Great advice.
I also thought you might be interested to know that muscle burn is not from lactic acid. Physiologists have known this for a long time but it's a persistent myth in the fitness world.
https://www.bostonsportsmed.com/2013/08/the-lactic-acid-myth/
I’m fully aware lactate does not cause soreness and is quickly metabolized but the article doesn’t really say much about what causes the “burn” and doesn’t really rule lactate out. What causes the burn if not the creation of lactate?
As I know what causes the burn are hydrogen ions which come from the anaerobe glycolysis. They turn the ph value lower and the lower ph value stresses your nociceptors so you feel the burn.
The lactate dehydrogenase uses that H+ to produce lactate and NAD+ so that actually prevents the ph value from dropping to low which would cause cell death.
Cool. Thanks for the info. I wonder how new that knowledge is. I had 400 level physiology classes in college back in the early 2000’s and the professor, well accomplished and respected, said the burn was lactate. Wondering if this knowledge came out since then or he just didn’t have his facts straight.
So I study physical therapy right now and that knowledge is still not that common. A lot therapist and professors of other subjects (not physiology) also still saying that the lactate causes the burn.
Heck, most people don’t know that lactic acid doesn’t exist in the human body and is always lactate. First step is calling it the correct name, then maybe we can get them to stop having it be associated with the burn.
Been a while since I studied physiology, so take this for what it’s worth.
I don’t think these two things are mutually exclusive, just because you need to train your cns to engage your muscles differently can’t mean your muscles can be depleted. Aka the muscles still need energy, hence the prolonged rest periods
MPS isn't happening at a rate quick enough to benefit you during a few minutes rest. CNS fatigue could play a role, but it isn't the bottleneck in almost any situation unless you're really overdosing yourself.
Overwhelming majority of the time it's ATP which is limited mostly by glucose and glycogen stores which are broken down into glucose which is oxidized by muscle cells to produce ATP.
That really isn't CNS fatigue lol.
Wait, is CNS failure the reason why my right pec will randomly give out with no warning?? It will feel fine for 4/5 reps, but then on rep 5 it just goes on vacation!
> A common - and sometimes deserved - complaint with powerlifters in commercial gyms is that they take freakin’ forever between sets. That’s not to allow their muscles time to recover, it’s to allow their CNS to recover. That takes a little longer even for a trained lifter.
Huh, I run almost exclusively strength programs and I always only rest 90 seconds between sets unless I'm going very heavy or doing crazy volume (looking at you, Deepwater).
nSuns, CAP3, Deepwater and 5/3/1 are the programs I prefer. Even on CAP3 when I'm doing 9 sets of heavy triples on deadlift, I'm still only resting 90 seconds.
Deepwater is the only program where I've felt I needed 3-5mins rest. But that's mainly due to the insane volume and just being absolutely gassed after each set.
It actually takes longer for a trained lifter because your CNS trains far slower than your muscles, so as the a trained lifter lifting higher weights require longer intervals to recover, both in terms of sets during a workout and between workouts itself.
I think the problem here is you're equating "hypertrophy training" with "training to failure all the time" and that's just simply not true and probably not even ideal.
There are some fitness based subs that truly believe you need to always go to or close to failure. They’re taking progressive overload way too literally and with a short term focus
Well, sets should be performed close to failure to maximize muscle growth. But that depends on what you define as "close to failure". I would define it as "0-4 Reps in Reserve" aka RPE 6-10. With this in mind an keeping the average intensity at around 2 RIR or 8 RPE should be near optimal for muscle growth.
Can't say about strength.
On the converse, in 23 years of training I've failed a squat 6 times, bench about 3, deadlift once or twice. It's a RARE instance for me.
It's what is so cool about lifting: so many approaches work!
I didn't say that you need to be at RPE9 all the time. However RPE9 with 1-2 reps in the tank is what you should be aiming towards in order to put as much strain on the muscle as possible.
If you do deload weeks on a RPE6-7 that's a different story, in order to progress you need to push yourself and that means increasing your intensity.
I’m not who you replied to but it probably is the OP saying he’s trained only for hypertrophy and then being hung up on taking everything to failure every session.
Not true at all. Intensity plays a pretty big part as does form and tension.
It's so nuanced that your generalized take is harmful even though you understand it to be true.
If you read the context of the thread you’ll understand that I’m arguing in favor of nuance. I say multiple times that there are several factors and multiple approaches work.
I did not say volume is all that matters, just that it is a primary focus.
But it's not even the primary focus - that is my point.
EG Dorian Yates, Mentzer bros etc. Their volume was low low.
My ultimate point is - everyone is different and different things work for different people.
John Meadows is the first one that comes to mind. Gamma Bomb has several days where you don’t reach failure on any movements for example. [Here are two days from the program that will kick anyone’s ass and have zero sets to failure. ](https://imgur.com/a/JyxRC3q/)
Jim Wendler, the designer of 531.
The Stronger by Science templates (including the hypertrophy one) don’t have you reach failure on every set.
I think you’re confused or I’m not being clear. Or you want some “gotcha” moment. Working to failure can be used for hypertrophy, but hypertrophy can be achieved in other ways.
https://www.strongerbyscience.com/training-to-failure-or-just-training-to-fail/amp/ this is a good read. It’s a tool in the toolbox but is not magic as stated in this article.
John meadows coaches IFBB pros you dunce. The fact that you think a degree is more valuable than results tells me all I need to know. Does Terrence Ruffin have a bad physique? John coached him.
Thank you for taking care of Mr. Jokester, I was just writing my own essay when I went to post it he had deleted his ridiculous reply. It would just be nice if people were more humble and took the listening approach and try to learn rather than argue with research and proven results.
The point I wanted to make for him was that in his mind he makes gains faster in a few months what takes others 5 years and to make it simple it doesn't paint the whole story. You, most on this thread and I know that the majority of gym goers are just making the rounds. They aren't disciplined in workout routine and dieting regimen. They workout but eat trash right after or they show up but have no clue how to get a proper workout in. It may just be that he is doing those parts better than most and isn't necessarily because of his exhaustion of every single muscle. Also he may just have predisposition DNA with more hormones available to him. So many factors at play that he fails to even consider. Anyways that's my 2 cents, rant over. Sorry guys have an awesome day.
Are you being this insufferable on purpose?
Tons of people don't train to failure and have achieved various degrees of hypertrophy , thus proving failure is not necessary for it. Optimality isn't the point here
There's like 30 million resources that show while taking sets to failure can be an element of hypertrophy, it by no means is the only way and this has been extremely well known in basically every element of the weightlifting community for awhile
[Here is a meta-analysis study](https://www.sci-sport.com/en/articles/training-to-failure-or-not-impact-on-hypertrophy-and-strength-193.php). Basically a study number crunching a bunch of similar studies on a single topic.
Basic principles of falsifiability. If someone builds muscle and has not taken that muscle to failure, it cannot be true that taking a muscle to failure is required for hypertrophy.
I train an 83 year old woman who has never taken a set to failure with me and never will. She regularly gets dexa scans to keep an eye on her bone density and muscle mass. Both have increased while she was working with me, and I know for a fact that she has not taken any other exercise to failure.
No disrespect, but did you get really strong and reach great numbers taking each set to failure everyday? If so why are you deciding to switch? Or maybe what you’re doing currently not working well, hence the switch?
Why don’t you take the 50-100 reps of push, pull, and core work close to failure? You do those every single day of 531.
No! My strength is very far from those who have followed strength programs, but my size is alright. That's why I'm switching, I want a more functional body.
People take the reps for BBB and assistance work to failure? My program sets a fixed weight and reps for BBB and it's so low that I doubt I'll reach failure.
Oh sweet Jesus, don't do that.
The key for 5/3/1 is building off of the volume. It's essentially a very open ended system for top set, drop set. A training style used for a long time for powerlifting, strongman, and oly lifting. You'll go straight into a wall if you start taking every set to failure. And even Wendler has backed off AMRAPS for the most part. His new updates give you the option to do everything in sets of 5 and not AMRAP the last top set at all.
You can fill out more bodybuilding work in your assistance exercises. If you read the programs it'll say 50-100 pushes, pulls etc. That's the bodybuilding stuff. The program doesn't designate it out because its too individual and honestly not rocket science to figure out. Your 100 pushes could be in 5 x10 sets of weighted dips, 5 sets 8-12 chest flies, take some tricep exercise to failure a few times, done. Although again, the recommendation is don't go full on to failure on the assistance or only do it occasionally. The assistance is to build volume on muscle groups the big barbell movements tend to not hit. The goal is to get them done\*, not to go to failure.\*
5/3/1 is beloved because it is a straightforward, adaptable **generalist** program for intermediates who have run out most beginner linear programs list Greyskull, starting strength etc. It'll get you reasonably strong and reasonably good looking naked. Its not ideal for either but most people don't need ideal, they need consistent. And its many many sub-programs allow you to adapt to other needs. Want to get strong? Boring but Strong template. Want to get big? Boring but big. Want to run a marathon but not stop lifting? First set last 5x5. Soldier with a bunch of PT prep you need to do for ranger school? Cool, program all that high rep PT stuff as your assistance. Newborn baby and are getting a cool 2.5 hours of sleep a night? Not Doing Jack Shit program.
Wendler is an old Westside guy: a program known for being brutal, having guys throw up crazy powerlifting weights, and having everyone blasting and coasting ridiculous amounts of PEDs. By his own admission he got tired of only being able to waddle up to the bar, squat an insane single and waddle away. He also mostly works with high schoolers now which sort of gives away the point of 5/3/1: getting in the lifting volume you *need* when the other 50-80% is the main point. That 50-80% might be football practice, wrestling, running, being a soldier, being a dad, having a life etc.
In my complete bullshitter on the internet recommendation (but also based on the [man himself's recommendation for 5/3/1 with a marathon running block](https://forums.t-nation.com/t/5-3-1-and-long-distance-running/224444))
To the questions of "I want to do 5/3/1 but I have to do this other thing that's very taxing like football, martial arts, running a marathon, morning unit PT"
The answer is basically always "5s pro, 5x5 first set last" and hedge expectations.
If it helps u/SodHawk, I used to compete in kickobxing and boxing, and now I do grappling (freestyle wrestling and BJJ) at a much lower hobby level. But the way I made training work basically always boils down to listening to your body and testing out to see what works.
I managed to do the 5/3/1 BBB that coincidentally OP is mentioning with a lot of success. In my experience, yes your muscles are tired if you workout before a training session, but it's not really a real obstacle. During BJJ (or wrestling or any other) training session, you usually aren't supposed to be going all out, RPE 9 type of training. You're focusing on technique, practice. Your muscles aren't supposed to take a beating each time.
For me what seemed to be the hardest to fit wasn't the lifting weights, but the cardio sessions. I kind of just gave up cardio because the 3-4 training sessions a week were very demanding cardio wise anyway and I just felt overly exhausted by doing cardio runs on top of that.
When would you schedule your lifting and bjj sessions though? I’m also a bjj guy with a wrestling background so my sessions are pretty intense. I don’t lift while grappling for this reason but am interested in seeing how others make it work
Do you have a link to the new ideas about NOT going to failure on the last AMRAP set? First time I've heard of this.
Can you explain more about why he's changed his idea about this?
He goes into it in Forever but you see bits and pieces of it in Beyond 531 and some of his other writings. One of the problem with Wendlers ADHD writing and unwillingness to actually make a comprehensive system is he tends to bounce and never fully explain himself.
Anyway, Forever lays out a protocol called "5's pro" which he uses in basically every Leader/Accumulation template in the book. All the percentages in all of the weeks are done as sets of 5. No AMRAPS. So
\- week 1 is : 65%x5, 75%x5, 85%x5 then FSL/BBB/etc
\- Week 2 is 70%x5, 80%x5, 90%x5 etc.
Reasoning being it spreads out volume across all 3 of these main ramping sets, makes it so the first two sets aren't quasi warmups (a very common nitpick). And keeps the AMRAP from gassing people since AMRAP stress to stimulus is usually a little high. Again you kinda see the logic if he's coaching high school football and wrestlers. AMRAPs for the lifts 4x a week and then hitting actual practice ends up taking away more the practice (its like someone told me is "the wrestling paradox." Being strong is extremely important. And often the strongest guy wins. But the **unambiguous** best way to get better at wresting faster is to practice, not lift).
He still includes the more traditional 5/3/1 rep scheme and AMRAPS. But saves them for what he calls "anchor" phases. Basically the ones where you do tests, PRs, joker and window maker sets etc. While the "leader" phases are basically accumulation phases to build volume.
Yes 100 of each.
I'll add a slight addendum to this. He also quasi-contradicts himself a few times in the few programs that actually lay out "fine I'll write an actual assistance program" (hardgainers, building the monolith, triumvirate) and then has the assistance round out the days since this is generally a "one lift a day per week" focused methodology. For example, doing pushes, such as dips etc only on lower body days but doing no additional pushes on your bench days.
Additionally, everything that is a push **is a push** regardless of how isolation-y or easy it is. Tricep extensions are a push. Rotator cuff rehab stuff is a push. Easy pushup volume is a push. You can and should do seated dumbbell presses as your "push" on day 1 but chest flies on day 2, etc.
The system is very much "I'm not bothering to program assistance because I don't know the exercises that work for you and the weights you use. Just do the general reps in your weak areas or stuff you want to work on. Add weight or reps once it feels too-easy but also never kill yourself."
The program is not adequately explained online anywhere that I have found. I own 531 2nd edition, 531 for Powerlifting, Beyond 531, and 531 Forever, and can honestly say the best money you can spend on your training among those is likely 531 2nd edition in ebook form. It's 10usd to get it on the free Kindle app.
Do not rely on people online to tell you about it, they always get it wrong.
Absolutely, can you explain the rationale behind the 50 or so different programs in the book, how you are supposed to train and progress accessory lifts, how many days of easy conditioning and hard conditioning you’re supposed to do on the different templates, which templates are good for bulking, cutting, competition prep? What anchor should follow which leader?
I highly doubt it’s as simple as you think. Really obvious by OPs complete lack of understanding on the topic.
Stronger by science and tactical barbell both have build your own programs that are have similar, and higher volumes and intensity than most 5/3/1 programs, TB in particular is heavy on conditioning and cardio, and SBS in particular has reps to failure every single day. 5/3/1 warriors get over the top fanatical about insisting people follow the programming to the letter, when Wendler himself says stuff like "just row something, don't overcomplicate it, pick up a weight and row for some reps".
IMO the best criticism of 5/3/1 is that it was designed as supplementary to an athletes main sports programming, and most of Wendlers refinements have followed his own goals of putting less and less time in the gym. There's way better programming out there for specific goals.
More volume than all 531 templates? There’s two 531 template that has you doing 115 reps of your main compound before you do 100 reps of push, 100 reps of pull, and 100 reps of core four times a week. I’ve read both additional programs, neither have volume that great.
Also, I agree with everything else you said. I’m unsure why it was said because it doesn’t really combat anything that I brought up.
531 is just a short way of saying "training programs made by jim wendler". He has over 50 programs and variations.
https://liftvault.com/resources/531-glossary/
https://www.keylifts.com/templates/531
The hypertrophy doesn't come from the 531 sets. It comes from the assistance exercises. Check out "531 for bodybuilding" and "531 boring but strong" for example.
r/531discussion is a good resource.
531 is intentionally sub-maximal. Your thought process that everything needs to be taken to failure is also flawed.
Which 531 template are you doing?
Failure is not paramount in training. I haven't failed a set in many months and I have never been stronger.
I have come close to failure, RPE 9ish, but never actual failure.
If you train to failure every day you’re likely going to stall pretty quickly, your CNS is not going to be having it. You might even regress.
Highly recommend maybe doing a bit more research from people on that side of the weights. Lots of crossover, but also lots of pretty big differences.
You’ll be surprised how much you can get out of your workouts by *not* going to failure and messing up your ability to recover. People who are going for size & aesthetics instead of strength & performance sometimes have this hurdle to get over but the “less is more” attitude can truly take you a long way if you are careful about it.
when I have done 5/3/1 successfully in the past, I have been surprised at how little work I've had to do. you don't need to kill yourself to make progress. Lift very heavy things, eat plenty, get rest.
What drives hypertrophy is volume.
With submaximal training, you get slightly less intensity per set, but significantly more volume.
For 5/3/1, you've literally only accounted for the main lifts. Supplemental volume is also generally high, especially on things like BBB or BBB Beefcake. Accessory volume can also be high if you let it be. Doing 50-100 reps of chinups and dips, 3-4x a week, adds up to a lot.
This isn't even counting the conditioning work you're suppose to do. Sled walks will absolutely build your legs. 80lb weighted vest walks will similarly build up your back strength a lot too.
https://www.strongerbyscience.com/the-new-approach-to-training-volume/
And one of the key findings:
> Doing more sets or volume (it’s still a little unclear which better predicts gains, although I lean toward more sets) gives you more results.
If your intensity is high enough that you can only do 1-2 sets for a muscle group, the stimulus for growth isn't going to be nearly as high as a dude who trains a little bit more submaximally, and hits 30 sets for the same muscle group.
So, would top-down pyramid style of training be most effective for strength and hypertrophy? As in, starting heavy and dropping the weight every set and going near or to failure. I have a feeling personally that it's both effective time-wise (less rest needed between sets) and most stimulating (there's both high tension in the first sets and a lot of volume in the last sets)
You can try it if you want. Or, you could do one of the many proven programs that also train you at a great variety of rep ranges. The thing about what you're saying is that, the moment you start moving some heavier weights, even if you're only going to "near failure", you're still going to get beat to shit.
On the other hand, submaximal volume is still volume, and provides almost as much stimulus for growth while having a fraction of the fatigue of going to "near failure".
If intensity was the main driver doing singles would get you jacked beyond belief... Alas it doesn't. While important, as doing sets of [email protected] will get you nowhere as well, you need both a moderate volume and proper intensity. (volume referring to total volume not just # of reps)
I said intensity was the key driver - not the only thing that matters. You took what I said and then said “ok well you could then do singles and get jacked beyond belief”. I obviously wasn’t saying that, but okay, then if volume is all the matters I could take a 10 lb ez curl and do 150 reps of 2H bicep curls and get jacked beyond belief, but that’s just going to get me a pump and not drive hypertrophy (sure, you’ll get some growth from that, but you’d also get growth from singles). My point was the key driver is intensity (meaning the most important thing, not the *only thing*) meaning that doing 4x12 with 1-2 RIR is better than doing 4x18 with 6-7 RIR.
Kind of ironic that you complain about misinterpretation, and then misinterpret something yourself.
Nobody said that volume is all that matters. In the same vein, intensity is not all that matters.
However, training volume is currently the best predictor of muscle growth. It should be noted, though, that "volume" means the number of *hard* sets you do, i.e. sets within a certain proximity of failure.
