Rewritten in a more reader-friendly and conversational tone:
Introduction
Imagine two identical twins starting a workout program together. They follow the same routine, use the same exercises, eat the same foods, get the same amount of rest and recovery, and basically have the same lifestyle.
Now, let’s say that one twin puts in more effort into their workouts and frequently trains to muscle failure (or close to it).
Who do you think would see faster progress? Intuitively, you’d probably guess that it would be the brother who trains harder. After all, we get what we put into something. In the case of training, more effort would therefore lead to better results.
So, how did we get to the point where some people ridicule training to failure and call it counterproductive? The truth is that it’s a complex topic and there are many different things we need to consider. We can’t give simple black and white answers because they don’t exist.
However, we can look at the bigger picture (both anecdotal and scientific evidence) to come to an accurate and unbiased answer.
What is Training to Failure?
Training to failure is the process of moving a given weight until you can no longer produce enough force to move that weight correctly. In other words, you’ve reached the point of failure when you have to reduce the range of motion or use momentum to move the weight.
Keep this in mind throughout this article as it will influence everything else we discuss today. Additionally, many people have a misconception about what training to failure really means.
The muscle failure you experience at this point is relative to a specific weight. You can’t lift that weight anymore without taking a break first, but you can reduce the weight slightly and continue training. This is a common technique called drop sets.
For example, let’s say you’re bench pressing 130 kg. You reach failure after the 8th rep, rack the weight, remove a few plates, lie back down, and continue the set.
In other words, your muscles aren’t completely exhausted, but their ability to produce force is significantly reduced for a while.
Training to Failure: The Latest Study (and What Older Studies Have Found)
Training to failure has gained more and more attention in recent years. We now have several well-designed studies that have looked at this topic and tried to find a definitive answer.
Before we delve into the research, it’s important to note that studying training to failure scientifically is difficult because researchers rely primarily on self-reported exertion from participants. However, a 2017 study highlighted that participants tend to be inaccurate in estimating how much effort they put into their workouts (1).
In this study, participants were told to choose a weight that was near their 10-rep max. Only 35 of the 160 participants reached failure at rep 10-12. All others performed 13+ reps before reaching failure.
The first paper on training to failure comes from the Australian Institute of Sport (2). The participants were 26 male elite soccer and basketball players between the ages of 16 and 18. All participants had at least six months of weight training experience. The participants were divided into two groups for a bench press test:
Group 1 performed 4 sets of 6 reps to failure
Group 1 performed 8 sets of 3 reps, but not to failure
Both groups trained bench press three times per week for 6 weeks. After these 6 weeks, the researchers tested both groups and found that the group that trained to failure had gained up to 5% more strength and power than the group that did not train to failure.
The second study comes from the University of Tsukuba in Japan (3). In this study, the researchers investigated the effects of metabolic stress on hormones and muscle adaptations. However, this study also provided some insights into the influence of training to failure.
The researchers had the participants perform three exercises:
Pull-ups
Shoulder press
Bilateral knee extensions
They divided the 26 men into two groups:
Group 1 performed 3 to 5 sets of 10 reps (to failure) for each exercise and rested for one minute between sets, which is typical of a standard training program.
Group 2 performed the same amount of training volume but rested for 30 seconds in the middle of each set to reduce some of the metabolic fatigue. Thanks to these short breaks, the participants in this group never reached failure.
So both groups performed the same number of reps and sets, but Group 1 was able to build more muscle and more isometric strength, significantly increase their one-rep max, and improve their muscular endurance to a greater extent.
Finally, a 2016 paper set out to use the existing data and give us a definitive
