I can do 10 reps with my 77%… But After it I am done… No more set…
Interesting point. Perhaps Charlie, or someone with lots of race statistics, can tell you what the probability of winning is for the person in 8th position at 50m vs the probability of the person in 1st position.
You must lift around a lot of very out of shape lifters. Don’t know where I got the chart I use most, I have several. The chart I generally use runs for 1RM to 20RM. The higher the RM, the less reliable the chart, but for most lifts above 75% it is very close, and for RM’s above 85%, it gives very reliable results, at least for experieced lifters who lift at both heavy and lighter loads. I have surpassed every predicted rep max shown below, not in terms of more reps, but in getting more weight than predicted at that RM. I think in my case it is because I normally use a very controlled eccentric unless I’m trying for a RM. This may give me some extra strength endurance over lifters with fast, more uncontrolled eccenstrics. Those lifters, who are actually in the majority in the gyms I see, may have trouble hitting some of these predicted RMs. But the chart has proven more accurate than any other I have seen for experienced lifters.
What would you estimate the max load at each RM for most lifters?
100 - 1RM
95.0 - 2RM
92.5 - 3RM
90.0 - 4RM
87.5 - 5RM
85.0 - 6RM
82.5 - 7RM
80.0 - 8RM
77.5 - 9RM
75.0 - 10RM
You must be kidding, or really bad at math. You’re saying that a guy that benches close to 400lbs. would struggle with a triple at 315? No way.
I really don’t see how this debate is still relevant, if you have realistic volumes of speed, plyos, MB etc. There is no way that you can go into the weight room and lift circa max weights and expect to progress in that situation.
I don’t think anyone is arguing that point. But offseason/GPP, if the athlete has not reached an acceptable level of strength, there should be plenty of room to include some heavy lifting.
Charlie (who some people on here must think is a Westside aficionado) has said REPEATEDLY that weights is supplemental work! It must serve the primary stimulus, not the other way around.
ALL lifting is supplemental, that does not lead to the suggestion that one approach is better than another.
As much as some people may disagree with James, he is spot on with his assertion that it is mind-numbingly easy to attain the necessary strength (at least what can be obtained in the weight room) to reach high levels of performance both in sprinting and team sports. Furthermore, using sub-max loads (note: still can be “heavy”) is a much more complementary method while incorporating a holistic program. Remember, the goal is more speed and one would be well served to avoid deviating too far from that specific objective.
Bulloney. If strength were “as easy as falling out of a boat and hitting the water”, just about every athlete in every gym would be much stronger. They are not. Even many good athletes who have lifted for years are not at all what I would call strong, even when that has been the stated goal of their training. James also has said his athletes, I think he stated the load was usually around 70%, do not lift explosively. Do you agree with that? Non-explosive lifting at a 10-12 RM. That’s the ticket to speed and explosive strength?
Star you keep confusing this topic with powerlifters, James said you can develop enough strength to be successful in your sport using submax load, you may not become world class lifters but will develop sufficient strength for sport.
For the most part I think your charts are accurate if you are fresh and not competing with sprints, jumps etc.
No, I’m just talking in general. James works with football players, and their strength requirements are much different than sprinters. I don’t actually think there is some universal level of strength for a sprinter. My comments are confined to those that feel the need to improve strength, and how do you go about integrating strength training into an already demanding training program. Furthermore, I think that lifting confined to no more than 70%, especially if lifted in an non-explosive manner, is not the answer to max strength for anyone.
Star, the confusion in regards to the 1RM percentages probably stems from the populations we’re talking about here. TWhite isn’t bad at math, he’s a professional football player. He’s used to being around explosive freaks. And fogelson is in a similar boat. While not a professional athlete, the people he lifts with are athletes. Not lifters, athletes.
Reps relative to 1RM percentages should be expected to vary greatly between populations, with ultra explosive athletes falling at one end of the scale and endurance athletes at the other. Sprinters, which most of us on this site are, sit at the far end of the bell curve, hence the “strange” percentages.
On a personal note, when I was much younger and actually trained my bench press, I managed 305 lbs x 1 rep. However, I could only bench press 225 lbs for 4 reps. That’s 74% of my 1RM for 4 reps. For me, doing 5 x 3 @ 75% would’ve been impossible, let alone 80%.
If by out of shape, you mean people that compete at a high level in a sport the actually requires fitness, then you might be right. I’ve trained with people who competed in Beijing and people that will be competing in Vancouver and none could come close to these numbers, whether fresh or after sprints/jumps/throws/sports practice.
If you are a believer in CP charts he says:
% for a fast twitch dominant: 8 reps 70%.
% for balanced fiber ratio: 8 reps 77%.
% for a slow twitch dominant: 8 reps 86%.
speed and special endurance certaininly can play a role in ones capacity to handle high intensity lifts for more reps? There is not one definite role it is more a result of the programming as a whole. Does the athlete regularly use between 75% and 85% for max repitions?
