I watched Mike's vid on emerging strategies a few weeks back and this finally sparked me to do a deep dive into all the data I was collecting on RTS over the last year for my workouts. I figured out what I was responding to (rep ranges) and my time to peak. I have but it all together and we will see where it takes me. It's a blend of jim wendler 531 and the RTS training manual. Like you say in the video there are manyyyy different approaches to achieving progress. For example my bench time to peak is 3 weeks, so I'm using a gas on gas off approach for developemental work. Push it for two weeks gas off for the third week, rinse and repeat and when I want to push it right to a true peak I go gas on for the full 3 weeks. Gas off for me means deload or overall less intensity in my workout. I'm trying to figure out how many developemental blocks to run before I run a peaking block. In my mind I'm thinking 3 developemental blocks, see how it all feels and go from there. Thanks for the vid.
Great video. This is where Powerlifting (or Oly lifting for that matter) starts to make what Bondarchuk was doing more weird and difficult. In other sports you'd just follow the prescription for the day and get your result from doing it, throw whatever distance you throw or run whatever time you run. But in any kind of barbell-based training you have to load the "result" on the bar *before* you actually do the training, with the penalty being undershooting or overshooting the intended RPE if you get it wrong. It not only makes "listening to your body" really important, but also knowing where your body's likely to be on a given day (based on where you are in the development period) and then picking the right target weights.
Thanks for the video! I’m looking to learn to program to get stronger for Jiujitsu. Is this type of programming adaptable for sports and if so how would you go about this?
How do you go about determining load drop percentage? Is 75% the ballpark for 5, then just trial and error subsequently? How do I gauge what's a good percentage for other rep ranges?
So to implement this in my program(PPL x UPPER/LOWER) I would squat on both leg days, with 1 top set rpe 8 and 4 back off sets off 75% of the estimated 1RM, for bench I would do the same and for deadlifts aswell.my question is I’d be hitting bench 2 times per week and I have other exercises than just the big 3 in my program,for I am trying to be a Powerbuilder, do I reduce the sets on my other exercises(let’s say for push day) or do I keep them the same?
Not sure if you are still monitoring these comments, but I remember that you once had a sample protocol that used backoff sets differently. Do 1 (or 3 or 5) at RPE 8 (or 9), then strip off 5% to 10% of the top set and do backoffs (with relatively short rest periods) until RPE on a backoff set hits 8 (or 9). I recall there was also a time limit in case the backoffs were too easy and you were doing 5-6 backoffs. Has the emerging strategies as described above supercede what I just described at "state of the art" or do you still use RPE based backoffs in some cases?
We do monitor the comments. Thanks for reaching out with your question. The protocol you are describing has a few different variations. In the most current version as applied in Emerging Strategies it would be something as follows: x3 @9 plus 2 down sets (load drop) The load drop is the 5-10% of the bar load. Most of the time it is 5%. However, some lifters need more. The down sets don't need to reach a 9 RPE. In that past, this was a % fatigue approach where you work back up to that original RPE level effort. In the application of ES, we want to hold the stimulus consistent with less variation. Ideally, a person would even finish a bit below that 9 RPE in the down sets. However, there are a lot of individual variables that would need to be considered.
This was helpful, thanks! One question that came to mind is ES suggests a low stress block once you've hit your time to peak, and in general, the low stress block should be about 1/3 the length of the TTP. Since research suggests volume-equated programs tend to perform similarly, could you reduce the microcycle volume (by say 25%) and continue training and never need a low stress block?
One of the things that has escaped me after listening to every episode of the podcast is how exactly the estimated 1RM is calculated. I know that one of the guests used an AMRAP at the end of the block, but never heard any more about it. Lets say the prescribed exercise is low pin squats for a set of 5 at RPE8. We would need to know the relationship between your RPE8 set of five and your 5RM, which could be done with an average chart to some degree of accuracy. Then we would need to know the relationship between a 5RM and a 1RM. Then we would need to know the relationship between a 1RM low pin squat and your 1RM competition squat. This is like playing telephone but each player is translating the phrase to a different language. No chart can be used to do this. Some lifters may have a strong correlation between low pin squats and comp squats, but others may have a very poor one. Because of the order of exercises and their context in a training program, it is difficult to make any truly accurate percentage based relationship between any of these movements. As the lifter improves they could become low responders to what they once were high responders to. What if we do chose an end of block test to determine the success of the block in improving the competition lifts? This could work better than the previous method, particularly in the case of an exercise actually having a negative correlation to the comp 1 RM. For example, if you think you need more pullups for a stronger upper back, but the non-specific stress from this exercise and time away decreases your comp 1RM. You may see a load or RPE improvement on the exercise, but that doesn't mean anything about your comp 1RM. There is also the question of what end of block test is most suitable for the lifter. An AMRAP, an SBD mock meet, etc. A difficulty with this is that the spacing of load and variations within a weekly plan could impact the effectiveness of your choice of benchmark lift. For example, if you did your highest volume squat day on the last day of the week before training, your AMRAP would likely be negatively impacted. If your highest intensity lifts were done on the last day, your mock meet would be negatively impacted. If you changed the benchmark each block/cycle, then you couldn't accurately compare one to another. You also require a knowledge of the correlation between the benchmark lift and the comp lift.
Estimated 1RMs can be calculated a variety of ways. I'll come back to the way we do it in a second. But in a traditional ES model, you don't HAVE to convert to e1RM. Since the training is the same each week, you can just look at the bar weight and see if it's progressing up or down and at what RPE. The e1RM does make it easier to see (IMO), but isn't essential. Now... the way we typically calculate them is by knowing the reps and the RPE. If you have a velocity device, that can be used to stand in for RPE. But the reps and the difficulty will allow you to estimate the percentage of 1RM fairly accurately. To your point, yes, there is a degree of error here. But in my experience the error is small enough that this metric is still very meaningful. Once you have the percentage, you can use the bar weight and easily calculate the e1RM. That does not need to be converted across exercises -- you're right, this would be a highly error prone process, so it's good to avoid it. The e1RM on non-competition exercises is actually much less important. It's the e1RM of the comp lift that we use in most decision making. It would be unusual to build a development block that didn't include a comp lift. -- Mike
Great video! One question, lets say I'm having a bad day, I'm supposed to hit 100kg again after hitting 100kg @8 last week, but this time 100kg is @10, do I repeat 100kg again for the third week or do I take new data and follow that into third week?
If you're gaining at an acceptable rate, I wouldn't. Don't pull that lever until you need it. You will probably need it eventually, but also more isn't always better.
@@SantiOutdoorspotentially when you’ve exhausted increasing the specificity of movements that increases load on the bar and you’ve found a microcycle that works for you. May be time to add volume to certain sessions then one at a time to cancel out any potential noise
tbf, I thought this when I first started coaching my lifters through it. Turns out, most of them don't think it's boring and they have a good time. Doing the same workouts for a few weeks isn't a big deal as long as the weight is getting heavier and you're seeing progress. The literally 2 athletes who have complained to me that it's boring... well, this system wasn't a good fit for them, so we moved them to something else.
I watched Mike's vid on emerging strategies a few weeks back and this finally sparked me to do a deep dive into all the data I was collecting on RTS over the last year for my workouts. I figured out what I was responding to (rep ranges) and my time to peak. I have but it all together and we will see where it takes me. It's a blend of jim wendler 531 and the RTS training manual. Like you say in the video there are manyyyy different approaches to achieving progress. For example my bench time to peak is 3 weeks, so I'm using a gas on gas off approach for developemental work. Push it for two weeks gas off for the third week, rinse and repeat and when I want to push it right to a true peak I go gas on for the full 3 weeks. Gas off for me means deload or overall less intensity in my workout. I'm trying to figure out how many developemental blocks to run before I run a peaking block. In my mind I'm thinking 3 developemental blocks, see how it all feels and go from there. Thanks for the vid.
Love what you’re doing with it! Progression is as individual as anything and it seems you’ve found something you groove with
Great video. This is where Powerlifting (or Oly lifting for that matter) starts to make what Bondarchuk was doing more weird and difficult. In other sports you'd just follow the prescription for the day and get your result from doing it, throw whatever distance you throw or run whatever time you run. But in any kind of barbell-based training you have to load the "result" on the bar *before* you actually do the training, with the penalty being undershooting or overshooting the intended RPE if you get it wrong. It not only makes "listening to your body" really important, but also knowing where your body's likely to be on a given day (based on where you are in the development period) and then picking the right target weights.
Velocity could help you out here.
Thanks for the video!
I’m looking to learn to program to get stronger for Jiujitsu.
Is this type of programming adaptable for sports and if so how would you go about this?
The video answered many open questions I had. Thanks alot for your efforts 🥰
Will there be an RTS manual 2.0 or an emerging strategies book?
2021 is a new year..that is all
I hope they mean yes lol
This was awesome. Thank you for sharing information, it is much appreciated!
Absolutely very well explained Jim thank you
Thank you
Appreciate you Jim and RTS team! Absolutely amazing video as always
Thank you Tyler! Glad you enjoyed it and found this useful!
How do you go about determining load drop percentage?
Is 75% the ballpark for 5, then just trial and error subsequently? How do I gauge what's a good percentage for other rep ranges?
Love it. Happy new year from the UK
Awesome Jim; thank you.
Needed to hear this, great video!
Thank you !! Glad to hear it
So to implement this in my program(PPL x UPPER/LOWER)
I would squat on both leg days, with 1 top set rpe 8 and 4 back off sets off 75% of the estimated 1RM, for bench I would do the same and for deadlifts aswell.my question is I’d be hitting bench 2 times per week and I have other exercises than just the big 3 in my program,for I am trying to be a Powerbuilder, do I reduce the sets on my other exercises(let’s say for push day) or do I keep them the same?
Thanks mate, this was a great video!
Not sure if you are still monitoring these comments, but I remember that you once had a sample protocol that used backoff sets differently. Do 1 (or 3 or 5) at RPE 8 (or 9), then strip off 5% to 10% of the top set and do backoffs (with relatively short rest periods) until RPE on a backoff set hits 8 (or 9). I recall there was also a time limit in case the backoffs were too easy and you were doing 5-6 backoffs. Has the emerging strategies as described above supercede what I just described at "state of the art" or do you still use RPE based backoffs in some cases?
We do monitor the comments. Thanks for reaching out with your question.
The protocol you are describing has a few different variations. In the most current version as applied in Emerging Strategies it would be something as follows:
x3 @9 plus 2 down sets (load drop)
The load drop is the 5-10% of the bar load. Most of the time it is 5%. However, some lifters need more. The down sets don't need to reach a 9 RPE. In that past, this was a % fatigue approach where you work back up to that original RPE level effort.
In the application of ES, we want to hold the stimulus consistent with less variation. Ideally, a person would even finish a bit below that 9 RPE in the down sets. However, there are a lot of individual variables that would need to be considered.
This was helpful, thanks! One question that came to mind is ES suggests a low stress block once you've hit your time to peak, and in general, the low stress block should be about 1/3 the length of the TTP. Since research suggests volume-equated programs tend to perform similarly, could you reduce the microcycle volume (by say 25%) and continue training and never need a low stress block?
For the low stress block are you referring to a pivot block?
This video got straight into top100of videos that should be 3 minutes long
#winning
One of the things that has escaped me after listening to every episode of the podcast is how exactly the estimated 1RM is calculated. I know that one of the guests used an AMRAP at the end of the block, but never heard any more about it.
Lets say the prescribed exercise is low pin squats for a set of 5 at RPE8. We would need to know the relationship between your RPE8 set of five and your 5RM, which could be done with an average chart to some degree of accuracy. Then we would need to know the relationship between a 5RM and a 1RM. Then we would need to know the relationship between a 1RM low pin squat and your 1RM competition squat.
