What's the ideal set and rep scheme for strength? 5x5? 3x3? 10x3?
Some people act as if a certain set/rep scheme is the holy grail of training. Others will argue that individual differences are so great that most traditional guidelines are useless.
I prefer to take somewhat of a middle ground.
Individual differences can indeed be significant. But not so much so that some general recommendations for training volumes and intensities can't be prescribed.
Prilepin's chart is a table developed in the 70s by Soviet sports scientist A.S. Prilepin after studying the training logs of more than a thousand champions in weightlifting at the national, world, european, and olympic level (1). The chart is a guideline for total volumes of work and reps per set at a given intensity. Intensity, remember, is defined as a percentage of a person's one-rep max in a given lift. If you take a look at most well-known (and successful) strength programs, you'll see that most of them adhere at least somewhat closely to Prilepin's chart.
Louie Simmons, creator of the Westside Barbell method of training, used Prilepin's chart as a basis for his methods, tweaking sets, reps, and intensities slightly to apply the chart to geared powerlifting. While many would argue that Simmons misapplied the principles of the sports science that he cites, it's hard to argue with his method's results. Westside has possibly produced more massive powerlifting totals (particularly in gear) than any other gym in history.
Tell Chuck Vogelpohl that his training is misguided. I dare you.
It's important to note a few important limitations of Prilepin's chart.
1. Individual difference
The table doesn't entirely take individual difference into account. Certain people will be able to tolerate (and will require, to make progress) more volume than others. This is particularly true when comparing two people who are at different "ages" in their strength training career. By that I mean how long a person has been training for strength.
Since total rep
ranges are given in addition to the "ideal" number, this problem is somewhat addressed by the table. Finding an individual's true ideal, however, is simply a manner of experimentation. This ideal number is also likely to shift throughout someone's lifting life.
2. Different exercises impose different stresses
In addition to difference between individuals, there may be differences
within individuals when applying the table to one lift versus another. For some people, deadlifting is extremely taxing to the body and can't be done for high volumes, while squatting feels far more natural and can be done for much higher volumes without burning out.
Limb lengths and leverages are a huge factor here. The person above would likely have a long torso and short femurs, making his/her body more naturally suited to squatting than to deadlifting.
Relative to powerlifting, the bench press can often be done for higher frequencies, sets, and reps than squatting or deadlifting because the absolute load is lighter.
3. It's based on the olympic lifts
Prilepin studied weightlifters' training logs - not powerlifters or strongmen. If you're a weightlifter, this is ideal for you. But for people more interested in brute strength than explosiveness and technique, Prilepin's chart may fall slightly short. But not extremely so.
Olympic lifters practice their craft with extreme specificity and frequency. They are able to do this in large part because the olympic lifts don't have an eccentric phase (lowering of the bar) - the bar is simply dropped from overhead. The eccentric causes more muscle damage and soreness than the concentric phase (2, 3), so the olympic lifts can be trained very frequently with minimal muscular damage.
Prilepin's recommendations are for individual training session volume but not necessarily for weekly volume. Therefore these volume recommendations per training session may be too conservative for a powerlifter, especially if each lift is being trained only once per week as many powerlifters do. However, since the powerlifts (with the exception of the deadlift) do have an eccentric phase, this "low" volume may not be as much of an issue since it is counterbalanced by more muscular damage per rep. This applies to the deadlift as well, because despite the fact that it lacks a true eccentric, the loads used are so high that significant systemic stress occurs per repetition.
One of the key factors that went into developing Prilepin's chart was an analysis of bar speed. The rep and volume suggestions he made are in large part based on keeping the bar moving as fast as possible. The point is to keep power output as high as possible. This can't be done with high-rep sets because fatigue will begin to limit power output as the set goes on. Once bar speed starts to slow, power output drops significantly. For olympic lifters, a lift is impossible to complete if it isn't moving fast enough, but the powerlifts can be grinded out. Grinding out reps too frequently in training will eventually reach a point of diminishing returns, so it actually is wise to keep the bar moving as fast as possible.
Explosiveness
is important in pure strength sports, though not quite as much so as with olympic weightlifting. This is why many successful powerlifters have emphasized putting maximal force on submaximal weights in their training. This is essentially Compensatory Acceleration Training (CAT), which I defined in my
first post. Examples of powerlifters who have used CAT effectively as a training principle include Fred Hatfield, Josh Bryant, Paul Carter, and nearly everyone at Westside (though they call it "speed work" rather than CAT, it's very similar in principle).
Important to note is that being explosive is not about making each set as quick as possible. It's about making the concentric phase of each individual rep as quick as possible.
4. It's not ideal for hypertrophy
The chart has the most application to olympic weightlifters, slightly less application to powerlifters and training specifically for maximal strength, and far less application to bodybuilders and training for maximal muscle mass. While some muscle gain might be possible by training within the guidelines of Prilepin's table, it simply was not designed for hypertrophy purposes. For that end, you're better off using much higher volumes of work and sets of 6-12 reps.