If we use your 4x12 1-2RIR vs 4x18 6-7RIR, then yes, the 4x12 is better, but that's because of the proximity to failure, not the higher intensity.
You are correct that volume is not the primary driver of hypertrophy, but this is using the traditional definition of volume which is sets x reps x weight over a workout.
What current research has shown is that not all reps are created equal. Meaning there are reps that stimulate hypertrophy and reps that don’t. The intensity you referred to could also be described as the reps that drive hypertrophy, also called “effective reps” or “stimulating reps”. These are the reps that have a large amount of mechanical tension and maximum motor unit recruitment. These are the difficult, slow reps that occur in the last few reps of the set or throughout the whole set if the load is heavy enough.
So when talking about volume it is correct to say volume by the traditional definition is not a driver of hypertrophy considering you could do a massive amount of volume with light loads and stay far away from failure and not grow at all or maybe grow very little if you are an untrained individual.
However if your talking about volume in terms of effective reps then it would be correct to say that volume drives hypertrophy.
>I was under the impression that volume is not the key driver for hypertrophy, but rather intensity (though obviously volume is a component of just working out in general). The key driver is actually how intense you work and basically reps left in reserve at the end of your sets, and that’s what drives hypertrophy
You are actually right. Volume in itself is a bit of a red herring when it comes to building muscle, otherwise marathon runners would have the biggest legs out of anyone and you could get jacked curling bananas. If you were to curl a banana to failure, the only reps that would matter would be the last couple, so there has to be some degree of intensity.
The intensity is what drives mechanical tension and that's where we see change. Volume is just an accumulation of your work, it will probably correlate with muscle growth but it is not causing it.
It’s been scientifically proven that lifting with an RER of +-2 gives better strength gains than going to failure. Additionally lifting to failure produces higher neurological, muscular and metabolic stress which can negatively impact training volume and recovery.
For alot of us it’s counterintuitive, because most of us have been lifting on broscience for years, and the true physiological science has only reached the fitness industry in recent years:
Tldr: Yes lifting less frequently and not until failure will improve results.
Source: Pubmed, WebOfScience, my own braincortex
Can you link the study? How about failure for hypertrophy? I'd imagine in a size context, going to failure is more acceptable. Especially with relatively light weights and reps. I'm sure metabolic stress isn't an issue with 10 rep strict bicep curls to failure or not.
You've been training for many years but you're blown away by the idea of not going to failure? Have you been working out in a bubble and never seen or talked to anyone with a different training style?
Most of the sources I've listened talk about reaching failure for hypertrophy. Not in every set, but in most of them and specially near the end. Sets should be made with a rep range like 10-12 where if you can get to 13\~14 you need to increase weight, so you usually fail at that rep range or get very close to.
Strength training isn't very famous or practiced in my country. My gym has like 40 people at the same time and just 1 squat rack that I can usually find free to use.
Thats a standard hypertrophy regimen and not real going to failure. You aim for 8-12 if you get 14 the weight is indeed too low. That's doable without working to failure I do this range and it's not working to failure. Because I don't fail. You just work until you reach an 8 RPE at most a 9 and stop basically. I always have at least 2 even 3 left in the tank if I give it my all I just don't push beyond that. It's not the same as working to failure it's just working
It works because failure isn't what drives strength gain. High intensity with a low rep range is what drives strength, even if you aren't quite at muscular failure by the end of each set.
To add to this: strength is a skill as much as it is having the muscle mass required to lift the weight. So strength programs have you practicing the skill.
Hypertrophy is driven by training stimulus. So hitting the minimum stimulus is necessary to drive growth. Hitting a higher stimulus tends to increase growth even further. So hypertrophy programs have you working hard to stimulate the muscles a lot.
I have been using a 5/3/1 program mixed with some hypertrophy work for the past 10 weeks and have seen great strength gains from it. I think an AMRAP for the last set of the compound movement (leaving 1 or 2 left in the tank though) has been working great for me. I run my program on a 4 day split leaving a lot of recovery time. Also, I haven’t felt the need to take a deload week so, I run the program without it. I think it’s good for strength gains but, it’s a slow process. I’d recommended doing research on the program or buying the book itself before fully committing to it. Either way you need to train hard, eat right, and get enough rest to get the gains for whatever program you decide on.
I like to make a big modification to 531. Normally 531 has you warm up, then do 3 work sets in ascending fashion. What I _don't_ like about this is that the first two sets come with a lot of fatigue, but aren't very stimulating. If it's 5's week, you're probably 10+ reps away from failure in one or both of those sets. They are basically fatiguing warm-up sets. You end up with worse performance for your top set. Because of this, I make a simple change but it fundamentally changes the program.
I take the 3 ascending sets and turn them into descending straight sets. I warm up with a few sets (3 or 4), then I do the top set until I'm 2 reps from failure (2 RIR, which stands for reps in reserve). I reduce the load by 5+%, then do another set at 2 RIR. Then I reduce the current load by 5+% and do the final set at 2 RIR. I find that these 5+% decreases keep me at the same number of reps across all 3 sets. So, instead of 1 highly stimulating set, I get 3. The loads for each set are very similar to what 531 plans. So it's basically the same sets but in reverse. Except you'll probably be doing a couple more reps to reach 2 RIR for the two lighter sets.
NOTE: By 5+%, I mean that when calculating 95% of the current load, if I have to pick between rounding up or rounding down to what I can load on the bar, I will round down.
NOTE: I do not make this modification for 1's week.
I make a similar modification to the templates. If the template I'm following calls for more sets of the main movement after those 3 main sets, I change it to a variation of a related movement. For example, if it's squat day and the template calls for more sets of squats, I instead do a deadlift variation. If they are straight sets at a high initial RIR (like boring but big), I'll do them as descending straight sets at 5 RIR (so very similar to the work sets).
I leave the rest of the program intact. 5's week, 3's week, 1's week. Leader templates, anchor templates. Etc.
I find these modifications result in more strength gains, at least when tracking my progress with them. These changes also make the program more similar to hypertrophy training, except with rep ranges too low to work for that kind of training. It might feel more familiar to someone who comes from that background.
You've seriously been going to failure, and therefore having to roll the barbell off of your chest, every single bench set for years?
I doubt it.
Plus 531 is a system. Within it there are hypertrophy and peaking programs.
It sounds like you need to do some reading.
Never for barbell BP, of course. If I want failure in chest I need to go to a machine/cable/dumbell or call a spotter. I did barbell declined BP today, 5x10. My sets went like 12-10-10-9-8. I know how my body responds when it's getting close to failure so there was no way I could reach 12reps in the last set for example without risking injury or embaressment.
My last squat (I'm doing 5x5 there) went 5-5-4-3-2 and I failed to get up in the last 2, the barbell lied on the squat rack supports.
No offense, but I agree with a few of the commenters who have a hard time believing that you've been going to true failure.
There is a difference between "I'm in incredible discomfort on my sixth rep and therefore my mind has forced me to stop" failure and "I have put 100% of the energy possible into this bar, and my muscles just can't move it" failure. I had a friend who would fail at front squats every time we trained, but really he just was hitting a point of extreme discomfort and knew it was okay to bail out. True failure means that you couldn't have lifted that weight if your life was on the line.
People, myself included, are generally pretty terrible at estimating when they've reached true failure. Some study with moderately trained lifters showed that when they were asked to identify the point in which they had two reps left, most people actually had six or more reps left.
I understand the skepticism, but a few weeks ago I tried to squeeze these extra reps and left with my back hurting for days after it. I couldn’t keep form. Maybe with a picture perfect technique I can do 1 or 2 extra reps, but I find it unlikely because I reach failure all the time in less risky exercises and my body simply cant move anymore not even if my life depended on it… so for squats I consider my last possible rep as the one it took a long time to drive the bar up and a failure where my body stops for a few seconds and cant go up anymore than I have to let it go.
You don't "rep to failure" in 5/3/1. You do a 1 rep max or RPE 9 once a workout on the compound lift of that workout. These are not the same. Lifting a light weight 10+ times until you run out of muscle glycogen is not the same as a max effort lift from fresh. You stress your nervous system as much as your muscles.
I got the 2nd edition pdf but unfortunately what is in there is basically outdated now since there is no mention of joker sets/leader-anchor/7th week protocol on it. 531 forever is basically 1/3 of the monthly minimum wage where I live so yeah no way I'm ever buying that. Gonna research the internet a little longer.
No offense, but if you take every set to absolute failure, how do your subsequent sets not suffer unless you keep dropping the weight? Especially if you do bro splits (just assuming that’s what you do since you said you used to do a 5 day split)
If you’re enhanced that’s one thing, but it doesn’t sound like you are.
> how do your subsequent sets not suffer
This is an expected and programmed part of different training styles. It's why you'll see some programs with RPE and RIR targets instead of strict rep numbers or direction to do X reps in as few sets as possible. It's not a concept that should offend anyone.
It’s his program so he can do whatever he wants. I’m just skeptical about him actually going to actual muscular failure every single set.
To address your point: I understand RIR and that there are routines out there that encourage going to failure sometimes or even on the last set. But I haven’t heard of one where you take all sets of an exercise to complete failure unless you’re an elite lifter. Targets are one thing, but based on what I’ve heard and read about, it’s a bit counter productive (again unless you’re advanced or enhanced) to take every single set to 0 RIR failure because you cannot keep up the same volume unless you drop the weight. Also doesn’t recovery become an issue?
