For bigger muscles you’re almost going to fail, but for strength you might not

When performing resistance training, such as lifting weights, there is a lot of interest in how close you push yourself to failure (the point where you can’t do another rep) and how this affects your results.

Although research has looked at this concept in a variety of ways, no meta-analysis to date has examined the pattern (i.e., linear or non-linear) of how distance to failure (measured by reps in reserve) changes muscle strength and affects muscle strength. mate.

As such, it is still unclear how close to failure you should go to maximize muscle growth and strength.

Researchers from Florida Atlantic University and collaborators analyzed how training to the point of failure affects muscle growth and strength. The study focused on how training to the point of failure affects muscle growth in the key muscles used in an exercise. For example, if someone was doing leg presses, the focus was on how training to the point of failure affects the quadriceps.

Researchers estimate the number of reps in reserve, which means how many more reps you could have done before reaching failure. They collected data from 55 different studies and performed detailed statistical analyzes to see how different reps at reserve levels affected strength and muscle growth.

Results of the study, published in the journal Sports medicine, found that how close you train to failure has no apparent impact on strength gains. Whether you stop far from failure or very close to it, the improvement in your strength seems similar. On the other hand, muscle size (hypertrophy) appears to benefit from training closer to failure. The closer you are to failure when you stop your sets, the more muscle growth you will see.

“If you’re aiming for muscle growth, training closer to failure can be more effective. In other words, it doesn’t matter whether you adjust training volume by changing sets or reps; the relationship between how close you train to failure and muscle mass growth remains the same” , says Michael C. Zourdos, Ph.D., senior author and professor and chair of the Department of Exercise Science and Health Promotion within FAU’s Charles E. Schmidt College of Science. “For strength, it doesn’t seem to matter much how close you come to failure.”

The researchers suggest that individuals looking to build muscle mass should work within a desired range of 0-5 repetitions, without fail, for optimal muscle growth or while minimizing the risk of injury. For strength training, they suggest that individuals should work on heavier loads rather than pushing their muscles to failure. As such, they recommend that to train for strength, individuals should stop about 3 to 5 repetitions before failure, without placing additional physical stress on the body.

“Training closer to failure improves the accuracy of self-reported reps in reserve,” says Zac P. Robinson, Ph.D., first author and a Ph.D. graduate of FAU’s Department of Kinesiology and Health Promotion.

“When people estimate how many reps they have left, this perception influences the weights they choose. If the estimate is incorrect, they may use lighter weights than necessary, which could limit strength gains. On the other hand, our meta-analysis shows Seeing that training closer to failure also leads to greater muscle growth.

“So for the average individual, training to the point of failure may be the best option because it appears to improve the accuracy of our perception of effort, as well as gains in muscle size.”

The findings help highlight the difficulties associated with training to near failure, which can be difficult and harder to recover from, potentially negatively impacting long-term performance. Additionally, the researchers say that training closer to failure could better simulate the conditions and experiences of a maximum strength test, which is often used in strength training programs, rehabilitation and athletic performance assessments to measure an individual’s strength capabilities and progress over time to follow.

“As load increases, motor patterns change, meaning that performing sets closer to failure can better mimic the demands of maximum force assessments,” Zourdos said.

“This approach aligns with the specificity principle by exposing you to similar motor patterns and psychological challenges. Additionally, training near failure can also improve psychological factors, such as visualization, that are important for achieving maximum strength.”

The study results can help guide future research and provide valuable insights for trainers on how proximity to failure affects muscle growth and strength. However, researchers say that the exact numerical relationship between near-failure training and strength gains remains unclear and that future studies should be deliberately designed to examine the continuous nature of the effects in larger samples.

Co-authors of the study are Joshua C. Pelland, a graduate student, and Jacob F. Remmert, a Ph.D. student, both within the FAU Department of Kinesiology and Health Promotion; Martin C. Refalo, a Ph.D. student at Deakin University in Australia; Ivan Jukic, Ph.D., a research fellow at Auckland University of Technology in New Zealand; and James Steele, Ph.D., associate professor of sport and exercise science at Solent University in England.