PDA

View Full Version : High rep sets and projected 1rm


Kevin Shaughnessy
09-09-2010, 01:19 PM
Am I alone in noticing that I can get a higher projected max doing lighter weight higher rep sets, then I can doing heavier lower rep sets? For example. I recently deadlifted 286x9. This put my project max at 371 using the formula in the 5/3/1 ebook. Today I deadlifted 302x6 for a projected 1rm of 362. I do not believe I've lost strength at all. Theres no reason I might have and last weeks high rep set was a PR over the week before that.

Are some people just better at higher reps then lower reps?

Jon Sikes
09-09-2010, 01:27 PM
Yes and yes

That is to say, the 1RM calculators can spit out inflated numbers at higher reps

And some people are better at higher reps than lower

Donald Lee
09-09-2010, 01:32 PM
That is a small difference. Daily variations in strength are normal. A downward trend is when you should start worrying.

And, yes, some people are better at higher reps and some better at lower reps.
1-RM projections can differ based on the rep range you use to test. They're dependent upon fast twitch-slow twitch ratio, technique, etc.

Kevin Shaughnessy
09-09-2010, 01:33 PM
And some people are better at higher reps than lower

Thanks for the reply. Based on my numbers, does it look like I might be in the group thats better at high reps? Or is losing 3 reps for a 16 pound increase on the deadlift normal?

Tyler Micheli
09-09-2010, 01:37 PM
More likely than drastic variations in strength is that the accuracy of the formula lessens the further you get from a 1RM. It works great to approximate a 1RM from a 3RM or 5RM (or vice versa), but perhaps not so well from a 10RM or greater. I would be curious to see the results of a regression analysis on a group of lifters and their RMs and how it compares to Wendler's formula. Any formula that results from that analysis, however, would probably be a bitch and not as user friendly or quick as Wendler's.

I would still use Wendler's but with a grain of understanding that its accuracy may drift at the higher RMs.

There may be physiological explanations too, but a more qualified person than I can speak to that.

Joe Hart
09-09-2010, 03:03 PM
I think Wendler recommended to try hit a 3RM to estimate the 1RM. I pretty much test 3RM to find 1RM because I lift alone in the basement and don't really want to find out the hard way what my 1RM is.

Dave Van Skike
09-09-2010, 03:44 PM
.

Are some people just better at higher reps then lower reps?


more this than anything else. my projected daily max with high rep stuff undershoots my actual tested max quite a bit on deadlifts. with squats and presses it tracks pretty well.

if you want to know where you'd be max wise, the three rep is a reliable indicator but if you're going to push yourself that hard, why not get some spotters and go for it for real?

Samuel Hughes
09-09-2010, 04:34 PM
I don't know. Undoubtedly disposition is a significant factor, but if a person has a maximal work capacity, their rep capacity has to be asymptotic. The disposition is more about how that maximal work capacity isnt definite, which in my opinion is a more a product of psychological factors than anything else.

Donald Lee
09-09-2010, 07:52 PM
I don't know. Undoubtedly disposition is a significant factor, but if a person has a maximal work capacity, their rep capacity has to be asymptotic. The disposition is more about how that maximal work capacity isnt definite, which in my opinion is a more a product of psychological factors than anything else.

Samuel,

I'm having a hard time understanding what you're trying to say.

I can't be the only one.

Joe Hart
09-09-2010, 08:57 PM
Whew! That is alot of words. I am not sure I get it, either. My guess is that if you can't lift near your 1RM and you have done it before your failure is in your head?

I would say my failure is in my head because I have been lifting in my basement by myself for the last 8 years (I know cause I quit going to the gym when my son was born) and I don't want to injure myself on a missed 1RM test.

Frank Needham
09-09-2010, 09:07 PM
I don't know. Undoubtedly disposition is a significant factor, but if a person has a maximal work capacity, their rep capacity has to be asymptotic. The disposition is more about how that maximal work capacity isnt definite, which in my opinion is a more a product of psychological factors than anything else.

