The Bridge

[Cmmm]

I don't think RPE even has to be that accurate for it to work well. So long as you don't go @10 when you're not supposed to, you're not blowing your load on hard sets all the time, you rest less, and accumulate more volume. If you undershoot the weight because of RPE, you will probably arrive at a more sweet spot once you increase the weight. If you overshoot, you may have to back-off earlier than intended in later sessions, but shit like this happens anyways.

I actually understand the concern with RPE. Not all lifters, specially the younger ones, do good training decisions all the time. But on the other hand its a good learning experience.

With the other benefits of autoregulative training, this is actually thing I like in RPE, PR blocks in 5/3/1, max. effort days in conjugate etc... They also underline the important fact that besides the program you're doing, the more important is the execution of that program. As we all know - training is highly empirical, and kind of skill-like activity. You'll learn best by doing stuff. RPE and other such things force people do decisions, which is imperative in training (if you don't have coaches to make decisions for you).

[Jordan Feigenbaum]

I had a similar thought to Sean but I wasn't thinking of form breakdown at heavy weights, rather that I don't really think I can squat with proper form using just the bar. I need some weight on there pushing down on me for the balance/depth/bottom position to be the same as working weights. Even 135 feels a little off, but once I get up to two plates it starts to feel like I'm doing it right.

Indeed. RPE is for lifters who know who hard is. (hint: most don't!)

Do the Texas method.

Scale back your intensity day so you begin 20 pounds lighter than your last 3x5 and start at 85% of that for your volume day. Now you have a month to get used to the increased volume and you can use the time to figure what % you need.

This tweak will act as bridge between the LP and TM! Amazing!

Easily the worst advice on this thread.

Ok, I guess I'll be the first to say that I see what the program is trying to accomplish and I literally see it as "the bridge" between SSLP and a more advanced program. That is how it's marketed, but not sure why it's also marketed as "Int/Adv." The first week is purely transitional and I'm not sure worth repeating if one is to run the program multiple times or continuously.

I think that the general thinking around here is that intermediate programing should be a close extension of novice programming, which is something I disagree with entirely. I think "simple" intermediate programs tend to work poorly overall. I also am not sure where it is marketed as inter/advanced, as it's literally designed to be ran right after SSLP. I would run the first week as planned coming off SSLP.

I like the variations in this program, but it takes so much experience to figure out RPE's even with the basic lifts... doing it with all of these other lifts is nearly impossible within a single or possibly multiple cycles.

I disagree. You just have to gauge how hard the sets feel. It takes no extra time, minimal extra effort, and you do it anyway whether you have a pre-planned linear scale to rate your effort levels on anyway.

Jordan, any reason to run "The Bridge" over the aforementioned program? They seem pretty similar besides the single and exercise selection (which can be tweaked).

They're meant for different populations.

[MBasic]

I don't see how people caN'T have a basic concept of RPE after SSLP.

...to at least "1 or 2 reps" in the tank.

Maybe the ".5" ratings, or a RPE 6...I could those being hard to "tell".

But come on

[Sean Herbison]

Indeed. RPE is for lifters who know who hard is. (hint: most don't!)

I'm still waiting for gilchrest to pop into the conversation here.

[Euby]

I am trying to understand all this RPE stuff, so subscribed...

[Eric K]

I am trying to understand all this RPE stuff, so subscribed...

RTS is probably a better place to learn about it. We're only moments away from devolving into name calling and cat pics.

[Jordan Feigenbaum]

I am trying to understand all this RPE stuff, so subscribed...

What is it specifically that you don't understand? I know it can be difficult to use for a week or two, but it's not terribly complex. Within the eBook, I wrote a pretty fair amount directly about RPE for more background info.

[Cmmm]

I don't see how people caN'T have a basic concept of RPE after SSLP.

...to at least "1 or 2 reps" in the tank.

Maybe the ".5" ratings, or a RPE 6...I could those being hard to "tell".

But come on

It is different to know and do. I see people fucking up training all the time. They always want to add that extra 5lbs or 1 rep even if they should not. This does not mean that autoregulation is bad, some people are just not enough advanced or smart when it comes to training.

[George Christiansen]

I don't see how people caN'T have a basic concept of RPE after SSLP.

...to at least "1 or 2 reps" in the tank.

Maybe the ".5" ratings, or a RPE 6...I could those being hard to "tell".

But come on

You should be quite aware of RPE 8,9, and 10.

The curve would just be picking the weights, but the PDF suggests adding 5% to get a 1RPE increase, so learning how be typical that % is for oneself would seem fairly simple to me.

[Euby]

I downloaded your ebook a few weeks ago, and have read your blog post on the general strength template. "Understand" is probably the wrong word as I believe I get the concepts, including the part about the learning curve early on. What I really still struggle with is applying it. I'm at the point of it just coming down to applying it like anything else in life to gain first-hand experience. From the outside, it seems I'd have lots of room to screw things up.