Training to failure isn't always better — here's when it backfires
Failure — the point where you physically can't complete another rep with good form — was long treated as the gold standard for an effective set. Recent research paints a more nuanced picture: training to failure does drive growth, but not more than sets stopped 1–3 reps short of failure, given the same total training volume.
The cost of failure, though, is noticeably higher: it creates significantly more neuromuscular fatigue and demands more recovery time between sessions. If you push every set of every workout to failure, fatigue accumulates faster than your body can recover from it — a direct path to a plateau or overtraining.
A sensible approach is leaving 1–2 reps 'in the tank' on most working sets and saving true failure for the last set of an exercise or specific key sessions. That gives nearly the same growth stimulus at a noticeably lower cost to recovery.