Other/Mixed Effectiveness of RIR?

[John K]

I remember we had a conversation on RIR a while ago but I couldn't find it. Dr. Mike came out with a video talking with Dr. Eric about RIR and I thought it was pretty good. Largely just talking about how accurate "real world RIR" and whether the criticisms leveled against it hold water.

 

[Kenny Croxdale]

RIR

RIR, Reps In Reserve

The value of this is questionable, as Dr. Mike noted. While Helms indicated that research indicated that many are fairly good at predicting it.

I don't see much value with it RIR.

The exception when picking attempts in Competition.

Each attempt take amount to being a Warm Up for the next attempt.

Thus, if an attempt difficult, a more conservative attempt (lower weight jump) is selected for the next attempt.

If an attempt is easy, a more aggressive attempt (much higher weight jump) is selected.

With that in mind, let examine...

Periodization Training

This appears to be one a misunderstood training principle.

Periodization Training's focus is on Progressive Overload as a means for Strength and Hypertrophy.

A specific number of week training is what Periodization Training is about.

The first week of a training of a Periodization Training is easy, with resistance is increased each week.

Warm Up Set Analogy

Think of each week of the Periodization Training Plan as a Warm Up Set for the following week.

The objective of each Warm Up Set (in this case the each Periodization Week) is to prepare for the Heavier Warm Up Set, in this case the next Periodization Training Week.

The Periodization Training Cycle, as with Warm Up Sets, is to do the minimal amount of work for stimulation to prepare you for the following week.

The key with the Periodization Weekly Training Cycles is to AutoRegulate to ensure progress for the following week.

The emphasis is on...

The Final Periodization Training Week

In the final week of a training program, the movement needs to be pushed to the limit or close to it.

This is progress is ensured; setting New Personal Records with a Weight or the Number of Repetition in a Set.

In other word, Save The Best for Last.

Once the final week is completed, a New Periodization Training Cycle is begun with light easy load.

This method promotes...

Active Recovery

Recover is where gain are made.

Lighter Load increase blood flow to the muscle which promotes Fast Recover.

Active Recovery visa a New Periodization Training Cycle is shown to be more effective than...

Passive Recovery

This means doing no training.

OverReaching > OverTraininng

Individuals who continue to push past OverReaching and into OverTraining limit long term results.

 

[John K]

RIR, Reps In Reserve

The value of this is questionable, as Dr. Mike noted. While Helms indicated that research indicated that many are fairly good at predicting it.

I don't see much value with it RIR.

The exception when picking attempts in Competition.

Each attempt take amount to being a Warm Up for the next attempt.

Thus, if an attempt difficult, a more conservative attempt (lower weight jump) is selected for the next attempt.

If an attempt is easy, a more aggressive attempt (much higher weight jump) is selected.

With that in mind, let examine...

Periodization Training

This appears to be one a misunderstood training principle.

Periodization Training's focus is on Progressive Overload as a means for Strength and Hypertrophy.

A specific number of week training is what Periodization Training is about.

The first week of a training of a Periodization Training is easy, with resistance is increased each week.

Warm Up Set Analogy

Think of each week of the Periodization Training Plan as a Warm Up Set for the following week.

The objective of each Warm Up Set (in this case the each Periodization Week) is to prepare for the Heavier Warm Up Set, in this case the next Periodization Training Week.

The Periodization Training Cycle, as with Warm Up Sets, is to do the minimal amount of work for stimulation to prepare you for the following week.

The key with the Periodization Weekly Training Cycles is to AutoRegulate to ensure progress for the following week.

The emphasis is on...

The Final Periodization Training Week

In the final week of a training program, the movement needs to be pushed to the limit or close to it.

This is progress is ensured; setting New Personal Records with a Weight or the Number of Repetition in a Set.

In other word, Save The Best for Last.

Once the final week is completed, a New Periodization Training Cycle is begun with light easy load.

This method promotes...

Active Recovery

Recover is where gain are made.

Lighter Load increase blood flow to the muscle which promotes Fast Recover.

Active Recovery visa a New Periodization Training Cycle is shown to be more effective than...

Passive Recovery

This means doing no training.

OverReaching > OverTraininng

Individuals who continue to push past OverReaching and into OverTraining limit long term results.

