A Brave New Assault on RPE

[AlanMackey]

I'm saying that there is a zero percent chance of me judging RPE of 7 versus 7.5 or 8, or 6.5, or 6. Zero.

This!

I’ve been trying to develop a sense for RPE but it never worked for me. I can gauge a @10 no problem (I barely could do that last rep and I definitely have no more reps in me) and, maybe, I might be able to guess a @9 (this was a hard last rep but maybe I have another one in me). This maybe means there is a 50% chance of being wrong.

I could NEVER guess what a @8 (much less @7) feels like.

I’m not saying RPE doesn’t work, because it does, but I can’t really make it work for me. The only RPE I can accurately use is @fuck (barely made it; something between @9 and @10) and @fuckyeah (this was REALLY easy; something between @4-and @8).

[EggMcMuffin]

That aside, why do you guys bother going to that echo chamber of stupidity? Is there something valuable there occasionally? Is it just to gloat of the fact that you escaped the cult? It seems like a negative force in your lives that just drags you down, and maybe your happiness level and quality of life would be better without it.

I'm 26 years old and have never had a girlfriend. Although many of the men on the SS forum are married, I'm very content that while at least I am alone, I am no longer going through whatever insane neurosis afflicts that forum. Plus it's funny to see people who deadlift less than me call people soyboys

[Hardartery]

That aside, why do you guys bother going to that echo chamber of stupidity? Is there something valuable there occasionally? Is it just to gloat of the fact that you escaped the cult? It seems like a negative force in your lives that just drags you down, and maybe your happiness level and quality of life would be better without it.

I'm 26 years old and have never had a girlfriend. Although many of the men on the SS forum are married, I'm very content that while at least I am alone, I am no longer going through whatever insane neurosis afflicts that forum. Plus it's funny to see people who deadlift less than me call people soyboys

If your standards are low, you can have a girlfriend or wife quite easily. Maybe not a good one. Maybe not one you will be happy with. But if the standard is low enough, you can do it. Just like settling for SS as a training program. It's a program. Maybe not a good one. Maybe not one that you will be happy with, but if the standard is low enough...

[Hardartery]

I'm saying that there is a zero percent chance of me judging RPE of 7 versus 7.5 or 8, or 6.5, or 6. Zero.

This!

I’ve been trying to develop a sense for RPE but it never worked for me. I can gauge a @10 no problem (I barely could do that last rep and I definitely have no more reps in me) and, maybe, I might be able to guess a @9 (this was a hard last rep but maybe I have another one in me). This maybe means there is a 50% chance of being wrong.

I could NEVER guess what a @8 (much less @7) feels like.

I’m not saying RPE doesn’t work, because it does, but I can’t really make it work for me. The only RPE I can accurately use is @fuck (barely made it; something between @9 and @10) and @fuckyeah (this was REALLY easy; something between @4-and @8).

It appears to work quite well for some people, so I want to understand it. I won't use it specifically, but if I can glean something good to use on my own training then I absolutely will. No program works universally for everyone, there are only general principles that apply to everyone. I don't do conjugate, but I absolutely have some conjugate stuff in my training. I don't do genuine linear progressions or genuine progressive overload. I don't really periodize exactly. But I absolutely use all of those things in some way in my training. Which is really what I think everyone should do. Take the bits that work for you and adapt. Know thyself and work with that. Some things don't directly succeed, but learning what doesn't work is pretty valuable in the long term as well.
For example, I absolutely shit all over HIT at any opportunity. One of the few programs that I genuinely despise and think really does a lot more harm than good for anyone using it. BUT, there is one positive thing that came from it. The Golden Era guys, like Arnold, hyped ridiculous volume and frequency. Unsurviveable and detrimental amounts. HIT stressed recovery and brought some reasoned consideration to the discussion - there is such a thing as too much to the point of being counterproductive IF you don't allow enough time and calories to recover. Of course, that was not the real push of that program and they took it way to far the other way, but there was something to learn from even that shitty program. On the whole, I am positive that RPE is miles ahead of that, so I expect there are good thing to learn from it and apply.

[MarkKO]

This is an interesting discussion.

I also don't get RPE, but can see it works. I just don't know how *I* could make it work. Like @AlanMackey I can tell if I've got no reps left or maybe one rep left with a 50/50 chance of being wrong; or a whole lot left. Outside of that, I'm lost.

I like that RPE allows for accounting for what you're capable of on the day. It's something everyone needs to do. What I don't like is that it requires a lot more skill to do correctly if you're doing it yourself. I'm pretty good at being objective with my efforts and I know I'm not good enough to be able to gauge accurately whether I've got two reps compared to three reps. I can do that watching a video of me, yes. Absolutely. Except that's pretty useless.

That's my main problem with the RPE systems. Under the guidance of a coach experienced enough to use it, it's a great system. Possibly with the use of a barbell speed tracker that feeds back to you in real time, you can use it yourself without a coach. But I absolutely am convinced the vast majority of people on their own under the bar will not be able to accurately gauge RPE from set to set.

There are easier ways to implement autoregulation. Using a sensible working max is a good start; using benchmarks to determine weight progression is another. Both are objective and don't require any skill, just compliance.

[mgil]

One can use RPE to track top singles or small sets where accuracy is typically higher and then use the tables to figure out some percentage work with the RPE targets. Then you track that over time with how recovery feels between sessions and voila, you have a blended RPE/percentage program scheme.

[Hardartery]

One can use RPE to track top singles or small sets where accuracy is typically higher and then use the tables to figure out some percentage work with the RPE targets. Then you track that over time with how recovery feels between sessions and voila, you have a blended RPE/percentage program scheme.

I can see that. I know that personally I am useless at judging that stuff. I can go out feeling like warmed over ass and the warmup sets are stupid and then, out of nowhere I do something way more than I was even shooting for. Other days it can be totally the opposite. I have gone by whatever the end result was as my gauge. But I can see how it could be reverse engineered to work for me, sort of. Maybe it would be good as an analysis tool looking bak over log notes of workouts.

[ChasingCurls69]

I think at some point the people claiming they can't rate anything lower than @9 or @10 have to try, and maybe be a little wrong. You know what a 10 is? Work up to it with smaller jumps and see how they feel. Not sure if it's an @6-8? Do an AMRAP after to double check. But at some point you have to put effort into learning it instead of throwing your hands up.

[MarkKO]

I think at some point the people claiming they can't rate anything lower than @9 or @10 have to try, and maybe be a little wrong. You know what a 10 is? Work up to it with smaller jumps and see how they feel. Not sure if it's an @6-8? Do an AMRAP after to double check. But at some point you have to put effort into learning it instead of throwing your hands up.

This isn't a bad point, but on the flip side why would you invest that time when you already have tools that do the same thing that don't require the time investment?

I think that's the main issue that RPE has for more seasoned lifters. It doesn't do anything percentage based training doesn't do when implemented sensibly. I *know* what percentages I need to train at and what rep ranges and number of sets I need to use them in and when to do that to improve. There is no incentive for me to spend time learning a new system that does the same thing.

For the less experienced there's a marginally stronger argument for investing the time in learning how to use RPE, because those people are not yet in possession of the skillset to implement percentage based training sensibly. In that case, you may as well learn how to use RPE. However, learning to implement percentage based training is quite easy, probably easier than learning how to use RPE. You can simply follow a decent percentage based system for a few months and by the end you'll already have a pretty good idea of what's what provided you've been observant.

It boils down to picking whichever method you prefer because they work on the same basic principles like all successful training systems.

[Hardartery]

I think at some point the people claiming they can't rate anything lower than @9 or @10 have to try, and maybe be a little wrong. You know what a 10 is? Work up to it with smaller jumps and see how they feel. Not sure if it's an @6-8? Do an AMRAP after to double check. But at some point you have to put effort into learning it instead of throwing your hands up.

Well, for starters, no one has to do anything. I know, from over 30 years of lifting, that there is zero chance of me making an accurate estimate of RPE. I have lifted enough things and failed and succeeded enough times to be confident on what I can and cannot judge. Confident enough to know how my body feels and adjust without using the RPE system. I don't NEED it to progress, I have done just fone with other systems. The question is, would I gain something by implementing this system or parts of it? I need to understand it to know that, so I am trying to have an intelligent conversation with other people that have actually used it.
And as far as "Learning" the feel for RPE, let's speak franklyabout that. It depends on a lot of things. What is your fast twitch fibre ratio? Slow twitch? How good is your actual neural recruitment? How much has your training affected those things? I know from experience that Estimated 1RM charts bear no resemblance to reality in my case, and I even know why that is. There is a very sharp drop off with reps for me. My 10RM is a distant horizon from my 3RM, but my 3RM is not that far from my 1RM. The jump in weight from 5RM to 3RM is also on the steep side relative to other lifters and estimation charts. You are intimating that I need to learn myself better to implement RPE, which is no different than saying that it works every time if implemented correctly. That's not how it works in real life. I'll add that I place no value of any kind in AMRAPS. While I am sure that they are useful for some people, in my experience they are at best a counterproductive waste of recovery - which is to say that they offer nothing positive to my training. I'm not guessing about that, I know from experience. I am not "Throwing my hands up", I am making a realistic assessment based on lifting for a long time. I know, as a point of fact, that that scale does not function for me. But, maybe the principles behind the system would prove useful to my training.

[alek]

It boils down to picking whichever method you prefer because they work on the same basic principles like all successful training systems.

Now you’re just being reasonable.

[mgil]

@Hardartery, note that the baseline RPE table is an average. Mike T has remarked upon the idea, as @ChasingCurls69 mentioned, that the individual has to work through the rep ranges and develop their own table if they want to employ RPE as effectively as possible.

If you have time, it’s worth going through what Mike T and the RTS crew have put out on how to employ RPE in an individual training plan. Further, the use of pivot blocks and other techniques to somewhat “reset” the training mind can be useful.

My biggest criticism of the SS crowd being critical of RPE is that they put little to no effort into actually learning about it. That’s because they suspect that Occam’s Razor can be applied to all training methods with optimal results. As I’m sure most here are aware, if one has been training for years (possibly decades for some of us), then they likely already know this.

[mgil]

I think at some point the people claiming they can't rate anything lower than @9 or @10 have to try, and maybe be a little wrong. You know what a 10 is? Work up to it with smaller jumps and see how they feel. Not sure if it's an @6-8? Do an AMRAP after to double check. But at some point you have to put effort into learning it instead of throwing your hands up.

This isn't a bad point, but on the flip side why would you invest that time when you already have tools that do the same thing that don't require the time investment?

I think that's the main issue that RPE has for more seasoned lifters. It doesn't do anything percentage based training doesn't do when implemented sensibly. I *know* what percentages I need to train at and what rep ranges and number of sets I need to use them in and when to do that to improve. There is no incentive for me to spend time learning a new system that does the same thing.

For the less experienced there's a marginally stronger argument for investing the time in learning how to use RPE, because those people are not yet in possession of the skillset to implement percentage based training sensibly. In that case, you may as well learn how to use RPE. However, learning to implement percentage based training is quite easy, probably easier than learning how to use RPE. You can simply follow a decent percentage based system for a few months and by the end you'll already have a pretty good idea of what's what provided you've been observant.

It boils down to picking whichever method you prefer because they work on the same basic principles like all successful training systems.

I agree with these points. Specifically the idea that you know your percentages based on experience. That’s experience gained over dozens (or hundreds) of training cycles and learning how your recovery systems cooperate.

I don’t use much of anything quantitative any more when I wander out to the garage. I just operate mainly on not feeling like I’ll be in pain the next three days based on what I’m doing now. Maybe there’s an RPE way to get to that, but for me the RPE numbers would be so low that the error associated with trying to put a pin in things obfuscates the point of what I’m trying to do anyhow.

[wiigelec]

I always set my target weight higher than the last session. Over the last few weeks of training using this method, some days all three lifts go up, some days none go up, some days one goes up one stays the same one bombs, some days . . . well you get the picture.

What has always, and I mean always happened to me in the past when pushing arbitrary increases is that I eventually end up getting sick, 99.99% of the time some kind of respiratory deal like sinusitis or bronchitis. In fact last year when I was pushing my training into November (and ignoring my feelings) I ended up with covid. So that method hasn't really worked for me.

So far this fall heading into the winter things have been going better. I did get some sinus stuff going on early, but the autoregulation modulated my training so I got over it a lot easier than I have using other training methods. At least that's the way I have perceived things happening. Progress has been slower but so far steady, and hopefully the long term outlook and not having the pressure of adding weight every session will work better for me.

I also have a lot of other stuff going on in my life like playing ice hockey, training bjj, normal life stresses: kids, messy house, shoveling snow, not-sedentary job (oil field electrician), mental ups and downs, not 8 hours of sleep every night, so on and so forth. Unfortunately training and recovery are not, and frankly cannot be, the number one priorities in my life. So RPE is giving me an excuse to lift lighter weights when I feel like it, maybe that's not such a bad thing in the grand scheme of things? It seems like maybe sometimes wimping out on a training session is the best thing one can do for mid-term progress.

But then again, I am a giant WAF pussy so what the hell do I know . . .

[Hardartery]

@Hardartery, note that the baseline RPE table is an average. Mike T has remarked upon the idea, as @ChasingCurls69 mentioned, that the individual has to work through the rep ranges and develop their own table if they want to employ RPE as effectively as possible.

If you have time, it’s worth going through what Mike T and the RTS crew have put out on how to employ RPE in an individual training plan. Further, the use of pivot blocks and other techniques to somewhat “reset” the training mind can be useful.

My biggest criticism of the SS crowd being critical of RPE is that they put little to no effort into actually learning about it. That’s because they suspect that Occam’s Razor can be applied to all training methods with optimal results. As I’m sure most here are aware, if one has been training for years (possibly decades for some of us), then they likely already know this.

I have every intention of looking that stuff up and learning the system. Just like I took the time to learn about other systems. I will probably implement bits of it here and there, just like I use bits of Conjugate and bits of Periodized and other things. There is always a value in learning, even if it's only to know something doesn't work for me. I have heard good things about Mike T here and there, he seems respected by people that have valuable opinions. I don't have much use for unqualified attacks on anyone's position - much less mine. The assumption that I haven't tried enough lifting to know if I can feel a difference in RPE is just silly, much less the blind assumption that it's just a matter of trying it and it works the same for everyone. I know full well that RPE as explained in the Megathread and here is not practicable for me, but that isn't saying much because it isn't explained particularly well or in depth in either thread.

[Hardartery]

I always set my target weight higher than the last session. Over the last few weeks of training using this method, some days all three lifts go up, some days none go up, some days one goes up one stays the same one bombs, some days . . . well you get the picture.

What has always, and I mean always happened to me in the past when pushing arbitrary increases is that I eventually end up getting sick, 99.99% of the time some kind of respiratory deal like sinusitis or bronchitis. In fact last year when I was pushing my training into November (and ignoring my feelings) I ended up with covid. So that method hasn't really worked for me.

So far this fall heading into the winter things have been going better. I did get some sinus stuff going on early, but the autoregulation modulated my training so I got over it a lot easier than I have using other training methods. At least that's the way I have perceived things happening. Progress has been slower but so far steady, and hopefully the long term outlook and not having the pressure of adding weight every session will work better for me.

I also have a lot of other stuff going on in my life like playing ice hockey, training bjj, normal life stresses: kids, messy house, shoveling snow, not-sedentary job (oil field electrician), mental ups and downs, not 8 hours of sleep every night, so on and so forth. Unfortunately training and recovery are not, and frankly cannot be, the number one priorities in my life. So RPE is giving me an excuse to lift lighter weights when I feel like it, maybe that's not such a bad thing in the grand scheme of things? It seems like maybe sometimes wimping out on a training session is the best thing one can do for mid-term progress.