> it’s a bit counter productive (again unless you’re advanced or enhanced) to take every single set to 0 RIR failure because you cannot keep up the same volume unless you drop the weight.
Taking out tempo or time under tension considerations, you can track and adhere to or manipulate volume workout-to-workout or week-to-week even if you need to lower the weight or number of reps per set. It doesn't have to be counter productive at all.
>Also doesn’t recovery become an issue?
Maybe if you're talking about heavy and taxing lifts, but I can take my ab work or tricep stuff to failure without any recovery issues. "Muscular failure" can be as simple as not being able to do another crunch or only getting a lat pull down to your nose. It's not always dudes pushing until they dramatically fail a squat.
I'm natural. I work with rep ranges, so today for example I did declined BP aiming for 12-10 reps and my sets went like 12-(added 10lbs)-10-10-9-8. Whenever I feel like I reach the top of my rep range without approaching failure I add weight.
The AMRAP set in 5/3/1 according to Jim Wendler should be done with crisp, good form. It's not going to momentary muscular failure, but probably a couple of reps short for most people.
5/3/1 is a template of main lift progression. Wendler emphasizes individual athletes programming their assistance work to support their goals. You are allowed to program your assistance work after the main lifts to failure if training to failure is your goal. He emphasizes submaximal (both in terms of intensity/%1rm and effort) training in most of the popular templates because that’s what he personally thinks is best.
I wouldn't recommend doing 531 personally. To answer your question yeah you do an amrap on the final set. Also in general you shouldn't be going to failure all the time it's better to stay 2-4 reps away from failure because the fatigue will outpace the adaptations.
A strength program without conditioning is not optimal. It's why it's referred to strength and conditioning. You need some 10, 12 an 15 rep sets to accomplish the conditioning component. Doing failures once a week is better than multiple times a week. Doing failure multiple times a week for years is not sustainable. Soft tissue will eventually degenerate which will lead to injuries...chronic ones.
I did 531 for a bit but moved on to Chad Wesley Smith's juggernaut method. I definitely prefer the extended periodization of it. A week of 5s, a week of 3s, and then the 531 week is way too condensed for my liking. Juggernaut has a 10s, 8s, 5s, and 3s mesocycle, each one being 3 weeks long. First week is high volume (like 5x10, amrap to 2-3 short on last set), second week turns intensity up (3x10, amrap to 1-2 last set), third week is 1x amrap to failure, fourth week is deload. Total volume goes down as intensity goes up, and the next mesocycle's training weight is based on how your final amrap goes
> A week of 5s, a week of 3s, and then the 531 week is way too condensed for my liking.
Well, that's just "Original 5/3/1", which is a pretty narrow view of what 5/3/1 is overall.
Many of the templates in 5/3/1 Forever don't even use the 5/3/1 rep scheme.
The templates do have different names. Coffinworm, Leviathan, Spinal Tap, Black Army Jacket, The Morning Star, 1000% Awesome, 5x5/3/1, etc.
And most of the more common/flexible templates like BBB, FSL, SSL, BBS, etc. all have options to run with 5/3/1 reps or 5's Pro reps. In most cases the newest iteration of the templates specify 5's Pro rather than the 5/3/1 rep scheme (like Forever BBB, SSL).
"5/3/1" is really just a brand name that means "Jim Wendler's training framework" and the various templates are like Lego blocks you can snap together to create programming.
I'm amused though that the start of his literature on 5/3/1 is "this is a program you can run forever," and then he writes like 3 books worth of variations. I get why he did it, but it's so funny
I know you all are experts seeking other experts opinions, but from a typical gym user's perspective: The people who aren't at the gym to socialize (\~1/3) like me, start with a rep goal for some number of sets, and usually fail after the first set. My goal on chest press is 3 sets of 12. I struggle to get to 12 of the first set, maybe get 10 on the next, and am down to 6 to 8 on the 3rd. By the time I've gotten to 12/12/12, I've moved up in weight, so in a way, it is mostly fail.
531 is not a really a hypertrophy program more of a strength workout therefore taking sets to failure is not ideal for strength training. You wanna be able to recover quickly from sessions you can strength train again.
Strength training and hypetrophy training are very different things, even though there is a lot of overlap. When training for strength, you don’t want to go to failure. If you do it constantly, you will stall and progress will start going backwards. Alex Bromley’s youtube channel is a great source for strength training programming content.
Accessory movements (single joint stuff) are basically bodybuilding and those can and should be done to failure.
You can do 5/3/1 and hypertrophy training. There is nothing saying you can't do that and do hypertrophy on your supporting isolation sets, or alternate between 5/3/1 and other forms like pyramid, on different cycles of weeks.
185cm 90kg (must have passed 15% bf by now for sure, gained like 5kg in the last 4 months of bulking and I've been training for years already)
5-rep max:
Squat - 100kg
BP - I think 85kg
DL - I think 100kg, have been a while
OHP - around 40kg
I would say it is too early for you to do any program like 531. It doesn't matter how long you have been training, you still have a lot of newbie potential. If I were you I would do a linear progression until you get to a 5RM of 180kg for deadlift and 80kg for OHP. This shouldn't take more than 6 months as long as you are eating enough. You will put on much more muscle from this rather than doing 531 or focusing on bodybuilding style workouts. Those come afterwards to dial in anything you think is lacking in your physique.
You asked the right question. Elsewhere I suggested weekly progress like the Texas Method but yes I’d probably go with something linear (Greyskull or whatever) to get the numbers up first
I think you understand the program OK, failure not being so important. I guess I’d look at the progression scheme with a calculator and ask a couple of questions. 1: are you OK with slow progress because this is a really long-term program. 2. If your strength training has been really lacking maybe a program that adds weight to the bar weekly might still be possible for you? (Texas method for example) 3. Will you go nuts spending every 4th week (as I recall) in recovery mode?
Good points. For the rest of this year i actually have planned 4months of 531, 1 month of hypertrophy and 4 months of cutting. Then 2024 onwards it will be like 4month 531 to every 1 month cutting. Maybe this Texas method is better for this first 4month strength project?
On the 4th week rest, it seems the current 531 program recommends deloak week for the 7th week, you two 2 cycles first. I’m not used to deloading every month so I should be doing the 7th week protocol.
Could you sum up what joker sets are? I didn’t find a good answer online. Let’s say I’m doing 531 BBB 7th week protocol, where does joker sets fits in this?
They are an optional set to take advantage of a good day, eg:
Let’s say on week 2 your amrap (90% of TM) goes well. You could another set (or sets) at 95 or 100% of TM, but stop at 3 reps.
I see… so everytime I feel that my AMRAP set went too easy I can go for an extra 3 rep set with a little more weight, basically? Seems simple enough if that’s it, I may try it.
[удалено]
Can you elaborate on the difference, and what each feels like?
[удалено]
Great advice. I also thought you might be interested to know that muscle burn is not from lactic acid. Physiologists have known this for a long time but it's a persistent myth in the fitness world. https://www.bostonsportsmed.com/2013/08/the-lactic-acid-myth/
Yup lactate actually is there to ease the burn
I lactate into a shaker cup for circular gains
I’m fully aware lactate does not cause soreness and is quickly metabolized but the article doesn’t really say much about what causes the “burn” and doesn’t really rule lactate out. What causes the burn if not the creation of lactate?
As I know what causes the burn are hydrogen ions which come from the anaerobe glycolysis. They turn the ph value lower and the lower ph value stresses your nociceptors so you feel the burn. The lactate dehydrogenase uses that H+ to produce lactate and NAD+ so that actually prevents the ph value from dropping to low which would cause cell death.
Cool. Thanks for the info. I wonder how new that knowledge is. I had 400 level physiology classes in college back in the early 2000’s and the professor, well accomplished and respected, said the burn was lactate. Wondering if this knowledge came out since then or he just didn’t have his facts straight.
So I study physical therapy right now and that knowledge is still not that common. A lot therapist and professors of other subjects (not physiology) also still saying that the lactate causes the burn.
Heck, most people don’t know that lactic acid doesn’t exist in the human body and is always lactate. First step is calling it the correct name, then maybe we can get them to stop having it be associated with the burn.
Thank you!
I agree with a lot of what you said, but isn't the rest period mostly about allowing ATP to reach critical mass to provide the energy for each set?
Been a while since I studied physiology, so take this for what it’s worth. I don’t think these two things are mutually exclusive, just because you need to train your cns to engage your muscles differently can’t mean your muscles can be depleted. Aka the muscles still need energy, hence the prolonged rest periods
[удалено]
MPS isn't happening at a rate quick enough to benefit you during a few minutes rest. CNS fatigue could play a role, but it isn't the bottleneck in almost any situation unless you're really overdosing yourself. Overwhelming majority of the time it's ATP which is limited mostly by glucose and glycogen stores which are broken down into glucose which is oxidized by muscle cells to produce ATP. That really isn't CNS fatigue lol.
Wait, is CNS failure the reason why my right pec will randomly give out with no warning?? It will feel fine for 4/5 reps, but then on rep 5 it just goes on vacation!
> A common - and sometimes deserved - complaint with powerlifters in commercial gyms is that they take freakin’ forever between sets. That’s not to allow their muscles time to recover, it’s to allow their CNS to recover. That takes a little longer even for a trained lifter. Huh, I run almost exclusively strength programs and I always only rest 90 seconds between sets unless I'm going very heavy or doing crazy volume (looking at you, Deepwater).