Do you feel similar regarding RPE? Do you think it is different for strength training vs hypertrophy training?

 

[Antti]

I'm not sold on the usefulness of RIR or RPE in strength training.

Most of the strength training volume should be relatively easy. Let's call it RIR 3-5. And it shouldn't be that hard to program it thus. Now, I'm not sure it matters if we occasionally have a session with RIR 2 or RIR 6. I'm not sure what the advantage would be to have a steady estimated 3 or 5 or whatever.

Also, I'm not sure I trust the feelings of the average trainee. It happens time and time again, people can do more or less than they thought they were capable of. It's often easier for the trainee to not have to think about it, just do.

Didn't watch the video, on the whole I'm not a fan of videos, I far, far prefer text.

 

[Steve Freides]

In strength and conditioning training, quantifying relative effort seems to have become the Holy Grail. Reps in Reserve - really just another way to talk about Relative Perceived Effort, no?

The old way is percentages of maximum efforts, those maximum efforts themselves being subject to doubt depending on the circumstances under which they were achieved. Competing from time to time, which yields a real result not subject to doubts of "was it a real maximum?" and then basing programming based on those numbers - this is a time-honored approach for good reason. (Likewise, the more recent "technical max" is also quantify-able and therefore useful in creating one's future programming.)

-S-

 

[Kenny Croxdale]

Do you feel similar regarding RPE?

Acronyms

Most know what the acronyms are.

However, not everyone who visit the form does.

Thus, defining what the acronyms is a benefit for many, as well as providing an example.

RPE, Rate of Perceived Exertion

This sums up my opinion...

I'm not sold on the usefulness of RIR or RPE in strength training.

Many individual have not idea in defining the Rate of Perceived Exertion.

They usually over estimate it.

In working with a couple of individual, they rated RPE at a 10 on a scale of 1-10.

When we bumped up the intensity, their RPE was a 12 on scale of 1-10.

Let go back to Periodization Training for minute.

Let use a...

4 Week Training Cycle

To reiterate, the first three weeks amount to the First Three Weeks of an Exercise.

The objective is to prepare a lifter for the Top Set of an Exercise, which elicits that Greatest Training Effect; when follow by Adequate Recovery.

The objective of the Periodization Training Cycle is for a lifter to prepare a lifter for the Final Periodization Training Week.

To ensure that Final Week is optimally trained, Progressively Increase the Load and/or Reps without burning out.

AutoRegulate

As per...

...just another way to talk about Relative Perceived Effort.

Periodization Training equates to Warm Up Sets. Do enough to stimulate but not annihilated your Top Set or in this case your Final Periodization Training Week.

Dr. Chad Kerksick

Kerksick's lab was working with college students, measuring their Rate of Perceived Exertions.

There research involved measuring blood levels. Doing so, allowed them to measure the intensity of the students workout.

As per Kerksick, many of the Rates of Perceived Exertion by the students, did not match the blood readings

In other words, the blood work indicated the students assessment didn't match.

Students drastically over estimated how intensity the training session was.

 

[Brett Jones]

RPE is an ongoing "internal" coversation not a set in stone measurement IMO.

RIR—if we add in velocity based research
(which I have some from Dan Baker and others here: Data for the Data-Averse | StrongFirst)
then the StrongFirst Stop Signs of a drop in rep speed and a change in tempo become a very good guide IMO.

 

[JPCross]

I was listening to a podcast recently with Jeremy Hamilton where he mentioned how far he took his strength as a natural while still pursuing BJJ; he mentions Pavel quite a bit as a source of information and programming before he switched to other methods the further down the road he went.

A couple of things that stood out to me were how strong he got following something rather simple, looking at strength as a skill, his emphasis on bringing up the sub-max strength and weights to ultimately raise the ceiling, and his relative dislike of things like RPE/RIR/etc.

While I am still strength training now, it's not my primary focus - I'm using strength work to push my rowing. When strength training was my number one focus, I really struggled to get on the RPE/RIR bandwagon. There seems to be a lot of research behind it and a lot of strong people training this way but it just never clicked for me. It just seems way too subjective and I don't know that the vast majority of people, myself included, can step back far enough to objectively evaluate a set, especially if you are not training very near or to failure. As I don't necessarily train very close to failure, it's not something that I use or would use.

