty sure all the fibers I want to be hit got hit quite well. Considering I'm working each bodypart once every 4 days or so, I think that for how hard I am hitting them, 3 days recovery is about enough.
If I did 15 sets, I'd need a lot longer to recover, and is there any scientific data that states that the harder you hit fibers, and the longer needed to recover = more growth than hitting them half as hard and working them again in half the time?
Personally I feel the muscles get more benefit working them more often.
Please post up anything you have in regards to why I may be wrong.
For months now I have been doing , for example, chest...
2-3 sets of dips
2-3 sets of inc db press
2-3 sets of pec dec.
My chest is fried after that. I'm pretty sure all the fibers I want to be hit got hit quite well. Considering I'm working each bodypart once every 4 days or so, I think that for how hard I am hitting them, 3 days recovery is about enough.
If I did 15 sets, I'd need a lot longer to recover, and is there any scientific data that states that the harder you hit fibers, and the longer needed to recover = more growth than hitting them half as hard and working them again in half the time?
Personally I feel the muscles get more benefit working them more often.
Please post up anything you have in regards to why I may be wrong.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: I went over to the Training Board.... and I learned...
Nahh bro not speaking "to" you - just sharing my take on what you probably already know.
Bad day or something bro? My only point is that what works for one person may not work as well for another.
245 low bf no shows 10 years. hee hee
pitbullstl said:
Nahh bro not speaking "to" you - just sharing my take on what you probably already know.
Bad day or something bro? My only point is that what works for one person may not work as well for another.
245 low bf no shows 10 years. hee hee
AAP said:Strength athletes? What are those? I always thought those were the gym guys too lazy to cinch up their diet.
Well yeah.....that too.....
AAP said:
I understand and respect that. My post was directed at those who posted that all they ever see were the posts on whether or not they should do isolation work, and how lame that was.
It's not lame to strength athletes. It makes sense. Not all of us are bodybuilders, and not all of us are strength athletes. Some of those posts come from strength athletes. (And I am sure some came from lazy BB'ers.)
Yours and pitbulls1 experience and ideas would always be appreciated to those who are pursuing BB'ing. (Both of your pictures speak for themselves.) Just understand that different sports require different training techniques.
That was all I was getting at......
Similar threads
