Training to Failure is Pointless

I don’t know how Jones was so secure about that, but my experience with training to failure is that is completely useless, it’s simply too taxing on the body and the central nervous system. Maybe guys with great genetics can get away with that, but for many many average guys hit is not better than high volume, it just doesn’t work, my body simply wouldn’t respond to this type training, it refuses to respond. Training hard, every set to failure, you know the macho attitude, well it doesn’t work, even if done very infrequently. I did it, experimenting with various volume, split, fullbody, frequencies, rep tempos etc and it didn’t help me at all. All that grueling torture sets of barbell curls to failure when you feel like you should puke on the barbell didn’t even add half inch to my arms, sweet and blood for nothing. So yeah, honestly Jones can go f*ck himself. One time I read on the hardgainer magazine some articles of people training hard, the “correct” way according to Jones, and getting no results, so you can see I’m not alone. And I know I can do better than this, I already have, but my body just don’t respond and I suspect it has something to do with all that training to failure. I’m done.

science shows that 1 set to failure is the best way to gain in size.

You need to lower frequency, lower volume and only do 1 failure set per exercises.

low volume, 4 days a week with one sets to failure only make me stronger and bigger than ever.

You think I didn’t try this? It doesn’t work.

We are all different animals. What does or doesn’t work for you could have a plethora of reasons from your approach to your genetics. It doesn’t mean your blanket statement applies.


Awesome dude. Hope you find a different hobby you can enjoy!


and this is not because it dont work for you that this is bullshit and everybody suck

1 Like

Seriously? The guy goes around saying this is the ONLY correct way of training, that everybody but himself is an idiot because they train differently but still it doens’t work for many many guys with average genetics, just like HVT. If you respond well to this you are not average, simple as that. As I said, i know I can do better than this, so it’s not me, or my terrible genetics. Show me an average dude or even below average that made good gains training with this “hardcore” macho style. But it’s my fault, I fooled myself believing examples of freaks on steroids like viator or menzter and thinking “well that is the way to go”, it was just stupid.

Exactly, training to failure is an hobby I don’t enjoy anymore.

For someone who is done, you’re still talking about it quite a bit…

I think training to failure can be cool sometimes!


It’s cool only if you get results!

It ain’t what you do its the way that you do it…


Yeah. He comes from an era where people valued that intangible quality of gravitas and “say so” much more than today.

Now, the proof is in the pudding and if your pudding sucks then you need to fuck off.

I just wish people would shut the fuck up about this bullshit artist.


Arthur Jones bragged about how his method didn’t work for Arnold Schwarzenegger.

When your method won’t work for one of the most gifted bodybuilders to ever walk the earth, the rest of us are screwed.


I don’t think you need to go to failure on every set of every exercise or even at every session. But training near failure is. Also consider that failure just might mean a difficult said in which another good rep cannot be done, not the sort of rep in which you’re convulsing and contorting your body to get it done.

Also you shouldn’t be much affected by taking bodyweight and isolation exercises to failure. Calf raises, lateral raises, and the like aren’t going to make you physically useless for the rest of the day.

1 Like

That’s what someone who runs a confidence game would say to a mark, but they say it in such a way as to make it seem that the failure was on the part of the other guy, and certainly not them.

My system is great! You’re the one who isn’t good enough!

Have you looked into the work of some dudes who say Not to go to failure?

1 Like

Unfortunately, Arthur Jones is not with us anymore. So, I don’t know why you mention “the guy goes around saying this is the ONLY correct way of training”. That could be true if you only consider early writings of Arthur Jones from 1970 to mid 1980s. However, if you care to look at his book “My first half century in the iron game” published in 1993-1995, “The Future of exercise” (1997) and even some articles from late 1980s, you will clearly see that he admitted he was wrong advocating “one size fits all” approach of one all-out set of 8-12 reps to failure. He clearly see a need for a different type of training for folks with slow-twitch fibers. Training to failure is just one of the methods, which has its pros and cons, and may not be appropriate to all people (depending on physiological and psychological factors, as well as goals, limitations, preferences etc.). However, it works to some extent (and number of other methods work as well within a certain period of time after which the body becomes accustomed to any method of training; that’s why variety is so important). I have put a number of people with previous training experience on a HIT schedule and all of them made meaningful and very noticeable gains in terms of muscle mass. Having very average genetics, I made my best gains utilizing HIT approach; however, as I said, every method has its validity period.


Ok so they guy went around saying this is the only correct way of training., He was indeed a very gifted individual, but it appears to me that he didn’t have all the answers and if he had been more cautious maybe he would have spared frustration to many many trainees, training very hard and getting NO results it’s not a very pleasant experience.

As an alternative, couldn’t others be more cautious in not believing everything they read, see and hear?


If you are not an expert in a field you trust people who appear to have the answers or who present themselves in a good way, simple as that.