I know this topic has been discussed time and time again but I have never found a concrete answer or even a general rule of thumb that is consistent. I want to talk test periods between sets, something that is controllable and in my opinion actually makes a noticeable difference in how much weight I can lift. Basically BBM advise about 4-5 minute rest periods between working sets for their non gpp templates. But how long do we wait in between sets of say rpe 6 or 7? I’d like to get some sort of consensus and that way I can pick a rest period protocol and stick to it. I feel like sometimes when I just go by feel it makes the rpe harder to gauge because I’m not waiting the exact same amount of time every week. So this is what I’ve been doing lately:
warmup with empty bar 2-3 sets of 5. Then I start adding weight and doing 5’s then 3’s then 1’s until I get to my first set @6. I don’t really wait much between those warmup sets, just enough to put the plates on and sit down for a second. Maybe a minute here between sets. Then after I hit my planned rpe 6 set, I use it as a gauge to determine what weights I’m going to use that day (i.e. Did this feel like it was planned to feel? Or does it feel more like a 7 or a 5? And then I adjust accordingly). This is the "calibration set Austin talks about.
Then, I wait about 2-3 minutes between the set @6 and the next set @7. I do the set @7 and then wait 3-4 minutes between the set @7 and the set @8. Between sets @8 I wait 4 full minutes every time. I do this for every lift including things like pause squats or pin presses UNLESS it’s say some assistance work at the end like DB bench 3x10@7 or SSB squat 3x10@7. Then I wait 3-4 minutes between each of those sets. For any isolation work at the end I wait 90 seconds between sets.
I use a format that I got from Mike Tuchscherer. I use a countdown repeat timer that lets me get all the work sets down in 20 minutes or less. Also i shoot for 10-15 minutes for warmup. For squats and deadlift, this format can be a bit of a challenge but is doable. I go faster for high rep assistance work.
From Greg Nuckols, the amount of rest required will vary dependent on your aerobic capacity. If someone is struggling to recover between set, then they need more LISS.
I don’t really adjust target weights based on anything less than 8 RPE.
I see. I notice for the sake of time a lot of guys on here will not take rest between their warmups. And then because some are focused on gpp templates or conditioning templates they keep their rest periods shorter overall. But for the sake of someone who has as much time when they train as they want and is looking to optimize their strength by not taking too short of rest periods, what seems to be the consensus. Like what’s a good recommendation? I’m curious what Austin or Jordan does in that regard. Pretend one was programmed to do say 5@6 5@7 5@8x2. I’ve read regarding guys running the bridge a lot of people generally do things like so: no/little rest between warmup sets, then 2-3 minutes between @6 and @7, 3-4 minutes between @7 and @8 and then 4-5 minutes between sets @8. I read on here 5 minutes between sets @8 usually is a good way to keep something @8. Now I spoke to Adam Franklin one time and he told me he sees no reason for someone post novice to take any longer than 5 minutes between sets. I’m just wondering what others think
I think you’re likely splitting hairs here. I don’t think that rest times, within reason of course, are going to contribute any in the way of actual progress. Resting 3 mins vs 4 mins likely means nothing in the grand scheme. Rippetoe made people think that resting longer is better simply as a way to bandaid the short comings of his own program. When you’re actually running an intelligently designed program that accounts for fatigue, like using RPE, then it really doesn’t matter. I would say for compounds RPE 8 and up somewhere in the vicinity of 3-5 minutes is going to work great for most people. Anything RPE 7 and under 2-4 minutes is likely good for most. For isolation exercises, it really doesn’t matter. Going for longer rest periods may allow you to lift a tiny bit more weight on subsequent sets, but does that actually make any actual difference? I’m not sure, I’ve never seen any evidence for or against that. There’s a lot of grey area here. I think the right answer to shorter or longer rest periods is going to be highly individual based on the trainee’s unique psychology, time constraints (or lack thereof), conditioning levels, and the phase of training they are currently in (i.e. if someone is peaking for a meet where they will have longer rest periods in between attempts, taking longer rest periods in training during the couple weeks leading up to it might be beneficial to simulate that environment).
Well said. I’d say for me personally, albeit a lack of conditioning most likely, in do notice a difference when I wait 5 minutes between sets as opposed to 3. Enough of a difference to make the rpe go up a point sometimes.
Now the real question… is does that “difference” you perceive actually make a difference in the grand scheme??? The real question to ponder is whether hitting an RPE 8 @ 200lb with 4 minute rest create the same adaptation as an RPE 8 @205lb with 5 minute rest? Is it the weight on the bar that drives the progress, or is it hitting quality volume at a certain relative intensity (RPE) the driving force behind the gainzZz? What about the extra fatigue present in the 4 minute rest, could the extra pre-fatigue present in the contractile tissues possibly contribute a tiny bit to hypertrophy in the subsequent sets?
Good point. I’m going to vote for quality volume. A few pounds here and there don’t matter. Plus, if you have time and you go with less rest, then you have time for even more volume.
@heltonjj That’s the opinion that I also anecdotally feel is true. I haven’t seen any research on this specifically. There’s definitely a lot of grey area here. But I don’t think it’s the weight on the bar that drives adaptation in and of itself. I think it’s the cumulative stress that causes the adaptation. Weight on the bar is certainly one part of the equation in finding the sum of cumulative stress. But I have a hunch that the RPE of a set combined with volume is the closest proxy we have to get an idea of the cumulative stress of a set. In other words, I feel that a set of 200 @8 would create the same stress and adaptation as a set of 220 @8, given equal volume. Don’t quote me on this because I haven’t seen any direct research examining this specifically. But from what I’ve read and understand, this at least seems probable to be somewhere in the ballpark.
But wouldn’t that mean that the person doing 220 @8 would have a higher 1RM than the person doing 200@8? In which case the stresses would not be the same because the person doing the 200@8 couldn’t reach the same 1RM as the person doing 220@8. The stress in terms of intensity would be greater for person 2 or am I getting this wrong?
I was assuming the same person. Either the 200 @8 being the last set of the day where there is fatigue, or maybe a “bad day” where they had to auto-regulate back.
I also don’t think that 1rm matters for stress, as stress is relative to the unique person and their strength, work capacity, training level, muscle mass levels, fatigue levels, diet, etc at that specific moment. All of those things are accounted for in the load they are using. If someone does a set of 5 @8, I’m not so sure the absolute load really matters. This would be why I believe that we don’t see BBM having separate programs for “intermediate” or “advanced” lifters, and why they don’t preach adding arbitrary loads to the bar every session. They program similarly for someone with a 300lb squat as someone with a 600lb squat. I could be wrong here, but this is at least how I look at training these days in myself and the couple of my friends that I coach. I don’t get hung up on the absolute weight on the bar anymore. I focus more on volume at the proper relative intensity. Coming from the SS world, it’s a pretty radical shift in mental attitude. But the longer I train, and the more I learn, the more I shift away from focusing on absolute loads, especially in development blocks (testing is a different story, obviously, but then you program differently as you want to maximize performance on a specific date).