But then again, I am a giant WAF pussy so what the hell do I know . . .

This is a useful post. This actually explains a bit of the actual practice and it's effects on someone. I can see value in the system as a form of modulation. Some guys need to be pushed and pushed to get anywhere because they really overestimate their actual exertion and underestimate what they can actually do. Other guys are the opposite and are most benefitted by being reined in a little. Makes sense.

[mgil]

Hardartery, note that the baseline RPE table is an average. Mike T has remarked upon the idea, as ChasingCurls69 mentioned, that the individual has to work through the rep ranges and develop their own table if they want to employ RPE as effectively as possible.

If you have time, it’s worth going through what Mike T and the RTS crew have put out on how to employ RPE in an individual training plan. Further, the use of pivot blocks and other techniques to somewhat “reset” the training mind can be useful.

My biggest criticism of the SS crowd being critical of RPE is that they put little to no effort into actually learning about it. That’s because they suspect that Occam’s Razor can be applied to all training methods with optimal results. As I’m sure most here are aware, if one has been training for years (possibly decades for some of us), then they likely already know this.

I have every intention of looking that stuff up and learning the system. Just like I took the time to learn about other systems. I will probably implement bits of it here and there, just like I use bits of Conjugate and bits of Periodized and other things. There is always a value in learning, even if it's only to know something doesn't work for me. I have heard good things about Mike T here and there, he seems respected by people that have valuable opinions. I don't have much use for unqualified attacks on anyone's position - much less mine. The assumption that I haven't tried enough lifting to know if I can feel a difference in RPE is just silly, much less the blind assumption that it's just a matter of trying it and it works the same for everyone. I know full well that RPE as explained in the Megathread and here is not practicable for me, but that isn't saying much because it isn't explained particularly well or in depth in either thread.

In case it wasn’t clear, specifically in the post I put after the one you quoted, I’m all for doing what is best for the individual.

If your training is still productive without RPE, mainly because of your training history and self-awareness, I’d doubt RPE shifts the needle much. I think it’s a great tool, as you mentioned earlier, to help a younger (training wise) lifter start to incorporate a feedback loop in regards to exertion and recovery. You’re well past that stage.

That being said, Mark Robb is a proponent of (and employee of) RTS. He has a substantial training history. It might be worth looking around for things he’s written or videos with him to see if there are useful nuggets from his perspective.

[Stoop]

The cool thing with RPE is you don't have to provide specific numbers for your lifters to hit when you're being an online coach. This is of course completely different from telling your lifters to just add 5lbs regardless of what their numbers are.

[ChasingCurls69]

@Hardartery that wasn't an attack on you specifically; it's a response to a common argument against RPE from people who haven't used it or might need a little more time to pick it up, and I gave two simple approaches to addressing their complaints about it.

None of us have to use RPE, or a % of an imaginary unknown 1rm given that it's a value which changes day to day, or a training max of what was our 1rm on our best day (because of the most common issue with % based programming), or velocity based training.

And yes, RPE ratings are individualized and will vary based on how your percieved bar speeds relate to each other. I've had lifters do 5 reps that look like they could all be RPE 10 on an average lifter, and lifters whose RPE 10's move quickly. It will also vary based on the day to day shit that affects strength performance. As long as you are close enough that you can train productively and adjust your training loads to match your abilities on a given day, that's all that matters.

[dw]

Probably going to repeat points other have already made but:

1. A high degree of accuracy is really not needed for RPE to be useful, although you probably want to be fairly consistent. You use a certain RPE scheme for your loading and if you get results, that's good enough.

2. Having said that I think for relatively high intensities it's pretty easy, especially if like me you use light enough weights that you can just go to true failure every once in a while to test your assessment.

3. But really... you just don't need to be that accurate. If your "RPE 8" is actually RPE 6 but you have built your programming around that error because you know what kind of volume at fake RPE 8 gets you results... then it's fine.