PDA

View Full Version : Please state your repetition maxes, thanks!


Rick Deckart
11-29-2010, 01:40 AM
et 9rm Be the Maximum weight used for 9 reps, 7rm for Sevens and 1rm for a Single. A Plot of those Rep maximum values shows a curve with some steepness. Simple Logic Dictates that the Ratio 1rm / 9 rm is Never smaller than 1 but larger than 1. That Ratio has an Upper Limit. Once that is reached the Trainee Stalls. To Progress once more higher Rep. Work Must unskew the Curve First, so that Maximum Single work can skew the Curve again...

Please state your 10RM and your 1RM, if you have those inbetween and beyond as well, thank you very much!

The more data points the more accurate the picture and the more reliable the estimation of said Q10 limit ratio!

Brian DeGennaro
11-29-2010, 07:35 AM
I've only got it for the back squat:

10RM 150kg
8RM 155kg
3RM 175kg
1RM 190kg

Rick Deckart
11-29-2010, 08:05 AM
1.27 you Need more Maximum Singles work

Brian DeGennaro
11-29-2010, 08:08 AM
I agree, that's why I'm doing bunches of singles for all my squats at the moment.

By the way, do you have this formula on hand?

Rick Deckart
11-29-2010, 10:37 AM
Q10=1RM/10RM

The highest Value so far was 1.44 (750 squat)

Don Stevenson
11-29-2010, 04:21 PM
For back squat

160kg x9
170 x7
180 x5
190 x3
208 x1

These may not be absoulte RM though as they were done during smolov so the 160 was for 3x9, 170 for 4x7, 180 for 5x5 and the 190 for 6x3

Rick Deckart
11-29-2010, 08:12 PM
1.27

1.34

your still good for some single work. I guess the limit of Q10 is around
1.5, but I will find out. Those reading these lines, if you feel bad to post your numbers, you can post the ratio instead, I am (currently) not interested in the absolute numbers. The Q10 ratio may be a good candidate for a parameter useful to steer training in the right direction...
For example with values over 1.4 apparently high repetition work will lead to greater yields.

Open questions:

Limit individual or phyiologically constant
difference between exercises
properties of the envelope over the values Q10--Q2

Jarod Barker
11-30-2010, 10:35 AM
Back Squat, forgive me for my small numbers, I am feeble and weak. 1RM might be higher now, I've been following Wendler 531 for about 3 and half months and I haven't maxed out since I started.

Pounds:
205 x 10
225 x 5
255 x 3
315 x 1

Kg:
93.18 x 10
102.27 x 5
115.9 x 3
143.18 x 1

Rick Deckart
11-30-2010, 05:02 PM
1.54 sq

Higher repetition work is on order for you!

1.23

1.3

1.44

1.16 sq

1.32 dl

1.54 sq

Average = 1.33

Which bye the way is exactley what this one rep max calculator assumes

http://www.exrx.net/Calculators/OneRepMax.html

Jarod Barker
12-01-2010, 07:27 PM
1.54 sq

Higher repetition work is on order for you!

1.23

1.3

1.44

1.16 sq

1.32 dl

1.54 sq

Average = 1.33

Which bye the way is exactley what this one rep max calculator assumes

http://www.exrx.net/Calculators/OneRepMax.html

Hahaha, well I guess my bias towards low reps shows. I do however know my 50 rep max is 155 pounds. This jerk S&C coach told me that his best athlete ever was able to squat his own bodyweight 35 times to "mid thigh parallel" (whatever that is). He then told me and my friend that we could never match that feat. So, I put my bodyweight on the bar and squatted it ass to grass for 50 reps.

I don't know if there's like a bell curve or something with regards to percentage of one rep max to the number of reps you can perform, but I'd bet there is a steep drop off of weights you can do for 1 rep, but aren't necessarily your one rep max.

Rick Deckart
12-01-2010, 09:41 PM
70.0%x7x3
72.5%x6x3
75.0%x5x4
77.5%x4x4
80.0%x3x5
82.5%x2x5
85.0%x1x6

'Week2' x+5%
'Week3' x+7.5%

3 sessions per week...

