Time Course of Recovery After Training to Failure or Not
Does training to failure hurt muscle recovery that much?
This study examines the recovery process after different resistance training protocols, focusing on the impact of training to failure versus non-failure approaches.
PMID: 28965198
Key Points
Compared three resistance training protocols: 3 sets of 5 reps, 6 sets of 5 reps, and 3 sets of 10 reps to failure
Measured mechanical and biochemical indicators of recovery up to 72 hours post-exercise
Training to failure resulted in slower recovery and greater fatigue compared to non-failure protocols
Aim and Methods
The study investigated how different resistance training protocols affect acute and delayed recovery. Ten trained men performed bench press and full squat exercises using three approaches:
3 sets of 5 reps (out of 10 possible)
6 sets of 5 reps (out of 10 possible)
3 sets of 10 reps to failure
Researchers assessed recovery using:
Countermovement jump height
Movement velocity at specific loads
Biochemical markers (ammonia, growth hormone, creatine kinase)
Results
Training to failure [3 × 10(10)] caused a greater acute decline in performance compared to non-failure protocols
Recovery was faster (24–48 hours post-exercise) for non-failure protocols [3 × 5(10) and 6 × 5(10)] compared to the failure protocol
Biochemical markers indicated that training to failure prolonged recovery up to 24-48 hours post-exercise
Practical Takeaways
Avoid training to failure regularly: This can slow down recovery and potentially hinder progress
Use submaximal training: Incorporate non-failure sets in your routine for faster recovery
Monitor recovery: Pay attention to performance indicators like jump height or movement speed to gauge readiness for subsequent training sessions
