-: The next scenario I wanna illustrate is
using different RPES,
so we just went through different rep ranges
and kinda how that was gonna affect
the volume of stimulus versus volume of work ratio.
And so now we're gonna do similar process,
but now we're gonna use kind of like that
mid range moderate rep range that we're looking for,
which is represented in the back here by this red box
that has covered up partially,
that is gonna be kind of our baseline
and then we are gonna compare
using that same rep range window
but working at different RPES.
So if this red box behind here,
represents that same volume of stimulus
of the four sets at a 12 rep max, right?
RPE of 10 or of zero,
this in like peachish, beige color below
is gonna represent six sets at an eight RPE
in terms of the estimated volume of stimulus.
And then these gray boxes here, it's two sets per box,
'Cause we've got those, like those two,
those curves laying over each other.
We're getting to the point
where now we're at like essentially nine
of those almost is equaling just over half,
like if you were to measure
and cut this red box in half,
these are about,
you know there are about 60% up, right?
So a little bit more than half.
So we're getting to the point where it's like,
all right, now we're not near as efficient
at volume of stimulus
and then once we get down to this green
which represents a five RPE,
we're really not getting that much volume of stimulus.
Now, a couple of things to take away from this visual
is understand that this red marker here,
which is four sets of 12 to absolute failure,
represents a higher degree of stimulus
than what we're probably realistically
going to try and achieve in a session.
Like that's what probably trying to achieve 80%
of that most of the time,
like we're maybe trying to average an RPE
of eight over the course of our sets.
So in terms of realistic, this here,
this, you know, beige colored segment
represents what's probably gonna be like the target
of a typical session for intermediate individual.
Now, the point that I'm trying to illustrate with this
is that, as we get to RPES
that are further away from 10,
their ratio of the volume of stimulus versus
the volume of work starts to become unfavorable,
meaning that we're just simply not getting
that much stimulus out of the set.
So this is where like this grain stuff down here,
that's like junk volume now, perse,
in terms of our mechanical tension stimulus,
it's not really contributing enough to that.
Like doing a lot of these is a very inefficient way
of trying to fill up this much space
in terms of volume of stimulus.
And you still need to be cognizant again,
does this red representation is
the theoretical maximum stimulus
that we could get if we could actually achieve that?
This is closer to a reality,
this is still a good chunk of stimulus, right?
Especially, you know, you have to think about is like
how much stimulus does a person need to progress?
They don't necessarily need all of it
depends on the recoverability,
depends on how trained they are,
how far they are into
you know, a current mesocycle et cetera,
so it's not that just like,
okay, I just got to get as much as better,
you have to look at how efficient to my being
and where is this volume of stimulus
in relationship to they're moving targets
that we're trying to hit
with that progressive overload,
so start taking these things
and kinda looking them at fluidly, yeah, fluidly
and understanding where those principals
are gonna kick it.
So the biggest point to take away here
is very similar to rep ranges,
once we start getting to the extremes,
they exponentially decrease
in their efficiency of working towards a stimulus
versus just adding volume of just work, just stuff, right?
That really isn't actually gonna contribute
to the adaptations and in this case,
the approach fee that we would be going for.
So what I wanna do now is try
and illustrate maybe a more realistic scenario,
especially maybe some of you guys program
throughout a workout you program a linear number of reps
and a linear loading,
like, okay, we're gonna do eight sets of 10
at a hundred pounds,
we are gonna do four reps
and each one of those is eight sets of 10,
like, you keep all of that stuff the same
and you make your progressions based there,
which aligns very much with a lot of
the examples we're going through
because it's a very simple way of looking at things.
However I program like this more,
especially with the intermediate to advanced individuals,
which is a case where I'm using
a variety of things in this scenario, right?
So if we were to look at this
and kind of use the same kinda scale here
is what I would say, is it like,
I'm not gonna give somebody a set of four sets
of a, you know, 10 RPE.
Like usually what we're looking at
is maybe they're doing their last set
of a particular exercise they're taking
that one to failure,
and then the other sets
are all gonna be somewhat submaximal, in terms of failure.
So in this case scenario,
like if we were to compare this is that,
almost realistic maximum amount of volume
but instead we said, okay,
I'm gonna come in,
I'm gonna do a set
at like a, you know, maybe a fiveish RPE, right?
As part of like, you know,
it's almost like that transition
of the warmup to my first set,
so maybe this just accounts for like,
us is just the accumulation of all
the warmup volume, et cetera.
And then we're getting right into like, alright,
now you gotta a couple of sets,
maybe this is a six,
maybe this is a six and a half seven or whatever,
right, we got a couple of those
and then we're getting into the eight to nine RPES
and then maybe I have one set
where I take that to failure.
So in this scenario,
where essentially I'm using six sets,
but I'm ascending in RPE,
which means that I'm either adding reps
or adding load or, you know,
to be able to increase that RPE
'cause the RPE doesn't go up magically, right?
We have to do something to make it harder to get there,
and in this example,
since we're talking about mechanical tension,
I wouldn't be using less rest
to make it more difficult.
I wouldn't be using fatigue,
I would be doing things
that were actually going to increase,
like the total attention
that tenant attendant attention demands as well.
So I would be doing either more reps
or I will be doing a more load ascending those things
to ascend my RPE through here.
When we start looking at using decreased rest,
as definitely a way to use fatigue,
to kinda get into the scenario
where we increased the RPE of a given,
you know, reps times load,
but when we're focusing on mechanical tension,
I'm just gonna give you the teaser
or just give you the answer
that may not be always the most efficient way,
if that's the stimulus that we are going for.
So yeah, this is a representation of kind of
the majority of the ways
that I would perform a exercise over a variety of sets,
with the goal of,
you know, getting a lot of mechanical tension stimulus,
is I use some sort of ascending load slash RPE method,
and that gives you kind of the, illustration
of what that volume of stimulus would look like.
And as promised at the beginning of this,
I wanna to showcase my limitations of making
this stuff all visual,
so you will not be able to find this puzzle on amazon,
yeah, it's just not gonna be in there,
we got some gaps in here or whatever.
But you get the general idea that,
we're covering about 85ish percent of this,
which means in terms of theoretical,
what would actually be possible for me
to achieve in a session,
this is probably a pretty good representation
of me getting about as much stimulus
as I theoretically could, right?
Because the thing is that
if I were to say,
okay, I would just want to do four of these, okay?
Instead of, you know, one all the way to failure
and a couple of these,
it's gonna be pretty close give or take a few,
you know, a few percentages
of how much volume of stimulus I would get out of,
you know, four sets of an eight RPE
versus working up from a six to a 10 RPE.
Now, so in terms of just like absolute volume,
those things may end up being very similar,
as people get more advanced,
as people start working with heavier loads, et cetera,
I do find an ascending approach
to be a little bit more valuable just
from a practical standpoint,
it seems to for me I seem to see it,
you know, from an observational standpoint,
better progressions in terms of
you know, strength and lower perceived,
we'll say fatigue in relationship
to the performance that we're producing,
and having that set of failure,
helps me keep a barometer
of well, what are we at?
Like when we actually take the set to failure,
that one is not as subjective as say,
well, I thought this was an eight RPE,
but how do you distinguish?
Well, was it an 8.5?
Was it a nine with like, where do you draw the line?
So by having that kind of you ascend to a set failure,
you may be maintaining a better barometer of
what your eights, your sevens and your sixes actually are
because you know what the 10 is
and you can base everything off of that, right?
And that goes for RPE, et cetera.
So there's a lot of practical and logistical reasons
that I like using the ascending ending load,
RPE based approach,
for going for a mechanical tension based stimuli,
this illustrates the volume on perspective event
in terms of volume of stimulus,
but those practical things
are probably the larger reasons that you would choose
that methodology versus just this model.
Because like I said, if you were just to do,
you know of maybe four sets,
if we were to think of visualizing
like four of these, right?
This is probably pretty close
to the same amount of volume,
maybe just a hair, less or hair more than what this is.
I actually didn't draw up that example,
but you can kind of visualize that.
(upbeat music)