Prilepin's Table

[craigmeister]

What do you think of using Prilepin's table, quoted so often in Westside related literature, for the basic lifts? Should it only be applied to the low and high percentage ranges, or ignored for everything but the Olympic lifts?

Thanks.

[Mark Rippetoe]

Once again, you have stumped the band. Do not assume that I am widely read. I am merely very smart. I do know, for example, that Avogadro's number is 6.02 x 10(23!).

[craigmeister]

Fair enough, you know what they say about assuming....
Here's Prilepin?s table of the optimal number of reps to be done at each percentage point of your max:
Percent: Reps per Set, Optimal Total Reps, Range
70 and below: 3-6, 24, 18-30
70-79: 3-6, 18, 12-24
80-89: 2-4, 15, 10-20
90+: 1-2, 7, 4-10

Sorry for the poor formating, but I don't know how to insert a table.

Thanks.

[Mark Rippetoe]

I am excruciatingly unfamiliar with this material, but I cannot see how it is possible to determine what an "optimal" number of reps might be when the intended conditioning goal would define on what "optimal" means. There must be something assumed here that I, once again, do not know.

[PMDL]

IIRC Prilepin's table is based on data from Olympic weightlifters and was based around optimal strength/force development within the given intensity zones.

A lot of folks try to generalize it over to other types of training, for better or worse.

[craigmeister]

If you follow the table, you should be able to maintain good bar speed. The though is that the high bar speed will lead to a more direct carry over to 1RM.
A more refined (better) question is: Do you think high bar speed in the 75% to 90% range will improve the carry over to 1RM in the basic lifts? Or are you better off just grinding out something like 5x5 with the heaviest weight you can, without making any special effort to move the bar quickly?

Thanks.

[Lifting N Tx]

I'm going to attempt a "cut and paste" from a post on Elite Fitness, which might at least help people who are wondering what the discussion is about. If the formatting of the table doesn't work that of the original post is very readable.

The problem with using Prilepin's Table is that it seems to address only a single workout. I've not seen an example of how one would use it to assist programming for lifters who need to plan their training in terms of a week or more at a time, and I don't think novices should be worrying about such things. If anyone has a link where someone applies Prilepin to more than a single workout discussion, I'd be interested.

As for Avogadro's number, adding a mole of iron at a time would take microloading to a new level, but might not be too productive. Back to being serious, here's my cut-and-paste:

Prilepin's Table

This is pretty highly prized in Westside training. There is some argument over its restrictiveness in allowing volume loading and how heavily it was relied upon by coaches (some people will say hugely, some actual former/current Soviet coaches will say not at all). Whatever, it's still a useful tool and at a minimum one can say that it has been implimented with unequivocally broad success in at least one training methodology- Westside and they aren't too shabby under even the most critical eye. So, there is some evidence that it shouldn't be completely ignored and might be useful enough to include here for those that are inclined and interested. There also seems to be some disagreement on how the guy spells his name - I've always seen Prilepin and that's what I'm sticking with.

Source: http://www.angelfire.com/pe/txpls/prilephin.html

Quote:

By Tom McCullough MEd., MSS

Percent............Reps/Set............Optimal Total............Range
55-65.................3 - 6......................24..................18 - 30
70-75.................3 - 6......................18..................12 - 24
80-85.................2 - 4......................15..................10 - 20
> 90...................1 - 2.......................7...................4 - 10

Prilephin's table can be used as a tool to plan you next workout. This table takes advantage of both the maximal and dynamic effort methods of strength training. The reason we exercise using several methods is to vary the level of resistance so to cause differences in metabolic reactions, intramuscular coordination, and biomechanical variables. By training this way we enable ourselves to work intensely enough to bring about the optimal gains in strength.

When maximal weights are lifted the largest number of motor units are activated . Using the maximal effort method is thought to be best for training the muscles and central nervous system due to the great load place on them. Because of the high level of motivation needed to lift maximal weights, the lifter can easily become over trained. Therefore, only about 10% of our training cycle will be spent lifting maximal and supramaximal weights.

As we all are very aware, a good maximal lift is often determined by the amount of explosion we generate out of the hole. If the momentum is great enough, we will generate enough speed to get through our sticking point and be able to lock out the lift. Therefore, the dynamic effort method is very useful in training the explosive strength necessary for getting those new personal records. By training with intermediate loads, we are able to move the weights quickly, thus improving the rate of force development and explosive strength. Dynamic effort training is best done in the 55-82.5% range, with controlled eccentrics and very explosive concentric lifting. While the loads are intermediate in weight, maximal efforts should be used in moving the weights.

As for the repetition range, Prilephin found that a given percent can be optimally trained in the suggested repetitions per set range. Any less than this and you have not done enough work, any more and the bar speed slows too much. For example, if 55% is trained for 4 sets of 6 repetitions, the total repetitions done will be 24. We are well within our optimal total repetition range. Let's look at another example, 55% is trained for 8 sets of 3 repetitions. The total work done is still 24, with is still within our optimal repetition range. So we can see how versatile this table can be.

[Mark Rippetoe]

I completely concur with the use of explosive bar speeds at lighter weights to increase power and force production at heavier weights. Thanks for posting the excerpt from Elite for us.

[cycomiko]

the data was also only observational, not so much experimental, in olympic lifters. It does not show what is actually optimal only what teh athletes did under the early russian paradigm of olympic weightlifting, with unknwon drug influences.

Extrapolating OL based lifts to PL based lifts is a huge leap of faith. But also does not take into account frequency.