Heavy on squats or enough weight to make the squat as

[LarryLove]

I disagree, at least on the context of training to failure.
Every single movement should be taken to failure, or at the very least close proximity to failure. Sets not taking to proximity to failure do not stimulate enough motor unit recruitment to meaningfully drive hypertrophy and would then require significantly more volume to get similar results, so much more volume that it would almost certainly be more fatiguing.

As for exercise selection, it depends on goals. If your goal is to grow your quads, then sure the squat isn't going to be absolute best.
But that doesn't mean you should avoid them in favor of mostly isolation movements.
Even if your goal is to specifically grow your quads, surely you wouldn't mind some stimulus on your glutes, hams, posterior chain as well as your quads.

I agree 100% with going to failure, they’re the only thing I consider “working sets.” But I prefer very delayed working/failure sets if say you’re over 40. I need hard work junk sets in there for blood flow before I go to failure and lots of rest between those sets, let’s say it’s 2 junk sets. I know bands and other methodologies can work somewhat, but there’s nothing to me like simulating the actual movement. I look at junk sets a lot differently than warm up sets, I guess. Let’s say you can squat 500 1-2 rep max. A junk set is 225 for 15-20. It’s almost a prexhaustion like the other guy said but with the actual movement, not just doing leg curls and other machines. Just my take on what’s worked for injury prevention.

 

[BigTomJ]

I agree 100% with going to failure, they’re the only thing I consider “working sets.” But I prefer very delayed working/failure sets if say you’re over 40. I need hard work junk sets in there for blood flow before I go to failure and lots of rest between those sets, let’s say it’s 2 junk sets. I know bands and other methodologies can work somewhat, but there’s nothing to me like simulating the actual movement. I look at junk sets a lot differently than warm up sets, I guess. Let’s say you can squat 500 1-2 rep max. A junk set is 225 for 15-20. It’s almost a prexhaustion like the other guy said but with the actual movement, not just doing leg curls and other machines. Just my take on what’s worked for injury prevention.

yeah i dont count warmup/work up sets. doesnt make any sense to take them to failure

 

[laclark89]

Yea I wouldent count warm ups or work up sets, doing high intensity training.

If I'm doing a volume program I still wouldn't count a warm up but I'd count the work up sets and all my pump stuff just to track how much volume I'm doing an progression.

 

[eery]

I disagree, at least on the context of training to failure.
Every single movement should be taken to failure, or at the very least close proximity to failure. Sets not taking to proximity to failure do not stimulate enough motor unit recruitment to meaningfully drive hypertrophy and would then require significantly more volume to get similar results, so much more volume that it would almost certainly be more fatiguing.

As for exercise selection, it depends on goals. If your goal is to grow your quads, then sure the squat isn't going to be absolute best.
But that doesn't mean you should avoid them in favor of mostly isolation movements.
Even if your goal is to specifically grow your quads, surely you wouldn't mind some stimulus on your glutes, hams, posterior chain as well as your quads.

I agree.

I ddint say that you shouldnt train to failure, you should train within 1-2RIR on most of your worksets, but taking ALL sets to 0RIR i dont see being very productive unless you are doing something like a 3x a week routine.

It depends on the context, how and where its implemented.

So many people in this industry think its black or white, its failure or its 10 reps in reserve.. you can pick and choose and implement it where you find it the most productive for you.