So it's clear that Prilepin's chart isn't perfect for
every type of training. Dogmatic adherence to it is pointless, as is freaking out if your chosen set/rep scheme at a given intensity is a few reps out of the ideal range.
That being said, the chart can still serve as an excellent starting point for people looking to become more precise with their strength training rather than just going to the gym with the intention of lifting maximally heavy every time.
Without further ado, here's the chart:
"Percent" denotes the intensity, or percentage of your 1-rep-max. If your max bench is 100 lbs, 55% intensity in the bench press is 55 lbs.
"Reps/sets" is a recommendation for the number of reps that should be done per set at a given intensity. At 55-65% intensity, you should be doing 3-6 reps per set.
"Optimal" is the total number of reps that Prilepin determined to be at the given intensity. For 55-65%, your optimal total reps is 24. Since your reps per set should be 3-6, you can get to this total by doing 8 sets of 3, 6 sets of 4, 4 sets of 6, or even 5 sets of 5 (which would put you one rep over the "optimal" and is essentially insignificant).
"Total range" is a reasonable range of total repetitions that one might choose. For 55-65%, anything from 18-30 total reps falls within Prilepin's guidelines. 6 sets of 3, 5 sets of 6, and various schemes in between would work.
So how would you go about setting up a program using Prilepin's chart?
There are countless ways you could incorporate these principles, but a simple and proven method is a linear progression. This will involve decreasing total volume and reps per set over time, while simultaneously increasing the intensity (weight).
First, you have to choose your max. You could either choose your current max, or something slightly above it as a goal weight. It has to be reasonable. If you bench 225, 235 is definitely reasonable over a 10-week progression. 255 may even be reasonable for one cycle, but you'll be able to string together more successful cycles if you start lower.
You can choose to start your first week of the cycle with the lowest end of the chart, 55%, and work your way up to 100% or beyond to set a new PR. This might be valuable for more advanced lifters with high numbers for their lifts.
For new lifters, you'd be better off starting at a heavier weight and following a shorter progression block. Novices will get less benefit from lower submaximal weights. If your bench press is 100 lbs, you aren't going to get as much out of 55 lbs as a 500-lb bencher would out of 275 for "speed" work. This could mean starting at 70% and working your way up to 95% in 5% increments, but not going to the 100% or for a new max. Rather, you'd then start a new cycle using a new max - 10 or so lbs heavier than the one you used in your previous cycle. Continue doing this for a few years, and you'll probably end up pretty strong.
Beginners will also generally be able to more sets, reps, and higher percentages than more advanced people. Advanced people will still have higher volume because the weights being lifted will be much higher - even if they're a lower % of the one-rep max.
You can choose to make these cycles as long or short as your want, though I'd recommend keeping it within the 4-12 week range. Percentage jumps should be a minimum of 3% and a maximum of 10%.
At the lower end of the intensity range, adhere more towards the higher end of the total reps and of reps per set. Do the inverse for the higher end. So for 55%, go for 24-30 total reps (5 sets of 6 or so). For 65%, go for 18-24 total reps (4 sets of 5 would work).
Here's an example. Say a given person benches 300. Here is the programming for improving their 1RM bench over an 11-week cycle. The person chooses 310 as the goal weight. All percentages, therefore are based off of 310. All weights are rounded to the nearest 5.
55% 5 sets of 6 reps (170 lb.)
60% 4 sets of 6 reps (185 lb.)
65% 5 sets of 5 reps (200 lb.)
70% 4 sets of 5 reps (215 lb.)
75% 4 sets of 5 reps (230 lb.)
80% 5 sets of 4 reps (250 lb.)
85% 5 sets of 3 reps (265 lb.)
90% 5 sets of 2 reps (280 lb.
93% 3 sets of 2 reps (290 lb.)
96% 3 sets of 1 rep (300 lb.)
100%+ to new max (310 lb.+)
The first 1-3 weeks may feel extremely easy. This is intentional to allow for momentum to build, and a base to be laid down. As Jim Wendler says, "If in doubt, start too light."
The last few weeks use smaller jumps to allow adaptation to heavy weights.
Each day, use the above progression scheme for one main movement, and follow it up with a similar supplemental movement (for bench, incline or close-grip bench would be good options). This supplemental movement can be trained with similar reps per set as the main movement, but for less total sets. Follow it up with 2-3 bodybuilding movements as accessories.
Remember to put maximum force into each rep. This is especially important in the early weeks of training.
This is a simple and solid way to get strong, and is similar to what I'll be using to prep for my next powerlifting meet in November.
Sources:
1. http://www.powerliftingwatch.com/files/prelipins.pdf
2. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2278966/
3. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2231221/