Better than smolov!?
:eek:

Spencer Mackay
12-02-2010, 03:25 AM
Hahaha, well I guess my bias towards low reps shows. I do however know my 50 rep max is 155 pounds. This jerk S&C coach told me that his best athlete ever was able to squat his own bodyweight 35 times to "mid thigh parallel" (whatever that is). He then told me and my friend that we could never match that feat. So, I put my bodyweight on the bar and squatted it ass to grass for 50 reps.

I don't know if there's like a bell curve or something with regards to percentage of one rep max to the number of reps you can perform, but I'd bet there is a steep drop off of weights you can do for 1 rep, but aren't necessarily your one rep max.

Brutal is what that is!

Jarod Barker
12-04-2010, 11:13 AM
Brutal is what that is!

Hahaha, I think "mid thigh parallel" is a quarter squat but this jerk just wanted to make it sound like it's some technical measure.... Pitt's S&C department is a bad joke.... :rolleyes:

Robert Callahan
12-04-2010, 02:04 PM
won't the ration between your 10RM and 1RM be highly variable with just genetics as well? Yes training makes a difference, but it seems like it would be hard to develop an "ideal ratio"?

Pete Gordon
12-04-2010, 08:22 PM
Chad, I suspect you've got more hair on yr chest than I do. 50 bw squats. I'm curious, what was the tipping point, when it went from not too bad to 'this is crazy'

Brian DeGennaro
12-04-2010, 08:56 PM
Lol I remember stupid challenges like that: 50-100 BW squats, max reps 135/225, and similar stuff. Ah fun times. It's like after 30 reps you don't feel your legs anymore and you just go till you're thinking "this is going to fuck me up tomorrow, the next day, and the next 2 weeks."

Pete Gordon
12-04-2010, 10:06 PM
A couple of years ago, a gym in my town hosted a competition called 'the 500 squat challenge'.

It was pretty easy. Who could do 500 reps in as few sets as possible. Sure you could do 500 singles, that'd be silly though. You could do 250 doubles...but that'd leave you in a pretty similar situation. What if you aimed to do 10 sets of 10? That'd be 50...that'd be okay.


One guys legs were pumped for the next two weeks.

Rick Deckart
12-05-2010, 12:00 AM
On the fly witness the birth of the first interactive adapive squat system...
Every four or five weeks - depending on if you squat 3 or 4 times per week - test 10RM, 5RM and 3RM,

Calc 1RM like so:

1RM = 3RM * Q3

where Q3 = 1.099

then

Ql= 1RM/5RM

and

Qh = 1RM/10RM.

So now we have two parameters, Q5 = 1.165 and Q10 = 1.33 and two individual estimates Ql and Qh...

define the following four states:

1. Qh > 1.33 & Ql > 1.165
2. Qh < 1.33 & Ql < 1.165
3. Qh < 1.33 & Ql > 1.165
4. Qh > 1.33 & Ql < 1.165

we need four programs to shift the respective Ql and Qh back to the average state...

ok one program with four faces, MARK X the final and lost brother smolov!

MARK Xa

Qh > 1.33 & Ql > 1.165

70% x 7 reps x 3 sets
75% x 5 reps x 2 sets
80% x 3 reps x 2 set
85% x 1 rep x 3 set

week 2 +5.0%
week 3 +7.5%

MARK Xb

Qh < 1.33 & Ql < 1.165

70% x 7 reps x 1 set
75% x 5 reps x 2 set
80% x 3 reps x 3 sets
85% x 1 rep x 6 sets

week 2 +5.0%
week 3 +7.5%

MARK Xc

Qh > 1.33 & Ql < 1.165

70% x 7 reps x 1 sets
75% x 5 reps x 5 sets
80% x 3 reps x 3 set
85% x 1 rep x 3 set

week 2 +5.0%
week 3 +7.5%

MARK Xd

Qh < 1.33 & Ql > 1.165

70% x 7 reps x 1 sets
75% x 5 reps x 3 sets
80% x 3 reps x 5 set
85% x 1 rep x 3 set

week 2 +5.0%
week 3 +7.5%

log the Q estimates over the course of the year, four weeks in front of a tournament make damn sure that

Qh and Ql are as high as possible for potential peak performance

took me less than half an hour to write this down.

