Training intensity considering advancement and RPE accuracy

[SmolBoy]

I just saw Jordan’s Instagram story (see below) and saw that training closer to failure may be more beneficial for novice trainees. What I’ve often heard as well as what the little research I have read came to conclude, is, that training to failure is probably more important for post novice trainees, with the argument being that beginners will grow with pretty much anything, so you can be more lenient.

Another question I have for you guys is the question of the accuracy of RPE. I have heard a lot of people in the fitness space say that we are bad at gauging RPE accurately, hence why we need to train to failure regularly. I am unsure of what your guys’ counterpoints to this are. I think I’ve heard you guys say that it doesn’t matter that much if we’re off by 1.5 RPE (which I would definitely agree on), also citing research that says we’re about that accurate at gauging RPE. First off I would love any citations so I can dig in further, but more importantly (here I’m trusting the other fitness ppl that there’s actual research showing that we’re less accurate at knowing RPE), I would wanna know why you guys think that the research showing that we’re rather accurate with RPE is more applicable to us.

Also quick thank you to you guys, I really appreciate all the work you put in and providing us with quality information. I am super grateful to have a resource like Barbell Medicine!

​

[Jordan_Feigenbaum]

@SmolBoy

What I’ve often heard as well as what the little research I have read came to conclude, is, that training to failure is probably more important for post novice trainees .

I have not seen a lot research to support this for hypertrophy or strength. The extent of the training to failure data seems to best support training to or closer to failure for isolation work, most notably in newer individuals.

@SmolBoy

Another question I have for you guys is the question of the accuracy of RPE. I have heard a lot of people in the fitness space say that we are bad at gauging RPE accurately, hence why we need to train to failure regularly. I am unsure of what your guys’ counterpoints to this are.

While training to failure is an option to refine RPE ratings, especially in newer trainees who have less experience, it seems like most people can gauge RPE with a high enough level of precision to drive adaptations. I’m not particularly concerned with RPE accuracy, but precision is more important given the wide range of suitable intensities and proximities to failure that will work for strength and hypertrophy. What’s more, the RPE seems to more reliably predict training stress than absolute loading.

I do not think the existing evidence suggests RPE ratings are imprecise enough to compromise training outcomes significantly or that there are better options.

[Jordan_Feigenbaum]

I’m not sure exactly what topic/question you’d like primary literature on. If you have something specific you’re looking for that you can’t find, I can provide it. Additionally, the low fatigue template text is heavily annotated.