Is repetition failure critical for the development of muscle hypertrophy and strength?
Sampson JA, Groeller H
Evidence is still building up
Summary
A comparative intervention in which 28 men completed a four-week familiarisation and then 12 weeks of unilateral elbow flexor resistance training three times a week at 85% of one-repetition maximum, counterbalanced on the basis of responsiveness (the abstract does not describe random allocation) across non-failure rapid shortening, non-failure stretch-shortening, or a failure control. Average repetitions per set were 4.2 in each non-failure group against 6.1 in the control, a significant difference — the design was not volume-equated. One-repetition maximum (30.5%), maximal voluntary contraction (13.3%), muscle cross-sectional area (11.4%) and agonist EMG (22.1%) all increased significantly, but no between-group differences were detected. Antagonist EMG increased significantly in the stretch-shortening (40.5%) and control (23.3%) groups but decreased by 13.5% in rapid shortening. The authors suggest that similar adaptations across the three regimens indicate repetition failure is not critical to elicit significant neural and structural changes in skeletal muscle.
Verification breakdown
- Bibliography
- Checked against Crossref
- Content
- The text of this record has been checked against the original abstractWhat was checked: measured outcomes, study design, population studied, sample sizeChecked against the PubMed abstract. Because repetitions per set differed significantly between groups, the record states explicitly that the design was not volume-equated. The abstract says only that participants were counterbalanced, without describing randomisation, so studyType is recorded as other.
- Editorial review
Bibliographic checks are made by querying Crossref and PubMed. The result reflects the check date shown above; retractions or corrections issued since then are not included. A new build using a lock older than 365 days will fail. Content checks are made by AI matching the record against the original abstract; they are not expert judgements of validity. What has not been checked is shown rather than hidden. About our verification process
Key findings
- 1
One-repetition maximum rose 30.5%, maximal voluntary contraction 13.3%, cross-sectional area 11.4% and agonist EMG 22.1%, all significantly.
- 2
No between-group differences were detected on any of these measures.
- 3
Average repetitions per set were 4.2 in the non-failure groups against 6.1 in the control: the design was not volume-equated.
- 4
Antagonist EMG rose in the stretch-shortening (40.5%) and control (23.3%) groups and fell 13.5% in rapid shortening.
- 5
Participants were 28 men training unilaterally for 12 weeks, three times a week at 85% of 1RM.
- 6
The abstract does not address injury, fatigue or muscle damage markers.
- 7
The abstract states participants were counterbalanced on the basis of responsiveness; it does not describe random allocation. We do not classify it as a randomised controlled trial.
Articles featuring this study
Last checked: