5x5 lifting - last set to failure?

steve2kay

I've just started a variation of the 5x5 lifting but with dumbells and did the last set to failure last night.
I've read the excellent summary on this site and various other sites and am not sure I should have done the last set to failure.

Can someone please clarify, I can't find the answer via the search?

Thanks,
Steve

3laine75

not too sure about this. i think the programme is designed so that you use a weight that will have you at or close to failure after your 5 reps.

however, i don't think it will do you any harm to be doing more reps to failure - i think 5/3/1 has a day that incorporates this.

hopefully you'll get more answers from people who know a bit more about what they're talking about

justanotherloser007

"According to the program if you can't make all your reps, don't increase the weight for that exercise in your next workout. If you fail on 3 consecutive workouts, drop the weight 10% and work back up - called a reset. After 3 resets, you should probably look for another program like 3x5." - This is what my hubby said according to Stronglifts. Hopefully, this helps!

FrnkLft

Yeah Wendler's 5/3/1 protocol has the last set done to just shy of failure. So you hit your min required reps, then go all out pretty much. I didn't know that Stronglifts had this in the program, but if it does I think it's great.

It takes time to figure out when you're about to fail and stop just shy (with maybe 1 rep left in you). This is good for a few reasons, safety and preserving your muscle for the next exercise.

Reputable studies (nevermind that personal experiance confirms this) have shown that there are benefits to working to failure, but that output after a true failure set is limited. So if you work to failure on the last set of the last exercise of the day for that muscle, you're doing alright. If you work to failure in the first exercise you burn out, and the rest of your work suffers.

The point of exercising is overload to promote a growth/strength response from your body afterwards. Results are cumulative, so pushing yourself to a limit if it's early in your routine is great (even past your min reps), but burning out before you're done will hamper your performance and gains. Make sense?

So Stronglifts... burning out on the squat will hurt your deadlift, deadlift hurts your squat, burning out on the bench will hurt your press, press hurts your bench, and rows are in large part on their own since they hit the back and biceps the most.

StrictlyPro

No, SL does not have AMRAP sets. A novice lifter doing a 5x5 or any standard sets across novice LP routine should not be hitting complete failure. You last rep should be pretty difficult, but you should still be completing it with decent form. Going to complete failure on compound lifts is not something to do on a regular basis and in reality is never warranted by 99% of us schmos just looking for some general physique improvement.

FrnkLft

No, SL does not have AMRAP sets. A novice lifter doing a 5x5 or any standard sets across novice LP routine should not be hitting complete failure. You last rep should be pretty difficult, but you should still be completing it with decent form. Going to complete failure on compound lifts is not something to do on a regular basis and in reality is never warranted by 99% of us schmos just looking for some general physique improvement.

Agreed, but even AMRAP sets (As Many Reps As Possible) are not the same as failure sets. They are meant to push you, and stop with a little left in the tank.

If he's just started the program and "starting with the bar" so to speak, I don't see ANY harm in AMRAP sets since the weight is probably still pretty light for him, not that it's an issue later on either.

Of course if you're serious about lifting, form is key always, and safety is the most imporant thing. Live to lift another day

JNick77

A novice lifter doing a 5x5 or any standard sets across novice LP routine should not be hitting complete failure.

Why is this exactly?

You last rep should be pretty difficult, but you should still be completing it with decent form.

What should novice lifters that are just starting with the bar do then? Even with SL5x5 for a novice lifter, the bar on at least 3 of the 5 lifts (Squat & DL for sure, maybe Row and Bench too) will be far off from their true max, so the weight will be super easy, far from difficult.

StrictlyPro

A novice lifter doing a 5x5 or any standard sets across novice LP routine should not be hitting complete failure.

Why is this exactly?

You last rep should be pretty difficult, but you should still be completing it with decent form.

What should novice lifters that are just starting with the bar do then? Even with SL5x5 for a novice lifter, the bar on at least 3 of the 5 lifts (Squat & DL for sure, maybe Row and Bench too) will be far off from their true max, so the weight will be super easy, far from difficult.

Training to failure is often counterproductive and is completely unnecessary for novice lifters.

First and foremost they should do the routine as written if that is the routine they chose to follow. If the routine says do 5 sets of 5, then do that. I personally think people should start with a weight that is somewhat challenging (something like 5 rep max - 20%) vs arbitrarily selecting the empty bar, but I don't have a published novice routine.

JNick77

A novice lifter doing a 5x5 or any standard sets across novice LP routine should not be hitting complete failure.

Why is this exactly?

You last rep should be pretty difficult, but you should still be completing it with decent form.

What should novice lifters that are just starting with the bar do then? Even with SL5x5 for a novice lifter, the bar on at least 3 of the 5 lifts (Squat & DL for sure, maybe Row and Bench too) will be far off from their true max, so the weight will be super easy, far from difficult.

Training to failure is often counterproductive and is completely unnecessary for novice lifters.

First and foremost they should do the routine as written if that is the routine they chose to follow. If the routine says do 5 sets of 5, then do that. I personally think people should start with a weight that is somewhat challenging (something like 5 rep max - 20%) vs arbitrarily selecting the empty bar, but I don't have a published novice routine.

I generally agree that if you're going to follow a method then you should follow it to the "T" and beginners have no business manipulating a program because they just don't have the experience. However I don't feel that doing AMRAP's is counterproductive by any means for beginners. I've trained other beginners using 5/3/1 and watched their strength just go through the roof in a short period. I know this isn't the argument at hand but that's why I think it's ridiculous when people say you get stronger on SL5x5 faster than 5/3/1. You may increment the plates on the bar faster but that doesn't mean your absolute strength is gaining faster.

StrictlyPro

A novice lifter doing a 5x5 or any standard sets across novice LP routine should not be hitting complete failure.

Why is this exactly?

You last rep should be pretty difficult, but you should still be completing it with decent form.

What should novice lifters that are just starting with the bar do then? Even with SL5x5 for a novice lifter, the bar on at least 3 of the 5 lifts (Squat & DL for sure, maybe Row and Bench too) will be far off from their true max, so the weight will be super easy, far from difficult.

Training to failure is often counterproductive and is completely unnecessary for novice lifters.

First and foremost they should do the routine as written if that is the routine they chose to follow. If the routine says do 5 sets of 5, then do that. I personally think people should start with a weight that is somewhat challenging (something like 5 rep max - 20%) vs arbitrarily selecting the empty bar, but I don't have a published novice routine.

I generally agree that if you're going to follow a method then you should follow it to the "T" and beginners have no business manipulating a program because they just don't have the experience. However I don't feel that doing AMRAP's is counterproductive by any means for beginners. I've trained other beginners using 5/3/1 and watched their strength just go through the roof in a short period. I know this isn't the argument at hand but that's why I think it's ridiculous when people say you get stronger on SL5x5 faster than 5/3/1. You may increment the plates on the bar faster but that doesn't mean your absolute strength is gaining faster.

I am absolutely not saying no AMRAP sets. I am saying no utter failure. As was stated earlier, even the AMRAP sets should not be to utter failure. Greyskull LP and a novice LP routine has AMRAP sets IIRC. I think in some respects it is a better program than SL, but it doesn't get the same publicity around here. I think we would have to do some hard studies to really determine if someone can get stronger just as fast on 5/3/1 as a novice LP routine. I am skeptical, but I won't outright call BS because I understand what you mean in that someone's true max may be going up faster than the training max they are using for the program, but I still think that starting out with the constant overreach with no full deloads and only resetting lifts on an individual basis would be faster than doing a deload every 4th week. I am wondering if what we would find is that a novice routine would be faster up until the point where some number of resets are needed after which the speeds may come more in line with each other. If I were starting over, I wouldn't go with any of these routines myself.

ElliottTN

On the normal 5x5 as I remember you should not go to failure. When you start to get stagnate on your progression (bc you should be constantly progressing in this program just starting out) then you will find yourself going to failure within the last set under 5 reps. Once you can bang out a full last set then you should be upping the weight.

