MED is a training variable, and failure is a workout variable. Two different things completely.
I really don't understand MED ( minimum effective dose).
Take a trainee who has learned to do 3x5 with an empty bar.
The trainee adds two feathers and repeated the three sets-did he produce MED ?
The trainee gathers all the plates in the gym gets under the bar and earns a trip to causality-despite his injuries, did he produce MED ?
Then, learning from his experience with using all the plates, he gets smart and begins to add 5lbs on every new session. He keeps on adding 5lbs until one day he discovers that he cannot complete his last set and only manages 3 reps and fails the 4th. Has he reached MED ? If he adds a further 5lbs the next week and fails the 5th rep of the third set would he still have reached MED ?
MED is a training variable, and failure is a workout variable. Two different things completely.
I'm missing some part of this. In the failure example, would that be a failure to plan the training session appropriately and all things being equal, is that an example of over reaching ?
I've recently had the experience where I found I could do less reps on LTE with the same 30Kg weight than the previous week, twice in a row. So I had achieved 12,12,8 then programmed 12,12,9 the following week and ended up with 12,10,8, which degraded the next week to 12,10,6 All other lifts went as planned. So is that over reaching, overtraining, did I fail to produce sufficient stress on the 12,12,8 week ? I'm losing weight at about 0.5lbs a week which clearly plays into it, but every other lift improved, just the LTEs that went bad.
This
If you can't eat through it, as you're obviously on a deficit, can you not reduce either the reps or weight increases? Minimum effective dose would dictate only changing one and observing the results before making another adjustment. You could do 3x10, or maybe 4x9 to keep volume the same. You could reduce to 1kg increases, etc....
Good luck with the weight loss, and keep in mind there is a cost to eating at a deficit, and you may be seeing it here.
Why are you doing ltes - do you really need an accessory exercise while eating at a deficit? What is your bench and press?
That's what I'm trying to decide. I accept that weight loss will result in strength loss. That's why a gave the two extremes. I could easily drop the weight by 20Kg and do three sets of 10, or drop the reps to 3 singles, but does either case give the minimum effective dose ?
In other words, just because I'm failing reps at the current weight in the bar, does it necessarily follow that the two alternatives of dropping the weight, or dropping the reps much lower so I don't fail the planned number, result in the right amount of stress, compared with just accepting a degree of rep failure, provided I'm actually doing some reps ?
Confusing.
No, it doesn't mean those options are the sure answer, and I think you realize that reducing weight by 67% or volume by 91.6% isn't the minimum effective dose. It's also foolish to only be looking at LTE when total stress and recoverability include your entire program and recovery variables.
It seems like you are afraid to make the wrong change. Because of this, you are looking to hyperbolic examples which aren't what you would choose anyway. Given your exact situation, what is the change you want to make that is the minimum effective dose?
Agreed, and that got me to reread The Minimum Effective Dose of Training | Mark Rippetoe. In that you state "Tonnage and intensity are the two variables that comprise the dose of training."
Based on that, and answering the question Nockian actually asked, I'd say say the stress from the 12, 12, 8 day may have been too close to MTD and not MED. The failures to even match tonnage at the same intensity for the next two workouts seems to support this.