If I had a more objective way to measure RPE/RIR, I might be more apt to be on board. I could see a lot of use in writing down RPE/RIR immediately after a set, then checking bar speed through one of the many velocity based devices, charting both points over time, and developing the relationship between the subjective and objective measurement. That said, I'm not a competitive lifter so I opt to keep things simple for the time being.

 

[silveraw]

If you are training yourself you leave a ton on the table not learning RPE or RIR.

Even if you just use %max training, being able to accurately articulate how hard something was is useful.

And not to appeal to authority, but some of the best regarded programs that have come out in the last decade all use it as a primary component. the stronger by science bundle, tactical barbells newest iteration, to Big Loz’s programming stuff. All highly effective.

If I had a more objective way to measure RPE/RIR

The common way to check it is saying what RIR you are at then repping out to verify.

 

[Adachi]

If you are training yourself you leave a ton on the table not learning RPE or RIR.

Even if you just use %max training, being able to accurately articulate how hard something was is useful.

And not to appeal to authority, but some of the best regarded programs that have come out in the last decade all use it as a primary component. the stronger by science bundle, tactical barbells newest iteration, to Big Loz’s programming stuff. All highly effective.

The common way to check it is saying what RIR you are at then repping out to verify.

So I watched the video, I like the idea more or less, that, at the very least, this can be. A useful tool for autoregulation.

However, I can't evade my own cynicism.

I'm not saying I'm right to be skeptical, (I think their explanations are credible to one degree or another) but I am skeptical.

I use RPE but it's not perfect
I've used RPE to some good effects in almost all my training. And while it can be used it is kinda finicky. The weather, temperature has an effect on my work capacity, and how I perceive my efforts. The hotter it is outside where I train the less I feel I can do. It's a marginal effect but it's still there.

While I appreciate the conversation proposing that RIR and or RPE is useful for virtually all trainees, my own personal bias is that for all its foibles I prefer to use it very unseriously . I use it but it's a tertiary measurement in my experience.

Looking back at my own experience, tonnage comes first. I can look at increasing weights and or volumes over time and I can use that very reliably to inform my training. Then there's recovery between sessions, I tend to adjust frequency of I'm still sore or tired.

RPE goes to the back of the line in evaluating my training
During the session I can use a drop in power much more definitively than RPE.

Even then within a session the relative perception I prefer to use is, "Am I 80% or more back to feeling like I did before my first set?" In order to gauge my rest between sets. (I use a lot of 80/20 rules in my thinking like Dan John uses a lot of quadrants in his explanations)

And then after the session is over (especially since RPE is a specific metric per the program, I'm running, like axe training) I do try to put a number on it. Over time I started using smaller and smaller decimal increments as my memory demanded that it felt easier this time but only just so. So I think there's one session I rated 7.5, and another 7.4. I remember looking at it in my log thinking "this is so silly", as I considered, "maybe I should put 7.45...."


Maybe I'm more skeptical of myself than others, or RPE / RIR itself
So, color me conflicted. I use RPE almost All the time. I have very similar feelings to offer RIR. In my imagination it's a Finicky thing to stand there and predict how many more presses I have with a certain weight, for example.

I can imagine using RIR for barbell training, or at least strength lifting, with a kettlebell. And I bet it'd work too. But, in my own head, I just can't take it too seriously.

There is some sense in which I literally find it to be comical that I'm technically thinking up these numbers on my own. And I bet with some experience, I'd basically be right or very close almost all the time. But that cynical part of my brain would have me taking sets to failure to check my thinking. probably far more often than is necessary.

 

[North Coast Miller]

I've used RPE with a number of approaches to good effect. I don't use RIR except in a very general sense - eg "don't get anywhere near 1 RIR on this set".

 

[silveraw]

The hotter it is outside where I train the less I feel I can do.

In a very practical sense, this certainly effects my max efforts. In the fall with nice temps I've easily tripled 375. In 95 degree heat, 325 for a triple is very much a max effort.

That said, I do like the certainty of RIR over RPE. It does break down in higher rep sets though.

have very similar feelings to offer RIR. In my imagination it's a Finicky thing to stand there and predict how many more presses I have with a certain weight, for example.