Ouch, you missed the bit ““Great start no finish””. but I will get over it.
I take everyone at their word, but I am amazed at comments like ‘could only get 4 at 75%’ and ‘5 x 3 at 75% would be impossible’. Perhaps its a result of rarely lifting heavy? As far as CP’s charts, his balanced fiber ratio is only about 1 rep off of my chart…(CP=8RM@77%, my chart=9RM@77.5%).
As far as the fast twitch CP numbers, this greatly contradicts Charlie’s comments that Ben’s 6RM was probably close to 90% of his 1RM due to well developed SE. According to CP’s fast twitch numbers, Ben doing 2 x 6 at 600 would put his 1RM at about 923 (600/65%). This is crazy. When I asked Charlie about this, he felt that Ben’s 1RM may have been less than predicted by charts. In other words, he could outperform the charts, which is what I would expect.
For those that can’t do 5 x 3 at 75%, what weight would you use if working hypertrophy at 4 x 8-10?
Originally posted by star61
I take everyone at their word, but I am amazed at comments like ‘could only get 4 at 75%’ and ‘5 x 3 at 75% would be impossible’. Perhaps its a result of rarely lifting heavy? As far as CP’s charts, his balanced fiber ratio is only about 1 rep off of my chart…(CP=8RM@77%, my chart=9RM@77.5%).
As far as the fast twitch CP numbers, this greatly contradicts Charlie’s comments that Ben’s 6RM was probably close to 90% of his 1RM due to well developed SE. According to CP’s fast twitch numbers, Ben doing 2 x 6 at 600 would put his 1RM at about 923 (600/65%). This is crazy. When I asked Charlie about this, he felt that Ben’s 1RM may have been less than predicted by charts. In other words, he could outperform the charts, which is what I would expect.
For those that can’t do 5 x 3 at 75%, what weight would you use if working hypertrophy at 4 x 8-10?
Reply With Quote
Yea im kinda with u on this one here. Im someone who has horrible SE. I cant maintain my top speed through a 60m race, yet i still have no problem doing 8 reps of 80% of my max on the bench press or squat. I dont knw where these numbers are coming from. What could the “4 reps at 75%” be attributed to? And better yet, would this type of rep max have any indication of a person’s ability to maintain his or her top speed through a 100m raise?
5x3 @ 75% would be doable for me, but still difficult and I can’t do 3x5x80% (have done 2x5). My curve seems to even out more as the percentage gets lower. I would use 60-70% for 4x8-10, possibly a bit higher than 70, but unlikely to get all sets/reps then.
I doubt it has any great relation at all. Completely different tasks, different energy systems, different requirements all together. Most people that have a hard time maintaining top speed have issues with relaxation and likely postural issues related to a poor pelvic position that is burning up huge amounts of energy during acceleration and top speed versus strength endurance (might be different if looking @ a 400m). I’d question whether the person even has great top speed as most of the time they are simply ahead because of acceleration and the differences in top speed haven’t shown until later in the race.
Originally posted by fogelson
I doubt it has any great relation at all. Completely different tasks, different energy systems, different requirements all together. Most people that have a hard time maintaining top speed have issues with relaxation and likely postural issues related to a poor pelvic position that is burning up huge amounts of energy during acceleration and top speed versus strength endurance (might be different if looking @ a 400m). I’d question whether the person even has great top speed as most of the time they are simply ahead because of acceleration and the differences in top speed haven’t shown until later in the race.
I completely agree, most people mask their poor top speed in shorter races due to great acceleration. However, assuming just for the sake argument, that there was a relationship between a person who can do 4 reps at 80% of his or her max, and their SE, do u feel that the athlete would be able to raise that to 6 or 8 reps because they happened to improve their SE through sprint training? Or would u still say that there is not enough of a relationship to even speculate?
I don’t think there is enough of a relationship to even speculate. Even if there was somehow not only a relationship, but a 1:1 relationship (basically 0 chance of this happening), most people’s lifting is after their sprinting (whether immediately or some period in the day later) and their lifting might be affected by the improved sprint performance(s).
I just don’t see the relationship to begin with, however, because there are so many extraneous factors.
Star, go back and read what I said before you make sensationalist statements. I never said it was impossible, simply that it was difficult. For me, 80% of my best squat is 432 lbs. I can tell you that aside from the times when we were forced to do Westside style circa max lifting, I never had to do a lift above 400 lbs. to have a max over 500.
What sensationalist comments are you talking about? I was quoting RB34, not you. And while I won’t question the fact that you’re saying you never trained above 75%, I have personally never met a single lifter, and I have met hundreds, that squat over 500 without ever training heavier than 400. Neither have I ever met any 500+ squatters, and I know dozens, who never train above 85%, much less never train above 75%.
If that’s you, and I’m not actually questioning it, you are the exception, not the rule, and certainly no basis for forming a training philosophy for max strength development.