Redpill me on rep counts. All my life i thought i was supposed

Working out until failure is often cinsidered not efficient because it causes a need for a greater recovery time.

Also exhaustion and technique degradation

>>42127150
welcome new friend

>>42127150
AMRAP is not good in my opinion because it asks for more energy on the ass end of the set/workout of that area. Like 2x5 +1xF, you are somehow supposed to have more energy at the end than the beginning. If you can AMRAP more than the rest of your sets, then you were lifting too light.

Plus what this anon said >>42127182

>>42127420
>it asks for more energy on the ass end of the set/workout of that area.
Thats the point. Train worn muscles and nerves. AMRAP is just a nicer way to say "till failure" because failure isnt in a /fit/izens dictionary unless the word social is before it.

>>42127692
Are you retarded or something?

I think for compound lifts or bigger lifts in general (lat pull down, squats, etc.,) having a definite rep range is ideal. That said, I've been toying with the idea of adding accessory lifts to the beginning and end of a work out and having them be 2 or 3 sets until failure. For example, if I'm doing chest I'm have bench be 3x5 or 5x5 but before I'll do db flies 3xf and after do pec Dec 3xf

Also been considering adding calf raises 3xf everyday