[удалено]
nSuns, CAP3, Deepwater and 5/3/1 are the programs I prefer. Even on CAP3 when I'm doing 9 sets of heavy triples on deadlift, I'm still only resting 90 seconds. Deepwater is the only program where I've felt I needed 3-5mins rest. But that's mainly due to the insane volume and just being absolutely gassed after each set.
It actually takes longer for a trained lifter because your CNS trains far slower than your muscles, so as the a trained lifter lifting higher weights require longer intervals to recover, both in terms of sets during a workout and between workouts itself.
This is such a true statement.
I think the problem here is you're equating "hypertrophy training" with "training to failure all the time" and that's just simply not true and probably not even ideal.
There are some fitness based subs that truly believe you need to always go to or close to failure. They’re taking progressive overload way too literally and with a short term focus
Well, sets should be performed close to failure to maximize muscle growth. But that depends on what you define as "close to failure". I would define it as "0-4 Reps in Reserve" aka RPE 6-10. With this in mind an keeping the average intensity at around 2 RIR or 8 RPE should be near optimal for muscle growth. Can't say about strength.
training with intensity to failure has helped me have significant progress vs not.
On the converse, in 23 years of training I've failed a squat 6 times, bench about 3, deadlift once or twice. It's a RARE instance for me. It's what is so cool about lifting: so many approaches work!
Because you're supposed to train on a 9RPE. leave 1 rep in the tank. Absolute failure does more harm than good - the risks outweigh the benefits
I think there are times for RPE10 and RPE7, and everything in between. To say everything needs to be RPE 9 all the time is a ridiculous statement
I didn't say that you need to be at RPE9 all the time. However RPE9 with 1-2 reps in the tank is what you should be aiming towards in order to put as much strain on the muscle as possible. If you do deload weeks on a RPE6-7 that's a different story, in order to progress you need to push yourself and that means increasing your intensity.
Yes you did clearly imply that, don’t give me that bs
Don't strawman what I said then.
[удалено]
I’m not who you replied to but it probably is the OP saying he’s trained only for hypertrophy and then being hung up on taking everything to failure every session.
[удалено]
Because you can achieve hypertrophy by not taking every set to failure
[удалено]
Hypertrophy programs by knowledgeable coaches that don’t have you take every set to failure and that volume should be the main focus for hypertrophy.
Not true at all. Intensity plays a pretty big part as does form and tension. It's so nuanced that your generalized take is harmful even though you understand it to be true.
Intensity doesn't necessarily mean training to failure - e.g. doing 5 x 12 reps of squats with 1 rep left in reserve for each set is pretty intense.
[удалено]
I didn't say it did. I'm saying there's more to it than volume.
If you read the context of the thread you’ll understand that I’m arguing in favor of nuance. I say multiple times that there are several factors and multiple approaches work. I did not say volume is all that matters, just that it is a primary focus.
But it's not even the primary focus - that is my point. EG Dorian Yates, Mentzer bros etc. Their volume was low low. My ultimate point is - everyone is different and different things work for different people.
[удалено]
John Meadows is the first one that comes to mind. Gamma Bomb has several days where you don’t reach failure on any movements for example. [Here are two days from the program that will kick anyone’s ass and have zero sets to failure. ](https://imgur.com/a/JyxRC3q/) Jim Wendler, the designer of 531. The Stronger by Science templates (including the hypertrophy one) don’t have you reach failure on every set. I think you’re confused or I’m not being clear. Or you want some “gotcha” moment. Working to failure can be used for hypertrophy, but hypertrophy can be achieved in other ways. https://www.strongerbyscience.com/training-to-failure-or-just-training-to-fail/amp/ this is a good read. It’s a tool in the toolbox but is not magic as stated in this article.
How heavy are those set of 8 barbell squats. That could end up being a ton of sets and brutal. Gamma bomb looks pretty cool
John meadows coaches IFBB pros you dunce. The fact that you think a degree is more valuable than results tells me all I need to know. Does Terrence Ruffin have a bad physique? John coached him.
Thank you for taking care of Mr. Jokester, I was just writing my own essay when I went to post it he had deleted his ridiculous reply. It would just be nice if people were more humble and took the listening approach and try to learn rather than argue with research and proven results. The point I wanted to make for him was that in his mind he makes gains faster in a few months what takes others 5 years and to make it simple it doesn't paint the whole story. You, most on this thread and I know that the majority of gym goers are just making the rounds. They aren't disciplined in workout routine and dieting regimen. They workout but eat trash right after or they show up but have no clue how to get a proper workout in. It may just be that he is doing those parts better than most and isn't necessarily because of his exhaustion of every single muscle. Also he may just have predisposition DNA with more hormones available to him. So many factors at play that he fails to even consider. Anyways that's my 2 cents, rant over. Sorry guys have an awesome day.
>coaches Oof. Hate to do this, but it’s *coached.
This looks alot like sealioning
lol, first time I saw it in action after learning what the word meant recently.
Are you being this insufferable on purpose? Tons of people don't train to failure and have achieved various degrees of hypertrophy , thus proving failure is not necessary for it. Optimality isn't the point here
[удалено]
Is this your throwaway account or something? Or do you consistently get banned for being insufferable?
How do you summon the final boss of r/confidentlyincorrect ?
Post physique
Why are you here giving people homework?
🦭
There's like 30 million resources that show while taking sets to failure can be an element of hypertrophy, it by no means is the only way and this has been extremely well known in basically every element of the weightlifting community for awhile [Here is a meta-analysis study](https://www.sci-sport.com/en/articles/training-to-failure-or-not-impact-on-hypertrophy-and-strength-193.php). Basically a study number crunching a bunch of similar studies on a single topic.
Basic principles of falsifiability. If someone builds muscle and has not taken that muscle to failure, it cannot be true that taking a muscle to failure is required for hypertrophy. I train an 83 year old woman who has never taken a set to failure with me and never will. She regularly gets dexa scans to keep an eye on her bone density and muscle mass. Both have increased while she was working with me, and I know for a fact that she has not taken any other exercise to failure.
That's like asking why should someone use progressive overload in the gym, or why use an umbrella when it rains.
> use an umbrella when it rains. What are you basing this on?
No disrespect, but did you get really strong and reach great numbers taking each set to failure everyday? If so why are you deciding to switch? Or maybe what you’re doing currently not working well, hence the switch? Why don’t you take the 50-100 reps of push, pull, and core work close to failure? You do those every single day of 531.
No! My strength is very far from those who have followed strength programs, but my size is alright. That's why I'm switching, I want a more functional body. People take the reps for BBB and assistance work to failure? My program sets a fixed weight and reps for BBB and it's so low that I doubt I'll reach failure.
Oh sweet Jesus, don't do that. The key for 5/3/1 is building off of the volume. It's essentially a very open ended system for top set, drop set. A training style used for a long time for powerlifting, strongman, and oly lifting. You'll go straight into a wall if you start taking every set to failure. And even Wendler has backed off AMRAPS for the most part. His new updates give you the option to do everything in sets of 5 and not AMRAP the last top set at all. You can fill out more bodybuilding work in your assistance exercises. If you read the programs it'll say 50-100 pushes, pulls etc. That's the bodybuilding stuff. The program doesn't designate it out because its too individual and honestly not rocket science to figure out. Your 100 pushes could be in 5 x10 sets of weighted dips, 5 sets 8-12 chest flies, take some tricep exercise to failure a few times, done. Although again, the recommendation is don't go full on to failure on the assistance or only do it occasionally. The assistance is to build volume on muscle groups the big barbell movements tend to not hit. The goal is to get them done\*, not to go to failure.\* 5/3/1 is beloved because it is a straightforward, adaptable **generalist** program for intermediates who have run out most beginner linear programs list Greyskull, starting strength etc. It'll get you reasonably strong and reasonably good looking naked. Its not ideal for either but most people don't need ideal, they need consistent. And its many many sub-programs allow you to adapt to other needs. Want to get strong? Boring but Strong template. Want to get big? Boring but big. Want to run a marathon but not stop lifting? First set last 5x5. Soldier with a bunch of PT prep you need to do for ranger school? Cool, program all that high rep PT stuff as your assistance. Newborn baby and are getting a cool 2.5 hours of sleep a night? Not Doing Jack Shit program. Wendler is an old Westside guy: a program known for being brutal, having guys throw up crazy powerlifting weights, and having everyone blasting and coasting ridiculous amounts of PEDs. By his own admission he got tired of only being able to waddle up to the bar, squat an insane single and waddle away. He also mostly works with high schoolers now which sort of gives away the point of 5/3/1: getting in the lifting volume you *need* when the other 50-80% is the main point. That 50-80% might be football practice, wrestling, running, being a soldier, being a dad, having a life etc.
This guy Wendlers
What's a good one for bjj?
In my complete bullshitter on the internet recommendation (but also based on the [man himself's recommendation for 5/3/1 with a marathon running block](https://forums.t-nation.com/t/5-3-1-and-long-distance-running/224444)) To the questions of "I want to do 5/3/1 but I have to do this other thing that's very taxing like football, martial arts, running a marathon, morning unit PT" The answer is basically always "5s pro, 5x5 first set last" and hedge expectations.
If it helps u/SodHawk, I used to compete in kickobxing and boxing, and now I do grappling (freestyle wrestling and BJJ) at a much lower hobby level. But the way I made training work basically always boils down to listening to your body and testing out to see what works. I managed to do the 5/3/1 BBB that coincidentally OP is mentioning with a lot of success. In my experience, yes your muscles are tired if you workout before a training session, but it's not really a real obstacle. During BJJ (or wrestling or any other) training session, you usually aren't supposed to be going all out, RPE 9 type of training. You're focusing on technique, practice. Your muscles aren't supposed to take a beating each time. For me what seemed to be the hardest to fit wasn't the lifting weights, but the cardio sessions. I kind of just gave up cardio because the 3-4 training sessions a week were very demanding cardio wise anyway and I just felt overly exhausted by doing cardio runs on top of that.
When would you schedule your lifting and bjj sessions though? I’m also a bjj guy with a wrestling background so my sessions are pretty intense. I don’t lift while grappling for this reason but am interested in seeing how others make it work
I did BJJ and 5/3/1 for a year. But I modified the exercises in 5/3/1 so I wouldnt hurt so bad during BJJ
Any chance of telling me what you did?
Do you have a link to the new ideas about NOT going to failure on the last AMRAP set? First time I've heard of this. Can you explain more about why he's changed his idea about this?
Wendler has never said go to failure on the AMRAP sets. He says it right in the books.
Well yeah he's always been a "to technical failure" or "1-2 in the tank" but I think the question is specifically about what Wendell calls 5's pro.
5's pro has no amrap sets at all. It's just 3x5
*Deleted my distracted comment*
No it's not, it's just changing 5/3/1 to 5/5/5 with no AMRAP. Source: Beyond 5/3/1
Yep, sorry. Completely wasn’t paying attention.
He goes into it in Forever but you see bits and pieces of it in Beyond 531 and some of his other writings. One of the problem with Wendlers ADHD writing and unwillingness to actually make a comprehensive system is he tends to bounce and never fully explain himself. Anyway, Forever lays out a protocol called "5's pro" which he uses in basically every Leader/Accumulation template in the book. All the percentages in all of the weeks are done as sets of 5. No AMRAPS. So \- week 1 is : 65%x5, 75%x5, 85%x5 then FSL/BBB/etc \- Week 2 is 70%x5, 80%x5, 90%x5 etc. Reasoning being it spreads out volume across all 3 of these main ramping sets, makes it so the first two sets aren't quasi warmups (a very common nitpick). And keeps the AMRAP from gassing people since AMRAP stress to stimulus is usually a little high. Again you kinda see the logic if he's coaching high school football and wrestlers. AMRAPs for the lifts 4x a week and then hitting actual practice ends up taking away more the practice (its like someone told me is "the wrestling paradox." Being strong is extremely important. And often the strongest guy wins. But the **unambiguous** best way to get better at wresting faster is to practice, not lift). He still includes the more traditional 5/3/1 rep scheme and AMRAPS. But saves them for what he calls "anchor" phases. Basically the ones where you do tests, PRs, joker and window maker sets etc. While the "leader" phases are basically accumulation phases to build volume.
Good explanation. Thanks for taking the time.
Wait am I supposed to be doing 100 reps of push and 100 reps of pull. Or 100 reps of a combo of push and pull exercises?
100 reps of push, 100 reps of pull, 100 reps of single leg/core work every workout, as clearly laid out in the book.
Yes 100 of each. I'll add a slight addendum to this. He also quasi-contradicts himself a few times in the few programs that actually lay out "fine I'll write an actual assistance program" (hardgainers, building the monolith, triumvirate) and then has the assistance round out the days since this is generally a "one lift a day per week" focused methodology. For example, doing pushes, such as dips etc only on lower body days but doing no additional pushes on your bench days. Additionally, everything that is a push **is a push** regardless of how isolation-y or easy it is. Tricep extensions are a push. Rotator cuff rehab stuff is a push. Easy pushup volume is a push. You can and should do seated dumbbell presses as your "push" on day 1 but chest flies on day 2, etc. The system is very much "I'm not bothering to program assistance because I don't know the exercises that work for you and the weights you use. Just do the general reps in your weak areas or stuff you want to work on. Add weight or reps once it feels too-easy but also never kill yourself."
You’ve not read the books have you? It’ll be hard to explain if you haven’t done the reading.
No... It's too expensive for my currency. Is it really crucial? I'm gathering info from around the internet on the program instead.
send me your email in DMand I'll buy whatever 5/3/1 ebooks there are for you
You’re a legend
Much appreciated! But I just got access to the 531 second edition and will be reading it soon.
My dude, just take the offer of getting the newest edition from a stranger for free. Get strong, pass your knowledge to three next people.
The gym bro we don't deserve <3
The program is not adequately explained online anywhere that I have found. I own 531 2nd edition, 531 for Powerlifting, Beyond 531, and 531 Forever, and can honestly say the best money you can spend on your training among those is likely 531 2nd edition in ebook form. It's 10usd to get it on the free Kindle app. Do not rely on people online to tell you about it, they always get it wrong.
[удалено]
The book absolutely necessary to read? For lifting? The gist of this seems simple.
Absolutely, can you explain the rationale behind the 50 or so different programs in the book, how you are supposed to train and progress accessory lifts, how many days of easy conditioning and hard conditioning you’re supposed to do on the different templates, which templates are good for bulking, cutting, competition prep? What anchor should follow which leader? I highly doubt it’s as simple as you think. Really obvious by OPs complete lack of understanding on the topic.
Stronger by science and tactical barbell both have build your own programs that are have similar, and higher volumes and intensity than most 5/3/1 programs, TB in particular is heavy on conditioning and cardio, and SBS in particular has reps to failure every single day. 5/3/1 warriors get over the top fanatical about insisting people follow the programming to the letter, when Wendler himself says stuff like "just row something, don't overcomplicate it, pick up a weight and row for some reps". IMO the best criticism of 5/3/1 is that it was designed as supplementary to an athletes main sports programming, and most of Wendlers refinements have followed his own goals of putting less and less time in the gym. There's way better programming out there for specific goals.
More volume than all 531 templates? There’s two 531 template that has you doing 115 reps of your main compound before you do 100 reps of push, 100 reps of pull, and 100 reps of core four times a week. I’ve read both additional programs, neither have volume that great. Also, I agree with everything else you said. I’m unsure why it was said because it doesn’t really combat anything that I brought up.
The great thing is that you’ll end building size too!
Try beefcake instead. Each 3rd week should get you at least close to failure on the 5x10's if your TM is ambitious enough
531 is just a short way of saying "training programs made by jim wendler". He has over 50 programs and variations. https://liftvault.com/resources/531-glossary/ https://www.keylifts.com/templates/531 The hypertrophy doesn't come from the 531 sets. It comes from the assistance exercises. Check out "531 for bodybuilding" and "531 boring but strong" for example.
r/531discussion is a good resource. 531 is intentionally sub-maximal. Your thought process that everything needs to be taken to failure is also flawed. Which 531 template are you doing?
I’m going to start the BBB variant in a few days
I think you’ll find once you get your TM set appropriately it’s plenty difficult.
TM?
training max
Thank you!
First read enough about 531. It's s great way of training, if you understand the meaning of it.
I've ran the 5/3/1 5's PRO BBB and this is a great program that will smoke you if your TM is set too high. Have an appropriate TM.
Failure is not paramount in training. I haven't failed a set in many months and I have never been stronger. I have come close to failure, RPE 9ish, but never actual failure.
This blows my mind a bit but I'm looking forward to.
If you train to failure every day you’re likely going to stall pretty quickly, your CNS is not going to be having it. You might even regress. Highly recommend maybe doing a bit more research from people on that side of the weights. Lots of crossover, but also lots of pretty big differences.
You’ll be surprised how much you can get out of your workouts by *not* going to failure and messing up your ability to recover. People who are going for size & aesthetics instead of strength & performance sometimes have this hurdle to get over but the “less is more” attitude can truly take you a long way if you are careful about it.
when I have done 5/3/1 successfully in the past, I have been surprised at how little work I've had to do. you don't need to kill yourself to make progress. Lift very heavy things, eat plenty, get rest.
What drives hypertrophy is volume. With submaximal training, you get slightly less intensity per set, but significantly more volume. For 5/3/1, you've literally only accounted for the main lifts. Supplemental volume is also generally high, especially on things like BBB or BBB Beefcake. Accessory volume can also be high if you let it be. Doing 50-100 reps of chinups and dips, 3-4x a week, adds up to a lot. This isn't even counting the conditioning work you're suppose to do. Sled walks will absolutely build your legs. 80lb weighted vest walks will similarly build up your back strength a lot too.
[удалено]
https://www.strongerbyscience.com/the-new-approach-to-training-volume/ And one of the key findings: > Doing more sets or volume (it’s still a little unclear which better predicts gains, although I lean toward more sets) gives you more results. If your intensity is high enough that you can only do 1-2 sets for a muscle group, the stimulus for growth isn't going to be nearly as high as a dude who trains a little bit more submaximally, and hits 30 sets for the same muscle group.
So, would top-down pyramid style of training be most effective for strength and hypertrophy? As in, starting heavy and dropping the weight every set and going near or to failure. I have a feeling personally that it's both effective time-wise (less rest needed between sets) and most stimulating (there's both high tension in the first sets and a lot of volume in the last sets)
You can try it if you want. Or, you could do one of the many proven programs that also train you at a great variety of rep ranges. The thing about what you're saying is that, the moment you start moving some heavier weights, even if you're only going to "near failure", you're still going to get beat to shit. On the other hand, submaximal volume is still volume, and provides almost as much stimulus for growth while having a fraction of the fatigue of going to "near failure".