I put this in the public domain and expect no less than every single world record shall be rewritten in due time.

lets see where the human limits really are.

to the nay sayers, you are lacking smarts, imagination and visions...

Jarod Barker
12-05-2010, 09:07 PM
Chad, I suspect you've got more hair on yr chest than I do. 50 bw squats. I'm curious, what was the tipping point, when it went from not too bad to 'this is crazy'

Hahaha, nah, I just lack a single shred of sanity. There's a disconnect between my body and my brain. I'm also the same person who can run on a fracture leg or foot till it breaks through so it's not strength, it's just stupidity that gets me through. In this case, I was just pissed a certain Pitt faculty member and felt it necessary to prove him wrong even if just to myself. I actually have it on video though and for a while I debated emailing it to him just win my argument, but then I decided to just leave him in his ignorance.

I have always been partial to low rep work when it comes to weight training. Don't get me wrong, I can bang out air squats, but put some plates on a bar and you'll almost never see me do over 3 reps.... That being said, when I started the max set BW squats, I got about 10 done and thought "oh crap, I bit off more than I can chew, well, I'll just go till I fail." This is going to sound even dumber but actually the thing that limited me in the end was not squatting, but rather holding the bar. It slowly started making it's way down off my shoulders, and I was fighting like hell to hold onto it but it started to really hurt my shoulders so I ended up dumping it. If it hadn't started moving, I might have gone well beyond 50 because I was just starting to slow down when I hit the mid 40s.

Dave Van Skike
12-07-2010, 11:06 AM
Last time I checked Deadlift (it's been a while)

500x10 t&g
606x1.

Rick Deckart
12-07-2010, 06:49 PM
1.21

the highest I have seen sofar was 1.6!

and you know what that means, sort your programming express-what-you-got-style
and pull 1.4*500 = 700

Rick Deckart
12-07-2010, 06:50 PM
and yes it is THAT simple but apparently EVERYONE is pessimistic, oh not lets try this, will not work, blablabla enough of this shit...

Derek Weaver
12-07-2010, 08:44 PM
On the fly witness the birth of the first interactive adapive squat system...
Every four or five weeks - depending on if you squat 3 or 4 times per week - test 10RM, 5RM and 3RM,

Calc 1RM like so:

1RM = 3RM * Q3

where Q3 = 1.099

then

Ql= 1RM/5RM

and

Qh = 1RM/10RM.

So now we have two parameters, Q5 = 1.165 and Q10 = 1.33 and two individual estimates Ql and Qh...

define the following four states:

1. Qh > 1.33 & Ql > 1.165
2. Qh < 1.33 & Ql < 1.165
3. Qh < 1.33 & Ql > 1.165
4. Qh > 1.33 & Ql < 1.165

we need four programs to shift the respective Ql and Qh back to the average state...

ok one program with four faces, MARK X the final and lost brother smolov!

MARK Xa

Qh > 1.33 & Ql > 1.165

70% x 7 reps x 3 sets
75% x 5 reps x 2 sets
80% x 3 reps x 2 set
85% x 1 rep x 3 set

week 2 +5.0%
week 3 +7.5%

MARK Xb

Qh < 1.33 & Ql < 1.165

70% x 7 reps x 1 set
75% x 5 reps x 2 set
80% x 3 reps x 3 sets
85% x 1 rep x 6 sets

week 2 +5.0%
week 3 +7.5%

MARK Xc

Qh > 1.33 & Ql < 1.165

70% x 7 reps x 1 sets
75% x 5 reps x 5 sets
80% x 3 reps x 3 set
85% x 1 rep x 3 set

week 2 +5.0%
week 3 +7.5%

MARK Xd

Qh < 1.33 & Ql > 1.165

70% x 7 reps x 1 sets
75% x 5 reps x 3 sets
80% x 3 reps x 5 set
85% x 1 rep x 3 set

week 2 +5.0%
week 3 +7.5%

log the Q estimates over the course of the year, four weeks in front of a tournament make damn sure that

Qh and Ql are as high as possible for potential peak performance

took me less than half an hour to write this down.

