Getting that last rep Getting that last rep - Page 3

starting strength gym
Page 3 of 11 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 107

Thread: Getting that last rep

  1. #21
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    North Texas
    Posts
    39,309

    Default

    • phoenix arizona seminar date
    • texas seminar date
    Quote Originally Posted by Scaldrew View Post
    If you want to be particular about terminology, RPE is an initialism. Both initialisms and acronyms are abbreviations.
    But both are so badass.

  2. #22
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Location
    Belgium
    Posts
    872

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mark Rippetoe View Post
    But both are so badass.
    Oh yeeeeah

  3. #23
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    274

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by stef View Post
    Where did you ever get the idea of "performing all-out volume sets," much less "always." So bizarre.
    Hey stef! That was an exaggeration of course - not to be taken quite literally. But generally the inclination here is more towards increasing weights (e.g. weekly in the TM for both VD and ID) and once it starts becoming impossible to finish all sets to simply reduce the number of sets (e.g. from 5x5 to 3x5). The weight offset between say VD and ID becomes small and often you start with your first set corresponding to something like an RPE 9, 9.5 or when you're having a bad day even a 10. By the time of the third set (and rest times of 10 min or longer) you're drained and the sets start to become real grinders (the OP is a good example). There are several problems with this but most of all it's psychologically draining to continue like that over weeks or longer while still being too low in volume to continue progress efficiently.

    Fuck the RPE acronym - it doesn't matter and I think RPE specifically has it's own issues anyway (e.g. a finished 5RM is RPE 10... but how do you denote a failed rep? 4.5x @ RPE10? 5x @ RPE11?). It's simply a great tool to consciously leave a certain amount of reps in the tank, especially when performing volume work (or training as opposed to displaying strength).

  4. #24
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Location
    Uk
    Posts
    705

    Default

    To recap: two years into training and I hadn't figured out what I was capable of lifting. At 3 reps I thought I might manage one more rep (RPE 9), at 4 reps the grind was so tough that I couldn't imagine doing another rep (RPE 10) and yet I did. Perhaps I could have even managed another rep if I had needed to ?

    An advanced lifter surely must have learned their limits, unlike a novice/intermediate, therefore they do not require RPE as they are wise enough not to train at max every session. A novice/ intermediate is not yet sufficiently experienced to use RPE. RPE is therefore a pointless complication for those who already know their limits and practically useless for the novice who doesn't.

  5. #25
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    274

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ivan Stepic View Post
    Superior for what?
    Superior for increasing cross-sectional area of the involved muscles aka gainz.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ivan Stepic View Post
    How do you know this?
    All the studies showing volume (after some threshold of intensity) is more important than intensity alone for continued progress. And you know that... you're not doing one 1RM per week expecting your strength to go up over a longer time period (yes, it might work short term due to getting towards the "adaptation" end of the stress-recovery-adaptation cycle and increased practice of performing the 1RM).

  6. #26
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    North Texas
    Posts
    39,309

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by deeprooted View Post
    Fuck the RPE acronym - it doesn't matter and I think RPE specifically has it's own issues anyway (e.g. a finished 5RM is RPE 10... but how do you denote a failed rep? 4.5x @ RPE10? 5x @ RPE11?). It's simply a great tool to consciously leave a certain amount of reps in the tank, especially when performing volume work (or training as opposed to displaying strength).
    Except for the fact that you don't actually know how many you left in the tank, so it's not actually data. But it gets treated as data by the kids on the internet. And I don't care. You want to masturbate over your training, go ahead.

    Quote Originally Posted by deeprooted View Post
    All the studies showing volume (after some threshold of intensity) is more important than intensity alone for continued progress.
    Yep. ALL the studies. Science is so cool. It's almost like you're a scientist if you talk about studies.

  7. #27
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    274

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mark Rippetoe View Post
    Except for the fact that you don't actually know how many you left in the tank, so it's not actually data. But it gets treated as data by the kids on the internet. And I don't care. You want to masturbate over your training, go ahead.
    Data? It's just a helpful estimation to choose the appropriate weight on a given day. Just like when you warm up to say 90% of your work weight and it feels like a breeze that day you are going to try to PR. Sometimes your estimation may be off and you fail the attempt. But often it works out and with growing experience a lifter's estimation of his ability (or data if you will) on a given day improves over time. RPE or whatever is the same damn thing.

    Quote Originally Posted by Mark Rippetoe View Post
    Yep. ALL the studies. Science is so cool. It's almost like you're a scientist if you talk about studies.
    You know exactly if I hadn't said so, somebody would have quoted me with something along the lines of "yeah right, so where's the data, huh?". You can attack that statement all you want but it's just attacking for the sake of attacking me and not my statement earlier regarding volume/intensity. If I'd be wrong you'd be attacking that and not my stupid reference to the studies.

    Look, all I'm trying to say is that limiting the weight on the work sets so that you can e.g. do proper a 5x5 without starting to grind by the 3rd set and maybe even miss reps later on is a good thing. Volume work shouldn't look like a CrossFit workout with it being a competition every time you do it. It's just a means to an end. RPE comes into play as just one possible way to manage a proper work weight.

  8. #28
    Join Date
    Dec 2018
    Posts
    119

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by deeprooted View Post
    All the studies showing volume (after some threshold of intensity) is more important than intensity alone for continued progress. And you know that... .
    Even if you ignore all the limitations "studies" have, that's not what studies are showing. There is no such thing as "threshold of intensity" after which volume (reps) is the most important variable. Completely made up, packaged for someone who likes spending time at the gym and is secretly a bodybuilder.

    you're not doing one 1RM per week expecting your strength to go up over a longer time period (yes, it might work short term due to getting towards the "adaptation" end of the stress-recovery-adaptation cycle and increased practice of performing the 1RM)
    You are continuing to use examples that only exist in your weird understanding of the methods. No one ever uses 1RM per week for long periods of time and no one ever does 5 sets of 5rep maxes.

    I don't intend to participate in another volume vs intensity debate because they are inseparable, always.

  9. #29
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    274

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nockian View Post
    To recap: two years into training and I hadn't figured out what I was capable of lifting. At 3 reps I thought I might manage one more rep (RPE 9), at 4 reps the grind was so tough that I couldn't imagine doing another rep (RPE 10) and yet I did. Perhaps I could have even managed another rep if I had needed to ?

    An advanced lifter surely must have learned their limits, unlike a novice/intermediate, therefore they do not require RPE as they are wise enough not to train at max every session.
    Don't think I'd call myself an advanced lifter but after some years of training I sure enough was dumb enough to reduce my sets on the TM VD from 5x5 to 3x5 and get my VD weights relatively close to ID weights. My progress stalled for a long time of course (only to improve for a few kg from time to time by eating to get fatter and fatter) until I realized that training at that intensity was not productive as long as the volume was so low.

    Quote Originally Posted by Nockian View Post
    A novice/ intermediate is not yet sufficiently experienced to use RPE.
    Don't actually know that. But yeah personally I think especially novices would have a hard time managing RPE into their workouts let alone the lack of experience to even know how 1, 2 or 3 reps in the tank even feel like.

    Quote Originally Posted by Nockian View Post
    RPE is therefore a pointless complication for those who already know their limits and practically useless for the novice who doesn't.
    I disagree with the first part... it's precise enough (certainly more then eyeballing the weight every session even if you're super experienced) yet simple to implement and work if you give it a few weeks of getting used to.

  10. #30
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Murphysboro, IL
    Posts
    28,979

    Default

    Mike Mentzer and his inroads to recovery ability is chuckling from his grave over this thread.

Page 3 of 11 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •