Blog

A hot topic in the strength training world and the topic of my thesis is autoregulated training. We all have days in the gym where we feel like we could break PRs, and days where we’d rather not be in the gym. The essence of autoregulation is customising your training to how your body performs on a given day. If you are having a bad day, training load (weight on the bar) and/or volume (sets x reps x load) will be adjusted downwards, and vice versa for if you are having a good day.

Why autoregulation could be a way of optimising progression

Typical structured programmes involve plugging in a one-rep-max value into a formula and having it spit out training weights for you to follow for 2-3 months before re-testing. While this is a better way to train than programmes with no structure, there may be a more efficient, fine-tuned way of doing things long term.

Day to day fluctuations in strength due to fatigue and improving strength levels may affect the accuracy of prescribing training based on a one-off maximal value. Within a single day, strength can vary 10-20%, resulting in a variable amount of repetitions when using a fixed percentage of 1RM (3). Some training days may not provide enough stimuli for optimal adaptation, whereas others may provide too much stimulus resulting in fatigue that is not desirable for a particular stage of the training phase. The potential for strength gain in some individuals may be greater than a traditional programme can facilitate, as such a method of incorporating some form of autoregulation may allow rapid gains. These reasons justify autoregulation as a tool within programming as it allows an individual to increase strength at their own pace (4). Also, autoregulated programmes often result in a constant adjustment of repetitions which may prevent training plateaus (1).

Most studies on autoregulated strength training have been carried out on participants under rehabilitation therapy. There are a couple (1,2) that used a form of autoregulation on strength gain and found it to be superior than non-autoregulation within a periodised routine. More research needs to be done on autoregulation and maximal strength gain, as theoretically and anecdotally it appears effective. Another important aspect to mention is enjoyment. Long term progress is largely dictated by adherence, which is affected by enjoyment. If you find autoregulated programming more enjoyable, you may find it easier to stick to the structure of the plan long term and make better gains.

How to structure autoregulation into your training

There are multiple ways to do this. The most common method is that described by Michael Tuchscherer (right) on http://www.reactivetrainingsystems.com/. Basically, you rate the difficulty of each set on a rating of perceived exertion (RPE) scale of ~5-10 as illustrated below.

Maybe you are in a scenario where you’ve been on a programme, progressing well, and you’re doing 5 sets of 5 with some weight which you could do 10 reps with if you really tried. Obviously it’s good that you’re progressing, but you may be able to progress faster AND have more fun with your training. This is how you could autoregulate things for a 5×5:

Aim for the first working set to be around RPE 7 (ie could have done 8 reps with that weight to failure). If you are having a great day, you might be able to do 5-10kg more than last week. Based on how difficult the set was, you adjust the weight up, down, or keep it the same for the next set. More often than not, with the main lifts (squat/bench/dead/row etc) you want to have one or two more reps left in the bank before you cease the set, due to the fatigue they can cause & the volume impeding properties of training to failure (refer back to previous articles). Keeping the RPE slightly shy from failure allows you to perform more volume, and the reps that you do perform will be with better form – essential for powerlifting and for injury prevention. So a suitable aim would be training to 5 sets of 5 at an RPE that averages around 8 across the sets.

The week after that you could do 5×5 at RPE 8 again. Perhaps this week you were getting sick or had elevated stress levels from every day life, affecting performance. Instead of attempting to progress from last weeks session and attempting a weight which you knew you would fail, it may be a time to tone things back a bit and still perform clean, effective reps. This is the usefulness of autoregulation: it individualises each day of training by day to day performance shifts.

There are so many ways of autoregulating training, this was just an example. It can take a bit of time to get used to accurately predicting how many reps you could do with a given weight, but it may be worth it long term. Ultimately, find whatever training structure you enjoy, and stick with it. Remember whatever allows you to increase volume over time most efficiently is what will give you the most gains.