If intensity was the main driver doing singles would get you jacked beyond belief... Alas it doesn't. While important, as doing sets of [email protected] will get you nowhere as well, you need both a moderate volume and proper intensity. (volume referring to total volume not just # of reps)
I said intensity was the key driver - not the only thing that matters. You took what I said and then said “ok well you could then do singles and get jacked beyond belief”. I obviously wasn’t saying that, but okay, then if volume is all the matters I could take a 10 lb ez curl and do 150 reps of 2H bicep curls and get jacked beyond belief, but that’s just going to get me a pump and not drive hypertrophy (sure, you’ll get some growth from that, but you’d also get growth from singles). My point was the key driver is intensity (meaning the most important thing, not the *only thing*) meaning that doing 4x12 with 1-2 RIR is better than doing 4x18 with 6-7 RIR.
Kind of ironic that you complain about misinterpretation, and then misinterpret something yourself. Nobody said that volume is all that matters. In the same vein, intensity is not all that matters. However, training volume is currently the best predictor of muscle growth. It should be noted, though, that "volume" means the number of *hard* sets you do, i.e. sets within a certain proximity of failure. If we use your 4x12 1-2RIR vs 4x18 6-7RIR, then yes, the 4x12 is better, but that's because of the proximity to failure, not the higher intensity.
Whoosh….
You are correct that volume is not the primary driver of hypertrophy, but this is using the traditional definition of volume which is sets x reps x weight over a workout. What current research has shown is that not all reps are created equal. Meaning there are reps that stimulate hypertrophy and reps that don’t. The intensity you referred to could also be described as the reps that drive hypertrophy, also called “effective reps” or “stimulating reps”. These are the reps that have a large amount of mechanical tension and maximum motor unit recruitment. These are the difficult, slow reps that occur in the last few reps of the set or throughout the whole set if the load is heavy enough. So when talking about volume it is correct to say volume by the traditional definition is not a driver of hypertrophy considering you could do a massive amount of volume with light loads and stay far away from failure and not grow at all or maybe grow very little if you are an untrained individual. However if your talking about volume in terms of effective reps then it would be correct to say that volume drives hypertrophy.
>I was under the impression that volume is not the key driver for hypertrophy, but rather intensity (though obviously volume is a component of just working out in general). The key driver is actually how intense you work and basically reps left in reserve at the end of your sets, and that’s what drives hypertrophy You are actually right. Volume in itself is a bit of a red herring when it comes to building muscle, otherwise marathon runners would have the biggest legs out of anyone and you could get jacked curling bananas. If you were to curl a banana to failure, the only reps that would matter would be the last couple, so there has to be some degree of intensity. The intensity is what drives mechanical tension and that's where we see change. Volume is just an accumulation of your work, it will probably correlate with muscle growth but it is not causing it.
What could one banana weigh, ten pounds?
It’s been scientifically proven that lifting with an RER of +-2 gives better strength gains than going to failure. Additionally lifting to failure produces higher neurological, muscular and metabolic stress which can negatively impact training volume and recovery. For alot of us it’s counterintuitive, because most of us have been lifting on broscience for years, and the true physiological science has only reached the fitness industry in recent years: Tldr: Yes lifting less frequently and not until failure will improve results. Source: Pubmed, WebOfScience, my own braincortex
Can you link the study? How about failure for hypertrophy? I'd imagine in a size context, going to failure is more acceptable. Especially with relatively light weights and reps. I'm sure metabolic stress isn't an issue with 10 rep strict bicep curls to failure or not.
You've been training for many years but you're blown away by the idea of not going to failure? Have you been working out in a bubble and never seen or talked to anyone with a different training style?
Most of the sources I've listened talk about reaching failure for hypertrophy. Not in every set, but in most of them and specially near the end. Sets should be made with a rep range like 10-12 where if you can get to 13\~14 you need to increase weight, so you usually fail at that rep range or get very close to. Strength training isn't very famous or practiced in my country. My gym has like 40 people at the same time and just 1 squat rack that I can usually find free to use.
Thats a standard hypertrophy regimen and not real going to failure. You aim for 8-12 if you get 14 the weight is indeed too low. That's doable without working to failure I do this range and it's not working to failure. Because I don't fail. You just work until you reach an 8 RPE at most a 9 and stop basically. I always have at least 2 even 3 left in the tank if I give it my all I just don't push beyond that. It's not the same as working to failure it's just working
It works because failure isn't what drives strength gain. High intensity with a low rep range is what drives strength, even if you aren't quite at muscular failure by the end of each set.
To add to this: strength is a skill as much as it is having the muscle mass required to lift the weight. So strength programs have you practicing the skill. Hypertrophy is driven by training stimulus. So hitting the minimum stimulus is necessary to drive growth. Hitting a higher stimulus tends to increase growth even further. So hypertrophy programs have you working hard to stimulate the muscles a lot.
I actually hate going to failure on anything. My form suffers and I am worried about injury. I am getting results just fine without doing that.
I have been using a 5/3/1 program mixed with some hypertrophy work for the past 10 weeks and have seen great strength gains from it. I think an AMRAP for the last set of the compound movement (leaving 1 or 2 left in the tank though) has been working great for me. I run my program on a 4 day split leaving a lot of recovery time. Also, I haven’t felt the need to take a deload week so, I run the program without it. I think it’s good for strength gains but, it’s a slow process. I’d recommended doing research on the program or buying the book itself before fully committing to it. Either way you need to train hard, eat right, and get enough rest to get the gains for whatever program you decide on.
I like to make a big modification to 531. Normally 531 has you warm up, then do 3 work sets in ascending fashion. What I _don't_ like about this is that the first two sets come with a lot of fatigue, but aren't very stimulating. If it's 5's week, you're probably 10+ reps away from failure in one or both of those sets. They are basically fatiguing warm-up sets. You end up with worse performance for your top set. Because of this, I make a simple change but it fundamentally changes the program. I take the 3 ascending sets and turn them into descending straight sets. I warm up with a few sets (3 or 4), then I do the top set until I'm 2 reps from failure (2 RIR, which stands for reps in reserve). I reduce the load by 5+%, then do another set at 2 RIR. Then I reduce the current load by 5+% and do the final set at 2 RIR. I find that these 5+% decreases keep me at the same number of reps across all 3 sets. So, instead of 1 highly stimulating set, I get 3. The loads for each set are very similar to what 531 plans. So it's basically the same sets but in reverse. Except you'll probably be doing a couple more reps to reach 2 RIR for the two lighter sets. NOTE: By 5+%, I mean that when calculating 95% of the current load, if I have to pick between rounding up or rounding down to what I can load on the bar, I will round down. NOTE: I do not make this modification for 1's week. I make a similar modification to the templates. If the template I'm following calls for more sets of the main movement after those 3 main sets, I change it to a variation of a related movement. For example, if it's squat day and the template calls for more sets of squats, I instead do a deadlift variation. If they are straight sets at a high initial RIR (like boring but big), I'll do them as descending straight sets at 5 RIR (so very similar to the work sets). I leave the rest of the program intact. 5's week, 3's week, 1's week. Leader templates, anchor templates. Etc. I find these modifications result in more strength gains, at least when tracking my progress with them. These changes also make the program more similar to hypertrophy training, except with rep ranges too low to work for that kind of training. It might feel more familiar to someone who comes from that background.
You've seriously been going to failure, and therefore having to roll the barbell off of your chest, every single bench set for years? I doubt it. Plus 531 is a system. Within it there are hypertrophy and peaking programs. It sounds like you need to do some reading.
Never for barbell BP, of course. If I want failure in chest I need to go to a machine/cable/dumbell or call a spotter. I did barbell declined BP today, 5x10. My sets went like 12-10-10-9-8. I know how my body responds when it's getting close to failure so there was no way I could reach 12reps in the last set for example without risking injury or embaressment. My last squat (I'm doing 5x5 there) went 5-5-4-3-2 and I failed to get up in the last 2, the barbell lied on the squat rack supports.
No offense, but I agree with a few of the commenters who have a hard time believing that you've been going to true failure. There is a difference between "I'm in incredible discomfort on my sixth rep and therefore my mind has forced me to stop" failure and "I have put 100% of the energy possible into this bar, and my muscles just can't move it" failure. I had a friend who would fail at front squats every time we trained, but really he just was hitting a point of extreme discomfort and knew it was okay to bail out. True failure means that you couldn't have lifted that weight if your life was on the line. People, myself included, are generally pretty terrible at estimating when they've reached true failure. Some study with moderately trained lifters showed that when they were asked to identify the point in which they had two reps left, most people actually had six or more reps left.
I understand the skepticism, but a few weeks ago I tried to squeeze these extra reps and left with my back hurting for days after it. I couldn’t keep form. Maybe with a picture perfect technique I can do 1 or 2 extra reps, but I find it unlikely because I reach failure all the time in less risky exercises and my body simply cant move anymore not even if my life depended on it… so for squats I consider my last possible rep as the one it took a long time to drive the bar up and a failure where my body stops for a few seconds and cant go up anymore than I have to let it go.
You don't "rep to failure" in 5/3/1. You do a 1 rep max or RPE 9 once a workout on the compound lift of that workout. These are not the same. Lifting a light weight 10+ times until you run out of muscle glycogen is not the same as a max effort lift from fresh. You stress your nervous system as much as your muscles.
You should really get the book (either Beyond 531 or 531 Forever). It's hard to understand the program with it.
I got the 2nd edition pdf but unfortunately what is in there is basically outdated now since there is no mention of joker sets/leader-anchor/7th week protocol on it. 531 forever is basically 1/3 of the monthly minimum wage where I live so yeah no way I'm ever buying that. Gonna research the internet a little longer.