There, its fixed. Just kidding.....now to attempt a translation to the real world. 1) Your work capacity has limits (which he's saying can be interpreted graphically). 2) Disposition, or rather your lack of it maybe, determines how much you accomplish.

Derek Weaver
09-09-2010, 11:14 PM
There, its fixed. Just kidding.....now to attempt a translation to the real world. 1) Your work capacity has limits (which he's saying can be interpreted graphically). 2) Disposition, or rather your lack of it maybe, determines how much you accomplish.

I'm fried from working at the computer all day, but I still don't know what that's all supposed to mean.

James Evans
09-10-2010, 02:00 AM
I think Samuel has spent too much time training his bench.

Ian Gallimore
09-10-2010, 04:05 PM
Aren't we missing a few important points here?

1) The only reason Jim stuck that formula in the book was to give you a way of roughly comparing workouts and thus give you a target to aim for next session.

2) Your one rep max is the weight you can lift only once, regardless of what the formula says. You find it out by putting weight on the bar and seeing if you can lift it. If you can, you stick some more weight on and try again.

3) Outside of competition a one rep max is no more meaningful than a 4 rep max, or a 7 rep max, or any other rep max. Don't get hung up on it, especially one which isn't even a real one - if there's one thing even more meaningless than a one rep max it's a one rep max that you "should" be able to do but haven't actually done.

Go to the gym, lift at least the prescribed reps, do your assistance, go home. There's no need to start analysing everything.

Dave Van Skike
09-10-2010, 05:26 PM
truth.

Kevin Perry
09-10-2010, 07:41 PM
One more thing.

Just do the program,

If you hit more than the prescribed reps then guess what? Your getting stronger and you just increased your overall strength and your 1RM.

Samuel Hughes
09-12-2010, 03:50 PM
I think Samuel has spent too much time training his bench.

That hurt my feelings.

I'd try to re-explain, but I don't think it would hold the vast majority of reader's attention. To sum it up:

- Wendler's formula approximates a specific region of a curve (near the 1RM). The farther you get from that region, the less accurate the approximation.

-No one can give a perfect definition of that curve because you can't mathematically model the human psyche perfectly.

Donald Lee
09-12-2010, 05:25 PM
Samuel,

That makes sense. You don't need to sound like Greg Glassman or Louie Simmons to get your point across.

Mike T. wrote an article about how to make a customized 1-RM chart.

http://www.reactivetrainingsystems.com/articles/training-articles/636-customizing-your-rpe-chart

Something like that will probably be as close you can get to an accurate estimation.

10 RPE means max reps (no more reps left)
9 RPE means you could do 1 more rep
8 RPE means you could do 2-3 more reps
7 RPE means a heavy speed reps (think the feeling of a heavy Oly lift and not Westside DE)

Samuel Hughes
09-13-2010, 06:08 AM
Samuel,

That makes sense. You don't need to sound like Greg Glassman or Louie Simmons to get your point across.

Mike T. wrote an article about how to make a customized 1-RM chart.

http://www.reactivetrainingsystems.com/articles/training-articles/636-customizing-your-rpe-chart

Something like that will probably be as close you can get to an accurate estimation.

10 RPE means max reps (no more reps left)
9 RPE means you could do 1 more rep
8 RPE means you could do 2-3 more reps
7 RPE means a heavy speed reps (think the feeling of a heavy Oly lift and not Westside DE)

I come from a science background and forget how geeked out I can get relative to the average joe. No antagonism/patronization was intended. Nice link though. All these calculations are interesting, but what makes lifting so beautiful is that it's still easiest/most accurate to follow a good progression instead of theorizing. Your not stronger if a formula tells you what you should be able to lift, you are stronger when you lift more than you did last time.

So to the original poster: don't sweat what the formula tells you. If you lift more weight, or the same weight more times, you got stronger. Nice job.

Will Peterson
09-13-2010, 02:14 PM
There is something that seems to not have been flushed out at the beginging of this tread. With the question of better at high reps vs high %1RM comes in part from training. No one will ever be able to teach the mental, emotional, electrical disposition of an elite lifter going for a competition 1RM, but with work in, near, around that level, the body's motor units can develop an understanding of that intensity.