I put this in the public domain and expect no less than every single world record shall be rewritten in due time.

lets see where the human limits really are.

to the nay sayers, you are lacking smarts, imagination and visions...

This is one of the coolest things I've seen in a long time. Thank you good doctor.

Mark Fenner
12-08-2010, 12:45 PM
On the fly witness the birth of the first interactive adapive squat system...
Every four or five weeks - depending on if you squat 3 or 4 times per week - test 10RM, 5RM and 3RM,

Calc 1RM like so: 1RM = 3RM * Q3 where Q3 = 1.099

then

Ql= 1RM/5RM and Qh = 1RM/10RM.

So now we have two parameters, Q5 = 1.165 and Q10 = 1.33 and two individual estimates Ql and Qh...

define the following four states:

1. Qh > 1.33 & Ql > 1.165
2. Qh < 1.33 & Ql < 1.165
3. Qh < 1.33 & Ql > 1.165
4. Qh > 1.33 & Ql < 1.165

<snip>


I like a lot of things about this approach. The first things I thought were (1) taking into account the strength-RM curve and (2) auto-programming (and some auto-regulating) based on current fitness.

I think it might be useful to rewrite the "state parameters" as percents of 1RM instead of percents of 5RM and 10RM (which are then greater than one). I'm a programmer, so really, I don't care about the names. But, we tend to think it terms of %s of 1RM. Incidentally, 1/Q5 and 1/Q10 are .858 and .752 .... so think in terms of 75% and 85%.

Also, if we're considering 1 rep to take ~3-5 seconds then 1RM is ~3-5s, 3RM is 9-15s, 5RM is 15-25s, and 10RM is 30-50s. There might be some call to work with fixed time durations instead of RMs to stop sets: of course, then we're getting into mythical-German-Thundergod-Thor (DB Hammer) terrain. Those time frames fit close to the 10s, 25s, 40s times from that line of thought. Then again, not everyone is into timed heavy work.

I do think it is somewhat important to keep reps consistent to make these calculations sensible. If you go from 20-breathing-squat tempo (breathing rest-pauses) to pure rhythmic squats, the weight is going to be (drastically) different (ballpark of 10RM versus 25-ish-RM).

Best,
Mark

Rick Deckart
12-08-2010, 01:12 PM
Well if you are a programmer do me a favour, write an app! Do me another favour, put YOUR name on it, seriously!!

the fewer know it was me the better! See I am currently working on a lot of projects simultanously, some would say that is simply impossible but you know if one has a perfect memory many things which seem like miracles and wonders to the ordinary gents and ladies are a given... and the best part is without written notes you leave no traces but those you want in the public domain...

Mark Fenner
12-09-2010, 06:30 AM
Well if you are a programmer do me a favour, write an app! Do me another favour, put YOUR name on it, seriously!!


Years ago, I had a nice little web calculator for Dan John's One Lift a Day.

Unfortunately, I don't have web hosting at the moment -- and I not in the mood to do the same thing on "hobby time" as I do on "professional time" (i.e., spend even more time communicating with the computer). But, if someone sets up hosting with a Python environment, I can have all the calculators you want very quickly.

Rick Deckart
12-09-2010, 02:12 PM
Deal!

Rick Deckart
12-17-2010, 04:29 PM
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/13406264/TheBrothersSmolov-MARKX.xls

here is my last strength training program... after six years in total and three years full time study of smolov I write stuff like that within 30 minutes...

the most advanced strength training system of all times - so who is the first to test it?
:eek: