The dynamic double progression method

[Animal2692]

Some of you probably already know about this so this is for those who don't or are looking for a solid progression method. This progression method is what I've instinctively been doing. I didn't know the name of it until now. Anyways, I think this is a better system because it meets your adaptations as they occur in real time. The older way of double progression is to work within a rep range where you add reps to all of the sets and then increase the weight for all of them and start from the lower end of the rep range again. Dynamic double progression on the other hand emphasizes keeping sets challenging as opposed to allowing earlier sets to become too easy as you try to get the same amount of reps across all sets before finally adding weight. This way the effective volume is kept consistent to allow for a more optimal rate of progress. Another huge benefit is that you won't be compromising your form trying to reach the new desired target like in the older method. The way it works is that you keep a target RPE of say 8, and add reps/weight right from the very first set then allow the reps/weight to fall for subsequent sets due to fatigue while still maintaining an RPE of 8 in the same rep range. Each set progresses on its own, thus making your overall progression much more natural.

Example:
RPE 8
5-8 reps chosen as the preferred rep range

Workout 1

Set 1: 100x6
Set 2: 95x7
Set 3: 95x5

Workout 2

Set 1: 100x8
Set 2: 100x5
Set 3: 95x8

Workout 3

Set 1: 105x5
Set 2: 100x7
Set 3: 100x5

Your rate of progress will obviously depend on how experienced you are or on the proximity to your genetic ceiling which could be workout to workout, week to week, month to month, etc. For fatigue management purposes, I recommend holding the same weight and reps instead of trying to continually fight for those +1s and getting too ahead of yourself so that you don't have to make more drastic changes. The RPE dropping for the same weight and reps also counts as progression.

*One final caveat is to allow the progression to come without further increasing RPE. Otherwise you'll have to maintain the same weight and reps until the RPE drops.

[air2fakie]

I haven't been around the last few decades so have never heard of this, so if this is for me, why is RPE discussed as the basis of this whole method and not explained at all?

And why has this post been edited like 50 times already? When will it stop?

[Animal2692]

I haven't been around the last few decades so have never heard of this, so if this is for me, why is RPE discussed as the basis of this whole method and not explained at all?

And why has this post been edited like 50 times already? When will it stop?

It's assuming you already know what RPE is. I mean it's so common nowadays it's hard not to know what it is. It would make it much more lengthy and lead to even more editing which we want to keep to a minimum for air2fakie's sake.

[air2fakie]

It's assuming you already know what RPE is. I mean it's so common nowadays it's hard not to know what it is. It would make it much more lengthy and lead to even more editing which we want to keep to a minimum for air2fakie's sake.

If I knew what RPE was then I prob wouldn't need the rest of info in the OP about why the way you specifically work out is so great.

[Animal2692]

If I knew what RPE was then I prob wouldn't need the rest of info in the OP about why the way you specifically work out is so great.

It's more in relevance to the older method of double progression. Not everyone is as fortunate as being a savant like you. But I do appreciate you being the first to jump to replying on this thread, it's been a week too long without me, I understand.

[leidenesLK]

If you’re trying to maintain RPE set-to-set, I much prefer a rep goal method as opposed to what you’re suggesting. I prefer to keep base sets static with weight decreases only coming by way of drop/back off sets etc, so progress (or lack thereof) is a little easier to gauge.

At the end of the day, progression is progression. Do what you enjoy.

[air2fakie]

But I do appreciate you being the first to jump to replying on this thread, it's been a week too long without me, I understand.

Last week you didn’t do RPE at all, so it’s puzzling how the way you’re training any given week can always the best in your mind.

[safcpaul]

Last week you didn’t do RPE at all, so it’s puzzling how the way you’re training any given week can always the best in your mind.

He's confusing his muscles mate. He trains rpe 9 for his anterior tibialis and does bicep curls in the squat rack to train his glutes. It's all confusion and tricking his body. If he doesn't know what he is doing week to week his body won't either. I see a new mr olympia in the making with him

[MyEgoProblem]

https://www.jpshealthandfitness.com....e-progression/

👍

[supramax]

I thought everybody knew about double progression, already. It just makes sense.

[paulinkansas]

What if you don't like changing weights? I keep the same weight for all the sets of each exercise during a workout. 2 or 3 workouts later I'm still doing the same weight but have increased the reps. I'm not very good with math, but somehow I have a degree in Finance and almost a minor in chemistry.

[Filmbuff81]

https://www.jpshealthandfitness.com....e-progression/

👍

Thank you for posting the Brian Minor article.

Something people seem to miss with this is that Brian states he mainly does this with accessories and variants of the main movement and sometimes with a main movement.

He also lists caveats. So if someone does want to try this out at least read the article vs the oversimplification above.

Personally I prefer keeping weight static and decreasing RIR week to week.

But pretty much anything works for hypertrophy so people need to just be consistent otherwise too many variables come into play trying to figure out what’s actually working vs what was just a reaction to a novel stimulus.

[MyEgoProblem]

Thank you for posting the Brian Minor article.

Something people seem to miss with this is that Brian states he mainly does this with accessories and variants of the main movement and sometimes with a main movement.

He also lists caveats. So if someone does want to try this out at least read the article vs the oversimplification above.

Personally I prefer keeping weight static and decreasing RIR week to week.

But pretty much anything works for hypertrophy so people need to just be consistent otherwise too many variables come into play trying to figure out what’s actually working vs what was just a reaction to a novel stimulus.

It something I'd use on lat pulldowns or hack squat ect
If I didn't have a more enjoyable protocol to use xD

I just set a timer and do as many sub max sets in that time. Adjust loads when I hit a set number of reps on first set or set total number of reps. 'density work' many solid hard sets in a short space of time that don't really beat you up.

And I'd much rather just do myo reps sets for small 1 joint lifts. Cos who can be arsed with doing those.

Regarding the *Signal vs noise*

I'd recommend if you somehow haven't yet, listening to pods (rts & guest spots) and reading articles by Mike tucherer on his bondarchuck inspired 'emerging strategies' stuff. Generally a little more strength biased but Absolute big brain plays and still somehow simple as hell.

[Corbets]

I thought everybody knew about double progression, already. It just makes sense.

But this is dynamic...

[Filmbuff81]

It something I'd use on lat pulldowns or hack squat ect
If I didn't have a more enjoyable protocol to use xD

I just set a timer and do as many sub max sets in that time. Adjust loads when I hit a set number of reps on first set or set total number of reps. 'density work' many solid hard sets in a short space of time that don't really beat you up.

And I'd much rather just do myo reps sets for small 1 joint lifts. Cos who can be arsed with doing those.

Regarding the *Signal vs noise*

I'd recommend if you somehow haven't yet, listening to pods (rts & guest spots) and reading articles by Mike tucherer on his bondarchuck inspired 'emerging strategies' stuff. Generally a little more strength biased but Absolute big brain plays and still somehow simple as hell.

I listen to it all. Definitely big brain time.

I find a lot of concepts can still transfer to hypertrophy when you look at the larger picture and I just like listening to smart people talk training.

My comment was mainly directed at others here and other threads getting bogged down in the weeds.

I think dynamic double progression can cause issues of its own(especially on a main lift), because sometimes the first set is the toughest and subsequent sets will feel easier at the same weight so dropping the weight down because set 1 felt too tough may just put you back in the same boat as static double progression but just an added step.

I’d much rather see someone do an overwarm single 10% higher before their working sets or even do a set of 1-3 at their working weight to get a feel.

I think some more inexperienced lifters read all this stuff employ a bunch of methods and then start conflating the feeling of toughness with RPE/RIR and sell themselves short.

Timers and myo reps are all very time efficient and effective and I’ve employed them in the past.

Edit/disclaimer: these are all the opinions of a nearly 40 year old dad who is relatively strong but by no means elite lol.

[air2fakie]

https://www.jpshealthandfitness.com....e-progression/

👍

Thanks for posting this link to this thread, useful overview for people who are new to these concepts rather than a one-size-fits-all bias.

[leidenesLK]

What if you don't like changing weights? I keep the same weight for all the sets of each exercise during a workout. 2 or 3 workouts later I'm still doing the same weight but have increased the reps. I'm not very good with math, but somehow I have a degree in Finance and almost a minor in chemistry.

If you want RIR across and don’t like changing weights, rep goals are a good bet. Though it requires cumulative addition, if that’s within your realm of math capability lol

[Animal2692]

Last week you didn’t do RPE at all, so it’s puzzling how the way you’re training any given week can always the best in your mind.

What do you mean I didn't do RPE at all? I stick to 9-10 RPE. While many people would say that's too high, it's still RPE. I'm just trying to see what you're saying

[Animal2692]

Here's a link to dynamic double progression that probably explains it better. I'm not claiming by any means that I came up with it or anything. I just didn't know what it was called until yesterday. And quite frankly I've never heard anyone here having mentioned dynamic double progression either.

https://evolvedtrainingsystems.com/o...e-progression/

[sooby]

What if you don't like changing weights? I keep the same weight for all the sets of each exercise during a workout. 2 or 3 workouts later I'm still doing the same weight but have increased the reps. I'm not very good with math, but somehow I have a degree in Finance and almost a minor in chemistry.

can confirm, lazy af to be changing around the weights crew

i do it for compounds but can't be fuked to do it for isolations unless it's a machine where you just insert a pin

[Animal2692]

What if you don't like changing weights? I keep the same weight for all the sets of each exercise during a workout. 2 or 3 workouts later I'm still doing the same weight but have increased the reps. I'm not very good with math, but somehow I have a degree in Finance and almost a minor in chemistry.

You can still keep the same weight using dynamic double progression like you say and I have points in time when that happens but once you reach the upper end of your rep range on the very first set, you then increase the weight for that first set next workout. It really just depends on how big your rep range is. I'd imagine that even in your case, you'd still eventually have to increase the weight and lower the reps back down. Unless you keep increasing the reps on the first set even past the upper end of your rep range, that first set or few sets will eventually get pretty easy by the time you finally get around to reaching your reps on the final set.

[Animal2692]

Thank you for posting the Brian Minor article.

Something people seem to miss with this is that Brian states he mainly does this with accessories and variants of the main movement and sometimes with a main movement.

He also lists caveats. So if someone does want to try this out at least read the article vs the oversimplification above.

Personally I prefer keeping weight static and decreasing RIR week to week.

But pretty much anything works for hypertrophy so people need to just be consistent otherwise too many variables come into play trying to figure out what’s actually working vs what was just a reaction to a novel stimulus.

I've heard about decreasing RIR each week as a great method as well. I don't really like that very much because I'm more black and white when it comes to effort. Either I'm all out or nothing. Maybe I'll find a happy medium one day but for now still being a novice I want to bulldoze forward with my lifts until they get decent enough before I offer myself the luxury of leaving something in the tank. I'm just wary of not going hard enough for now.

[air2fakie]

What do you mean I didn't do RPE at all? I stick to 9-10 RPE. While many people would say that's too high, it's still RPE. I'm just trying to see what you're saying

Fair enough, all sets of any kind do have an RPE even if one isn't tracking it at all, doing all sets blindly until failure across the board, or getting fat for weighted calisthenics as their means of progressive overload.

[Animal2692]

Fair enough, all sets of any kind do have an RPE even if one isn't tracking it at all, doing all sets blindly until failure across the board, or getting fat for weighted calisthenics as their means of progressive overload.

I am tracking them by ensuring I hit failure which is the same as aiming for 10 rpe. So far it's helped me progress a lot in just 2 weeks. I've reached higher numbers than I ever thought I would since I last time had a gym membership. I like that I can use it as a clear benchmark. I have long lost that extra fat I gained from overshooting my lean bulk btw too.

[MyEgoProblem]

I listen to it all. Definitely big brain time.

I find a lot of concepts can still transfer to hypertrophy when you look at the larger picture and I just like listening to smart people talk training.

My comment was mainly directed at others here and other threads getting bogged down in the weeds.

I think dynamic double progression can cause issues of its own(especially on a main lift), because sometimes the first set is the toughest and subsequent sets will feel easier at the same weight so dropping the weight down because set 1 felt too tough may just put you back in the same boat as static double progression but just an added step.

I’d much rather see someone do an overwarm single 10% higher before their working sets or even do a set of 1-3 at their working weight to get a feel.

I think some more inexperienced lifters read all this stuff employ a bunch of methods and then start conflating the feeling of toughness with RPE/RIR and sell themselves short.

Timers and myo reps are all very time efficient and effective and I’ve employed them in the past.

Edit/disclaimer: these are all the opinions of a nearly 40 year old dad who is relatively strong but by no means elite lol.

/on spread

I agree completely.. I especially love over warmups and/or x1@6,7 or 8 benchmark sets

I love listening to a good theory wank session, probably too much. Especially during this crap UK lockdown.
I've basically run out of decent pods and articles.

All helps to keep developing my coaching skills and style.

Edit/disclaimer: these are all the opinions of a nearly 40 year old dad who is relatively strong but by no means elite lol <- same.

If you want RIR across and don’t like changing weights, rep goals are a good bet. Though it requires cumulative addition, if that’s within your realm of math capability lol

I prefer to "surf" around an @rpe.
Which is similar to a rep drop protocol, for main lifts.


Work up to a work set eg 8@8
Then repeat sets at x@8
Letting reps drop and maintain @rpe
And stop when I hit a certain bottom range of reps due fatigue purposes

90 8@7
100 8@8 initial set
100 6@8
100 6@8
100 5@8
100 4@8 stop

[leidenesLK]

I prefer to "surf" around an @rpe.
Which is similar to a rep drop protocol, for main lifts.


Work up to a work set eg 8@8
Then repeat sets at x@8
Letting reps drop and maintain @rpe
And stop when I hit a certain bottom range of reps due fatigue purposes

90 8@7
100 8@8 initial set
100 6@8
100 6@8
100 5@8
100 4@8 stop

Yep, that’s a solid method

[Filmbuff81]

I am tracking them by ensuring I hit failure which is the same as aiming for 10 rpe. So far it's helped me progress a lot in just 2 weeks. I've reached higher numbers than I ever thought I would since I last time had a gym membership. I like that I can use it as a clear benchmark. I have long lost that extra fat I gained from overshooting my lean bulk btw too.

There’s nothing inherently wrong with what you’re doing

I believe I mentioned elsewhere you’re essentially doing HIT like Dorian Yates and Jordan Peters

Jordan aims to beat his log book every workout even if by 1lb. So he’s constantly straining to 9-10 RPE.

But it has drawbacks too. Fatigue accumulation is pretty brutal and eventually you need to increase volume anyway to keep progressing your lifts and hypertrophy, so right now it’s 6 sets, next is 8, then you’re eventually doing 10+ sets and doing that every week is going to lead to an injury or the very least extreme stagnation.

Since you’re a novice I’m not saying leave a bunch in the tank, but you could hit an 8 RPE on a set and let the RPE ride to 9 for 2 more sets and have less fatigue and still make pretty much the same progress.

But because you’re a novice I did mention when you posted your OHP video I don’t think your 9-10 RPE is really 9-10 RPE anyway.

Your OHP video was probably 8-9. Maybe 8.5

You claimed going to failure but really you didn’t attempt another rep, so did you go to true concentric failure? Doubtful.

I only mention this because I’m in my overreaching week and I have taken every set of my lifts to a 9.5-10.

Squats and bench press I will leave a half rep on the tank, but everything else is true failure.

When you take something to true failure I don’t care who you are, wanting to do that every single week is just nuts.

Gun to your head RPE 7 and up on compounds is just ****ing brutal.

[Animal2692]

There’s nothing inherently wrong with what you’re doing

I believe I mentioned elsewhere you’re essentially doing HIT like Dorian Yates and Jordan Peterson.

Jordan aims to beat his log book every workout even if by 1lb. So he’s constantly straining to 9-10 RPE.

But it has drawbacks too. Fatigue accumulation is pretty brutal and eventually you need to increase volume anyway to keep progressing your lifts and hypertrophy, so right now it’s 6 sets, next is 8, then you’re eventually doing 10+ sets and doing that every week is going to lead to an injury or the very least extreme stagnation.

Since you’re a novice I’m not saying leave a bunch in the tank, but you could hit an 8 RPE on a set and let the RPE ride to 9 for 2 more sets and have less fatigue and still make pretty much the same progress.

But because you’re a novice I did mention when you posted your OHP video I don’t think your 9-10 RPE is really 9-10 RPE anyway.

Your OHP video was probably 8-9. Maybe 8.5

You claimed going to failure but really you didn’t attempt another rep, so did you go to true concentric failure? Doubtful.

I only mention this because I’m in my overreaching week and I have taken every set of my lifts to a 9.5-10.

Squats and bench press I will leave a half rep on the tank, but everything else is true failure.

When you take something to true failure I don’t care who you are, wanting to do that every single week is just nuts.

Gun to your head RPE 7 and up on compounds is just ****ing brutal.

In that OHP video, I don't think I could of done 1 more lol. I was already shaking like a leaf on that last one, I would have to turn it into an incline press. I guess to be more precise I should say I go to technical failure and not absolute failure because when you think about it, who would ever want to go to absolute failure on a compound movement? Forget the fatigue accumulation, it will be hello snap city instead. I even changed my underhand rows to overhand grip to not risk tearing a bicep, **** that. I wanna be in this for the long haul. But in that vein, would you say technical failure counts as an RPE 8.5 at the most? I mean if that's the case then I don't have to worry about using RPEs that are too high.

The thing that gets me when it comes to increasing volume as you get stronger is that you're technically doing more volume as far as total tonnage is concerned (not hard sets) so I don't know if that necessarily counts as a volume increase since it's still the same amount of hard sets. But anyways I am definitely leaving the door open to having to increase volume in the future. It just depends on whether I end up stalling or not and at a calorie surplus. I'm not even eating in a surplus yet since I'm trying to recomp and progress on maintenance calories as long as I can first. My best guess is that it will be a longgg while before I'll have to increase the volume.

[Filmbuff81]

I’d say just use the term failure however you want but stick to that term.

So if you want to say you’re going to technical failure just say that, and you’re going to always use that as your basis.

Maybe technical failure for you is 8.5, maybe it’s 9.5. This is something you need to find.

I know I can grind out a 9.5/10 and my technique will look the same.

But if it was a max attempt I’d be more conservative.

Going to true failure on pulldowns or curls isn’t gonna kill you.

Also you’re not gonna tear a bicep on underhand rows. Those should be a higher rep accessory anyway.

Most injuries I’ve seen for biceps are freaky, or someone was doing something awkward and weird.

Or jerking a barbell in a deadlift.

Tonnage going up doesn’t really count as volume going up, that’s just kinda relative.

Higher tonnage can certainly be more stressful, but it’s so variable it’s easier do just ignore it.

Me squatting a single @8 and you doing a single @ 8 would be different tonnage but the relative intensity is the same.

[air2fakie]

In that OHP video, I don't think I could of done 1 more lol. I was already shaking like a leaf on that last one, I would have to turn it into an incline press. I guess to be more precise I should say I go to technical failure and not absolute failure because when you think about it, who would ever want to go to absolute failure on a compound movement? Forget the fatigue accumulation, it will be hello snap city instead. I even changed my underhand rows to overhand grip to not risk tearing a bicep, **** that. I wanna be in this for the long haul. But in that vein, would you say technical failure counts as an RPE 8.5 at the most?

It’s always going to be somewhat subjective and personalized so there’s no exact answer, but if someone said 1 more rep and you win $10M you would’ve found the willpower to do it.

Plus IMO RPE 10 is pretty much you’re about ready to collapse, which you weren’t at.