In the newest book Wendler recommends 5s PRO which is only doing 5 reps for your top sets, no AMRAPs
What?? Is the 5+, 3+ and 1+ reps dead? Lol Has this been adopted by most?
It’s in his newest book so yes
Dude, it's actually not good to go failure in every exercise every day. Also, basic 5/3/1 isn't 3x week, its 4x week.
Not really strength, but look at Dorian Yates workouts. He won mr Olympia with his very minimalistic workouts (and juice)
No offense, but if you take every set to absolute failure, how do your subsequent sets not suffer unless you keep dropping the weight? Especially if you do bro splits (just assuming that’s what you do since you said you used to do a 5 day split) If you’re enhanced that’s one thing, but it doesn’t sound like you are.
> how do your subsequent sets not suffer This is an expected and programmed part of different training styles. It's why you'll see some programs with RPE and RIR targets instead of strict rep numbers or direction to do X reps in as few sets as possible. It's not a concept that should offend anyone.
It’s his program so he can do whatever he wants. I’m just skeptical about him actually going to actual muscular failure every single set. To address your point: I understand RIR and that there are routines out there that encourage going to failure sometimes or even on the last set. But I haven’t heard of one where you take all sets of an exercise to complete failure unless you’re an elite lifter. Targets are one thing, but based on what I’ve heard and read about, it’s a bit counter productive (again unless you’re advanced or enhanced) to take every single set to 0 RIR failure because you cannot keep up the same volume unless you drop the weight. Also doesn’t recovery become an issue?
> it’s a bit counter productive (again unless you’re advanced or enhanced) to take every single set to 0 RIR failure because you cannot keep up the same volume unless you drop the weight. Taking out tempo or time under tension considerations, you can track and adhere to or manipulate volume workout-to-workout or week-to-week even if you need to lower the weight or number of reps per set. It doesn't have to be counter productive at all. >Also doesn’t recovery become an issue? Maybe if you're talking about heavy and taxing lifts, but I can take my ab work or tricep stuff to failure without any recovery issues. "Muscular failure" can be as simple as not being able to do another crunch or only getting a lat pull down to your nose. It's not always dudes pushing until they dramatically fail a squat.
I'm natural. I work with rep ranges, so today for example I did declined BP aiming for 12-10 reps and my sets went like 12-(added 10lbs)-10-10-9-8. Whenever I feel like I reach the top of my rep range without approaching failure I add weight.
[удалено]
I avoid going to failure in the barbell BP as I said, still I get very close hence the drops in the last sets.
You're not supposed to take any of your main lifts to failure on 5/3/1.
I’ve been doing AMRAPs each week on the last set. Should I be doing 5s instead? So 65x5, 75x5, and then 85x5? Instead of 85x5+? Similarly for 3s
You can do whichever you prefer. AMRAP sets are much more fun. But you shouldn't take those to failure either.
I go until I slow down which is usually 1-2 more depending on how I’m doing that day.
The AMRAP set in 5/3/1 according to Jim Wendler should be done with crisp, good form. It's not going to momentary muscular failure, but probably a couple of reps short for most people.
5/3/1 is a template of main lift progression. Wendler emphasizes individual athletes programming their assistance work to support their goals. You are allowed to program your assistance work after the main lifts to failure if training to failure is your goal. He emphasizes submaximal (both in terms of intensity/%1rm and effort) training in most of the popular templates because that’s what he personally thinks is best.
I wouldn't recommend doing 531 personally. To answer your question yeah you do an amrap on the final set. Also in general you shouldn't be going to failure all the time it's better to stay 2-4 reps away from failure because the fatigue will outpace the adaptations.
Why don’t you recommend 531?
A strength program without conditioning is not optimal. It's why it's referred to strength and conditioning. You need some 10, 12 an 15 rep sets to accomplish the conditioning component. Doing failures once a week is better than multiple times a week. Doing failure multiple times a week for years is not sustainable. Soft tissue will eventually degenerate which will lead to injuries...chronic ones.
I did 531 for a bit but moved on to Chad Wesley Smith's juggernaut method. I definitely prefer the extended periodization of it. A week of 5s, a week of 3s, and then the 531 week is way too condensed for my liking. Juggernaut has a 10s, 8s, 5s, and 3s mesocycle, each one being 3 weeks long. First week is high volume (like 5x10, amrap to 2-3 short on last set), second week turns intensity up (3x10, amrap to 1-2 last set), third week is 1x amrap to failure, fourth week is deload. Total volume goes down as intensity goes up, and the next mesocycle's training weight is based on how your final amrap goes
> A week of 5s, a week of 3s, and then the 531 week is way too condensed for my liking. Well, that's just "Original 5/3/1", which is a pretty narrow view of what 5/3/1 is overall. Many of the templates in 5/3/1 Forever don't even use the 5/3/1 rep scheme.
Thinking maybe Jim should rename the template if it doesn't follow the 5/3/1 scheme
The templates do have different names. Coffinworm, Leviathan, Spinal Tap, Black Army Jacket, The Morning Star, 1000% Awesome, 5x5/3/1, etc. And most of the more common/flexible templates like BBB, FSL, SSL, BBS, etc. all have options to run with 5/3/1 reps or 5's Pro reps. In most cases the newest iteration of the templates specify 5's Pro rather than the 5/3/1 rep scheme (like Forever BBB, SSL). "5/3/1" is really just a brand name that means "Jim Wendler's training framework" and the various templates are like Lego blocks you can snap together to create programming.
I'm amused though that the start of his literature on 5/3/1 is "this is a program you can run forever," and then he writes like 3 books worth of variations. I get why he did it, but it's so funny
I know you all are experts seeking other experts opinions, but from a typical gym user's perspective: The people who aren't at the gym to socialize (\~1/3) like me, start with a rep goal for some number of sets, and usually fail after the first set. My goal on chest press is 3 sets of 12. I struggle to get to 12 of the first set, maybe get 10 on the next, and am down to 6 to 8 on the 3rd. By the time I've gotten to 12/12/12, I've moved up in weight, so in a way, it is mostly fail.
So, you train suboptimally due to ego? You’d fit in a LOT more volume if you just checked yourself.
You do not need to go to failure, or anywhere near it to make make strength gains. I probably go to failure like... way less than even once per week.
531 is not a really a hypertrophy program more of a strength workout therefore taking sets to failure is not ideal for strength training. You wanna be able to recover quickly from sessions you can strength train again.
Strength training and hypetrophy training are very different things, even though there is a lot of overlap. When training for strength, you don’t want to go to failure. If you do it constantly, you will stall and progress will start going backwards. Alex Bromley’s youtube channel is a great source for strength training programming content. Accessory movements (single joint stuff) are basically bodybuilding and those can and should be done to failure.
You can do 5/3/1 and hypertrophy training. There is nothing saying you can't do that and do hypertrophy on your supporting isolation sets, or alternate between 5/3/1 and other forms like pyramid, on different cycles of weeks.
What are your numbers? Weight, height, lifts?
185cm 90kg (must have passed 15% bf by now for sure, gained like 5kg in the last 4 months of bulking and I've been training for years already) 5-rep max: Squat - 100kg BP - I think 85kg DL - I think 100kg, have been a while OHP - around 40kg
I would say it is too early for you to do any program like 531. It doesn't matter how long you have been training, you still have a lot of newbie potential. If I were you I would do a linear progression until you get to a 5RM of 180kg for deadlift and 80kg for OHP. This shouldn't take more than 6 months as long as you are eating enough. You will put on much more muscle from this rather than doing 531 or focusing on bodybuilding style workouts. Those come afterwards to dial in anything you think is lacking in your physique.
You asked the right question. Elsewhere I suggested weekly progress like the Texas Method but yes I’d probably go with something linear (Greyskull or whatever) to get the numbers up first
You might have more fat than you think or I would expect your lifts to be a lot higher at that weight.
Size ≠ strength
I think you understand the program OK, failure not being so important. I guess I’d look at the progression scheme with a calculator and ask a couple of questions. 1: are you OK with slow progress because this is a really long-term program. 2. If your strength training has been really lacking maybe a program that adds weight to the bar weekly might still be possible for you? (Texas method for example) 3. Will you go nuts spending every 4th week (as I recall) in recovery mode?
Good points. For the rest of this year i actually have planned 4months of 531, 1 month of hypertrophy and 4 months of cutting. Then 2024 onwards it will be like 4month 531 to every 1 month cutting. Maybe this Texas method is better for this first 4month strength project? On the 4th week rest, it seems the current 531 program recommends deloak week for the 7th week, you two 2 cycles first. I’m not used to deloading every month so I should be doing the 7th week protocol.
There is also BBB 5/3/1, just saying.
I really enjoy adding joker sets. Allows me to get another good working set in on a good day.
Could you sum up what joker sets are? I didn’t find a good answer online. Let’s say I’m doing 531 BBB 7th week protocol, where does joker sets fits in this?
They are an optional set to take advantage of a good day, eg: Let’s say on week 2 your amrap (90% of TM) goes well. You could another set (or sets) at 95 or 100% of TM, but stop at 3 reps.
I see… so everytime I feel that my AMRAP set went too easy I can go for an extra 3 rep set with a little more weight, basically? Seems simple enough if that’s it, I may try it.
Depends on the week, on week 3 it’d be an extra single. I think Jim says you shouldn’t do them week 1 though.
What are the differences between the two, and how do they both make you feel?