This is like playing telephone but each player is translating the phrase to a different language. No chart can be used to do this. Some lifters may have a strong correlation between low pin squats and comp squats, but others may have a very poor one. Because of the order of exercises and their context in a training program, it is difficult to make any truly accurate percentage based relationship between any of these movements. As the lifter improves they could become low responders to what they once were high responders to.
What if we do chose an end of block test to determine the success of the block in improving the competition lifts? This could work better than the previous method, particularly in the case of an exercise actually having a negative correlation to the comp 1 RM. For example, if you think you need more pullups for a stronger upper back, but the non-specific stress from this exercise and time away decreases your comp 1RM. You may see a load or RPE improvement on the exercise, but that doesn't mean anything about your comp 1RM. There is also the question of what end of block test is most suitable for the lifter. An AMRAP, an SBD mock meet, etc. A difficulty with this is that the spacing of load and variations within a weekly plan could impact the effectiveness of your choice of benchmark lift. For example, if you did your highest volume squat day on the last day of the week before training, your AMRAP would likely be negatively impacted. If your highest intensity lifts were done on the last day, your mock meet would be negatively impacted. If you changed the benchmark each block/cycle, then you couldn't accurately compare one to another. You also require a knowledge of the correlation between the benchmark lift and the comp lift.
Estimated 1RMs can be calculated a variety of ways. I'll come back to the way we do it in a second. But in a traditional ES model, you don't HAVE to convert to e1RM. Since the training is the same each week, you can just look at the bar weight and see if it's progressing up or down and at what RPE. The e1RM does make it easier to see (IMO), but isn't essential.
Now... the way we typically calculate them is by knowing the reps and the RPE. If you have a velocity device, that can be used to stand in for RPE. But the reps and the difficulty will allow you to estimate the percentage of 1RM fairly accurately. To your point, yes, there is a degree of error here. But in my experience the error is small enough that this metric is still very meaningful. Once you have the percentage, you can use the bar weight and easily calculate the e1RM. That does not need to be converted across exercises -- you're right, this would be a highly error prone process, so it's good to avoid it. The e1RM on non-competition exercises is actually much less important. It's the e1RM of the comp lift that we use in most decision making. It would be unusual to build a development block that didn't include a comp lift.
-- Mike
Great video! One question, lets say I'm having a bad day, I'm supposed to hit 100kg again after hitting 100kg @8 last week, but this time 100kg is @10, do I repeat 100kg again for the third week or do I take new data and follow that into third week?
I would take on the new data.
@@ReactiveTrainingSystems OK, cool. Thank you for answering my question. Appreciate it!
So weight accumulation comes from the back off sets
Yes, with most protocols that have an RPE /% combo that’s one way to drive the progress.
Is there a point at which you increase volume (e.g., add an additional back-off), assuming the program is working?
If you're gaining at an acceptable rate, I wouldn't. Don't pull that lever until you need it. You will probably need it eventually, but also more isn't always better.
@@michaeltuchscherer9322 thanks Mike! So how long after progress "stalls" would you advise pulling the "more volume" lever?
@@SantiOutdoors case by case. I wouldn't say it's a last resort, but I would try a lot of other things first.
@@SantiOutdoorspotentially when you’ve exhausted increasing the specificity of movements that increases load on the bar and you’ve found a microcycle that works for you. May be time to add volume to certain sessions then one at a time to cancel out any potential noise
💯🤝
Really cool, but takes the fun out of training lol
tbf, I thought this when I first started coaching my lifters through it. Turns out, most of them don't think it's boring and they have a good time. Doing the same workouts for a few weeks isn't a big deal as long as the weight is getting heavier and you're seeing progress. The literally 2 athletes who have complained to me that it's boring... well, this system wasn't a good fit for them, so we moved them to something else.
lol just go to gym and train until you are tired