Post 21: Rep Ranges, What Do They Mean?

          Ok, so this may not be exactly groundbreaking, but I've come to a pseudo-conclusion about rep ranges and strength development. Athletes may or may not notice patterns in rep ranges throughout their training and pick up some inkling (read: slight knowledge, or suspicion) of periodization without really realizing it. However, as coaches, just as every exercise should have a purpose, so do the rep ranges that govern how much work actually gets done. My initial understanding of rep ranges was low volume for core movements, high volume for assistance movements. As I gained better knowledge about energy systems, I figured that these concrete parameters need not apply for types of exercises, but for the strength quality desired in the training effect. What I mean by this was the typical low volume for strength and power, high volume for endurance and hypertrophy model. Later in the year we started messing around with time under tension (TUT) and recording our results before failure: total reps, speed, time etc. More recently, while experimenting with some "HIT" style workouts for my summer training - I gained more understanding of what I was actually achieving using different rep ranges. Finally to tie it all together, I was referring to some notes I made in the past from some of Louie's work on the dynamic method, and I saw light!

Prilepin's Chart

          In Louie's work, there is reference to Prilepin's chart and speed of repetition execution. In as few words as possible, it says:

-At 70% 1RM, force production decreases at the 7th repetition.

-At 80% 1RM, force production decreases at the 5th repetition.

-At 90% 1RM, force production decreases at the 3rd repetition.

          Now, these are going to be somewhat ambiguous figures, depending on the athletes you're working with, and what type of training effects you have created with them in prior sessions or training blocks. BUT we're onto something.

          What I'm getting at here, is that force production, the energy system targeted, and time under tension all play an equally important role when determining rep ranges. To use the most popular and common example, it's believed that 45-60 seconds (60 being on the high-end) under tension, with anywhere 30-45 seconds rest in between (with a high intensity) is optimal for developing hypertrophy. This is due to the fact that during this event (assuming there is no break in the eccentric-concentric chain) vasoconstriction of the vessels and capillaries within the muscle causes immediate post-set influx of fresh blood and the PUMP that people so often talk about. To bring this back together, assuming a quality rep takes 3 seconds, 45-60 seconds under tension lands us in the ballpark of 15+ reps, classic hypertrophy prescription! 

          Also, notice the quality of work done, according to the above parameters from Louie and Prilepin. You'll notice that when dealing with high intensities (85% and above) as we all have, that your speed of rep execution decreased a LONG time before you got to that 15th rep (including forced reps.) That's because this duration of exercise slaughters ATP-PC stores, and gets into lactate onset. Consequently, hypertrophy and endurance are two qualities attributed to the classic 12-15 rep range.

          In regard to this, I'm not so sure we've had it right all along using concrete numbers to determine training effects and stimulus, but we're on the right track. What many people overlook or tend to disregard is the cause of these training effects, and even then, this requires coherent execution by the athletes we train. I think rather, speed of execution, and time under tension are more relevant factors when training. To illustrate this, think of strength-speed training. Typically, 1-3 reps are used at 90%+ (again: see above parameters) to maintain speed of execution. While I agree that this is certainly a safe guideline for strength-speed, there's not a doubt in my mind that certain athletes with different muscle fiber compositions could possibly achieve a 4th or 5th rep without diminishing returns.

          Having said that, training optimally on an individual basis becomes a very tedious task, but it can be done. Using "tendo unit spotters" in particular when developing strength-speed, could ensure that athletes are completing the optimal number of repetitions based on their personal characteristics and thereby enhancing the quality of training effects that are created. This is additionally productive in ensuring that we get what we can out of individual athletes on any given day. In this scenario, a specified percentage, and speed of execution become the parameters for a given set, and rest intervals could be determined by heart rate recovery.

-Alex

Post 20: Summer Training

          I heard a funny comment earlier this year in our office regarding the nature of S&C professionals. Actually, in my experience this applies to anyone that spends a worthwhile amount of time in the weight room either coaching or lifting. The guy I'm talking about said you could take five people from any other profession and put 'em in an elevator, hallway, anything; and they'd talk for hours. If you're familiar with strength coaching, or coaches you know damn well that most of them would gladly do the opposite, if you're lucky a smackdown might even ensue and you'd have great seats. Unfortunately this is the personality type that most of us are assumed to possess. I will admit there are many of us who do exhibit these types of behaviors, and there are also some who have a little more humane approach. The egalitarian side of me will tell you that it all depends on the athlete, and a little plasticity with respect to how you handle them will go a long way.

          Again, I've digressed from the purpose of my musings. What I intend to allude to is that there are several realms of training that each have their own dedicated and aggressive advocates. These disciples range from bodybuilding, powerlifting, Olympic lifting, and high intensity to the martyrs of bosu balls, TRX bands, and kettlebells. Again, my democratic alter-ego would say that ALL of these things work, but at different times of the year - of course I'm referring to periodization of athlete training programs.

          Anyways, the most recent of my training experiments has lead me into the church of high intensity. I read some good stuff by Ken Mannie and saw Mickey Marotti's latest salary and that turned into the flavor of the week for me. I hadn't even taken a serious look at a machine in a gym since my junior college days, but when I looked at them in this light I was "inclined" (get it?) to throw two days of my workout at that side of the gym. I called these two days my "intensity" days, one for upper and one for lower body. I called the other two days Volume Days where I went back to dumbbells, cables, and some of my other favorites. I'm falling in love with the machines because they afford the opportunity to get some high volume work done with better loading and more time under tension. The blood coming back to these muscles gives you that good full feeling or "pump" that we all so desperately seek. In combination with good rest periods this is a great opportunity to add some more pounds to your program, and maybe bust some plateaus wide open when you don't have access to equipment for a good dynamic day.

          The above is what I've been up to since I got back, a little less than two weeks ago, and it's a refreshing change from what became somewhat of a stagnant routine from before. In the next week or so I'll be looking to make some changes involving some more "true HIT" in the intensity days, and potentially try some different pre-exhaustion strategies in my compound sets on volume days to see how I like that. That's it for now.

-Alex