A more intense way to decrease RPE from 10 to 8?

[Darkius]

Some people get rested up between sets of a lift they can do 11 reps of, and they deliberately stop at 9 reps because they think 8 RPE, or 2 reps in reserve is best.

Some people say they are slacking off.

I've been thinking about cardio super sets, and got an idea I plan to test, but want feedback.

What if instead of waiting 90 seconds to be able to perform another 11 reps and then stopping at 9, one waits only 70 seconds and then is cardiovascularly stopped at 9? Wouldn't that have the same body building effect as voluntarily stopping at 9, but take less time in the gym and work the heart more too?

I wonder if I doing crazy talk. Both failures might be the same. Muscle failure is often local blood overload. I've even read that if someone goes to failure and waits 5 minutes, they can fail at their first number of reps.

That then raises another question. If someone stops the first set at 11 reps but could have done 12, and then after 90 seconds does 10 reps but could have done 11, should they have just ground out the 11th rep?

What is it about a long lactic acid grind to failure that tears more fibers?


The RIR theory is based on growth signal taking less reps than muscle tearing, both being based on time under load.
If someone failed to eat enough carbs before a workout, and fails the set at fewer reps, I don't see how that would tear fibers too much. Going to failure sounds optimal there.

I think the reason to not go to failure here is the neurological fatigue or psychological fatigue reducing how many sets can be done. The fibers will grow fine without soreness, but CNS fatigue may be a limiting factor.

I don't think failing is that draining psychologically if done just ones. So in the case of people doing 3x10 and failing on the 3rd set, I'm not sure how much fiber tear is actually happening there. Likely not from the failure, if they did not rest a lot.


What I do believe is the optimal growth exertion is a bit less than the exertion that starts tearing more fibers, and that tension, not tearing, is what signals for growth, and that RIR might not be as simple as I thought, as far as predicting where that sweet spot is.


As a beginner, I'll grow no matter what I do, as long as I keep going to the gym and listen to my body. But I want to figure this stuff out before I end up needing it, and maybe even reap faster growth now.



I wonder if ever set needs to be short of failure, or just short of the time and reps that would have brought the first set to failure.

[air2fakie]

As a beginner, I'll grow no matter what I do, as long as I keep going to the gym and listen to my body.

Don’t be so sure, some people are really good at finding ways to **** up simple concepts.

[Darkius]

Don’t be so sure, some people are really good at finding ways to **** up simple concepts.

Agreed. And for the reasons in my lengthy post, I think I found another reason why 2 RIR is easier to mess up than 1 RIR.

Some researchers sound equal growth from 0 RIR vs 2 RIR, but I bet the researchers were much better than the average lifter at knowing where 2 RIR was and using adequate rest between sets.

Since some studies have found that lack of rest between sets can reduce gains, I might be better off getting my cardio elsewhere, or only trying this 1 of my 3 full body sessions per week.



Yeah, if beginner gains were so guaranteed even with suboptimal performance, there would be a lot more true intermediate lifters out there.

[MyEgoProblem]

You sure as **** should be getting your 'cardio' by doing your cadio/conditioning/gpp Seperately..

Lifting for cardio is retarded.
Lift for strength/hyp/power ect.. Don't water down your results.

[Darkius]

I also read that just doing 8-12 reps does not make a set hypertrophic. It also has to last 30-70 seconds.

On Friday, I lifted a heavier weight, and failed at 6 reps. My trainer assisted me for 4 reps past failure. Peer pressure there. I thought going past failure is bad. But maybe he was trying to get me to the 30 second mark. That really got me wondering how I know whether I'm tearing fibers or just reaching stimulus.

I'm looking for a more clear rule.

[air2fakie]

I'm looking for a more clear rule.

I’m pretty sure the clear rule of your TWO trainers is that there’s a sucker born every minute.

[Darkius]

I’m pretty sure the clear rule of your TWO trainers is that there’s a sucker born every minute.

True.
Definitely not worth $1500. 24 sessions, that is. I did learn some good stuff, so there are worse things I could have spent it on. I don't know what I'll do with the remaining 7 sessions I can't get a refund for. I think I get a better workout by myself, or at least a teainer does not improve mine much. And I now know good youtube channels.
At least now I don't feel like I'm costing my gym money when I go 30 times per month.

[mdonnelly80]

IMO, this is just over-complicating things in sooo many ways:

1. RPE is a simple, individualized tool that is being applied in a complicated manner. It's a useful gauge that tells you how to progress from set to set and workout to workout. I'd leave it at that.

2. I still don't understand why people make the process of hypertrophy so complicated; train hard, get into a caloric surplus and you'll grow. Nutrition is 80%+ of that battle, training is the other 20%. And, that 20% just means following a quality program with consistency.

3. Conditioning with resistance exercises is fine; after the core workout is completed. Unless you want to do Crossfit; this is what they pretty much major in.