RIR is a learned skill. You have to work at gauging it and it can be pretty accurate in the 1-3 range pretty consistently.

During the session I can use a drop in power much more definitively than RPE.

Agree that with power based kettlebell movements, that is probably a better metric.

I can imagine using RIR for barbell training, or at least strength lifting, with a kettlebell. And I bet it'd work too. But, in my own head, I just can't take it too seriously.

It might help if there was a practical example of how RIR is used in training.

For instance the SBS program starts by calculating %1RM. then starts you out doing something like sets of 5 at 70%1RM. It then instructs you to do as many sets of five until you go over 3 RIR. If you get over 6 sets, it bumps up your estimated 1rm by 2-4% for your next session. If you get less than 4 it drops it by 2-4%. So it takes into account what your actual 1rm is and tries to use RIR to keep you in an effective training zone for a given rep scheme.
Think of it like how RELOAD calculates your weight jumps, but instead of basing it off of one session 8 weeks ago, it bases it off your most recent workout.

Another way I've seen it used is working up to a single at RPE 8. Then using that to dictate your training max for the day and your working sets.

 

[JPCross]

If you are training yourself you leave a ton on the table not learning RPE or RIR.

Even if you just use %max training, being able to accurately articulate how hard something was is useful.

And not to appeal to authority, but some of the best regarded programs that have come out in the last decade all use it as a primary component. the stronger by science bundle, tactical barbells newest iteration, to Big Loz’s programming stuff. All highly effective.

The common way to check it is saying what RIR you are at then repping out to verify.

I certainly agree there are a lot of highly regarded and successful programs that use RIR/RPE, and quite a few accomplished coaches who use this as well. I don't mean to discredit the method, programs, or coaches at all. Clearly they're getting great results with it. What I am saying though, for me and the way that I am training currently and with my current goals, RIR/RPE is not something that I would gain a lot from, at least what I would take would not be worth the investment in trying to figure it out as it would likely mean I would need to alter my training substantially. I would rather maintain training and give up learning RIR/RPE for the time being. What I would think I could gain a lot from though would be some kind of bar speed device.

 

[silveraw]

I remember we had a conversation on RIR a while ago but I couldn't find it. Dr. Mike came out with a video talking with Dr. Eric about RIR and I thought it was pretty good. Largely just talking about how accurate "real world RIR" and whether the criticisms leveled against it hold water.

I'm going through the video and have a couple thoughts.

His point about people being worried that trainees will undershoot because they aren't in a lab reminds me of this Pavel article about approaching your training scientifically.

Seven Steps to Strength: Programming as a Science Experiment | StrongFirst

What do successful athletes not blessed with Olympic genes have in common?—Patience to tweak their training, one variable at a time, until they have found “their” way.Contrast that with a typical trainee who impatiently switches programs before he has had a chance to see whether they deliver...

www.strongfirst.com

Eric also has an interesting point that higher reps dilute the accuracy.. But his example is 30 reps. I haven't seen a lot of people doing that for strength work around here, so I dont' think it is an applicable worry for strength training. I mean my "high rep" work tends to top out at 12. And I get the sense I do more high reps than the average SF person.

The point about recording your sets being important. I'd agree. You need someone watching you. You don't have to post it, but look at your sets. You learn a ton about everything. @Anna C had a few great points about this as well in another related thread about self training.

I was surprised that they have found RIR accurate up to 5 in sets up to 8. I'll have to test that out for myself.

would not be worth the investment in trying to figure it out as it would likely mean I would need to alter my training substantially.

It shouldn't. The main principles are still the same, it is just a more accurate way of measuring effort day to day rather than %1rm calculations from a month or three ago.
And especially in SF training terms, if you are already following the rule of 1/3-2/3 of what you could do in a set. RIR is just a more accurate method of defining that.

