Volume sensitivity for older lifters

[perman]

This thread has been interesting in the context of tonight's workout - I think I have the same problem as many here in wanting to go too heavy. Tonight I'm supposed to bench 5x5 @ about 80% of 1RM. Now I know I should be able to hit fives for at least a few sets with probably 10% more than that so in my head I'm thinking I'll overshoot.

If you look at The Bridge program and compare the RPEs for benching with squats and deadlifts, @9s are used for benches some days, while @8s are always used for squats and deadlifts. In Mike T's generalized intermediate program, I remember I saw an @10 for TNG bench one day. Benches are more stubborn to increase, and the consequences of going too heavy once in a while don't affect your overall fatigue as much, so I don't think people need to alter their balls-to-the-wall psychology quite as much for upper body work as for lower body work.

Going heavy for some sets in bench and backing down is perfectly normal within the RPE framework. I haven't gotten an impression that top sets+ back-offs vs. repeated sets across has a clear winner for accumulating volume, both can work, though I would like to understand when/where/why you would use each...

[manveer]

If you look at The Bridge program and compare the RPEs for benching with squats and deadlifts, @9s are used for benches some days, while @8s are always used for squats and deadlifts. In Mike T's generalized intermediate program, I remember I saw an @10 for TNG bench one day. Benches are more stubborn to increase, and the consequences of going too heavy once in a while don't affect your overall fatigue as much, so I don't think people need to alter their balls-to-the-wall psychology quite as much for upper body work as for lower body work.

They put @10 in lower body work too... just depends. I see @10 bench sets prescribed every few weeks, usually high rep sets.

What Kinds of Responses Are You Expecting From @10 RPEs? - YouTube

[VikingCellist]

Of course, its a fine line between too much and enough as one put it here - but thats the case with everyone who approaches his genetic limit which is a recovery limit in practice. So basically, ageing can be seen as reducing the gap between one´s current level and one´s limit.

I'm not familiar with your work, but the point here is that the balance between the stress and recovery is not always a fine line. It is highly dependent upon training advancement. The physiological effects of aging on genetic limits and recovery are not understood well enough to assume that we need to worry about volume to the degree that we approach it differently at the early intermediate stage than younger trainees.

[Marenghi]

Of course training level (i.e. distance to your genetic limit) is one decisive factor. I just remarked that age can be seen as another factor that decreases the ability to recover and thus can be looked at as also decreasing the distance between individual level and limit. Along other factors like ...life.

This doesnt contradict your example at all, quite the contrary: it very much is in line with the notion that age doesnt change training fundamentally, but gradually. Thats why I dont see "volume" as a special factor whose influence changes fundamentally when ageing (while others like frequency would not). There is simply no evidence for that, as Jordan and Austin(?) wrote.

[Sinai]

People are attempting near-5RMs for multiple sets across, getting wrecked from it, and then calling themselves "volume sensitive".

I wonder how much the typical SSLP encourages this mindset. I know that during my LP, I would have told you each week that my 5RM was the same as my current work set. But looking back at my notes, I could have eeked out a few more reps for each set, especially early on. It was only at the end that I think I approached my true 5RM. I' pretty sure that the last month or so of my LP was just increasing my RPE for each work out, not necesarily strength increases.

I'll be writing more about this in the future.

Looking forward to it.

[VikingCellist]

This sounds very much like me. I have a very hard time taking it down a notch.

Me too, especially when you read that your age makes you not only "volume sensitive," but also "intensity dependent." Maybe those things are supposed to make an argument for heavy BB training compared to the established recommendations for lighter weights, higher repetitions, machines, etc... the kind of stuff the SS community has been fighting for years.

If you look at The Bridge program and compare the RPEs for benching with squats and deadlifts, @9s are used for benches some days, while @8s are always used for squats and deadlifts. In Mike T's generalized intermediate program, I remember I saw an @10 for TNG bench one day. Benches are more stubborn to increase, and the consequences of going too heavy once in a while don't affect your overall fatigue as much, so I don't think people need to alter their balls-to-the-wall psychology quite as much for upper body work as for lower body work.

Going heavy for some sets in bench and backing down is perfectly normal within the RPE framework. I haven't gotten an impression that top sets+ back-offs vs. repeated sets across has a clear winner for accumulating volume, both can work, though I would like to understand when/where/why you would use each...

For me going bttw on bench was going to failure and doing assisted reps. The two times I tried that everything shut down. I don't know if this is written, but I infer that if there is no difference in accumulation, back off sets will allow you to increase intensity without going to failure, e.g. when you do a few sets at 85-90% ie. 3-5 @ RPE 9. If you just repeat the last workout, it may not be enough stress to disrupt homeostasis, but together with the top set at a higher weight it might.

[VikingCellist]

.

[perman]

They put @10 in lower body work too... just depends. I see @10 bench sets prescribed every few weeks, usually high rep sets.

What Kinds of Responses Are You Expecting From @10 RPEs? - YouTube

Informative video, thanks.

[John Hanley]

What Kinds of Responses Are You Expecting From @10 RPEs? - YouTube

Thanks for posting.

I have the same drone you see over Mike T's shoulder.

[Euby]

The key point, that I kept missing for a long time, is that I have to limit the intensity on volume sets.
Coming off of SS, I thought all work weights must rise inexorably to my very limits.
*That* is what I can't tolerate.

Thanks for putting these thoughts into words. This is where I think I am at. At 45, I was SHOCKED to see how strong I could get with SSLP in such a short period of time after having not trained with barbells in over 15 years. I regained all the strength of my younger years in 3 months. The last month was brutal but I was progressing. I learned to push really hard, and since I hit the ceiling I'm beating my head against it with that same mentality that I've got to destroy myself on 3-5x5 across, or one hard 1x5 followed by 3-4x5 backoff sets, with the last set being very near failure. Doing that week in and week out is demanding. I keep starting a new H/L or HLM program at a 10-20% reduction in weight, feeling great for a few weeks until the weight gets back to where it was at the end of SSLP, and then all the sudden i'm no good for anything except lying around trying to eat/sleep so I don't feel wasted or having to reset again.

It's miserable. There has to be a better way but I haven't found it yet. I'm wondering if "The Bridge" will help. I'd have to learn RPE and how to apply it though. Not afraid of that at all, of course, but I feel like a chronic program hopper at this point.