Load drops vs repeats

[Levon_Xidyn]

I know SS forums isn't exactly filled with people that use RPEs, however I know a few know quite a bit:

I understand how repeats and load drops work...well, I think, at least. Just to be sure:

Repeat example:
~5% fatigue
400x5 @ 8
400x5 @ 8
400x5 @ 8.5
400x5 @ 9

Load drop example:
~5% fatigue
420x5 @ 9
400x5 @ 8
400x5 @ 8
400x5 @ 9

Anyways my question is, generally, when / why would you program repeats vs load drops?

[Gerhard]

Stress management presumably,

A set at RPE 8 is less stressful than a set at RPE 9. Repeating an 8 until 9 allows for volume with only going to one set at 9, rather than doing volume with a set at 9 and going to 9 in your fatigue sets, depending on the range (a 5-10% fatigue drop may mean going to RPE 9 2-3 times).

[John Hanley]

It's really just splitting hairs & probably makes no difference whatsoever to anyone less than "advanced".

The load drop biases a bit toward peaking/intensity...repeats are good for just knocking out volume.

I like "rep drops" for really high intensity work leading to a peak. For instance a 3rm dead@10, followed singles a the same weight until @10.

Just different tools for arranging stress for really strong fuckers...but not terribly important distinctions for most of us.

[lou t]

It's really just splitting hairs & probably makes no difference whatsoever to anyone less than "advanced".

The load drop biases a bit toward peaking/intensity...repeats are good for just knocking out volume.

I've been using RTS for awhile and agree with you in basic terms.

[Levon_Xidyn]

Stress management presumably,

A set at RPE 8 is less stressful than a set at RPE 9. Repeating an 8 until 9 allows for volume with only going to one set at 9, rather than doing volume with a set at 9 and going to 9 in your fatigue sets, depending on the range (a 5-10% fatigue drop may mean going to RPE 9 2-3 times).

This is what I was finding from some looking around too, but even as an advanced athlete wouldn't it still be better to use load drops in most cases? Since an advanced athlete needs more volume, and repeats allow for more volume because they are less stressful, seems like it would make said advanced athletes have to do a shit ton of sets (possibly impractical from a time management perspective) to achieve the volume he needs vs a little less to achieve the right fatigue with load drop.

[Levon_Xidyn]

Oh, and another question: why / when program, for example, fatigue of 10% load drop vs 5% load drop then another 5% load drop. Theoretically its the same fatigue amount (10%). Is the difference just a bit more intensity focused with two drops instead of one, and better for athletes who can do a bunch of volume at lower intensities?

[Adam Skillin]

Is... better for athletes who can do a bunch of volume at lower intensities?

Yes, that's exactly right. Those on the left side of the grinder-exploder spectrum (typically women, atypically me, genetically low SVJers in general) aren't 1RMing as close to the muscles' true 1RM as the exploders on the right, so the double-5 load drop is a tool that might make more sense for us since it gives us some additional volume at an intensity that more closely approximates that of the single-10 load drop in a more neuromuscularly efficient lifter.

John H has helped me think this through recently, and probably can put it in better words, but I think we've both got the idea down, Levon.

[Levon_Xidyn]

Yes, that's exactly right. Those on the left side of the grinder-exploder spectrum (typically women, atypically me, genetically low SVJers in general) aren't 1RMing as close to the muscles' true 1RM as the exploders on the right, so the double-5 load drop is a tool that might make more sense for us since it gives us some additional volume at an intensity that more closely approximates that of the single-10 load drop in a more neuromuscularly efficient lifter.

John H has helped me think this through recently, and probably can put it in better words, but I think we've both got the idea down, Levon.

What would you consider "genetically low SVJer"?

[Adam Skillin]

What would you consider "genetically low SVJer"?

Well, it's a continuum, and not my area of expertise, so I'm not confident in drawing a line at what's "low." If you're a physically intact male and have a 15" or less SVJ, you can confidently guess that your neuromuscular efficiency is on the grinder end of the grinder-exploder spectrum. If you have a SVJ in the upper 20's, you can be confident that you're on the right side. Everything in-between is shades of gray.

[Adam Skillin]

What would you consider "genetically low SVJer"?

Well, it's a continuum, and not my area of expertise, so I'm not confident in drawing a line at what's "low." If you're a physically intact male and have a 15" or less SVJ, you can confidently guess that your neuromuscular efficiency is on the grinder end of the grinder-exploder spectrum. If you have a SVJ in the upper 20's, you can be confident that you're on the right side. Everything in-between is shades of gray.