Share this article on Facebook & join in the conversation

References

• (1) Mann, J. B., Thyfault, J. P., Ivey, P. A., & Sayers, S. P. (2010). The effect of autoregulatory progressive resistance exercise vs. linear periodization on strength improvement in college athletes. The Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research, 24(7), 1718-1723.
• (2) McNamara, J. M., & Stearne, D. J. (2010). Flexible nonlinear periodization in a beginner college weight training class. The Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research, 24(8), 2012-2017.
• (3) Poliquin, C. (1988). Football: Five steps to increasing the effectiveness of your strength training program. Strength & Conditioning Journal, 10(3), 34-39.
• (4) Siff, M. C. (2000). Supertraining. Denver, CO; Supertaining Institute.

Read this before the following article if you haven’t already 🙂

Drop-sets and super-sets are a mainstay in the routine of many gym-goers. However, the usefulness of these techniques in inducing muscle growth have been overrated.

This article will cover:

• an explanation of drop-sets and super-sets
• why they are overrated
• when they should be used

Drop sets often involve taking a set to failure (usually at around 70-90% of a one rep max (1RM)), followed by 1-3 more sets at descending weights which are taken to failure. The amount of weight being moved during the final drop set is often at an intensity (weight) of around ~30% of 1RM. Super-sets are when sets of two separate exercises are performed back to back with minimal rest in between. This is often done with exercises that utilise antagonistic musculature (for example bicep curls and tricep extensions) or with exercises which use similar musculature (for example squats and leg extensions). While these techniques have their merits and can be fit into a well structured routine, I feel they are often overrated in relation to other training variables.

Over-utilisation of drop sets results in huge amounts of fatigue and hinders performance on subsequent sets, making it difficult to do much work with heavier weights, frequently throughout the week. Sure, reps completed at a low percentage of 1RM while fatigued make you feel “the burn” and a pump (metabolic fatigue), and fast twitch fibre recruitment (both stimuli for hypertrophy), BUT this can greatly hinder your performance on a following set and thus hinder volume accumulation.  Large amounts of metabolic fatigue is a stimuli for muscle growth however inducing this should not be your main priority at the expense of volume performed at a higher % of 1RM. Sure, it makes you feel good afterwards and makes you feel like you’ve worked hard, but aimlessly performing drop sets is  simply not the best for long term progress. Your effort is better spent prioritising performing multiple sets at a higher percentage of your 1RM, slightly shy of failure. This will cause more mechanical tension, likely the main factor in driving long term hypertrophy (1).

When should drop-sets be used?

-If you are short on time in the gym, drop sets could be used effectively.

Two exercises that could be supersetted if you were short on time.

-For the final set of a training session where it doesn’t matter if performance is hindered after that. Thus metabolic fatigue can be achieved without total training session volume being hindered (the best of both worlds).

However, they are certainly not required for muscle growth, and should be used sparingly. The fatigue and muscle damage resulting from drop sets also needs to be managed so it does not influence the next training session in a negative way.

Super-sets which utilise different muscles (curls and tricep extensions) are fine to implement so long as you can maintain performance on both of the exercises when performing them back to back. However, super-setting exercises like squats and leg extensions, or lunges and leg curls, is counter-intuitive. The fatigue accumulated in the quads during leg extensions will greatly hinder your performance on squats, limit the amount of weight you can use and volume you can perform, and thus the stimuli from each lift may not be as great as you want. Form may also be affected, increasing injury risk. Therefore the positives of increased metabolic fatigue would probably not outweigh the negatives. For these reasons I would almost never recommend supersetting exercises which utilise the same musculature, when your goal is muscle gain.

The Take Home Message

Increasing volume over time in the main exercises (squats, bench, deads, overhead press, rows etc) is the most potent stimuli for whole-body muscle growth, and so should be prioritised, over fancy ways of fatiguing your muscles through drop sets and super-sets.

-Plan your training so that you can increase volume over time in the exercises that use the musculature that you want to improve.

-Utilisation of drop sets can be effective in aiding a little additional hypertrophy, when placed at the end of the training session so as to not hinder volume accumulation.

-Avoid super setting exercises which utilise similar musculature when your goal is muscle gain.

Share this article on Facebook & join in the conversation

Reference

• (1) Schoenfeld, B. J. (2013). Potential mechanisms for a role of metabolic stress in hypertrophic adaptations to resistance training. Sports medicine, 43(3), 179-194.