Sorry I saw this thread a long time ago but forgot to answer it. I may be wrong but I think we might have a misunderstanding. When I’m referring to training to failure I’m using it as a general term but am more specifically referring to sets to failure in the 8-12 range. This is what is commonly used to describe this type of protocol, and as I???ll discuss in a little bit, inaccurately called failure. Correct me if I’m wrong, but I think you might be referring to sets to failure as sets in the 2-4 rep range with very heavy loads. While I still wouldn’t recommend this, it would be for a different reason.
First of all, let???s look at the differences between the two scenarios. One is really an issue of fatigue (8-12 reps) and the other would be more accurately described as failure. From this standpoint, your use of fatigue would be more accurate but would not be the commonly used definition of the term****. Failure as I’ve just described strongly implicates neural limiting factors but rarely takes an athlete to the point of fatigue. In contrast, fatigue is more due to muscular or metabolic factors.
Let me know which training protocol you were referring to and I???ll try and further explain myself.
***I’ve found that many of the things that are thought to be “common knowledge” are almost always wrong.