Ps 5x5 is extremely hard when you get heavier with dumbells bc you are always stepping up by 5 pounds . You might want to familiarize yourself with a barbell bc soon you will get to a point where your standard gym won't have heavy enough dumbells or you need to increas the weight by 1 or 2.5 pounds to progress.

_errata_

Always lift to failure.

JNick77

A novice lifter doing a 5x5 or any standard sets across novice LP routine should not be hitting complete failure.

Why is this exactly?

You last rep should be pretty difficult, but you should still be completing it with decent form.

What should novice lifters that are just starting with the bar do then? Even with SL5x5 for a novice lifter, the bar on at least 3 of the 5 lifts (Squat & DL for sure, maybe Row and Bench too) will be far off from their true max, so the weight will be super easy, far from difficult.

Training to failure is often counterproductive and is completely unnecessary for novice lifters.

First and foremost they should do the routine as written if that is the routine they chose to follow. If the routine says do 5 sets of 5, then do that. I personally think people should start with a weight that is somewhat challenging (something like 5 rep max - 20%) vs arbitrarily selecting the empty bar, but I don't have a published novice routine.

I generally agree that if you're going to follow a method then you should follow it to the "T" and beginners have no business manipulating a program because they just don't have the experience. However I don't feel that doing AMRAP's is counterproductive by any means for beginners. I've trained other beginners using 5/3/1 and watched their strength just go through the roof in a short period. I know this isn't the argument at hand but that's why I think it's ridiculous when people say you get stronger on SL5x5 faster than 5/3/1. You may increment the plates on the bar faster but that doesn't mean your absolute strength is gaining faster.

I am absolutely not saying no AMRAP sets. I am saying no utter failure. As was stated earlier, even the AMRAP sets should not be to utter failure. Greyskull LP and a novice LP routine has AMRAP sets IIRC. I think in some respects it is a better program than SL, but it doesn't get the same publicity around here. I think we would have to do some hard studies to really determine if someone can get stronger just as fast on 5/3/1 as a novice LP routine. I am skeptical, but I won't outright call BS because I understand what you mean in that someone's true max may be going up faster than the training max they are using for the program, but I still think that starting out with the constant overreach with no full deloads and only resetting lifts on an individual basis would be faster than doing a deload every 4th week. I am wondering if what we would find is that a novice routine would be faster up until the point where some number of resets are needed after which the speeds may come more in line with each other. If I were starting over, I wouldn't go with any of these routines myself.

My experience in training beginners with 5/3/1 was really positive and I actually skipped the deloads with them. What was interesting in the rep PR's they could push from cycle to cycle even with the weight increasing. Sometimes the weight would increase and they would hit the same reps as they did at the lower weight or maybe even hit one or two more, it was crazy sometimes. But you could see how either lifting more weight with the same reps as prior cycle and obviously lifting more weight with one or more reps is also a sign of strength increase. I think sometimes we get polarized on how many plates are on the bar and forget to look at the entire picture.

JoRocka

Yeah Wendler's 5/3/1 protocol has the last set done to just shy of failure. So you hit your min required reps, then go all out pretty much. I didn't know that Stronglifts had this in the program, but if it does I think it's great.

It takes time to figure out when you're about to fail and stop just shy (with maybe 1 rep left in you). This is good for a few reasons, safety and preserving your muscle for the next exercise.

Reputable studies (nevermind that personal experiance confirms this) have shown that there are benefits to working to failure, but that output after a true failure set is limited. So if you work to failure on the last set of the last exercise of the day for that muscle, you're doing alright. If you work to failure in the first exercise you burn out, and the rest of your work suffers.

The point of exercising is overload to promote a growth/strength response from your body afterwards. Results are cumulative, so pushing yourself to a limit if it's early in your routine is great (even past your min reps), but burning out before you're done will hamper your performance and gains. Make sense?

So Stronglifts... burning out on the squat will hurt your deadlift, deadlift hurts your squat, burning out on the bench will hurt your press, press hurts your bench, and rows are in large part on their own since they hit the back and biceps the most.

I think this is a great post.

one thing I have found is people (women and several month old beginners) are afraid to hit failure. And it's a useful thing to know- it helps you set your weights- it helps you know when you need a spotter- when you need to up the weight or drop the weight- I know what my body does when it is going to fail- and based on my lifting for the day- I don't do as many reps- or I break it up- or I cut the weight- just depends on the goal that day- but you have to KNOW what that truly feels like- and a lot of people scare themselves out of it.

I can't speak to Strong Lifts/Starting Strength/NROFL on what their "to failure" goals/limits/plan is. I've never done any of those. But I'm a firm believer in knowing what true failure feels like- and knowing how to PROPERLY fail a lift.

Failing a dead lift is one thing... failing a squat, a front squat or a bench- they are tricky and you should know HOW to do it before the weight get's REALLY REALLY heavy.

I also agree AMRAP is not the same thing as a true failure.

I can AMRAP 135 on a dead lift- after a full pyramid up and down that's usually around 15 reps.... and then I lose form and get shakey.

My legit failure? Happens well over that and I view it as a true "I can't pick this up" failure. Not AMRAP until I can't do it anymore- it's totally different.

_errata_

Dear lord you people complicate things.

Lift a weight until you fail on rep 7 or 8 emphasizing the negative (concentric) part of the lift. Eat a bunch of protein. Profit.

JNick77

Dear lord you people complicate things.

Lift a weight until you fail on rep 7 or 8 emphasizing the negative (concentric) part of the lift. Eat a bunch of protein. Profit.

Why 7 or 8? Why not 3 to 5? Why not 9 or 10? By emphasizing the "negative" you mean the eccentric and not the concentric part of the lift correct? By emphasizing the eccentric you're focusing more on body building type lifting then?

ElliottTN

Dear lord you people complicate things.

Lift a weight until you fail on rep 7 or 8 emphasizing the negative (concentric) part of the lift. Eat a bunch of protein. Profit.

Why 7 or 8? Why not 3 to 5? Why not 9 or 10? By emphasizing the "negative" you mean the eccentric and not the concentric part of the lift correct? By emphasizing the eccentric you're focusing more on body building type lifting then?

Dear lord you people complicate things. All OP asked was if you go to failure on the 5x5 programs, not what routine is yours, aka better than the next posters, aka the best freaking thing ever and if you're not doing it my way than its wrong opinions.

OP, is probably sitting in a corner crying somewhere now with a bag of Cheetos bc he gave up after reading the comments in this thread.

(Not gonna lie, I love these discussions though, please continue)

StrictlyPro

Dear lord you people complicate things.

Lift a weight until you fail on rep 7 or 8 emphasizing the negative (concentric) part of the lift. Eat a bunch of protein. Profit.

Why 7 or 8? Why not 3 to 5? Why not 9 or 10? By emphasizing the "negative" you mean the eccentric and not the concentric part of the lift correct? By emphasizing the eccentric you're focusing more on body building type lifting then?

You forgot to ask for how many sets

JNick77

Dear lord you people complicate things.

Lift a weight until you fail on rep 7 or 8 emphasizing the negative (concentric) part of the lift. Eat a bunch of protein. Profit.

Why 7 or 8? Why not 3 to 5? Why not 9 or 10? By emphasizing the "negative" you mean the eccentric and not the concentric part of the lift correct? By emphasizing the eccentric you're focusing more on body building type lifting then?

Dear lord you people complicate things. All OP asked was if you go to failure on the 5x5 programs, not what routine is yours, aka better than the next posters, aka the best freaking thing ever and if you're not doing it my way than its wrong opinions.

OP, is probably sitting in a corner crying somewhere now with a bag of Cheetos bc he gave up after reading the comments in this thread.

(Not gonna lie, I love these discussions though, please continue)

My comments there were directed errata's comments.

I guess to answer the OP's question this would be my real answer. If you get to your last set, you're feeling good, and feeling like you want to rep-out, then rep that **** out but maybe don't go to complete failure. If you don't feel good, then don't do it. There's a lot of "feel" when it comes down to lifting. The gym's "bro police" aren't gonna come yell at you for working harder then the program slated you too. Err... they might I guess. Just be cognizant of how you feel.

steve2kay

Thanks all. I clearly don't know enough about this stuff - which is why I'm following the programme.
I decided against going to failure on the last set - I sometimes do more than the 5 if I'm feeling strong (I'm concious of trying to overload the muscle), but don't go to failure as I'm not sure I'd fail safely.

Good point about the dumbells - I've reached the max (25kg) for several of the weights. The next step in the gym I'm at is the smith machine - but even that only goes to about 100kg in total - so maybe I need to find a different gym.

JNick77

Thanks all. I clearly don't know enough about this stuff - which is why I'm following the programme.
I decided against going to failure on the last set - I sometimes do more than the 5 if I'm feeling strong (I'm concious of trying to overload the muscle), but don't go to failure as I'm not sure I'd fail safely.

Good point about the dumbells - I've reached the max (25kg) for several of the weights. The next step in the gym I'm at is the smith machine - but even that only goes to about 100kg in total - so maybe I need to find a different gym.

As you get more experienced you'll fine that a lot of your workouts you will adjust based on how you feel.

It would be more ideal to find a gym that has a couple power racks and benches so you can bench, squat, row, and DL with an olympic bar. Smith Machine is far from ideal, would almost rather use DB's with magnetic 1.25lb plates for the sides.

FrnkLft

Thanks all. I clearly don't know enough about this stuff - which is why I'm following the programme.
I decided against going to failure on the last set - I sometimes do more than the 5 if I'm feeling strong (I'm concious of trying to overload the muscle), but don't go to failure as I'm not sure I'd fail safely.

Good point about the dumbells - I've reached the max (25kg) for several of the weights. The next step in the gym I'm at is the smith machine - but even that only goes to about 100kg in total - so maybe I need to find a different gym.

Your smith machine has selectorized weight? Just to be sure about what kind of machine we're talking about here, this is a smith machine:



In my opinion, Smith Machines are superior in one thing... safety (which I do believe is incredibly important), but because it only allows the bar to track up and down (some offer front and back too, which solves this issue), it can actually cause you more stress during squats.

Even someone with a perfect squat will have *some* forward and backward movement. If your feet aren't planted perfectly in line with the track of the bar, you will find that the movement will be awkward/strained. So be careful.

Also, I can definitely bench more on the smith than with a free barbell. This is because when I'm straining on a lift, I might push forward against the bar, effectively pushing the weight "up hill/at an angle to the vertical bar" vs. "straight up without support". But this is kind of a non-issue, I mean, if it's all you've got you will just be using higher weight, it's perfectly fine.

Just keep these things in mind. I actually couldn't manage the squat without pain until my gym got a power rack, though I did learn to bench on the smith, and it is nice to know that if you run into trouble, you can twist the bar into the supports and get out unscathed.

Anyway, this is a topic, thanks for asking and let us know how it goes!

steve2kay

Thanks all.
Yes that is similar to the Smith machine we have in the gym.
I've maxed out the dumbells on the squats and deadlifts so tried out the smith machine for a couple of squats which is ok but I don't feel it in my quads so much so I'm not convinced.

i also had to switch the one armed rows (leaning on a bench) for bent over rows as I was nearing the dumbell max on the first one. I can life much lower weight with the second one.

I also discovered the gym has a barbell that they keep in the office - so once I'm comfortable in knowing what I'm doing, or when no-one else is around - I might get it out for deadlifts.

JNick77

Yes that is similar to the Smith machine we have in the gym.
I've maxed out the dumbells on the squats and deadlifts so tried out the smith machine for a couple of squats which is ok but I don't feel it in my quads so much so I'm not convinced.

Yes, the Smith Machine is not idea at all. If you can get that olympic bar and they have a squat rack then that's what you want. If not, hopefully you can find another gym if possible.

i also had to switch the one armed rows (leaning on a bench) for bent over rows as I was nearing the dumbell max on the first one. I can life much lower weight with the second one.

If you're finding yourself limited with DB weight for DB Rows, checkout Kroc Rows: http://www.t-nation.com/free_online_article/most.../kroc_rows_101

Those really are no joke.