What does it mean to be "Stronger"?

[John Watson]

What does it mean to be "Stronger"?

You'll want to understand fatigue and how it affects the display of strength;
from a single set, from a group of sets, from some weeks/months of accumulated stress.

The Barbell Prescription describes in detail the energy systems that affect fatigue.

[Jordan Feigenbaum]

I think this is a very important question that was well thought out. Here are my thoughts:

Seems like here's the subtle distinction between testing and training strength. Right?
3x5 or 3x3 isn't a pure test of strength anyway, so the question "is he stronger?" is void. Maybe, maybe not.
Wouldn't the real question be "is there a training effect in workout 2 that is comparable to workout 1, even though he used less volume"?

Or more specifically, is the training stress appropriate- better yet, optimal- despite the difference in volume?

TL;DR: yes, he's stronger because he recovered from his 300 workout before doing 305. But he didn't display it fully during the 305 workout, and maybe didn't get a significant training effect from the 305 workout either.

How do we know he's stronger without an objective measurement of strength that is the same in both of the events being compared? We can't.

Someone who can dead lift 3 plates is much stronger than a lifter who does 2 plates. 5-10 lbs can be a normal daily strength/mind variation.

Yes, of course this is true. An interesting question is that if daily performance levels vary significantly, how could one select the appropriate load for themselves or another human thousands of miles away without additional parameters, e.g. some metric to gauge the difficulty of the set, such that the appropriate stress is delivered on a given training day?

Of course strength is defined as the ability to produce a force against an external resistance.

Let's say a novice lifter squats 300 at some arbitrary set and rep range, for the sake of argument we'll go with 3x5. The last rep of the last set is a ball buster (RPE 10 ha! you know you love it) and it is the first time they have squatted this weight over the course of their training, so a personal record max. The next session our lifter squats 305 but for fewer reps either because he is having a bad day or because of a programming decision, say (choose one) 5,5,4, 3x3, or x1.

Is our lifter stronger because he lifted more weight ergo produced more force, or does he need to do the 305 x 5 x 3 in order to say he is stronger ie apples-to-apples comparison at our previously identified arbitrary set and rep range?

Short answer- we don't know without an additional metric of information that clues us into the performance level of the lifter that day. Bar speed, RPE, or other metrics could be used to suss this out.

If the first workout was very easy for the lifter, e.g. he could have done 305 (or 310) x 5 x 3 sets on that day, yet only did 300- then he was stronger on that workout as far as we can tell. This requires us agreeing that 3 sets of 5 reps is the display of strength, e.g. the "test". If we agree there, then another piece of qualitative data can be used to compare workouts. It may be important to do this to be sure that the appropriate stress is applied to the lifter on a workout (or series of workouts) as verified by the demonstrable adaptations.

Any stressor that does not produce useful fatigue and subsequent adaptation, as verified by successful improvement in the "test" or metrics that are being tracked (like a rep max or 3 sets of 5 in this case), is a programming inefficiency.

A workout can provide the wrong stress, too much or too little stress and the end result is reduced performance. For instance, 3 sets of 5 at 305 is not always more stressful than 300 for 3 sets of 5. Again, performance has to have both qualitative and quantitative data points.

Interestingly, we use this in coaching folks all the time- novice or otherwise. If the bar speed looks faster during warm ups we'll make a bigger jump for work sets, maybe 10lbs. If it looks slower or the form is off, we make a smaller jump or maybe don't go up at all. All of this is in an effort to apply the right stress for the workout or series of workouts.

So, 5lbs more on work sets isn't always stronger and it isn't always better if the stress isn't correct. Sometimes less or sometimes more would be better from a training effect standpoint.

I default to trying to add weight as often as possible, but there are other data inputs we use as coaches to generate the correct amount of stress.

[wiigelec]

Thanks Jordan it can be easy to forget that the name of the game here is the proper application of the appropriate incremental stress.

[Amy-in-PHX]

A beautiful, nuanced reply, Doc! Thanks.

[Mark Rippetoe]

Yes, of course this is true. An interesting question is that if daily performance levels vary significantly, how could one select the appropriate load for themselves or another human thousands of miles away without additional parameters, e.g. some metric to gauge the difficulty of the set, such that the appropriate stress is delivered on a given training day?

Short answer- we don't know without an additional metric of information that clues us into the performance level of the lifter that day. Bar speed, RPE, or other metrics could be used to suss this out.

If the first workout was very easy for the lifter, e.g. he could have done 305 (or 310) x 5 x 3 sets on that day, yet only did 300- then he was stronger on that workout as far as we can tell. This requires us agreeing that 3 sets of 5 reps is the display of strength, e.g. the "test". If we agree there, then another piece of qualitative data can be used to compare workouts. It may be important to do this to be sure that the appropriate stress is applied to the lifter on a workout (or series of workouts) as verified by the demonstrable adaptations.

Any stressor that does not produce useful fatigue and subsequent adaptation, as verified by successful improvement in the "test" or metrics that are being tracked (like a rep max or 3 sets of 5 in this case), is a programming inefficiency.

A workout can provide the wrong stress, too much or too little stress and the end result is reduced performance. For instance, 3 sets of 5 at 305 is not always more stressful than 300 for 3 sets of 5. Again, performance has to have both qualitative and quantitative data points.

Interestingly, we use this in coaching folks all the time- novice or otherwise. If the bar speed looks faster during warm ups we'll make a bigger jump for work sets, maybe 10lbs. If it looks slower or the form is off, we make a smaller jump or maybe don't go up at all. All of this is in an effort to apply the right stress for the workout or series of workouts.

We have a big article coming out on this very topic next Wednesday. Stay tuned...

[Jordan Feigenbaum]

About the OP’s question or qualitative training data?

[Mark Rippetoe]

It's a surprise!!

[VivekSaini007]

We have a big article coming out on this very topic next Wednesday. Stay tuned...

I had been wondering about the same things as the OP recently. Looking forward to the article.

[Sean Herbison]

Is our lifter stronger because he lifted more weight ergo produced more force[?]

If you want a quicker, less nuanced answer, just think of what you said at first:

Of course strength is defined as the ability to produce a force against an external resistance.

Ability, not display. If he lifts more weight, he is displaying more force. But he may have been able to display that force before, if he had chosen to. Tom Platz once squatted something like 500 for >20 reps. I've squatted 550 for one rep. It's still pretty clear who's stronger here, and it's not me.

[MBM77]

In my opinion I would say that if they did not do 305x3x5 the next session then it was due to either insufficient recovery, poor programming choice not to do 3x5 , or they let their “feelings”dictate their training instead of the weight on the bar. Doing more weight but for less reps could just be an expression of the same strength displayed differently. The main question is this. Did you do300x3x5? Next workout did you do 305x3x5? If yes then you’re stronger. If you’re running NLP this is basically the only thing you need to ask yourself. Did the weight on the bar go up?