 

[Hung]

From the OG:

And then there are the misconceptions

• It’s not about your feelings. There’s a notion that, beyond a certain point, everything “feels heavy”. RPE isn’t about that. It’s about your exertion relative to a maximum effort. It’s about performance more than emotions.
• Reps-In-Reserve is a concept that fits within the RPE framework. We use it as part of the rating for higher effort sets in rep-based exercises. But other exercises can use RPE as well (Farmer’s walk, snatch, time based movements, etc). It just won’t use the same descriptions for each rating.
• You should have target weights. Don’t go to the gym with no idea of what you’re doing. A target weight to aim at will improve your training. RPE will then allow you to fine-tune that weight up or down based on how you’re performing at that time. This will also allow you to do visualizations and have the additional motivational factors that target weights can provide.

How to Use RPE in Your Training *Correctly*

By Mike Tuchscherer, 5 December 2017 You may see people using the term “RPE” regarding their training, but not be sure what it’s all about. Or, more likely, you are one of the people who *thinks* you know what it’s about, but still make fundamental errors with it. No matter which one you...

store.reactivetrainingsystems.com

 

[Boris Bachmann]

I've always been terrible at RPE stuff. Like awful. I'm slightly better at gauging RIR, but only slightly.

Some people obviously have great success with it, but yeah, not me. If I had a competent training partner or coach, I think I could come around on it, but yeah...

 

[Bill Lets]

I’m sixty-six and have a dull mind. I understand this thread is valuable to many so my apologies for being off topic. For me this thread makes my head spin. If I could have a life do over I wonder what would have happened if trained like a perpetual beginner, through boredom, full body three days a week with 3x10. Agh, I guess everything works.

After much hesitation I hit the Post reply. I go now. Have a good day and don’t stop.

 

[Anna C]

I think RIR / RPE is a fascinating tool. This is the one I'm familiar with and have used in the past for barbell strength training, attributed to Mike Tuchscherer:



I used it a few times as prescriptives ("do 3 sets of 5 at RPE 8"), and learned how to figure out what that weight was for the day.

More often, I used it in my training log to do whatever I had to do that day, but used RPE to note how the set felt. For example, I had planned to do back squat of 160 lbs for 4 sets of 5, but I noted that the RPE was 8, which is a quick and easy way to note in the log that it was hard but not a max effort. It also indicates that the prescription for the day and at that point in the program is about right, because RPE 8 is usually a great place to do a lot of strength training work so a lot of my programming has appropriately been about there.

I think it's a nice objective data point that can be used for many purposes. Even though it's somewhat subjective, it doesn't seem as judgemental as "made the rep/set" or "failed the rep/set" so your mind tends to go more towards "This is hard, but I can do it, and there is a relevant "how hard is it" level that I can tune into and take note of". In other words, you don't need to feel good or feel bad about it -- it just is what it is. Then there's so much you can do with that. For example, let's say you have to do 4 sets that day of however many reps... let's say 4 sets of 5 reps -- really each of the sets should feel about the same, with maybe the last one just a tad harder than the first. I usually feel best on the 2nd set. But it's a fairly minor difference. UNLESS I don't rest enough between sets, or I get distracted, or some other factor comes into play. Then RPE changes and I need to figure out why. Or, I'm somewhere into a well designed program and RPE is way harder than it should be that day, then I need to figure out if it's sleep, stress, nutrition, etc.

Anyway, I liked the original post video and I think it's interesting that there's been research on how accurate people can be with it once taught to do it.

 

[GreenSoup]

I'm never sure I know what I'm doing in RPE training, even though it gave me excellent results in Easy Muscle.

For RIR you can measure it exactly. Test your reps. Did you get 10? A set of 7 gives you three reps in reserve.

RIR is even accounted for in a Strongfirst plan as a means of waving difficulty while also waving volume. It worked for my KB press.

Variable Effort and the Triple-Tier Plan | StrongFirst

For over a decade at StrongFirst we have advised against pushing sets to failure and advocated towards always keeping a few reps “in the tank.”In recent years we have heard more and more often from well-known strength coaches, and on the web, about Rate of Perceived Exertion (RPE) and Reps in...

www.strongfirst.com

 

[Adachi]

Wherein Dr. Pak provides some thoughts that counterbalance the mere veneration of RIR in general.

And helps me focus myself on attempting to use RIR. Sets of 12 of less. And maybe save your estimations for when you're closing in on the end. The closer you are to 0 RIR, the more likely you are to be close or correct in estimation. Moreover, bar speed is mentioned again as an indicator.