Methodology: reps to failure vs. total reps?

[Mike Buckley]

Anybody care to answer a question from a (relatively) new CF'er?

Last week I enjoyed the WOD "Lynne" (five rounds of: bench pressing body weight followed by chin ups.) I went to failure on each set, and my BP (190#) looked like this: 12, 7, 6, 6, 6, for a total of 37.

I thought about it afterward, and I believe that had I paced myself on the BP (instead of going to failure) I could have done five sets of 8 for a (higher) total of 40.

Any thoughts on which approach (reps to failure vs. pacing oneself to achieve a higher total) best reflects the CrossFit approach?

Thanks.

[Brandon Oto]

It's an old question. Generally it's probably smart to do both. For Lynne, though, "to failure" is specifically prescribed, so in that case just push and pull until you stop moving. For something like Tabata? Up to you.

[Derek Maffett]

Avoid pushing failure too much - it's not nice on the CNS. Lynne is a little different due to unlimited rest times, but I'd still stop just short of failure.

[Steven Low]

Tabata as prescribed by dr. tabata is supposed to be all out. CF version let's you scale.

But yeah, depends on what you're aiming for (e.g increase total power output) vs. increase maximum endurance output (next time). Um, they're slightly different on a physiological level so that's why most of us will say do both at least with metcons.

For strength to failure that's generally a bad thing.

[Mike Buckley]

Thanks, guys; I appreciate your input!